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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Sanctuary city = Treason

page: 2
29
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 09:05 PM
link   
a reply to: odzeandennz

You forget in some cases federal law Trump's State and subsequently local law (pun intended).

If you disagree with that, use the proper channels to try and change such laws. Immigration has pretty clear guidelines. As you'll see from my above post my family can relate and not only followed such guidelines and paid their taxes, they fought. So excuse me for wanting the ones willing to adhere to the system to ensure the ones who do the right thing get a fair shake.

Otherwise they wait in line, how is that tolerant or fair? There are rules for a reason, to reward those who are willing to start the process of assimilation. You may see that as unfair, but that process prepares them for the bureaucratic sh## show they'll have to go through like the rest of us with success.




posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 09:48 PM
link   
a reply to: odzeandennz

I am not sure I follow you. Trump taking office yet is not relevant.

You are correct that this is not the first time a state wouldn't abide by federal law. However, this is a city not a state, not that it matters for purposes of this discussion. Bathroom laws, etc, are not treasonous is broken. This law is specific to giving aid and comfort to an enemy of the USA. The mayor of a US city proclaiming that the city is and will remain a sanctuary city for illegal aliens, which he can not ensure are not enemies, qualifies as Treason.

As for taking a different tack when Trump gets in office, Chicago is as democrat as a city can get. Trump taking office will change nothing about Chicago or its leaders. Chicago has suffered under a democrat stranglehold for decades. His intent is twofold: a) defy republican authority at all costs, and, b) make it possible to blame the ruin of Chicago on someone else - preferably the new republican President



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker



Well all the citizens there are prospering, so I think they can give a little to people who don't have to pay into said said system.


Yes , Federal money. You know , the money that was destined for the legal citizens to pay welfare , food , health care. Repair infrastructure. That sort of thing.
But , instead , old buddy Rahm following in his master's footsteps with no regard for law....
Guess we could call him Robbing Hood

edit on 11/16/16 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Not enough people want to strive for what Trump is doing, my opinion. Even his own supporters are mainly concerned with jobs and lowering taxes. The reality of deporting millions of people? Not even his supporters like it. A lot of you talk in favour of it, but if you had to do it yourself, if you had to break up families and haul away people who only committed minor crimes, you too would get limp. Where's the humanity in that. The damage is already done. We let these people in and we can't just hit rewind. Those jobs Trump says we'll get, resulting from this policy? They'll evaporate. American workers aren't ready to take those jobs. What'll happen is either the employers will scramble for permits to hire workers from elsewhere, exploit loopholes, or they'll automate.

It's not sexy. It's all law and order without soul.

Protests. Opposition from every corner. Trump can't win.

Jobs. For everyone. Get us all working. That's sexxy. Or at least try to. Even if it's futile, it's a worthy aim we all can support.
edit on 11/16/2016 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 11:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Seattle will remain a city of equality as well.

Good.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:12 AM
link   
It sounds like a good way to attract the illegals into a concentrated group and get them to sign up for assistance. Once they have been identified and their addresses known, it would be easier to round them up for deportation. If I were an illegal I wouldn't go for the bait myself, but many would believe and go there to feel safe.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: jonnywhite

I am in favor of deporting illegal aliens. That is where the 'illegal' part comes in to the conversation. Liberals always ignore the illegal part and try to treat all immigrants as 'equal' in the eyes of the law when they clearly are not. I agree that I would not break up families, unless it was absolutely necessary. If the entire family was here illegally, I would deport the entire family. If some members of a family were here legally and others were not, I would offer them all the opportunity to leave together. They can still be a family, and I encourage that, but in a country where they can do so legally. We break up families every day by putting a US citizen in jail. Why do illegals deserve a break from that consequence of their own actions?

I do not like the idea of deporting people for committing minor offenses. Entering the country illegally is not a minor offense. Illegal aliens have already committed a crime just in coming here without going through proper channels. As always, it leaves me wondering why illegal is not illegal enough for some people... Why are additional crimes against US citizens required in order to demand action be taken? Isn't it the responsibility of government to take action to 'avoid' those crimes against its citizens whenever possible? This is one way in which it is possible.

As for people not taking the kinds of jobs that will be left behind, that is small consolation to the damage already done by their presence. And people will take those jobs. I knew a man who had been a facility manager for a manufacturing plant. He was a little older than some of his co workers and got downsized out of a job. He went from roughly $80k per year to 15 hours a week at Burger King for minimum wage. Granted, he knew he would not be there forever and indeed left after only a few weeks with an offer more aligned with his experience. But the point is, he took the job rather than be unemployed and do nothing. There is a generation of young people now that believe they should, immediately upon entering the work force, be as successful and wealthy and rewarded as the generation before them who worked hard for 30 years for their success. The trophies for showing up and giving a half-assed effort at something you suck at don't appear on paychecks. In the real world trophies go to the over achievers. Not the participants. The attitude, "I am too good for that job" is a joke. You are only as good as the best job you can actually get. If that is flipping burgers, guess what... Be proud that it is honest work for an honest wage. And that wage is increasing regularly now which most workers in the US can't say about their own jobs. My rate increases have been modest to non-existent in recent years. That is the nature of business. You don't retreat to our safe space and cry about it. You work hard and hope that when things improve your efforts will not go unnoticed.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: plaindoughnut

By equality do you mean that US citizens get a free pass on committing crimes too?



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

I am in favor of deporting illegal aliens. That is where the 'illegal' part comes in to the conversation. Liberals always ignore the illegal part and try to treat all immigrants as 'equal' in the eyes of the law when they clearly are not. I agree that I would not break up families, unless it was absolutely necessary. If the entire family was here illegally, I would deport the entire family. If some members of a family were here legally and others were not, I would offer them all the opportunity to leave together. They can still be a family, and I encourage that, but in a country where they can do so legally. We break up families every day by putting a US citizen in jail. Why do illegals deserve a break from that consequence of their own actions?

The only way to stop this activity is to deport illegal/undocumented immigrants.

The first thing the people that embrace the forgiving of this crime will throw up in your face is, "We have to protect the children and families". Well I work in an area that has a lot of contact with people that are here illegally, and if they want to improve safety for the children caught up in this criminal activity, the best thing they can do is stop this criminal enterprise, punish those that are feeding off illegal immigration, and deport all those they find that are here illegally.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:54 AM
link   
There should be no sanctuary cities. America was built by immigrants. I'm all for immigration when it is done through legal channels and not swimming across the Rio Grande.




posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: jonnywhite

He is taking about removing criminals and gang related offences. Deporting those would help up greatly. We don't need the Chicago chapter of MS13 to be the strongest in the world. Perhaps we could listed to what he actually said instead of parroting the MSM?



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:07 AM
link   
You people.

Its like the Statue of Liberty doesn't have anything about taking in the tired and poor and those yearning to be free. I imagine anyone in Nazi Germany who stood up against fascism and the rounding up of Jews and other minorities was/should have been summarily shot for disobeying the lawful and righteous 3rd Reich? Isn't that how history remembers them?

Would Jesus have wanted us to kick all these people out? They are people first, not illegal immigrants. What kind of world do we live in now where selfishness is good and right, and suffering for compassion's sake to help our fellow human beings is seen as the wrong way?

They didn't flee to America because they were evil and wanted to take your jobs and make life hell. Their life was already hell, they came here to find peace and respite. A nation of immigrants whole usurped the land from its original inhabitants is now getting all up in arms over immigrants flocking to the country. I can't reconcile how any conservative mindset doesn't drown in its own moral hypocrisy.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: Vroomfondel

trump is not president yet.

if he declared this under trumps admin, its still not treason.

kinda like the same sex marriage looney who wouldnt allow same sex to marry and defy the law.


The immigration laws are already laws. There are laws against illegal entry to the country, laws against hiring illegals, laws against protecting and harboring illegals, etc. The Secure Fence Act of 2006 already exists too - we should have been building a wall and securing borders for at least 10 years. The current administration has encouraged violation of existing laws.

Trump did not make up the laws. He just wants to enforce them.

So, if a mayor says he is refusing to follow federal laws, he has committed a crime. It has nothing to do with Trump.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

There are legal ways to immigrate.

Those who came through Ellis Island by the Statue of Liberty came here legally and were processed according to our laws, so using her poem does not help your case.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:22 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

But it does. Its the meaning of the poem that's important and implies our immigration system is whats lacking. You failed to mention how those acting against the round up and deportation of Jews in WW2 Germany were in fact treasonous bad people. Are they bad people for not following their duly appointed mandates/laws?



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

The Jews in Germany were legal citizens, and were rounded up, tortured and killed. It's ridiculous to make that comparison.
Our laws just send them home. If they sneak into our country in violation of immigration laws, they can not stay.

Every country has immigration laws and processing requirements. This is not unique to the US.

The US welcomes immigrants. We have laws to process people that legally apply for immigration.
We also have quite generous visas for students, those who need to legally work here and for visitors.
But we need to know who is coming and check their backgrounds.
We do need to have limits so that immigration can be considered along with the impact on our current population.

There are many, many people who come to the US legally and follow the proper procedures.
It's not fair for others to disregard the law.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

The US immigration process works great if you are immigrating under a very lax timeline or have very specialized skills. Those who lack the time or skillets most often get denied. What of people fleeing starvation, violence, lack of economic opportunities, etc? Do you think US immigration law is completely adequate and those that come here under duress should be sent right back to their nexus of suffering?

You can hide behind the law as an excuse for allowing other to suffer, but if the law is ineffective would you rather wait decades to fix it and in the meantime let those who wait for years continue to suffer? Most likely your great grandparents immigrated to the US under far more lax and less stringent requirements (not to mention in a much shorter processing time) than those looking to come here now.

Do you believe it is important to follow whatever the law states even if people are suffering because of it?



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

The US needs take care of our own people first.

Yes its sad that there is suffering in other countries. But we are not responsible for every single person in the world who is suffering.
That said, they can also come in as refugees - legally.
But we need to know who is coming and to have the right to deny admittance to criminals and terrorists. The safety of our citizens is the primary responsibility of our government.

It would crush our country if we opened the borders and let anyone flood in who wants to come.
That is not responsible or practical.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:53 AM
link   
If you harbor a crew of illegal aliens in your home, the Feds can and used to come in and deport the illegals and arrest you for breaking the law.
We have to end the selective enforcement of the law by elected officials.

A law can be the dumbest damn law ever put in the books, but it is still the job of the elected officials to enforce it.

If the law is unconstitutional, it is the job of the courts to strike it down. If a law is unpopular, it is the job of the people to elect someone that will change it.
edit on b000000302016-11-17T08:54:09-06:0008America/ChicagoThu, 17 Nov 2016 08:54:09 -0600800000016 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

It is telling that you can so easily disregard other's suffering couched under nationalism. Are we all not human beings? Are American's greater/worth more than humans of other nationalities?

Reasoning away complacency/inaction under the guise of protecting 'our citizens' is the hallmark of fascism. You can argue any point under that aspect (wrongly I may add). Have you any facts/numbers/metrics for how many of 'our citizens' die from terrorists/un-vetted immigrants or are you parroting conservative talking points because they sounded good and helped you feel better about disassociating yourself from the suffering of human beings?




top topics



 
29
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join