Topic: Well, Trump's Muslim ban is upheld.
Anonymous A started this discussion 9 years ago #63,529
Prick racist.
becky joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 12 minutes later[^] [v] #794,060
No it's not, lol
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 34 seconds later, 12 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #794,061
what? link?
Syntax joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 4 minutes later, 17 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #794,062
You need a link really?
Does NOT NOT NOT effect anyone from any of those countries on the list IF there is even a hint of some legit connection - Work Visa family visit - Want to visit 5th cousin etc
CNN is in overload Net news is in overload and Court is going to do a full hearing in October but even at that its to review a 90 day ban which may have expired UNLESS TRUNK extends it
Does NOT NOT NOT effect anyone from any of those countries on the list IF there is even a hint of some legit connection - Work Visa family visit - Want to visit 5th cousin etc
CNN is in overload Net news is in overload and Court is going to do a full hearing in October but even at that its to review a 90 day ban which may have expired UNLESS TRUNK extends it
Meta joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 1 minute later, 18 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #794,063
Islam isn't a race!
beckyderp !yDoooooooo replied with this 9 years ago, 27 seconds later, 18 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #794,064
@794,061 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
There was a preliminary injunction preventing the travel ban from going into effect. The Supreme Court "mostly" lifted the preliminary injunction, allowing a narrower version of the travel ban to go into effect prior to the case being heard fully. Preliminary injunctions are supposed to be reserved for when you can establish permanent harm if it's not granted and some were predicting this.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/26/533934989/supreme-court-will-hear-cases-on-president-trumps-travel-ban
There was a preliminary injunction preventing the travel ban from going into effect. The Supreme Court "mostly" lifted the preliminary injunction, allowing a narrower version of the travel ban to go into effect prior to the case being heard fully. Preliminary injunctions are supposed to be reserved for when you can establish permanent harm if it's not granted and some were predicting this.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/26/533934989/supreme-court-will-hear-cases-on-president-trumps-travel-ban
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 36 seconds later, 19 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #794,065
He is trying to protect us..
Syntax replied with this 9 years ago, 4 minutes later, 24 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #794,068
@previous (F)
LOL Really?
Saudi Arabia is not on the list and guess where 95% of the World Trade Center Rag Heads came from and those were with full Visa's
I could look it up but my memory says only one was from Yemen
LOL Really?
Saudi Arabia is not on the list and guess where 95% of the World Trade Center Rag Heads came from and those were with full Visa's
I could look it up but my memory says only one was from Yemen
Meta joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 2 minutes later, 26 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #794,069
Anonymous F replied with this 9 years ago, 10 minutes later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #794,078
@794,068 (Syntax)
exactamundo..
and what what what is the state religeon in saudi arabia..
that tidbit along with what you just said...is
PROOF this is NOT exclusively a muslim ban..
exactamundo..
and what what what is the state religeon in saudi arabia..
that tidbit along with what you just said...is
PROOF this is NOT exclusively a muslim ban..
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 44 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #794,094
@794,064 (beckyderp !yDoooooooo)
What's your prediction on the Supreme Court's final judgement on this?
What's your prediction on the Supreme Court's final judgement on this?
Meta replied with this 9 years ago, 13 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #794,104
@794,064 (beckyderp !yDoooooooo)
From a purely Constitutional standpoint, does the President have the authority to block immigration from specific countries?
From a purely Constitutional standpoint, does the President have the authority to block immigration from specific countries?
beckyderp !yDoooooooo replied with this 9 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #794,106
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 38 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #794,113
squeegee joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 45 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #794,117
@794,104 (Meta)yes, as a matter of fact he does. and this isn't a "ban" anyway. tbh i already feel safer, i think i might go shopping at a mall this year for christmas.
beckyderp !yDoooooooo replied with this 9 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #794,118
Meta replied with this 9 years ago, 17 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #794,124
@794,117 (squeegee)
@previous (beckyderp !yDoooooooo)
Didn't you read that BuzzFeed article where more people have died from furniture injuries* than Islamic terrorism? And remember the bowling green massacre? ?
*Since September 12, 2001
@previous (beckyderp !yDoooooooo)
Didn't you read that BuzzFeed article where more people have died from furniture injuries* than Islamic terrorism? And remember the bowling green massacre? ?
*Since September 12, 2001
Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 1 hour later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #794,137
@OP
Pisslam isn't a race. Thanks.
Pisslam isn't a race. Thanks.
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 41 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #794,155
Well, you were warned that the South will rise again
Anonymous F replied with this 9 years ago, 57 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #794,178
Deffenbach. joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 43 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #794,179
google it
Anonymous M double-posted this 9 years ago, 35 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #794,180
