
Like the Common last week, Copley Square this afternoon was a sea of people, protesting President Trump's attempt to shut the US to refugees and people with visas and green cards from seven mainly Muslim countries.
"We stand with Muslims in Boston," and against "the betrayal of American values," Mayor Marty Walsh told the rally, organized by the Massachusetts chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations.
"We will protect you," he told Muslims in the crowd - not just in the halls of City Hall itself, but with "the sacred document this country was founded on, called the United States Constitution!"
The rally also featured senators Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey.
"Little girls who flee murderers are not threats to the United States" - any more than the doctors and students who come here and the Iraqi translators who put their lives on the line for American troops, Warren said.
The crowd went wild when Warren praised the lawyers in general, and the ACLU in particular, for dropping everything yesterday to rush to airports to battle what she called an unconstitutional imposition of a religion test.
"They are doing God's work fighting for justice," she said, adding "we will not stop fighting until this executive order is tossed in the dustbin of history. We will not let Donald Trump chip away at the very heart of our democracy. ... We will not turn our backs on refugees and immigrants."
"We will stand for Massachusetts values, we will stand for American values, we will stand for human values," Markey said. Recalling what the poem at the base of the Statue of Liberty says, he thundered, "Today, Lady Liberty is weeping at Donald Trump's executive order."
"This is a Muslim ban, no matter what alternative facts Donald Trump tries to peddle," he said. And "it is propaganda for ISIS; it is a recruiting gift for terrorist groups ... President Trum, I say: Rip up this ban."
Conspicuous in his absence, again, was Gov. Charlie Baker. "Where's Charlie Baker?" the crowd chanted.
In addition to elected officials, an imam, a minister and a rabbi also spoke and called for the fight to continue against the ban.





Trump wasn't the only Washington official to get scorned:









Two alternatives for dealing with Trump:





Jewish members of the crowd had particular messages:


Among those attending: Boston Police Commissioner William Evans (photo by Kris H.):

Also in attendance: Some of the Boston Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence (photo by Deborah Elizabeth Finn):

Oh, yeah, Tom Brady is friends with Trump (photo by Sarah Connors):

At the end of the formal remarks, Muslims in the crowd went to the Boylston Street side of Trinity Church for prayers:

Warren's speech:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Did you forget that the San
By CCD
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 4:02pm
Did you forget that the San Bernardino shooting took place in 2015? Did you needed to reminded of that event and how its great example of the failure of DHS and vetting folks? What about the attack on the recruiting center in Chattanooga in 2015? Just the San Bernardino attack resulted in more deaths than that snopes article...
Did you forget that ...
By SwirlyGrrl
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 4:25pm
That particular shooter's ties were to Pakistan, which isn't on the list of countries that Herr Bannon Riefenstahl put forth in the grade F homework assignment that Trump paid him to write for him?
Or that the Marathon Bombers came from Russia originally?
Reading comprehension fail? Or just failing to read?
By avjudge
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 6:17pm
Apparently you didn't actually read the Snopes article, as it includes San Bernardino attacks. It concludes: ". . . the total of toddler-involved shooting deaths in the United States in 2015 [was] 21.
"By contrast, if we counted both the Chattanooga shootings and San Bernardino as instances of Islamic terrorism, that would mean 19 Americans were killed in instances of suspected, reported, or potential Islamic terrorism in 2015. Counting American victims of the November 2015 Paris attacks brought that number up to 20."
As for whether vetting folks would have made any difference, the Chattanooga shooter and one of the San Bernardino shooters were American citizens by birth. The other shooter in San Bernardino was from Pakistan, a country not included on Trump's list.
Nope, I didn't forget the San
By ZachAndTired
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 7:30pm
Nope, I didn't forget the San Bernardino shooting. Maybe try reading the full article before commenting next time.
Nice try, but...
By lbb
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 4:06pm
That may or may not have happened, but the suspect -- the sole suspect -- is reported to be a white Christian male and a fan of right-wing extremists such as Marine Le Pen.
Also of note...
By theszak
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 6:25am
Also of note
http://ur1.ca/qev07
https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=defau...
Its not a "Muslim" ban people
By CCD
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 8:31am
Its not a "Muslim" ban people! Christian and Yazidis also live in the 7 countries listed in Trump's EO. Calling it a Muslim ban is not only dishonest but false.
In 2011, Obama put a temporary hold on the Iraqi refugee program for 4 months! I don't recall massive protests or people slamming Obama for a "Muslim ban." I get that people despise Trump, I don't like him either but this is not only hypocritical but disturbing. This country is going down the tubes fast. Facts or civil discourse don't matter, mob rule is taking over...
Excuse me, did Obama's
By anon
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 9:12am
Excuse me, did Obama's REFUGEE program suspension put a blanket ban on LEGAL residents - with visas and green cards, preventing them from entering the country?
"State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011"
"While Obama did halt the refugee program, it did not impact green card holders, or anyone with a visa."
Is your brain too small to comprehend the difference?
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us...
http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/barack-obama-ban-ref...
Yes his or her brain is too small
By Miaow
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 9:28am
I see this same "but it started with Obama! It's not Trump's fault" from many Trump apologists.
And could you figure out a
By R Hookup
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 6:38pm
And could you figure out a way to screw up an implementation (more) than the way that this administration handled the roll-out? Nobody knew what they were doing when it all happened late Friday afternoon.
Minor edit (in parens)
"However, there are reports
By CCD
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 4:14pm
"However, there are reports that the ban is being applied even to green-card holders. This is madness. The plain language of the order doesn’t apply to legal permanent residents of the U.S., and green-card holders have been through round after round of vetting and security checks. The administration should intervene, immediately, to stop misapplication. If, however, the Trump administration continues to apply the order to legal permanent residents, it should indeed be condemned."
No I can comprehend that and not saying I agree with everything in the EO, it was rolled out in an incompetent fashion. However, the selective outrage is pretty ridiculous. Obama rolled out the policy before quietly and media silence ensued.
"According to the draft copy of Trump's executive order, the countries whose citizens are barred entirely from entering the United States is based on a bill that Obama signed into law in December 2015.
Obama signed the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act as part of an omnibus spending bill. The legislation restricted access to the Visa Waiver Program, which allows citizens from 38 countries who are visiting the United States for less than 90 days to enter without a visa.
At the initial signing of the restrictions, foreigners who would normally be deemed eligible for a visa waiver were denied if they had visited Iran, Syria, Sudan or Iraq in the past five years or held dual citizenship from one of those countries.
In February 2016, the Obama administration added Libya, Somali and Yemen to the list of countries one could not have visited — but allowed dual citizens of those countries who had not traveled there access to the Visa Waiver Program. Dual citizens of Syria, Sudan, Iraq and Iran are still ineligible, however.
So, in a nutshell, Obama restricted visa waivers for those seven Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen — and now, Trump is looking to bar immigration and visitors from the same list of countries."
Well, facts don't seem to be getting in your way
By CraigInDaVille
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 9:32am
...when you consider that his order exempts Christians in those countries, so, yeah, it's kind of a "Muslim" ban.
And please don't equate a temporary hold from five years ago on one country's refugee status to a general ban on re-entering from all these countries EVEN IF THEY ARE LEGAL PERMANENT US RESIDENTS. It's not the same in real life, even if your alternative facts universe helps you think that it is.
That is false:
By CCD
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 4:18pm
That is false:
"...there is a puzzling amount of outrage over Trump’s directive to “prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.†In other words, once refugee admissions resume, members of minority religions may well go to the front of the line. In some countries, this means Christians and Yazidis. In others, it can well mean Muslims."
"Sadly, during the Obama administration it seems that Christians and other minorities may well have ended up in the back of the line."
"For example, when Obama dramatically expanded Syrian refugee admissions in 2016, few Christians made the cut: The Obama administration has resettled 13,210 Syrian refugees into the United States since the beginning of 2016 — an increase of 675 percent over the same 10-month period in 2015."
As a point of reference, in 2015 Christians represented roughly 10 percent of Syria’s population. Perhaps there’s an innocent explanation for the disparity. Perhaps not. But one thing is clear — federal asylum and refugee law already require a religious test. As my colleague Andy McCarthy has repeatedly pointed out, an alien seeking asylum “must establish that . . . religion [among other things] . . . was or will be at least one central reason for persecuting the applicant.â€
Similarly, the term “refugee†means “(A) any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality . . . and who is unable or unwilling to return to . . . that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of . . . religion [among other things] . . . [.]â€
Religious considerations are by law part of refugee policy. And it is entirely reasonable to give preference (though not exclusivity) to members of minority religions.
Whatever thin rationalization helps you sleep at night
By CraigInDaVille
Tue, 01/31/2017 - 9:15am
sweetie.
Thin rationalization? You
By CCD
Tue, 01/31/2017 - 10:55am
Thin rationalization? You meaning the efffing law????? The same law that applied to your savior Obama.
Funny you mention law
By SwirlyGrrl
Tue, 01/31/2017 - 11:04am
Especially when the administration is declaring itself above the law.
I gotta give you credit, COD
By erik g
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 9:38am
It's a pretty high bar, getting called "worst person in the thread" when FISH has oozed through in a comment upthread, but I think you've just about managed to do it. I'd take your argument apart piece by piece, but someone else has already done most of the heavy lifting, and I don't have the time or the crayons it would take to explain it to you.
(Also, yes, the mob is indeed coming. Maybe you'd better decide if you want to publicly side with the Fuhrer, in this here People's Republic of Massachusetts)
lol, sweet. I could care
By CCD
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 4:21pm
lol, sweet. I could care less...
http://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/11451378/smug-america...
Smug
By SwirlyGrrl
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 4:50pm
Okay, whatever.
It comes from doing research and knowing that we are right.
You can always decamp to one of those shitwater hellholes of the red states if you don't like employment, affluence, good health, low crime rates and all of the benefits that come with rationality and a fact-based existence.
I grew up with no-nothings and uneducated people who would lose their savings because they "believed" that pyramid scheme would make them rich or that some form of Daddy - sky, president, or sugar - gave two shits about them and would make their lives easy if only they didn't question.
And kept on handing over the cash.
As a trailer trash kid by birth, I'll take living amongst the "smug" any fucking time, dear.
Some great signs in there
By anon
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 9:14am
Some great signs in there
Any Estimates on Numbers?
By APB
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 12:37pm
Adam, and everyone,
Have you seen any estimates for the number of people at yesterday's protest? I haven't and am curious. It's already off the Globe homepage.
I've seen an aerial photo and it looked huge. (And awesome, which it was.)
Thanks!
It's still on the Globe home page
By Ron Newman
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 12:41pm
(near the bottom left, under "Metro")
Here. The story is on the printed front page.
but all it says is "Thousands"
Thanks!
By APB
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 1:22pm
But "Thousands" we already knew....
"at least 10,000" according to Mayor Walsh's office
By Ron Newman
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 2:16pm
in this Boston Herald article
20,000
By APB
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 7:48pm
I was at the Mayor's presentation at the Boston Public Library tonight and he said "20,000" people.
Aerial zoom in
By adamg
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 1:33pm
Special bonus UHub Mobile Action News Unit sighting: The shot zooms in on some people holding a large white #NoMuslimBan sign on the steps of Trinty Church. I'm the guy in the brown jacket and red hat above the last N.
Great roundup on this protest
By lizkdc
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 1:36pm
Glad to see so many coming out to make a differnce.
Hmm
By anon
Mon, 01/30/2017 - 11:21pm
So God's work is not religious?
Pages
Add comment