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.

 

BREAKING NEWS: Emergency Stay Granted - Defeat for Trump's Right Wing Agenda

page: 10
89
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Kuroodo

It's national.




posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:33 PM
link   
So it looks like those people who were already vetted with valid visas are covered, plus at least 2 of those guys have good track record as translators during the Iraq war. Looks like they can't rule on future travelers, only current ones moving from point A to point B.

Moving on.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:33 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Don't forget the Big Gulp!



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:33 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI



There already exists bans on firearms, plus plenty of regulations that are permanent.


There are already plenty of regulations as to whom can enter the country. Why are we creating more out of fear and politics?



I'm doing my best to stay on topic and within scope. Please do the same. That is not a logical comparison at all.


It is logical when that is the manner in which you choose to formulate an argument.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: JinMI



We shut the door were there is an actual or strongly perceived threat.


Keyword: "perceived".

Again, it's a defensive reaction made out of fear by those that have been duped in to believing people of a certain region, or perhaps religion, are going to steal their babies, bomb everyone else and instill Sharia Law.

Scared, limp-wristed governance.



Again, I don't like the fact that this halts LEGAL immigration


Then you should oppose it. Period.

So perceived means we should ignore history or habit? Stealing babies? That's a new one by me.

You think is should oppose it, but this is temporary and I half agree with it. Period.period.period.question mark.


Would you support a ban on firearms because of their history or their specific purpose?

Even if temporary?


There already exists bans on firearms, plus plenty of regulations that are permanent.

I'm doing my best to stay on topic and within scope. Please do the same.

That is not a logical comparison at all.


That that FEDERAL judge in New York is just fine with.


I get your intention but it still is a false equivalency.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Guess what? It does.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: JinMI



We shut the door were there is an actual or strongly perceived threat.


Keyword: "perceived".

Again, it's a defensive reaction made out of fear by those that have been duped in to believing people of a certain region, or perhaps religion, are going to steal their babies, bomb everyone else and instill Sharia Law.

Scared, limp-wristed governance.



Again, I don't like the fact that this halts LEGAL immigration


Then you should oppose it. Period.

So perceived means we should ignore history or habit? Stealing babies? That's a new one by me.

You think is should oppose it, but this is temporary and I half agree with it. Period.period.period.question mark.


Would you support a ban on firearms because of their history or their specific purpose?

Even if temporary?


Fully automatic weapons are already effectively banned for most people.


No they are not. You have to jump through an extra hoop or two.

In relation to this current issue, the hoops are being temporarily taken away because of politics and fear.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

You do realize you are talking about Ann Donnelly ??



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

If your going to call it fear then there would be little to no testament needed to argue against, no? You're ok with calling it fear because what has happened and is happening around the globe is not happening here. Others seek to keep it from happening here. Do you lock your doors at night? Your vehicle? Abstract from yourself, do businesses keep their doors open after close?


I showed you why the equivalency is false, if you want to keep arguing it fine but lets not it take precedence over our interaction.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

This president only operates from a position of fear. Both his own and the fear he spreads. You guys voted based on it. Come on.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

The President, Donald Trump, operates from a position of authority the powers of which are granted to him under the constitution and the law of the land.

Fear doesn't come into it.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: flatbush71
a reply to: JinMI

You do realize you are talking about Ann Donnelly ??



No I didn't know whom the judge is nor am I familiar with her. What am I missing?



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Maybe supplying weapons to Syrian rebels in the region for the past eight years wasn't such a great idea. But no one was out marching in the streets about the consequences of such actions. Those consequences being that we armed terrorists and further destabilized the entire region.

Now Trump gets elected and takes a stand to do what he can from letting terrorists into the country.

Interesting times indeed.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: flatbush71
a reply to: JinMI

You do realize you are talking about Ann Donnelly ??



No I didn't know whom the judge is nor am I familiar with her. What am I missing?


They are a politically appointed, and by the last president.

So people should take the ruling as such.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: queenofswords

This president only operates from a position of fear. Both his own and the fear he spreads. You guys voted based on it. Come on.


~yawn~

I did not vote based on fear. Sorry to disappoint you. Common sense approaches and an America First attitude was pretty high on my list for voting for Trump.

That...plus...Hillary is a crook in my book.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: JinMI



We shut the door were there is an actual or strongly perceived threat.


Keyword: "perceived".

Again, it's a defensive reaction made out of fear by those that have been duped in to believing people of a certain region, or perhaps religion, are going to steal their babies, bomb everyone else and instill Sharia Law.

Scared, limp-wristed governance.



Again, I don't like the fact that this halts LEGAL immigration


Then you should oppose it. Period.

So perceived means we should ignore history or habit? Stealing babies? That's a new one by me.

You think is should oppose it, but this is temporary and I half agree with it. Period.period.period.question mark.


Would you support a ban on firearms because of their history or their specific purpose?

Even if temporary?


Fully automatic weapons are already effectively banned for most people.


No they are not. You have to jump through an extra hoop or two.

In relation to this current issue, the hoops are being temporarily taken away because of politics and fear.


You cannot buy a NEW fully automatic weapon, it has to be from before 1986, and the prices on the existing ones left in circulation are huge. Yes you are correct, you can still get one however, It's more than a simple hoop or two.
edit on 28-1-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:42 PM
link   
This is becoming funny.

The people held are still held, just can't be deported.
Lawyers will have to go back to court to get detainees released.
Order does not apply to any future arrivals.

I wouldn't be surprised if even this step gets overturned.

edit on 28/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ohanka

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: liveandlearn

The demonstrations BTW we're pulled together with ties by organisers of the woman's march.


Theocrats and murderers?



Solid Gold post.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:43 PM
link   

edit on 28-1-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Madame SJW of the Federal Bench.
There are some stories.

Buck



new topics

top topics



 
89
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join