Why Middle Eastern nations support Trump’s immigration halt


"Critics of President Trump’s temporary travel ban on seven Muslim nations should remember the Chinese proverb, “Kill the chicken and let the monkey watch.”

The much-criticized measure was a warning to the governments of the Gulf States, Turkey and Pakistan, who walk a fine line between support for Western counter-terrorism efforts and concessions to jihadists. It has had precisely the result that the White House intended, as a Dubai security official indicated on January 29. As Reuters’ Zawya.com reported:

“Dubai’s deputy chief of police and public security, Lieutenant General Dhahi Khalfan Tamim, has praised US President Donald Trump’s recent decision to temporarily ban citizens from seven Muslim-majority states, saying in a series of tweets it was a ‘preventive measure’ to safeguard the country.”



The immigration order only affects poor Muslim counties that the United States and its allies have been oppressing for decades.

Of course the United States isn’t going to do anything to hurt its rich Persian Gulf allies.

Shame on the United States for oppressing the poor and favoring the rich.


There is another, much more important difference. The seven countries subject to the order are all battlegrounds without functioning governments, which terrorist organizations can claim to rule as legitimately as anyone can.

The others aren’t. And what Muslim country is poorer than Tajikistan, which is not on the list? And Egypt might be halfway modern in places, but it’s quite poor.

No, there might be some emotional satisfaction in attributing everything to money, but it’s not always the case.


So putting a temporary stop on the flow of people from these countries because they cannot be properly vetted is oppressing? Jordan and Indonesia are by no means rich but they are not on the list.


I think Middle Eastern rulers know their own people better than we do.


Oh yeah, that functioning stable government in Saudi Arabia worked real well to prevent 15 out of the 19 Sept 11 hijackers coming from their country to the United States.

Come to think of it, did any of the 9/11 hijackers come from these 7 countries?
Did the Boston Bombers?
The San Bernardino shooters?

Any “terrorists” at all???


At least Saudi Arabia keeps track of its citizens and can tell us about them, which countries ruled by disparate warlords can’t and don’t. And S.A. offered Bin Ladin to the U.S., but Clinton wouldn’t take him. Both S.A. and Clinton knew exactly what he was, because S.A. told us about him.

And, of course, the Russians warned us about the Tsarnaevs, but we didn’t listen. Russia, too, has a government and keeps track of people.

Finally, the 911 hijackers were all here on expired visas. Had we kept track of them and deported them when they first went rogue, they, at least, couldn’t have carried out 911.

This country has had a history of not listening to the warnings of others about terrorists, not policing immigrants, not enforcing immigration laws, and paying high prices for those failures.

Time that changed.


Yet people think that enforcing immigration laws is oppressing and when you are for it, they claim that you going against the Pope.


I didn’t realise the 911 terrorists were illegally in the country at the time.

Figuratively speaking, it seems in some cases walls are much better than bridges.


And literally too. Sometimes harsh measure is necessary for harsh and stubborn problem, like the proverbial cutting of the serpent’s neck to prevent it from spewing more deadly serpents.

In fact terrorists/illegals could easily pass through the border with the horde of refugees and laxed immigration enforcement.


Channeling Hitler?


Hitler is the serpent. Perhaps spewed forth from the Marxist serpent.

What Marxism, Leninism and Stalinism failed to accomplish, we shall be in a position to achieve. Adolph Hitler. (according to Otto Wagener)

National Socialism always bears in mind the interests of the people as a whole and not the interests of one class or another. The National Socialist Revolution has not aimed at turning a privileged class into a class which will have no rights in the future. Its aim has been to grant equal rights to those social strata that hitherto were denied such rights…Adolph Hitler. 1937.

Because it seems inseparable from the social idea and we do not believe that there could ever exist a state with lasting inner health if it is not built on internal social justice, and so we have joined forces with this knowledge. Adolph Hitler…early 1920’s.


Was the attack at Ohio State University considered terrorism? If not, why not? It was perpetrated by a Somali refugee who had been granted permanent residence in the US.

There have certainly been terrorist attacks carried out in Europe by those from these nations.

The men who killed the Priest in France in 2016 had both attempted to enter Syria. Whilst they wouldn’t be refused entry to the US based on this ban, it does highlight why simply visiting Syria is an issue and does cause a ban. A certain type of person is attracted to Syria at the moment.

A Syrian refugee blew himself up outside a music festival in Germany on 24th July 2016.

A young German-Iraqi boy planted a nail bomb at a Christmas market in November.

At least one of the perpetrators of the Brussels bombing had links to Syria I believe.

That is just 2016.

If we go further back, there are more.

To suggest that no terrorists come from these countries is just foolish.


This new phenomenon is very sad and so untrue. These are the ones who vote for abortion yet have the guts to say we are against the Pope. Very uncharitable and I hope the mods crack down on this nonsense!


I would hope the mods crack down on all posts that reference people instead of issues and use personal qualities (or perceived qualities of them) of those posters as a means to make an argument via ad hominem.

No-one has suggested no terrorists come from the countries named, that is a strawman that has been introduced to the thread. However the likelihood of terrorism is been used to create ‘boys to beat’ to further scapegoating and ultimately create red herrings for people to chase politically.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.