Valkyrie Riders Cruiser Club
November 22, 2025, 01:24:40 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Ultimate Seats Link VRCC Store
Homepage : Photostash : JustPics : Shoptalk : Old Tech Archive : Classifieds : Contact Staff
News: If you're new to this message board, read THIS!
 
MarkT Exhaust
Pages: [1]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Fed-up  (Read 1238 times)
98valk
Member
*****
Posts: 13661


South Jersey


« on: December 08, 2015, 05:49:25 PM »

http://100percentfedup.com/

how quickly the media forgets...
BOMBSHELL: President Carter Banned Iranians From America During Hostage Crisis
Logged

1998 Std/Tourer, 2007 DR200SE, 1981 CB900C  10speed
1973 Duster 340 4-speed rare A/C, 2001 F250 4x4 7.3L, 6sp

"Our Constitution was made only for a Moral and Religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the goverment of any other."
John Adams 10/11/1798
SteveC
Member
*****
Posts: 96


Honolulu, Hawaii


« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2015, 07:32:57 PM »

http://100percentfedup.com/

how quickly the media forgets...
BOMBSHELL: President Carter Banned Iranians From America During Hostage Crisis


Two points on this:
1) this is not true, despite the fact that several publications have repeated this.  Beware of historical 'facts' that have no history.

2) Trump advocates banning people based on their religious beliefs.  Illegal, immoral, and laughable.  He proposes that Immigration officers ask people if they're Muslim.  Of course anyone wanting to do us harm would never lie...
Logged
Jess from VA
Member
*****
Posts: 30866


No VA


« Reply #2 on: December 08, 2015, 07:50:47 PM »

It would not be illegal to ban (place a moratorium) on any immigration for muslims (and or from any primarily muslim population countries).  Potential immigrants do not have any of our Constitutional protections, nor should they.   It's certainly not immoral or laughable either.

While everyone is screaming bloody murder over this, Trump's idea is fundamentally sound and reasonable.

And it could be much easier, just stop ALL new immigration for a while.  (Leave a small loophole for select individuals we may really want or need)

We already have 11 million illegals to deal with as it is.  
Logged
rusty
Member
*****
Posts: 86


milaca, mn


« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2015, 08:09:01 PM »

It would not be illegal to ban (place a moratorium) on any immigration for muslims (and or from any primarily muslim population countries).  Potential immigrants do not have any of our Constitutional protections, nor should they.   It's certainly not immoral or laughable either.

While everyone is screaming bloody murder over this, Trump's idea is fundamentally sound and reasonable.

And it could be much easier, just stop ALL new immigration for a while.  (Leave a small loophole for select individuals we may really want or need)

We already have 11 million illegals to deal with as it is.    cooldude
Logged

peace man
98valk
Member
*****
Posts: 13661


South Jersey


« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2015, 03:06:44 AM »

our sane immigration laws were changed/destroyed by pres Johnson and sen kennedy.
back in the 60s while the USA was letting just about anybody in, the USSR and other countries only let in peoples with high education and skills.

The origins of illegal immigration date to the late nineteenth century. In 1875, a federal law was passed which prohibited entry of convicts and prostitutes. In 1882 President Chester A. Arthur banned almost all Chinese immigration to the United States, and shortly thereafter barred paupers, criminals and the mentally ill from entering. Although this affected only a small percentage of immigrants, there were now distinctions between legal and illegal immigration. Before this, immigration was barely regulated.

 Ellis Island, the New York portal for immigrants, opened in 1892 and became the nation’s premier federal immigration station. New arrivals were required to prove their identities, answer a series of questions, find a friend or relative who could vouch for them, and were scanned for physical ailments. When it ended operation in 1954, Ellis Island had processed over 12 million legal immigrants.

 During the large wave of immigration from 1881 to 1920, nearly 23½ million immigrants poured into the United States from all over the world. In 1921, Congress passed a Quota Law that reduced immigration to 357,000 a year and limited the number of immigrants from any one country. In 1924 immigration was reduced further to 160,000 a year, and in 1929, immigration was cut to 157,000 and quotas were again reset based on national origins in the 1920 U.S. Census. The rationale was that these laws would ensure the existing ethnic composition of the country and help assimilate the 15 million southern and eastern Europeans who had entered the previous forty years.

 However, the door was left open for Mexicans (who even then were desired by employers for their cheap labor) and northern Europeans. As history would show, this legal immigration led to illegal immigration and foreshadowed today’s debate on these topics. During the 1920s illegal immigration was the subject of heated Congressional debates. Edward H. Dowell, vice-president of the California Federation of Labor, testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Immigration in February of 1928 about the burden of the unrestricted flow of Mexicans on the state’s taxpayers, prisons, hospitals and American workers’ wages. He estimated that while 67,000 Mexicans entered the U.S. legally the prior year, many times that number entered illegally.

 Furthermore, a Los Angeles Times story from April 1926 noted that many of the ranch workers in California’s Imperial Valley entered the U.S. illegally without passing the (then) literacy test and did not pay the $18 entrance fee. In February of 1929, the U.S. House Immigration Committee heard testimony from government officials about problems at the border with both Canada and Mexico, including steps that were taken to eliminate the “visa mill” at Juarez (opposite El Paso), where were found “the most lax conditions imaginable in connection with inspection of persons wishing to enter the United States.” Visas were required for legal residency.

 Immigration dropped sharply during the lean years of the Great Depression. After the stock market crashed in 1929, the U.S. tightened visa rules which markedly reduced Mexican immigration. Local, state and federal government officials debated what to do with those already here. Some Mexicans repatriated themselves either voluntarily or under pressure from local welfare officials. Others were deported. Eventually between about 500,000 to 1,000,000 Mexicans left the United States between 1929 and 1939. This was due to deportation, as well as other factors such as the threat of deportation and acute unemployment.

 This repatriation began during President Herbert Hoover’s administration and reached its peak in the early 1930s. It also applied to all alien groups, not just Mexicans. Hoover believed they were taking jobs from Americans, and endorsed a vigorous effort to reduce legal and illegal entries and expel “undesirable aliens.” Deportations and repatriations of Mexicans and others decreased (along with legal immigration) during President Franklin Roosevelt’s administration, during the Great Depression, but did not end. In July 1935, for example, Roosevelt ordered a large deportation of alien criminals (such as mail robbers), but exempted Mexican and Canadian criminals due to the fear that they would sneak back in.

 Today’s high level of illegal immigration originated during the war years of the early 1940s. Labor shortages caused the federal government to set up a program to import Mexican laborers to work temporarily in agriculture, primary in the Southwest. This was called the Bracero Program. The goal was to import foreign workers (originally thought to number in the hundreds) during agricultural harvest and then encourage them to go home.

 Over the next two decades about 4.8 million Mexican workers came into the country and provided cheap labor to many U.S. employers. Although braceros were supposed to be hired only if an adequate number of Americans could not be found, employers preferred the foreign workers who were willing to work for lesser wages. The program finally ended in 1964 due to complaints from unions and Mexican-Americans that these foreigners were taking jobs from them. Not surprisingly, many of the former braceros reentered and worked in the U.S. illegally -- many for the same employers. Illegal immigration increased greatly during the years of the supposed “temporary work” Bracero Program. The Los Angeles Times reported in May 1950 that 21,000 Mexican nationals had “flooded across Mexican border into the United States during April” and complained about the overworked, understaffed border patrolmen and the “the endless wave of line jumpers, unprecedented in the nation’s history.” The argument about jobs “Americans won’t do” was recited by an employer, while the authorities stressed the need to enforce the law.

 During President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s first term, it was estimated that illegal Mexican border crossings had grown to about 1 million. Such a massive illegal workforce had a devastating impact on the wages of American workers. Eisenhower, concerned about corruption that resulted from the profits of illegal labor, took decisive action. In 1954 he appointed General Joseph Swing to head the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Shortly thereafter, “Operation Wetback” was launched. With only 1,075 Border Patrol agents, tens of thousands of illegal aliens were caught and sent back deep into Mexico. Hundreds of thousands more returned to their homeland voluntarily. Illegal immigration had dropped 95% by the end of the 1950s.

 But it was not to last, as seen in prior decades, after the 1965 Immigration Act passed, while legal immigration increased sharply, illegal immigration rose right along with it. As the Center for Immigration Studies noted, this increased immigration in part because Congress “shifted the legal preference system to family relations and away from employment needs and immigrant ability.” Senator Edward Kennedy said at the time: “The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society.” However, this bill spurred “chain migration” which fueled illegal immigration, along with a sense of entitlement amongst illegal immigrants. In subsequent decades, Mexico has become the primary source country of both legal and illegal immigration.

 Many illegal aliens also use the lure of “birthright citizenship,” (a/k/a “anchor babies”) to circumvent U.S. immigration laws and gain permanent residency, if not citizenship. This is a misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution that grants U.S. citizenship on those born on American soil, including children of illegal aliens. Illegal immigrants know that the odds are low that U.S. immigration authorities will deport them, if they have a child who is an American citizen (and who as a bonus also qualifies for taxpayer-funded benefits).

 Since the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, Congress has passed seven amnesties:

1. Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA), 1986: A blanket amnesty for over 2.7 million illegal aliens

2. Section 245(i) Amnesty, 1994: A temporary rolling amnesty for 578,000 illegal aliens

3. Section 245(i) Extension Amnesty, 1997: An extension of the rolling amnesty created in 1994

4. Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) Amnesty, 1997: An amnesty for close to one million illegal aliens from Central America

5. Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act Amnesty (HRIFA), 1998: An amnesty for 125,000 illegal aliens from Haiti

6. Late Amnesty, 2000: An amnesty for some illegal aliens who claim they should have been amnestied under the 1986 IRCA amnesty, an estimated 400,000 illegal aliens

7. LIFE Act Amnesty, 2000: A reinstatement of the rolling Section 245(i) amnesty, an estimated 900,000 illegal aliens


 The largest of these amnesties was the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) which amnestied about 3 million illegal aliens. This law was supposed to be a compromise -- an attempt to finally limit illegal immigration through strengthened border security and increased immigration enforcement against employers -- combined with amnesty for the millions of illegal workers in the United States. Illegal immigrants who had resided in the U.S. for five years and met other conditions received temporary legal status, which could be later upgraded to citizenship.

 President Ronald Reagan approved this “path to citizenship” amnesty due to what was believed to be a relatively small illegal immigrant population. Unlike many current politicians and amnesty proponents, Reagan called this what it was: amnesty. Unfortunately, there was widespread document fraud and the number of illegal aliens seeking amnesty far exceeded expectations. Most importantly, there was no political will to enforce the law against employers. The 1986 IRCA amnesty failed and actually led to millions of more people entering the United States illegally.

 While President Bill Clinton made some efforts to combat illegal immigration during the 1990s, the problem remained. In 1996 the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 was passed. Still, leaders from Central American and Caribbean nations relied heavily on untaxed remittances sent back to their countries from the United States, and worried that Clinton would support mass deportations. While at least paying lip service to enforcement of laws, Clinton assured these leaders that there would be no mass deportations. There were about 7 million illegal aliens residing in the U.S. when he left office.

 The eight years of President George W. Bush’s administration saw a marked increase in illegal immigration and a drop in immigration enforcement throughout much of his tenure. For example, the number of illegal aliens arrested in workplace cases fell from nearly 3,000 in 1999 to 445 in 2003, with the number of criminal cases against employers during this period falling from 182 to four. Not surprisingly, by 2005, there were an estimated 10-20 million illegal aliens living in the United States. Even at the end of 2007 after the Bush administration’s enforcement crackdown had been underway; only 92 criminal arrests of employers had taken place, in an economy that, according to the Washington Post, includes 6 million businesses that employ more than 7 million illegal foreign workers.

 Despite the failure of past amnesties and the fact that these increase illegal immigration, Bush repeatedly pushed mass legalization (amnesty) schemes for illegal immigrants using the well-worn line that they “are doing jobs Americans will not” or “are not” doing. One scheme was the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act 2007 which was defeated by widespread popular opposition.

 Today, over 1 million immigrants enter our country legally per year, while the illegal alien population grows by about 500,000 per year. Most of those who violate our borders and enter illegally come from Mexico and other Latin American countries. Only about 6 percent of the illegals come from Canada and Europe. Close to half of all illegal immigrants now residing in the U.S. did not enter illegally but rather overstayed their visas. Just as the federal government has historically failed to secure its borders, it has concurrently failed to closely monitor visa holders.

 About 12-20 million illegal aliens currently reside in the United States. California has more illegals than any other state, at about 2.4 million. Others states with high illegal alien populations include Texas, Florida and New York, although many states are now impacted.

 Americans of all backgrounds are still seriously concerned about the negative impact of illegal immigration, such as with the number of bankrupted hospitals, overcrowded schools, and increased crime. Taxpayers pay dearly for this, illustrating the high cost of so-called “cheap labor” for some unscrupulous employers and their political allies who for decades have watered down immigration laws. For example, in California alone, as of 2004 the net cost of illegal immigration to taxpayers is estimated to be nearly $9 billion annually.

 Despite Americans’ opposition to illegal immigration and amnesty, open border advocates are pressuring President Barack Obama to pass yet another mass amnesty for illegal aliens. These special interests and their allies in the mainstream media continually attempt to re frame the debate away from the core issues (e.g., illegality, sovereignty, overpopulation, fiscal costs), and redefine the terms used in the debate. The most common euphemisms for amnesty used by the open-border lobby are: “comprehensive immigration reform,” “pathway to citizenship,” “earned legalization,” “guest” or “temporary worker plan,” and bringing “undocumented immigrants” “out of the shadows.” Citizens concerned about illegal immigration should also be aware that pro-illegal alien advocates often offer the false choice between either mass deportation or mass amnesty. They say that since we can’t “round up and deport 12 million people” we have to provide them with a “pathway to citizenship” (i.e. amnesty).

 However, there is a common sense, humane and cost-effective way to solve the problem of illegal immigration, without resorting to either mass deportation or amnesty. This is called “attrition through enforcement” wherein if our existing immigration laws are consistently enforced and jobs cut off, the number of illegal aliens will return to their home countries over time. This middle-ground strategy is endorsed by real immigration reform groups such as ALIPAC and NumbersUSA.

 Acknowledgements: Special thanks to NumbersUSA for the history of amnesties.

http://www.endillegalimmigration.com/History_of_Illegal_Immigration_in_US/index.shtml
Logged

1998 Std/Tourer, 2007 DR200SE, 1981 CB900C  10speed
1973 Duster 340 4-speed rare A/C, 2001 F250 4x4 7.3L, 6sp

"Our Constitution was made only for a Moral and Religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the goverment of any other."
John Adams 10/11/1798
Patrick
Member
*****
Posts: 15433


VRCC 4474

Largo Florida


« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2015, 03:15:19 AM »

Plus I wonder how many actually listened to all of what Trump said, and, not just the lame stream sound bite.
Logged
hubcapsc
Member
*****
Posts: 16802


upstate

South Carolina


« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2015, 03:29:57 AM »

Plus I wonder how many actually listened to all of what Trump said, and, not just the lame stream sound bite.

That's the only way to listen to Trump... every week or so I watch the most recent
speech on Youtube... the difference, for example, between watching the four or five
guys start yelling, and then get escorted out of the room, and reading "TRUMP PROTESTERS
DISRUPT SPEECH" news stories was real interesting...

The image of Carl Icahn negotiating trade deals is hard to beat...

-Mike
Logged

Robert
Member
*****
Posts: 17398


S Florida


« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2015, 03:41:23 AM »

WOW JUST WOW I listened to TRUMP SPOKESPERSON Hammers it Home On Trump’s Moratorium On Refugees [Video] and it was really awesome. Finally a person shuts down with plain english with points that could not be disputed a tv interviewer trying to make Trump non politically correct statement sound bad. But all she did was give the Trump spokes person the ability to explain in a no nonsense way good sound points.  cooldude cooldude

Hey thanks for that site I never would have heard that video that was actually uplifting because of common sense.
http://100percentfedup.com/trump-spokesperson-hammers-it-home-on-trumps-moratorium-on-refugees-video/

Just one point on O and his immigration policies that no one is talking about O's executive orders on immigration that amount to a total disregard of what the people want. which at best is lawless and worst may be treason.

Appeals court keeps block on Obama immigration actions
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/obama-immigration-executive-order-supreme-court-215664
« Last Edit: December 09, 2015, 03:49:23 AM by Robert » Logged

“Some people see things that are and ask, Why? Some people dream of things that never were and ask, Why not? Some people have to go to work and don’t have time for all that.”
..
Member
*****
Posts: 27796


Maggie Valley, NC


« Reply #8 on: December 09, 2015, 05:39:03 AM »

How quickly Americans forget when a new "squirrel" comes into sight.

The southern border has once again been overwhelmed with illegal immigrants.
Logged
98valk
Member
*****
Posts: 13661


South Jersey


« Reply #9 on: December 09, 2015, 09:30:51 AM »


Peace loving?
 
https://youtu.be/7yGN8SlIEZ8

They are all peaceful until they read/learn that they must
KILL OR BE KILLED by any means necessary to get into their heaven.
Logged

1998 Std/Tourer, 2007 DR200SE, 1981 CB900C  10speed
1973 Duster 340 4-speed rare A/C, 2001 F250 4x4 7.3L, 6sp

"Our Constitution was made only for a Moral and Religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the goverment of any other."
John Adams 10/11/1798
Wizzard
Member
*****
Posts: 4043


Bald River Falls

Valparaiso IN


« Reply #10 on: December 09, 2015, 09:56:45 AM »

not withstanding the fact this is going on. http://www.ibtimes.com/immigration-reform-2015-cuban-migrants-texas-arriving-record-rates-amid-resumption-2091435

And they automatically get welfare due to some act passed some time ago.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/us-cuba-welfare-benefits/sfl-us-cuba-welfare-benefits-part-1-htmlstory.html

« Last Edit: December 09, 2015, 10:10:06 AM by Wizzard » Logged


VRCC # 24157
Patrick
Member
*****
Posts: 15433


VRCC 4474

Largo Florida


« Reply #11 on: December 09, 2015, 10:59:40 AM »

The Cubans are now going to Texas ?!  Interesting, didn't know that.

Maybe the welfare is better there than in Florida.
Logged
98valk
Member
*****
Posts: 13661


South Jersey


« Reply #12 on: December 09, 2015, 11:09:16 AM »

http://100percentfedup.com/

how quickly the media forgets...
BOMBSHELL: President Carter Banned Iranians From America During Hostage Crisis


Two points on this:
1) this is not true, despite the fact that several publications have repeated this.  Beware of historical 'facts' that have no history.

2) Trump advocates banning people based on their religious beliefs.  Illegal, immoral, and laughable.  He proposes that Immigration officers ask people if they're Muslim.  Of course anyone wanting to do us harm would never lie...


it seems u are incorrect my friend.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261062/carter-banned-iranians-coming-us-during-hostage-daniel-greenfield

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33233
Logged

1998 Std/Tourer, 2007 DR200SE, 1981 CB900C  10speed
1973 Duster 340 4-speed rare A/C, 2001 F250 4x4 7.3L, 6sp

"Our Constitution was made only for a Moral and Religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the goverment of any other."
John Adams 10/11/1798
Lyonardo
Member
*****
Posts: 206


« Reply #13 on: December 09, 2015, 12:33:09 PM »

http://100percentfedup.com/

how quickly the media forgets...
BOMBSHELL: President Carter Banned Iranians From America During Hostage Crisis


Two points on this:
1) this is not true, despite the fact that several publications have repeated this.  Beware of historical 'facts' that have no history.

2) Trump advocates banning people based on their religious beliefs.  Illegal, immoral, and laughable.  He proposes that Immigration officers ask people if they're Muslim.  Of course anyone wanting to do us harm would never lie...


it seems u are incorrect my friend.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261062/carter-banned-iranians-coming-us-during-hostage-daniel-greenfield

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33233

I usually stay out of these political conversations, but I'm just going to point out that what Carter did was expel the Iranian diplomatic staff from the US. That's a pretty common practice between nations when there are tensions, and has happened many times. Both by us, and against our own diplomats in other countries. I'm old enough to remember that time, and remember watching the press release at my grandpa's house when I was a teenager.
Carter didn't ban muslims, or even Iranian citizens. Just the staff of their ambassadors office, etc...
Logged
98valk
Member
*****
Posts: 13661


South Jersey


« Reply #14 on: December 09, 2015, 02:27:01 PM »

http://100percentfedup.com/

how quickly the media forgets...
BOMBSHELL: President Carter Banned Iranians From America During Hostage Crisis


Two points on this:
1) this is not true, despite the fact that several publications have repeated this.  Beware of historical 'facts' that have no history.

2) Trump advocates banning people based on their religious beliefs.  Illegal, immoral, and laughable.  He proposes that Immigration officers ask people if they're Muslim.  Of course anyone wanting to do us harm would never lie...


it seems u are incorrect my friend.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261062/carter-banned-iranians-coming-us-during-hostage-daniel-greenfield

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33233

I usually stay out of these political conversations, but I'm just going to point out that what Carter did was expel the Iranian diplomatic staff from the US. That's a pretty common practice between nations when there are tensions, and has happened many times. Both by us, and against our own diplomats in other countries. I'm old enough to remember that time, and remember watching the press release at my grandpa's house when I was a teenager.
Carter didn't ban muslims, or even Iranian citizens. Just the staff of their ambassadors office, etc...


he did more than the thorough tell the people everything news media reported to u back then. the links provide the info

"Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly. "

" Meanwhile here's how the Iranian students in the US were treated.

    Carter orders 50,000 Iranian students in US to report to immigration office with view to deporting those in violation of their visas. On 27 December 1979, US appeals court allows deportation of Iranian students found in violation.
"
Logged

1998 Std/Tourer, 2007 DR200SE, 1981 CB900C  10speed
1973 Duster 340 4-speed rare A/C, 2001 F250 4x4 7.3L, 6sp

"Our Constitution was made only for a Moral and Religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the goverment of any other."
John Adams 10/11/1798
BF
Member
*****
Posts: 9932


Fort Walton Beach, Florida I'm a simple man, I like pretty, dark haired woman and breakfast food.


« Reply #15 on: December 09, 2015, 06:30:39 PM »

http://100percentfedup.com/

how quickly the media forgets...
BOMBSHELL: President Carter Banned Iranians From America During Hostage Crisis


Two points on this:
1) this is not true, despite the fact that several publications have repeated this.  Beware of historical 'facts' that have no history.

2) Trump advocates banning people based on their religious beliefs.  Illegal, immoral, and laughable.  He proposes that Immigration officers ask people if they're Muslim.  Of course anyone wanting to do us harm would never lie...


Untill we wake up and realize that we are indeed in a war with a religion, then we'll keep on playing this political BS until we're all caring around prayer rugs.

The fact is is that elements of islam have declared war on us...in fact...they declared war on the entire world in the name of islam.  We ARE at war with islam whether anyone wants to admit it are not because they're sure as hell at war with us. 

There's nothing wrong with screening these people...or all out banning them until we can figure out and verify who they are. 

If members of that religion don't like that, then they can go back to whatever patch of dirt country that they came from. 

Logged

I can't help about the shape I'm in
I can't sing, I ain't pretty and my legs are thin
But don't ask me what I think of you
I might not give the answer that you want me to
 

Oss
Member
*****
Posts: 12765


The lower Hudson Valley

Ossining NY Chapter Rep VRCCDS0141


WWW
« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2015, 06:58:54 PM »

glad to see you back on the board BF

Been missing your contributions the past month or so

You must be regaining strength that was a good post   Cool
Logged

If you don't know where your going any road will take you there
George Harrison

When you come to the fork in the road, take it
Yogi Berra   (Don't send it to me C.O.D.)
G-Man
Member
*****
Posts: 7912


White Plains, NY


« Reply #17 on: December 10, 2015, 05:27:30 AM »

The Cubans are now going to Texas ?!  Interesting, didn't know that.

Maybe the welfare is better there than in Florida.

More jobs, maybe?
« Last Edit: December 10, 2015, 05:30:36 AM by G-Man » Logged
Alpha Dog
Member
*****
Posts: 1557


Arcanum, OH


« Reply #18 on: December 10, 2015, 07:00:38 AM »

That was some very very good info 98VALK.  Sheds a lot of light on the ongoing problem for  many many years and not just today.  It comes down to Big Business and Farms want cheap labor.  The Dems want the vote that these poor and not to smart folks tend to give them.

Just love how Trump is being attacked viciously by all the policy wonks when his policy, of a moratorium is, what has traditionally been used and in light of all the radical attacks that have transpired here and around the world, obviously makes the most since.  FBI Director Comey says they can not be vetted when no records exist.  And even if they do how do we know what is in their heart.  A whole bunch of fellow employees found this out in San Berdo recently.  Also it takes up to 30 Fbi angents to track one person and currently there are over 1000 ( who knows what the real number is ) terror suspects.  We do not have the means to track all those that mean us harm.  Best bet, just shut them out, jeepers what could be easier.   I have to laugh at Shemp II and all the others that say this is not who we are.  Well it has been who we are and it better be who we are.  Besides that is there opinion and spin and does not represent the majority of Americans who want to be safe and can not trust the current power structure.

After all this brew ha ha, CBS poll just came out and Trump is up even more.   Man those establishment Repubs who are in overtime now against him have really got there work cut out.  Maybe they should just let him be.  Back in the 70s I saw the Rockefeller wing try to do the same to Reagan.  They all worship him now, but only in speech only.  They still can not stand he was not Ivy league and country club.  It is all about power and they do not want to lose it.
Chuck
Logged
Patrick
Member
*****
Posts: 15433


VRCC 4474

Largo Florida


« Reply #19 on: December 10, 2015, 07:36:21 AM »

The Cubans are now going to Texas ?!  Interesting, didn't know that.

Maybe the welfare is better there than in Florida.

More jobs, maybe?





The Mexicans have taken all the jobs in Florida.  Grin
Logged
Lyonardo
Member
*****
Posts: 206


« Reply #20 on: December 10, 2015, 01:22:39 PM »

http://100percentfedup.com/

how quickly the media forgets...
BOMBSHELL: President Carter Banned Iranians From America During Hostage Crisis


Two points on this:
1) this is not true, despite the fact that several publications have repeated this.  Beware of historical 'facts' that have no history.

2) Trump advocates banning people based on their religious beliefs.  Illegal, immoral, and laughable.  He proposes that Immigration officers ask people if they're Muslim.  Of course anyone wanting to do us harm would never lie...


it seems u are incorrect my friend.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261062/carter-banned-iranians-coming-us-during-hostage-daniel-greenfield

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33233

I usually stay out of these political conversations, but I'm just going to point out that what Carter did was expel the Iranian diplomatic staff from the US. That's a pretty common practice between nations when there are tensions, and has happened many times. Both by us, and against our own diplomats in other countries. I'm old enough to remember that time, and remember watching the press release at my grandpa's house when I was a teenager.
Carter didn't ban muslims, or even Iranian citizens. Just the staff of their ambassadors office, etc...


he did more than the thorough tell the people everything news media reported to u back then. the links provide the info

"Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly. "

" Meanwhile here's how the Iranian students in the US were treated.

    Carter orders 50,000 Iranian students in US to report to immigration office with view to deporting those in violation of their visas. On 27 December 1979, US appeals court allows deportation of Iranian students found in violation.
"


Gotcha. Still, that's a much more narrow approach than what Trump is proposing.
I understand the urge to point the finger at all muslims. Here's my opinion why we shouldn't:

If the US is going to take a leadership role in this fight, let's unite all the forces from the local muslim countries, and the western allies as well and attack isil on all fronts.
Right now there IS a war, but it's between the isil terrorists, and a big chunk of the middle east. Yes, those fools have attacked a few Americans (even one was too much!) and a couple hundred French citizens but they have killed tens of thousands of muslim people in the middle east. What they want is to win over, or enslave the entire middle east.
Yes, the US, Russia, France and a few more have dropped some bombs in the fight against isil, but Iraq, Syria, Turkey and the Khurds, as well as other countries in that region are actually in a full on war with isil.
My point is, since a large chunk of countries in the middle east are fighting against isil now, I don't agree with lumping them all together. If isil wants to slaughter Syrians, let's train all those men and send them back to fight for their own homes! If the Khurds are winning battles against isil, let's help them coordinate and provide them with intel!
It doesn't pay for us to view "all muslims" as our enemy here. We should be actively working to help them take isil out... but ultimately it's their fight.
If isil is able to enslave or win over all of the muslim opposition, THAT's when they'll become a real problem for us.
Logged
Moonshot_1
Member
*****
Posts: 5142


Me and my Valk at Freedom Rock


« Reply #21 on: December 10, 2015, 02:21:21 PM »



Gotcha. Still, that's a much more narrow approach than what Trump is proposing.
I understand the urge to point the finger at all muslims. Here's my opinion why we shouldn't:

If the US is going to take a leadership role in this fight, let's unite all the forces from the local muslim countries, and the western allies as well and attack isil on all fronts.
Right now there IS a war, but it's between the isil terrorists, and a big chunk of the middle east. Yes, those fools have attacked a few Americans (even one was too much!) and a couple hundred French citizens but they have killed tens of thousands of muslim people in the middle east. What they want is to win over, or enslave the entire middle east.
Yes, the US, Russia, France and a few more have dropped some bombs in the fight against isil, but Iraq, Syria, Turkey and the Khurds, as well as other countries in that region are actually in a full on war with isil.
My point is, since a large chunk of countries in the middle east are fighting against isil now, I don't agree with lumping them all together. If isil wants to slaughter Syrians, let's train all those men and send them back to fight for their own homes! If the Khurds are winning battles against isil, let's help them coordinate and provide them with intel!
It doesn't pay for us to view "all muslims" as our enemy here. We should be actively working to help them take isil out... but ultimately it's their fight.
If isil is able to enslave or win over all of the muslim opposition, THAT's when they'll become a real problem for us.

[/quote]

Well, here's my opinion.

Trump is correct. An immediate, but  temporary, moratorium on Muslim immigrants particularly from Islamic countries is needed. When we arrive at a real comprehensive plan to vet and deal with such immigration with embedded terrorist then we can relax the moratorium.

We know that the likes of ISIS are embedding themselves in the mass of immigrants coming out of these countries. The attack on Paris, the attack on San Bernardino makes this self evident.

Our own national security agencies publicly say that many of these refugees cannot be vetted.

The likes of ISIS, al-qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and other like organizations are simply the militant arm of Islam. Nothing extremist about them really. At least relative to Islam. They are readily supported by Muslims in general. Rarely if ever condemned by the leadership of Islam.

The war in the middle east between the likes of ISIS and Syria is for all intents and purposes, tribal warfare. The whole place has been ruled by brutal dictators and monarchs for centuries. None of them have EVER been deposed by a kinder and gentler dictator or monarch. That is not how that works.

Should we view all Muslims as the enemy? Not necessarily, but

 the culture they embrace includes, beheading, genital mutilation, and allowing for, what we in the western culture would consider, atrocities against women and children and non muslims. These are not ancient standards of Islam. They are the current standards of Islam, practiced today, not by ISIS but by Muslims in general in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, etc. Iran is having a women STONED TO DEATH.

So I got not problem taking a hard line on the issue. Remember, we are discussing not allowing entry into the country for a temporary time. We are not discussing beheading them.



 
Logged

Mike Luken 
 

Cherokee, Ia.
Former Iowa Patriot Guard Ride Captain
BF
Member
*****
Posts: 9932


Fort Walton Beach, Florida I'm a simple man, I like pretty, dark haired woman and breakfast food.


« Reply #22 on: December 10, 2015, 02:30:13 PM »

glad to see you back on the board BF

Been missing your contributions the past month or so

You must be regaining strength that was a good post   Cool

Thanks Oss.   cooldude
Logged

I can't help about the shape I'm in
I can't sing, I ain't pretty and my legs are thin
But don't ask me what I think of you
I might not give the answer that you want me to
 

Patrick
Member
*****
Posts: 15433


VRCC 4474

Largo Florida


« Reply #23 on: December 13, 2015, 12:46:19 PM »

That San Bernadino shooter [ malik] passed 3 checks and was issued a visa.

Yep, our vetting can be trusted.  There is no  need to worry about women and orphans.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
Print
Jump to: