I live in Japan, itself an extremely xenophobic nation. As a non-white immigrant it's annoying but I understand and respect their policies, from the perspective of national cultural preservation and social integrity. Japan's strict stance on assimilation means that it's almost impossible for disgruntled ethnic enclaves to really thrive here, and they have NO tolerance for non-Japanese responding to conformist pressure with violence/protests/etc....
I have close friends here who are Iranian Shia expats, been here for decades. Ya know what's funny? The wife of the family often talks politics with me and says "Why is everyone so mad at Trump? Of course you should ban those people from your country. They're dangerous!"
Middle-aged Muslim woman says its not smart to allow Muslim refugees into America. That's a headline you'll never see on CNN. Now besides the obvious irony of someone who fled the Iranian Revolution* complaining about present-day refugees, this married couple is upper class and extremely well-educated (usually a requirement for long-term residence in Japan). Do we have any easy, reliable means for verifying the education, background, or criminal history of refugees from the 6 Travel Ban countries? Highly unlikely. They are practically failed states.
*Some of her uncles were Generals in the Shah's Army....all "disappeared".
The sheer magnitude of innocent people caught in that ginormous net is extremely unjust by any measure. That some Americans are terrified of a tiny minority of people from those countries wearing towels on their heads does not make it any more rational or just.
The United States is not under any international or domestic legal obligation to allow travelers or immigrants from elsewhere. We have that right as a sovereign nation to control our borders. As for "innocent people" and "unjust"......How's that White Man's Burden working out for you? Do we elect our public officials to do what is in the best interests of American citizens, or the best interests of foreigners? The two are often not overlapping on a Venn diagram.
That some Americans are terrified of a tiny minority of people from those countries wearing towels on their heads does not make it any more rational or just.
How tiny is the tiny minority? Is it 1% of Muslims? That's 18 million jihadis. Even if it were 1% of the 6 Travel Ban countries, that's 1.8 million jihadis. If we add those 1.8 million to the US population of ~326 million, they would be about 0.5% of Americans. Would you still shop at Wal-Mart if 1 out of every 200 customers was just waiting for the best time to blow himself up at the checkout line? Are you willing to accept that risk? For what purpose? What do we really lose by saying "You know what, I think we're just NOT going to let you guys come here until you get your shit straight." What are the second- and third-order effects of increasingly frequent terror attacks attributable to radical Islam? Effects on the economy? Effects on overall quality of life from the inevitable security theater?
Thing is, it's NOT a "tiny minority". Check out the data from the Pew Research Center: 2014 study. Look how many are at least kinda-sorta ok with the idea of using suicide bombings against CIVILIANS. Bangladesh? 47%. Turkey? 18%. Egypt? 24%. That means those 3 countries alone have 100 MILLION Muslims who think it's okay to blow up women and children in defense of Islam. Is that your idea of a "tiny minority"? Let's also throw in the 25% of American Muslims who agree with them: http://www.reuters.com/article...
Ya know if we were really smart....we would filter a Muslim ban by allowing women 16-30 a fast track to immigration. Women are usually politically radicalized by their male relatives or lovers. If we steal all their women away, we can hopefully crater long-term population growth rates in the Muslim world, as well as increase the US population of non-obese family-oriented women. Double whammy........but they'll probably just fall under the sway of Progressive SJWs and turn into blue-haired man-hating harpies, so....that might not work out either.....The conservative Christian family types in the Red States aren't going to marry some fresh-off-the-boat "sand n*****" no matter how cute.......Hmmmm, back to the drawing board on that one...
Actual terrorists are almost as rare as aliens. They may as well not exist at all and we should really treat them as if they don't
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thetimes.co.uk%2Fart...
"About 3,000 people from the total group are judged to pose a threat and are under investigation or active monitoring in 500 operations being run by police and intelligence services. The 20,000 others have featured in previous inquiries and are categorised as posing a 'residual risk'."
The UK alone has got a brigade's worth of potential Inghimasi in its borders, and another division's worth of likely recruits on hand. That's your idea of "rare as aliens"? Now it *IS* interesting to note that those 23,000 are about 0.7% of the UK's Muslim population, which seems a really small fraction compared to the poll data I provided above. So let's take this new percentage as a baseline of really radicalized Muslims, not just the ones talking shit when they respond to polls. These are ACTUAL potential sources of violent attacks. Globally, that would work out to 12.6 million extremists. To put that in context, it's about equal to the total strength of the US or Soviet armies at the end of WW2. "Rare as aliens"......*rolls eyes*
