Support NeoGAF

[DryvBy]

This ban shows the lengths this racist is going to so he can tear America apart. White men with guns are more of a threat than Muslims are in America

1) No one is banning "Muslims". Lots of Muslims can come here from countries not on this list.

2) Muslims aren't a race. You can't be racist against a religion.

3) While labeling Trump a racist, you turn around and identify the "whites" and their guns as a bigger threat that an organized religion.

4) The majority of gun violence in the United States isn't caused by "white people" if you really want to go there.

 

[BraveOne]

Oh, all homicides in general? Then, yeah, whites likely overtake muslims. But then blacks overtake whites. So I figured you probably wanted to avoid that..

I see you dont know how to contrast Islamic Terror attacks and Mass Shootings

You switching to black on black vs White on White is exactly what i was expecting from someone like you, clutching for straws when shit gets tough. White men with a hard on for mass murder are more of a concern than Islamic terror in America .. its a fact plain and simple. But keep trying to save face.

1) No one is banning "Muslims". Lots of Muslims can come here from countries not on this list.

2) Muslims aren't a race. You can't be racist against a religion.

3) While labeling Trump a racist, you turn around and identify the "whites" and their guns as a bigger threat that an organized religion.

4) The majority of gun violence in the United States isn't caused by "white people" if you really want to go there.

Since when did Fox News get a Gaf account. All these points have been contested by people since last year if you cant even find the answers to them your just not trying

 

[ic3cait]

I feel like I'm being trolled.

 

[Kaban]

Oh, all homicides in general? Then, yeah, whites likely overtake muslims. But then blacks overtake whites. So I figured you probably wanted to avoid that.



See above.

The point isn't who overtakes what, the point is that Trump is creating a policy based on a tiny, almost infinitesimal fraction of people who commit terrible actions, except this is with less rhyme or reason since he's including countries that haven't committed acts of terror on American soil , and it would be wrong to create a similar policy on other races/religion for that reason. I didn't like it when Obama did it with Iraq, but even then that lasted for only 6 months, and they still allowed visa applicants from those countries.

 

[BraveOne]

The point isn't who overtakes what, the point is that Trump is creating a policy based on a tiny, almost infinitesimal fraction of people who commit terrible actions, except this is with less rhyme or reason since he's including countries that haven't committed acts of terror on American soil , and it would be wrong to create a similar policy on other races/religion for that reason. I didn't like it when Obama did it with Iraq, but even then that lasted for only 6 months, and they still allowed visa applicants from those countries.

Trump Supporter Response : " Oh but the Blacks , looks at the blacks and how many people have died at their hands .. CHICAGO .. OMG what is going on there. "

No point in pointing out the reason for making the contrast on this forum , they love their whataboutism. l

 

[DryvBy]

Since when did Fox News get a Gaf account. All these points have been contested by people since last year if you cant even find the answers to them your just not trying

So you don't really have an answer to any of them other than "SiNcE wHeN dId FoX nEwS gEt A gAf AcCoUnT."?

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

You'd think that handling immigration and foreign travel to a country was the primary function of a Gov't body based on how often it gets brought up in politics these days.

No word about the failing power, plumbing, roadway, and sewer infrastructure in many parts of the country for our own citizens, most of them too impoverished to move away from the decay. No word about calcified public school districts contributing to poorer education for our impoverished inner-city citizens. No word about bloated social services providing a benefit to the few at the cost of the many while simultaneously making it more difficult for many of those who benefit from the services to rise out of their socio-economic level.

Nope. The USA is literally Hitler because it doesn't let people pass over our Southern border or travel to our country from foreign countries where women aren't allowed to drive cars or vote.

 

[ic3cait]

the point is that Trump is creating a policy

Before we go any further, I have to know something. What do you think the point of the policy was? I suggest you go read it before replying. It's readily available on the internet. Don't read somebody's opinion of it. Their interpretation. Their fake news propaganda. Go read the 'travel ban,' word for word.

 

[bucyou]

Before we go any further, I have to know something. What do you think the point of the policy was? I suggest you go read it before replying. It's readily available on the internet. Don't read somebody's opinion of it. Their interpretation. Their fake news propaganda. Go read the 'travel ban,' word for word.

That would involve thought and logic though, who needs that when you have feelings and emotions?!

 

[Kaban]

Before we go any further, I have to know something. What do you think the point of the policy was?

The burden isn't on me to provide my point, you already know what I think of it. What do you think those 7 countries are guilty of? Do their people deserve to be turned away from American borders, no matter how legally they entered the country?

 

[Kaban]

That would involve thought and logic though, who needs that when you have feelings and emotions?!

Lol, and we get shat on for having reactionary posts, ah classic

also, bucyou, thank you for quoting ic3bait's original post their before he edited it, now I can see that he deleted the part of it where he thought he had a legitimate argument before making (quite wisely) a correction.

edit: aw, looks like he put it back in. Regardless, there's still no argument. It's a shitty policy made for shitty reasons regardless of how it's written, and we're not going to meet in the middle there. Sorry, man, genuinely, but it goes against all my values.

 

[bucyou]

Lol, and we get shat on for having reactionary posts, ah classic

also, bucyou, thank you for quoting ic3bait's original post their before he edited it, now I can see that he deleted the part of it where he thought he had a legitimate argument before making (quite wisely) a correction.

quick quotes come in handy.

The comment wasn't directed personally at you, but more in general. I'll agree that most people freaking out havent read it. I mean it lays out why they are on the list, and even provides steps on how they can get off the list.

 

[Moneal]

What do you think those 7 countries are guilty of?

Not being able to provide competent information on its citizens. Making it extremely hard to properly vet those citizens when they attempt to enter the country. Pretty much what Obama and the intelligence community claimed to pass the law restricting travel from those countries.

Trump Supporter Response : " Oh but the Blacks , looks at the blacks and how many people have died at their hands .. CHICAGO .. OMG what is going on there. "

No point in pointing out the reason for making the contrast on this forum , they love their whataboutism. l

Your counter to a whataboutism, black on black crime is worse, against your whataboutism, white men are more dangerous than islamist extremists, is to say whataboutism isn't a good argument, which it isn't. great argument there.

 

[ic3cait]

The burden isn't on me to provide my point, you already know what I think of it. What do you think those 7 countries are guilty of? Do their people deserve to be turned away from American borders, no matter how legally they entered the country?

YES CONSIDERING WE HAVE NO WAY OF PROPERLY VETTING WHO THE FUCK THEY ARE BECAUSE THEIR COUNTRIES DON'T HAVE A FUNCTIONING GOVERNMENT

 

[Kaban]

YES CONSIDERING WE HAVE NO WAY OF PROPERLY VETTING WHO THE FUCK THEY ARE BECAUSE THEIR COUNTRIES DON'T HAVE A FUNCTIONING GOVERNMENT YOU S

America already had strict and very thorough vetting laws in place even under Obama, but sure, speak in caps to drive your point home.

 

[Kittehkraken]

You either give the proper information for the vetting process or your citizens aren't allowed in. Pretty straight forward and simple.

 

[oagboghi2]

The burden isn't on me to provide my point, you already know what I think of it. What do you think those 7 countries are guilty of? Do their people deserve to be turned away from American borders, no matter how legally they entered the country?

If you are going to criticize a policy, shouldn't you know what it is and why it exists?

 

[CampbellzSoup]

Trump Supporter Response : " Oh but the Blacks , looks at the blacks and how many people have died at their hands .. CHICAGO .. OMG what is going on there. "

No point in pointing out the reason for making the contrast on this forum , they love their whataboutism. l

No point in arguing with you. Clearly you think you know more than Supreme Court does. Travel ban sticks, the whining of racism is doing nothing.

 

[TheShadowLord]

You either give the proper information for the vetting process or your citizens aren't allowed in. Pretty straight forward and simple.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/why-data-science-argues-against-a-muslim-ban/

Data science has assumed the expansive role of running our increasingly data-driven world. It drives security screening for both government and commerce, including predictive policing, assessing convicts for parole decisions and detecting fraudulent transactions. (And the field extends beyond security to optimize for marketing, online ads, financial credit risk, health care and more.) Data science also applies to improve screening for terrorists. So, if Muslims as a group posed a security risk that warranted their prohibition, then data science would bear that out.

From the perspective of data science, however, a Muslim ban would weaken security, not strengthen it—even if only applied to a limited set of countries. Indeed, the majority of data scientists oppose such a ban.

 

[BraveOne]

That would involve thought and logic though, who needs that when you have feelings and emotions?!

Logic and Thought.. so where is Saudi Arabia on this ban list, you know the country that funded 9/11, Yeah when your pals with the crown prince and have build up business ties with them by selling them weapons and arms .. thats okay. Money over blood is looking like the American way . Where is the logic in trumps original ban , lets looks at those countries Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen . He removed Iraq the country that was the breeding ground for allot of Islamic terrorism simply because they lobbied there way out of it .. where was the logic and though from your Xenophobic friend there and he removed Sudan which was on there for like no reason even though they have been in a civil war for years now ... but when you can lobby effectively shit gets done

Why Iraq was removed from the Ban
Saudi arms deal with Washington
Sudan and Chad's travel ban

Maybe you should start thinking critically and stop jumping on every train trump is riding and start asking your self questions.

Your counter to a whataboutism, black on black crime is worse, against your whataboutism, white men are more dangerous than islamist extremists, is to say whataboutism isn't a good argument, which it isn't. great argument there.

The moment i mentioned white mass shooters you start talking about black people. that is pure whataboutism , you can stand someone being critical of your race so you need to pivot away and change the topic, because lord know more Americans have died to a crazy white man whipping out his guns on innocent people than some guy in Venezuela.

No point in arguing with you. Clearly you think you know more than Supreme Court does. Travel ban sticks, the whining of racism is doing nothing.

There are allot of things you can do that are not right but legally you can do it, that should not stop people from being critical of that decision, that is how democracy is built, maybe you want to live under a trump dictatorship i dont know , but in the West we challenge racist and xenophobic mantras.

 

[Moneal]

The moment i mentioned white mass shooters you start talking about black people. that is pure whataboutism , you can stand someone being critical of your race so you need to pivot away and change the topic, because lord know more Americans have died to a crazy white man whipping out his guns on innocent people than some guy in Venezuela.
.

I didn't bring up anything. I just noticed you brought up a whataboutism and the complained when it was done back to you. bringing up white mass shooters is pure whataboutism too. I am not white so i can definitely stand people being critical of my race, black on black violence would be about my race, but thanks for the assumption.

 

[Kittehkraken]

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/why-data-science-argues-against-a-muslim-ban/

"In contrast, a ban that targets Muslims would be an epic national mistake—not only in terms of social justice but also in terms of security."

Except two of the countries on the list aren't Muslim. And the VAST majority of the Muslim population on the planet isn't being targeted. It's almost like the list could have a purpose that isn't Islamophobic.

 

[lil puff]

Maybe they could think of another name and promote it better than "muslim ban"

I get the point but the optics are horrible.

 

[Moneal]

Maybe they could think of another name and promote it better than "muslim ban"

I get the point but the optics are horrible.

pretty sure the "muslim ban" term was made up by the news media, not the trump admin. so yea the optics of the term are supposed to be horrible.

 

[BraveOne]

pretty sure the "muslim ban" term was made up by the news media, not the trump admin. so yea the optics of the term are supposed to be horrible.

Nope he said it himself. You cant blame the media on this one

 

[Moneal]

Nope he said it himself. You cant blame the media on this one

didn't hear muslim ban there. while trump campaigned on preventing muslim immigration, he didn't do that. the policy got called a muslim ban by the media and protesters. Do you have a quote of trump or anyone from his white house calling it a muslim ban? thats rhetorical because I know you don't.

 

[hollams]

didn't hear muslim ban there. while trump campaigned on preventing muslim immigration, he didn't do that. the policy got called a muslim ban by the media and protesters. Do you have a quote of trump or anyone from his white house calling it a muslim ban? thats rhetorical because I know you don't.

I watched the video and it seemed to be edited quite well, you didn't get to hear the whole speech, but only the things that program wanted you to hear to prove their opinion. To be honest you need to listen to the whole speech in full so you can draw a true conclusion.

 

[BraveOne]

didn't hear muslim ban there. while trump campaigned on preventing muslim immigration, he didn't do that. the policy got called a muslim ban by the media and protesters. Do you have a quote of trump or anyone from his white house calling it a muslim ban? thats rhetorical because I know you don't.

Whats that word again when you stop someone or a people from going somewhere .... a BAN. You cant be this convoluted that when you hear some say a shutdown to Muslims coming into the country you dont know that its a BAN. Jesus

 

[Moneal]

Whats that word again when you stop someone or a people from going somewhere .... a BAN. You cant be this convoluted that when you hear some say a shutdown to Muslims coming into the country you dont know that its a BAN. Jesus

you said he was the one that said it was a "muslim ban". he didn't say that. the media and protesters called it a "muslim ban". I didn't say it wasn't meant to be a ban on muslims or that that was what he wanted. only that the media called it a muslim ban, not trump or even his administration.

 

[RedVIper]

Whats that word again when you stop someone or a people from going somewhere .... a BAN. You cant be this convoluted that when you hear some say a shutdown to Muslims coming into the country you dont know that its a BAN. Jesus

The vast majority of muslisms aren't even part of the ban and you're still banging on how about this is about muslims. Have you considered that maybe it has others purposes? Maybe its about countries that don't provide enough information about their citizens and they can't be vetted properly. You would think if it was a "muslim ban" they would ban countries like Pakistan and Indonesia.

 

[BraveOne]

you said he was the one that said it was a "muslim ban". he didn't say that. the media and protesters called it a "muslim ban". I didn't say it wasn't meant to be a ban on muslims or that that was what he wanted. only that the media called it a muslim ban, not trump or even his administration.

Okay if English is not your first language i get it , so ill explain it again. Calling for a shutdown of muslims coming into the country is banning them. You cant get as clear as that, its nothing other then a ban. If English is your first language then you need to learn how contextual language can have 2 meanings.. AKA saying a shut down is saying a ban . The same way you can call Destinys Child a Music group or a girl band.

The vast majority of muslisms aren't even part of the ban and you're still banging on how about this is about muslims. Have you considered that maybe it has others purposes? Maybe its about countries that don't provide enough information about their citizens and they can't be vetted properly. You would think if it was a "muslim ban" they would ban countries like Pakistan and Indonesia.

Well you need to ask yourself why is Saudi Arabia not on his ban list, You know the country that funded 9/11 and multiple jihadist groups.

 

[RedVIper]

Okay if English is not your first language i get it , so ill explain it again. Calling for a shutdown of muslims coming into the country is banning them. You cant get as clear as that, its nothing other then a ban. If English is your first language then you need to learn how contextual language can have 2 meanings.

1. Insulting someones understanding of language doesn't make you right.

2.If trump wanted to ban muslims he would ban muslims, not specific countries that happen to have muslims ( And a lot of other people who arent muslims but neither you or the media or talks about those)

Well you need to ask yourself why is Saudi Arabia not on his ban list, You know the country that funded 9/11 and multiple jihadist groups.

3.You're literally defending my argument. Saudi arabia is pretty much exclusively muslims if this was a ban on muslims wouldn't it make sense to ban it? Again, maybe, just maybe, there are other reasons.

 

[oagboghi2]

Well you need to ask yourself why is Saudi Arabia not on his ban list, You know the country that funded 9/11 and multiple jihadist groups.

Uhhh... What is your point again?

 

[ic3cait]

Well you need to ask yourself why is Saudi Arabia not on his ban list, You know the country that funded 9/11 and multiple jihadist groups.

Why isn't Israel on the list? You know, the country who attacked the USS Liberty, killing 34 crew members and wounding 171 others.