Deblasio like I said a years ago is going to be indicted. He is going to Jail where they don't eat pizza with a knife and fork. Democrates won't help him because they want Hillary to run for major.

Rudy Giuliani



Thoughts, guys?

Yes, Trump said it. I believe that his friends and associates said, "You can't do that. That's crazy and unconstitutional." (In a diplomatic way, of course.) Then came up with a plan to deal with refugees and some immigrants that's NOT a Muslim ban. If it was a Muslim ban then there'd be bans on 40+ Muslim countries instead of only seven. If Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan and Indonesia aren't banned, how can anyone seriously call it a Muslim ban? It's a temporary moratorium, not a permanent ban.

Personally, I don't think it's necessary, but I'm not going to misrepresent it because I disagree with it. That's how we get fake news. Anyone who calls it a Muslim ban is either ignorant or lying.

I've seen people reply, "Well, he's going to focus on bringing in religious minorities! Isn't that discriminating against Muslims?" Uh, no. Was President Obama discriminating against Christians when he brought in 10,000 Muslims and only 53 Christians? What he's doing is favoring the people who are most persecuted and discriminated in those seven countries. Christians and Yazidis are even persecuted in refugee camps. Who's doing the persecuting? Muslims! So that seems like a good policy to me.

The legal challenges are moving rapidly. The government filed a motion for an emergency stay Friday with the 9th Circuit. The court denied the request for an immediate stay and set an accelerated briefing schedule. The last brief will be filed this afternoon. I wouldn't be surprised to see a decision issued by tonight night.


Anticipating the emergency motion and public interest in the case, the Ninth Circuit has created a page on its website, if anyone is interested. https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/content/vi ... 0000000860

F1,

If that's an actual Trump quote, and we have every reason to believe it is, via Rudy...Isn't that what the spirit of the ban is? And aren't they just attaching bells and whistles to it to mask what it's STATED intent was?

Like I've said before on the forum, in real life I have had TERRIBLE experiences with Arabs (often merchants),but how can this exec. order not be seen as what it's stated intent was?

I mentioned my past experiences only to say that I will only go far as to try to get to the heart of the issue. Sometimes things are unfair....and as Americans we have to speak out against them.....but I'm not gonna be out there marching and trying to effect change for groups who by and large have treated me like dirt.

something for the "poor oppressed muslims" crowd to ponder...

Gets,

A Muslim ban was Trump's original intent, but he didn't get his way because the law wouldn't allow it. Thank God we're a nation of laws and not men, as the saying goes. It's like Joey intended to shoot and kill Tony, but he got talked out of it and only ended up slapping Tony in the head. Intent versus actual results.

So what he did is use a list that the Obama administration came up with. That's where he got those seven countries, and they are legitimate countries of concern since in most of them there's no bureaucracy to obtain documents. Iran is the largest state sponsor of terrorism. Plus, it's a 90 to 120 day moratorium, not a permanent ban. So facts are facts. There is no ban against all Muslims, in fact there's no ban at all. It's like a 14-day waiting period for guns isn't a ban on guns. This increases the waiting period on those seven countries for now, and even non-Muslims are affected.

And, by the way, they're not all Arab. Libyans are North Africans (generally Berbers), Iranians are descended from Persians, Sudan and Somalia are East Africans. I do know that in the U.S. there have been a number of Somalians who want Sharia here and support ISIS and Al Qaeda. Somalia used to be a beautiful country. A lot of the women there look like models. The Islamists ruined that country.

If Iran were banned because of state sponsoring terriosm why was Saudia Arabia not banned? They are just as bad as Iran but no one cares

Them two are part of the problem in the middle east both are the most powerful and influential countries out there both hate each other Iran's influence has grown in recent years since Saddam Hussain was taken down they have influence in Iraq especially as they have sent there special forces in to fight ISIS. They are also close with Assad and Russia these days aswell.

Saudis Arabia feels threatened at the moment there biggest Allie is the US and the West stuff they get away with is ridiculously I mean imagine if any other country had been doing what they are doing in Yemen or were so open in there support for terrorism.

F1,

Doesn't (or didn't, pending the legal battle) Trumps executive order prevent American Permanent Residents and those holding dual citizenship(of the listed countries) from re-entering what is technically "their country".

We would presume that the vetting process happened before these people were issued green cards or granted American citizenship. On what basis, other because he can, does POTUS prevent our people from returning to their homes?



Good correction about Arabs. I know a few Persians. No Iranians though, since 1980 NOBODY I've ever met from there says Iranian, they always say Persian. My experiences have been with actual Arabs. And while there are Coptic Christians and people of other faiths in those lands....most Arabs are Muslims(unless I'm mistaken) and 95% of the experiences have been negative.
Those misguided Arabicized Africans in Sudan who waged war on people who looked just like them in the name of Shariah law can all take a flying leap. Ethnic and political conflict runs rampant across that continent and those fools adding another element to the mix...can take a long walk off a short pier.


I'm going to assume that the countries listed are also among the most poor and unstable in the "Muslim" world. Turbulent places are usually the ones that produce the most immigrants. I can trace my family's departure from Haiti to just before things got bad (my Dad had foresight) and I'm sure most people on this board are in America because bad conditions compelled their great great.etc.etc grand dads to leave home and forge a better way.
The countries not on the list, are just not producing the exodus of people that these more volatile places do. Saudi Arabia ALWAYS seems exempt from these "lists" even though I've read articles linking nationals to funding terrorism.

Oral argument has been set for 3:00 tomorrow. Not sure what that means. Normally, the Court of Appeals won't review a TRO. On the other hand, this isn't a normal case.

Attorney's representing each side will argue points of law and due process before a three judge panel.

Saudi Arabia is the only staging area for US deployments in the Middle East.

He gives his justifications on the EO, but it doesn't make sense to me either. I think the Trump admin sorta/kinda admitted (without really admitting) it screwed up on that point by saying it wouldn't fight the first judge's ruling that negated that part. On the other hand, as for the judges who tossed out the entire EO, I don't think they have a leg to stand on.



Most people aren't aware of this, but it was the Muslim Arabs who created the worldwide African slave trade. When they forcibly converted the Christians and other Africans to Islam they brought their beliefs about slavery with them. They started with Egypt and Libya and Morocco followed. Muslim Egypt made a treaty with Christian Nubia (Sudan) that required an annual extortion tax that included 300 slaves. Because Nubia had excellent archers it was able to keep the Muslims at bay, but they wore them down. The Muslims took so many slaves from the area that the land was known as Abd (slaves), and some Muslims today still call blacks "abeed." Our English word "slave" comes from Muslims enslaving Eastern European Slavic tribes.

The sultan of Morocco then conquered a lot of Sub-Saharan Africa and began importing black slaves from there. West Africa had a large country known as the Ghana Empire. In around 1076 the Almoravid dynasty of Morocco captured it and it became Muslim. Part of Ghana became Mali, and Musa I of Mali (ruled c1312-1337) became the most powerful emperor in Africa. As a percentage of GDP, he may have been the wealthiest person ever. His wealth was built on the slave trade. It was from this slave trade that the first European (Portuguese) purchased African slaves in 1441.



Saudi Arabia has never directly funded terrorism against the U.S. The Saudi government has, generally speaking, been an ally. That doesn't mean it's good. It's one of the most evil governments on Earth. The good thing is that the Saudis don't attack our allies and are enemies of our enemy, Iran and Sunni extremists (like ISIS). Individual Saudis do fund terrorism, but we have individual Americans who ARE terrorists.

There should definitely be a ban on Muslims, it is not a religion like any other.

Trump administration should make argument that Muslim immigrants, taken as a community, are implicitly seditious group

Read Guillaume Faye, "Understanding Islam"

https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Islam-Guillaume-Faye/dp/1910524832

Or read "Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration--Accepting Freedom or Imposing Islam?"

https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Day-Trojan...ay+trojan+horse

And Libya has a Berber substrate, but lots of Arab admixture

Dom,

Meaning no disrespect, If I click on those links I think I will find writings remarkably similar to the anti-Catholic stuff that was written decades ago in American press . The same tone and arguments.


I don't know if you are in fact of a Roman Catholic background,just saying.

sorry, that is a very uninformed and naive comment

and, yes, I am Catholic in background

and, yes, I think there is going to be an ethnic civil war in Europe within 10 years max -- natives versus Muslim invaders

And we would be fools to let the Muslims reach a critical mass on this country

Not all Muslims believe in the caliphate or killing apostates. There are liberal and secular Muslims. Zuhdi Jasser is a Muslim with political views that you could probably support.

perhaps, but Muslims also have a doctrine of duplicity and "conquest from below" via ethnic replacement (obviously much more of a threat in Europe than here, but this is why we should not let them get too big a foothold)

many so-called moderate imams practice deception vis-a-vis the gullible West

moreover, you have to look at which version of Islam is in the ascendant, and which version the youthful & uprooted masses adhere to ----> for as these groups grow more powerful, the so-called moderates return to the flock (for reasons of fear, if nothing else)

and, last, you have to look at the core nature and teachings of Islam

Can't disagree with that.

I know a lot of muslems. Through soccer and business. Probably more then most of you. If the guys I know want to do terror here they are tremendous actors and should be in the movies.

However, that does not mean all are good people. You can't just let anyone in his country without a lot of documentation.

I don't think all Jews are good. My father was a Jew Chuck schummer is a Jew. Both are fucked up people.

I still maintain that not all Muslims are violent, etc., and don't think we should generalize against an entire group. Reformed Muslims are not practicing deception, nor are secular Muslims. There are many moderates (not liberals) though who will support fundamental ideology found in the Quran and Hadith as a nation gets more Islamic through immigration and/or births. But I also know of many Muslims who were conservative/fundamentalist in their beliefs and as they learned more, they were shocked and disgusted into leaving Islam. So for these reasons we should not stereotype, but be aware of nuances.

not all Muslims are violent to say they are is ridiculous. However there is some who do believe in the extremism but a minority should not represent the majority. People need to be integrated into society when Muslim communities get isolated from everyone else that's when extremism grows look at Holland and France. Germanys problem is they let over a million people in a short period of time very hard for security to manage the situation merkels fault the majority of the migrants will have good intentions it is sad but there is always going to be that bad people who come through if you are not sure who is coming into your country your very vulnerable.

The UK is stronger than most in Europe when dealing with extremism secret services and security strong and Muslims here are less isolated than elsewhere in Europe there is however exceptions to that. Norway are doing it the best they have a de radicalisation programme any younger guys they find has extremist beliefs they send to these prisons/centres and don't let them leave till they lose there extremist beliefs

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-38908312

this is fucking disgusting

Court refuses to reinstate Trump travel ban

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38927175




Here's the opinion.

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/o ... -35105.pdf

Thanks Helen,

It's pretty telling that the new administration didn't even try to make their case. "Cause I said so" isn't making your case.

During W's term, something like this would be followed by an orange terror alert. Speaking of which
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/32501273/ns/us...e-terror-alert/

I watched bits of some of Trump's news conferences and I do agree with him that the immediate change in policy did catch people with bad intentions off guard as opposed to announcing when it was going to change. I wonder why the new admin. didn't actually try to make their case before the court.It's President Trump, not King Donald I. There are checks and balances in our govt.

They let inexperienced doj plead the case. Those people should be let go now.

Get someone who pleaded the case on the Supreme Court do it.

Now push the new Supreme count judge to break the tie and do it again.

Those three judges against trump were the most over turned judges in the United States.

95 percent of your experiences with Arabs have been negative? How many experience with white Americans been negative by contrasts to Arabs? And finally how many experiences have been negative with blacks, and finally Asians. Just looking for a contrast of comparison here.

It turns out that some of the attorneys who were designated to argue the case had to recuse themselves for conflicts of interest, which is why the wrong person appeared before the court.

On the one hand, Trump should have waited until after he had a new AG in place before releasing the executive order. Some of the justifications used in the EO didn't make sense, so if Sessions was in place he probably could have helped improve it. Even better, Trump could have met with his administration and ordered the "extreme vetting" without a pause in immigration from the seven countries.

On the other hand, based on the Arizona v. U.S. (2012) I think Trump was right. The federal government sets immigration policy, not the states. Not only that, the states didn't have standing. So I think this decision will be overturned. Footreads is correct that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is the most overturned court, so for these reasons it'll get tossed.

My experiences with muslems have been pretty good. I have not had any problems with them.

However yesterday my son called me just to shoot the breeze. He caught a muslem he knows walking out of his building with a bicycle tire from his bike. He told him while he was talking to me that he knows that his from his bike. I told him get him alone and fuck him up.

He told me he knows what to do with him. If that was me I would have fucked him up right then and there when I was his age. So he learned to wait and get him later from me.

http://www.msnewsnow.com/story/34458170/teens-steal-cars-at-gunpoint-lead-police-on-high-speed-chase

SMDH. What's up with some of foolish delinquent in this generation and FB Live?

Notice how the mother was protective. A mother in a previous generation would tell them to not let the door hit 'em where the Lord spit 'em. Even then, fools have been doing this for as long as we've had cars.

I was reading an article about Chicago mobster Sam Battaglia and how some Oak Park police detectives spied on a meeting, then followed him as he left. Battaglia and his driver led them on a 100 mph chase until the police caught up with them. Then Battaglia ran out of the car and took a couple swings at the detective sergeant and missed. Then the sergeant beat the crap out of him until he shouted, "Please stop! You'll kill me!" His driver ran down the alley and yelled burglars, so a neighbor called the Chicago police, who arrested them all -- including the Oak Park detectives. Because the Chicago police were owned by the Outfit (or at least some of them), they were released. This was in the late 1950s or early 60s. As long as criminals think they can get away with it, they'll keep on doing it.