The Muslim Ban Has Begun!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ElectricFetus, Jan 26, 2017.

  1. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Ah, now you are trying to change the goalposts. Nice try! But I never said "most Americans follow the Pope." I said that he is by far the most influential leader within Christianity, and is the explicit leader for more than half of Christians worldwide.
    Wrong on both.
    I agree. Republicans, however, no longer represent Christianity or Christian ideals.
    And GW Bush has made deals with the country the 9/11 terrorists came from. He had business dealings with Bin Laden's brother, and gave approval for Bin Laden's family to escape the US via private jet during the no-fly period. He ignored a briefing entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US" that listed airlines and iconic buildings as targets - and that briefing was given to him a month before 9/11. So a similar amount of culpability there as well.
    If someone demands his country do non-Christian things, they are not expressing Christian ideals. If they spend time, money and effort trying to implement their non-Christian ideals, then they are Christian in name only. Their faith is dead.

    But don't take my word for it. From someone much wiser than me:

    James 2 -
    What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

    Not building walls, not banning travel and not making screenings even longer and more difficult would be cheaper, not more expensive. So you fail there as well.
    Funny how "real Christians" are never short of reasons why they can't actually BE Christian; it's just too hard!
    I agree. So cancel the wall. Cancel the ban. Cancel the expensive screenings. I am sure you will agree that bankrupting the country in the name of making refugees and immigrants suffer is neither Christian nor good for America. And if you do agree to such a commonsense conclusion, congratulations! You are well on your way to abandoning the farce that the GOP has become.
     
    Quantum Quack likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    So why were YOU concerned about which god?

    Are you concerned Ra has gotten into his mind?

    Is that your worry?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Truck Captain Stumpy The Right Honourable Reverend Truck Captain Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,263
    Uhm... not quite.
    let me explain

    the commander in chief (or a commander in the military) can issue all the orders they want, but if it is not a lawful order, or it is not within the mandate of the military or it's mission, or within the legal and operational realm of the military, then there is no requirement to follow the order per the UCMJ

    it can be considered and left to the discretion of the recipient to act upon, but if it is later found to be unlawful then said act upon the order makes said person culpable under the UCMJ and or any other applicable laws, and said person can be prosecuted for acting upon said order (especially now that the military is all volunteer)

    if the order violates the constitution (as in: it directly can be stated or explained that said order is a violation of a constitutional right) or is a violation of the Geneva convention (or similar laws of engagement), then it is the responsibility of the soldier, airman, marine, seaman or coastie to refuse the order on the grounds of it's legality
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Too bad - he's sworn to uphold the Constitution, and the Constitution says he has to abide by them whether he trusts them or not.
    That's our protection from somebody like him, speaking of trust.
    He's Commander in Chief of the US military forces. We're not in them. We don't have Commanders - we're civilians. We employ him to do the job of President, and we expect him not to fuck up like this when he's working for us.
    Paying your taxes is mentioned in the Bible, in a couple of different places. It's in one of the more famous stories in the New Testament, for example: Jesus tells Christians to pay their taxes, and quit bitching about it.
    Every newspaper and historical account you've ever read in your life, your memories from years past, plus what you see on the TV machine.
    Ok, maybe you don't read, and can't remember anything more than a couple months. But you can still watch TV.
    Yes, it does - they have to cross the border. National travel and immigration policy is directly involved.
     
  8. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Suffice to respond with :
    Just because Trump fits the typical profile of a major figure in a "secret male dominated" organization that has significant presence in the USA doesn't mean he is a major figure in a "secret male dominated" organization that has significant presence in the USA.
    An organization that have an Anglo Protestant Christian facade, an old testament leaning, whose actual allegiance to a divinity is unable to be publicly determined.
    How do I get this suspicion?
    I have had the misfortune of having to deal with 3 senior members of this organization (chapters outside the USA) on 3 separate occasions and the behavioral similarities are striking and uncanny.

    I'll let your imagination fill in what ever blanks it throws up....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2017
  9. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    I agree I agree I agree is that clear I agree

    The Order was

    taken to Court to

    rule (judge) if if if the Order

    was LEGAL

    THE COURT DID NOT MAKE ANY JUDGEMENT ON THAT

    In effect the Court ruled there was some disruption to various parties and ' stop it '

    So as I follow the situation

    POTUS has the power to make Executive Orders (but not illegal ones <<--- I agree)

    POTUS made a Executive Order (I would think it would have been partly cheçked but vetted or not, and I don't think it is mandated it MUST be vetted)

    The department made a stuff up of implementation (part of which lays with POTUS)

    Some lawyers are upset about the disruption caused (and on the basis of the disruption went to Court)

    The Court ruled on the disruption in effect saying ' naughty POTUS you made a Executive Order which caused disruptions)

    But did not judge if the Executive Order was or was not LEGAL

    And so my Lords Ladies and Gentlemen I rest my case

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    and further if a Judge is presented with a request to review the order and finds the orders legality to be dubious then he MUST suspend that order so that it can be reviewed by those more capable of making that decision as to do other wise is to declare the order legal...which he can not do if he finds the order's legality dubious.
     
    Truck Captain Stumpy likes this.
  11. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    True

    and the Constitution says he has to abide

    and it also gives POTUS the power to issue Executive Orders

    I stand corrected and informed

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    My 2 neurones do not have room for imagination and they keep taking their medications to stop throwing up

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,451
    Hmm. The influence of the "Israel Lobby" on the neocons that drove the decision to invade Iraq has been well documented by respected academics. However these authors have been very careful to avoid words with loaded connotations, such as "Zionist" , or words that are dangerously misleading such as "Jewish" (the Israeli Lobby was/is primarily what one might call "Likudnik", i.e an extension into the US of a particular Israeli political mindset, by no means shared by Jews in general).
     
  14. Medium Dave Registered Member

    Messages:
    48
    Lol. So if the Jewish lobby is a main factor, one can't say that because not all Jews are in the Jewish lobby? Wow, sounds logical and not contrived.
     
  15. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    That is a common misconception among white supremacist.

    Reality tells us otherwise.

    It would help if you actually did some research before spouting off on this site.

    You have yet to demonstrate that they were a "main factor".

    They weren't.

    Are you aware that most Jews in Congress actually voted against going to war with Iraq, both times?

    What is lacking in logic and what is absolutely contrived is your fake outrage and the target of said outrage.

    Look dude, we have seen the likes of you come through this site too many times to count and it never ends well. How long you remain here will depend entirely on your conduct. I have advised you of the rules of this site. The rest is up to you. But don't think for a minute that you have fooled anyone here.
     
    Truck Captain Stumpy likes this.
  16. Medium Dave Registered Member

    Messages:
    48
    Well, too busy to cover this in detail now. Some food for thought.

    "
    At the outset, it must be clearly seen that Jewish Zionists perceived Saddam Hussein's Iraq as one of Israel's most dangerous enemies. Hence, wouldn't it be nice, so this Zionist logic went, to goad America into utilizing all of its military might to destroy one of Israel's worst enemies? Simply put, many Jewish Zionists have long relished the thought of America doing Israel's "dirty work." This was revealed in an article that appeared in Cleveland,

    Ohio's main Jewish community paper, CLEVELAND JEWISH NEWS:

    "Some normally outspoken Jewish activists are deliberately muting their most fervent wish-that the [Bush] administration deal with the Iraqi military threat in a decisive way - out of fear of an anti-semitic backlash that could be a by-product of a costly and protracted Persian Gulf War."1

    The PLAIN DEALER (Cleveland, Ohio) pointed out that Israel's contemporaneous Prime Minister, Yitzhak Shamir, actively encouraged the U.S.-led alliance to continue the war effort until Iraq's military machine was destroyed and Saddam was removed from power. The article added: "In pursuing their [Israeli] interests, Israeli officials have sometimes played down the difficulties Allied forces face in fighting Iraq."2

    The American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is one of the most powerful of all political lobbying organizations in the United States. In a rare but quite candid WALL STREET JOURNAL article, it was pointed out that AIPAC's efforts were crucial in gaining Congressional approval for President George H.W. Bush's war plans. But even more importantly, the article revealed this immensely powerful Zionist organization worked "behind-the-scenes" and consciously disguised its efforts to garner Congressional approval for the war.3

    CLEVELAND JEWISH NEWS stated:

    "Most Jewish groups lined up behind the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations to support publicly the president's policy. How hard they actually worked is unclear. Many senators and representatives reported getting calls from Jewish leaders and constituents. The effort was kept low-profile largely out of sensitivity to possible accusations of turning the [pro-war] resolution into an 'Israel vote.'"4

    In politics, when a concerted effort is kept low profile, it means that an attempt is being made to hide the effort from public scrutiny.

    These pro-war efforts were kept low profile in order to hide from public scrutiny how certain Jewish-Zionists were pushing for a Gulf war."

    http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/war/iraq/campaign.shtml
     
  17. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    I have this weird habit of supporting my arguments. Something you are yet to do.

    Sweet Liberty?

    Is this meant to be a joke?

    After checking your source, I found that they are 9/11 conspiracy theorists who also have threads on "weather modification" and even chemtrails..

    Are you sure you want to go with that website and their arguments on this site?
     
  18. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Problem being that these laws are only meaningful if there is someone to enforce them...

    As the numerous conflicts of interest of the Trump administration have shown... nobody has the spine to do so.
     
    Truck Captain Stumpy likes this.
  19. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,451
    I think this must the first time I've seen someone taken to task for supporting their arguments.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
  21. Medium Dave Registered Member

    Messages:
    48
    Arguments? Lol. You hyperlink to an article the title of which you like and expect your opponent to go through it and make your argument for you. The papers you link to are easily debunked too. Clearly you're unable to articulate what they are saying. It's really the laziest, most arrogant, and downright pathetic "debate" style I've ever seen. It's even more sad that you seem so quick to label cherry picking a paper because you like the conclusion "science". You're an absolute joke.

    And now you commit the genetic fallacy.
     
  22. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    You can just say Israel. Israel perceived Saddam Hussein to be one of their enemies, and they lobbied in favor of regime change, which is their right. So what? We were free to ignore them.
     
  23. Medium Dave Registered Member

    Messages:
    48
    Do you honestly think Jewish Americans pay no attention to Israeli affairs? The members of this board seem to post nothing but obvious lies. It's rather odd.
     

Share This Page