IMPORTANT PETITION to ease visa regulations

[James Thurgood]

"I would agree with that, except that if they want people to sign a petition I don't see why the parties in question shouldn't be named.  Besides, if the person is banned from the US, they don't need to Google to find that out."

I have no desire to get into a prolonged argument about this, but I do think the matter could be of some consequence to the parties involved.
  
So, first of all, we don't know that "they" - the parties I do not want named - DO want people to sign a petition - the request didn't come from her/them, as far as we know.
  
Secondly, if the petition were in support of her/them specifically, then of course it would be pointless to refrain from naming her/them, but the petition makes no reference to their specific case; it is a call for a change in pertinent policy generally.  

Thirdly, can we be certain, on the basis of a message to an on-line forum, that she has been "banned for life from visiting the US"?  It is possible that the details of that message are not entirely accurate; it is also possible that if a ban has been put in place, it may be lifted - but if some officious border guard ten years from now doesn't like the cut of her jib, he could Google her name and find an excuse to deny her entry.  They have been reported to do that sort of thing; it isn't just some paranoid fantasy of mine.  

Finally, there is no compelling reason why her/their names should remain here in relation to that incident; it is really of no consequence WHO this happened to; the disturbing thing is that it happened.  Note, by the way, that the writer of the call to sign the petition took care NOT to include names in that call.