This is not a Muslim ban; over 40 Muslim countries not affected by order: Trump

January 30, 2017

Washington, Jan 30: President Donald Trump insisted on Sunday that his executive order temporarily halting travel from seven majority-Muslim countries+ was "not a Muslim ban," after it was met with confusion, global outrage and huge protests+ across the United States.

trumpban"America is a proud nation of immigrants and we will continue to show compassion to those fleeing oppression, but we will do so while protecting our own citizens and border. America has always been the land of the free and home of the brave," Trump said in a statement.

"This is not about religion — this is about terror and keeping our country safe," he said, adding that more 40 Muslim countries were not affected by his order.

His defense came+ in the form of an official written statement issued by the White House, a rare move for a president who has favored speaking directly to his audience via Twitter.

The president singled out the media, which he has attacked repeatedly since coming into office just over a week ago.

"We will keep it free and keep it safe, as the media knows," he said, referring to the United States.

"To be clear, this is not a Muslim ban, as the media is falsely reporting."

Trump signed the executive order on Friday, suspending the arrival of all refugees+ for at least 120 days, Syrian refugees indefinitely and barring citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days.

While Trump has cited the September 11, 2001, attacks as justification for his move, he did not target any of the 9/11 hijackers' home countries — Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Judges in at least four states with major international airports — Massachusetts, New York, Virginia and Washington — issued temporary stays to block parts of Trump's executive order, preventing authorities from deporting people who had been detained.

Trump recalled that his predecessor Barack Obama, a Democrat, had paused for six months in 2011 the Iraqi refugee program.

And he stressed that the seven countries targeted by his ban were also listed by Obama.

But the previous administration's restrictions were of a different sort, requiring visas for people having traveled to those countries in the past five years.

"We will again be issuing visas to all countries once we are sure we have reviewed and implemented the most secure policies over the next 90 days," Trump added.

"I have tremendous feeling for the people involved in this horrific humanitarian crisis in Syria. My first priority will always be to protect and serve our country, but as president I will find ways to help all those who are suffering."

Comments

PedoMhdFkdAmna
 - 
Monday, 30 Jan 2017

Why are 13 Muslim countries banned Israelis from entry ?

Ahmed K.C.
 - 
Monday, 30 Jan 2017

As per their claim 19 people who hijacked airlines on 9/11 were from GCC, namely, 15 from Saudi, 2 from UAE, 1 from Lebanon and 1 from Egypt.
But, no ban on above countries. If he really has DUM, should ban them and see the result.

PedoMhdFkdAmna
 - 
Monday, 30 Jan 2017

Good Trumpanna !

Dean
 - 
Monday, 30 Jan 2017

If he starts banning all terrorists then america will be left with only Muslims. :) We should also ban american products and outlets in Muslim countries. No Muslim should fly to US to show solidarity to the countries that were excluded. Canada is going to ban All Christians from entering Canada after yesterdays Masjid attack. First america should get out of Muslim Land and stop poking nose in Muslim countries for petrol.

Rikaz
 - 
Monday, 30 Jan 2017

Not good, racist president of America....

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 11,2020

Udupi, Feb 11: In a tragic incident, a 62-year-old man from Chennai died of drowning in Sri Krishna Mutt’s Madhwa Sarovar (pond) during the wee hours of Tuesday.

Police said the deceased has been identified as Capt G Sridharan.

It is suspected that Sridharan accidentally fell into the holy pond while taking a bath. The incident is said to have occurred around 4 a.m.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 20,2020

Bengaluru, May 20: An owner of a hair cutting training salon in the city has given shelter to the jobless IT professionals and migrant workers hailing from north-eastern states and Nepal, in his salon.

Rahul Rai, the owner said, "The moment the lockdown started then I received many complaints from different corners that several persons became jobless and they were thrown out of their rented accommodations."

"They are from different states of the North-east and some of them are from Nepal also. I converted my hair-cutting training salon into a shelter home for them," he added.

A person who got shelter at the salon said, "I lost my job after the lockdown started. I was facing a lot of issues after my landlord had evicted me from my rented accommodation. I spent about a week nearby a lake. I managed to contact Rahul Rai through Facebook and he rescued me along with many others."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 19,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.

Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.

“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.

In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.

‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’

Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.

“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.

In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.

“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.

The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.