It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Obama: I'm Still Not Enforcing Immigration Law, No Matter What The Court Says

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 04:21 PM
a reply to: iTruthSeeker

For all intents and purposes. Sorry. Carry on.

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 04:32 PM

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 04:42 PM
a reply to: Kali74

It could easily be inferred from your avatar and screen name

that your god is Kali.

Kali has a certain reputation.

How would you describe your god Kali's stance regarding the concept that things can be "illegal."

What is Kali's reputation, stance, generally, typically regarding what is legal and illegal.

You purport an opinion about the current Imposter-In-Chief's ignoring the Supreme Court ruling as NOT being illegal.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask what is your god's general stance and reputation regarding what is legal and illegal.

It appears that your notions of illegal and legal are quite askew from those of the general population.

So what is your chosen god's stance on legal and illegal?

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 04:54 PM
a reply to: BO XIAN

I don't worship any God or Goddess. I don't think she's ever given a press conference on he opinions on American law though. If she did, I missed it.

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 04:57 PM
a reply to: Metallicus

It completely is.

He won't enforce the law that the states tried to end around and enforce on their own and were told by the courts they couldn't. So we have a congress with no spine that will not do what they are supposed to do which is remove an executive who will not faithfully execute the laws of the land.

Something has to be corrected.

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 04:59 PM
a reply to: BIGPoJo

I suppose if we're now ignoring the SCOTUS, Texas should just have their regulations no matter what today's ruling was. I don't see why not, Missouri has pretty much had the exact same ones in place on our clinics since 1986.

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 05:02 PM

originally posted by: TexasTruth
Uh... We already did that once. It should be in the history books under American Revolution, look it up. And it was more of an a$$ whippin' than just a vote.
a reply to: crazyewok

Smater to win independence without bloodshed than with.

Plus that was 1776 this is 2016.

Between then and now the USA has got a worse tyranny back and in the process most your population seems to have lost there political back bone

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 05:06 PM
a reply to: crazyewok

During the Revolution, it was not a majority opinion to try for independence. The army was a minority, certainly, and I think there was just enough support from the populace for them to pull it off, but I think the majority opinion was to stick with Britain.

You do not always have to have a majority to win.

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 05:14 PM
Go ahead and look up what branch of the government the President belongs to, and then look at the description of what that branch does and THEN look up what Obama's role is in that branch.

Either, you're all ignorant, uneducated, or corrupt. Obama is fully within his rights to make enforcement decisions.

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 05:17 PM

originally posted by: grahag
Go ahead and look up what branch of the government the President belongs to, and then look at the description of what that branch does and THEN look up what Obama's role is in that branch.

Either, you're all ignorant, uneducated, or corrupt. Obama is fully within his rights to make enforcement decisions.

He directs the bureaucracy; that much is true. However, what good are laws if every time you get a new President, he can essentially go through the entire legal code and pick and choose which laws will be enforced during his term?

At that point, we might as well start calling ourselves a dictatorship because there is little point and function to the rest of the government.
edit on 27-6-2016 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 05:23 PM
a reply to: Kali74

Nice deflection and avoidance.

OK, if worship was too strong a word . . .

in the culture where Kali is most revered . . .

what is her reputation in terms of how she relates to the whole issue of legal/illegal?

What is your preferred idol, god, symbol's track record on such scores.

She evidently influences you significantly . . . so what is her influence regarding the whole notion of legal/illegal?

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 05:26 PM
a reply to: Kali74

What is the historic attitude attributed to Kali regarding legal/illegal?

I want to understand where you might be coming from to so shockingly assert that the current Imposter in Chief is not being illegal in considering himself ABOVE the highest Court in the land and in trashing the Supreme Court's ruling.

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 05:33 PM

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Unity_99
It's called TREASON! Normally, the system isn't broken. There is a protocol to get them to courts and conviction. But apparently all those elected from all parties are in on it, and apparently the military won't step in and do its part.

I must have missed the citation in the Constitution for coup d'etat and junta protocols ... can you remind me of the article?

Thank you kindly.

No I won't. Read up on constitutional law and what supreme court means to the government. Governments are legally under the courts, for a reason, that corrects stray errors and tyranny when they overstep their boundaries.

What has occurred non stop, for the past few years, probably all 8, and certainly not restricted to this government, is treason.

Merkel is committing treason.

Anything that violates constitution is tyranny and illegal.

Bringing in violent high risk people violates oath of office and purpose of office, to serve the people, and endangers them.

If you haven't been following the news for the past 20 years, and seen what is going on in the last 4-8, shame on you.

But I don't have a month of my life to do someone else's homework


posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 05:54 PM
a reply to: BO XIAN

Why can't you just read?

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 06:05 PM
reagan and bush wanted amnesty as well

when did the GOP become so crazy ?

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 06:10 PM
Forgive me for this long post...bear with me on this

It is really a shame. I read people I know here of great intellect and wisdom I’ve been blessed to read their posts on many topics fighting over this issue.

I won’t mention names

It saddens me that the devil has won in how we are divided.

Good people so divided on an issue that 30 or 40 years ago didn’t even exist.

Indeed, when they opened up this hell through 911 and other events it was a harbinger of today’s world of deep division and strife, darkness and evil the world has rarely faced

I have mentioned often on this forum that I’ve have known the dark, lower mind of the Wahhabi fundamentalist first hand as I was a member of one of the first legitimate American truly Islamic communities in America. A moderate non Wahhabi group infiltrated later by the Wahhabis and the CIA.

Not long after that the community broke up

We were bitter opponents of the kind of mentality of these narrow minded religious bigots from the Saudi Wahhabis. But as Muslims we had to give the respect due to any Muslim. They tried to bribe us but out leader refused and would never go over to their n narrow and intolerant version of Islam.

Back then there was no violent fundamentalist this was before even Afghanistan. But one could see the seed of narrow bigotry and dark ignorance in their mentality and dogmatic certainty was bound to lead to something bad.

Everybody was evil except them. No other school of thought was worthy but theirs.

Trying to get us to have our woman wear Burqas…

Our leader would always tell us when they visited: just win your argument

Indeed many of the sons of the wealthy Saudis would visit our community and we'd be steeped in religious controversy because we knew the real and true Islam and it wasn’t them!

The point of this post is to emphasize and remind that the mentality of these fundamentalist IS dangerous.

They have a right to their narrow beliefs of course but its our job to refute this intolerant version of Islam at all times.

And if it were left to me I would inspect closely the extreme fundamentalists coming to America from Wahhabi Muslim lands

That’s said, on the other hand there are Muslims in other Islamic schools of thought who are great people: moderate and lofty thinkers and exponents of the true teaching of Muhammad. Such as for example, the Sufis, the Admadiya sect, some of the mystical Shia branches, and many more and many others who Americans should welcome with open arms, who are ardently opposed to the version of Islam that has spawned these evil Islamists

I say again it’s all from the Wahhabi sect that these jihadi, narrow and dangerous ideas emanate from within Islam


We need to educate the population on the fact that the Islamists ARE ALL WAHHABIS

This narrow form of intolerant Islam only become prominent because the Saudis and all their oil money basically has bribed their way acres the world

The solution to this problem is to understand and disseminate this

Obama is an idiot and knows nothing about historical Islam or the nuanced reality of the Wahhabi perversion he won’t even talk about it.

He does more harm to Islam defending these narrow religious bigots


edit on 27-6-2016 by Willtell because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 06:22 PM
a reply to: Kali74

I didn't realize you were in the dark regarding my reading & comprehension skills and habits.

Nice deflection, again.

Obviously I don't need to give a gnat's fart's worth of attention to your blathering about legal/illegal in terms of the Imposter In Chief's trashing of the ruling of the highest Court in the Land.

Evidently you like sucking up to arrogant tyrants and their presumed undivine right to be dictators.

We will see how that works out for you in the long run.

In terms of reading . . . Please let me know if I used too many long words in the above. Not sure I could improve it but I could try.

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 06:25 PM
a reply to: Kali74

Oh, to answer my own question . . .

my understanding of your preferred god Kali . . . is that she's a DESTROYER . . . not necessarily abiding by any laws or limits, legal or otherwise.

No wonder you think the current Imposter in Chief can behave like a Hindu Destroyer goddess doing her own thing. He certainly has insisted on doing his own treasonous illegal piles of poo from the beginning.

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 06:29 PM
a reply to: Willtell

There you go again . . . forcing me to agree with you . . . you rascal you.

Clearly the end is near with this happening more and more.



However, I don't think they are "narrow" . . . they are merely acting out many dozens of verses in their founding religious documents. They are merely being "good and devout" Muslims according to their Muslim Scriptures.

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 07:45 PM

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: iTruthSeeker

It's nothing close to treason. There's zero wrong with what Obama has done on immigration. Disliking his approach doesn't make it illegal.

Federal Immigration laws make this illegal. Period
Get it , got it , good

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in