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.

 

We are a Nation of Guns, We are The Law

page: 4
21
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Here the thing.

Its practical to ban entry for a country.
Personally id stop travel to and from saudi arabia.

How do you ban entry for a entire religion?

Its not on your passport.

Is border patrol meant to just ask? Cause that wont work as if a terrorist is trying to get through you dont think they will just lie?
edit on 11-12-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: forkedtongue

They also leave this part out.



Ever since Iranian terrorists imprisoned American Embassy personnel in Tehran early in November, these 50 men and women—their safety, their health, and their future—have been our central concern. We’ve made every effort to obtain their release on honorable, peaceful, and humanitarian terms, but the Iranians have refused to release them or even to improve the inhumane conditions under which these Americans are being held captive.


Ge t a load of this 'conservative'.



Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly.


Yeah Carter really showed some respect for the first amendment there!



What Iran did was an Act of War. its what must be done to ensure Security....Just like now...Ensuring Security



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

I am gonna go out on a limb here and say.

What is currently going on is about more about scoring political points for 2016 than actually addressing a very real problem.

People playing politics more so than actually trying to come up with a solution.

Immigration from the middle east, and the visa programs do need to be looked at very closely.

But it still wouldn't stop people from coming here.

They would either come from the Northern border, or the southern border.

So it boils down to a damned if we do damned if we don't situation.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: neo96

It would be nice if conservatives respected the First Amendment as much as they respected all the others...


Funny from a guy championing deny the 1st amendment rights of an American just the other day right here on ATS.

Does your hypocrisy know no bounds?


I'd explain the context of that, but I'm sure you don't care enough about me to actually tell the difference there so I won't bother. I'll just let you keep believing this lie instead.


And yes this conservative minded fellow right here is the one that called you out on it then and again now.

So um no, it wasnt conservatives trying to deny the 1st, it was conservatives defending it from the left, at least be consistent.


Riiiight... Banning all muslims from entering the country...


There is no context in which an American should have their free speech limited, with a few minor exceptions as I stated then.


And I never said that an American's speech should be limited. I was laughing about how Britain wanted to kick Trump out of Britain because America can't do it.


You wanted to try to say it is conservatives trying to limit free speech, but it is always you lefties demanding folks be silenced when they dont agree with you, not conservatives.


Uh huh.


Banning all muslims from entering the country "until they can be fully vetted "

You seem to always want to leave that part out.

"the greatest form of censorship is the ommission"- Mark Twain


That part is irrelevant. It's the first part that is unconstitutional, with or without the second part. "Until they can be fully vetted" is a vague length of time that could be anything from a day to forever. So let's not be coy here. Though it's nice to see you defending violating Muslim's 1st amendment rights. Nothing like contradicting your own posts as you type them.


Um no, by the code, the time limit is "any length of time that the president deems necessary".

And it clearly saysd he can deny any group of immigrants from any country for any reason, with a few qualifications, religion being one of them, which isnt even required, to ban syrians, iraqis, iranians..etc.

So yes, it is 100% constitutional, both to ban them until vetted, and to ban them for as long as it takes for that vetting to be of a satisfactory quality as to ensure not one of them is a terrorist, or that it can be reasonably assumed that they arent.



I know pumpkin, Americans being more important in America than immigrants....."what a travesty"

But one that is finally going to be as it should be, and should have been the entire time.

Immigrants do not have as much of a right to this country as Americans do, Americans should always come first, at all times.

As long as Americans can be relatively safe from imported terrorists, ok, let the vetted ones in.

Im not demanding perfection, that is unatainable, I am only demanding due diligence, which is lacking at the moment.

ETA- forgot to ask, how is not allowing them entry to America denying their first amendment rights?

They Dont have any rights if they arent in America.

Our constitution does not extent beyond our borders.

No foreigner in any foreign country has a single right protected under the US constitution.
edit on 11-12-2015 by forkedtongue because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: neo96

Here the thing.

Its practical to ban entry for a country.
Personally id stop travel to and from saudi arabia.

How do you ban entry for a entire religion?

Its not on your passport.

Is border patrol meant to just ask? Cause that wont work as if a terrorist is trying to get through you dont think they will just lie?
If they wont partake in the sacred swine blood ceremony, then they must clearly be Terrorists...Sowwy, Guantanamo for you..Have a nice day



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: neo96

It would be nice if conservatives respected the First Amendment as much as they respected all the others...


Funny from a guy championing deny the 1st amendment rights of an American just the other day right here on ATS.

Does your hypocrisy know no bounds?


I'd explain the context of that, but I'm sure you don't care enough about me to actually tell the difference there so I won't bother. I'll just let you keep believing this lie instead.


And yes this conservative minded fellow right here is the one that called you out on it then and again now.

So um no, it wasnt conservatives trying to deny the 1st, it was conservatives defending it from the left, at least be consistent.


Riiiight... Banning all muslims from entering the country...


There is no context in which an American should have their free speech limited, with a few minor exceptions as I stated then.


And I never said that an American's speech should be limited. I was laughing about how Britain wanted to kick Trump out of Britain because America can't do it.


You wanted to try to say it is conservatives trying to limit free speech, but it is always you lefties demanding folks be silenced when they dont agree with you, not conservatives.


Uh huh.


Banning all muslims from entering the country "until they can be fully vetted "

You seem to always want to leave that part out.

"the greatest form of censorship is the ommission"- Mark Twain


That part is irrelevant. It's the first part that is unconstitutional, with or without the second part. "Until they can be fully vetted" is a vague length of time that could be anything from a day to forever. So let's not be coy here. Though it's nice to see you defending violating Muslim's 1st amendment rights. Nothing like contradicting your own posts as you type them.


Um no, by the code, the time limit is "any length of time that the president deems necessary".


Whatever. That doesn't make it any less vague.


And it clearly saysd he can deny any group of immigrants from any country for any reason, with a few qualifications, religion being one of them, which isnt even required, to ban syrians, iraqis, iranians..etc.

So yes, it is 100% constitutional, both to ban them until vetted, and to ban them for as long as it takes for that vetting to be of a satisfactory quality as to ensure not one of them is a terrorist, or that it can be reasonably assumed that they arent.


No. It isn't.


I know pumpkin, Americans being more important in America than immigrants....."what a travesty"


Not all Muslims are immigrants or visitors. Some are American's too you know?


But one that is finally going to be as it should be, and should have been the entire time.

Immigrants do not have as much of a right to this country as Americans do, Americans should always come first, at all times.

As long as Americans can be relatively safe from imported terrorists, ok, let the vetted ones in.

Im not demanding perfection, that is unatainable, I am only demanding due diligence, which is lacking at the moment.


You aren't demanding perfection, just xenophobia. I know.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: neo96

Here the thing.

Its practical to ban entry for a country.
Personally id stop travel to and from saudi arabia.

How do you ban entry for a entire religion?

Its not on your passport.

Is border patrol meant to just ask? Cause that wont work as if a terrorist is trying to get through you dont think they will just lie?
If they wont partake of the sacred Swine blood ceremony, then no entry and Guantanamo for you..Have a nice day



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




You aren't demanding perfection, just xenophobia. I know.


Oh now but this XENOPHOBIA was perfectly 'acceptable'.

Petition Seeks To Ban Donald Trump From U.K. Over Hate Speech



Lol this is hilarious! Trump could get banned from the UK for his messages of hate. Good job UK I hope this is successful. It just goes to show that the rest of the world is watching and they don't approve either.


Woulda look at dat ?

With your FULL support.



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

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: neo96

It would be nice if conservatives respected the First Amendment as much as they respected all the others...


Funny from a guy championing deny the 1st amendment rights of an American just the other day right here on ATS.

Does your hypocrisy know no bounds?


I'd explain the context of that, but I'm sure you don't care enough about me to actually tell the difference there so I won't bother. I'll just let you keep believing this lie instead.


And yes this conservative minded fellow right here is the one that called you out on it then and again now.

So um no, it wasnt conservatives trying to deny the 1st, it was conservatives defending it from the left, at least be consistent.


Riiiight... Banning all muslims from entering the country...


There is no context in which an American should have their free speech limited, with a few minor exceptions as I stated then.


And I never said that an American's speech should be limited. I was laughing about how Britain wanted to kick Trump out of Britain because America can't do it.


You wanted to try to say it is conservatives trying to limit free speech, but it is always you lefties demanding folks be silenced when they dont agree with you, not conservatives.


Uh huh.


Banning all muslims from entering the country "until they can be fully vetted "

You seem to always want to leave that part out.

"the greatest form of censorship is the ommission"- Mark Twain


That part is irrelevant. It's the first part that is unconstitutional, with or without the second part. "Until they can be fully vetted" is a vague length of time that could be anything from a day to forever. So let's not be coy here. Though it's nice to see you defending violating Muslim's 1st amendment rights. Nothing like contradicting your own posts as you type them.


Um no, by the code, the time limit is "any length of time that the president deems necessary".


Whatever. That doesn't make it any less vague.


And it clearly saysd he can deny any group of immigrants from any country for any reason, with a few qualifications, religion being one of them, which isnt even required, to ban syrians, iraqis, iranians..etc.

So yes, it is 100% constitutional, both to ban them until vetted, and to ban them for as long as it takes for that vetting to be of a satisfactory quality as to ensure not one of them is a terrorist, or that it can be reasonably assumed that they arent.


No. It isn't.


I know pumpkin, Americans being more important in America than immigrants....."what a travesty"


Not all Muslims are immigrants or visitors. Some are American's too you know?


But one that is finally going to be as it should be, and should have been the entire time.

Immigrants do not have as much of a right to this country as Americans do, Americans should always come first, at all times.

As long as Americans can be relatively safe from imported terrorists, ok, let the vetted ones in.

Im not demanding perfection, that is unatainable, I am only demanding due diligence, which is lacking at the moment.


You aren't demanding perfection, just xenophobia. I know.


If they are Americans, they cant be barred, period.

Trump will lose that in court.

No problem with that.

It should be clear that isnt going to happen.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t




You aren't demanding perfection, just xenophobia. I know.


Oh now but this XENOPHOBIA was perfectly 'acceptable'.

Petition Seeks To Ban Donald Trump From U.K. Over Hate Speech



Lol this is hilarious! Trump could get banned from the UK for his messages of hate. Good job UK I hope this is successful. It just goes to show that the rest of the world is watching and they don't approve either.


Woulda look at dat ?

With your FULL support.


That is in fact the Same thread I called him out about.

I wander if he can even understand his disconnect on the subject.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

No, that isn't xenophobia. That is just me hating on one man because I hate him. Do you not know the definition of xenophobia or something?



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: neo96

It would be nice if conservatives respected the First Amendment as much as they respected all the others...


Funny from a guy championing deny the 1st amendment rights of an American just the other day right here on ATS.

Does your hypocrisy know no bounds?


I'd explain the context of that, but I'm sure you don't care enough about me to actually tell the difference there so I won't bother. I'll just let you keep believing this lie instead.


And yes this conservative minded fellow right here is the one that called you out on it then and again now.

So um no, it wasnt conservatives trying to deny the 1st, it was conservatives defending it from the left, at least be consistent.


Riiiight... Banning all muslims from entering the country...


There is no context in which an American should have their free speech limited, with a few minor exceptions as I stated then.


And I never said that an American's speech should be limited. I was laughing about how Britain wanted to kick Trump out of Britain because America can't do it.


You wanted to try to say it is conservatives trying to limit free speech, but it is always you lefties demanding folks be silenced when they dont agree with you, not conservatives.


Uh huh.


Banning all muslims from entering the country "until they can be fully vetted "

You seem to always want to leave that part out.

"the greatest form of censorship is the ommission"- Mark Twain


That part is irrelevant. It's the first part that is unconstitutional, with or without the second part. "Until they can be fully vetted" is a vague length of time that could be anything from a day to forever. So let's not be coy here. Though it's nice to see you defending violating Muslim's 1st amendment rights. Nothing like contradicting your own posts as you type them.


Um no, by the code, the time limit is "any length of time that the president deems necessary".


Whatever. That doesn't make it any less vague.


And it clearly saysd he can deny any group of immigrants from any country for any reason, with a few qualifications, religion being one of them, which isnt even required, to ban syrians, iraqis, iranians..etc.

So yes, it is 100% constitutional, both to ban them until vetted, and to ban them for as long as it takes for that vetting to be of a satisfactory quality as to ensure not one of them is a terrorist, or that it can be reasonably assumed that they arent.


No. It isn't.


I know pumpkin, Americans being more important in America than immigrants....."what a travesty"


Not all Muslims are immigrants or visitors. Some are American's too you know?


But one that is finally going to be as it should be, and should have been the entire time.

Immigrants do not have as much of a right to this country as Americans do, Americans should always come first, at all times.

As long as Americans can be relatively safe from imported terrorists, ok, let the vetted ones in.

Im not demanding perfection, that is unatainable, I am only demanding due diligence, which is lacking at the moment.


You aren't demanding perfection, just xenophobia. I know.


If they are Americans, they cant be barred, period.

Trump will lose that in court.

No problem with that.

It should be clear that isnt going to happen.


It should be clear that none of Trumps proposals will happen. Mostly because they are impossible to achieve, let alone the legal ramifications.

I still want to know how he's going to make Mexico build a wall for us.
edit on 11-12-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: neo96

It would be nice if conservatives respected the First Amendment as much as they respected all the others...


Funny from a guy championing deny the 1st amendment rights of an American just the other day right here on ATS.

Does your hypocrisy know no bounds?


I'd explain the context of that, but I'm sure you don't care enough about me to actually tell the difference there so I won't bother. I'll just let you keep believing this lie instead.


And yes this conservative minded fellow right here is the one that called you out on it then and again now.

So um no, it wasnt conservatives trying to deny the 1st, it was conservatives defending it from the left, at least be consistent.


Riiiight... Banning all muslims from entering the country...


There is no context in which an American should have their free speech limited, with a few minor exceptions as I stated then.


And I never said that an American's speech should be limited. I was laughing about how Britain wanted to kick Trump out of Britain because America can't do it.


You wanted to try to say it is conservatives trying to limit free speech, but it is always you lefties demanding folks be silenced when they dont agree with you, not conservatives.


Uh huh.


Banning all muslims from entering the country "until they can be fully vetted "

You seem to always want to leave that part out.

"the greatest form of censorship is the ommission"- Mark Twain


That part is irrelevant. It's the first part that is unconstitutional, with or without the second part. "Until they can be fully vetted" is a vague length of time that could be anything from a day to forever. So let's not be coy here. Though it's nice to see you defending violating Muslim's 1st amendment rights. Nothing like contradicting your own posts as you type them.


Um no, by the code, the time limit is "any length of time that the president deems necessary".


Whatever. That doesn't make it any less vague.


And it clearly saysd he can deny any group of immigrants from any country for any reason, with a few qualifications, religion being one of them, which isnt even required, to ban syrians, iraqis, iranians..etc.

So yes, it is 100% constitutional, both to ban them until vetted, and to ban them for as long as it takes for that vetting to be of a satisfactory quality as to ensure not one of them is a terrorist, or that it can be reasonably assumed that they arent.


No. It isn't.


I know pumpkin, Americans being more important in America than immigrants....."what a travesty"


Not all Muslims are immigrants or visitors. Some are American's too you know?


But one that is finally going to be as it should be, and should have been the entire time.

Immigrants do not have as much of a right to this country as Americans do, Americans should always come first, at all times.

As long as Americans can be relatively safe from imported terrorists, ok, let the vetted ones in.

Im not demanding perfection, that is unatainable, I am only demanding due diligence, which is lacking at the moment.


You aren't demanding perfection, just xenophobia. I know.


If they are Americans, they cant be barred, period.

Trump will lose that in court.

No problem with that.

It should be clear that isnt going to happen.


It should be clear that none of Trumps proposals will happen. Mostly because they are impossible to achieve, let alone the legal ramifications.

I still want to know how he's going to make Mexico build a wall for us.


That one is easy actually.

We give mexico billions in foreign aid every year.

"build the wall and police your side of it correctly or we cut off all foreign aid to your country"

See trump is a business man, he understands leverage.

And when it comes to mexico we have all the leverage, they do nothing for us, we do a lot for them.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: forkedtongue

Wait, you really believe it is that simple? LOL!!! No wonder you are a Trump supporter. And to honestly say that Mexico does nothing for us? Wow... Good show mate. You and Trump deserve each other.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: forkedtongue

Wait, you really believe it is that simple? LOL!!! No wonder you are a Trump supporter. And to honestly say that Mexico does nothing for us? Wow... Good show mate. You and Trump deserve each other.


Well, mexico can lose billions a year in aid, or spend millions a year building a wall......

Seems like a win win, we get the wall( that im no fan of, for many reasons) and mexico gets to keep billions in aid a year.

Why try to insult me for my political leanings?

You are the one that supports liberalism.....if either of us deserved to be ridiculed for their political leanings it most obviously would be you.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t




You aren't demanding perfection, just xenophobia. I know.


Oh now but this XENOPHOBIA was perfectly 'acceptable'.

Petition Seeks To Ban Donald Trump From U.K. Over Hate Speech



Lol this is hilarious! Trump could get banned from the UK for his messages of hate. Good job UK I hope this is successful. It just goes to show that the rest of the world is watching and they don't approve either.


Woulda look at dat ?

With your FULL support.


That's not xenophobia! Do you know what the word even means?
And by the way, no, we don't want Trump anywhere near us.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: forkedtongue

Wait, you really believe it is that simple? LOL!!! No wonder you are a Trump supporter. And to honestly say that Mexico does nothing for us? Wow... Good show mate. You and Trump deserve each other.


Well, mexico can lose billions a year in aid, or spend millions a year building a wall......

Seems like a win win, we get the wall( that im no fan of, for many reasons) and mexico gets to keep billions in aid a year.


Except for the part where Mexico can interpret this form of coercion as an act of war...


Why try to insult me for my political leanings?

You are the one that supports liberalism.....if either of us deserved to be ridiculed for their political leanings it most obviously would be you.


I'm laughing because you support Trump's overly simplistic and idiotic plans that are not only impossible to implement successfully but are wildly intolerant of other cultures. I'm not laughing at you because you are a conservative. Though you have just told me that your opinion in politics is rather simplistic and partisan blinded if you think that defending liberalism is something to be laughed at. Just an fyi, I flip-flop between conservative and liberal ideals depending on the quality of politicians being fielded. Right now the Dems have the best politicians hands down. Last election I was for Ron Paul or Gary Johnson.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: SPECULUM

The best OP I have seen in many months, finally a dose of high strength TRUTH.

There have been the New York mandatory registration law? that most people did not comply with, which shows that if Obama starts making new confiscation laws and going for broke, which is his plan all along, and his supporters keep saying he is not coming for the guns. When Obama bites a recruit, they turn and become very agreeable to anything he does, and the bite from the Vampire king Obama injects a substance that tells them everything good is happening now, but not knowing how they were used as pawns for the master plan of turning everything he touches into dog crap, or cursed dog crap, which is much worse than regular dog crap and anything the cursed stuff gets on must be obliterated to avoid it tainting everything else. Pretty much exactly what is transpiring with our traitor on vacation or golfing when everyone else is on fire or dying. He will take the guns of others away, while adding guns to his own guards, exactly like when he made our military soldiers disarm before him showing up for a visit. This is what all leaders with the mind of a tyrant do, which naturally makes them very paranoid of everyone else, because they know like Obama knows, that when they start really screwing people over, they will feel enough guilt for doing it that they think they need to add guns to their own guards, and take away guns from everyone else. (But never enough guilt to stop doing bad things to countrymen).




posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: SPECULUM

The best OP I have seen in many months, finally a dose of high strength TRUTH.

There have been the New York mandatory registration law? that most people did not comply with, which shows that if Obama starts making new confiscation laws and going for broke, which is his plan all along, and his supporters keep saying he is not coming for the guns. When Obama bites a recruit, they turn and become very agreeable to anything he does, and the bite from the Vampire king Obama injects a substance that tells them everything good is happening now, but not knowing how they were used as pawns for the master plan of turning everything he touches into dog crap, or cursed dog crap, which is much worse than regular dog crap and anything the cursed stuff gets on must be obliterated to avoid it tainting everything else. Pretty much exactly what is transpiring with our traitor on vacation or golfing when everyone else is on fire or dying. He will take the guns of others away, while adding guns to his own guards, exactly like when he made our military soldiers disarm before him showing up for a visit. This is what all leaders with the mind of a tyrant do, which naturally makes them very paranoid of everyone else, because they know like Obama knows, that when they start really screwing people over, they will feel enough guilt for doing it that they think they need to add guns to their own guards, and take away guns from everyone else. (But never enough guilt to stop doing bad things to countrymen).



Erm, say what again? You think that Obama's... a vampire?



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: forkedtongue
Um, guns serve more of a purpose then just killing.

Killing like war, is a last resort.

Most concealed carry vs criminal cases dont result in death, it results in the concealed carry brandishing or just showing the criminal the gun, and the criminal runs away.

Because the threat of death is usually more than enough to put the stop to their BS.


So you're going to brandish a weapon and the government will back down? What are you going to do when they come for your guns, and don't back off when you pull it out and start waving it around?



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join