June 30, 2017
This wasn’t the travel ban we wanted, but it sure is a massive step towards it.
The psychological impact of this is what really matters – it was played-up by the media as a racist hate-driven ban on little babies needing surgery because Trump hates the color of their skin, and yet it got done anyway. This damages the morale of the liberal opposition, while boosting ours.
Everything is moving in the right direction. That is a fact.
A scaled-down version of President Donald Trump’s travel ban took effect at 8 p.m. ET Thursday, with none of the dramatic scenes of protest and chaos that greeted the original version of Trump’s executive order five months ago.
The Departments of Homeland Security, State and Justice went ahead with the implementation after the Supreme Court partially restored the order earlier this week.
The new rules tighten visa policies affecting citizens from six majority Muslim nations: Sudan, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. People from those countries who need new visas will now have to prove a close family relationship or an existing relationship with an entity like a school or business in the United States.
Citizens of those countries who already have visas will be allowed into the U.S. as usual.
Much of the confusion in January, when Trump’s first ban took effect, resulted from travelers with previously approved visas being kept off flights or barred entry on arrival in the United States.
Lower courts blocked that initial order and, later, a revised Trump order intended to overcome legal hurdles.
In guidance issued late Wednesday, the State Department said the family relationships valid for entry would include a parent, spouse, son, daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law or sibling already in the United States. It does not include other relationships such as grandparents, grandchildren, aunts and uncles.
As the order took effect, the state of Hawaii filed an emergency motion asking a federal judge to clarify that the administration cannot enforce the ban against fiancés or other relatives not included in the State Department’s definition of “bona fide” personal relationships.
The “bona fide relationship” restriction also applies to refugees, regardless of their country of origin, unless they are able to obtain a so-called “national interest waiver” from the State Department or U.S. Customs and Border Protection. However, the U.S. has almost filled its quota of 50,000 refugees for the budget year ending in September and the new rules won’t apply to the few remaining slots. With the Supreme Court set to consider the overall ban in October, the rules could change again.
Karen Tumlin, legal director of the National Immigration Law Center, said the rules “would slam the door shut on so many who have waited for months or years to be reunited with their families.”
Yeah see. There’s that “because it’s sad tho” argument, which is at the heart of any of these arguments when you strip them down: emotional, feminine nonsense.
That is why the “liberation” of women was at the root of this satanic kike agenda.
If you go back even to the turn of the 20th century, before the Jews really took hold but when women were starting into politics, they were meddling, destroying things.
They are the ones who pushed for alcohol prohibition, which turned into a disaster. As I wrote about yesterday, they also pushed for the age of consent laws for marriage, which helped destroy the institution of marriage by lessening the possibility that a woman would remain a virgin until marriage, and also her ability to bond psychologically to her husband.
Their argument was that they were working so they should be able to vote. The problem was that this was sort of a reasonable-seeming argument. They never should have been working in the first place.
Any time any argument is based on emotion, it is the result of the feminization of our society. It is also always, always, always going to be wrong. If someone has a logical explanation for something, they will give you that first. When you get the emotions first, you know you’re being lied to.
There is no logical reason you would want Moslems in your country.
Any cost-benefit analysis is going to show that it is a net loss, even if you believe race “is a social construct.”
So they always go straight for the feels.