Are the left being brainwashed by Islam?? - Mod warning in OP

Help!!!!

alastair wrote: »

No he wasn't.

It was mentioned on Sky news this morning but heres something you can read

https://sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

but Trumps travel ban makes sense ,

Except it doesn't, as those countries already have extremly stringent checkes placed on refugees and anyone applying for a green card. Its just Steve Bannon trying to stir up hatred and Xenophobia.

Help!!!!

wes wrote: »

Except it doesn't, as those countries already have extremly stringent checkes placed on refugees and anyone applying for a green card. Its just Steve Bannon trying to stir up hatred and Xenophobia.

Read this its quite interesting

https://sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/

alastair

Help!!!! wrote: »

It was mentioned on Sky news this morning but heres something you can read

https://sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/

I thought I was the sheep duped by the media?

Both Sky (if you heard correctly) and your mate Seth are wrong.

Trump’s claim that the seven countries listed in the executive order came from the Obama administration is conveniently left unexplained. A bit of background: soon after the December 2015 terror attack in San Bernadino, President Obama signed an amendment to the Visa Waiver Program, a law that allows citizens of 38 countries to travel to the United States without obtaining visas (and gives Americans reciprocal privileges in those countries). The amendment removed from the Visa Waiver Program dual nationals who were citizens of four countries (Iraq, Iran, Sudan, and Syria), or anyone who had recently traveled to those countries. The Obama administration added three more to the list (Libya, Somalia, and Yemen), bringing the total to seven. But this law did not bar anyone from coming to the United States. It only required a relatively small percentage of people to obtain a visa first. And to avoid punishing people who clearly had good reasons to travel to the relevant countries, the Obama administration used a waiver provided by Congress for certain travelers, including journalists, aid workers, and officials from international organizations like the United Nations.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/30/sorry-mr-president-the-obama-administration-did-nothing-similar-to-your-immigration-ban/

On Seth's piece:
http://www.snopes.com/trump-immigration-order-obama/

Walter H Price

wes wrote: »

Except it doesn't, as those countries already have extremly stringent checkes placed on refugees and anyone applying for a green card. Its just Steve Bannon trying to stir up hatred and Xenophobia.

I don't agree , i honestly think by the time your are advising your citizens not to travel to a country any country because of a real and sever threat to your life due to the beliefs and attitude of its citizenry to you and the country you are from, that it is probably a good idea to greatly restrict or stop immigration from that country.

If people were on the streets of wherever chanting death to the Irish and burning the tricolor , attacking our embassy's and our government were saying do not travel there as your life is in danger , how comfortable would you feel about allowing people from those countries come here ?

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

I don't agree ,

On what basis is the current screening deficent? I have yet to be provided any evidence in regards to that at all.

Walter H Price wrote: »

i honestly think by the time your are advising your citizens not to travel to a country any country because of a real and sever threat to your life due to the beliefs and attitude of its citizenry to you and the country you are from, that it is probably a good idea to greatly restrict or stop immigration from that country.

If people were on the streets of wherever chanting death to the Irish and burning the tricolor , attacking our embassy's and our government were saying do not travel there as your life is in danger , how comfortable would you feel about allowing people from those countries come here ?

Ah nice little picture you paint, not exactly representative of reality however.

I oppose Trumps ban (the one we see in reality and not a fantasy), seeing as it banned people who lived in the US for years, who have commited no crime, and had innocent people being put in hand cuffs, 5 year old children seperated from there mothers etc. That is the definition of a bad policy. How anyone can defend this is beyond me. It seems that fear and hatred have sadly overwhelmed good sense for far to many people. How is it right to ban a premanent resident who has commited no crime for years of living in a country. How is right to ban a bloody 5 year old. When you find yourself supporting that, I think you need a long hard look in the mirror.

Also, if the policy was created by a facist like Steve Bannon, that on its own, would be enough for me to oppose such nonsense, and I would be rather worried about my safety from my own government, as they have allowed a facist to be involved in government at all. A facist who wants war with China no less. Dieing in nuclear armagedeon, is rather worrisome.

I personally find the fact that the Trump admin, blamed Muslims on a massacre at a Canadian mosque, when it was a Trump supporter who did it, and haven't bothered to correct there bull**** since then. I find the support for facism to be rather worrying, as I am not white, and as such a target of that group.

alastair

Walter H Price wrote: »

I don't agree , i honestly think by the time your are advising your citizens not to travel to a country any country because of a real and sever threat to your life due to the beliefs and attitude of its citizenry to you and the country you are from, that it is probably a good idea to greatly restrict or stop immigration from that country.

If people were on the streets of wherever chanting death to the Irish and burning the tricolor , attacking our embassy's and our government were saying do not travel there as your life is in danger , how comfortable would you feel about allowing people from those countries come here ?

You think the Irish should have been banned from the UK then?

And presumably the refugees from these hotbeds of terrorism, having been personally investigated for up to two years, should be removed from such a blanket ban, having been 'extremely vetted'?

BuilderPlumber

wes wrote: »

Except it doesn't, as those countries already have extremly stringent checkes placed on refugees and anyone applying for a green card. Its just Steve Bannon trying to stir up hatred and Xenophobia.

Donald Trump is totally under the thumb of Steve Bannon. Bannon's goal is to implode the presidency and administration and to create havoc. Trump knows this but his hands are tied. Bannon being a media baron has so much on Trump that he owns him.

constance tench

Nody wrote: »

Then go listen to Westboro Baptist Church preachers and tell me what you think as that's representing all Christianity by the same definition.

Do you think engaging with what-aboutery furthers your argument?

Walter H Price

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I think a better question to ask would be why are they chanting death to the irish?

Americans are fed a pile of horseshít about these barbarians simply hating the idea of freedom and that's why they hate America.
That's not the reason, they hate America because Americans raped and plundered their countries and because Americans killed their fathers/ mothers/ kids so on.
They are right to hate America, America is as close to an evil nation as you will find on this globe. Responsible for the deaths of countless millions of people. They are more or less ALWAYS at war with somebody - they just fúcking love a good old fashioned war. Of the 10 countries that spend the most on their militaries every year, uncle sam spends something like 5 or 6 times what the other 9 do combined.
Stop bombing these people and maybe they'll hate you that little bit less - it's not fúcking rocket science!

No doubt there a legitimate level of hate their , i don't buy the enemy's of freedom BS and fully agree i dont know why the US and others are still getting involved in the middle east its a waste of time and money , money that could be invested in alternative energy making their oil and the Wests dependence on them redundent.

The fact remains large swaths of the citizenry in these countries are hostile towords Americans , therefore it seems logical to severely restrict their elegibility to enter America.

I'm far from a hardline republican supporter id classify myself as far more libertarian , as in economically right socially predominantly left

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

The fact remains large swaths of the citizenry in these countries are hostile towords Americans , therefore it seems logical to severely restrict their elegibility to enter America.

There already doing that. Take a look at the vetting of immigrants and refugees that already exists. Trump and Bannon are lieing about the state of vetting. Its already extreme vetting.

Then, there is the fact of permenant residence being denied entry, who have lived there for years. If someone has lived in your country for years, and has caused no trouble, why do they need extra vettinng? Surely, years of not commting crimes etc should be a enough.

Bannon, wants to normalize hatred of immigrants and foreigners and is deliberately trying to stir up hatred. Its not about protecting any body, and if that was the case Saudia Arabia would be the top of the list.

Walter H Price

wes wrote: »

There already doing that. Take a look at the vetting of immigrants and refugees that already exists. Trump and Bannon are lieing about the state of vetting. Its already extreme vetting.

Then, there is the fact of permenant residence being denied entry, who have lived there for years. If someone has lived in your country for years, and has caused no trouble, why do they need extra vettinng? Surely, years of not commting crimes etc should be a enough.

Bannon, wants to normalize hatred of immigrants and foreigners and is deliberately trying to stir up hatred. Its not about protecting any body, and if that was the case Saudia Arabia would be the top of the list.

He ran on a promise of suspending and reviewing , he was elected , he has suspended and is reviewing as he was elected to do.

This is a temporary ban , i do disagree with it affecting those who already have a green card and are stuck abroad etc.. but once the new system is in they should have to apply and go through the new process.

I doubt very much that Trump hates foreigners , he's married to one. But either way and i know its difficult in the context of the week i don't believe the OP's intent was to start another discussion about immigration , the ban or Tump

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

He ran on a promise of suspending and reviewing , he was elected , he has suspended and is reviewing as he was elected to do.

Being elected is no excuses for incompetence.

Walter H Price wrote: »

This is a temporary ban ,

Will believe it when it has ended, as Trump and his admin have lied repeatedly, and as such can't be trusted.

Walter H Price wrote: »

i do disagree with it affecting those who already have a green card and are stuck abroad etc.. but once the new system is in they should have to apply and go through the new process.

So they lose there jobs, homes and property in the mean time? Have to go through a multi year process again, to see there families, for the crime of being abroad at the wrong time? What about those people already in the US. Are they now illegals? You are minimising the suffereing of this throughly incompetent and vile decision by Trump.

What about Trump and the DHS ignoring court orders? Why are they above the law? Surely, some of them should go to jail for violating a court order. Last, I checked the Presidetnt can't run rough shod over the law.

Again, look at who Steve Bannon is. The man is a straight up facist and racist. He is behind this policy. This is just the start for him, if he can have his way, it will be much worse.

Walter H Price wrote: »

I doubt very much that Trump hates foreigners , he's married to one.

Just Mexicans and Muslims, as per his own words.

Walter H Price wrote: »

But either way and i know its difficult in the context of the week i don't believe the OP's intent was to start another discussion about immigration , the ban or Tump

I think the OP was just having a go personally. Lets look at the timing of this thread, a ban targetting Muslims was just passed, and a terror attack by a right wing Trump supporter just happened a couple of days ago. That imho says a lot.

Help!!!!

wes wrote: »

I think the OP was just having a go personally.

Having a go at what?? I asked a perfectly good question. Through my own personal experiences I do not understand why the left/feminists etc are bending over backwards for Muslims when Islam is against western values

Walter H Price

wes wrote: »

Being elected is no excuses for incompetence

If keeping election promises is now viewed incompetence i think we have far bigger issue then the US implementing a temporary travel and immigration ban on 7 countries.

Reuters poll in the last few days found 49% of Americans either agree or strongly agree with the ban , 41% don't and 10% undecided, so if anything hes competently doing the job the american public elected him to do with this move.

I don't think the OP was just having a go to be honest i think he raised an interesting point , i wouldn't have used the term brainwashed personally but , i do find the relationship between the social left and Islam very very strange

wes

Help!!!! wrote: »

Having a go at what??

The left, as per you thread title.

Help!!!! wrote: »

I asked a perfectly good question. Through my own personal experiences I do not understand why the left/feminists etc are bending over backwards for Muslims when Islam is against western values

Treating people fairly is not bending over backwards, and again very recently we had a right wing, anti-feminist, anti-Muslim right winger butcher 6 people in a mosque, and then having the Trump admin turn around and blame Muslims instead.

The question, I think needs to be asked is why so many on the right are ok with that? Why do they support targetting a miniority group of the actions of the few. Why are they ok with collective punishment? Your thread timing is again rather interestng. I guess you wanted to strike while the iron was hot so to speak.

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

If keeping election promises is now viewed incompetence i think we have far bigger issue then the US implementing a temporary travel and immigration ban on 7 countries.

Violating court orders is incompetence and in fact is criminal. The chaos is a perfect example of the incomptence.

You have completely side stepped why I said it was incompetent. Being elected to do something, and then dong it isn't the same as being competent. Your defense, doesn't make any sense.

How is the chaos we have seen with the policy, where various other parts of the government were not aware of the policy, not an example of rank incompetence? How is violation of court order competence? Again, the president is not above the law. The legislature is responsible for changes to the law, the President has to work within the law, or he could have had the senate and congress that his party controls change the law. Instead a poorly wored executive order that has caused chaos.

Walter H Price wrote: »

Reuters poll in the last few days found 49% of Americans either agree or strongly agree with the ban , 41% don't and 10% undecided, so if anything hes competently doing the job the american public elected him to do with this move.

A lot of people agreeing with something is not an example of competence, just public opinion, and as we have seen with the election of Trump, its not exactly accurate all of the time.

Basically, public opinion has no bearing on the policy being competently done. Again, you have not made you case at all, and what your saying is in fact irrelevant as to whether the policy was implemented competently.

Walter H Price wrote: »

I don't think the OP was just having a go to be honest i think he raised an interesting point , i wouldn't have used the term brainwashed personally but , i do find the relationship between the social left and Islam very very strange

Well, considering the OPs anti-Muslim atatements, I would beg to differ.

Help!!!!

wes wrote: »

The left, as per you thread title.



Treating people fairly is not bending over backwards, and again very recently we had a right wing, anti-feminist, anti-Muslim right winger butcher 6 people in a mosque, and then having the Trump admin turn around and blame Muslims instead.

The question, I think needs to be asked is why so many on the right are ok with that? Why do they support targetting a miniority group of the actions of the few. Why are they ok with collective punishment? Your thread timing is again rather interestng. I guess you wanted to strike while the iron was hot so to speak.

What you going on about there was no hidden agenda behind the post. Lets get things straight here if you think I'm right wing or whatever the hell. I was an immigrant, i am married to an immigrant, my cousins who are mixed race came to live in Ireland in the 80s, I have friends of many different race/culture/religion some even Muslim. I have spoken honestly with some of them & the practising Muslims would like to have Sharia Law. I have heard the way the talk about women & gays. So I'm just trying to get my head round why what looks like a lesbian (might be wrong) woman would be singing Alluha Akbar at a womens march

wes

Help!!!! wrote: »

What you going on about there was no hidden agenda behind the post. Lets get things straight here if you think I'm right wing or whatever the hell. I was an immigrant, i am married to an immigrant, my cousins who are mixed race came to live in Ireland in the 80s, I have friends of many different race/culture/religion some even Muslim. I have spoken honestly with some of them & the practising Muslims would like to have Sharia Law. I have heard the way the talk about women & gays. So I'm just trying to get my head round why what looks like a lesbian (might be wrong) woman would be singing Alluha Akbar at a womens march

You stated that there are no moderate Muslims, that is an extremist position. Do you deny that is your position or not? Simply question.

As for being right wing or not, honestly could care less. Being an immigrant doesn't stop you having biggoted opinions about other groups, and again you have stated, there are no moderate Muslims, a position you share with ISIS btw,

I stand by my statement in regards to timing. Muslims have been targetted the last fews days, and you decide to have a go at the left, which is what the thread is, as per the title.

Now, maybe just maybe, not every Muslim is the same. I know that may be shocking for you, but maybe just maybe some people think it wrong that people are discriminated against. Maybe, the Muslims they know, aren't anti-women or homophobic. I know, maybe hard for you to believe, consdering your anti-muslims statements. Maybe people can be against religous extremists, but also be against attacks on the believers, who aren't hurting anyone?

Maybe, just maybe women, all women, Muslim or otherwise, are against Trump, who made his personal opinion clear on Women rather clear. I do note with interest, how Trump supporters are given a free pass by so many, with the defense of "economic" anxiety or some other guff.

Walter H Price

wes wrote: »

You stated that there are no moderate Muslims, that is an extremist position. Do you deny that is your position or not? Simply question.

i thinks its difficult for a Muslim to be both devout and moderate , as discussed in this thread moderate does not refer to the support of jihad , moderate to me would be a rejection of sharia which are extreme , oppressive , degrading and discriminatory laws , totally at odd with western culture and values any Muslim who supports sharia cannot be called a moderate , and in my experience there are very few devout Muslims who will not defend sharia at he very least if they are not in full support of it.

The only Muslims i have met who are truly moderate , rational m, decent people are those who have left or are looking for a way to leave Islam, such as the girl from my masters course that myself and a number of my classmates helped gain asylum here this year. She was about a Muslim as the pope but had she gone back to Saudi she'd have been in a Burka and the property of her father / husband etc for the rest of her life. She couldn't fathom why any European woman would defend or support Islam and helped completely change the view of a number of the Irish , French and Dutch girls in our class in relation to this.

Help!!!!

wes wrote: »

You stated that there are no moderate Muslims, that is an extremist position. Do you deny that is your position or not? Simply question.

From my experience I have met no moderate Muslim. You have Muslims in name only who drink alcohol, do drugs dont go to mosque & then you have the ones who go to mosque & if you question their religion or prophet their persona changes. Moderate to me is a Muslim who fits in & respects other cultures & all human beings no matter their sex or sexual orientation
As I've said, it is my experience that doesn't make me a racist/extremist or anything else

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

i thinks its difficult for a Muslim to be both devout and moderate , as discussed in this thread moderate does not refer to the support of jihad , moderate to me would be a rejection of sharia which are extreme , oppressive , degrading and discriminatory laws , totally at odd with western culture and values any Muslim who supports sharia cannot be called a moderate , and in my experience there are very few devout Muslims who will not defend sharia at he very least if they are not in full support of it.

The only Muslims i have met who are truly moderate , rational m, decent people are those who have left or are looking for a way to leave Islam, such as the girl from my masters course that myself and a number of my classmates helped gain asylum here this year. She was about a Muslim as the pope but had she gone back to Saudi she'd have been in a Burka and the property of her father / husband etc for the rest of her life. She couldn't fathom why any European woman would defend or support Islam and helped completely change the view of a number of the Irish , French and Dutch girls in our class in relation to this.

Defending Muslims is not the same as defending Islam. Unless, you can show where people are defending particulars of the Religous belief, than the statement is not an accurate one.

wes

Help!!!! wrote: »

From my experience I have met no moderate Muslim.

From my expericence, people who say that are extremist bigots or liars.

Help!!!! wrote: »

You have Muslims in name only who drink alcohol, do drugs dont go to mosque & then you have the ones who go to mosque & if you question their religion or prophet their persona changes. Moderate to me is a Muslim who fits in & respects other cultures & all human beings no matter their sex or sexual orientation
As I've said, it is my experience that doesn't make me a racist/extremist or anything else

In my expericence it does, as people who say there are no moderate are extremists and bigots. Again, you and ISIS are on the same page there.

Help!!!!

wes wrote: »

From my expericence, people who say that are extremist bigots or liars.



In mine it does, as people who say there are no moderate are extremists. Again, you and ISIS are on the same page there.

Sticks & stones & all that, typical leftie break out the bigot & liar yada yada ya when someone has a different view to you

I think I found you on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-3Y3NDCT-Y

wes

Help!!!! wrote: »

Sticks & stones & all that, typical leftie break out the bigot & liar yada yada ya when someone has a different view to you

My experience is just as valid as yours. Why is your experience of anymore value than mine? Interesting, how you don't like it, when I use the exact same reasoning as yours, and reject it when its used on you.

Seems you reject your own reasoning, then its aimed right back at you. Very interesting, and then you descend into childish nonsense about "typical leftie" or whatever.

If your experience is valid, then so is mine. Can't have it both ways.

Help!!!! wrote: »

I think I found you on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-3Y3NDCT-Y

Interesting accusation. I made 0 accusations based on your race, but rather on people who share you opinions. Seems to be that you are making a false accusation, unless you can back up your claim of me attacking you based on your race.

Seems to me you don't like being challanged, and reject other people experience, but we have to take your as being gospel. Pretty hypocritical.

I take it you either missed the point I am trying to make, or you copped it, and are now lashing out in anger.

Walter H Price

wes wrote: »

Defending Muslims is not the same as defending Islam. Unless, you can show where people are defending particulars of the Religous belief, than the statement is not an accurate one.

But how do you separate a person from their faith without actually getting to know them personally, if your just going to blanket defend Muslims that's as ill though out an approach as the extreme right looking to ban all Muslims.

You accept there are fundamental issues with Islam and the thinking and Idealogy of devout Muslims (aside from the jihadi extremists) view and values which conflict and contrast with existing western values and the even more so conflict with the liberal ideal, you would not defend Devout Catholics or Orthodox Jews in the same way so what is it about Islam that makes it different.

I maintain my position the the socially left and Muslims make very very strange bedfellows, its the equivalent or arch Capitalists defending the rights of Marxists complete polar views on many many issues. This is far from a race thing , some of the most extream / least moderate Muslims I've met have been white Bosnians

Help!!!!

wes wrote: »

My experience is just as valid as yours. Why is your experience of anymore value than mine? Interesting, how you don't like it, when I use the exact same reasoning as yours, and reject it when its used on you.

Seems you reject your own reasoning, then its aimed right back at you. Very interesting, and then you descend into childish nonsense about "typical leftie" or whatever.

If your experience is valid, then so is mine. Can't have it both ways.



Interesting accusation. I made 0 accusations based on your race, but rather on people who share you opinions. Seems to be that you are making a false accusation, unless you can back up your claim of me attacking you based on your race.

Seems to me you don't like being challanged, and reject other people experience, but we have to take your as being gospel. Pretty hypocritical.

I take it you either missed the point I am trying to make, or you copped it, and are now lashing out in anger.

No but your the one that started calling me an extremist bigot & liar just because my experience & views are different to yours. I'm not the one calling you names because your views are different

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

But how do you separate a person from their faith without actually getting to know them personally, if your just going to blanket defend Muslims that's as ill though out an approach as the extreme right looking to ban all Muslims.

It pretty standard that everyone is innocent until proven otherwise. Why should this standard be different for Muslims?

Walter H Price wrote: »

You accept there are fundamental issues with Islam and the thinking and Idealogy of devout Muslims (aside from the jihadi extremists) view and values which conflict and contrast with existing western values and the even more so conflict with the liberal ideal, you would not defend Devout Catholics or Orthodox Jews in the same way so what is it about Islam that makes it different.

If someone wanted to take there rights away I would. Yet, I don't see anyone trying to justify there being no moderate Jews or Catholics, by using there personal experience on this thread, hence no reason to defend those groups on this thread.

Walter H Price wrote: »

I maintain my position the the socially left and Muslims make very very strange bedfellows, its the equivalent or arch Capitalists defending the rights of Marxists complete polar views on many many issues. This is far from a race thing , some of the most extream / least moderate Muslims I've met have been white Bosnians

I never claimed it was a race thing, but again I disagree, defending the rights of individuals is very much a left wing thing to do, and shows that even when there is disagreement in people views that are being defended, that the left defends there fundamental rigths. This is not strange at all, and is the proper ting to do.

wes

Help!!!! wrote: »

No but your the one that started calling me an extremist bigot & liar just because my experience & views are different to yours. I'm not the one calling you names because your views are different

Except I didn't. Go read my posts again:

wes wrote: »

You stated that there are no moderate Muslims, that is an extremist position. Do you deny that is your position or not? Simply question.

As for being right wing or not, honestly could care less. Being an immigrant doesn't stop you having biggoted opinions about other groups, and again you have stated, there are no moderate Muslims, a position you share with ISIS btw,

I said that opinions are biggoted, never said you were. I was being careful, not call you any names, and to attack the idea and not the person.

wes wrote: »

From my expericence, people who say that are extremist bigots or liars.

In my expericence it does, as people who say there are no moderate are extremists and bigots. Again, you and ISIS are on the same page there.

I never said you were a bigot or a liar, just that people who in my experience who have the same views are bigots and liars. I chose my words careful, as I didn't want to falsely accuse you of something, as I don't know you. Again, I was making a point about how someone experience doesn't really prove anything.

Again, my experience just as valid as yours, and I would ask you please read my posts carefully in future. Simply put my opinion is that views that thare are no moderates Muslims, are extremist and biggoted. My position based on my experience is just as valid as your position, but you take exception to my opinion, which has as much weight as your does.

Walter H Price

wes wrote: »

It pretty standard that everyone is innocent until proven otherwise. Why should this standard be different for Muslims?



If someone wanted to take there rights away I would. Yet, I don't see anyone trying to justify there being no moderate Jews or Catholics, by using there personal experience on this thread, hence no reason to defend those groups on this thread.



I never claimed it was a race thing, but again I disagree, defending the rights of individuals is very much a left wing thing to do, and shows that even when there is disagreement in people views that are being defended, that the left defends there fundamental rigths. This is not strange at all, and is the proper ting to do.

16 countries all majority Muslim including 6 of the 7 on Trumps list deny entry to Israli citizens. what is the difference ?why are the socially left not protesting the right of Israli citizens to travel or move to those 16 countries ?

Now it may seem fairly clear why Israelis might be banned from those Muslim countries as it could be said they have very conflicting view's on issues in the middle east and very different cultural values, that said ive met plenty of Jews including Israelis who have no time for Bibi or the settlements but still they would be denied entry to those 16 countries.

are you honestly telling me that devout Muslims , who believe in sharia etc... are any more compatible with western liberal values than those Israelis banned from those 16 countries