Then you should care about the fact that "Muslim ban" mischaracterizes the EO.
> I care about hypocrisy. And I think it's interesting that now it appears some have discovered nuance for the first time
I don't know what this means, or what it's in reference to.
> This policy is and will be used to support that narrative.
I believe you, and I think this is worth considering, though I don't think that it's the only thing worth considering. Jihadists have waged a war against the West for decades, and so the tick up in radicalization (and whether it's really a "tick" or an "avalanche") should be carefully weighed against supposed benefits. That's a great thing to discuss.
If you're curious about the history of the modern war between radical Islam and the West, I recommend The Looming Tower. It's a fascinating, award-winning history of bin-Laden's predecessors through the 9/11 attacks.
> I care about accuracy
Then you should care about the fact that "Muslim ban" mischaracterizes the EO.
> I care about hypocrisy. And I think it's interesting that now it appears some have discovered nuance for the first time
I don't know what this means, or what it's in reference to.
> This policy is and will be used to support that narrative.
I believe you, and I think this is worth considering, though I don't think that it's the only thing worth considering. Jihadists have waged a war against the West for decades, and so the tick up in radicalization (and whether it's really a "tick" or an "avalanche") should be carefully weighed against supposed benefits. That's a great thing to discuss.
If you're curious about the history of the modern war between radical Islam and the West, I recommend The Looming Tower. It's a fascinating, award-winning history of bin-Laden's predecessors through the 9/11 attacks.