" *How many shark attacks have there been in Hawaii recently?
*How many terrorist attacks have taken place in the US under the existing rules, regulations, and screenings?
More shark attacks in one state than terrorist strikes in the entire country"
Not one the best comparisons there + no real logic to back up what seems like your opinion and witless put down.
How many have died is a better question to ask.
http://www.dailywire.com/news/11410/comp...es-barrett
Better safe than sorry. IMO
+ there's always more than what we read right ?
Posts: 14,122
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
Not one the best comparisons there
Disagree. Attacks by both terrorists and sharks are reactions to someone crapping in their house.
Posts: 11,089
Threads: 756
Joined: Sep 2012
How many have died is a better question to ask.
That would be a good question to ask.
An even better question might be, were those deaths (in your link) caused by any of the types of people targeted in the new immigration ban:
* immigrants
* people from the six affected countries
* refugees who have been screened for 2 years under existing rules?
The answer is no. Most of the perpetrators were US citizens.
Which means the new immigration ban would not have prevented a single incident listed in your link.
Better safe than sorry. IMO
The ban would make us no safer by targeting the wrong people. Hawaii officials recognize that fact, and want to see us protected from wanton, needless, and downright useless legislation.
+ there's always more than what we read right ?
Yes there is. I think we just found that out.
You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 159
Threads: 1
Joined: Oct 2016
I'm all for loving they neighbor as thy self and when other folks cant do that I wonder why?
But how do you deal with many persons who inter this country who may think that your belief... U.S. Constitution v.s. sharia law is in conflict? How do you put a hold on those persons entering?
I know the same thing happened with the Native Americans of the mainland and the Polynesians who found their way to these islands. They both got screwed.
It might come down to what goes around comes around!
Hey I didnt open this thread but I have replied as it has not been deleted.
Slow Walker
quote:
Originally posted by pog
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/...n-2-0.html
To refer to the Trump travel restrictions, imposed pursuant to long-established law, and applied against nations who have been identified by the previous "administration" (if you can call it that) as a "Muslim ban", is to demonstrate the epitome of ignorance. The restrictions are tied to countries, not a religion, and members of all religions from those countries are included.
Hawaii has once-again demonstrated how pathetic its "leadership" is by bringing action against the duly-elected leadership of this country in pursuit of its responsibility to protect Puna and the rest of the USA from Terrorism.
To ignore the nature and motivations of the terror campaigns waged against civilization for the last millennium+ is stupidity itself.
The administration should cut off all discretionary federal funds to Hawaii poste-haste.
If this adversely affects Puna, well... Boo Hoo!
Posts: 1,466
Threads: 12
Joined: Oct 2016
quote:
Originally posted by Lopaka
quote:
Originally posted by pog
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/...n-2-0.html
To refer to the Trump travel restrictions, imposed pursuant to long-established law, and applied against nations who have been identified by the previous "administration" (if you can call it that) as a "Muslim ban", is to demonstrate the epitome of ignorance.
"Muslim ban", in quotations, is to suggest that even though that's not exactly what's going on, that's what it is in all intents and purposes. Which is true, as the stated goal from Mr. Trump is to stop Islamic terrorists. Never mind that not a one terrorist attack has been perpetrated by any citizen of the affected countries to date. So, I think the plan itself is what deserves the "epitome of ignorance" slight.
However, I think Hawaiian lawmakers should just make a statement in protest of this stupidity, rather than fight it legally.
Posts: 664
Threads: 67
Joined: Mar 2016
The crux of the problem is there are people who are citizens and will be hurt by this ban like Dr. Elshikh.
quote:
The suit brings Trump's campaign promises into the courtroom, in order to illustrate the way that Trump has consistently linked Muslim immigration to terrorism, and his explicit desire to implement a Muslim ban. Among the statements cited in the lawsuit is a press release then-candidate Trump sent out on December 7, 2015, titled "Donald J. Trump Statement on Preventing Muslim Immigration", which said in part:
"Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on. According to Pew Research, among others, there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population."
Hawaii's lawsuit names Ismail Elshikh as a co-plaintiff, "because the Executive Order inflicts a grave injury on Muslims in Hawai'i, including Dr. Elshikh, his Family, and members of his Mosque." Elshikh is the Imam of the Muslim Association of Hawaii.
The suit alleges that a portion of Hawaii's population is now subject to:
"discrimination and second-class treatment, in violation of both the Constitution and the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Order denies them their right to associate with family members overseas on the basis of their religion and national origin. And it results in their having to live in a country and in a State where there is the perception that the Government has established a disfavored religion."
And by disfavoring a religion, the suit argues, Trump's executive order is establishing a state religion, in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Hawaii's economy leans heavily on tourism, and the lawsuit cites both economic and familial hindrances caused by the ban. "It is damaging Hawaii's institutions, harming its economy, and eroding Hawaii's sovereign interests in maintaining the separation between church and state as well as in welcoming persons from all nations around the world into the fabric of its society."
You can read the full filing here on NPR http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2...travel-ban
quote:
Originally posted by Durian Fiend
quote:
Originally posted by Lopaka
quote:
Originally posted by pog
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/...n-2-0.html
To refer to the Trump travel restrictions, imposed pursuant to long-established law, and applied against nations who have been identified by the previous "administration" (if you can call it that) as a "Muslim ban", is to demonstrate the epitome of ignorance.
"Muslim ban", in quotations, is to suggest that even though that's not exactly what's going on, that's what it is in all intents and purposes. Which is true, as the stated goal from Mr. Trump is to stop Islamic terrorists. Never mind that not a one terrorist attack has been perpetrated by any citizen of the affected countries to date. So, I think the plan itself is what deserves the "epitome of ignorance" slight.
However, I think Hawaiian lawmakers should just make a statement in protest of this stupidity, rather than fight it legally.
There are no quotes in the title of the thread, nor in common usage of the term, and what is happening isn't even close, isn't even in the same "Universe" as a "muslim ban". Why you perpetuate the fake news story is beyond me.
I am amazed how people of such low information, i.e. situational awareness, such as yourself and others in the general public, would second-guess those who not only have infinitely-more information available to them, as well as the actual responsibility for protecting the people of Puna and beyond. Your parroting of snippets and factoids doesn't qualify as rational decision-making. If constitutes nothing but background jabber.
The government and people, of, Hawaii should let those far-better qualified and positioned than themselves, carry out the responsibilities assigned to them by the Constitution by virtue of the Office they hold.
Posts: 664
Threads: 67
Joined: Mar 2016
Lopaka the suit filed against the Executive Order that I linked explained this and provides evidence of how this targets Muslims from the Middle East and demonstrates this has been a stated motivation for this ban by the current administration. You can choose not to believe it if you want but you shouldn't insult others who do.
quote:
Originally posted by Eric1600
The crux of the problem is there are people who are citizens and will be hurt by this ban like Dr. Elshikh.
Hardly. Not even close.
The crux of the problem is that an entity is waging a war of aggression against civilization, and many of us can't even see it.
The President, pursuant to his Oath of Office, is taking rational steps to defend the people of Puna from an organization whose motto is "Convert or Die".
I fully-support President Trump for picking up the shards and fragments left behind by the previous "occupant" of the office, and putting together a cohesive rational response to said aggression.
|
