LINDEN LAB STATEMENT ON TRUMP’S EXECUTIVE ORDER ON IMMIGRATION

Obviously, things are not working well. Something needs to change to keep killers out.

The next paragraph points out those that are to be prevented from coming into the States.

In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles.  The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law.  In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including “honor” killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation.

So, we are to keep out those with hostile intent toward America and our citizens. Someone should explain why that is a bad thing and to be opposed. It seems to practical and rational.

Section 2 – Policy is next. It is to protect American from those with malevolent intent.

Sec. 2.  Policy.  It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist attacks in the United States; and to prevent the admission of foreign nationals who intend to exploit United States immigration laws for malevolent purposes.

Section 3 – Suspension of Visas.

Sec. 3.  Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern.  (a)  The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall immediately conduct a review to determine the information needed from any country to adjudicate any visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications) in order to determine that the individual seeking the benefit is who the individual claims to be and is not a security or public-safety threat.

This says we have to be able to know who the people are that we let into the country. Are they a criminal, a radical, one with harmful intent for our people? Why is it a problem to keep these people out if cannot know who they are?

Paragraph (b) of the section says:

(b)  The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit to the President a report on the results of the review described in subsection (a) of this section, including the Secretary of Homeland Security’s determination of the information needed for adjudications and a list of countries that do not provide adequate information, within 30 days of the date of this order.  The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a copy of the report to the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence.

They started with Obama’s list of countries. But, obviously, the list may change. So, everyone crying about other countries that were the home of known terrorists not being on the list are way premature. Those saying those not on this list are off because trump does business there are just silly.

Paragraph (c) is a bit more complex.

(c)  To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).

A lot of visas from the countries on the list got blocked. This part was poorly implemented. The thinking was that if there is no working government then it is possible for anyone to get these visas.

When I traveled overseas in certain countries we knew we could get black covers for our US Passports so they would look like diplomatic passports. That would get us through most immigration systems much faster… if we didn’t get busted. With totally failed government buying a fake but for all intents real diplomatic passport is going to be relatively easy.

Paragraph (d) – is about what countries on the list can do to get the restrictions lifted.

(d)  Immediately upon receipt of the report described in subsection (b) of this section regarding the information needed for adjudications, the Secretary of State shall request all foreign governments that do not supply such information to start providing such information regarding their nationals within 60 days of notification.

Paragraph (e) – Here we see a future list is coming. Those countries that cannot or will not provide the background we need to know who is being issued a visa will be restricted.

(e)  After the 60-day period described in subsection (d) of this section expires, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the President a list of countries recommended for inclusion on a Presidential proclamation that would prohibit the entry of foreign nationals (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas) from countries that do not provide the information requested pursuant to subsection (d) of this section until compliance occurs.

Paragraph (f) – The list will change as needed.

 (f)  At any point after submitting the list described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Homeland Security may submit to the President the names of any additional countries recommended for similar treatment.

Paragraph (g) – This provides Dept of State and DHS the ability to grant visas in special cases.

(g)  Notwithstanding a suspension pursuant to subsection (c) of this section or pursuant to a Presidential proclamation described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked.

More pages… links below.

23 thoughts on “LINDEN LAB STATEMENT ON TRUMP’S EXECUTIVE ORDER ON IMMIGRATION

  1. “It seems surprising that people can’t figure out…”
    ^^ You’re still surprised by the mass public’s ignorance of detail, or the media’s failure to properly research, comprehend, and explain such things clearly and factually to the public?

    -ls/cm

    • Actually… yes. But, I tend to handout with thinkers and forget 30% of the world is out of touch with reality.

  2. Thank you for this analysis. We really need to start having rational discussions again and your article was the only one that I read so far. People think too much with their tummy. Media tends to oversimplify the world, though to be fair, Trump does as well. The world is not black and white, it is always a shade of grey.

  3. There was also nothing that was officially racially motivated in turning away the SS St Louis during WWII, or in the literacy tests used throughout the south to determine someones right to vote. They were also described as reasonable acts, done to protect Americans. This is not our first time turning onto this road.

    • That’s not true. The Democrats knew exactly who they were targeting with those Jim Crow laws and wink-wink talked about it. Trump did paint with a large brush when speaking and gave the appearance of going the same way. But, his actions paint a different picture.

      While it is PC to not racially or religiously profile, we know nearly every terrorist is from a small set of counties and more specifically a couple of specific sects of the Muslim religion.

      On a practical level, most thinking people do NOT want laws discriminating against race or religion. So, it becomes complex figuring out how to get just the bad guys. Giuliani did a good job of writing an order that avoids discriminating against a religion or race while targeting the bad guys.

      • Thank you for your well reasoned reply.

        While I have no proof, I am fairly certain Trump and Bannon were wink-winking as they drew this up. Trump’s own statement during an interview with the CBN tells us this, when he mentions that Christian refugees will be given priority over other religions. Not only that, but this blanket ban covers people like our Kurdish allies, as well as smaller sects who have suffered horribly, such as the Yazidis.

        While there have been terror attacks in this country, the successful ones haven’t been committed by people from these nations covered by the ban. That tells me our current system works fairly well. Of course it could be better, but the system can be improved as we move forward. Many of the terrorist attacks in this country have been committed by people born here in the US and recruited by terror organizations through the internet. An action such as this executive order, while not targeting Muslims specifically, does play right into those recruiters hands.

        • You could be right. In general I have no doubt that on a simple level just banning Muslims is easy to say and think. But, like most things people decide to do the implementation is more complex than the idea or verbal statements. I expect Trump and Bannon are finding that the case. But, by turning to Guiliani they show a willingness to abide by the Constitution.

          The impact on the Kurds and Yazidis is regrettable. But, they live in Iraq and getting good background checks from an Iraqi government that only controls part of the country is a problem. If one blanket grants their race visas the law becomes racial and there is nothing to stop ISIS/Dash from send people through that channel.

          Trump is in office because he is not a politician… well wasn’t. I expect him to make mistakes like this and for there to be pain as the mess the world is in gets addressed.

          In your last paragraph you again move back to trying to block countries that terrorist came from. I addressed that and seem to ignore my points. It is can we get good background checks. Not where did previous terrorist come from and isn’t you point on the profiling side?

          That terrorist have gotten says there is lots of room for improvement. It isn’t ‘pretty good’ in my opinion.

          I hear that this or that plays into the ‘recruiters hands’. But, there is no evidence of that. The movement to destroy America and Israel was started in the 1950’s. People promulgating the idea of playing into their hands when asked about why Muslims hate the West never give the answer the Muslims give. Why is that?

  4. One group of people particularly affected by the Executive Order are people from the countries concerned who’ve been granted visas and have been living and working or studying in the USA for some time.

    As I understand it, if someone in this position had the misfortune to be outside the USA when the order was issued — travelling on business, perhaps, or visiting family back home, or on vacation somewhere — they haven’t been able to return (not until Judge Robart’s order, anyway) and people in the USA have, presumably, been unable to leave the country for fear they won’t be allowed back in, but otherwise have been able to carry on as normal.

    How does this help national security? Whether or not an international student at Stanford University, or a programmer at Google (or LL, of course), with an Iranian passport, is or isn’t a potential terrorist doesn’t depend whether she happened to be on vacation in Mexico a fortnight ago.

    If there’s evidence to suggest people are involved in terrorism, then arrest them, whether you stop them at the border or have to arrest them at their apartment in San Francisco. If there’s no evidence, then leave them alone.

    It seems like a complete muddle and bureaucratic cock-up to me.

    • You are correct. They screwed that part up. It doesn’t help the country to lock out those that have been helping us. The problem is the new administration isn’t sure we know who those people are. I think they should have considered those people in advance.

      A problem is within these 7 countries is ISIS/Dash has been working to get their agents visas of various types, including green cards. Trump wants those reviewed. But, there should have been some way to protect and allow in those the military had already vetted.

      But, when you know you have killers coming through the front door, do you leave it open or close it? If you are protecting your family, you close it.

      • Do you know “you have killers coming through the front door”? I don’t much like arguments by analogy but it seems to me a bit more like not letting anyone through the front door in case they turn out to be a killer (after all, most murder victims know their killers).

        It all seems to me to causing vast amounts of disruption to innocent peoples’ lives for very little return.

        Maybe it’s different in the USA but in the UK (and the rest of Europe, I think) we’re far more worried about disenchanted young men and women getting radicalised by people they meet in coffee shops or college or prison, or online.

        • Hi Innula,

          Do we know we have killers coming through the door? ISIS/Dash, Iran, and various other groups of Jihadist are bragging they are sending their agents through the refugee program and by other means into our country. We have caught some of them. So, they are living up to their claims. So, yes, we do know killers are coming through the existing visa system.

          As to not letting anyone through the door… even before the Court stay, tens of thousands of people from those countries are coming into the US. Again, the EO isn’t a ban as the media claims. It is an order directing we be sure we know who is coming in.

          ‘…vast amounts of disruption to innocent peoples…’ We could debate the quantification of the EO’s “vastness’ in light of the turmoil in the middle east, but, without a quantification scale it seems to be an argument about opinion. I also assume that if a single terrorist got in and killed a member of your family that would be an acceptable lost for the convenience of the majority of innocent people?

          If you are most worried about ‘people’ radicalizing your young, why aren’t you keeping those people out? It is the Jihadists that do the radicalizing, in person or via media. Also, why are they susceptible to radicalization?

          There is good information and psychological knowledge that those with strong belief systems can’t be radicalized. The book The Rape of the Mind gives a good account and reasons for why that is true based on what happened in the German concentration camps and other WWII prisons.

          The idea that there is no God and mankind evolved removes the need for right and wrong code of morality. Good is simply whatever one wants to do. There is no foundation for not stealing or killing. So, for those people there is no moral foundation. With no foundation beliefs, that vacuum is easily filled by radical ideas.

          • Take a look at this analysis of the available data by a former FBI analyst, and see if you don’t think it supports her contention that “Absolutely nothing in the large body of data we have about real terrorist plots in the United States remotely supports either a focus on barring refugees or a focus on these particular seven countries.

            Nothing.”
            https://lawfareblog.com/its-not-foreigners-who-are-plotting-here-what-data-really-show

            As to young people being radicalised, all the evidence we have in the UK suggests that online social media are one of the main engines of radicalisation. That or friends at school, college, prison or wherever.

            It’s simply not a question of people coming in from abroad to spread their jihadist ideology — Daesh use the internet and social media to spread their ideas, not asylum seekers.

  5. No ban on the Saudi’s? – Osama and the Twin Tower hijackers would still be allowed to travel into the USA today under the new rules, so Mr Trump’s decision is full of holes, and isn’t nearly tough enough. Perhaps it is because Mr Trump’s friends in Saudi would be upset ?

    • There are some differences with Saudi. Saudi is not a homogeneous nation: 4.3 million (25%) Shia, 4 million (23%) Wahhabi, 9 million (52%) non-Wahhabi Sunnis. The ruling portion of the royal family is mostly Wahhabi. They are helping us fight ISIS/Dash. Plus we have provided them military protection and training. Our military people know a significant number of key Saudi military people. So, Americans tend to paint with a wide brush when thinking of Saudi, its not realistic or just. Not, all Saudis are nuts.

      Once one clears the conceptual hurdle of thinking of thinking of EO as a racial or religious ban and sees it as an increase in vetting of people from countries that hate us, have a failed government, or one we can’t trust the omission of Saudi is not surprising. Besides this list of countries was identified by Obama.

  6. Check out this!
    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/iraq-crisis-how-saudi-arabia-helped-isis-take-over-the-north-of-the-country-9602312.html

    It seems to me the Saudis are playing the USA off against the Iranians, and got away with it under Obama and Hillary. It’s a darn shame that Trump doesn’t have the balls to call them out.

    • You like most Americans think of Saudi as a homogeneous whole it isn’t. The Sunni, Wahhabi, Shia, and other sects exist in Saudi. The US government deals mostly with the Royal Family (Wahhabi) and the military. It isn’t like out intelligence and military groups do not understand the Saudis or their goals. The Saudis, the rulers, are providing us intelligence and aiding in the fight against ISIS. So, about 40% of the Saudis are sort of on our side. But, because of the confrontational nature if Islam anyone in any sect can decide it is time to take out the ‘West’.

  7. I was just banned from posting on NWN’s site. Again. Frowny Face… ;( Evidently, I was very naughty… LOL! I commented on the current hullabaloo around LL’s Muslim Ban Manifesto. Their “Port Huron Statement”concerning “white boy” oppression and President Trump hating. SDS forever, huh! LMAO!

    So, I come here to reveal what my motives and intentions were since Hamlet just does not get me in any way shape or form. I appreciate that he doesn’t remove my latest posts in the “LL Muslim Ban Manifesto”. It shows that he has some respect for allowing opponents of this to engage in actual debate about the issue.

    Exposure. That’s why I post . To expose the absolute hypocrisy of the left. And the right. ; ) In this case, I chose to aim my fire at libtards. They are similar to parrots. Parrots are more intelligent but the similarity lies in their mindless flinging of disrespectful language. At anyone who doesn’t agree with them. And lately threats and multiple incidents of assaults on anyone who is not them. Enough.

    See, I expose their hypocrisy. They are the racists. They are the sexists. They are the fascists. They are the communists. They are the HATERS.

    They HATE anyone not like them with a vengeance. They stick to “slogans” to make their points. They use “insults” to smear their opposition. Read back through those blog posts. I made my points at first directly aimed at LL. They chose to direct theirs at me. So, I responded. If someone was respectful, they got respect back. If someone was disrespectful I gave whatever they “dished out” right back to them.

    And the “libtards” HATE THAT!!!

    They are used to dealing with “appeasers”. Weak spined “leaders?” in both parties, Republican and Democrat, that give these numnuts every thing they want. And they cannot stand it that at least one person is in Washington D.C. attempting to stop all the America Hating, Christian Hating, and White People Hating that has been going on over the last several decades. For once in a very long time, people who are not complete libtard insane asylums are speaking up and “shooting the rod” right back in their faces. And they can’t stand that!!! ; )

    I love everybody! Except libtards and conservatards. Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Bahais, Shintos, Native American Religions, etc. etc. Black people, White people, Brown People, Asians, Mexicans, Iranians even ; ). I have no problem with anyone. More power to ya! Worship who you want. Love who you want. Etc. Etc.

    But if you are behaving like complete numnut insane asylums then I am all for “fucking you up”. If some numnut is a religious freak. A koran thumping asshole. And harms ANYONE else because of those beliefs. Then “fuck them up”. The libtards want to hold hands, chants slogans, issue manifestos about white supremacy, and be soft on Radical Islam.

    The current “New Left” opposition is now headed and directed by all those old “commies” from the 60’s demonstrations. The America Hater freaks. And just like the “New Left” turned on all those SDS movement leaders and morphed into Insane Shit like The Weather Underground. Watch the same thing happen here. And watch assholes like Bill Ayers cheer it all on. And so will Hitlery. And evidently LL! LOL!!

    The same people that spit on returning American soldiers coming back from Vietnam. The same leftists that went too far back then. And are going too far now. They’re turning off people who have at least half a brain. And that is the vast majority of the country. 70-80%+. Like what happened after things got out of control in the late 60’s Early 70’s. They received 40 years of being laughed at and exposed for what fools they are. Until Obama. For the last 8 years it has been Peace, Love, Dope! F$$k AmeriKKKa! F$$k White People. Hey Hey LBJ How many kids did you kill today time at the Whitehouse. In other words the typical libtard numnuttery. LMAO!

    But now things are different. Normal people are calling libtards out on their childish braindead nonsense. It’s refreshing. Like a cool breeze blowing through the house and cleansing it of a foul odor. It’s also the funniest shiz I have seen in a very long time. ; )

    And the Turkey Buzzard goes… “Can we all get along?” – Rodney King I ask the same question , Rodney. And I think the libtards are too far gone. Too HISSterically over the edge. They Bat-Shiz Crazy!!! ; )

    • When you ready… tell us how you really feel…

      I suggest you not use the tactics and style of the Left when trying to criticize them. You come across as nuts and hateful as they usually do.

      • @Nalates. “They” do not want a debate. “They” declared all out war on “us” decades ago. “They” have imposed “their” lunacy on all of “us” for decades. Enough.

        Please explain how exactly i am “nuts” and “hateful” if I am exposing “their” hypocrisy and “their” hatred and “their” insanity?

        Did you refer to the libtards at LL as “nuts”? The LL board(Mitch Kapor) as nuts? They issued a “Manifesto” that was as disrespectful as you can get towards “white people” and Trump voters. Are the libtards at LL “hateful”? It’s obvious to anyone not a libtard that they are and were being racist in issuing such a moronic statement.

        Words like “nuts” or “hateful” is a disrespectful way to be dismissive of anyone that does not think like you.

        You don’t honestly think you can have a reasoned discussion or debate with libtard haters do you? If you do that’s as naive as a person can get. “They” go right for the jugular. “They” have no respect for anyone not them.

        “They” have an agenda. And “they” have been pursuing it with a vengeance for decades. And “their” agenda is being exposed and “they” do not like that. It really is that simple. Wise up. ; )

        And the Turkey Buzzard goes… It’s the height of naivete to argue that libtards are in any way respectful of other folks ideas or opinions. They are HISSterical HATERS. ; )

  8. Reply to Inula,
    It is getting harder and harder to fight the fake news. Large papers like Washington Post and TV channels like CNN are running agenda supporting fake news. They often misreport FBI and DoJ reports, like the information you got, which is wrong. One actually has to pull and analyze the data.

    So, while the list is small there is one. LIST: http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/seattle-judge-just-plain-wrong-about-no-foreign-nationals-having-been-arrested-from-trumps-ban-list/ One can run the names and verify the data. At this time, there are less than a dozen from the 7 countries that have been convicted. But, there are terror connected people coming from those countries. There are <200 in the USA that are being investigated for terror connections.

    One of the people that should know if ISIS/Dash fighters are getting into the Syrian refugee population is Iran’s buddy Bashar al-Assad, sort of Syria’s head of what government there is. See video: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/02/09/bashar_al-assad_terrorists_definitely_hiding_among_refugees.html

    Venesuela is selling fake passports to people with terrorist connections and/or history.
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/08/world/venezuela-passports-investigation/ CNN
    http://www.breitbart.com/middle-east/2017/02/07/whistleblower-iran-venezuela-passports/
    Google Search 377,000 hits: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1ASVA_enUS708US708&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=venezuela+selling+fake+passports

    Expect Venezuela to be added to the next list for additional vetting.

    ISIS/Dash is bragging about how many trained fighters they have sent through the refugee program. Google Search 135,000 hits: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1ASVA_enUS708US708&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=isis+brags+about+sending+fighters+with+refugees

    So, you are getting bad information.

    I agree radicalization is not solely by incoming radicals. But, it isn’t like the incoming radicals don’t proselytize too.

    What we do know is ISIS/Dash fighters have training and are conditioned to their beliefs. Why would you let these people into your home?

    I notice you didn’t answer my previous question…

    Edit: added in links that dropped out of copy/paste.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *