Про решение Supreme Court за travel ban в пользу Трампа написали многие. Хочу лишь уточнить, что решение было принято единогласно, 9:0, безо всяких особых мнений.
"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)"
It was supposed to be a temporary suspension, not an indefinite ban, to allow time for improving screening of "fellow bloggers". You can invite him to visit, but it might take State Department a while to conduct proper background check of somebody from Iran, especially since there is no US embassy in Tehran since 1979.
Why do these iranian citizens suddenly need extra background check scrutiny? They were coming the the US before and nothing seriously bad happened in the past. Why ban these visits now?
I'm a Pastarian, which from the point of view of traditional Islam makes me guilty of apostasy, which in turn is punishable by death. I don't know about you, but I really don't want people with such beliefs to come over and behead me.
So how many people were killed by these attacks in the last 20 years?
Then compare it with the number of people killed by the US in the last 20 years. Which of these two numbers seems more "serious" to you?
> which in turn is punishable by death
Who, in your mind, is going to bring that punishment on you? Does that theory of yours have practical confirmations in reality?
> but I really don't want people with such beliefs to come over and behead me.
I agree - let's not allow into the US anyone who wants to behead people. But what does it have to do with the vast majority of Iranians and citizens from other banned countries?
Your argument about number of people killed by the US is called whataboutism.
If you are saying that Iran specifically does not belong on this list, that might be a valid criticism. Not all countries there pose equally high risk, and some notorious ISIS strongholds are absent. But the list was created by the previous administration. Executive order we are discussing just references it.
Re: Bona fide relationship
Date: 2017-06-27 12:54 am (UTC)It was supposed to be a temporary suspension, not an indefinite ban, to allow time for improving screening of "fellow bloggers". You can invite him to visit, but it might take State Department a while to conduct proper background check of somebody from Iran, especially since there is no US embassy in Tehran since 1979.
Re: Bona fide relationship
Date: 2017-06-27 08:39 am (UTC)They were coming the the US before and nothing seriously bad happened in the past. Why ban these visits now?
Re: Bona fide relationship
Date: 2017-06-27 11:01 am (UTC)I'm a Pastarian, which from the point of view of traditional Islam makes me guilty of apostasy, which in turn is punishable by death. I don't know about you, but I really don't want people with such beliefs to come over and behead me.
Re: Bona fide relationship
Date: 2017-06-27 01:18 pm (UTC)So how many people were killed by these attacks in the last 20 years?
Then compare it with the number of people killed by the US in the last 20 years.
Which of these two numbers seems more "serious" to you?
> which in turn is punishable by death
Who, in your mind, is going to bring that punishment on you?
Does that theory of yours have practical confirmations in reality?
> but I really don't want people with such beliefs to come over and behead me.
I agree - let's not allow into the US anyone who wants to behead people.
But what does it have to do with the vast majority of Iranians and citizens from other banned countries?
Re: Bona fide relationship
Date: 2017-06-27 01:29 pm (UTC)If you are saying that Iran specifically does not belong on this list, that might be a valid criticism. Not all countries there pose equally high risk, and some notorious ISIS strongholds are absent. But the list was created by the previous administration. Executive order we are discussing just references it.
Re: Bona fide relationship
Date: 2017-06-27 03:08 pm (UTC)