It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

page: 8
72
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 09:09 PM
link   
MSNBC poll





posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Stormdancer777

They'd only have that up if they knew what we were discussing.



posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Wait WHAT ?

Question was: Has Donald Trump gone too far with his plan to ban all muslims.

And 87% Hispanics.
96% African Americans

Said NO.

Doesn't that make them more 'racist' than Caucasians at 69%

I can't be reading that right.



posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Trumps spinning politicians on their heads. Well played since he is not one. This just shows that none of the other candidates wanted to bring it up. Considering we do PAY THEM to know this stuff.



posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 10:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
MSNBC poll



What a PC nightmare that poll could be huh? How about instead of politically correct we just worry about being correct first, as in accurate. That poll is simply accurate. And it's good info that our politicians should know. Maybe they shouldn't be taking info like this poll and making it POLITICALLY CORRECT. We pay these people 100's of thousands of dollars. They can work the data and be good bean counters like they should be and present us bipartisan solutions. Man, I hope Trump wins and cleans house. Lol
edit on 9-12-2015 by tonycodes because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 11:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Phoenix

Thank you BOTH for the OP and for the well written posts.

I agree with you both...and here is my two cents.

Trump has always just spoken in a stream of conscience type style thst shows how quick his mind makes connections and decisions. I was kind of taken aback when he read his "Muslim comment" from a prepared script. Now I know why...with his precisely worded statement that dovetails US CODE 8 sect 1182 (which the hapless media, the scores of WH advisors, Congresscritters, Senators and a slew of presidential hopefuls) NEVER READ or thought to even research the matter before proclaiming Mr. Trump "raaaacist."

The brilliance of giving so many so much rope with which to hang themselves is just masterful.

I feel fully confident that a President Trump will do the same when dealing with world leaders. He truly schooled them.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 02:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
MSNBC poll



That's really interesting and I think goes to prove the point that the racism drum has been beaten for so long that ordinary white people can't make rational decisions for fear of being called racist - while the other groups who are not encumbered by such nonsense just use their brains to produce rational thought.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 02:49 AM
link   
Taking the article mentioned in the OP and 1sr amendment into consideration. Why couldn't we just place a ban on ALL immigrants coming from any/all Islamic governed and/or ME countries?

Wouldn't that take the religious issue out if the equation?



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 03:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: RainyState
Taking the article mentioned in the OP and 1sr amendment into consideration. Why couldn't we just place a ban on ALL immigrants coming from any/all Islamic governed and/or ME countries?

Wouldn't that take the religious issue out if the equation?


I think banning anyone supporting Sharia Law would get to the actual problem. But bans from countries that are terrorist hot beds would be a good start.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic


And the very last part says




(a) Any alien who planned, ordered, assisted, aided and abetted, committed or otherwise participated in, including through command responsibility, widespread or systematic violence against any civilian population based in whole or in part on race; color; descent; sex; disability; membership in an indigenous group; language; religion; political opinion; national origin; ethnicity; membership in a particular social group; birth; or sexual orientation or gender identity, or who attempted or conspired to do so.


So by these last few SB characters going and getting radicalized (even more now we find out) by going overseas, they have conspired to bring harm to Americans.

This is pretty damning for the presidency if he signed this and is saying he can't do it? Which is obvious for political reasons...get the right person..say Donald or Cruz highlighting Obama has the power but would rather play politics as usual and hopefully people will start to see a shred of what is going on here.

- Graffik



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 07:22 AM
link   
And Trump has risen 8 points in national polls since his comment....So there's that.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 08:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phoenix

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Phoenix
So far what I see here is certainly no one can dispute a Presidents absolute constitutional powers to decide on what we'd call arbitrary reasons "detrimental" to the United States in regards to immigration or non-immigration of aliens. PERIOD.


I dispute it! All you have to do is read the order. It's talking about keeping out INDIVIDUALS, not groups of people, and not based on religion. You want this so badly to be true, that you're not making sure you're right. And you're not.


NO.No No, go back and read the actual law. Not my wish or opinion. In fact read the prelude to Obamas proclamation where he cites his Constitutional authority!

Its you who is wishful thinking these powers don't exist.


This thread is such a face palm. Go back to your own links, and the quote in the OP, the 'powers' of the president you are citing and the bold 'religion' you cited, IS FOR PEOPLE WHO COMMITED WARCRIMES AND VIOLENCE AGAINST people because of religion. Dear lord, what a train wreck this thread is.

'The president has powers to bar war criminals who persecuted people because of their religion, ergo, Trump can ban all Muslims"

In other words, the president signed a proclamation that aliens who have violated laws of this nation are disbarred from entering, is being used to say that a law that violates laws of this nation would be legitimate.

Thats your argument.

Facepalm. Absolute Facepalm.
edit on 10-12-2015 by boncho because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-12-2015 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 08:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: Indigo5

You are correct 8 USC 1182 has no religious test, I was thinking Obamas Proclamation.

However 8 USC 1182 has no limitation on reasons a President may use in determining term detrimemental.


Obama's proclamation has no religious qualifier, except that is someone is persecuting religious people in their country, they are barred from entering the United States. In other words, what you cited in the OP, states:

Trump would be barred from entering the US if he tried to pull his 'no Muslims Allowed ' crap in another country, and then tried to enter the US

It is barring people who have committed war crimes or other discrimination against others BECAUSE of their religion. In other words, if Trump committed crimes against Muslims in another country and wanted to emigrate to the US he couldn't. It is not even the same thing. It says if you violate basic rights and freedoms the US assigns to its people, don't expect to come into it and make it your home country, or even your temporary home. The US will not accept war criminals who have been found guilty of persecuting people for religious freedoms.


(a) Any alien who planned, ordered, assisted, aided and abetted, committed or otherwise participated in, including through command responsibility, widespread or systematic violence against any civilian population based in whole or in part on race; color; descent; sex; disability; membership in an indigenous group; language; religion; political opinion;


You are saying because a rule bans war criminals, or people who have persecuted others strictly because of religion, that it gives the right for a president to ban people because of religion? No.

Dear lord no. The proclamation is banning people who have already broken the rights of the people in this nation, but in another country. In other words if you are in a country and have committed crimes that would violate someone's constitutional rights in the US, don't expect to get come to the US.
edit on 10-12-2015 by boncho because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-12-2015 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Glinda


Ummm...I totally agree...The best part of all IMO...is how all of those salivating highbrows...are now having to wipe sweat from said...I especially love to see it in our own ATS members...It's very high theater...With every new shot over the bow by Trump...they twist and swing tightening the noose's that they placed around their own throats...

I love it best because it shows that their vaunted intelligentsia...is all being washed away like the castle of sand it always was...exposing the scurrying rats that actually inhabit that with which they clothe themselves...Talk about not seeing "the forest for the trees"...WOW...

As PT Barnum once said..."This way to the egress"...and the droves of finger pointers trample one another in their frenzy to be their next Trump induced pitfall...all while being shown the door...

This is way too funny...and for a thinking man...way too obvious...




YouSir



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 08:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
However, alien Muslims are not citizens and do not have constitutional protections.


You should research this. Even illegal aliens have Constitutional protections. SOME rights pertain only to citizens (voting, for example), but the Bill of Rights pertains to PEOPLE'S protections from the US government.



Often described as a "living document," the Constitution has repeatedly been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, federal appeals courts and Congress in order to address the ever-changing needs and demands of the people. While many argue that "We the People of the United States," refers only to legal citizens, the Supreme Court has consistently disagreed.
Source

Aside from that fact, I think it's pretty funny that people think we can ask everyone if they're a Muslim and they're going to answer "yes", knowing that it would prevent them from entering the country they wish to enter! LOL!
edit on 12/10/2015 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 08:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Indigo5

They do.

Did we allow Germans, Japanese and Italians to immigrate during WWII?



WTF??? Honestly...How can you not understand the difference between a Religion and a Nationality or Political Party????

Ahem...No...we did not Let Nazi's immigrate to the USA during WWII, because we were at war with them.

A religious faith is not Nationality, or a Political Party..

Christians come from every nation on the planet and come in every color..The Bible has been translated into over 500 languages...

There are more Muslims on the globe than Christians...And Islam is practiced by followers all around the world.

No...The sane patriots of this nation have tolerated a lot of crazy nonsense from the unhinged right lately...But cheering Fascism and suggesting that Freedom of Religion...the very reason for the USA existing.....is disposable...is just ideologically sick and dangerously so.

Trump has no business running for President...scratch that...he is useful in that he exposes a certain segment of the population for what they are...cowards and facilitating ISIS's agenda through their fear and ignorance. It is good that we have this national discussion so that the rest of the country becomes aware of how weak the resolve is among some of our own.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: Indigo5

You are correct 8 USC 1182 has no religious test, I was thinking Obamas Proclamation.



So you are running in circles...if you are back to resting your claim on Pres. Obama's proclamation...He was forbidding entry by any gov officials who have persecuted their native citizens via a religious test. Precisely the opposite of religious test...not admitting people who oppressed a segment of their populace because of faith.

Your OP, by your own explanation, is invalid.
edit on 10-12-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

So, the Obama proclamation does not cover banning a religious group, as it addresses banning individuals.
The 8 U.S. Code § 1182 does not cover banning a religious group, as it defines specifically what "classes" can be banned and religion is not among them.
And the Constitution protects aliens from being banned because of religion...

But oh, look! On some random online poll, African Americans are as racist as Trump and most of his supporters are!!
So that proves something! Right?



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Regardless a law is on the books that can be used by the president, I am not saying it's good or bad merely that it exists.
Actually there are plenty of laws on the books that skirt the constitution, they have just never made it to the supreme court to be overturned.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Muslim is not a religion, Islam is.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

A Muslim, sometimes spelled Moslem,[1] relates to a person who follows the religion of Islam,[2] a monotheistic and Abrahamic religion based on the Quran. Muslims consider the Quran to be the verbatim word of God as revealed to the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

So everyones talk about the constitution, not being able to ban a religion may or not be correct. But muslims can be temporally banned as they are not a religion.




top topics



 
72
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join