Discussion in 'From The News' started by hellrazor, Mar 16, 2017.
Still heading for SCOTUS. Immigrant bans from regions are completely legal.
Yes they are however publicly stating you want a Muslim ban then claiming it's for anything still makes it illegal...
That is why it was placed on hold.
Second Place Sauce
starting to think this is nothing more than bait libs keep biting onto. like what does he really want? and what's he really doing? Because they latch onto this like nobodies business.
haven't been keeping up as much the past few months. Can't seem to get any real news, just political bias on top of bias.
can't seem to get any local news either. 90% Washington focused politics... but there's like traffic and fires and junk...yet nobody's talking about anything real right now.
wanna talk to NSA...they have to have some real news...I mean they spy on everyone right?
Maybe you don't have any local news... because you live in a boring area..
Except that one of Trump's first acts as POTUS was to order a strike against Al Qaeda in Yemen, one of the countries on the list and something Obama and the Department of Defense was working on.
All of the countries in the ban have a long history of having an anti-American slant as well as terror operations inside. You don't need a report from the NSA to repeat what has widely been reported on over the last 2-3 decades.
That's the vibe I've been getting too. Media is having a frenzy but no one is biting.
That statement is "fundamentally flawed" because notably Islamic nations, like Indonesia (87.2% Islam), Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt (90% Islam) are excluded. Let's go down the list of those that are included:
-Libya: still a clusterfuck since Clinton and Obama decided to fund the wildlife to topple Gaddafi.
-Yemen: goes all the way back to USS Cole. DoD has said that Al Qaeda in Yemen is more potent than it was in Afghanistan. We recently lost a SEAL obtaining information on Yemen cells--Trump honoring his widow broke the damn record of standing ovations during a Presidential address.
-Iran: "Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps," 'nuff said. They've been and remain a thorn in our side since 2003. Decades before that if you want old history.
-Iraq: ISIS. Also, see Iran. Iran effectively controls Iraq now because they've occupied parts of the country.
-Somalia: Al Qaeda has been operating in Somalia for a while now.Remember the pirates?
-Sudan: perhaps the only one that maybe shouldn't be on the list because they seem to have been in retreat since 2013. That said, there may be a spike in activity there that isn't public knowledge which Trump was briefed on.
Trump is doing the right thing and all the libtards are complaining because they think the world is full of roses and sunshine.
POTUS #1 job is to protect Americans. The judiciary is apparently confusing the whole world with "American." Many judges on federal courts approve of Trump's executive order. The problem is it only takes one challenge in a liberal court to put a hold on it until a higher court can rule. SCOTUS will eventually declare it's the executives right to impose immigration bans for security concerns. There is plenty of precedent.
Islamic radicalism is a transient enemy. It knows no borders and it obeys no recognized government. An executive order this broad has never been made before because it is the nature of the enemy. Bush attacked it directly so it was constantly fleeing. Obama let it fester. Trump was hired to contain and kill it. This executive order represents exactly why he was elected.
I do too. Thing is, radicals of their faith like to capture and kill (sources above) those that disagree with them. We have to address that threat. It's really no different than the UK dealing with the Provisional Irish Republican Army. Bad people corrupt good religions.
The President can ignore the courts if he so chooses.
And he should.
Back when my family came to this country the threat was the Mafia.
It was a very real threat and it was spilling American blood daily....
Apparently the United States wasn't full of pussies back then...
Something to consider is how many fewer Muslims we have than we take in..... They can walk away from Islam in the USA without worry if getting a knife in their chest.
Take in Muslims from Indonesia then. At least they don't hate American guts. Hell, resisting China's aggression in the South China sea shapes their opinion in favor of the USA.
You ever talk to one of the many Iranians we took in in the 80's?
Notice all the problems they caused?
Go ahead look it up.
When it comes down to it the only two countries we have had serious problems with immigrants are Guatamala and Saudi Arabia and neither of those countries are on the list.
It was mid-late 80s when the USA started influencing the middle east in bad ways (installing dictators, making sure they weren't deposed, defending Israel, etc.). Now USA has more or less declared war on the entire region. There's some in there that don't want to stone/flog/murder/execute us but that's a minority.
Have a chat with Sweden about masses of Muslim immigrants (crime is up hundreds if not thousands of percent, depending on metric), and Sweden sent hardly any troops (hundreds versus hundreds of thousands) to the middle east compared to the USA.
You're forgetting the Time's Square Bomber, Boston Bombers, and the Underwear Bombers. Also the Islamic priests that have been apprehended for turning Muslim-Americans against America. Hell, can't forget that Alaskan Muslim that went all the way to Florida to shoot up an airport terminal.
What ties all these people together? They often visited Yemen or Syria for training before coming back to attack Americans. It's not where they were born that's the problem, it's where they're coming from.
All of the above spells out a very clear modus operandi. To claim otherwise is dangerous naiveté. We're at war with an idealogy that is polar opposite to the USA. Letting small numbers in and making sure they're dispersed across the country is okay (normal immigration process). Letting large numbers in where they create enclaves will ensure the same problems France and Sweden have here (violent, mass attacks on civilians). We already have enough of those problems in existing ghettos. At least most people that live in American ghettos don't hate Americans, just authority figures.
And where's the logic in bringing them here anyway? Where are they going to live? Where are they going to work? Where are they going to school? USA still has a massive unemployment problem on top of healthcare, education, incarceration rate, civil unrest, and I'm pretty damn certain we're heading for another financial collapse (recession). We don't need to fill our schools with 20-30 year old men that can't speak basic English and we don't need unskilled laborers because the country is already saturated with them.
If USA took in every refuge on the planet (like what some people here seem to be advocating for), USA as a whole would become a ghetto (rampant crime, unreliable government services, unsustainable levels of unemployment, food shortages, housing crisis, and so on). These people aren't our responsibility. They need to take back their own home and leave us alone. We also need to leave them alone (unless they do something that warrants a direct response).
F*uck refugees, spineless coward who would not stay and fight for their own better future.
Also f*uck the liberal trash.
I'm just going to point out that there are legitimate refugees in the world. Not all of them are men of fighting age.
Is that what you think passes for a rant?
Separate names with a comma.