Slashdot Mirror


Afghan Girl Roboticists Denied US Visas (bbc.com)

Three anonymous readers share a similar report: An all-girl team of roboticists will watch their creations compete in a US competition via Skype after being denied visas to enter the country. President Trump recently ordered a ban on travel from six Muslim-majority countries, but Afghanistan was not included on the list. Teams from Iran, Sudan and Syria -- which are on the list -- did manage to enter the country. The six-member team watched their ball-sorting robot compete in Washington DC via a video link from their hometown of Herat, in western Afghanistan. "We still don't know the reason why we were not granted visas, because other countries participating in the competition have been given visas," Fatemah Qaderyan, 14, told Reuters.

399 comments

  1. Girl by 110010001000 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Why does their gender matter? Quit being so sexist.

    1. Re:Girl by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Why does their gender matter?

      Why does the fact that she's Afghani matter? Why does the fact that she's a roboticist matter?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Girl by Kierthos · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It matters because in Afghanistan, women risk being attacked for daring to get an education. The fact that these young women are a robotics team is an important part of the story.

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    3. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why did we not read about each case of denied Visas under Obama? They did happen.

    4. Re:Girl by nightfire-unique · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why does their gender matter? Quit being so sexist.

      Have you been living in a basement for the past 10 years?

      It matters because girls in much of Afghanistan are systematically repressed and mistreated, denied education, equal rights and privileges, etc. That an all girls team from Afghanistan is excelling in robotics is very relevant to this story.

      --
      A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    5. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Their gender matters because as girls from Afghanistan, they would have been able to make a pretty good case that they should be allowed to remain in the US after being admitted due to conditions for girls in Afghanistan.

    6. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 0, Troll

      It matters because in Afghanistan, women risk being attacked for daring to get an education.

      And that is probably why they aren't being admitted to the US, because once here, they could likely find a way to legally stay.

    7. Re:Girl by CrankyFool · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And wouldn't that be just terrible. God knows how our culture could possibly survive allowing a few young girls come here.

    8. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For the simple reason that Obama didn't make it a signature policy of his to create a Muslim ban. Mistakes were probably made, but since Obama didn't wade into it, there was no mess on him.

      Instead, the right-wing went into hysterical frenzies over Obama criticizing the police, ATF guns, and Guantanamo. Even today, an NYPD officer was shot. Obama will likely get attacked for it, but Trump? Nope.

      Just watch though, Trump will likely get flak over trying to bring a baby in the country, whose lifespan will be measured in agonizing months, and all his supporters will be ignoring how his Trumpcare cuts funds for medical care for US citizens.

    9. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Oh, so a perfectly legitimate reason to deny entry from countries that have a certain religion in the majority?
      Is that what you are saying?

    10. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the simple reason that Obama didn't make it a signature policy of his to create a Muslim ban.

      If the end result is the same, then what difference does it make?

    11. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. I didn't even know that rugs had a gender

    12. Re:Girl by jellomizer · · Score: 0

      There is sexism involved. To get these Visa needs effort from the Host Government U.S. and the Government willing to let the person go (Afghan).
      Right now the US is under the rules of a Crazy man, with the Crazy embolden to take the orders and make things harder. Then you have Afghan who has a history of sexism who will not probably go the extra mile to try to get the Visa from the U.S. Because of some middle manager in immigration who is now empowered to block people who cable news says they are to be afraid of. If the country pushes further chances are they will get someone who is more willing to do their job properly.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    13. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, Islam's treatment of women is a problem, but the sad thing is that this is normal.

      They don't explain why they didn't give you a visa, they just turn you away and it sucks, so I definitely feel for them, but this is a regular occurrence in most countries without visa waivers. You may get arbitrarily denied, with no appeal and no idea what if anything you did wrong.

    14. Re:Girl by Kierthos · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh, the horror. Educated young women with interests in STEM fields. How would "Merica" ever survive such a thing?

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    15. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't understand? Setting an attitude makes it your problem, or rather Trump's.

    16. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Those are not just "a few young girls". They are roboticists having made a stand for female education in Afghanistan. They would probably slap our president if he patted their behind and groped them, putting him in risk of injury.

      Those are not the kind of females wanted in the U.S.

    17. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... since Obama didn't wade into it, there was no mess on him.

      You do know the ban originated with Obama, right? Six of the seven countries were his.

    18. Re:Girl by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 2

      None of those things matter. Maybe her people should clean up their own country so that the new generation has better opportunities to exploit with its potential. Islam isn't so keen on girls doing intellectual work..or work of any kind, except homemaker.

      You say that none of these things matter, and then proceed to say what a big deal it is for a girl in Afghanistan to be able to do robotics. You completely contradict yourself in one single paragraph.

      And what opportunity have these girls missed? Oh yes, going to the United States. In this case, it is not Islam that is holding these girls back.

    19. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Exactly. They're likely to automate more tasks with their robotics skills then there is more job loss. They're also likely to help inspire American women to pursue more intellectual careers and then they are a little bit less likely to be impressed by a redneck. Won't you think of the steady undermining of low class white uneducated racist sexist etc American culture?

    20. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do details matter at all. We could replace all headlines with "Bad thing happened involving a non-specific number of people" and eliminate details all together.

      Oh, right... because then it would be fucking boring to read and nobody would bother.

    21. Re: Girl by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

      afgan neighbors with iran. good luck to the young lady.

    22. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi, I'm a white "cis-gendered" male. My job is basically taking people's jobs, analyzing them and finding ways to automate them to increase efficiency. I have personally saved my company over $500k/year with one major project out of a dozen other successful projects. I have put plenty of people, some of whom I know personally, out of work. Sure, most of them were temporary workers, but this was their main source of income 6 months out of the year.

      It doesn't take a foreign-born person to take away jobs from semi-skilled and even skilled workers. People should focus on bettering themselves. Maybe they could get the education needed to automate the automators.

    23. Re:Girl by Drethon · · Score: 1

      And wouldn't that be just terrible. God knows how our culture could possibly survive allowing a few young girls come here.

      I know some young male programmers that would likely turn into babbling idiots. This could seriously lower productivity.

    24. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      And wouldn't that be just terrible.

      Well, yes, it would be. These girls have no financial resources of their own. So the tax payer will have to pay for their healthcare and education, hundreds of thousands of dollars per kid. Furthermore, the tax payer is never going to recoup that investment in terms of economic contributions.

      God knows how our culture could possibly survive allowing a few young girls come here.

      The culture you should worry about is Afghan culture: if you keep luring away the smart, educated, independent-minded people from a country, all you're left with is dumb warlords.

    25. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Those are not just "a few young girls". They are roboticists having made a stand for female education in Afghanistan.

      Which is why, of course, the logical thing is to remove them from Afghanistan so that Afghanistan can stay in the hands of oppressive pigs, right?

    26. Re: Girl by sycodon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "President Trump recently ordered a ban on travel from six Muslim-majority countries, but Afghanistan was not included on the list."

      But we are going to mention it in order to stir up shit.

      I can't wait for someone from Canada to be denied entry for whatever reason and then some stupid fucker mention the Ban while explaining that Canada wasn't part of it.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    27. Re: Girl by kwbauer · · Score: 1

      Obviously Trump has not put out a blanket ban on Muslims either as mentioned in the article.

    28. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      It would be if you were a right wing racist lunatic like the olloonie up there.

      Thank you! Being called a "right wing racist lunatic" by you is indeed a compliment.

    29. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why did we not read about each case of denied Visas under Obama? They did happen.

      And you know about them because you read about them.

    30. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Right got all weepy about Terry Schiavo, despite the fact that only extreme life support keep her body alive all that time.

      They're supposed to believe in Jesus. Jesus was obviously trying to call Terry home, but there they were fighting to keep her out out Heaven.

      Why does the Right hate Jesus?

    31. Re:Girl by kelanos · · Score: 0

      God you're stupid.

      You say that like the risk is because they're women.
      No, it's because they're in AFGHANISTAN.

    32. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And wouldn't that be just terrible.

      Well, yes, it would be. These girls have no financial resources of their own. So the tax payer will have to pay for their healthcare and education, hundreds of thousands of dollars per kid. Furthermore, the tax payer is never going to recoup that investment in terms of economic contributions.

      So, a team of young robotics enthusiasts who have overcome massive obstacles would forever be a drain on the US taxpayer if they (hypothetically) immigrated?
       
      Pah, nonsense, I say! The kind of smarts and resourcefulness that accomplish this kind of results at such a young age are a good indicator that these young people would be a considerable net gain in that hypothetical event.

      Anon because, Trump.

    33. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      You know he has dozens of accounts, farming for mod points, just so he could get himself back up from those downmods and create an illusion of wider consent to his lunacy?

      I don't actually know how "farming for mod points" would work, but you seem to have experience with it. Can you explain? I always believed that in order to get mod points, you actually need to use an account and receive positive mods yourself. Isn't that true?

    34. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know the ban originated with Obama, right? Six of the seven countries were his.

      Not quite, Skippy. Obama left behind a list of "countries of concern," but not a ban.

    35. Re:Girl by kelanos · · Score: 0

      It matters because girls in much of Afghanistan are systematically repressed and mistreated, denied education, equal rights and privileges, etc.

      At least that's what the propaganda rags tell me to think

      Kabul University was opened to girls in 1947

      See, if you turn your brain on, you realize that no matter what kind of culture it is, they still have to compete with the rest of the world in mobilizing their women to the work force. No one is fighting women getting educations.

      However, in a country where there is quite some risk to simply traveling to school each day, males are better suited to the risks.

      But women can by infantry too

      Can't address such stupidity. Can we just stuff all these liberals into the trash can please?

      The problem isn't girls not being educated in Afghanistan, it's that Afghanistan is so destabilized and NO ONE can get an education.

    36. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They're girls, not women

    37. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      people have short memories, I do remember reading every few months about visas being denied to groups of people whom you would think are the type we want to bring in, students,doctors and alike. But I'm probably a bit closer to the subject than most.

    38. Re:Girl by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Whether it is terrible or not is irrelevant, current US law requires all aliens to be assumed to be immigrants until they establish they are not - and that is a factor that would be considered when determining if they should be granted a non-immigrant visa.

    39. Re:Girl by e3m4n · · Score: 1

      thats a good point, but I think the article is more about a temporary visit. Its absolutely ridiculous to jump to conclusions as to why they are banned. The article already says that other students were allowed in who WERE from actual banned countries. So this is not a case of a blanket policy preventing admission. Don't you guys remember the old musician Cat Stephens getting on the no-fly list about 12+ yrs ago because he had the exact same real name as a known terrorist and it was his name alone that put him on a no-fly list. Maybe it was a mistake, maybe there was actionable intel that one of the members was a known subversive. The point is the article did a crap job of trying to tie a 90 ban to some girls in afghanistan since the 90 ban doesnt actually cover said country.

    40. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or possibly ... just possibly ... the stories about girls in Afghanistan being repressed, mistreated, denied education, etc. ... have been just a tiny bit exaggerated?

      So here is a case of an asshole who wants to say something that he knows is indefensible so he frames it as a question.
      The answer to your question is no. The stories of repression of females in Afghanistan have not been exaggerated.

    41. Re: Girl by kenh · · Score: 2

      You remember when the white non-Muslim man from Switzerland that wrote CURL was not granted a visa? That was also because of Trump's travel ban, even though he was white, non-Muslim, and from Switzerland, right?

      Clearly stated in both stories is the phrase 'a country not on the (trump EO) list', but who reads the summary?

      --
      Ken
    42. Re:Girl by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      That health care for a (healthy) 14 year old girl costs hundreds of thousands of dollars is your own damn fault. Or rather, the fault of your insurers. And no, Obamacare would not have made an improvement, on the contrary...

      Break the insurance companies. That is step 1.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    43. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Its absolutely ridiculous to jump to conclusions as to why they are banned. Maybe it was a mistake, maybe there was actionable intel that one of the members was a known subversive.

      And as I was pointing out, it probably was none of those. The most common reason why people from poor and third world nations are denied entry to the US (or Europe) is insufficient funds or doubts about their intent to leave. That's the most likely reason here; nothing to do with religion.

    44. Re: Girl by kenh · · Score: 1
      --
      Ken
    45. Re: Girl by kenh · · Score: 1

      It matters because in Afghanistan, women risk being attacked for daring to get an education.

      Shouldn't that Have been included in the summary, since apparently that is what makes this story important...

      --
      Ken
    46. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Break the insurance companies. That is step 1.

      Why? Many European countries have private health insurers. And in the US, high health care costs are primarily driven by the massive single payer public system.

    47. Re: Girl by kenh · · Score: 1

      Fascinating how you took a story with nothing to do with Trump and tried to make it all about Trump...

      The simple answer could be that someone forgot to process their visa applications in time for the trip.

      #TrumpDerangementSyndrome

      --
      Ken
    48. Re: Girl by fedos · · Score: 0

      So what you're saying is that, like all right wing scumbags, you're a complete idiot.

    49. Re: Girl by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Yeah he was just bombing them....

    50. Re:Girl by e3m4n · · Score: 1

      as in they might be a refuse-to-leave risk? That's an interesting statistic I was unaware of though it does make sense.

    51. Re:Girl by denzacar · · Score: 1

      As you clearly well know, you just need a wide net of plenty of active, positive karma accounts, to catch those randomly distributed mod-points.
      And at 23 daily posts (in the last 24 hours, so far) you clearly have plenty of time on your hands, between therapy sessions, to maintain your mod-point farm.

      And even if one did need positive mods, I'm sure someone like you could find the time to run two concurrent farms - each pumping up the other with mod-points.
      If anything, that'd be a more certain way to accrue mod-points.
      Though, one would have to restrain from down-modding. At first.
      Gotta pump them 1s to 2s, 2s to 3s hoping them 3s will grow into 4s and 5s on their own by pure inertia and bandwagoning of crowds, after peeking their heads up over the rest of the field...

      And complimented or not, you're still a right wing racist nutcase, loonie.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    52. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because even Trump's most sycophantic peons had to admit that an outright Muslim ban wouldn't fly.

      Trump, however, did make it a signature policy of his. You could view it on his campaign website, or watch his numerous YouTube videos.

      So he set about doing it, while pretending otherwise

      Same reason that Southern states couldn't ban blacks from voting, but could throw up all sorts of impediments.

      Is this unknown to you for some reason??

    53. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The insurance companies created this mess. Don't go blaming this on US single payers. For a long time having a job meant health insurance. That was the first mistake. Linking work and insurance together has fucked us. For so long our employers paid more than half the cost. Now we see the true cost and everyone freaks out. The insurance companies are sitting back rolling in money. Trump will not fix the problem. He doesn't know how to. He doesn't know how to do ANYTHING except talk shit on twitter. The man is a professional shit talker. Period.

    54. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet you offer no argument or rebuttal, just a blind denunciation of the Leftists. Who you quite obviously hate.

      But you are mistaken there, as it is the right that stupidly believes they won't get flack for the attitude they set.

      Or rather, they demand we not look at it, whether for same-sex marriage, drug laws, or Muslim bans. Because it makes you look bad.

    55. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 0

      As you clearly well know, you just need a wide net of plenty of active, positive karma accounts,

      Actually, no, I didn't know, but I take your word for it.

      And complimented or not, you're still a right wing racist nutcase, loonie.

      I wear it as a matter of pride that socialists and fascists like you call me that.

    56. Re: Girl by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

      Why did we not read about each case of denied Visas under Obama? They did happen.

      And what different does it make now? If anything happened in the past, then discuss it in the past. Trying to pull your political bias into other topics much? I don't care much for what political point TFA is trying to make, but I don't like a troll especially those other trolls modding the post up.

      Back on the topic, TFA made an obvious discrepancy which is annoying to me. Syria does NOT participate in the competition as of today regarding the official site (look at the gray label), so how could TFA said the country managed to enter the US???

      From TFA

      Teams from Iran, Sudan and Syria - which are on the list - did manage to enter the country.

    57. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      BTW, this looks like a pretty good summary:

      http://www.alllaw.com/articles...

    58. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet Obama didn't go around screaming about Muslims, in fact, the right attacked him for not doing so.

      Falsely, at times, like when Mitt Romney opened his mouth in the debates and claimed that Obama didn't call something terrorism.

      Which in turn, hurt his argument.

    59. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Break the insurance companies. That is step 1.

      Why? Many European countries have private health insurers.

      Because in the US, the insurance companies are responsible for being an impediment to actual necessary reform.

      And in the US, high health care costs are primarily driven by the massive single payer public system.

      Good idea, blame something that DOESN'T exist.

      Rather than you know, the actual insurance companies with lobbyists and policy-setters at their beck and call.

    60. Re: Girl by lpq · · Score: 1

      Are you stupid or just ignorant?

      It was mentioned because a large number of people in the country are Muslim. I.e. even though the country wasn't on the banned country list, this group of engineers was still denied entry -- evidence that the US is more interested in a Muslim ban than a 6-country ban.

    61. Re: Girl by Boronx · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter who says it, Donald is ridiculous.

      Do you remember last week after almost a year of downplaying Russian attempts to influence the election, Donald reversed course and blamed Obama for not doing anything about it?

      Even though Obama did do something about it, and Donald is *still* trying to reverse those retaliations that Obama started?

      Ridiculous. Dishonest. Traitorous.

    62. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets build a wall to keep educated young women with interests in STEM fields from overstaying their visas and away from our freedums!

    63. Re: Girl by Bartles · · Score: 0

      Because you can't signal your virtue by criticising Obama.

    64. Re: Girl by Bartles · · Score: 0

      Trump doesn't go around screaming about Muslims either. You're an idiot.

    65. Re: Girl by Bartles · · Score: 0

      The Supreme Court has pretty much rejected that as an argument.

    66. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't wait for someone from Canada to be denied entry for whatever reason and then some stupid fucker mention the Ban while explaining that Canada wasn't part of it.

      You haven't been keeping up to date.

    67. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Educated young women with interests in STEM fields. How would "Merica" ever survive such a thing?

      Typically, by teaching them to be feminists, so they lose any interest in doing something worthwhile with their lives.

    68. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they should be so grateful they aren't being shot that they should just put up with the other shit.

    69. Re: Girl by sycodon · · Score: 1

      It's the end of the day.
      I'm tired.

      So go ahead an imagine all the names I'd call you and the extent to which I would demean your intellect and reasoning abilities.

      Have fun with that.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    70. Re: Girl by jedidiah · · Score: 0

      > So what you're saying is that, like all right wing scumbags, you're a complete idiot.

      Yes. Show us the extent of your expansive intellect with... insults.

      This shit happens all the time. It's only a tragedy today because you are butt hurt about the election. You are a flaming hypocrite that wouldn't care less about this situation if Hillary won the election.

      This cannot be linked to any particular policy directive of the current administration. It's just being played for mindless hysterics and being crassly exploited by partisans.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    71. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently you're unaware of the age range at which females are frequently viewed as women in various parts of the world. -PCP

    72. Re:Girl by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Presumably, the country of origin matters because of the immigration control thingy.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    73. Re:Girl by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      So brain drain is positive today? Removing the good people until only assholes remain is good for Afghanistan?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    74. Re:Girl by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Presumably, the country of origin matters because of the immigration control thingy.

      Afghanistan is not on the list of Trump's immigration control thingy for some reason. And the girls from Syria and Somalia got visas, no problem.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    75. Re:Girl by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 0

      Immigration control is a universal fact of life in modern nation states. That someone was admitted into a country is no basis for demands by others. Outrage that they happened to be fourteen year old roboticists is irrelevant.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    76. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, yes, claiming an empty victory as a triumph when in reality, the Supreme Court made no ruling on the merits of the case. They only allowed the most obvious of conditions to continue in effect, not that it was denied anyway.

      Now I'm sure Thomas and Gorsuch will pretend that Trump's Muslim ban is irrelevant, and Alito will likely deny it, but Roberts and Kennedy may not play along. Being that obtuse takes a lot of effort.

      But hey, you can signal your virtues by screaming about Obama, and Muslims, it is very popular among the right. See Donald Trump, birther-in-chief, builder of Mexican walls, and head of Muslim banning. His website may be scrubbed, but the archive is still around, as are his videos.

    77. Re: Girl by Bartles · · Score: 1

      It's not a ban. To call it such is a lie. You are correct that the SC has not ruled on the merits. But they though the governments argument had enough merit that it warranted lifting most of the injunction.

    78. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they are denied education, how did they became roboticists
      How did they enter some american competition?

    79. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one is fighting women getting educations.

      Ignoramus.
      In almost all of the world, before 1960 most top universities in the USA Great Britain, and Europe allowed only a very few females to enter. Almost all of those that were allowed were the children of the professors or the politically powerful. Many college programs did not allow any females under any circumstances.
      Going back further in history, every country in the world tried to prevent women from getting an education.
      There are many primitive people and groups in the world that still want to prevent women from being fully educated. The is little difference between the Taliban/fundamentalists and the 18th century Western world, except in how the Taliban carries out its goals.

    80. Re: Girl by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Citation needed. You must demonstrate that that was because of Trump's 'Muslim ban.'

      No, opinion pieces do not count.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    81. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does their gender matter? Quit being so sexist.

      Have you been living in a basement for the past 10 years?

      It matters because girls in much of Afghanistan are systematically repressed and mistreated, denied education, equal rights and privileges, etc. That an all girls team from Afghanistan is excelling in robotics is very relevant to this story.

      In addition, the girls were trying to travel to the US, a land of identity politics. The race and gender identities of each participant are of paramount importance. Without these vital facts, American commentators would not be able to evaluate the justice/injustice of the situation.

    82. Re: Girl by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Wait, no. I misread the tone of your post. My bad.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    83. Re: Girl by KGIII · · Score: 1

      ^What he said.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    84. Re: Girl by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I am on the left. I suspect you are on the left. Trump has done nothing to legally qualify as a traitor. Traitor is well defined. You may hate Russia, but they are not actually a recognized enemy of the nation. He hasn't done anything qualifies him to be a traitor.

      Meh... Give it six months. We have to get some declared enemies first. I don't think anyone has been formally on the list since like 1954. Even the USSR wasn't an official enemy of the US, IIRC.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    85. Re: Girl by KGIII · · Score: 1

      If the country is so bad that you complain about it, maybe it isn't quite the missed opportunity that you are making it out to be? Good. She will be well rested and have fresh new ideas for when she goes to the competition in India. That's even closer.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    86. Re: Girl by KGIII · · Score: 1

      You say no one can get an education, yet here we are with some educated people.

      I see a flaw in your logic.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    87. Re: Girl by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Silly question...

      Do you really believe people do that?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    88. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "President Trump recently ordered a ban on travel from six Muslim-majority countries, but Afghanistan was not included on the list."

      But we are going to mention it in order to stir up shit.

      I can't wait for someone from Canada to be denied entry for whatever reason and then some stupid fucker mention the Ban while explaining that Canada wasn't part of it.

      So Trump's plan doesn't work quite as planned, as many treasonous customs agents follow the letter of the law instead of its intent. So SAD.

    89. Re: Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember the outcry when 20,000 Coptic christian refugees his administration refused to grant visas to? Me neither.

      Maybe because that story isn't even about visas, but about asylum applications (you do know the difference?) Maybe because that claim was made by Pamela Geller and thus staid in the fringe media where it belonged? Maybe because some "Coptic christians" were denied entry because they couldn't answer "Bible trivia" questions? Asked not by Obama, but by bible thumpers to weed out those not of true faith - or those who are actually Muslims who know that Christians have a better chance of getting through the process?

    90. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are not just "a few young girls". They are roboticists having made a stand for female education in Afghanistan.

      Which is why, of course, the logical thing is to remove them from Afghanistan so that Afghanistan can stay in the hands of oppressive pigs, right?

      Trump controls Afghanistan now?

    91. Re: Girl by lpq · · Score: 1

      I replied to someone asking why their country -- Afghanistan was mentioned as not part of the 6 country ban...

      Is saying someone is from Afghanistan infering something about their intellect or reasoning abilities?

      Perhaps your reasoning abilities need to be examined?

    92. Re:Girl by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      if you keep luring away the smart, educated, independent-minded people from a country

      Why can't the smart, educated, independent-minded people decide for themselves in which country they'd prefer to live? Why do they have to sacrifice their well-being, and quite possibly their lives, to improve the Afghan society, just because they had the bad luck of getting born there?

    93. Re:Girl by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      That's odd, because statistically immigrants create about four jobs for every one job they take, pay taxes and (if undocumented) get no services from it... I find it odd that you expect these four to somehow completely fail to be like every other immigrant in the history of the world.

      Do you have some reason to expect that to be the case ? Because it's a pretty extraordinary claim, which means it needs extraordinary evidence.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    94. Re:Girl by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Actually, the exact opposite, even the most far-left liberals oppose the treatment of women in fundamentalist Islam (though we refuse to discriminate against the entire Muslim population over it) - we want them to have a reformation movement to fix that, in the meantime, offering talented young girls a chance to get educated outside the control of that system is a good thing.
      If anything, this is a reason to give preferential entry to people (particularly women) from Muslim countries !

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    95. Re:Girl by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Yeah, right, and Taliban operatives actually trying to kill girls who go to school (and targetting them specifically) has no role to play in that right.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    96. Re: Girl by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Except if you read the article you would find they made the 500-mile, extremely dangerous, trip to Kabul several times and did - in fact - apply for their VISAs well in advance.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    97. Re:Girl by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      >Why? Many European countries have private health insurers
      Who compete with high quality government-funded medical care, so in order to make a profit - they have to actually offer really good value. Even rich people wouldn't be their customers at all if they didn't offer something exceptional.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    98. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Do you have some reason to expect that to be the case ? Because it's a pretty extraordinary claim, which means it needs extraordinary evidence.

      If admitted as refugees, these girls would clearly be eligible for decades of government services in education and healthcare alone, in addition to the infrastructure and other public goods they consume. If you want to admit them, the burden of proof is on you that they don't impose a net cost on American taxpayer. That's not just my opinion, that's actually the law. They probably couldn't do that, which is probably why they didn't get admitted.

      Now, as to your specific points:

      That's odd, because statistically immigrants

      The population of "immigrants" isn't the same as "girls from Afghanistan seeking asylum".

      create about four jobs for every one job they take

      Statistical job creation is a meaningless metric of contribution to society.

      pay taxes and

      If legally admitted, they wouldn't be paying any taxes for a decade, until their education is complete. After that, there is a good chance that they will get married and have children. Their parents also never paid into the system.

      (if undocumented) get no services from it...

      Absolutely false.

    99. Re:Girl by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      If they are refugees then sorry but the law does not say anything of the kind - a refugee by international law needs no VISA, needs not passport, and cannot be legally turned away by any country. America is a signatory to that law, and bound by it.

      If they are accepted as immigrants that's another matter - but they will have no hard time proving it, since it's a statistical fact that they will contribute more than they cost. Immigrants ALWAYS do.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    100. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Why can't the smart, educated, independent-minded people decide for themselves in which country they'd prefer to live?

      They can! Everybody has a right to emigrate from their country. However, nobody has a right to immigrate into any country they choose.

      Why do they have to sacrifice their well-being, and quite possibly their lives, to improve the Afghan society, just because they had the bad luck of getting born there?

      I'm not passing judgment on this either way, I'm just pointing out that there are downsides to luring away all the smart people from a foreign country.

    101. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Many European countries have private health insurers

      Who compete with high quality government-funded medical care, so in order to make a profit - they have to actually offer really good value.

      You're mixing up health insurers and health care providers. Under universal healthcare, both can be private (Germany, Switzerland), both can be public (UK, France), or you can have public insurance with private providers (Canada).

      The US has all three models, for different populations. All of them perform poorly in the US, but the publicly insured models are far worse than the privately insured ones.

    102. Re:Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      If they are refugees then sorry but the law does not say anything of the kind - a refugee by international law needs no VISA, needs not passport, and cannot be legally turned away by any country. America is a signatory to that law, and bound by it.

      Refugee status is something these girls would have to apply for from Afghanistan and would have to get granted before travel to the US. Since they haven't applied for it, they can't travel as refugees. Once they apply for refugee status, they can't travel as visitors anymore.

      If they came to the US under a visitor visa and then applied for refugee status, it would be harder to remove them, regardless of whether their application is ultimately granted or not. To avoid this situation, countries avoid admitting people likely to seek asylum in the first place.

    103. Re:Girl by kelanos · · Score: 0

      How do you know that's real?

      Because CNN told you? Yeah that's about it.

      You're buying false propaganda because, like I said, like I explained, you haven't switched your brain on, because you would rather live in a simplified dream world because you haven't had any rigour in your life and you depend on external sources for all your motivation (your free will is lacking).

    104. Re: Girl by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Well firstly you do not need to apply for refugee status. It's perfectly legal to just show up without paperwork. You can then be detained for vetting but you cannot be denied entry.
      If their intention was refugee status they would be silly to apply for visas.
      So why are we discussing a hypothetical scenario with no reason whatsoever to think it's even a remote possibility?

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    105. Re: Girl by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      And who are you listening to? Alex Jones? Me? I am giving credence to first hand reports rather than whatever makes me feel good.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    106. Re: Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      So why are we discussing a hypothetical scenario

      Because you're ignorant? I have simply been trying to explain to you the rationale behind existing US law.

      Existing US law requires that in order to enter the US as a visitor, you provide evidence that:

      the reason for your trip is for pleasure (or else medical treatment)
      you plan to stay in the U.S. for only a specific, limited period
      you have sufficient funds to cover your expenses while visiting the U.S. (particularly important because if you run out of money, the authorities assume you might violate your visa by working in the U.S.)
      you have compelling social and economic ties in your home country, such as a job or schooling and family, and
      you have a house, apartment, or other residence outside the U.S. as well as other binding ties that will ensure your return when your permitted stay is over.

      You don't like it or don't like the rationale behind it? Tough shit, take it up with politicians. I'm just explaining the thinking to you since you seem utterly ignorant of how this stuff work. But, personally, I think these rules make a lot of sense. They are pretty much the same rules most civilized countries use.

    107. Re: Girl by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      I have no issues with those laws. Now please point out which one these girls do not meet. I cannot see it.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    108. Re: Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      I have no issues with those laws.

      Great. Then you don't have any reason to object to their exclusion from the US.

      Now please point out which one these girls do not meet. I cannot see it.

      Well, you can't "see it" because you haven't seen the application, and hence you have no idea what evidence they did or didn't provide.

    109. Re:Girl by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      Because everyone, at their core, is sexist against men. It is part of our biology. So if you put up a story about an all boy team of roboticists being denied entry to the US, or even if they were murdered before getting on the plane, it would be completely overlooked because there was another article about an all girl team that wasn't treated with the utmost respect and dignity.

    110. Re: Girl by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      So you believe we should just blindly trust that the government always follows and enforces the law correctly and even handedly?
      Because I do not.

      When there is obvious reason for their action and explanation offered we have every right to question those actions.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    111. Re: Girl by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      So you believe we should just blindly trust that the government always follows and enforces the law correctly and even handedly?

      The US refuses about 2.7 million visitor visas out of a total of 9 million visitor visas. The B-visa refusal rate for Afghanistan was 74% under Obama (for comparisons, it was 4% for UAE and 5% for Switzerland, so not a Muslim issue). Meeting the evidence and documentation requirements for US visas is not easy, take it from someone who has gone through it many times. It is in no way surprising or unusual that a few adults and a bunch of kids from Afghanistan would be refused visitors visas to the US. Having a passport from Afghanistan absolutely sucks. Welcome to the real world.

      When there is obvious reason for their action and explanation offered we have every right to question those actions.

      You most certainly have a right to make yourself look like an ignorant, partisan bigot, which is what you're doing.

    112. Re: Girl by kenh · · Score: 1

      No problem, it happens.

      --
      Ken
    113. Re: Girl by denzacar · · Score: 1

      Would people with issues and or agendas go out of their way to present themselves and their ideas as influential and beloved by masses of people willing to spend "prestige currency" on them at the expense of others?
      Or simply in order to keep an account in "positive karma"?
      Really? You have to ask about that?
      As if it is something... well... I was gonna say unimaginable but unusual would be a more appropriate term.

      People will whore for Facebook "likes" and open up fake accounts to "salt" the praise of themselves.
      If anything, Slashdot mod points are a more valuable (definitely more rare and more perishable) prestige currency.
      Also, Slashdot crowd is quite capable of automating the task of harvesting it.
      Hell... We're at over 4 million accounts. Setting a very conservative guesstimate of skill, will and lunacy and/or agenda needed at one in a million - that's at least 4 people doing it.
      Remember APK?

      Believing has nothing to do with it. If it is technically possible, someone is already doing it.
      Is olloonie up there capable of doing that? I doubt it. He is a creature of low skill and intelligence.
      But he may have sucked some cocks to pay someone to set that up for him.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    114. Re:Girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, unskilled work should absolutely be automated. Such work is mindless and often detrimental to the people's physical health that perform those jobs. But what about replacing 10 office workers with 1? What about eliminating semi-skilled and mid-skilled labour like truck drivers? Where are those millions going to find work? What about the 10s of millions more that would be affected by the loss of income derived from those wages? Where are these people going to find work?

      Sure, it's logical that we want to keep moving forward on technology, but there is a cost associated with that, and it's going to be displacing a LOT of people. And by displacing, I mean killing.

    115. Re: Girl by KGIII · · Score: 1

      LOL I know it's possible, I"m just not sure why anyone would bother with a one-also-ran website that's now populated by angry and inept - with a smattering of holdovers who type the URL as much out of habit, as for any other reason.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    116. Re: Girl by Boronx · · Score: 1

      Putin's explicit goal is to undermine the democratic governments in Europe and here. Trump sought and got help from Putin to win the election. Are we at war with Putin? Not a hot one, but he is the enemy.

    117. Re: Girl by KGIII · · Score: 1

      In matters of law, only the official position matters.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    118. Re: Girl by denzacar · · Score: 1

      Why anyone would bother? I don't know... that's up to their agenda and mental issues.
      Then again, I've seen people go into hardcore agenda pushing mode in comments read by at best dozens of people.
      Hell, people will go all "I am the king toad of this pond" on forums where MEMBERSHIP numbers are in dozens.

      On the other hand... Slashdot does reach eyeballs of many in tech community AND... if one is looking for a way to pad one's ego - it's clocking in at over 5 million accounts now.
      Back when DICE took over, it was clocking it at "more than 5,300 comments daily and 3.7 million unique visitors each month."
      If one wants to present themselves or their agenda as influential and respected...
      Presenting oneself as keeping a high prestige score among 5 million people or millions of "unique visitors" or being the "most insightful" among hundreds of thousand of comments each month... those aren't bad numbers.
      I live in a country smaller than that with voter turnout much like the number of comments made on Slashdot each month.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  2. Ethic Harassment Panda strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mainstream racism? Blistering idiocy? Red meat theater for the angry masses? Any combination of these, with additional ingredients thrown in? Either way, hardly surprising.

  3. American Xenophobia by cahuenga · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Welcome to the DeEnlightenment.

    What an embarrassment this country is becoming.

    1. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Welcome to the DeEnlightenment.

      The Endullenment.

    2. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not knowing the reason for their denial you assume the worst? What is more embarrassing is your virtue signaling without all the facts.

    3. Re:American Xenophobia by Baloroth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course, the same thing could have (and did) happen under the Obama administration years ago, it's just you didn't hear about it when it did, because there wasn't much political capital to gain by reporting on it. In fact, the summary itself undercuts the "xenophobia" narrative: why would the US let in teams from Syran, Iran, etc. if xenophobia was the driving motivator? Any time you apply for a visa to any country, there's a chance it'll be rejected. The US system in particular can be a bit capricious, which is a problem, but it's more of a bureaucratic problem, not a prejudicial one.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    4. Re:American Xenophobia by Nexion · · Score: 2

      "Not knowing the reason for their denial you assume the worst? What is more embarrassing is your virtue signaling without all the facts." - AC

      I have to agree with AC here. We don't really know why they were denied and there are many good reasons they might have been. Perhaps even one of them might have been a security risk. It sounds silly to think of a bright young woman being such, but far younger impressionable minds have been manipulated into doing terrible things.

      Since we do not know exactly why they were denied entry asserting such speculation as fact only serves to expose our own bias. The truth is that a trip to the US would only be the cherry on top. The real win for these young women is the education they are getting that may someday prove useful once we see an end to the persecution of women in their country of origin. What is truly heart breaking is that they might not see it in their lifetime.

    5. Re:American Xenophobia by aicrules · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is at least the fourth story I've seen posted here where the "muslim ban" is referenced while in the same article it specifically states that the travel ban has nothing to do with why this happened. Such a BS biased tactic on the part of the editing staff both here and at the various sites that reported this.

    6. Re: American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why he had a woman running his campaign. You're an idiot.

    7. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he doesn't like intelligent people.

    8. Re:American Xenophobia by Rockoon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The thing is, the left doesnt understand that when they open with dishonesty they can never trick new people into believing them.

      Nobody gives a fuck what the left has to say any longer. They even tried to convince Californians that they wanted single-player health-care, then promptly buried it in committee.

      These are the same people that, when there was suddenly a chance of legislation passing that would allow cheaper medicine being imported into the country (because several Republicans at the last minute decided to join in and support it), changed their tune and scheduled a witching-hour vote where 13 Democrats that told the public they supported it, voted against and killed that too.

      after they killed it, those same 13 Democrats then went back to the public and sad how they are supporting it again.

      Their words are lies. Their actions are harmful. Fuck the Democrats.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    9. Re:American Xenophobia by Straif · · Score: 2

      It could have been something as arbitrary as a misspelling of a home address on a form or as serious as a close relative of one of the applicants being on some watch list but to far too many people all they see is some bright young girls being picked on by the POTUS and then they run with the narrative that Trump is mean to little girls.

      Visa denial are pretty SOP regardless of who is in the oval office.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
    10. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except both sides are dishonest. Don't act like one side is honest and the other isn't. I see BS from every direction.

      Give up political parties, be an independent and think for yourself.

    11. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The second sentence specifically states that this was not because of the Trump travel ban. Should it be in flashing red lights?

    12. Re:American Xenophobia by cayenne8 · · Score: 2
      Yup..sounds like the headline should be about all the other people from the banned countries that DID get visas and were admitted to the country.

      They should all have been watching the contest on TV from home, not in the US.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    13. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The con artist doesn't like intelligent women. That's why they were denied entry to this country.

      I didn't see that in the article, where did you get this info?

    14. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're not wrong, I just don't know why you're singling out Democrats and the Left. Republicans and the Right are at least as full of shit.

      Or do you just not ever speak ill of the home team?

    15. Re:American Xenophobia by twistedcubic · · Score: 1

      Any group of children must have an adult chaperon, which means the adults must get clearance as well as the children for any of them to come at all.

    16. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is, the left doesnt understand that when they open with dishonesty they can never trick new people into believing them.

      As if the "right" is any different.

      Distrusting and painting the entire Democratic party as liars because of some libtards is no better than dishonesty in the slashdot headline. Just to make it seem like your view is the purely superior stance, you inject random "facts" of the Democratic evil behavior. Those maybe true or they you could be outright lying as far as I know. Either way its irrelevant. If you are only interested in know about the evil mistakes of the opposite party, you're are just part of the problem.

      We are fucked until the majority starts ignoring the fucktards on both ends of the Left/Right Spectrem and begin to work together.

    17. Re:American Xenophobia by e3m4n · · Score: 4, Insightful

      you should have not posted as AC, because too few people actually realize this. They constantly get fed bullshit from one side that promptly blames the other. Right now I'm seeing this to a disproportionate degree from the left, but its always there. Since just before the election I've seen claims that the right will bring about world war 3, enslave billions, starve entire countries, cause the plague, famine, the apocalypse,.. you name it. Then the media gives them a voice to spread their fearmongering to the extent that people believe this horshit so much that they act out in pure, unadulterated violence. The media does nothing to tone down the rhetoric, instead they fan the flames, despite the threats of assasination, and exile. Then suddenly someone makes a video gif of trump punching a CNN logo and NOW SUDDENLY the media goes on and on about professionalism and how its not cool to threaten the press. To hell with that. They said nothing as other people have been threatened, even shot. They even were caught rejoicing when that shooter shot up the baseball practice.

      The only solution is to eliminate a 2 party system. Polarization and a 50/50 divide where people believe one side as the epitome of good while the other the bastion of evil is Toxic to this country.

    18. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't a Democrat problem, nor a Republican problem. It's a problem with politicians in general.

      They've sucked you into this manufactured left/right dichotomy where you rail against straw-men and they can just continue doing what benefits them.

    19. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are the same people that, when there was suddenly a chance of legislation passing that would allow cheaper medicine being imported into the country (because several Republicans at the last minute decided to join in and support it), changed their tune and scheduled a witching-hour vote where 13 Democrats that told the public they supported it, voted against and killed that too. after they killed it, those same 13 Democrats then went back to the public and sad how they are supporting it again.

      Could you cite your source on this? Not to doubt your version of the story, but it's the first I've ever heard of it.

    20. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most diverse large country in all history. Be embarrassed, for your ignorance and total lack of perspective.

    21. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, the same thing could have (and did) happen under the Obama administration years ago, it's just you didn't hear about it when it did, because there wasn't much political capital to gain by reporting on it.

      Or... Maybe its because immigration issues are a major focus of the public right now so stories that report on immigration issues get more resources.

      Nah. its obviously a conspiracy by the leftist media to acquire "political capital." Its all a conspiracy!!!

    22. Re:American Xenophobia by otomoton · · Score: 2

      A perfectly cromulent word.

    23. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since the existence of the "muslim ban" is pretty common knowledge, it seems reasonable that an article about muslims not getting visas would say something like "Oh hey that 'muslim ban' you hear tell about? This ain't that.". I.E. the article SHOULD reference the "muslim ban" and then specifically state that the travel ban has nothing to do with why this happened.

    24. Re:American Xenophobia by Nexion · · Score: 1

      You seem to be a very angry person. You really need to let go of your prejudices and find a way to be happier in life.

    25. Re:American Xenophobia by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

      My stepdaughter is Chinese, and still lives in Shanghai. Her first two tourist visa applications to come visit us in the US were denied because the official birth registration hospital had closed, and confirmation of her birth certificate was nearly impossible. Thankfully we found an alternate means to get an official copy - and then it was issued. She came, she visited, and she's back in Shanghai... ;) If you cannot prove who you are, getting a visa - even a tourist one - is nearly impossible. Given the abject failure of much of the Afghani Government, and the incredibly poor record keeping there, it does not surprise me that getting a visa can be difficult at best.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    26. Re: American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why have a contest in such a country in the first place? There are plenty of places that are not sp hostile to visitors.

    27. Re: American Xenophobia by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Why have a contest in such a country in the first place? There are plenty of places that are not sp hostile to visitors.

      We're only hostile to the ones that want to come over here and blow us up.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    28. Re: American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I pay AC because I don't have an account and have no desire to have one. I like to contribute to the conversation but don't care about recognition.

    29. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then suddenly someone makes a video gif of trump punching a CNN logo and NOW SUDDENLY the media goes on and on about professionalism and how its not cool to threaten the press.

      Suddenly? That's been a recurrent theme throughout Trump's campaign. He has gone on and on in his media attacks, and the Media chides him for it, and he continues. Not to mention that Montana fellow, and dozens of others.

      But even before that, there have been dozens of incidents where some media is subjected to criticism for their conduct, even asking questions is forbidden, and no, this is not new.

    30. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SO you are YET ANOTHER IDIOT who doesn't know these people are denied because of rules obama put in place.

      Doesn't it bother you that complaining about it now...
      Just points out how you have no fucking clue what's been going on for the last decade?
      And yet you expect people to listen how you know what people say/do/think/believe and why we should do SOMETHING!

    31. Re: American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/pay/post/

    32. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK idiot, list the Obama rule that blocked them.

    33. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't really agree with your assessment. The whole "muslim ban" thing, for better or worse, is something of a hot topic at the moment, and as such readers may be inclined to jump to the conclusion that this is the reason for the Visas being denied, so it's important for the article to state clearly that this is not the case, especially since it didn't even stop entrants who actually are from "banned" countries.

    34. Re:American Xenophobia by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Except both sides are dishonest.

      You know whats also dishonest?

      A) Pretending that there are only two sides.
      B) Pretending that one of the sides isnt clearly worse.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    35. Re:American Xenophobia by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Or do you just not ever speak ill of the home team?

      I speak ill of the worst first.

      My "home team" only got 3.28% of the vote.

      You seem to be projecting your own deficiencies here. (A) You are defending "your side", (B) you are pretending that there are "only two sides", and (C) you are pretending that the Democrats arent clearly worse than everybody else. Too bad, they are. Clearly worse. Horrible people.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    36. Re:American Xenophobia by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      They've sucked you into this manufactured left/right dichotomy

      No they didn't. I am from neither the "left" nor the "right"

      You are imposing the dichotomy... RIGHT NOW.. by presuming it of others.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    37. Re:American Xenophobia by DaPhil · · Score: 1

      I do agree with your evaluation. I just don't think eliminating a 2-party-system will help. I'm from Germany and we do not have a 2-party-system, yet still we see the same kind of left-vs.-right propaganda that you are describing (and, incidentally, with the same skew to the left as you see). It crosses party boundaries. It's like the human race is only able to perceive things in black and white. I am at a loss at what to do.

    38. Re:American Xenophobia by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Entrumpment?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    39. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only solution is to eliminate a 2 party system. Polarization and a 50/50 divide where people believe one side as the epitome of good while the other the bastion of evil is Toxic to this country.

      So now you get 3 parties where each group thinks their own are pure and good and other two parties are bastions of evil.
      How is that an improvement?

      Then suddenly someone makes a video gif of trump punching a CNN logo and NOW SUDDENLY the media goes on and on about professionalism and how its not cool to threaten the press.

      Uh... no. Nobody gave a damn about the video until the leader of the free world officially published it. That is what made it a big deal.

      They even were caught rejoicing when that shooter shot up the baseball practice.

      For the love of God, get out of your conspiracy echo chamber, please!

    40. Re: American Xenophobia by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Pick a night with your friends and go out breaking glass.

      Do I need to point out this is in jest?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    41. Re: American Xenophobia by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Trump didn't publish it, did he?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    42. Re: American Xenophobia by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Hell, there was an earthquake in Nepal. I had a visa application in, when it happened. It was denied almost immediately. I straight up made a donation to an NGO that was on the ground helping and even forwarded the receipt with my new visa application.

      In other words, I pretty much tried to bribe my way into Nepal. In my defense, I wanted to help. However, yes... Yes, I tried to bribe my way in. I did, however, donate a goodly sum.

      That visa was declined as well. They took like 60 days to decline it. I presume that was because they were buried under piles of rubble and because they weren't letting people in to help clear up the mess. Also, I haven't dared reapply for a new visa. I think my bribery attempt may have soured some opinions. I don't know, as I haven't tried.

      Anyhow, point being that a visa is not even remotely a sure thing. Also, you can bribe your way to permanent resident, but seemingly not in Nepal. Even when they are in dire straights, you can't even bribe your way in.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    43. Re:American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the plus side, there's gunna be plenty of Brawndo for everyone. Which is pretty nice.

    44. Re: American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't create it.
      He wasn't the first one to release it.

      But not only did he publish it, he published it as an official statement of the president of the united states.

    45. Re:American Xenophobia by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Blame Trump. He talked a lot about a Muslim ban. His first attempt at the executive order was a Muslim ban applied to several countries (he wanted to let in religious minorities, in other words non-Muslims). He is head of the Executive Branch.

      This means that, whenever Muslims are denied entry for unknown reasons, when there's reasons to expect them to be permitted in, there's going to be questions about whether this is because of their religion, whether Trump is getting the immigration officials to preferentially deny entry to Muslims.

      If Trump doesn't want every unexpected refusal to let a Muslim in be scrutinized, he needs to make it clear that he's changed his policy.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    46. Re:American Xenophobia by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The thing is, the left doesnt understand that when they open with dishonesty they can never trick new people into believing them.

      Trump supporters seem to be interested in following their Leader, and believing what he says, regardless of truth.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    47. Re: American Xenophobia by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Twenty thousand people is a large number. There can be many reasons not to let in so large a block. Five girls isn't a large number.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    48. Re: American Xenophobia by KGIII · · Score: 1

      What definition are you using for "publish?" I am not sure that I follow.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    49. Re:American Xenophobia by aicrules · · Score: 1

      Or the media could do their job and report the news. This has nothing to do with the travel ban and isn't even newsworthy. The existence of the story may be topical, but reporting it is 100% inflammatory without reason.

    50. Re: American Xenophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any of these three:

      https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/publish

      1a : to make generally known
      1b : to make public announcement of

      2a : to disseminate to the public

      But frankly if your biggest issue in this discussion is dictionary pedantry, you've really missed the point.

    51. Re:American Xenophobia by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The President's words and actions are newsworthy. Anything the government does related to them is also newsworthy. A group of Afghani girls entering an international robotics competition is newsworthy, and anything significant about them is therefore at least marginally newsworthy.

      Printing inflammatory rhetoric against the President is a time-honored American tradition that I really don't want to go away. The President should always be faced with the consequences of what he did or said.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  4. Click bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    14 stories will make you say fuck borders and shit.

  5. Visitor visas are fickle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Visitor visas are weird creatures. Even under ideal circumstances, with good jobs and excellent ties to their native country, about half of them are denied (or more) at certain embassies. It's entirely at the mercy of the consular officer, and this probably had nothing to do with the travel ban. It was probably a CO being skittish.

    1. Re:Visitor visas are fickle. by aicrules · · Score: 1

      No it doesn't PROBABLY have nothing to do with the travel ban, it definitely has no connection at ALL to the travel ban as the article and summary both admit. The travel ban doesn't include Afghanistan. End of story.

    2. Re:Visitor visas are fickle. by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Gambian team was also denied entry, and they're also not an at-risk country. More than 160 countries are taking part and only two were rejected, agreed that it is most likely a local consulate thing.

      --
      Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    3. Re: Visitor visas are fickle. by kenh · · Score: 1

      Or as mundane as "unable to process applications in time"

      --
      Ken
    4. Re:Visitor visas are fickle. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      This is very true

      That said, travel ban or no travel ban, there is a good reason to put the skids on this. While the courts may have played all sorts of games w/ the DHS, one way the Administration can seal it is quietly close down the visa sections of all embassies in Muslim countries, thereby achieving the ban. This may be a thorny issue, but it was people of Afghan ethnicity and Islam who did both the Orlando nightclub shooting, as well as the dumpster attacks in New York & New Jersey. While the Afghan roboticist may indeed be just an engineer & nothing more, there is no reason to risk finding out otherwise. Yeah, it's a pity that roboticists from the banned countries are in the US, but that's due to the courts playing footsie w/ US lives.

    5. Re: Visitor visas are fickle. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      It being so close to the 4th, and I being a sentimental old fool, it would be so awesome if the sent in something like SEAL Team 6 in to get the contestants from both f these countires, chuck them and their gear into a C-5, and deliver them under convoy conditions to the competition.

      It'd restore my faith n America.

      Also, it'd be awesome footage and fantastic PR.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    6. Re: Visitor visas are fickle. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      You're right, in most every regard.

      Instead of calling you wrong, I will try to show you another right. Logic doesn't always mean a singular conclusion.

      Me? I am not scared. I am comfortable letting in all these girls and their immediate families. It scares me exactly none.

      Hell, if it's just a few, I'd be willing to give hem shelter until they got on their feet. I can even afford to feed them.

      Point being, I am not scared. Funny, people point out lower crime rates in immigrantopulations, but they never bother to point out that is above and beyond what would have been, had that population existed.

      So, you're right. I just disagree. I am not scared of a half-dozen little girls, or their family. If I can't beat them up, I can bribe them with chocolate chip cookies.

      Note: my view would change if these were ex-ISIS/ISIL/IS fighters, or similar. I'll take the chance with a handful of nerdy little girls. Worst case, we distract them with Americana and teen pop idols.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    7. Re: Visitor visas are fickle. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Considering the fact that there are girls from the 'travel banned' countries in question, I agree w/ you more than you think. In other words, if we can have nerdy girls from Somalia or Sudan or Yemen or Libya, I don't see how Afghanistan makes a difference.

    8. Re: Visitor visas are fickle. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I'd even go so far as to state that I suspect they'd result in an increase in GDP (even if vanishingly small in total). A bunch of bright young girls are probably more likely to be productive than the typical refugees we bring in - I suspect, I don't have numbers for this and don't know how to look them up.

      I am not scared of terrorists. Then again, I'm almost certain that I'm just about the last person who will be harmed by terrorists. It just seems REALLY unlikely that they're going to manage to find my house, in the middle of nowhere, and want to cause me harm. I could probably post a video of me burning the Koran and not have to worry about repercussions. Not that I would, but that I probably could.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    9. Re: Visitor visas are fickle. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      The problem is not that the terrorists would specifically target you. The problem is that while you are in a mall, an allahu-akbar jihadist would suddenly draw a knife & stab you at random - just b'cos you happened to be the first person he could get. Or that you are walking on a sidewalk, and a Muzzie, who's not yet been banned from driving a car due to his religion, could just switch lanes from the road to the sidewalk and try running over you. That's the threat being considered here, not whether you've been nice to Islam and would thereby get a pass

  6. Trump Ban? Maybe Not by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It is possible that the reason is unrelated to Thr Trump Ban. many times people from these particular type of shit-hole countries get a visa of one type or another and then just dissapear into an expat community.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re: Trump Ban? Maybe Not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Exactly. The consular officer probably had concerns about them not returning to Afghanistan (or perhaps their chaperone) and that is then most likely explanation. Visitor visas are not a right, contrary to what many in the tech community seem to think. They require a finding by the consular officer that the visitor has sufficient ties to their native country that they will return to it at the end of their stay. A child with no job, parents with a less than ideal situation, in a devastated country, would have a hard time establishing this, and it gets worse if they are bringing their parents as a chaperone. Sadly, people get denied visitor visas everyday. It is part of life in a non-visa waiver country. It isn't just muslim countries.

    2. Re:Trump Ban? Maybe Not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also possible it was a paperwork screw up. This is federal government, so that is very likely.

      But let's blame Trump instead.

    3. Re: Trump Ban? Maybe Not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe the attitude of the bureacrats has adjusted according to the man calling the tune, instead of being chastened for what is a questionable decision, they find themselves expected to reject and deny instead.

  7. NO BALLS TO SORT IN AMERICA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    America doesn't have any balls these days.

  8. It's daily life for us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If they ever read U.S. Tax Code, they will understand why.

  9. probably the usual reasons by ooloorie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "We still don't know the reason why we were not granted visas, because other countries participating in the competition have been given visas,"

    Most likely the usual reasons: either, they didn't demonstrate that they had enough money to stay in the US, or there was doubt about their ability or desire to leave the US once granted entry. Same reason EU countries frequently deny entry.

    After all, the US does seem to have difficulties removing people who overstay their visas or enter illegally.

    1. Re:probably the usual reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      14 years old girls that in Afghanistan are able to be part of a robotic team? If they stay the US gains.

    2. Re:probably the usual reasons by Nikkos · · Score: 2

      Or they simply didn't do their paperwork right. Perhaps they chose the wrong type of visa, or waited until the last minute.

      Unfortunately the US government usually doesn't give more than vague reasons for denial.

    3. Re: probably the usual reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And yet the possibility of a valid reason is doubted.

      That's the problem with establishing a poor record, you aren't trusted to make even earnest decisions.

    4. Re: probably the usual reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This country is overpopulated. Need to let the herd thin out a bit.

    5. Re: probably the usual reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it's no a problem. It's a opportunity for those who want to distorting the situation for political gain.

    6. Re:probably the usual reasons by Rockoon · · Score: 0

      Most likely "didnt do their paperwork right" means "the men that did their paperwork for them sabotaged it because Islam"

      Getting a VISA isnt only about convincing the place you want to go to let you in, its also about convincing the place you want to leave to let you leave.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    7. Re:probably the usual reasons by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      The DMV told me a deed isn't valid proof of my address, but they excepted a receipt from the post office when I had my mail forwarded. I could easily have my mail forwarded to a relatives house while traveling for an extended period, I know I did it before when I was traveling for about a year.

      Who knows what crazy things appear on the visa form.

    8. Re: probably the usual reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, overpopulation will be taken care of. Like with the last great immigration (which began after 1492) the natives will all die of some new disease brought in by the immigrants. Then prosperity will reign. Doesn't history always repeat itself?

    9. Re: probably the usual reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US needs to get rid of its enormous surplus of retards. Denying entry to visitors who might theoretically immigrate and then become a net benefit does not accomplish that goal.

    10. Re: probably the usual reasons by Megol · · Score: 1

      In no way or form! The US can sustain massively amounts of people.

    11. Re: probably the usual reasons by karmatic · · Score: 1

      Immigrants are generally not a net benefit, and immigrants to the US tend to suppress wages on the lower end of the scale. This puts a drain on resources, and increases income inequality.

    12. Re: probably the usual reasons by karmatic · · Score: 1

      Sure, the US can sustain EU-level population density, but why should it? Higher cost of living, longer commutes, higher levels of stress, smaller yards and houses?

      It doesn't benefit the population to do so.

    13. Re: probably the usual reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are straw-man arguments: The cost of living in the EU is generally lower, and in some EU countries, it's a lot more reasonable than in the U.S. Even in tech hubs, like Estonia. Most EU countries have universal health care, and you won't be bankrupted for getting treatment, even if it's for emergencies. Though, if it's not an emergency, then long lines to the doctor or a specialist can be a problem.

      The commutes are also much shorter, because many of the cities are smaller than in the U.S., thus more compact, and all these cities have great public transportation. In some countries, it's expensive-to-cheap. In Tallinn, Estonia, public transportation is free for residents registered in the city. Population density in Northern Europe can be small: Finland and the Baltics come to mind.

      You can get a big yard and house for much less in eastern parts of the EU. For example, it only takes three days to buy a house in Estonia — from looking up that house to closing the purchase deal (aka finalising the contract).

      Of course, U.S. citizens abroad and U.S. persons for taxation purposes living outside the U.S. face substantial banking, privacy, and reporting hurdles set up the U.S. Congress itself, because of citizenship-based taxation, FBAR and the FATCA law. Ha.

    14. Re: probably the usual reasons by Megol · · Score: 1

      All those arguments are easily proven false. They are also irrelevant. I'll wait to answer until you actually spend some time trying to make an argument - this is pathetic.

  10. Re:Too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fuck is wrong with you?

    Supporting young roboticists is exactly the type of thing what Slashdot is all about.

    Grow up.

  11. WebEx FTW by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    >> The six-member team watched their ball-sorting robot compete in Washington DC via a video link from their hometown of Herat, in western Afghanistan

    In related news, my company refused to fly my Indian overseas coders to the US for a week to watch the software they contributed to run for the first time on a monitor in the data center. I would think that fellow environmentalists would be happy that we didn't have to emit the carbon to ship a team of meatspace bodies halfway across the world.

  12. Do we have to blame Trump? by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Informative

    President Trump recently ordered a ban on travel from six Muslim-majority countries, but Afghanistan was not included on the list.

    So it has nothing to do with Trump's ban on those countries has it?

    US immigration is a law unto itself and usually pretty arbitrary. I realise a lot of the world's problems are Trump's fault, but not all of them are.

    1. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

      I realise a lot of the world's problems are Trump's fault, but not all of them are.

      Trump: "Hold my beer."

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Trump also ordered "extreme vetting" of visa applicants, so it is his fault. We are spending billions of dollars a month to win over the people of Afghanistan. This visa denial is a gift to the Taliban and ISIS.

    3. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by thegarbz · · Score: 0

      So it has nothing to do with Trump's ban on those countries has it?

      Of course it does. Maybe not directly, but the fact Trump is even in power legitimises further xenophobia which has given the wonderful lads at the border a new sense of self worth thanks to legitimising their power to ban people of certain races and looks now that the orange buffoon has made it socially acceptable.

      Maybe not directly in law, but it's much the same as the huge spike in racism that occurred in the UK right after Brexit. Don't under-estimate the power of opinion, especially the opinion of the leader of 370million people.

    4. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 2

      Immigration law was not involved. This was about travel visas, not working visas, education visas, or immigration visas. I don't know that Trump is to blame, but his failure to nominate sufficient state department staff could have an impact on this sort of thing.

    5. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      They aren't blaming it on Trump. That line is in there to make sure the reader knows it's not because of the ban. Take that line out and you'd be complaining it isn't in there giving the impression that it is blaming Trump.

      For a person that complains that others are easily offended you are quite easy to offend. I bet you were one of the flaming Trumpsters that got upset when NPR tweeted the Declaration of Independence on July 4th, because it promoted revolution against Trump.

    6. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can "a lot" of the world's problems be Trump's fault? The man has been in office less than six months. And sorry to tell you but US immigration policy hasn't changed all that much since Obama was president.

      Feel free to blame the sitting US President all you want, but at least be rational about it. If you're criticizing US immigration policy you must criticize the Obama administration for it's many failures over eight years. Including mass deportations and banning individuals based on country of origin. Yes that's the truth, but somehow many people became silent from late 2008-2016. Strange how hypocritical partisans become :/

    7. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Translation: I have absolutely no evidence it is even remotely Trump's fault, but it worked for CNN for 10 months with the Russia thing without evidence I just assumed you could make baseless claims about Trump and be regarded as intelligent. Mod me up because I bashed Trump!

      Its almost as if I can ignore anything a liberal says these days, its not like they even attempt to be honest any more.

    8. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      legitimising their power to ban people of certain races and looks

      If that were true then the others from Syria, Iran, and Sudan would have been denied entry. It is more likely a routine denial based on some bureaucratic rule that the team overlooked. You know, SOP for entry into any foreign country.

      But that isn't as fun as screaming 'racism' at any chance you get now is it?

    9. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course it does. Maybe not directly, but the fact Trump is even in power legitimises

      That's the dumbest thing I've read all day.

    10. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It's likely due to pressure from the Trump administration to quietly deny visas to people from countries like Afghanistan, while not being an official ban.

      We have something similar in the UK. Technically it is possible for people to bring their spouses here on a spouse visa, but in practice the Home Office does everything in its power to stop them. Losing documentation, waiting until the last moment to send replies so that the applicant doesn't have time to appeal, telling people that they must leave the country immediately when in fact they can stay while they appeal, all kinds of tricks.

      Plus the whole process is now incredibly expensive, just to further discourage people.

      Makes the numbers look better, without the need for actual legislation and scrutiny.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by gtall · · Score: 1

      Trump doesn't drink alcohol...which makes his behavior even more alarming.

    12. Re: Do we have to blame Trump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't put words in Trump's mouth.

      Even if there are things you long to put in his mouth, you will never have the chance. You, as a Slashdot troll, have few opportunities.

    13. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I realise a lot of the world's problems are Trump's fault"

      No they are not, it is the height of ignorance or malice (only you know which) to claim otherwise.

    14. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      I used the term ironically because I was expecting Anti-Trumpers to leap on my comment and accuse me of being a Trump-fanatic. I was expecting people to either get the irony, or be so partisan that they miss it entirely because it agrees with their preconceptions.

    15. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If that were true then the others from Syria, Iran, and Sudan would have been denied entry.

      No. Legitimising racism does not make everyone suddenly racist. It only brings out the latent ones. Not every border security is a jackass, not every police officer is a highschool bully who couldn't get a job, not every lawyer is the son of Beelzebub.

      A metric shitload of what it takes to get into the USA if you're not a white Christian who knows the words to the star spangled banner is luck. And a the unlucky ones just got a whole lot less lucky.

    16. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      Right, because border agents can do anything they want regardless of the law... It takes a metric shitload to get into the US regardless of the characteristics you said. Even then, it isn't a right to access to a foreign country.

      How has racism been legitimized in the US?

    17. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I lost my cars keys... Damnit Trump!

    18. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

      Trump doesn't drink alcohol...

      True, but "Hold my cup of Russian hooker piss" doesn't have the same ring to it.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    19. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SHHHHH they will see you making sense and talking facts and truths and awkward stuff!!

    20. Re:Do we have to blame Trump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How has racism been legitimized in the US?

      By allowing it to happen.

  13. No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Entry into a foreign country is not a right.

    These girls did not have any of their rights violated. They applied for visas; they were declined. It happens all the time. It happens to foreigners applying for visas in the US; it happens to Americans applying for visas elsewhere.

    In addition, their gender is irrelevant. This information has only been included to incite more outrage from those who feed off of left-wing identity politics.

    There is no story here except for the one that professional victims and their allies are trying to create.

  14. Re: No Fucks To Give by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama never did that. Stop repeating Faux Knews lies.

  15. Hillary's America had balls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Donald's just nuts.

    1. Re: Hillary's America had balls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We would have significant ground troops in Syria today if Clinton had been elected. She campaigned on an active war-based foreign policy.

  16. Re:Too bad by stealth_finger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The fuck is wrong with you?

    Supporting young roboticists is exactly the type of thing what Slashdot is all about.

    Grow up.

    Really? I thought slashdot was all about typos in teh summaries and misplaced rage from people who don't read the articles.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  17. Re: No Fucks To Give by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes he did. He even tortured some folks.

  18. Re: No Fucks To Give by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    So the 6 month total ban Obama put in place on any visa from Iraq never happened? Oh wait, you're about as wrong as Trump is orange.

  19. Oh dear... by Archtech · · Score: 1

    The US armed forces have been fighting an unwinnable war in Afghanistan for 16 years. Many people in Afghanistan hate them and wish they were gone.

    Military robotics is a leading-edge field.

    Hmmmmm.

    https://www.amazon.com/Gone-To...

    --
    I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    1. Re:Oh dear... by gtall · · Score: 1

      Most Afghanis hate the Taliban and wish them gone. They aren't leaving either.

    2. Re: Oh dear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama told us Afghanistan was the "good war".

      At what point did he fuck it up so badly it became unwinnable?

    3. Re:Oh dear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The war was won a long time ago. The occupation is facing armed resistance from rebels.

    4. Re:Oh dear... by bongey · · Score: 1

      You know that Afghans want us gone, let me guess you haven't been there have you? I have, only the crazy religious zealots want us gone.

  20. Re:Too bad by bobbied · · Score: 1

    LOL... You have a good point there...

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  21. Men In Black? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...Then I saw little Tiffany. I'm thinking, y'know, eight-year-old white girl, middle of the ghetto, bunch of monsters, this time of night with quantum physics books? She about to start some shit, Zed. She's about eight years old, those books are WAY too advanced for her. If you ask me, I'd say she's up to something...

  22. Re:Too bad by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

    Supporting young roboticists is exactly the type of thing what Slashdot is all about.

    Well, we have these things called jokes. I realize it's hard to sense a sarcastic tone in written form, but being more explicit seems to ruin the delivery. I don't have any problem with them coming over here, and I tried to convey that with my second part by saying "on a more serious note..." but my guess is that you didn't get that far and just had a knee-jerk reaction to the first part.

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
  23. Re:Disheartening Trend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Feminism is concerned with women's rights, on the basis of equality. If it's not about women's rights, there's no concern about equality. Egalitarianism is only a subset of feminism.

  24. How's this related to the Travel ban? by bobbied · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Until somebody shows that the denial was based on Trump's "travel ban" why are we mentioning it?

    NOTHING in the "travel ban" has anything to do with this. Visa's get denied all the time for all sorts of reasons, some good, some not so good. Somebody decided to deny this visa application by a non-US citizen and until we know why, how's this has anything to do with Trump's Executive Order?

    Oh, I know... It's guilt by association... How dare ANY visa application get denied! Everybody has a right to come here! (NOT!)

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:How's this related to the Travel ban? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing to do with the travel ban at all. Afghanistan isn't even on the list.

      The consensus as to why their visa got denied is because they are considered very high risk for overstaying their visa and/or claiming asylum once they're here.

      Don't try mentioning to people that it's a vetting procedure that originated during the Obama administration...everything and anything is Trump's fault after all.

    2. Re:How's this related to the Travel ban? by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      Until somebody shows that the denial was based on Trump's "travel ban" why are we mentioning it?

      Maybe to head off the inevitable deluge of comments about it being because of Trump's ban if it wasn't mentioned?

      There are still quite a few from people who didn't read the summary before replying, but it would probably be worse without the disclaimer being there.

    3. Re:How's this related to the Travel ban? by dirk · · Score: 1

      Maybe because it is a similar story? This happens all the time. For example, if a police officers is killed, usually they mention other officers from the same area that were killed. Or if there is a murder in Chicago, they mention other murders and the murder rate in Chicago, even though they are not directly related to this murder. If there is a protest somewhere, they will bring up other protests that were similar. This isn't something new that only applies to stories about Trump, this is a common journalistic tool used to expand the scope of an article and tie it into other related stories.

      --

      "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
    4. Re:How's this related to the Travel ban? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One would think that young girls setting an example and competing in a robotics competition would me inline with our values. This is something to be encouraged. But this is not the goal anymore. The Endullment way is to reduce our influence on the world and throw away our leadership position. Rule of law is to be replaced by rule of a man. Democracy is to be replaced by Kingdoms and Oligarchies. The common peasantry is to be ground back into the dirt that they are. Superstition is to be encouraged. Population is to be controlled, not by education and access to birth control, but by bringing back ancient diseases which also keeps the peasants down under the weight of their own sicknesses. These are the new fine royal conservative Psudo-publican values.

    5. Re:How's this related to the Travel ban? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      So any denial of a travel visa by the USA is now related to Trump's travel ban? I don't think so...So why included it if you don't intend to skew the interpretation of the facts to the reporter's political views?

      I suppose that you COULD say that the only reason we are actually reporting THIS instance of a visa not being issued is because of Trump's executive order and how it makes visa denials somehow newsworthy now, but that amounts to the reporter putting their political bias on public display. Either way, this sure looks like a journalistic ethics failure by the reporter.

      NEVER should a reporter expose their own personal bias on the story by choosing what facts they include, especially when the facts discussed are not DIRECTLY related to the story at hand. Anything less is a violation of traditional journalistic principles..

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    6. Re:How's this related to the Travel ban? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /. bringing up Trump in sentence two is an example of one manner of how fake news works... including things that people may assume are related just because they were included in the text, with the author fully cognizant that it is actually not in the context.

      Even if these folks had been from a country included in the 90-day travel ban, if the ban which was found constitutional by SCOTUS 9-0 had not been delayed by Ninth Circuit judges confusing court decisions with their individual free speech rights, it would have been over months ago.

      Like others have said, wake me up when Trump proposes on the record to ban all Muslims from Canada and UK.

    7. Re:How's this related to the Travel ban? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      So any denial of a travel visa by the USA is now related to Trump's travel ban?

      If it's a visa for a Muslim, yes. It's not just the Executive Order, it's Trump's talk about a Muslim ban. Anything the President says will be scrutinized, and anything that looks like an anomaly regarding it will be reported. The White House is not a safe space, never has been, and never will be.

      NEVER should a reporter expose their own personal bias on the story by choosing what facts they include, especially when the facts discussed are not DIRECTLY related to the story at hand. Anything less is a violation of traditional journalistic principles..

      Reporters and editors have to choose which facts they include, and have to decide what's related. They also have biases. This is necessarily true, and it's always been this way. Moreover, news needs to attract eyeballs, and again it's always been this way. What mythic time was it when journalists did anything else?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  25. Full patriotism in action... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck Yeah !!!!
    Make America Great Again one roboticist at a time. /irony

  26. It's too bad. What's a good answer? by Kohath · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Does anyone know how to make a policy that allows visits from legitimate gadget makers while perfectly screening out anyone who might make a bomb instead? Please post the details here.

  27. I used to call my mom the afghan girl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Now she only knits sweaters.

  28. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >These girls did not have any of their rights violated. They applied for visas; they were declined. It happens all the time. It happens to foreigners applying for visas in the US; it happens to Americans applying for visas elsewhere.

    All correct but that doesn't magically make it not a story as much as you want it to not be.

  29. Yea. It's Rdiculous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We are spending billions of dollars a month to win over the people of Afghanistan.

    Bullcrap. But, if it was true, we should stop spending any money trying to "win over the people" of anywhere, especially Afghanistan.

    Fuck them. You don't like us. Fine. Stay home. Fuck with us and we'll invade you again.

    Tow the line or get wrecked. Welcome to reality. We don;t care if you don't like it.

  30. Re:It's too bad. What's a good answer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, their robot was admitted and competed. So it would seem that they had no problems with the gadget.

  31. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to know that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Odds are pretty good they would come here and never leave. People use travel visas like this to sneak into the US never to leave all the time. The reviewing official likely had cause to conclude this was the likely outcome and thus denied the visa. This is the most common reason why travel visas are denied and also the reason why we have travel visa regimes with countries like Afghanistan and no travel visa regime with countries like the UK.

  32. Idiocy by s.petry · · Score: 3

    It really gets tiresome repeating facts to the ignorant and shills who refuse to work with those facts.

    When 90% of a the people following a particular Religion are not impacted by the travel moratorium, it is not "xenophobic" policy. Making such a claim is lazily disingenuous. "You are a racist" is not an argument. Even if it were true, the policy being debated may not be. It is failed logic called a fallacy.

    Considering that the countries impacted are all either failed states or have governments who support terrorists and terrorist organizations, the policy purpose is obviously to address potential terrorism. While we may be able to argue the actual risks involved, you make that impossible with "more" ad hominem based on failed logic. "You are a racist and homophobe" is not an argument.

    Lastly, Countries _ARE_ REQUIRED to control their borders. This is a well known fact and every single nation on Earth does exactly that, because without doing so you have no country. (See Tibet for an example). More lazy arguments based on faulty logic won't make that untrue. More ad homimen (you are a racist, homophobe, misogynist) is still not an argument and is a simply lazy and disingenuous. If you have doubts that countries in fact do need to control their borders, leave all your papers at home and try to enter Mexico, or China, or Russia, or Germany, or any other place you wish. You will be begging for your papers and demanding to see the US embassy in little time. Attempting in fact to rely on the nation that you are attempting to subvert and undermine with your lazy disingenuous arguments!

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Idiocy by gtall · · Score: 2

      No, it is xenophobic. el Presidente Tweetie doesn't give a flying rat's ass about who comes into the country except that he can use it as a hot button issue for his supporters who indeed are a xenophobic.

      By the way, just who requires countries control their borders? The International Border Commission? How come I never got the memo?

    2. Re: Idiocy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It really gets tiresome repeating facts to the ignorant and shills who refuse to work with those facts.

      That is complete bullshit. Doing so validates your whole purpose in preaching to us.

      It energizes your day, and gives you somebody to feel better than.

    3. Re:Idiocy by Rockoon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "You are a racist" is not an argument. Even if it were true, the policy being debated may not be. It is failed logic called a fallacy.

      The left has cried "racist!" so much in my lifetime over things that clearly aren't, that more and more people like me have come to the "easy road"

      The "easy road" is just responding "Fine, I'm racist. The word has lost all its meaning thanks to you, so now you can't harm me with it."

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    4. Re:Idiocy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      By the way, just who requires countries control their borders? The International Border Commission? How come I never got the memo?

      Any country that wants to continue to exist?

    5. Re:Idiocy by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      When 90% of a the people following a particular Religion are not impacted by the travel moratorium, it is not "xenophobic" policy.

      You're the only one who mentioned religion here.

    6. Re: Idiocy by dunkelfalke · · Score: 0

      So you say that you finally have decided to be honest? Congratulations, I guess.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    7. Re:Idiocy by s.petry · · Score: 1

      So you used the term "xenophobe" and have no idea what it means? Argumentum ad ignorantiam is another type of faulty logic.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    8. Re: Idiocy by penandpaper · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When everything is racist how do you not be a racist? Seriously, I want to know.

    9. Re: Idiocy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's ridiculous. Many countries, if not all of them, have illegal immigrants and refugees (legal or illegal). Most countries don't even have secure borders.

      Name a country you think lacks illegal immigrants and then Google it.

    10. Re:Idiocy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So basically you, like all social liberals, have absolutely no argument dealing with the fact that people are being killed by muslims and have instead resorted to calling people who disagree with you names. You're doing little different than a priest calling a supporter of evolution a heretic a century ago. At some point, the sting wears off and reality wins out. All you're doing is bullying but you fail to understand that your bully tactics have stopped working on the general public and we're all sick of it.

      Regarding the muslim ban, the best "argument" I've heard against it is that "People need to be vigilant." Everytime one of this assholes blows themselves up, runs over people, etc. I want to post to these idiots, "## people dead because they weren't vigilant enough." Meanwhile, a muslim ban is a proactive, vigilant step. Yes, I know not all muslims are terrorists, but enough of them are that it's not worth putting the rest of us at risk. And before you decide I'm a xenophobe, I have or have had immigrant friends from 24 different countries, including muslim countries. The fact is, if we're bombing a place, somebody who passes our screening process can become radicalized over here if we bomb something that kills a relative. The fact is that many of the attackers are descended from the original immigrants, and we can't vet them so as they say, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

      Finally, before you bring up gun control, I support it. IMO, a good compromise would be to require that certain types of guns remain locked at the gun range. Gun enthusiasts get to have them and shoot with them, the rest of us needn't worry about them being on the street.

    11. Re:Idiocy by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      What country doesn't control its borders?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    12. Re: Idiocy by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      It is not that everything is racist, it is just what used to be acceptable, isn't anymore. Nothing wrong about it, really. Ethnic slurs used to be acceptable, they aren't anymore, and only actual racists complain about it.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    13. Re: Idiocy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check your privilege you racist wank.

  33. Exactly this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Says everything that needs to be said on this topic.

  34. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by Sique · · Score: 0
    You are juristically correct. No country has to ever allow entry to anyone. Not even to their own citizens. The U.S. has a constitution which guarantees free movement to their own citizens, but there is no international law requiring any country to have similar regulations.

    You also have no obligation to invite anyone in your home. It will still raise questions if you arbitrarily deny entry, and people will think you are a quite strange guy.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  35. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure it does, regardless of how much *you* want it to be. Standard visa rejection. Not a story.

  36. Allowed their Kill-Bots in! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet Trump allowed them to send their Kill-Bots into the U.S. !!!

  37. Re:Too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But these young Afghan girls might build child sex robots! And America doesn't want any of those around.

    Oh, sorry. Prof. Sharkey was a Brit, not an American.

  38. Less than worthless story by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    Travelers from a country not included in the travel ban can't enter the US and we have no idea why.

    Has Slashdot resorted to printing articles simply to take up space?

  39. Thanks for keeping us safe, Trump by AntronArgaiv · · Score: 1

    Although denying these students visas accomplishes nothing in that respect.

    Probably soured the entire team on the US is about all they accomplished with this dumb move.

  40. Ask the Israelis how they do it. by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    They seem quite good at it - for them it is a matter of life and death.

    http://www.haaretz.com/1.74329...

    Their screening policies are viewed as necessary for survival and political correctness does not factor into their policies and procedures.

  41. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll have you know the US constitution does not just apply to citizens. Self evident rights apply to everyone.

  42. Did anyone actually read the story? by whitroth · · Score: 1

    It's a *team* of girls. And, since the robot is made of a choice of parts from an explicit list, there's no hidden weapons in it.

    ObDisclosure: my stepson's First team made it to the semi-finals a couple of years ago.

    No, this is put "they're Muslims, we don't want them, we read their application the same way that the right-wing slashdotters read the story."

    1. Re:Did anyone actually read the story? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did *you* read the story?

      Teams from Iran and Syria were granted entry and allowed to repeat.

      This has nothing to do with Islam. It's a routine visa denial. They happen all the time.

  43. Re: No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a r by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Humans have a natural right to free movement.

  44. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll have you know that the US Constitution does not provide for unfettered immigration of immigrants or entry of foreigners.

  45. Re: No Fucks To Give by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, that never happened. There was a partial ban that in practice meant that some applications took a few months longer.

  46. So basically.... by kimvette · · Score: 1

    So, basically... we in America are afraid of school girls. Seems accurate.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  47. Please, no by kelanos · · Score: 1

    Please TAKE A HIKE with your cherry-picked example for bleeding hearts, state-run BBC new service.

    Liberals may have has few boundaries established for them by their parents, but I'm afraid their ignorance and lack of discipline cannot be allowed to prevent our entire country from establishing boundaries.

    1. Re:Please, No by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Which boundary is being established by denying these particular people visas?

  48. Please, No by kelanos · · Score: 2

    Please TAKE A HIKE with your cherry-picked example for bleeding hearts, state-run BBC new service.

    Liberals may have had few boundaries established for them by their parents, but I'm afraid their ignorance and lack of discipline cannot be allowed to prevent our entire civilization from establishing boundaries.

    And by "Liberals" I mean almost all "conservatives" as well. Our civilization is being raped from the inside.

  49. Re:AND STAY OUT!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Middle-eastern people DO NOT have a right to enter this country. It's a major privilege.

    No foreigners have a right to enter this country, regardless of origin.

    We have a NORMAL president now.

    [Insert maniacal laughter] [Insert more maniacal laughter] [Insert sobbing]

    The Obama administration had no regard for the safety of Americans.

    And you really think Trump gives a rats ass about average Americans? For all of his many faults, this is one area I would chose Obama as far ahead of Trump. Pay attention instead of repeating quips you heard on Fox.

  50. Re: No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a r by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why, are we migrating herd animals?

  51. Propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You really have to dig for this stuff, don't you, liberal media? If you published a story about every outrageous case in which a deserving person was deprived a visa, with or without "travel ban," you'd not have room to publish anything else.

    I understand the "travel ban" is disturbing in its motivation, its populism, its incompetence for any meaningful result, its incompetence in implementation.

    I would like US immigration to treat travelers with much higher competence, respect, and predictability. But the harsh fact is, the added harm of the travel ban vanishes in the noise of their general level of service. It's that bad.

    1. Re:Propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      difference between liberal and conservative media:

      Liberal media: Sensationalized human interest stories to make you mad about what conservatives support
      Conservative media: fear mongering to make you fear what the liberals support

      its bullshit both ways and both sides have an unlimited supply of it. how about instead of being divided by our partisan beliefs and scolding specific sides of the media, we band together against bad reporting in general. But its easier for us to be divided and fight each other than see the common enemy and work together.

  52. Re:Too bad by snookiex · · Score: 1

    slashdot was all about typos in teh summaries

    To be fair, also typos in the commentaries.

    --
    Open Source Network Inventory for the masses! Kuwaiba
  53. Bureaucrats... by slew · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Being an intelligent (young) woman is most decidedly a threat.

    Yes, sadly, a threat to overstay their visas. Sadly, that is one of the criteria that has been historically used by bureaucrats in the visa office to deny visas.

    In case you haven't been involved in obtaining visas for foreigners before, this is unfortunately quite common. I've seen this many times, despite impeccable invitation letters, pre-paid round trip air tickets, evidence of foreign funds (bank accounts), evidence of strong ties to return (e.g., children, close family members), visas for young folks (12-30 years old) from many poor-er countries get routinely denied by bureaucrats in the various visa offices ostensibly for this reason.

    Depending on your politics and your sympathies, you may not care about this risk, but to some of the faceless bureaucrats running the visa offices, visa overstay risk is as much of a "threat" as association with terrorists.

    On the flip side, see it from their point of view in "enforcing" the laws on the books: a group of young girls with little to tie them to their home country (and who might be ostracized in their own country for being educated), want a visa to travel to the USA on limited funds. Sadly, you gotta admit that at least a yellow flag would be raised that they are at risk of overstaying their visa. Maybe you don't care if they overstay, but depending on who was reviewing their visa application, that person might happen to care enough to deny the visa and I suspect that is exactly what happened.

    1. Re:Bureaucrats... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slew is absolutely correct. People are viewing this as a Trump issue when it really is simply an immigration issue.

      If these girls land in the U.S, I can guarantee you that as soon as they get to customs they will demand asylum. They are presumably educated women in a society that will consider them a threat because of this. The dumbest immigration attorney this country has ever produced would win this case. They will claim that is are at in danger of being killed by simply living in Afghanistan, and an immigration judge will agree. They don't even need an attorney for an asylum case as they can claim almost anything on their own (fear of murder, rape, beatings, etc..) and there is a presumption of credible fear just because of where they live.

      If they get here, they will be approved for asylum. Once that happens, they can apply for green cards which they will also get due to asylum granting them eligibility. And once that happens, they will petition for their parents and siblings as lawful permanent residents are allowed to bring their family members over. So each one of them will bring their parents and 10 plus siblings over, the parents will get green cards and petition for their parents, siblings, and the siblings will petition for their kids. We're looking at dozens of people here, in a country where there are minimal records, and no serious vetting can take place. I know this because I used to be an immigration officer and am quite familiar with the bullshit games that people play to stay in the U.S.

      Since they won't be able to speak English, may be minors, and therefore can't work. They will get federal/state welfare to pay their rent, food healthcare, and give them spending money. USCIS will process their family petitions for free. And as long as they can get funds to bring the family members over, the parents, grandparents, uncles/aunts, and siblings will get welfare social security cash benefits, without most likely working a single day in our country. I am not saying they will all behave this way. Experience has taught me the younger people will find jobs and go to college/trade school as they will realize the can have a better lifestyle. But the older, and most like illiterate parents and other relatives, will be taxpayer funded for the rest of their lives.

      This isn't just an Afghanistan issue, you will see this from citizens from any poor country who arrive in the U.S and don't have any significant wealth, enterprises, or a high-paying job in their home nation. The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) has so many provisions and loopholes that unless a person committing a serious crime, or is positively identified as a terrorist. They will find a way to stay and get a green card eventually.

      Consular officers at embassies and consulates are required to consider the likelihood of someone trying to stay in the U.S. And fortunately, the officer in question did their job.

    2. Re: Bureaucrats... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I mostly live off capital gains. That matters because it means I did well last year. I paid a large amount of taxes, at the Federal and State level. It was a pretty good number and I don't have any complaints about paying it.

      Which leads me to this...

      I hate how my taxes are spent but I begrudge them nothing. How about we build one less bomber and support that kid's whole family in perpetuity? How about you change long term capital gains into 36 months instead of 12? Maybe even bump it up 7.5%? I don't mind and it will not make me reconsider investing in America. I'll still happily invest and pay my taxes. Those changes would cost me a few bucks, but not enough to hurt.

      And, you know, buy one fewer bomber. Hell, we can probably get a few more years out of our current generation aircraft carriers. For that amount of money, we could probably outfit her entire family with limos and servants.

      If you want to really help, let me write off more charitable donations, but enforce some standards to be called a charitable donation. I already donate more than I get credit for. Inspire me to donate even more. It just reduces my tax burden. It still costs me money.

      Seriously, we could feed and water that whole country with table scraps. I am not entirely for open borders, but I can understand nationalized empathy by means of accepting immigrants. We aren't poor. We are just in debt because we like bombing little brown men. To be fair, we do have a pretty adept military.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  54. Re:AND STAY OUT!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >>No foreigners have a right to enter this country, regardless of origin.

    But it's the THIRD WORLD who consistently speaks out and complains about not being able to enter/stay in America. It's the third world who thinks they HAVE a right. A German doesn't have a right either but they do not complain one bit!

    >>And you really think Trump gives a rats ass about average Americans? For all of his many faults, this is one area I would chose Obama as far ahead of Trump. Pay attention instead of repeating quips you heard on Fox.

    This shows your stupidity! Are you kidding me? You see what's happening with the huge increase in terror attacks. It's been demonstrated OVER AND OVER how dangerous third world (non-white, non Japanese, etc) people are to our society. They're DESTROYING Europe and trying to do the same here. Well, thankfully, Trump WILL NOT ALLOW the same to happen to our citizens. Go back to your fake CNN liberal shit news. You're probably a millennial and/or LGBT freak of nature!

  55. Government Employees . . . by hduff · · Score: 1

    Nobody ever got fired for saying NO.

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
    1. Re:Government Employees . . . by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      What the British call a "jobsworth". Great expression.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  56. Re: No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a r by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You sound like this bitch

     

  57. Re: No Fucks To Give by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean the 6 month ban on processing persons from a specific country, done because of a specific threat. A Ban that didn't actually prevent people from coming in who were already processed. There was a slowdown from about March to June in 2011 while new security measures were implemented. It's July what ever their temporary ban from earlier this year was supposed to do or solve should have been figured out, but he can't be held responsible for his lack of leadership skill, brain and nerve damage is a known problem for orange dye. https://lakeland.edu/PDFs/MSDS/76/Fluorescent%20Orange%20Marking%20Paint.pdf

  58. Here is how I read the summary... by gosand · · Score: 2

    An Afghan all-girl robotics team was denied entry into the US for a competition. If you are thinking it was because of the travel ban, it wasn't because a) Afghanistan wasn't part of the travel ban and b) teams from countries that were part of the bad were able to secure visas.

    What I thought should have been highlighted more in the submission is that girls are generally denied education in Afghanistan so this was a big achievement for them. I also thought there could have been more details around the fact that visas are denied often for all kinds of reasons. The fact that one of the girls on the team doesn't understand why they weren't allowed in is somewhat meaningless. I also thought it was kind of interesting that they could still watch their robot perform via a live feed.

    I didn't get any sense that this post was anti or pro Trump, or anti or pro any issue. I read it for what it was, and I think the people who are bitching on both sides of the "argument" in this post need to see this for what it is - a very poorly written story summary.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    1. Re:Here is how I read the summary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The article also implicitly laments, that talent is not allowed to enter the United States—as if the U.S. is still so special somehow, that it would have the smarts to let inventive people in.

      I mean, why should the young Afghani women bother to go there, when they could apply to participate in a robotics competition in the EU. (Unless for some reason they were first denied entry to the Schengen area, too)

      There are a great many reasons why the U.S. is not a desired place to travel to under almost any conditions. One of those reasons, then, and the primary one, to boot, being intrusions on privacy. Even if Trump's presidency stops, then the onerous policies carried over from his era [and from before 2008] stay on because of bureaucratic inertia.

      This could be said about any country with nuclear weapons, save EU member states.

      The list of nuke states is already a gallery of rogues: China, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, and Russia. And the U.S. To various degrees, each has a particularly inflated and typically undeserved sense of importance in the world. It could be easy to say "like, whatever," — but their possession of such weapons does not make the world any less dangerous.

      Israel, of course, has legitimate reasons to defend itself from belligerent neighbors, and its existence has indirectly allowed many a country to maintain their own independence.

      Pakistan has legitimate reasons to defend itself from India, given that India developed a nuclear weapon, too. Both India and Pakistan have a large amount of problems that are not likely to go away anytime soon.

      North Korea will have to realise, that South Korea, Japan, the U.S., and the rest of the world really are not its enemies. Once it has, then maybe it will finally find peace within, thereonafter reconciliation, and perhaps even true independence.

  59. Re: No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a r by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, they don't.

  60. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No country has to ever allow entry to anyone. Not even to their own citizens.

    You often have the right to enter your own country. In the US you don't even need a passport to re-enter if you're a citizen. You'll probably get hassled tho. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights also states you have the right to renter your own country, so this is true for the signatory countries as well.

  61. Obviously by kenh · · Score: 1

    President Trump recently ordered a ban on travel from six Muslim-majority countries, but Afghanistan was not included on the list. Teams from Iran, Sudan and Syria -- which are on the list -- did manage to enter the country.

    And

    "We still don't know the reason why we were not granted visas, because other countries participating in the competition have been given visas," Fatemah Qaderyan, 14, told Reuters.

    So obviously it's because of the Trump travel ban EO, right?

    Apparently no forigeners were ever prevented from entering the US without an explaination before Trump took office, right?

    This entire story boils down to "a handful of Afghan girls were not granted visas to the US, we don't know why".

    --
    Ken
  62. Trump Bashing Bonanza, No news at 11... by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

    So a story that has nothing to do with Trumps travel ban (which by the way worked properly, allowing in non-threat robotics teams from even counties on the watch list), yet somehow this is Trumps fault? Since the other teams who WERE from watchlist countries managed to get in, I suspect that this team couldn't make it because they put in their travel applications late or didn't pay the processing fee or some other mundane thing along those lines, but the alt-left media and their lap dogs here on slashdot automatically jump to blame Trump, yet when we find out the truth, that it had nothing to do with Trump, it will be a single paragraph on page 32...

    We get it, several of the slashdot editors hate Trump. They haven't published a single positive thing that Trump has done, including the stories that I sent them. Things like:
    - Trump killing TPP, something universaly called for on slashdot; we get no info from slashdot moderators
    - Trump reforming the VA
    - Trump banning travel from state sponsors/hotbeds of terrorisim with poor or no ability to vet potential immigrants
    - Forcing sanctuary cities to obey the rule of law (regardless of what you think of illegal aliens, local municipalities ignoring federal laws is a recipe for anarchy, because why should I obey their laws if they won't obey federal laws).
    - Trump slapped new sanctions on Iran for immediately violating their agreement with Obama by firing ballistic missile tests,
    - Trump added 10,000 border enforcement agents and new ways for ICE to work with state and local LEOs,
    - Trump has been working to replace Obamacare, which is falling apart (many areas have one or no providers in the exchange and costs have skyrocketed by 49% since Obamacare took effect, often for inferior coverage with deductibles jumping $1000 to up to $15,000/year) https://www.forbes.com/sites/t...

    Media coverage of Trump is something like 92% negative, and we now have CNN caught making shit up and several CNN contributors admitting that the Russia-Trump thing is total BS. And the media wonders why Trump is calling them out for being fake news outlets...

    --
    If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    1. Re:Trump Bashing Bonanza, No news at 11... by PPH · · Score: 1

      yet somehow this is Trumps fault?

      It's his administration.

      Whatever happened to "The buck stops here"?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Trump Bashing Bonanza, No news at 11... by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      And has nothing to do with the travel ban, since people from Iran, Sudan and Syria were able to participate. Those countries are on the travel ban. See how that works. You might want to ask the State Department why they were denied access, but Trump's travel ban was not the cause.

    3. Re:Trump Bashing Bonanza, No news at 11... by PPH · · Score: 1

      You might want to ask the State Department

      Who appointed Rex Tillerson?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  63. A quiz for you by Texmaize · · Score: 0

    A. You understand that a sizable fraction of the muslim population wants you dead, as evidenced by the numerous attacks against people listening to music, seeing tourist sights, or having a meal out, during the last few weeks. You understand that this culture does not practice tolerance as you understand it, including issues of women's rights, homosexual right to survival, and freedom of religion (or even agnosticism).

    B. You are a moron.

    Please insert your answer for scoring by the larger /dot community.

    --
    "Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
    1. Re:A quiz for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A. You understand that a sizable fraction of the muslim population wants you dead, as evidenced by the numerous attacks against people listening to music, seeing tourist sights, or having a meal out, during the last few weeks.

      Oh, so you are destroying your own argument by pointing out that their actions are not directed towards me, but rather towards another end that they wish to achieve by their campaign of violence and intimidation.

      What do you think drives it? Could it have its roots in something?

      You understand that this culture does not practice tolerance as you understand it, including issues of women's rights, homosexual right to survival, and freedom of religion (or even agnosticism).

      You're describing the culture that is around me already. They don't like brown skin, gays, women's rights, agnostics, atheists, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and more.

      B. You are a moron.

      Why? Are you just used to screaming about a person not being intelligent or something?

      Please insert your answer for scoring by the larger /dot community.

      Already up to +5 man, you should look and see what you can learn.

    2. Re:A quiz for you by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      If a sizable fraction of the Muslim population wanted people like me dead, there'd be a lot more killings. Give them a little credit for competence. Where I sit, Muslims are not dangerous. There are parts of the world where this is not true.

      I dislike Muslim culture in may respects, and Islam is my least favorite major religion. That doesn't mean I don't want Muslims to get fair treatment. The Muslims I've known have been good people.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    3. Re:A quiz for you by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Apparently "significantly less than one percent" is now "a sizable fraction"
      And if it had been more than "significantly less than one percent" we would all be dead already.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  64. Slashdot Shame Lies Above by Texmaize · · Score: 1

    There may be reasons that the US immigration policy is a mess compared to the rest of the world. There may be reasons that a lot of the world's problems are due to a president in office for about half a year. The thing is, we will never know if this is true because there are so many zealots on this forum that substitute name-calling for fact based discussion.

    Shame on you slashdot for modding this up. This type of parochial tribalism, not Trump, is exactly what is wrong with the world.

    --
    "Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
  65. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except that you are not right. In many countries there are laws that prohibit the government to deny entry to citizens (with only exceptions for excommunicated people). In some cases you even have the right to return after you have given up your citizenship, because your right is by birth and cannot be taken away even if you renounce your citizenship.

  66. Your Ignorance is Not Proof of Conspiracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is at least the fourth story I've seen posted here where the "muslim ban" is referenced while in the same article it specifically states that the travel ban has nothing to do with why this happened. Such a BS biased tactic on the part of the editing staff both here and at the various sites that reported this.

    Or instead of a conspiracy by people you don't like its because the muslim ban is currently in the headlines, these kids are muslim and many readers will wonder if the two are connected. So the editors decided to dismiss that very obvious question right off the bat and then get to the meat of the story.

    Here's the very first sentence of the article:

    President Trump recently ordered a ban on travel from six Muslim-majority countries, but Afghanistan was not included on the list.

    Frankly you sound like one of those people who constantly conspiracy rooted in their own ignorance and incompetence. I'm pretty damn tired of loud-mouthed idiots like that.

    1. Re:Your Ignorance is Not Proof of Conspiracy by GonzoPhysicist · · Score: 1

      This is the correct and simple answer. I wish I had mod points, and you hadn't posted as AC.

      --
      horror vacui
    2. Re:Your Ignorance is Not Proof of Conspiracy by aicrules · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it's a simple answer, but it is in no way demonstrably correct. If that sentence had been simply reversed, highlighting the relevant subject of the story (Afghanistan is not included on the list of six countries for which President Trump ordered a travel ban.) then it would have at least been a genuine attempt to clear it up. Instead it's making the travel ban the active, important clause of the sentence. There is a difference, and it's purposeful. It may not be a conspiracy, but it is certainly an attempt to inflame rather than explain. In fact, writing the sentence "backwards" like that is poor writing. The important part of the sentence is Afghanistan is not on the list, not that trump order the travel ban. It being the second sentence of the article is also unnecessary. The second sentence should be the statement that it is currently unknown why the girls' visas were denied.

  67. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

    In addition, their gender is irrelevant. This information has only been included to incite more outrage from those who feed off of left-wing identity politics.

    I tried to *jokingly* make that point above & got buried. Glad to see someone's modding up common sense . I might have jinxed you though.

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
  68. The right wing response to this... by fedos · · Score: 0

    seems to be "let me tell you how unbelievably stupid I am".

  69. Probably due to their age and gender by Solandri · · Score: 2

    I used to help at an English school in Korea, which also put together travel packages for the teachers and students to visit the U.S. This was back in the days before the automatic 90-day travel visa for holders of S. Korean passports.

    The children, males, and older (married) Korean women had no problem getting travel visas. But we had a high percentage of rejections for young females. Our theory was that the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service thinks young, unmarried women want to visit the U.S. in hopes of finding a husband, and obtaining U.S. citizenship that way. So it gives them a higher bar to hurdle if they apply for a tourist visa.

  70. Enforcement problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Denying visas because of being afraid they won't go back is just ridiculous.
    There are other ways to enforce that, like ask the inviting organisation for some
    guarantees or just kick them out if they change their plans.

    The US is a f*** superpower with bombs hitting targets at millimeter precision thousands of miles away. They should be
    capable of dealing with 6 Afghan girls on their home turf.

    1. Re:Enforcement problem by karmatic · · Score: 2

      "Denying visas because of being afraid they won't go back is just ridiculous."

      That's pretty much the point of visas in the first place - they let you screen applicants that are criminals, likely to overstay, likely to illegally work, or likely to file a refugee claim.

      "There are other ways to enforce that"

      When the government tries that, they get called out as inhumane monsters:

      http://nacla.org/news/2015/01/...

      "or just kick them out if they change their plans." ... at which point people will start calling the US a police state, since people who disappear are in an unknown location, and people get all upset when you check people's citizenship. Start checking ID, and now you're Nazi Germany.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Why do you think there are over 10 million illegals in the US? As you say, the US has the ability to hit targets at millimetre precision thousands of miles away. It's technically possible to do mass deportations (and it wouldn't be the first time), but people dislike when the government does what it would actually take to enforce it's borders after the fact.

      So, the government instead relies on regulating who can come in.

  71. That doesn't make it right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Entry into a foreign country is not a right.

    You've substituted legality for morality.

    Just because no rights were 'violated' doesn't make what happened right.

    There is no story here except for the one that professional victims and their allies are trying to create.

    The only 'professional victims' I see are all the strident whiners who are offended by the mere reporting of this story.

    1. Re:That doesn't make it right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing ethically wrong with denying entry to people who do not have the right to enter. It's not bigotry.

      As has been pointed out elsewhere in this thread:
      1) Competitors from Iran and Syria were allowed to enter the US and participate.
      2) Afghanistan is not affected by the travel ban in any case, and any attempt to link it to the travel ban is totally disingenuous.
      3) People are denied visas all the time for completely innocuous reasons.

      But go ahead and continue to think that some gigantic outrage has happened here, just because it makes you sad.

    2. Re:That doesn't make it right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing ethically wrong with denying entry to people who do not have the right to enter.

      1) Competitors from Iran and Syria were allowed to enter the US and participate.

      One group being arbitrarily singled out is pretty much the definition of being "ethically wrong."
      When your first and best point obliterates your own argument that's normally a huge clue your logic is broken.

  72. It's not necessarily unrelated by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    the "Travel Ban" sets an overall hostile tone resulting in more visas being declined for sketchy reasons.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:It's not necessarily unrelated by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Not only that, calling it a "travel ban" is a lie on it's face.

    2. Re:It's not necessarily unrelated by karmatic · · Score: 0

      "more visas being declined for sketchy reasons." ... which might matter if there was a right to freely enter foreign countries. There's not.

  73. Democrats =/= "The Left" by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 1

    The issue here is that the sellout Dems that pulled away from the drug import bill in no way represent "The Left". None of the Dems really do. Certainly not Cory Booker, who was most responsible for killing the Canadian re-importation bill the first time around. He comes from NJ, where Pharmaceutical companies contribute heavily to his campaign coffers.

    The closest thing we have to an actual leftist in Congress is Bernie Sanders, who is an Independent, not a Democrat. Maybe Tulsi Gabbard, or sometimes Elizabeth Warren on one of her good days. Even Sanders is really only "left" if viewed in a US context. Pretty centrist compared to most European labor/left parties.

    The rest of the Dems are so beholden to their corporate masters bribes (aka "campaign contributions") that on issues of economic justice and corporate hegemony, there really isn't a whole hell of a lot of difference between the Dems and the GOP.

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    1. Re:Democrats =/= "The Left" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, the "No true Socialist" defense.

      I know you don't want to face this, but the concept of individual liberty is so far away from your favored forms of tyranny that all three of them are "extreme left." The people who actually believe "crazy" ideas like those in the Declaration of Independence are so far to the right of what you consider "right wing" that all we see when looking at your "enlightened" worldview is a debate over who to kill and who to recruit when implementing a totalitarian government.

      The US has been moving left, into fascism and away from liberty. Many of us oppose that. You want to charge right past fascism into even more complete forms of government oppression. We oppose that too.

    2. Re:Democrats =/= "The Left" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sanders is too much of a peacenik. His domestic policies are very good, and therefore he would be best as a VP.

      President Obama tried a reset with Russia, and, well, despite his genuine personal and professional effort, that "reset" was undermined by Russia in 2008 anyway, when it had invaded parts of Georgia. And that was before Obama was elected President. The picture repeated in Ukraine in 2014.

      Trump might be a fan of the top in Russia, but in the interim, Congress appears to have grown a spine.

      Elizabeth Warren, on the other hand, seems to have a very realistic view about the world. Even if I don't know exactly what her foreign policy outlook is, then her domestic policies show, that she pretty much knows how the world works.

      My captcha is 'democrat'. Interesting.

  74. The Muslim Ban changes the tone by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    of our entire immigration process. Think about it this way, when your boss goes on a tirade you take notice, right? How about your Bosses boss going on a tirade? Now ratchet that all the way up to President. That's what's happened here.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:The Muslim Ban changes the tone by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Umm, no. Doing a quick check, I find that the USA, for the eight years of the Obama Presidency (and presumably for seven of the eight of the Bush Presidency) has had a 75%+ disapproval chance of getting a visa for ANY Afghanis.

      IOW, this isn't the EEEEEVIL MR Trump. This is the same policy that Obama was using.

      PS. I also note that the guys running the robotics conference in question consider their success rate in getting visas much higher than it has been historically. They're expecting only two countries to not get their visas, as opposed to the 50 or so that marks "average".

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  75. That cuts both ways by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    Obama wasn't using Immigration policy as political capital. It was just one more thing he did because he was president.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  76. Doesn't that make it worse by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    that we'd be turning away people to come to tech events because their home country is so rotten they might not go back?

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  77. Sure it does by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Trump's repeatedly called it a Muslim ban. Should we be surprised when his administration starts arbitrarily denying visas to Muslims. If anything the fact that it's not one of the six countries makes it more suspect. I've also seen it argued in the thread that the kid & their parents might try refusing to go back home. If that's the case we're got a bigger problem. A country we are at war with and occupying is so unstable it's people are fleeing? A war that's over a 15 years long with no end in site? And a kid trying to get ahead in the world using technology. Seems to me everything's in order for a perfect cluster fuck.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Sure it does by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There isn't anything arbitrary about a Muslim ban. "Are you or are you not a Muslim?" is quite consistent.

      Secondly, you are surprised that people wish to leave a country that is unstable, poor, and occupied by a foreign power? I am not. What does surprise me is that they'd like to flee to the homeland of their occupiers.

  78. My rights were violated by rsilvergun · · Score: 0

    if she was denied entry because she is Muslim or comes from a Muslim country. I as an American have a 1st amendment right to have my government not enact laws respecting the establishment of a religion.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:My rights were violated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Competitors from Iran and Syria were allowed to enter and compete.

    2. Re:My rights were violated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, thousands of Muslims enter America every day.

      But please continue your great story of how you won the gold medal in the Oppression Olympics.

  79. Children At Risk by SeattleLawGuy · · Score: 1

    See, if you turn your brain on, you realize that no matter what kind of culture it is, they still have to compete with the rest of the world in mobilizing their women to the work force. No one is fighting women getting educations.

    However, in a country where there is quite some risk to simply traveling to school each day, males are better suited to the risks.

    "Quite some risk" arises because people *are* fighting women getting education.

    Males *are NOT* better suited to the risks. Read "I am Malala." What exactly is a grade-school age boy going to do when men with AKs stop his school bus and take him off it? More importantly, the discussion of the importance of the radio station in fomenting the culture where girls couldn't go to school safely is probably one of the best lessons in propaganda and how a country becomes radicalized that you are otherwise likely to come across.

    The risks are higher for girls because people can gain status or power within their group of thugs by keeping girls from getting an education. But men aren't better suited to the risk. And in the meantime, making it harder for girls to get an education hurts the economy--but benefits certain people who cling to absurd positions because (1) it benefits their power base personally, (2) they are afraid of what will happen if they do not conform to the absurd positions, or (3) they have been manipulated by others into believing it is in some sense morally right.

    --
    Real lawyers write in C++
    1. Re:Children At Risk by kelanos · · Score: 0

      Read "I am Malala."

      Read the cherry-picked propaganda story I like, fuck the facts

      Males are better suited to combat and its collateral effects, end of story.

    2. Re:Children At Risk by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      *citation needed*

      Good luck finding one, as in a good peer-reviewed scientific citation - not something Alex Jones pulled out of his colon.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    3. Re:Children At Risk by kelanos · · Score: 0

      BIG BODY > LITTLE BODY

      peer-reviewed scientific citation

      I need as expert to tell me it's okay to think

      god you're fucking stupid

    4. Re: Children At Risk by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      I bet I know some women who can kick your ass. Besides in armed combat a smaller body is arguably an advantage because it's harder to hit a smaller target.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    5. Re: Children At Risk by kelanos · · Score: 0

      Now it comes out, israeli jew.

      it's gonna go real hard for you when your bubble bursts and reality hits

    6. Re: Children At Risk by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Much like your assumption about combat prowess your assumption about my nationality and ethnicity is way off the mark.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  80. getting hysterical won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They even were caught rejoicing when that shooter shot up the baseball practice

    Show me one quote where there is rejoicing.

  81. Is their a travel ban or not? by schwit1 · · Score: 1
    "President Trump recently ordered a ban on travel from six Muslim-majority countries, ... Teams from Iran, Sudan and Syria -- which are on the list -- did manage to enter the country."

    If their is a ban how did people from those 6 countries enter the USA?

  82. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    You also have no obligation to invite anyone in your home. It will still raise questions if you arbitrarily deny entry, and people will think you are a quite strange guy.

    What's your home address? I'll have a few dozen people show up just to show up and sit a while in your living room. That OK? Or are you quite a strange guy?

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  83. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Entry into a foreign country is not a right.

    OK, so let's say that some random government bureaucrat were to decide, completely arbitrarily and without any kind of justification, that you personally are not allowed to buy spaghetti sauce at your nearest grocery store. Would that be a violation of your "rights". Do you have a "right" to buy spaghetti sauce at your nearest grocery store? At most, you might have a general right to "individual freedom" or "due process" and "rule of law".

    But if you have a "right" to things like individual freedom and due process, and if "rights" are supposed to be absolute, universal, irrevocable, etc., then what about the rights of these Afghan girls to individual freedom and due process. If it matters whether you can buy yourself some spaghetti sauce, does it also matter that other people can attend robotics competitions?

    It happens to foreigners applying for visas in the US; it happens to Americans applying for visas elsewhere.

    As an American, I've applied for lots of visas and never had one declined. But I know plenty of people who have been denied visas to travel to the USA when there was absolutely no justification at all for the denial.

    Given that I understand basic math, I'm not particularly concerned about the kinds of terrorism that would be prevented by denying someone a tourist visa (i.e. a terrorist organization capable of making a nuclear bomb wouldn't be stopped by lack of tourist visas). But, even if you are concerned the about the occasional crazy person coming over from the Middle East, then wouldn't you be concerned about the fact that the current system seems to be completely arbitrary? If the USA visa system is so broken that it is denying tourist visas to good people then it is also almost certainly also granting tourist visa to bad people who will come to the USA and kill (a relatively small number) of Americans.

  84. That's fine then by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    but was a reason why she was denied access given? Perhaps the person that reviewed her request is pro-Muslim Ban the the person that reviewed the Iran/Syria ones is anti-Muslim Ban. Given the current political climate you'll forgive me if I don't want some extra scrutiny.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:That's fine then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no "Muslim ban".

      The overwhelming majority of the world's Muslims live in countries whose citizens are not barred from entering the US under the travel ban. And with the exception of Iran, the six countries whose citizens are barred from entering the US are all failed nations.

      And Afghanistan was not on the list of barred nations. Ever.

  85. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

    Their gender *does* matter when it comes to tourist visas. In many countries, the treatment of women is so poor that they can make a prima facia case for asylum once they get here. Which unfortunately means that the consulates are then put in a very difficult situation of not wanting to discriminate against women but they only way they can avoid doing so is to treat men equally as poorly. It's really hard to grant tourist visas from certain regions of the world as pretty much everybody who lives there has a valid asylum claim.

  86. Re:Girl sounds like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...an Excellent investment and very proper use of taxpayer funds!

      -a taxpayer

  87. Mod parent up for most likely answer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n/t

  88. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then the scope is too wide to consider some people potential asylees. Young women, who do something great, should be granted visas, while uneducated young men should not be.

  89. Re:Too bad by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    Some typos are international.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  90. Nepal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Donating to a cause and then sending a copy of the slip is likely to make things worse.

    Maybe it would have been simpler to have have joined as a volunteer in an NGO.

    But hey — if Nepal didn't want you, then there are up to two-hundred other countries that may want your help.

  91. Return trip, too | mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And deliver them safely back :-)

    After that, offer generous scholarships to MIT or CalTech or another tech college, if they fulfil the educational criteria after graduating high school.

  92. girls and robots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    come on... girls AND robots? what country coul refuse that? US U Crazy dudes! :-)

  93. rephrase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    * By letting it happen.

    Captcha: 'grinder'. Nice.

  94. Re:Girl brought in to *make our replacements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, FFS bring her in. How else will we get replacements for our current lame jobs, without these robots?

  95. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    The more visas we deny without good reason, the less welcoming the US seems. Every time someone is blocked from routine business in the US, it increases the chances that future events will be held outside the US. This is not good for us.

    The fact that five Afghani girls are in a serious robotics competition is very newsworthy. Their gender is very relevant to what they accomplished (well, very relevant when considering their country of origin), and so it will be mentioned in anything related. You're paranoid.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  96. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How the fuck is it paranoid to point out OTHER PEOPLE'S insane theories?

    Leftists are claiming **completely without evidence** that there was something nefarious behind these visa denials. When in fact visas are routinely denied **all the time**.

    God, you people are fucking retarded.

  97. Re:It's too bad. What's a good answer? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Are you seriously claiming that a bunch of schoolgirls building robots is a danger to US because they can make a bomb?

    You know who else can make a bomb?

    Anyone. Literally anyone.

    Heck, if you're in US, you can just go and buy enough tannerite and stuff it in a fridge or something.

  98. Re:No rights violated: Entry to the US is not a ri by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    I'd assume visas are denied all the time with no evidence of problems. AFAIK, there's no real accountability, and the bureaucratic way is to deny requests when halfway reasonable because that's usually the safe decision.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  99. I can always tell someone lives in TV-land.. by Rujiel · · Score: 1

    .. when they talk about liberals or "the left" interchangeably with "the democrats", as if amyone who calls their self a liberal is responsible for what the dem party does. I know such nuance isn't convenient for your all-encompassing strawman abstract, but try to be just a little less intellectually lazy.