Putting Trump’s Travel Ban and IML into Perspective

I was wondering when someone was going to write an article covering this subject. I have been thinking about this since i heard the “ban”.

The difference is that there is no registry for muslims under the new new administration, while the is for sex offenders (yet. keep reading for that.) Muslims are being treated like criminals because of the actions of a few by comparison to its whole population. But what’s interesting is that Trump has made it clear he wants a muslim registry. At the time, i heard no lines drawn in any articles making that comparison to the sex offender registry.

Here is an article from one of the very few non-fake news websites: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/17/the-evolution-of-donald-trump-and-the-muslim-database/

There are way more parallels between sex offender and muslims than people seem to understand. The difference now is how this even will play out for muslims and what that means ultimately for registered citizens. Let not the muslim ban issue harming muslims be in vain– a silver lining may be that it may help restore the rights of registered citizens to freely travel. We’ll see how the courts try to dance around the parallels and how they’ll argue how different these are. One is criminal and one is not. The criminality has only to do with the past for registered citizens while it is absolutely not a crime to be a muslim, but that is as far as their arguments should go if they want to pull that argument out for their reason to continue punishing registered citizens for something they are convicted for in the past, which has nothing to do with travel, mind you.

I find it ironic that our country doesn’t want us around, yet they don’t want us to leave.

Janice,

There was a great comment posted by a commentator that shows clearly in Black and White that any judge could understand that IML is completely unnecessary:

Page 19 of the 2010 GAO study referenced in the article: http://www.gao.gov/assets/310/305432.pdf

“The [State] Department does have legal authority to deny passports in certain circumstances, including limited authority to deny in cases involving sex offenders. As noted in the draft report, Congress has already provided the Department authority to deny passports to individuals convicted of the crime of sex tourism involving minors and who used their passport or passport card or otherwise crossed an international border in committing an offense. The Department is currently working with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to implement this legislation. The Department also has authority to deny passports to individuals for whom an order of probation or parole as been entered by a court forbidding departure from the United States. When such orders are entered for sex offenders, the Department has authority to deny their passports on that basis.”

How about a little perspective. Don’t buy in to what the media says about the “travel ban,” as it isn’t really a travel ban, but a suspension of travel from only seven countries, countries in which more terrorists come from than all the rest of the world combined, so they can put a better method of vetting out any possible terrorists who might try to infiltrate the US posed as refugees in place. And it’s only a four month suspension(Obama once did a six month suspension and I never heard anyone call it unjustified or hateful or cruel), and doesn’t affect those who already have been granted permanent residency here, not a permanent ban. Yes, this affects thousands if not tens of thousands, but if they have no nefarious reasons for coming here, they should still be able to come after the suspension is lifted. It is not cruel, as this article claims, it is simply a protective measure to keep the people on US soil safe.

However, registered citizens here DO have a permanent ban from many countries, and this band affects not just thousands or even tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, but millions and millions of us and our families. And it’s not just the IML that has done this. Dozens of countries, due to influence from the US, have created laws which prohibit us as registered citizens from traveling there.

There is no huge outcry that the UK has created a hateful law that keeps millions of us from possibly traveling there for vacation or business. And don’t expect a huge outcry from either liberals or conservatives that having “identifiers” on passports makes us targets or even that it has put us in league with Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as the only governments to ever create a subclass of citizens to be identified as such. Don’t mourn that a Hillary presidency would have helped get a more liberal justice appointment to SCOTUS because both sides use us as political tools. If you don’t believe me, just look at the history of the new senator from California, Kamala Harris, a democrat with a long history of persecuting registered citizens, or that the IML was passed and signed into law by the most liberal president this country has ever had. We needn’t hold our breath, it’s going to be a very long, very difficult battle to get this overturned if we can at all.

Here is a breaking news story about the woman who was deported to Mexico:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/10/us/mexico-government-warning/index.html

The Reporter explained that despite having a “relatively minor” felony conviction, this poor illegal immigrant was deported back to Mexico. She didn’t even have time to gather all of her belongings.

How about those poor RSO’s who don’t even have a felony conviction,,, hundreds and hundreds get immediately deported from foreign countries back to the US- all of the time apparently, according to Representative Chris.

Even, I read of an RSO who was deported from Mexico back to the US, and wasn’t even able to return back to Mexico to pick-up his belongings.

Where is the breaking news story about that?