Immigration officials have been 100 percent successful in stopping terrorists from entering the U.S. from the countries covered by the president’s ban.

The vetting process is 100 percent successful.

The current vetting process is 100% successful.

There have been zero terror attacks in the U.S. by a refugee from those countries.

Zero.

The president claims the ban is needed to improve procedures that are already 100 percent successful.

The process can’t get any better than perfect.

Since it’s impossible for the process to demonstratively improve, will the ban remain in place forever?

The president, his apologists and pundits in mainstream media babble about the need to “keep us safe.”

Are they ignorant of the facts or are they lying?

The ban can’t improve something that isn’t broken.

The ban is succeeding in keeping students and professionals out of the country while simply victimizing people who are already victims and asking for help.

People who support the ban are colluding with the oppressors the refugees are fleeing.

For example:

• Syrian refugees are fleeing ISIS and oppressive dictator Bashar al-Assad.
• Assad is backed by Russia. Trump is signaling possible closer U.S. relations with Russia and lifting of sanctions..
• By banning Syrian refugees indefinitely, the president is giving Assad a better opportunity to murder and silence dissidents and victims of the regime.

The countries on the list are places where people face violence, dictators, and death. Countries where the president has economic investments and business partners aren’t on the list.

While making victims of some Muslims, the president continues to conduct personal business with Muslim-majority countries that produce terrorists.

From the New York Times.

The seven countries whose citizens are subject to the ban are relatively poor. Some, such as Syria, are torn by civil war; others are only now emerging from war. One thing these countries have in common is that they are places where the Trump organization does little to no business.

By contrast, other neighboring Muslim countries are not on the list, even though some of their citizens pose just as great a risk — if not greater — of exporting terrorism to the United States. Among them are Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt. A vast majority of people living in these countries, like the people living in the seven subject to the immigration ban, are peaceful and law abiding. But these three countries have exported terror to the United States in the past. They accounted for 18 of the 19 terrorists who perpetrated the Sept. 11 attack on American soil (an attack which was directed by another Saudi, Osama Bin Laden, with the assistance of an Egyptian, Ayman al-Zawahri).

The president is intentionally confusing countries that have created terrorists with countries that haven’t. He is intentionally creating a smokescreen to obstruct his business dealings in countries that produce terrorists. Or else he’s simply a fool who doesn’t know what he’s doing.

The president is counting on public ignorance and xenophobia to distract from the money flowing into his pockets from Muslim majority countries with citizens who have committed terrorist acts in the U.S.

For Christians to approve of the ban conflicts with every message in both books of the Bible. Repeatedly, scripture tells us not to discriminate against widows, orphans and children. Scripture says not to deny help to others because they are different. Jesus says to love others.

The ban turns the United States into the wrong characters in the good Samaritan story.

When U.S. Christians support the ban and the president, they become the Roman government, denying the humanity of victims simply because of where they happened to be born.

When we deny basic human rights and dignity to innocent victims seeking help, we deny Christ at our airports, and send him away.