The Supreme Court voted 9-0 to uphold most of the Travel Ban (pending further review).

No matter how hard I've tried to explain it to liberals, they just COULDN'T get through their thick skulls:

The U.S.Constitution DOES NOT APPLY to foreigners OUTSIDE the U.S.!

One of the things that I've always told them, is that when our government was first formed, it's first priorities were to protect our borders and preserve our rights. One of those rights is not to get blown up.

"Protect the borders" and the right to "Not be blown up. You have never actually read the constitution have you?

Firstly...that is not a GREAT reading on the War for Independence...our Borders were the QUESTION (do we get them or does the Empire control it all. Canada was a situational threat not existential...and Spain and France fell apart in the European wars for/over New World Empire.).

But HERE....YOUR RIGHTS are being compromised - in the name of statistically insignificant "Threat", of our OWN CREATION.

I doubt that we'll solve the world's problems by meme-ing in tbe comment section (though stranger things have happened...respect the 100 other monkeys reading this. Including the author...) - But we ARE likely to perpetuate them if we don't ACTIVELY work to elevate not only our own understanding and conciousnesses - but those of others as well.

These are COMPLEX issues reaching broadly across disciplines...sound bytesdo them little justice barring a meme-ing MasterStroke. When I see you or anyone hit those ...you get mass points and what-not. But reducong the thoughts of the otherside (or bette YET a CRUDE and inaccurate Caricature of them - ) to a bumpersticker... rarely helps us get where we need to go.

So to be CLEAR...on the Nth BITE @ the APPLE....THEY ALMOST GOT IT ENTIRELY CONSISTENT with the MINIMUM protections given to Foreigners SEEKING ENTRY - AND the RIGHTS of Americans (and OTHER LEGAL ALIENS) travelling ABROAD....(as acknowledged by a troubling Court) - on a PRELIMINARY, not final nasis?

Crank up the band.

I'm sure Obama would have skirted the Law FAR more ADROITLY.

So very true. The U.S. Constitution is not a treaty. The U.S. Constitution is a document that only applies to the United States and the U.S. territories.

and now theirs no longer applies to us. good job.

Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that other countries' constitutions applied to us OUTSIDE their borders?

It's not just a meme with you. You REALLY ARE a special kind of stupid.

Nor do the INALIENABLE rights of State Citizens attach to US citizens...as outlined in the footnotes of Cook v. Tait - and the AFROYIM case in Colorado (US citizens ARE ALSO Resident Aliens in and relative to, their STATEs of RESIDENCE.). Most Conservatives b**ch because they want US citizenship (Fictional) benefits like Limited Liabilty under statutes rather than common law unlimited liability. You receive benefits - then pay the costs. Your rights are NO GREATER than ANY OTHER RESIDENT ALIEN. So a Syrian with a Green Card has as much right to enters as you do. Your rights can be removed for cause.

Got BEEF with the Women, Children and Orphans which your consensus foreign policy creates...SHOW CAUSE against the on an individual basis (the Courts generally eat-up the MOST TISSUE THIN of security and Safety type arguments - which is what made the previous rebukes SO DRAMATIC in their impact on the Trumpist regime's statue and credibilkty domestically sure - but ABROAD...oh Yes! ).

But this Blanket order shit is STRAIGHT OUTTA 1941. A dark time in our history regardless of the nominal party of leadership. And some horrible decisions - some of which still stand.

And it wasn't ONLY US Resident Japanese that got rounded up. The German American-Bundt and Italian FASCIST SUPPORTERS got rounded up, too. But on some STATED BASIS and justification - to which JAPs weren't considered "entitled". Even Japanese and other asians living as far South as PERU were rounded-up over somone ELSE's bullshit war. Try putting yourself in the position of the OTHER once in a while. Can you NEVER see their position? How about your own ACTUAL self-interest (as opposed to what you've been led to believe that to be.)? You have rights being compromised here...though your lack of a Syrian wife may make the theft less obvious....

MY rights are being violated? Um...NO! NOBODY'S rights are being violated... WHICH IS MY FRICKIN' POINT!!!

In my opinion, you and laonsite are on par (see my response to that gender-unspecified person).

In fact your common law "INALIENABLE" rights are CERTAINLY being violated - because as a US citizen you've waived them.

Your rights would be chilled and violated if you have your foreign born wife - returning from a visit to her parents abroad - summarily denied entry - because of some nonsense ban based on geography and not so subtly upon, race and religion. Which a court found recently when rebuking the doofus. Something like the court 'finds the statements you make as indicative of your actual intent, regardless of what your mouthpiece says in his briefs'.

You know I don't hate ya. I don't know of laonsite though we seem to share many views with the founders. I think the comment you responded to was a joke lost in translation. Other statements by that party seem more cogent.

Special kind of stupid ? Best reserved for those - so blind to the arguments of others - that they miss obvious the obvious points for a valid rebuttal in favor of arguments generally held invalid by more rational courts, 5-10 years after the panic of the moment has passed. See Goebitis and Ex Parte Milligan.

On the local front here in Cali, we have Thompso(e?)n vs. Superior Court - which acknowledges that the sort of law practiced in our Nisi Prius courts is BROADLY violative of the common law rights of California's RESIDENTS. So if you want to have a rational discussion of conservative issues (over-regulation, taxation etc., great - reaction to having to SHARE traditional White Privilege with others - gets a less sympathetic hearing. ), well I'm here.

But the likely answer is that you already agreed to it all. Congress regulates Commerce, as do STATE and local governments. If you're not in INTERSTATE COMMERCE in everything you do (as RESIDENTS are...) you'd have less interference and intrusive taxation of "Franchise" and "Revenue". Now the Koch Brothers get you all wound up demanding inalienable rights for CORPORATIONS to whom G-D made no such donation - because At Law, US citizens are "Joint Stock Associations". And Corporations are "Persons" (Mitt's declaration to the contrary notwithstanding), with arguably GREATER rights than you have.

So I'm a big fan of the Constitution, in toto - not just the parts I FEEL LIKE USING

12zd31.jpg (click to show)

I have officially lost any respect for you as a thinking individual. It is MIND-BOGGLING how you have survived this long.

Sir Thomas Moore finds you a poor descendant no doubt. I suvive by TEACHING THE LAW to imbeciles. Sometimes, they don't even happen to be wearing Geneva Robes or Uniforms. I guess this was one of those occassions. Go ahead do a victory lap on a PRELIMINARY ruling. That means that Uncostitutional harms being propounded by your President-pro-tempore's decree is NOT so immediate as to require the Court to strike it down IMMEDIATELY. That is all ot means. We'll all see how rhe Court rules on its final decision. But since it seems like you support the guy No Matter What he's done....perhaps you're the wrong party to be giving an ok to his prent attempt - since that last ones were CLEARLY a problem - and it doesn't sound like you saw THAT, EITHER.

I'm sure I should be VERY Sorry to have lost the respect of such an AUGUST scholar on the Law such as yourself.

And - for explaining to you why your philosophy is intellectually bankrupt...you're Welcome.

Your use of strawman arguments and failing to stay on topic is why I say you have lost my respect. You are NO intellectual, though you try to go through the motions.

It only works on the intellectually inferior, of which, I am sure you have difficulty finding.

I directly addressed the issie at hand - if you GAVE A F**K about someone aside from YOURSELF - then their misfortune and UNJUST TREATMENT would be your own.

If you don't feel like your rights are being violated - STFU and pay your TAXES like a GOOD US citizen. And keep yer big bad HeritageFoundation sponsored Obamacare coverage up to date while your at it.

You are an intellectual and a WINNER and my superior in EVERY RESPECT nodoubt - because of your UNILATERAL Declaration. Great - next you're the King of Denmark - because you declare it so.

His ideas was a lot better than banning guns and having open borders with no increased border security.

Hilarious!

Thanks! :)

The countries on the list are in states of civil war or other anarchy. There is no functioning government to give us the vetting info we need.

odd, isn't it?

That has more credibility than that chart. Just two examples of where it is wrong: Pan Am 103 bombing, 1988, by Libyans; first World Trade Center bombing, 1993, by Iraqis.

Excellent points. Plus, people need to start distinguishing between the threat represented by more recent, more "organic" terrorism versus the countless historical incidences of much more classic false-flag operations.

IRAQI's did the First WTC bombing? Bet that's news to them. No we had an Egyptian Intelligence officer INSIDE the Al Qaeda cell that the generally unquestioned history recounts as doing that one. He BUILT THEIR bomb. Then the FBI fired him. Plot sucessful. No Iraqi involvement alleged that I can recall. And Al Qaeda members are a bit like "ISIS", generally - in their allegiance to nontradional actors. So homecountry (geography) is less important to them often than other forms of social system. Adam Gahan was it - Orange County, California. Can we make the IRANGE CURTAIN a reality based on that.

The Pan Am thing had ALL KINDS of issues with the story. Including US SigInt spoofed by Israelis...compromised cells and the like.

On the flight in question - was a Marine detail which had refused some unconstitutional or otherwise unlawful.orders, to my knowledge this is NOT commonly known. But verifiable, I suppose, if need be. It would be quite a bit of work - to report, on water long ago under the bridge - and over a trivial point, so please don't demand it. It IS both My information and belief, that this was in fact the case, and that the lambs sacrificed likely included some amongst their number who were perhaps deliberately tageted adding an element of an "Object Lesson" to the False Flag event.

So if those are your quibbles...not great - SINCE the Saudi statistic is the glarring one - and likely Quite low.

And "CIVIL WAR" and "ANARCHY" are both relative terms - since both WE AND/OR THE SAUDIS are ballz deep in ALL that BS in EVERY instance.

Pottery Barn. Mic Drop.

i didn't hear that before about the Marine presence on Pan Am 103, sounds like a dry-run for what they did to seal team 6 a few years ago! If you can post any other info, that would be very interesting to look up.

Also, I was pointing out, above, that the only evidence linking Pan Am 103 to Libya was when the US investigators found the handle from the suitcase which exploded, and managed to retrieve a fingerprint from it!!

i dunno much about the first world trade centre bomb tbh. but Libya's doubtful, the only thing tying Pan Am 103 to Libya was the suitcase handle of the case which carried the bomb, they found it with a fingerprint on it....almost as lucky as finding that passport under 300 tons of rubble at ground zero

also odd how the countrys on the "Yes" list have all had some kind of military/regime change intervention from the US, and the others haven't :/

And then there-s the Christo-Fascists - like Pence and Huckabee.

It ought to be 9th Circus.

Great idea!

Awesomeness!