Executive Order has Nothing to do with National Security Intended to Provoke Iran

[Billy_Kinetta]

Guess it a matter of those who win the war get to choice the spoils? if this is true then WW2 gave the Jewish people the land .where are the legal borders?

It isn't true.

GRAND THEFT is more like it. Ask Menachem Begin and the Irgun Zionist gang.

.

I really liked those guys. Read "A History Of Zionism" by Walter Laqueur. A nice round study.

 

[Weatherman2020]

SCAM ALERT

The EO has NOTHING to DO with National Security. it only affects Shiite Muslims Intended to provoke Iran. Abuse of power


.

Great news, thanks!

 

[Weatherman2020]

Reason #5,693 why all funding to PBS should be eliminated.

 

[Contumacious]

Guess it a matter of those who win the war get to choice the spoils? if this is true then WW2 gave the Jewish people the land .where are the legal borders?

It isn't true.

GRAND THEFT is more like it. Ask Menachem Begin and the Irgun Zionist gang.

.

I really liked those guys. Read "A History Of Zionism" by Walter Laqueur. A nice round study.

You probably like Charles Manson. too.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Guess it a matter of those who win the war get to choice the spoils? if this is true then WW2 gave the Jewish people the land .where are the legal borders?

It isn't true.

GRAND THEFT is more like it. Ask Menachem Begin and the Irgun Zionist gang.

.

I really liked those guys. Read "A History Of Zionism" by Walter Laqueur. A nice round study.

You probably like Charles Manson. too.

Nope. Too Democrat for me.

 

[Contumacious]

"Many other foreigners have been convicted of terrorism-related offenses that did not include planning a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. One list released by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) details 580 terror-related convictions since 9/11. This incomplete list probably influenced which countries are temporarily banned, and likely provided justification for another section of Trump’s executive order, which directs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to release all information on foreign-born terrorists going forward, and requires additional DHS reports to study foreign-born terrorism.

I exhaustively evaluated Senator Sessions’ list of convictions based on publicly available data and discovered some startling details.

First, 241 of the convictions (42 percent) were not for terrorism offenses. Senator Sessions puffed his numbers by including “terrorism-related convictions,” a nebulous category that includes investigations that begin due to a terrorism tip but then end in non-terrorism convictions. My favorite examples of this are the convictions of Nasser Abuali, Hussein Abuali, and Rabi Ahmed. An informant told the FBI that the trio tried to purchase a rocket-propelled grenade launcher, but the FBI found no evidence supporting the accusation. The three individuals were instead convicted of receiving two truckloads of stolen cereal. That is a crime but it is not terrorism."

.

 

[Contumacious]

SCAM ALERT

The EO has NOTHING to DO with National Security. it only affects Shiite Muslims Intended to provoke Iran. Abuse of power


.

Trump’s Immigration Ban Is Illegal


"appellants claim the discrimination violates 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1152(a) of the INA. This section provides "no person shall ... be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person's ... nationality ... or place of residence." Appellants argue that the Department violated the statute in drawing an explicit distinction between Vietnamese nationals and nationals of other countries when refusing to process the visas of the screened out Vietnamese immigrants. Appellants assert this statute compels this court to invalidate any attempt to draw a distinction based on nationality in the issuance of visas. In contrast, appellees urge us to adopt the position that so long as they possess a rational basis for making the distinction, they are not in violation of the statute. Appellees maintain the goal of encouraging voluntary repatriation and the aims of the CPA certainly provide a rational basis for the practices and policies in question.


We agree with appellants' interpretation of the statute. Congress could hardly have chosen more explicit language. While we need not decide in the case before us whether the State Department could never justify an exception under the provision, such a justification, if possible at all, must be most compelling--perhaps a national emergency. We cannot rewrite a statutory provision which by its own terms provides no exceptions or qualifications simply on a preferred "rational basis." Cf. Haitian Refugee Ctr. v. Civiletti, 503 F.Supp. 442, 453 (S.D.Fla.1980) (under 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1152(a), INS has no authority to discriminate on the basis of national origin, except perhaps by promulgating regulations in a time of national emergency).


45 F.3d 469

310 U.S.App.D.C. 168

LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOR VIETNAMESE ASYLUM SEEKERS; Thua Van Le;
Em Van Vo; Thu Hoa Thi Dang; Truc Hoa Thi Vo, Appellants
v.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS, et al., Appellees

.










"

 

[Contumacious]

Acting Attorney General Orders Justice Dept. Not to Defend Refugee Ban

.