So you're saying there should be one?

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

$$$$$$$$$$

And, supposedly, allies.

It would be interesting to see if Trump has business dealings in those countries that will be protected by not including them. What's the over/under on that?

Well you know, wouldn't want to piss off the terrorists.

From Bloomberg...

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

One word, oil!

---

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." Jimi Hendrix

Huh? What oil does Egypt and Turkey have?

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.

Oil!!!!!!!

No blood for oil!!!!!!

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

One possibility is that Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt are predominantly Sunni Muslim.

Iran is predominantly Shiite.

Saudi Arabia is far more concerned with Iran than they are terrorists looking to harm the U.S., so to appease them, you pick on Iran and leave Saudi Arabia and the other Sunni countries alone.

In other words, what Saudi Arabia wants, Saudi Arabia gets.

I think the answer is that Trump's policy is just a carry-over from the Obama administration's Visa Waiver Program:

Under the Act, travelers in the following categories are no longer eligible to travel or be admitted to the United States under the VWP:

• Nationals of VWP countries who have been present in Iraq, Syria, or countries listed under specified designation lists (currently including Iran and Sudan) at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited government/military exceptions).
• Nationals of VWP countries who have been present in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited government/military exceptions).

You can read about the program here:


https://www.cbp.gov/...l-prevention-act-faq

---

"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."

It would only make sense to do business in the more stable areas in the region, if at all. If you showed me a map of these countries without a color key, I'd pick exactly the same countries to do business with, though Egypt would be cause for concern.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I know.

Have you heard about these "spontaneous" airport protests?

You know, the ones that just sprung up today, spontaneously....

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

You might have a point, but I'd suggest instead of trying to guess where terrorists come from by looking at stability, why not just look at the countries that terrorists have actually come from?

And they just happen to be those that are not banned.


Using Occam's Razor, is it more likely that Trump truly has our best interests at heart, because he's such a swell guy? Or is it likely that it has something to do with business relationships with those countries among the aristocracy?

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Yup, I know several friends who drove to SFO tonight. There's this cool thing called the Internet....

Did they also instantaneously get some professionally printed signs made up on their way to make travel miserable for the masses?

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

A large percentage of the ones that I have seen are hand-painted. I can ask my friends tomorrow if they made their signs by hand. Your concern for the travelling masses is duly noted. These protests are in response to Trump's policy. I assume that you are blaming him, right?

Trump's policy didn't make me drive to the airport and block traffic. It didn't force you to do it either.

I blame the idiots who are shutting down travel at major airports for this.

Hopefully the day never comes when some dip shit tries block my path...

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

I just don't understand! This makes no sense! There must be some conspiracy! He doesn't really believe in keeping Americans safe!

I don't care about all those people killed by radical Islamist in this country, this is just the wrong way to do it. If we can only convince them to celebrate diversity! Accept homosexuals, bisexuals, trans-sexual, lesbians, or whatever us enlightened, smarter than everybody leftist people hold dear. I don't care if one of my relatives ever is the future victim of a Radical Islamic terrorist attack, I know I am fighting for a more virtuous cause. We must not exclude any peoples into our country from where there might come more Islamic extremism. We Americans don't matter! Political correctness is most important! For Budda's sake, a 4 month ban is just ridiculous! Who cares about a better vetting system?

I know, freedom of assembly is so darn inconvenient!

How many of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia? A country that is not on the banned list...

I'll save you the trouble. 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

Appeals to emotion and strawmen aside, where do you draw that line on immigration rights? The desire to create 100% safety from any attack leads down a very dark hole in which virtually any action can be justified. The standard cannot be 100% success, otherwise we would ban all guns, and all cars, and all swimming pools (all far deadlier). Rather than rant, how far do you take it? We interned the Japanese, was that too far? Would a Muslim registry be too far? IMHO, this particular action may be unconstitutional, besides being counterproductive. You may not agree, but that argument is certainly plausible.

I can't believe you would question why Saudi Arabia isn't on the banned list? You sound like one of those narrow minded Fox News patriotic Americans that worries about raising there families in a safe society. How dare you be so bigoted!

Curious why you bring up sexual orientation in a discussion of travel bans based on so called lists of religious countries?

Cause the more Islamic Extremists in our country, the more safe people of different sexual orientation are.

Clearly. Why didn't I see that in the first place....or maybe you're just an idiot...

Why should someone of different sexual orientation ever feel unsafe? Is it because of intolerant bigots?

Step one: Issue retarded travel ban that won't stop any terrorists from being terroristic.

Step two: use terrorist attack by someone from a country not on the travel ban list to justify retarded travel ban.

Sounds about right. #fakenews #cnnisunfair

http://edition.cnn.com/...&linkId=33895816

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Of course, that was almost 16 years ago, so basing policy on the make up of the 9-11 teams doesn't exactly make a whole lot of sense. Not to mention the fact that the Saudi government is far more vigilant about terrorist or terrorist-leaning individuals in their country than probably any other on the list.

This is not to say I am a fan of the new policy; I'm not. But to say Saudi Arabia should be on the list because of something that happened in 2001 doesn't make much sense to me.

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.

Trump's new policy is simple grandstanding. There's a Cato Institute study that's being widely quoted regarding the risk faced by Americans due to foreign born terrorists. Among other statistics, the number of Americans killed since the 9/11 attacks by any, much less foreign born terrorists, is very small.

"From September 12, 2001, until December 31, 2015, 24 people were murdered on U.S. soil by a total of 5 foreign-born terrorists, while 65 other foreign-born terrorists attempted or committed attacks that did not result in fatalities. During the same period, 80 people were murdered in terrorist attacks committed by native-born Americans and those with unknown nationalities. The number of murders committed by terrorists who are native-born or have unknown nationalities is higher than the number committed by foreigners in pre- and post-9/11 United States."

https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa798_1_1.pdf

Simple solutions for simple minds.

---

"Human existence is based upon two pillars: Compassion and knowledge. Compassion without knowledge is ineffective; Knowledge without compassion is inhuman." Victor Weisskopf.

Hey, one American killed on American soil by a terrorist is one too many, OK?

Now, Americans killed by americans... Apparently 15000 is not enough to do anything about.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

Not to mention the fact that the Saudi government is far more vigilant about terrorist or terrorist-leaning individuals in their country than probably any other on the list.

The Saudi government is vigilant in their own country because the Saud family is concerned with stability and staying in power, not because they are concerned with terrorists who want to harm the West. The Saudis lead the world, by a long shot, in exporting terrorism. They currently fund about 24,000 Madrasses in Pakistan and those Madrasses teach Wahhabism, a radical brand with an anti-Western militancy.

The number of Muslim terrorists who have killed Americans on U.S soil is so low that the U.S should look to them as an example of how to lower the rate of murder by Americans against other Americans.

Also, the vetting process already exists. It can take up to 2 years for an immigrant from Somalia to come to the U.S. The fear mongering is out of control.

Sarcasm noted. However, look at the OP. If he wants to keep us safe, why is he only banning muslims from countries who have not attacked us, and not banning them from countries who have?

Anyone remember way back when Bin Laden attacked us and he was from Saudi Arabia, and training people in Afghanistan and hiding in Pakistan.......so we invaded Iraq?

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

You mean bin Laden.

Listen, sucking on Trump's balls is the exclusive territory of Duffy around these parts.

Spewing complete incoherence and illogical arguments that have no basis in reality or facts is the territory of several others, but even our craziest here know better than to go off on the Alex Jones talking point bandwagon as you've done.

So, have you anything of your own to contribute here?

Use this on him:

---

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)

I don't care about all those people killed by radical Islamist in this country


Since 9/11, how many Americans have been killed by radical Islamists in the U.S.?


The risk in the U.S isn't from immigrants coming in, it is from the people in the country that have been radicalized from people outside or from the Mosques in the country. If you want to reduce the risk of terror attacks in the U.S., you have to start working on ways to deal with the threats within the borders. Anything else is just for show and politics.

Here is a conclusion from "Terrorism and Immigration: A Risk Analysis" performed by the Cato Institute.


..."Foreign-born terrorism on U.S. soil is a low-probability event that imposes high costs on its victims despite relatively small risks and low costs on Americans as a whole. From 1975 through 2015, the average chance of dying in an attack by a foreign-born terrorist on U.S. soil was 1 in 3,609,709 a year. For 30 of those 41 years, no Americans were killed on U.S. soil in terrorist attacks caused by foreigners or immigrants. Foreign-born terrorism is a hazard to American life, liberty, and private property, but it is manageable given the huge economic benefits of immigration and the small costs of terrorism. The United States government should continue to devote resources to screening immigrants and foreigners for terrorism or other threats, but large policy changes like an immigration or tourist moratorium would impose far greater costs than benefits..."


It's fear mongering, plain and simple.




https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/terrorism-immigration-risk-analysis

Yep. Fixed it. (Freudian slip on my part?) =)

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Correction: Its fear mongering, except when it affects business, hence the countries not on the ban.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

If you think the choice of countries had to do with Trump's business interests, you're probably misinformed about where the list came from.
https://sethfrantzman.com/...media-wont-tell-you/

But but but but OBAMA!!!!!!

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

If you think the choice of countries had to do with Trump's business interests, you're probably misinformed about where the list came from.

Please tell me you're kidding.

Please tell me you actually read it.

I'm not apologizing for Trump. I'm more than happy to discuss/argue that this was a stupid idea. But let's do it on the merits of the facts, not on unsubstantiated accusations that don't hold up to scrutiny.

What most people fail to understand is the reason terrorists attack. Their government is selling off their oil to us, and the majority of the subjects get zero of the profits while their rulers get most or all of it. That is why you get terrorists from the countries we do business with - they are pissed that they are poor (you'd be mad too, bro) and why we are the ones they are mad at. While they are poor and living in dirt and sand, we are driving around in nice cars with big houses with the profits from their oil. That's also why Trump's not banning those countries - because we are doing business with them. It's a catch-22. You don't want to anger the countries we do business with, but it's the countries that we do business with that are pissing off their citizens. Religion just provides the convenient vessel to carry/excuse/shape the hate.

If the kings-and-such shared the profits and generated a middle class instead of keeping all the money to themselves, they'd be happy and not even think about how we're different. The arabs that do have lots of money driving around in their Bugatti Vareons don't spend a lot of calories building bombs to kill filthy Americans.

People arguing about this need to think a level deeper and we need to be working on demanding their kings share the wealth and create a middle class. Terrorists are the symptom, not a cause. You'll never stomp out the fire unless you turn off the fuel.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

I have to agree with you on the "desire to create 100% safety from any attack..." We've been told through the media that "we're trying to protect the US from further terrorist attacks, etc." It's been a constant since 9/11. So, any action that's being done now is "because of terrorism." "We're trying to keep all Americans safe, etc." Personally, I think we have more to be concerned about from within than without. Just my observation.

-
The answer to your post and Barry's question has already been given; the Obama admin had chosen these as countries of concern. The Trump order did not even name any country other than Syria, but referenced Obama era docs for the list.
This guy covers it decently:

https://sethfrantzman.com/...media-wont-tell-you/

CNN Piece that you can divine the truth from:

http://edition.cnn.com/...nation-ban-refugees/

Example from Obama years:
"As a result of the Kentucky case, the State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011, federal officials told ABC News – even for many who had heroically helped U.S. forces as interpreters and intelligence assets. One Iraqi who had aided American troops was assassinated before his refugee application could be processed, because of the immigration delays, two U.S. officials said. In 2011, fewer than 10,000 Iraqis were resettled as refugees in the U.S., half the number from the year before, State Department statistics show. "
http://abcnews.go.com/...es/story?id=20931131

The answer to your post and Barry's question has already been given; the Obama admin had chosen these as countries of concern.


The reason I asked if he was kidding is because there is a difference between raising concern about some countries and banning immigrants.


The pretense that this action will make the country safer is a joke. The immigrants coming into the U.S do not kill Americans. The only way to keep Americans safe in America is to ban Americans, they are the ones doing the killing.


I feel like I'm in a bizarro world to be honest. Facts and common sense seem to have no place here.

What about the answer to my OP? "Because Obama" doesn't answer that.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Probably does. The Obama stuff was already in place, Trump was able to use it for quick action. Certainly some valid questions about why those countries and not others, but those same questions would have gone to the previous admin, so we have their answers...right? (I'm thinking that well before the election, Obama was in talks with Trump and made sure to protect Trump's investments, just in case...yeah, yeah, that's it. )

Have you ever been to Saudi Arabia? The ruling family spends a boatload of oil cash to keep their citizens happy. The majority of Saudi citizens are not poor.

Here's a good article you may want to read: http://www.wsj.com/...t-shrinks-1482415526

Quote: "For decades oil money allowed the Saudi monarchy to spend generously on benefits for its citizens, who pay no tax. The prolonged strain on the kingdom’s finances is beginning to shift that social compact."

The Saudis are actually working hard now to try and wean themselves off of all the oil cash. You need to dig deeper and read a few books about Islamic terrorism because you are waaaaay off the mark here. I suggest "The Age of Sacred Terror" as a good start, along with "The Looming Tower."

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.

Many of those countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, etc are welfare states where oil cash and many govt jobs gonto citizens. Most of the problems they face are from non-citizens. Especially groups like Palestinians.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

Why are these countries not on the list?
Because someone didn't put them on the list.



Gee, thanks for answering my question. I knew I could count on you for something.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Saudi Arabia doesn't pass the cash down, dude. Here's a pic of the 80 falcons the Saudi prince bought tickets for on his plane ride. Check in to reality. If you and your entire village were dirt poor, while people were pulling cash right out from under your feet, you'd be pissed too.



https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5qzkz4/my_captain_friend_sent_me_this_photo_saudi_prince/

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

Just because the royal family spends a lot of the oil cash doesn't mean that they also don't spend a lot on Saudi citizens. I'll ask again...have you ever actually been to Saudi Arabia? Have you done any reading on the country and it's finances other than make assumptions based on photos? I'mm gonna give you a hint...it's not me that needs to check in with reality here.

ETA: I should note that there are poor people in Saudi Arabia; but they are a minority. There is quite a bit of wealth that passes down from the royal family. A World Bank Report said that Saudi Arabia had the 10th lowest poverty rate in the world: http://english.alarabiya.net/...says-World-Bank.html

Others put the rate higher than that, at perhaps as high as 25%. But the government does spend quite a bit on their citizens: "The Saudi government spends several billion dollars each year to provide free education and health care to all citizens, as well as a variety of social welfare programmes – even free burials. The government also provides pensions, monthly benefits and payments for food and utility bills to the poor, elderly, disabled, orphans and workers who are injured on the job."

This doesn't mean that there aren't people who are pissed at the royals for spending as much as they do on themselves...there are. But I've never heard anyone link that to terrorism. Certainly, OBL wasn't poor, nor were any of the 9-11 hijackers.

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.

The individual terrorists themselves aren't poor. That would make them to uneducated to be effective. What is happening is angry educated men (takes money) that can engineer effective attacks. So saying the individuals that attacked weren't poor is irrelevant. Nobody is afraid of a shoeless bum with a slingshot that can't do basic math. But what makes great terrorists is smart people pissed off about their surroundings. They feel helpless, like they are being taken advantage of, so they lash out. You can't ask for a better situation than the oil producing countries, and that's why they came from there. Did they come from there? Yes. Because things are great? No.

Case in point -
a 2011 study using microlevel data on the Palestinian economy found “evidence of the correlation between economic conditions, the characteristics of suicide terrorists, and the targets they attack. High levels of unemployment enable terror organizations to recruit better educated, more mature, and more experienced suicide terrorists, who in turn attack more important Israeli targets.” A recent country-level analysis by three German economists found evidence that “education may fuel terrorist activity in the presence of poor political and socio-economic conditions, whereas better education in combination with favorable conditions decreases terrorism.” (Israel situation is slightly different in that they are fighting over land, not oil)

Recipe for a terrorist - Engineering degree, no good jobs because royalty is hoarding the cash, local leaders pointing out how the West is profiting from all your oil. That guy is angry and can make bombs.


A person that's always been poor doesn't go shoot up an office building. But a person that had a job there (potential wealth) and then was fired does. He's angry at the loss and feels betrayed, and that leads to violence. Just like a guy that sees his potential wealth being shipped out to fuel all our cars. The royals are too dangerous to attack, so we're the best target.


So again.. and again... it's the lack of a middle class because of the wealth-hoarding of the elite that is the root of the problem. The cure is a 1-2 punch of working towards renewable energy and mandating that we don't buy oil unless that country passes down the wealth to more people. The people that normally become terrorists would rejoice and leave us the F alone.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

First, the notion that there is no middle class in Saudi Arabia is simply wrong. Don't know about the other oil producing countries, but Saudi Arabia has a pretty healthy middle class. Why you keep insisting that there isn't is beyond me. Do they have a problem with unemployment? Yes, they do, but I'd love for you to show me a reference that links Saudi unemployment with terrorism.

Second, there are plenty of studies that have looked into the link between poverty and terrorism. Here's a quote from one: "Any connection between poverty, education and terrorism is indirect, complicated and probably quite weak. Instead of viewing terrorism as a direct response to low market opportunities or ignorance, we suggest it is more accurately viewed as a response to political conditions and long-standing feelings of indignity and frustration that have little to do with economics."

http://www.rochester.edu/...ke/214/Krueger03.pdf

Third, the rationale for the founding of AQ has zero to do with economics and everything to do with religion. The entire reason for the attack on 9-11 was about defeating the far enemy (the US) so that AQ could turn on the near enemy (the "apostate" Saudi regime) and return Saudi Arabia, and eventually the entire region to an area ruled by a Caliphate and under strict Sharia law. That is also the entire reason that the ISIS leader declared himself a Caliph.

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.

[quote How many of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia? A country that is not on the banned list...

I'll save you the trouble. 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.[/quote]


Of the twelve lethal terrorists in the United States since 9/11: three are African-Americans, three are from families that hailed originally from Pakistan, two came from Russia as children, one was US-born and descended from family that emigrated from the Palestinian Territories, one emigrated from Egypt and carried out an attack a decade after arriving, one each had families that originally came from Kuwait and Afghanistan


None of these countries are on the travel ban list.