Elerond

Some could say that there would be much less people immigrating if France had not conquered quite lot other countries in North Africa, Middle East and Asia.

IIRC any conspicuous symbols are banned, crosses included -- if there were any. There are no crosses in French schools AFAIK. I mean that people could wear crosses in full view of everybody and school official didn't see that conspicuous, where things like hijabs of course were always ordered to be removed (but it is long time that I have last time read news about it).

Any examples of such laws? I would say France is an example of what happens when you cater to the minorities to the extreme. If you fulfill all the demands the demands will just grow and grow to the point you are not able to fulfill them. Then the violence starts and if you don't respond to violence but instead encourage and exuse it then it will escalate. Burka ban, ban for religious items in schools but not extending to crosses, and quite lot or regional/city ordinances to prevent building mosques, when mosques can be open etc.. Most of this were cancelled by courts, but they have caused protest, riots etc. in past 16 years. I would not say that Nicolas Sarkozy's policies for example are examples of catering minorities to extreme. But maybe I am wrong and he was very minority loving president.

France is excellent example what happens when you have millions of people in certain minority and then your politicians decide to get some populist points by picking said minority by creating laws and regulations that are designed to harass said minority. And now decade later said minority is full of people that resent majority of French people in such extent that they seem to be easy to incite to commit terrorist attacks against said majority.

Germany has had long time now law that forbids slandering heads of foreign states. This year they seem to try to abolish that law, but it is still in effect. One main reason for abolishing that law is probably this case.

This comment from the article's comments gives good indication why Trump don't need to care factualness of his tweets. His supporters don't just seem to give him benefit of doubt but they actually invent narratives in their head that Trump does only good things and everything else is conspiracy against him even if its is just linking and commenting tweets that Trump himself has made. "Katharine Dupre The reason you think the President is lying is because the Washington Post lies about what he is doing. Wake up and smell the coffee!" Some could say that it don't look that one could argue with Trump's supporters reasonable manner, because they don't believe in reason, but only in their own world view and everything else is wrong and bad.

They say that Times and National Geographic aren't write about same story, but I am not entirely convinced of that isn't the case

If I don't like game after couple hours I stop playing if I don't have before hand knowledge that it gets better after sometime. But these days I take quite little risk with games that I buy, as I seem to have quite little time to play games these days. Like I didn't even log 1000 hours last years all games combined.

Here somethings of some significance that happened in 1954

You mean same country that Trump chose to be his first country to align towards? It is OK for USA to reach agreements with Russia but not for Iran? Well that is not what happened, the sanctions against Russia havent been dropped so what agreements do you mean? http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/trump-calls-putin-world-leaders/ Trump and Putin discuss stabilizing ties, Kremlin says CNN's Matthew Chance in Moscow said a Kremlin summary of the phone call talked about stabilizing the relationship between the two nations and several other subjects. Some of the other issues included restoring trade ties, international terrorism, the situations in Ukraine and the Korean Peninsula, and the coordination of military action against ISIS and other terrorist groups in Syria.

You mean same country that Trump chose to be his first country to align towards? It is OK for USA to reach agreements with Russia but not for Iran?

It is mind warming to see that all the super Christians and bible thumpers in US Senate and Congress are still willing stand behind Christian values like they are when it comes to subjects like marriage equality and having right to refuse service because of religious values

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/us/politics/trump-syrian-refugees.html All these countries have ISIS groups, so its a valid preventative measure, are you worried this making the USA look bad ? Also Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Malaysia and France have ISIS groups.

Because they are allies of USA and were just forward thinkers in policies that USA will establish?

It seem that this dangerous citizen of UK, but who is ex-Somalia fears that his return to US will also be denied https://www.facebook.com/MoFarahGold/posts/1369028299785195 Mo Farah On 1st January this year, Her Majesty The Queen made me a Knight of the Realm. On 27th January, President Donald Trump seems to have made me an alien. I am a British citizen who has lived in America for the past six years - working hard, contributing to society, paying my taxes and bringing up our four children in the place they now call home. Now, me and many others like me are being told that we may not be welcome. It’s deeply troubling that I will have to tell my children that Daddy might not be able to come home - to explain why the President has introduced a policy that comes from a place of ignorance and prejudice. I was welcomed into Britain from Somalia at eight years old and given the chance to succeed and realise my dreams. I have been proud to represent my country, win medals for the British people and receive the greatest honour of a knighthood. My story is an example of what can happen when you follow polices of compassion and understanding, not hate and isolation. EDIT: Removed alternative facts that slipped in. As Farah don't anymore have Somalian citizenship and he has not yet tried to enter to USA after the ban.

Total number of Iranian descents in USA is about 1 million (estimate 2016). Total number of people with Somali ancestry living in USA is about 200000 (census data 2012) Total number of Syrian descents in USA is about 157000 (census data 2005) Total number of Sudanese descents in USA is 42,214 (census data 2013) Total number of Iraqi descents in USA is about 150000 (census data 2015) Total number of Libyan descents in USA is about 9000 (census data 2012) Total number of Yemeni descents in USA is about 40000 (census data 2014) Can't say what annual numbers are, but not probably that high that total ban would add more security compared to security vetting and visa(+green card) process that was done before it.

Bans seems to be doing good and blocking very dangerous sounding people to entering in the country http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/01/28/boston-area-academics-facing-bans-entering/StddgeCOncofRfEFVG7LTL/story.html Boston-area academics are facing bans on entering US Among those whose plans were disrupted was Seyed Soheil Saeedi Saravi, a scientist from Iran, who was planning to come to Boston with his wife to work at a research laboratory specializing in cardiovascular disease at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. Now his visa has been suspended for three months. “Many Iranians are successful persons in the field of science and trade in US. We are peaceful people and we are out of political games,” Saravi, 30, wrote in an e-mail. “We learn, research, work for development of our country and help to improve the public health of global populations. . . . I am so sorry for this decision.” Dr. Thomas Michel, a cardiologist who hired Savari to work in his lab, got the news Friday. He said the travel ban is jeopardizing the country’s position in the scientific community. “So many people who have been trained in science in this country have gone on to do amazing things in the US and their home countries,” Michel said. “That is being undermined.” Samira Asgari, who holds a doctorate from the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne in Switzerland, posted a Twitter message Saturday announcing that she had been barred from boarding a flight to the United States because she’s Iranian. She was traveling to Boston to begin working on a tuberculosis project at a Harvard Medical School research laboratory run by Dr. Soumya Raychaudhuri. He said he recruited Asgari after hearing her give a talk last May at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York. She was granted a J-1 Visa and was awarded two years of research funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation. “I couldn’t believe that somebody with a visa with her standing would be denied entry,” Raychaudhuri said in a telephone interview. “I was very upset.” He said Asgari had flown from Geneva to Frankfurt where she was barred from continuing to Boston.

They're also close US allies, who we can't afford to quarrel with. So only fatal attacks count? There were just recently a couple of attacks by Somalis. Egypt with government that is somewhat hostile towards USA is ally, but Iraq with government placed by USA isn't? And I would questioning how good ally Turkey is in these days. I can't say what counts as fatal attacks don't at least seem to be the reason for the bans.

Time when Teen Vogue is your example of good journalism http://www.teenvogue.com/story/donald-trumps-immigration-ban-excludes-countries-business-ties?mbid=social_twitter Yesterday (January 27), President Donald Trump signed an executive order banning immigration from seven countries, all of which are predominantly Muslim. The countries in question are Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. During the signing, President Trump proclaimed, "I am establishing new vetting measures to keep radical Islamic terrorists out of the United States of America." However, over the past four decades, there have been no fatal attacks on American soil that were orchestrated from immigrants from any of those seven banned countries. Additionally, according to a report from the Cato Institute, no Americans have been killed in the past 15 years by Muslim Americans with family backgrounds in any of those countries. And it has been noted that zero of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were from any of those seven countries. The report from the Cato Institute concluded that Trump's ban "will have virtually no effect on improving U.S. national security." Incidentally, the same report demonstrates that approximately 3,000 Americans have been killed by citizens from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Turkey. The majority of those victims died during the 9/11 attacks. Those four countries have something pretty glaring in common – they are all locations where President Trump has close business ties.

They use stripe as their payment processor. When KS moved to use it I had problems to get it accept my visa certified credit card.

Elerond I watched an interview with someone from the Trump camp about this and what he said actually made sense Trump is prohibiting Muslims coming from countries that cannot guarantee or vet the people who get on planes, these countries include Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Sudan All these countries are either war zones, enemies of the USA or hotbeds of Islamic extremism....do you blame Trump for blocking them? I would think this is appropriate considering the fact the USA is a target of terrorist attacks ? http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/27/politics/trump-plans-to-sign-executive-action-on-refugees-extreme-vetting/ Yes I blame him. USA don't take non-vetted refugees, so everybody now denied are people that US officials though to be safe to take in, many such that have helped them in past. Also USA actions in past are big part why Iraq, Libya and Syria have become hotbeds of Islamic extremist and why people are fleeing from them now. Of course stopping and killing Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi and opposing Bashar al-Assad can be justified and even seen as necessary actions, but they were also actions the destabilized those countries and drive them in uncontrollable civil wars and give room for extremist to get foot hold in them. Also where you think refugees mainly come if not from war zones? Also Iraq's current government is ally of USA. This is one of the few topics you and I dont agree on, since we have had this debate before all I ask is you consider what I am going to say below Even though I dont agree lets say you right about Iraq and thats all the USA fault The initial civil wars in both Libya and Syria were caused by the Arab Spring, everything else came after that and both Gaddafi and Assad had options to share resources and agree to what the protestors were asking for Both of them refused to make any concessions and civil wars started. How is that the fault of the USA? In Libya USA gave weapons to those who opposed Gaddafi and during rebellion they gave air support for rebel forces. Meaning that USA take active part in dethroning Gaddafi and Clinton was quite gleeful when their efforts ended successfully. In Syria USA has given military schooling and weapons to rebels that oppose Assad and some of those weapons even ended in hands of ISIS terrorists. Meaning that USA had active part in Syria's civil war. So just to be clear, you are going to ignore the reasons why these civil wars started which had nothing to do with the USA but still blame the USA for supplying arms and weapons? I don't ignore why they started, but when you supply weapons, and give military schooling and air support for one side of civil war, then you can't say that you didn't play part in the consequences of said civil war and new civil wars started by previous ones.

Elerond I watched an interview with someone from the Trump camp about this and what he said actually made sense Trump is prohibiting Muslims coming from countries that cannot guarantee or vet the people who get on planes, these countries include Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Sudan All these countries are either war zones, enemies of the USA or hotbeds of Islamic extremism....do you blame Trump for blocking them? I would think this is appropriate considering the fact the USA is a target of terrorist attacks ? http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/27/politics/trump-plans-to-sign-executive-action-on-refugees-extreme-vetting/ Yes I blame him. USA don't take non-vetted refugees, so everybody now denied are people that US officials though to be safe to take in, many such that have helped them in past. Also USA actions in past are big part why Iraq, Libya and Syria have become hotbeds of Islamic extremist and why people are fleeing from them now. Of course stopping and killing Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi and opposing Bashar al-Assad can be justified and even seen as necessary actions, but they were also actions the destabilized those countries and drive them in uncontrollable civil wars and give room for extremist to get foot hold in them. Also where you think refugees mainly come if not from war zones? Also Iraq's current government is ally of USA. This is one of the few topics you and I dont agree on, since we have had this debate before all I ask is you consider what I am going to say below Even though I dont agree lets say you right about Iraq and thats all the USA fault The initial civil wars in both Libya and Syria were caused by the Arab Spring, everything else came after that and both Gaddafi and Assad had options to share resources and agree to what the protestors were asking for Both of them refused to make any concessions and civil wars started. How is that the fault of the USA? In Libya USA gave weapons to those who opposed Gaddafi and during rebellion they gave air support for rebel forces. Meaning that USA take active part in dethroning Gaddafi and Clinton was quite gleeful when their efforts ended successfully. In Syria USA has given military schooling and weapons to rebels that oppose Assad and some of those weapons even ended in hands of ISIS terrorists. Meaning that USA had active part in Syria's civil war.

Elerond I watched an interview with someone from the Trump camp about this and what he said actually made sense Trump is prohibiting Muslims coming from countries that cannot guarantee or vet the people who get on planes, these countries include Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Sudan All these countries are either war zones, enemies of the USA or hotbeds of Islamic extremism....do you blame Trump for blocking them? I would think this is appropriate considering the fact the USA is a target of terrorist attacks ? http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/27/politics/trump-plans-to-sign-executive-action-on-refugees-extreme-vetting/ Yes I blame him. USA don't take non-vetted refugees, so everybody now denied are people that US officials though to be safe to take in, many such that have helped them in past. Also USA actions in past are big part why Iraq, Libya and Syria have become hotbeds of Islamic extremist and why people are fleeing from them now. Of course stopping and killing Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi and opposing Bashar al-Assad can be justified and even seen as necessary actions, but they were also actions the destabilized those countries and drive them in uncontrollable civil wars and give room for extremist to get foot hold in them. Also where you think refugees mainly come if not from war zones? Also Iraq's current government is ally of USA.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/28/us/refugees-detained-at-us-airports-prompting-legal-challenges-to-trumps-immigration-order.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0 President Trump’s executive order closing the nation’s borders to refugees was put into immediate effect on Friday night. Refugees who were airborne on flights on the way to the United States when the order was signed were stopped and detained at airports. The detentions prompted legal challenges as lawyers representing two Iraqis held at Kennedy Airport filed a writ of habeas corpus early Saturday in the Eastern District of New York seeking to have their clients released. At the same time, they filed a motion for class certification, in an effort to represent all refugees and immigrants who they said were being unlawfully detained at ports of entry. ... The lawyers said that one of the Iraqis detained at Kennedy Airport, Hameed Khalid Darweesh, had worked on behalf of the United States government in Iraq for 10 years. The other, Haider Sameer Abdulkhaleq Alshawi, was coming to the United States to join his wife, who had worked for an American contractor, and young son, the lawyers said. They said both men had been detained at the airport on Friday night after arriving on separate flights. The lawyers said they had not been allowed to meet with their clients, and there were tense moments as they tried to reach them. “Who is the person we need to talk to?” asked one of the lawyers, Mark Doss, a supervising attorney at the International Refugee Assistance Project. “Mr. President,” said a Customs and Border Protection agent, who declined to identify himself. “Call Mr. Trump.”

I would guess that it is because of fees that PayPal asks