World Health Organization Stopped Medical Experts from Recommending Coronavirus Travel Bans

I have posted in detail on this matter.
From prior posts, the answer is clearly no.

The WHO is an organization that can no longer be trusted.


The WH is an organization that can no longer be trusted.

Thanks for your honest answer.
I’ll bet you’re pleased that President Trump sealed the border for several weeks in an effort to stop the spread of covid-19.

First, thanks for your straightforward answer.
If you argue that foreigners should not be banned from entry, then do you also oppose state travel bans in states like New York, California, Michigan, and Virginia? Just seeing if you’re consistent.

1 Like

In reality, he did no such thing.

or that either.

I made no such argument.

Do you think Cuomo did a great job in New York having the most covid-19 cases? Or was it “Trump’s fault”?

You just said you wanted no travel ban from China. “0%”. Aren’t the Chinese foreigners?

I said no such thing.

@dvdjs: “In reality, he did no such thing.”

from CBS, not exactly pro-Trump:

Do you honesty not understand the difference between what Trump actually did and the idea that he “sealed the border”?

Maximus1 . . .

Yes to stopping everyone who potentially had the virus. For nationals, strict sequester

What about the spread of virus Maximus1?

Here you’ve been talking like this is canned death.

And now you are going to exempt foreigners??

Why (in your mind) should just “nationals” hibernate?
Or if you didn’t mean just “nationals” WHY use the term in this context?

And what do you think we should do to STOP not only illegal immigration to America, but legal as well?

Are you looking for a “wall”? (I have never favored a wall, but it seems you MIGHT now. I’ll wait and see how you answer.)

1 Like

@dvdjs: “I made no such argument.”

@1cthlctrth: So are you arguing the ban should have been 100% or 0%?
@dvdjs: From prior posts, the answer is clearly no.

@1cthlctrth: You just said you wanted no travel ban from China.
@dvdjs: I said no such thing.

You can’t have it both ways. It’s easy to criticize without actually stating to readers of this post what YOU think Trump should have done. Or waffling back and forth.

1 Like

Both ways? It seems that there is a false binary clouding your perception.

From January 27, which was a mere 4 days prior to President Trump’s travel ban of foreigners travelling from China:

Good for Pelosi. It was xenophobic, gave a false sense of security, and was ultimately ineffective.

At least Joe Biden was man enough to admit he made a mistake in criticizing Trump’s ban of foreigners’ travel into the U.S.:

Biden now says that he supports the president’s travel ban to and from China.

This is a 180-degree spin from the former vice president. Just two months ago, Biden called a ban on travel to and from China, where the virus originated, was “xenophobic” and “racist:”

"The national emergency and worldwide alerts. The American people need to have a president who they can trust what he says about it. That he is going to act rationally about it. In moments like this, this is where the credibility of a president is most needed, as he explains what we should and should not do. This is no time for Donald Trump’s record of hysterical xenophobia and fear mongering to lead the way instead of science,” per CNN.

Medical experts have affirmed that President Trump’s travel ban helped contain and fight the COVID-19 epidemic.

1 Like

Are you unaware of the actual story of what Biden criticized and what he supported?

Easy answer:
At first, Joe Biden opposed Trump’s travel ban.
Several weeks later, Joe Biden admitted that the travel ban was a good idea.
(I recommend reading my comment before you reply to it.)

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

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