Radio Paradise

Recently Active Forum Topics:

Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 1158, 1159, 1160 ... 1351, 1352, 1353 Next

Post to this Topic

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 6, 2017 - 10:34am

NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

Well, that's interesting. I was under the impression the US had one of the tightest vetting processes worldwide. But isn't it simply the job of the immigration department to decide these things? Are you saying they are not doing their job? Or that there are no laws in place?

You are totally ignoring my point. That is ... what the distinction between legal and illegal encompasses and why it matters. You have yet to answer if you still agree on the distinction, given the parameters that I attach to it. These are the same parameters that Trump is using.

So unless we reach an agreement on the parameters, your agreeing on the distinction without these parameters means nothing.

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Feb 6, 2017 - 8:03am
...Mr. Bannon remains the president’s dominant adviser, despite Mr. Trump’s anger that he was not fully briefed on details of the executive order he signed giving his chief strategist a seat on the National Security Council,...

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Feb 6, 2017 - 5:17am
Supporters of President Trump rally in Portland ...all eight of them.

Skydog

Skydog Avatar

Posted: Feb 6, 2017 - 5:06am
4:01am? wild superbowl party just winding down, new meaning to a coke and a smile

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Feb 6, 2017 - 4:43am

NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender:

Posted: Feb 6, 2017 - 1:27am

kurtster wrote:

I feel the exact opposite and strongly so. That I make this distinction and have over the many years here is the primary basis for calling me among other things anti immigrant (period), racist, bigoted, Islamaphobic and xenophobic. It is a foundation of the Democratic party and its members (and especially the MSM) to ignore this distinction and vilify those who make this distinction. The majority here have insisted on using the term undocumented immigrant. That is well established. Also a purpose and use of political correctness which prevents honest discussions on the subject.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 6, 2017 - 1:04am

BlueHeronDruid wrote:

Innocent question: Do you think the immigrants turned away by the Muslim ban were illegal?

First off, it was not a Muslim ban, it was a ban from travel from a list of 7 countries that are predominantly Muslim. Calling it a Muslim ban is wrong on that basis. Muslims from the rest of the world were unaffected. I do however understand that interpretation. But to your question, no, those turned away were not illegal, imo, to the best of my knowledge. They had their paperwork in order to the best of my knowledge and were playing by the rules. They were caught up in a poorly executed executive order. I do agree with the purpose of a temporary freeze on travel from these countries to figure out who we should and should not let in.

BlueHeronDruid

BlueHeronDruid Avatar

Location: Заебани сме луѓе

Posted: Feb 6, 2017 - 12:47am

kurtster wrote:

Innocent question: Do you think the immigrants turned away by the Muslim ban were illegal?

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 6, 2017 - 12:37am

NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

which makes everything that follows meaningless.

No, it doesn't. Nobody is denying a distinction between legal and illegal immigration. At least nobody that I know. Even your nemesis, Merkel, upholds this distinction and many asylum seekers are turned down in Germany and deported. No one is denying that the US has a right to do the same.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 6, 2017 - 12:18am

NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

Can I keep a running score on things we agree on?

First principle.
There is a distinction between legal and illegal immigration.

Kurtster and NoEnz hold this to be self-evident.

Great.

Now what I make of this distinction is that those who make this distinction believe that those who immigrate here legally respect this country, its borders and its Constitution and the people who are citizens and live here legally. Those who do not make this distinction and that includes citizens, do not respect this country, its borders and its Constitution, nor its citizens and those who played by the rules and came here legally. And the latter includes those who insist on substituting the term undocumented for illegal and believe in among other things, Sanctuary Cities whose very foundation is to ignore the laws of this land and puts illegal immigrants ahead of the county's citizens and laws.

If we can agree on this, we can move on.

NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender:

Posted: Feb 5, 2017 - 11:18pm
Can I keep a running score on things we agree on? First principle. There is a distinction between legal and illegal immigration. Kurtster and NoEnz hold this to be self-evident.

NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender:

Posted: Feb 5, 2017 - 11:16pm

kurtster wrote:

This is the first principle that you fail to acknowledge which makes everything that follows meaningless.

I insist on the distinction between legal and illegal immigrant. ..

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 5, 2017 - 11:10pm

NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

PS: oh, you mean this:

yeah, that is a principle. A country should have borders to protect its laws. Not sure that is quite true to be honest. I took from this that your primary goal was to protect the constitution. Are you saying I got you wrong on this?

This is the first principle that you fail to acknowledge which makes everything that follows meaningless.

I insist on the distinction between legal and illegal immigrant. ..

NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender:

Posted: Feb 5, 2017 - 10:50pm

PS: oh, you mean this:

kurtster wrote:

I share the same belief that a country without respected borders is not a country and what ever laws are in place, they could only be considered transient and malleable based upon expediency and convenience only. It renders the US Constitution meaningless as only the country called the USA can defend it and its worth within its borders. It applies no where else.

yeah, that is a principle. A country should have borders to protect its laws. Not sure that is quite true to be honest. I took from this that your primary goal was to protect the constitution. Are you saying I got you wrong on this?

NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender:

Posted: Feb 5, 2017 - 10:37pm

kurtster wrote:

This is where it all falls apart. You ask me for my thoughts, yet condemn me and tell me how I feel, regardless of what I say. What is the point of continuing ? You tell me that you already know even though I tell you something else.

This weekend I see people around the world telling the USA who we are supposed to let in our country and how we are supposed to do it. There is something totally wrong with that. Only the USA says how that works. Its our country. Not the world's country. Apparently I'm the only one who is asking WTF is wrong with this. The USA is still a sovereign nation. It / we decides who can come in and why. Not other countries, not the United Nations, not foreigners, not bully's, not protesters in other lands, not people who want to do harm to this country.

What I stated above in the quoted section is clearly a principle. It is not based on fear at any level. It is based upon the respect for this country and our Constitution. Yeah its a shame and a pity that you fail to see a principle for what it is. You hear me, but you don't listen to what I am saying. You have prejudged me and can only see me in what ever those terms are you have established. There is no point to continuing this discussion. You can only see me as someone unprincipled cowering in a corner, drooling on myself crying for my mommy.

Later.

nice image.

Kurtster, what I think about you is totally irrelevant to the discussion. I actually give a shit how you, or I for that matter, feel on this at any given moment. In fact, I am deliberately trying to keep emotions out of it. I am giving you a fair chance to demonstrate to me your principles. I sincerely do want to know what they are. You claim you have stated one in the quoted section above.. um above? Where? (EDIT: my mistake, see next entry) If you mean "protecting the constitution" then that is what I would call a second level principle. The first level principles would be the ones written in the constitution.

In other words, I am measuring current US immigration policy on US ideals.. nobody, and least of all me, is questioning US sovereignty. (Given the power of the US military, any "telling" the US what to do would be a rather futile exercise, wouldn't it? And you know it.)

Remember these words:

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.

Now, if you can explain to me how Trump's ban in any way is an expression of this ideal. I would be happy to hear it. What are the principles underlying this blanket ban on seven countries?

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 5, 2017 - 9:59pm

NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

kurtster wrote:

Immigration
I, insist on the distinction between legal and illegal immigrant. ..
I share the same belief that a country without respected borders is not a country and whatever laws are in place, they could only be considered transient and malleable based upon expediency and convenience only. It renders the US Constitution meaningless as only the country called the USA can defend it and its worth within its borders.

Ok, on this topic you are obviously afraid only about certain kinds of immigrants coming into the country,

This is where it all falls apart. You ask me for my thoughts, yet condemn me and tell me how I feel, regardless of what I say. What is the point of continuing ? You tell me that you already know even though I tell you something else.

This weekend I see people around the world telling the USA who we are supposed to let in our country and how we are supposed to do it. There is something totally wrong with that. Only the USA says how that works. Its our country. Not the world's country. Apparently I'm the only one who is asking WTF is wrong with this. The USA is still a sovereign nation. It / we decides who can come in and why. Not other countries, not the United Nations, not foreigners, not bully's, not protesters in other lands, not people who want to do harm to this country.

What I stated above in the quoted section is clearly a principle. It is not based on fear at any level. It is based upon the respect for this country and our Constitution. Yeah its a shame and a pity that you fail to see a principle for what it is. You hear me, but you don't listen to what I am saying. You have prejudged me and can only see me in what ever those terms are you have established. There is no point to continuing this discussion. You can only see me as someone unprincipled cowering in a corner, drooling on myself crying for my mommy.

Later.

oldviolin

oldviolin Avatar

Location: esse quam videri
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 5, 2017 - 8:11pm
Didn't see Trump coming? Really? I don't believe you...

Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: The foot of Mount Belzoni
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 5, 2017 - 7:59pm

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Feb 5, 2017 - 2:40pm
After Trump moves to undo financial regulations, Sanders calls him "a fraud"

R_P

Gender:

Posted: Feb 5, 2017 - 1:09pm

Skydog wrote:

O'Reilly pressed on, declaring to the president that “Putin is a killer.”

Unfazed, Trump didn't back away, but rather compared Putin's reputation for extrajudicial killings with the United States'.

“There are a lot of killers. We have a lot of killers,” Trump said. “Well, you think our country is so innocent?”

this is from an interview Trump did with Bill O'Reilly and I just don't get his Russia/Putin thing
is it about money? does the new Sec of Sate want to pump all that crude that Russia has and Trump wants to build new hotels or whatever in Russia?
even for them that just doesn't seem that important
so how about this senerio?
Steve Bannon has said that "war with China is inevitable, no doubt about that".
Is Trump recruiting Russia as an ally to fight China?

just thinking outloud

Trump, like his recent predecessors, has joined this list of extrajudicial killers with his recent Yemen "win".

Personal motives for Trump are hard to fathom, but I suspect in part it's naked power, authoritarianism, and machismo. The rest is geopolitics as advised by the well-established president whisperers.

Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 1158, 1159, 1160 ... 1351, 1352, 1353 Next