Refuting Ombugge's left wing rhetoric

I made this a new topic since it doesn’t have anything to do with TAL’s situation… But I couldn’t let this shit just slide…

“To try to ban free travel for all 1.5 Bn. Muslims in the world…”

The 6 countries in the revised travel ban have a combined population of 180 to 200 million… That’s you trying to parrot the left wing talking point that it was a “Muslim ban”. What it is, is a “War torn countries with unstable and chaotic situations that we can’t verify who is who ban”. Additionally, the ban doesn’t ‘ban free travel’ as you state… It bans travel to the US. Nobody has a RIGHT to come to the US except US citizens.

“It is still a dangerous number of individuals, but far from a majority.”

I’m happy to see you’re willing to acknowledge the fact that it is a dangerous number of individuals. That separates you from many of your left wing, globalist brethren. And because of this FACT, that is enough for the commander in chief to initiate action to protect his citizens.

“why should the rest of the world not ban all Americans from entering their countries in fear of the few that is able and willing to take extreme action for their believes?”

Any country is well within their right to do so. The fact that none have illustrates that governments of the world are not as worried about US based right wing beliefs as you are. When a right wing extremist highjacks a plane and flies it into a mosque in Kuala Lumpur, then we can revisit this.

“Even Mariners here have expressed the view that all foreign seafarers should be banned from shore leave in US Ports…”

I don’t recall anyone saying this. Yet another false equivalency… What been said is that MLC 2006 won’t pass here because it would allow visa free access to US ports by visiting mariners who have not been through any vetting process to verify who they are.

And by the way, how’s the Muslim refugee settlement situation going in Norway? I had a tough time finding any articles where Norwegians were saying how great it is to have their new neighbors from the Middle East…perhaps you have some links but to the contrary? Very easy for you to spout your holier than thou rhetoric from your place in Singapore with it’s Uber tight immigration laws.


Agree that my last posts have had nothing to do with TAL, thus moving to this thread:

I don’t see that there are many seafarers jumping ship in the US these days?? Whether that is because the restrictions on shore leave, or because there aren’t that much interest by seafarers in getting illegally into the US is another question.
I don’t think that “everybody” wants to live there anyhow, even if they are invited. Why should they??

All it would take is for a ship in Long Beach or New York or where ever to have most of the crew go ashore, pile into a van and head inland leaving the ship stranded at the wharf. Then there’d be hell to pay in the press.

In reply to tugsailor in TAL thread:

It certainly looks like to me.

Obviously, the US cannot surrender it’s sovereignty to the IMO and be required by London to admit entry of ALL foreign seafarers to the US. Nor should it. That does not mean that the US should not allow the entry of many foreign seafarers. It should and it does. The US has a visa waiver program where the citizens of many countries are allowed entry into the US without a visa. Citizens of other countries can and do apply for visas.[/quote]

No US should not “surrender it’s sovereignty to IMO”, but to reciprocate to other countries that allow US seafarer visa free access and shore leave is hardly that. I’m sure you would appreciate being treated as an honest seafarer and not a suspected “terrorist” when you call at a foreign port?

To say that seafarers from certain countries are banned because of their nationality, race, religion or whatever, is against the American stated principle of equality, is it not.
Besides, it is against the UN Charter that US was instrumental in forming, that communal punishment is prohibited.
Has all that been forgotten?

Yes, from paranoia, not from a real treat to homeland security, or because those people would “steal American job” to any major extent. When was the last time a ships crew disappeared in a US port by the way??

You are exaggerating the danger and the attractiveness of America to most seafarer today.

First of all, thanks for moving. We were getting far away from the subject of the TAL thread.

The stated aim of Mr. Trump was to ban ALL Muslims from entry, but due to resistance he had to water it down somewhat. That doesn’t mean that there are not millions of innocent people being affected though.
Or are you of the opinion that every country with an unstable and chaotic situation" + a crime problem should be baned from entering other countries? I don’t think you would appreciate the conclusion of that.

NO US Citizens has a RIGHT to come to any other country either!!
Why have no country tried to implement a ban on American bigots and racists?
Because we believe in FREEDOM TO TRAVEL. But it MAY be only a matter of time.

Time for those who have signed MLC’06 to ban US seafarers from shore leave, since they haven’t been vetted??

Norway have their shear of racists and bigots as well, but the majority is welcoming to refugees and foreigners that arrive here. I disagree with the slow system of integration and handling of asylum seekers, caused by the bureaucracy being forced by the present right wing government to look for any excuse to send them back, even to unsafe conditions.
If it wasn’t for immigrants the Norwegian population would have been falling, but it is now actually growing quite rapidly. At the moment there are 14% foreign born residents in Norway, but that number will increase in the years to come.
Here is key figures on immigration to Norway, if you should be interested:

PS> I moved back to Norway last year, but Singapore is still my second home in more ways than one. I did spend most of my life there and may be more of a Singaporean than a Norwegian patriot.
Maybe we have met in Singapore??

You’ve correctly stated before that not all non US flag mariners are ‘3rd world villagers’, the fact is that a lot are. My buddy who is an AB for APL (and is Filipino) says the entry level ratings are now from Myanmar… So yeah, as much as I consider Long Beach to be an undesirable place to stay, I bet it beats the hell out of Naypyidaw.

And by the way, any response to the original post in this topic?

Citation please.

I’ll cut you a little slack because English isn’t your first language but your reading comprehension appeared to be lacking. Go back and re-read what I said and find where in it I expressed my opinion at all.

Do you actually believe that everybody from Myanmar (Few of whom live in the new capital of Naypyidaw by the way) would like to live in Long Beach, or anywhere else in the US??

Myanmar may not be the richest country in the world, nor with the best political system, but a lot of people like it there and it is a land of opportunities for those with skills and money.

I have visited and worked there many times over the years. First in 1973 when it was a closed country and the best place of entertainment in Rangoon was a club in the basement of the US Embassy, run by the Marine guards. I worked there for TOTAL in 1999 for 6 months, when it looked like they would open up, until the US enforce an embargo that put development back several years.

I was last there for Hyundai Offshore Engineering some 4 years ago things really opened up. It is the place to be, if you are looking for opportunities in just about any business.

US mariners are thoroughly vetted. The FBI vets them twice. Once for the TWIC Card and again for their MMC (CoC). Many US citizens cannot pass this vetting. US Mariners on government contracted ships are subjected to very extreme vetting for security clearances. Most Americans cannot qualify for a security clearance. Many mariners are also vetted by the TSA and FBI for “Pre-Check” for domestic flights. Not every American can qualify for pre-check.

There is an international trend toward vetting “trusted travelers.” Many US and foreign Mariners have been vetted for the Global Entry System. The US, Canada, Mexico, Australia, UK, South Korea and The Netherlands are participants. I expect that Norway and Singapore will join in. It’s an excellent program, but many Americans do not qualify.

Any country which wishes to exclude US Citzens, or US Mariners in particular,is free to do so. Probably some do. US Customs has stupidly abused Canadians so badly, that now Customs Canada is giving Americans a hard time. There is a similar situation with Brazil.

While the US has long had a catch and release policy for most people entering the US illegally, that has never applied to foreign seafarers. Deserting foreign seafarers were, and probably still are, held in custody at company expense by private security contractors, sometimes for years. That is not right and should be changed.


OK, you did say: "I think it also requires us to allow them to have shore leave as well."
That does mean you qualified your statement and didn’t say chegoricly that the US HAD to grant shore leave. Nice.

Yup…that’s our 3 legged/checks and balances system at work.

It only affects those who might have otherwise been granted a visa without the ban…not sure that number is in the millions. Regardless of the number, yes it sucks for them. However, non-US citizen’s being inconvenienced is not on the list of concerns of the Commander in Chief. The safety and security of US citizens is his concern and what he was elected to ensure.

Surely you’re not trying to make an equivalency of the situation in the 6 countries on the ban list and the situation anywhere in the US (well…Chicago might be close) are you? Because that would be pretty ridiculous. I’m not making any sweeping generalizations as you have suggested. I am saying that the current US President has determined that it is in the interest of the security of the US that visas not be issued to the 6 countries he cited in his ban.

I believe I made that point when I said:

Why? Out of spite? If a country feels that US mariners pose a security risk to their country or its citizens, then they should absolutely ban us from coming ashore. The fact that it hasn’t happened anywhere I’m aware of should tell you their stance on this issue.

You seem to say this with great pride…we’ll see if your countrymen feel so great about this demographic shift in 2 generations when the law is passed (due to the newly majority coalition of Muslim population and far left “white guilt” crowd) that requires all the little blond haired blue eyed girls to wear burkas when outdoors.

1 Like

A) I’m not sure what your point is.
B) I misspoke. What I should have said is “I think it would also require us to allow them to have shore leave.”

I qualified that statement because I don’t have MLC 2006 memorized and I’m not sure it requires shore leave, I just think it does.

Again, at what point did I say these were my views on the topic?

Are you seriously trying to say that if the US state department set up a tent anywhere in Myanmar with a sign that said “Sign up here for free US Permanent Residence” that there would not be MASSIVE (as in, 90+%) takers???

Is this right? Are you just trolling?

Thanks for info. Very informative and understandable, even for a non-native English speaker like me.:zipper_mouth_face:
But all the vetting you are talking about is done by US authorities, not by the other country. If that is accepted, fine.
Does US accept vetting by foreign country’s authorities?

Your last brought back memory to a time when it was Communism and even Socialism that was the big bad wulf. I was going to join a ship in Houston and needed a visa to travel there. At the US Embassy in Oslo I was “vetted” by Norwegian employee, who started the interview, reading from a prepared form, by saying; “When I knock my head, you say YES. When I shack my head, you say NO”.

Later, an Indonesian ship with a Norwegian Captain was caught up in a Longshoreman strike in New York for several weeks. The Captain had been a member of a Socialist Society in his youth, which had somehow come to the attention of the US authorities (maybe he had had a different Consular Officer during vetting?) He was banned from going ashore and had armed guard watching him, at the expenses of Djakarta Lloyd. His brother lived on Long Island, but he was not allowed to visit, even with guards. He had changed his political view 180 degr. and was now member of a moderate party, but that cut no ice.

This was back in the 1960’s, but not much have changed, it seams. (Except the wulfs?)

Who’s view are you posting??

I wasn’t posting anyONE’s view.

The question was why won’t they US sign the MLC, so I gave the reason(s) why the US won’t sign. I also didn’t give any commentary to hint whether or not I agreed with the government’s reasons, I just answered the question.

1 Like

I seriously think that most people would rather stay home then move to the other side of the world to an uncertain future. Wouldn’t you???

That applies not only to Myanmar, but all other countries as well. That a lot of people is trying to enter US and Europe doesn’t mean they would LIKE to move, but the are either feeling compelled to do so from the lousy opportunities and conditions where they come from. or because they have been seduced by watch glorified TV and films that make them believe the streets are paved with gold there.

1 Like

I wish you were right…if you were right, we wouldn’t now have a president who won with chants of “build that wall”. And yeah, here the future IS pretty certain…in the worst case, they’ll go on various government funded…or shall I say…TAXPAYER funded welfare programs which will definitely pay them more than the $1,374 per year they’d earn in Myanmar (per capita GDP).