9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban - Page 10 - Talk About Marriage
Politics and Religion This is the place to discuss politics, morality, religion, and anything controversial.

User Tag List

 129Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
post #136 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-13-2017, 11:39 AM
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 5,519
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bibi1031 View Post
You are right in that I really don't know based on real laws. My experience is based on personal knowledge of what is happening in my neck of the woods. My part of the country is full of shenanigans like people who are illegally living here and can vote. Also those same people have housing and get money and all kinds of help for their kids and their elderly parents. It's mind boggling to say the least. Now I am noticing the business owners here as well and it looks like there is more of the same type of corruption.

It is legal "their way" though because the votes count, the people live for free pretty much and the elderly get all kinds of medical care, nurses that visit them in their home, providers that care for their meals and keeping their places clean (personal elderly maid service). Who do you think pays for all this?

Now, I am seeing my private tutoring kids that live in Mexico but do in indeed have green cards to pass the international bridge every morning and afternoon without paying for their education because the green card allows this to happen due to their parents having a business green card due to it. There are plenty of kids that come to American schools for their education, but they pay a hefty chunk of change to do so.

What I am trying to get at is, who is in charge of this happening and if it is illegal because quite frankly it is; why is nothing done to fix it? If this happens here, what would stop it from happening anywhere else in America?
So then you are in favor of actually enforcing immigration laws? Ok.


Always remember the LD motto: "Sex isn't important!!!"
tech-novelist is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #137 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-13-2017, 11:48 AM
Member
 
Bibi1031's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: texas
Posts: 1,807
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by tech-novelist View Post
So then you are in favor of actually enforcing immigration laws? Ok.
Of course, I am American because my father was American and not because my folks decided that they could just cross the river and live here for years, procreate and then demand to "give me the rights that all Americans have".

My parents worked all their lives in America. My dad sold his crops to the local markets here in Texas. We spent time in Mexico because that is where my mother's family lived and her parents were pretty much loaded, but my father was dirt poor. While my mother's parents were well off, most of their wealth went to the males in that family, the two oldest males to be more exact.

The Mexican culture is complicated and males pretty much rule. My parents had 4 girls and only two boys. My mother didn't like that. She believed that her daughters had "almost" the same rights as her sons.

America is far greater than Mexico will ever be in pretty much everything. I would like for it to stay this way because I have children and grand children whose freedom and safety is at stake. Immigration is a huge problem from what I see going on in south Texas.

Good things come to those who wait...greater things come to those who get off their a$$ and do anything to make it happen.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Bibi1031 is offline  
post #138 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-13-2017, 11:49 AM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,822
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

There's a limit of 10,000 visas a year for investor green cards, compared to the overall nearly million per year.

http://www.eb5investors.com/qa/how-m...scis-each-year

These are subject to per country quota as well... The idea that tens of thousands of Mexicans are running daycare centers and nursing homes for green card purposes could use some more evidence. The mainland Chinese have overrun the program.

http://www.immigrationhelpla.com/blo...idents-mexico/
john117 is online now  
 
post #139 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-13-2017, 11:59 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,065
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by VladDracul View Post
If I understand you correctly, people in other middle eastern countries talking, "death to infidels" are no less dangerous and we are just as likely to import them as we are from these 7 countries. I generally agree. On the other hand, since any number of folks from this region have been shouting (and practicing), "death to infidel" for centuries, I don't think Trump's executive order did a hell of a lot to exacerbate things.
My "conspiracy" theory is, after of 9/11, the Arabs told Bush, "We'll give you Saddam as a scapegoat, but you leave our boy Osama alone". I mean how hard is it to pull a 6'5" Arab out of a haystack of middle eastern men with an average height of about 5-8 or 5-9.
Actually the Afghans did offer bin Ladin, all they asked for in return was some assurances and respect. But Bush needed a war to jump start the economy. So rather than give the Afghans a few billion dollars in aid in return for their acceding to our demands, we blew $3T and allowed thousands of our young men to die in the longest war in US history. But we showed them!
The whole purpose of the entire fruitless exercise was to prime the pump for the military spending that is bankrupting us.

At the center of every moMEnt of my life is ME!
Ynot is offline  
post #140 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-13-2017, 01:06 PM
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 5,519
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot View Post
Actually the Afghans did offer bin Ladin, all they asked for in return was some assurances and respect. But Bush needed a war to jump start the economy. So rather than give the Afghans a few billion dollars in aid in return for their acceding to our demands, we blew $3T and allowed thousands of our young men to die in the longest war in US history. But we showed them!
The whole purpose of the entire fruitless exercise was to prime the pump for the military spending that is bankrupting us.
You forgot making excuses for tightening down the police state, e.g., the so-called "PATRIOT Act".

Always remember the LD motto: "Sex isn't important!!!"
tech-novelist is offline  
post #141 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-13-2017, 03:14 PM
Member
 
VladDracul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 1,003
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by uhtred View Post
I don't follow this argument.

I don't see how terrorism affects cities or states in a way that accidents don't. Dam failures, aircraft crashes, chemical releases etc all can kill as many people as a large scale terrorist attack.

I don't see why terrorism shouldn't be viewed in the same way as those other risks.
Risk have a way of adding up. Think of it like this--you've just driven to work on a two lane road where teenagers and some stupid adults are texting while driving 60 mph, than through a neighbor known for gangs and drive by shooting, and you finally arrive at work only to find some radical Islamist in the elevator wearing a bomb vest. Your risk of ending up in a rubber bag from risk A+B+C are much greater than just risk A.

If you don't embody controversy, what you say will become just another part of the media driven culture of stifling thought and debate about issues.
VladDracul is offline  
post #142 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-13-2017, 04:11 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,909
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

But that is just a linear addition. The risk is just the sum of the risks, and I think that is intuitive to most people.

I am most likely to die of an age related illness.

Otherwise I'm most likely to die of a random illness - cancer, heart disease not associated with extreme old age.

Accidental death more me is mostly flying my airplane, but for most people its cars, guns, falls, etc.

Terrorism is not a large chance of death even including the small probability of large attacks.



Quote:
Originally Posted by VladDracul View Post
Risk have a way of adding up. Think of it like this--you've just driven to work on a two lane road where teenagers and some stupid adults are texting while driving 60 mph, than through a neighbor known for gangs and drive by shooting, and you finally arrive at work only to find some radical Islamist in the elevator wearing a bomb vest. Your risk of ending up in a rubber bag from risk A+B+C are much greater than just risk A.
uhtred is offline  
post #143 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-13-2017, 04:29 PM
Member
 
VladDracul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 1,003
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot View Post
Actually the Afghans did offer bin Ladin, all they asked for in return was some assurances and respect. But Bush needed a war to jump start the economy. So rather than give the Afghans a few billion dollars in aid in return for their acceding to our demands, we blew $3T and allowed thousands of our young men to die in the longest war in US history. But we showed them!
The whole purpose of the entire fruitless exercise was to prime the pump for the military spending that is bankrupting us.
I knew there was a conspiracy in there somewhere. While we babble endlessly about truth, fact, and reality, we mindlessly follow media constructed narratives. I said earlier that I think humans inherently create words, phrases, and labels that take the place of common sense and thought. Leaders in government and business use this weakness to persuade and ultimately control the majorities perspective and its not much of a stretch to know, in this world, perspective equals reality.

If you don't embody controversy, what you say will become just another part of the media driven culture of stifling thought and debate about issues.
VladDracul is offline  
post #144 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-13-2017, 07:44 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,065
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by VladDracul View Post
I knew there was a conspiracy in there somewhere. While we babble endlessly about truth, fact, and reality, we mindlessly follow media constructed narratives. I said earlier that I think humans inherently create words, phrases, and labels that take the place of common sense and thought. Leaders in government and business use this weakness to persuade and ultimately control the majorities perspective and its not much of a stretch to know, in this world, perspective equals reality.
Of course, it is all just some crazy conspiracy theory. How awfully stupid and inept of me to use an otherwise completely acceptable source for my allegation. How thoughtless of me! Anyways here is the link, if you care to prevue something outside of your apparent sphere of communication:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...tan.terrorism5

At the center of every moMEnt of my life is ME!
Ynot is offline  
post #145 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-13-2017, 09:27 PM
Member
 
VladDracul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 1,003
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

I wasn't clear. I was referring to the general population and not you directly. I was in college during the Viet Nam war Y. I know very well the wheelings and dealing that government is capable of doing. Like they use to say in Washington, "nothing wrong with us expecting people to die for their country, as long as its the right people dying for their country".


If you don't embody controversy, what you say will become just another part of the media driven culture of stifling thought and debate about issues.

Last edited by VladDracul; 02-13-2017 at 09:31 PM.
VladDracul is offline  
post #146 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-14-2017, 12:47 AM
Member
 
Wolfman1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 548
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot View Post
[COLOR="Red"]You can say my argument is dishonest only because you disagree with it, /COLOR]
No, I say it's intellectually dishonest NOT because I agree or disagree, but because it is parsing some sub-qualifier to hide behind a "technically correct" statement to give the wrong overall impression in this specific discussion. I know you're doing it, and it's pretty apparent you know it too.

That's the essence of intellectual dishonesty. If you really want to contribute an honest statement, then the relevant fact to this discussion would be that the risk of being killed by terrorism committed by ANY immigrant would be significantly higher, with deaths in the thousands since 9/11.

Here's the relevant link defining INTELLECTUAL HONESTY:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_honesty

Note this point from the wikipedia link:

Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted even when such things may contradict one's hypothesis;

Since the thread is about an executive order placing a temporary ban on ALL immigration from designated countries (not just refugees), and the court decision stopping the Executive Order was based on a motion from the State of Washington which had nothing to do with refugees AT ALL (their standing to bring the action had nothing to do with refugees), then it's pretty clear that that the RELEVANT FACTS AND INFORMATION would be about ALL immigrants not just refugees. Since you are omitting that, and instead spamming us with your irrelevant "3.6 billion" number, it's pretty clear you are failing to abide by the criteria for intellectual honesty.

So, no, it has nothing to do with "whether I agree with it", it has to do with the definition of intellectual honesty. You are, in fact, being intellectually dishonest.
Wolfman1968 is online now  
post #147 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-14-2017, 01:05 AM
Member
 
Wolfman1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 548
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by wild jade View Post
Nidal Hassan was a US Army major (other, later, Fort Hood shooter also US Army, btw)
Boston Bomber - American citizen (immigrated at age 8)
San Bernando shooting was an American born citizen
Orlando shootings, also an American citizen
'
I am fully aware of that. I have already conceded it was a rough approximation. I was just getting a rough total of terrorist death count since 9/11 to do a rough estimate of the death risk to Americans. I stated that it was very rough, and obviously will change according the the exact ratio of immigrants vs radicalized native-born terrorists. But for Ynot's "one in 3.6 billion" to have any relevance to the discussion (instead of his intellectually dishonest "refugee" qualifier) the "back of the envelope" estimate I offered would have to change by a factor of 2000. I think that more than 1 in 2000 of the terrorists since 9/11 have been immigrants.

Doesn't change the basic idea of the post.
Wolfman1968 is online now  
post #148 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-14-2017, 01:50 AM
Member
 
Wolfman1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 548
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot View Post
Actually the Afghans did offer bin Ladin, all they asked for in return was some assurances and respect. But Bush needed a war to jump start the economy. So rather than give the Afghans a few billion dollars in aid in return for their acceding to our demands, we blew $3T and allowed thousands of our young men to die in the longest war in US history. But we showed them!
The whole purpose of the entire fruitless exercise was to prime the pump for the military spending that is bankrupting us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot View Post
Anyways here is the link, if you care to prevue something outside of your apparent sphere of communication:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...tan.terrorism5

Your OWN SOURCE shows that you are telling distorted half-truths.

The Taliban didn't ask for assurance, they claimed they wanted "proof", which most people, including me, did not view this as an honest inquiry. They supported Bin Laden, allowed him to build his training camps, so I have no doubt that they knew damn well he was behind it. (In fact, this CBS news link from the time quotes the Taliban as admitting they communicated with Bin Laden through "Taliban security personnel who travel with him." Taliban Won't Turn Over Bin Laden - CBS News )

Furthermore, your own source does NOT say the Taliban promised to turn Bin Laden to the US, but rather a "third party country that could not be pressured by the US". Which is exactly how Bin Laden ended up in Afghanistan; he was in Sudan, due to pressure from that country he left for Afghanistan. So, indeed, the Taliban would not actually be turning him over to face justice, but rather letting him pull up stakes for another move.

Your repeated half-truths come across once again as intellectually dishonest. And I really can't believe that you or anyone would seriously believe that the Taliban, an organization with a record of hatred of other religions (just look at their destruction of 1700 year old Buddha statues), who blatantly allowed bin Laden and others to operate Islamic terrorist training camps, who committed flagrant war crimes on their own populace while gaining control of the country, have ANY credibility. Really? You believe the lies that come from them over statement from the US government?

And here's the bottom line. The Taliban clearly were aiding and abetting Bin Laden in the first place by letting him set up the terrorist camps in the first place, and by protecting him after the fact. Quite frankly, they have no room to negotiate, and they have essentially declared war on the United States. I think the US had moral right to obliterate them, no second chances. It's fine to discuss if it would be WISE to do so, which it well may not be, but morally, the US was attacked by them through their Bin Laden/Al-Qaida and the Taliban closed ranks with them, so there is NO QUESTION that the US could go to war on them with a clear conscience.

You just come across as an apologist for them, using half-truths.
Wolfman1968 is online now  
post #149 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-14-2017, 07:03 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,065
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfman1968 View Post
I am fully aware of that. I have already conceded it was a rough approximation. I was just getting a rough total of terrorist death count since 9/11 to do a rough estimate of the death risk to Americans. I stated that it was very rough, and obviously will change according the the exact ratio of immigrants vs radicalized native-born terrorists. But for Ynot's "one in 3.6 billion" to have any relevance to the discussion (instead of his intellectually dishonest "refugee" qualifier) the "back of the envelope" estimate I offered would have to change by a factor of 2000. I think that more than 1 in 2000 of the terrorists since 9/11 have been immigrants.

Doesn't change the basic idea of the post.
You really need to learn how to read and work with statistics. The fact is that you haven't refuted anything you are just confused lack of understanding, now you attempt to confuse everyone else. There were (using your average arbitrarily starting on 9/11) an average of 200 deaths per year (never mind the vast majority happened on one day and for which the current over hyped travel ban would have had no affect). That is 200 for a period of 365 days. Now take the population of the United States and multiply it by those same 365 days. You will get a very different figure. Or you can continue to trudge along in abject fear of the boogie man who is out to get you.

At the center of every moMEnt of my life is ME!
Ynot is offline  
post #150 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-14-2017, 07:03 AM
Member
 
wild jade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,586
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfman1968 View Post
I stated that it was very rough, and obviously will change according the the exact ratio of immigrants vs radicalized native-born terrorists. But for Ynot's "one in 3.6 billion" to have any relevance to the discussion (instead of his intellectually dishonest "refugee" qualifier) the "back of the envelope" estimate I offered would have to change by a factor of 2000. I think that more than 1 in 2000 of the terrorists since 9/11 have been immigrants.

Doesn't change the basic idea of the post.

It doesn't bother you that most of the examples you cited to demonstrate the threat of immigrant terrorists are actually American citizens? And you're now lecturing people on intellectual honesty?
wild jade is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on Talk About Marriage, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Important! Your username will be visible to the public next to anything you post and could show up in search engines like Google. If you are concerned about anonymity, PLEASE choose a username that will not be recognizable to anyone you know.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome