|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1762 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Trump's order on immigration and the wacko liberal response | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 18047 Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
quote: You were just saying that the U.S. Government lacked sovereignty to grant constitutional rights to people in other places - even when the actual dispute involved people in the U.S. and even though the U.S. government can certainly grant rights with respect to its own actions. If you want to spout irrelevancies you could at least have the grace to admit that they are utterly irrelevant to the points you are supposedly replying to.
quote: The order itself is certainly illegal. Going beyond that if, say, the legalities were ignored for the sake of grandstanding - and it seems pretty likely to me that is the case - I would certainly hope that signing would be illegal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9627 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Just as a by-the-by, Trump's brainfart on immigration is causing considerable trouble here in the UK. The invitation of a full state visit is being protested - 1.7 million signature asking for it to be stopped in little over 24 hours. It now has to be debated in Parliament.
Old Queeny has had to hold her nose whilst greeting some appalling people so she'll deal with it professionally but it's all very embarrassing. It seems likely that it will be delayed a few months for the smell to fade a little - I suspect Donald will stamp his little feet. Continentally Europe is equally appalled.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Porosity Member (Idle past 2411 days) Posts: 158 From: MT, USA Joined:
|
You're trying to deflect discrimination onto Liberals, as if they support extremism. When in fact, it is your demagoguery that is validating and supporting ISIS propaganda.
There is no question ISIS propagandists are sending the message across the globe that the US doesn’t care about Muslim suffering.By blocking refugees from several Muslim countries and prioritizing Christians, validates the message to the Muslims living in the US that their government is against them, and that they must therefore take up arms and defend Islam against these attempts to destroy it. Here is just one of many online propaganda magazine Daabiq, ISIS is warning that.. Muslims in the crusader countries [i.e., the West] will find themselves driven to abandon their homes as the crusaders increase persecution against Muslims living in Western lands. al-ayt Media Center presents a new issue of the Islamic State’s magazine: Dbiq #7" They are talking to the some 3.3 million American Muslims and their family's abroad, whom you are painting with a broad brush as Islamic extremist. This is Religious persecution, in a country that is pluralistic, a liberal democracy where people of all faiths (and no faith) are free to practice their beliefs as they see fit. You know.. the same country where Christians whine they are the one's being persecuted cause they don't have the right to discriminate. Do you realize that philosophically, Christian extremism and Muslim extremism are two sides of the same ignorant shit dipped coin? And all the bullshit you all use to create chaos was plagiarized and bastardized from preexisting religions. Edited by Porosity, : Doh!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
You were just saying that the U.S. Government lacked sovereignty to grant constitutional rights to people in other places - even when the actual dispute involved people in the U.S. and even though the U.S. government can certainly grant rights with respect to its own actions. If you want to spout irrelevancies you could at least have the grace to admit that they are utterly irrelevant to the points you are supposedly replying to. The point about lacking sovereignty was just part of an aside on our Constitutional obligation, in general, and had nothing to do with the dispute involving people in the U.S. I alluded to that here in (now) bold:
Nobody is saying "do whatever it likes", but I don't think we have the sovereignty to grant our Constitutional rights to people in other countries. That doesn't necessitate what we do decide to do in treating people here, but the question was one of legal obligation. Geez, grant me a little charity here, you really think I would talk about foreign sovereignty in regards to something here on our soil?
The order itself is certainly illegal. What if it didn't use the term "aliens" and instead just spoke of refugees?
Going beyond that if, say, the legalities were ignored for the sake of grandstanding - and it seems pretty likely to me that is the case - What makes that seem so likely?
I would certainly hope that signing would be illegal. Seems like a pretty tough case to make.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 485 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Green cards don't get full Constitutional rights, but near full.
E.g. they can't vote.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member (Idle past 302 days) Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Lie about what motivates Islamist terrorists. It's purely ideological, they are not motivated by circumstances, except as they are taught to pretend to be to deceive leftist kooks. Their own propaganda, the tools they use to radicalize people, utilizes circumstances to drive a sense of outrage. Is this to fool 'leftist kooks' too? That seems a little peculiar.
When the infidel is strong and aggressively opposes them they retreat rather than seeking to do the harm that Islam requires of them. Peculiarly this would be in opposition to what they believe Islam requires of them. And indeed, since we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq Islamist terrorist threats and attacks have grown more frequent.
Poor silly PC-crippled Europeans who tolerate all their raping No, they don't.
invite them to express their evil Sharia Law No. They do give people the freedom to settle civil disputes using religious mediation if all parties consent to so doing. But that's true in America, too.
and weep big tears as if it's their own fault when these ideologically driven people do what their ideology drives them to do. The point is that their ideology is driven by politics and religion, not just religion. Political attacks against them strengthens their resolve and is and has been used as a recruitment tool. That's the whole point of terrorism. Terrorism has never militarily defeated a powerful nation - let alone a union of them, but it has worked to change those nations for the worse, cost them disproportionate amounts of money and so on. It has only ever been stopped by understanding the underlying grievances and seeking their resolution and thereby removing most of the emotional motivation to do anything violent. Naturally - fundamentalist religious folk of all stripes are notoriously intransigent and resistant to compromise. Turning their mothers, sisters and baby brothers away so that they have to live in warzones, or dangerous camps merely gives the young adult males motivation to want to *something*, and to feel anger and outrage. It is this desire to do something, coupled with their fury that Islamist recruiters exploit to get new bodies for their reign of terror. Injustices (real or merely perceived) drove the people to the IRA and their offshoots, they drove people to Irgun, and they are driving them to ISIS.
Lie about the sane rational objective understanding of the supporters of the ban. a) Call us fearful. So you aren't afraid Muslim terrorists are going to kill American citizens? You should change what you are saying, then, because it sounds like it to everybody else.
That is, YOU are scared of a Muslimj sittin gon the fence who might become violent if anyone dares to oppose their will. Yes we are (sort of, I don't agree with your characterisation completely). Fear is not shameful. Fear is not cowardice. However, the tactics of terrorism need to be understood in our response to it. The tactic isn't to kill everybody. It's to make scared people support politicians making policy that benefits them. The question is, what tactics benefit terrorists more? For recruitment purposes, those that seem to target 'our Muslim brothers and sisters' are a godsend. Sure, allowing refugees in might increase the probability of people that want to commit terrible acts getting in - though there are easier ways than through refugee process (though if they can get in that way, and then cause chaos, it serves their purposes of inhibiting refugees (ie., potential slaves/soldiers) fleeing them). I say, let them come here and kill themselves. Let's say there are 200,000 members of ISIS. They all come to Europe, and they all kill 100 people in suicide attacks. It's terrible that 20,000,000 (+200,000) people just died - but ISIS just wiped itself out and very probably destroyed any will by others to join them. And it won't have made much of a dent in the European population. A 3% loss is merely a minor strategic setback - Europe has suffered and survived considerably worse in the last 150 years. It would be a complete victory against ISIS though. And looking at the terrorist attacks that they've managed to mount so far, 100 deaths each seems VERY ambitious. More like 10 at a huge push, if we discount all those that don't get past the planning stage before arrest or accidentally killing themselves. Their violence isn't a threat to our society. And those millions of people are more likely to be thankful for not freezing to death, drowning, being raped, mugged and so on in the numbers they were and are less likely to be swayed by Islamists. Also, we get to propagandize/proselytize to their kids, they will see our culture first hand rather than the lies they were being fed. Those that return will be motivated to replicate our internal stability and peace in their own lands - and the worst nutters are all dead so that makes it easier. Finally, it is a dereliction of duty. America has a duty to share the burden. By refusing this duty, they are pushing the problem on other nations. Increasing the density of immigrants/refugees elsewhere increases racial tensions elsewhere, increasing anger and giving recruiters an easier job. It also means the 'demographic war' you fear will be easier for Muslims to win as they disproportionally go elsewhere. If they take Europe, Faith, America doesn't stand a chance.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 485 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
The legality of the order will have to be tested in court, there are conflicts within the law.
14th Amendment, section 1:
quote: 8 U.S. Code 1152 - Numerical limitations on individual foreign states:
quote: 8 U.S. Code 1182 - Inadmissible aliens:
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 485 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
Sessions is a racist bigot that was deemed to be unfit to be a federal judge because of his views.
That's a big fat evil lie. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 18047 Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
quote: I have been giving you plenty of charity. In fact the question of legality - which you were supposedly addressing - centred on events on U.S. soil. Moreover, as I pointed out, it was absurd even when addressing people who had yet to fly in.
quote: If you want charity, using out of context quotes is not a good way to get it. I will repeat my actual point, an Executive Order which violates constitutional rights is illegal. Now, maybe the circumstances are such that if Trump did only ban refugees it would not violate any constitutional rights - or other legal rights - but that would be more important than the wording. And I do not claim an adequate understanding of U.S. Law to address the issue.
quote: The way that the order was rushed into effect. There is simply no reason why it had to be done that way.
quote: Not really. Is it not held that ignorance of the law is no excuse ? Even if there are exceptions I do not think that wilful neglect of the law can be considered a valid excuse for issuing an illegal order.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
If you want charity, using out of context quotes is not a good way to get it. Fine, have a nice day.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1722 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
You don't know how thought out it is, but I agree that it was poorly implemented. And the countries were picked beforehand so that ridicule isn't on Trump. More likely it comes through Bannon (he controls how the edicts are written). What is certainly curious to anyone who looks into it further, it that all the countries NOT included are ones where Trump has business interests;
If we can get Safe Zones set up in the Middle East, supported by other countries, and start getting the refugees to work rebuilding their own country, then don't you think that would be better than dispersing them across the globe? Both for them and their region? This is another curious thing to me, he talks about setting up Safe Zones in the Middle East, but then criticizes and threatens retaliation to cities in the US that set up Safe Zones for existing citizens and residents. Leads me to wonder "safe" from who?
It's, like, his first week... let him get some OJT in If he needed job training maybe he should have taken a course (but not from Trump University). And I remind everyone of how much slack the republicans gave Obama. Our No. 1 priority is to make this president a one-term president,’ says Rendell, citing the remark made by Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, ... " Just like Democrat resistance to appointments mirrors the treatment of Obama's appointments by the republicans. If enough republicans vote against Sessions because of this ban issue that would be Karma. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Porosity Member (Idle past 2411 days) Posts: 158 From: MT, USA Joined:
|
Oh.. how far the GOP as fallen.
Excerpt from a speech by former President George W. Bush. "When we think of Islam we think of a faith that brings comfort to a billion people around the world. Billions of people find comfort and solace and peace. And that’s made brothers and sisters out of every race ― out of every race. America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country. Muslims are doctors, lawyers, law professors, members of the military, entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, moms and dads. And they need to be treated with respect. In our anger and emotion, our fellow Americans must treat each other with respect.""Islam is Peace" Says President Talibangelicals! Onward! South Of Heaven!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
More likely it comes through Bannon (he controls how the edicts are written). What is certainly curious to anyone who looks into it further, it that all the countries NOT included are ones where Trump has business interests; Let me know when you've got some evidence... or at least something more than coincidence. Why would Obama limit the countries that he picked to put on that list to those that Trump didn't have business interests in?
This is another curious thing to me, Meh, go ahead and be curious all you want. Got any facts?
Leads me to wonder "safe" from who? The conflicts in their regions.
And I remind everyone of how much slack the republicans gave Obama. Our No. 1 priority is to make this president a one-term president,’ says Rendell, citing the remark made by Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, ... " Just like Democrat resistance to appointments mirrors the treatment of Obama's appointments by the republicans. Good to know that their holier-than-thou attitude was pure hypocrisy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 18047 Joined: Member Rating: 5.0
|
Obama didn't come up with the list.
The original four were apparently attached to a must-pass spending bill by a Republican and the other three were added by the DHS. All we can say is that Obama didn't think it worth vetoing an important bill just to reject the rider.
Snopes has the story.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
It's, like, his first week... let him get some OJT in That's may be a reasonable request. In particular, Trump's team may have learned better ways to coordinate a plan that requires the cooperation of multiple entities, and they might also have learned how to handle court orders. My problem with this particular incident is that the errors seem to stem more from arrogance rather than carelessness. But getting the next few things correct might dispell that impression. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025