Trumps Muslim Ban Allowed

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,510
Update: President Trump is hailing Monday's Supreme Court decision on his controversial travel ban as a "clear victory for our national security." He said in a statement that his "number one responsibility" is to keep the American people safe.
The nation's highest court on Monday said it would let a limited version of Trump's ban on travel from six mostly Muslim countries take effect. The ban on visitors from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen can be enforced as long if those visitors lack a "credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States."

The justices will hear full arguments in October.

This story was originally published on June 26, 2017 at 10:55 a.m.
The Supreme Court is letting a limited version of the Trump administration's ban on travel from six mostly Muslim countries take effect, a victory for President Trump in the biggest legal controversy of his young presidency.
The court said Monday the ban on visitors from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen could be enforced as long as they lack a "credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States." The justices will hear arguments in the case in October. Trump said June 14 that the ban would take effect 72 hours after being clearedby courts.
The Trump administration said the 90-day ban was needed to allow an internal review of the screening procedures for visa applicants from those countries. That review should be complete before Oct. 2, the first day the justices could hear arguments in their new term.

A 120-day ban on refugees is also being allowed to take effect on a limited basis.
Three of the court's conservative justices said they would have let the complete bans take effect.
Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, said the government has shown it is likely to succeed on the merits of the case, and that it will suffer irreparable harm with any interference. Thomas said the government's interest in preserving national security outweighs any hardship to people denied entry into the country.
Two federal appeals courts had blockedthe travel policy, which Trump announced a week after he took office in January and revised in March after setbacks in court.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, VA said the ban was "rooted in religious animus" toward Muslims and pointed to Trump's campaign promise to impose a ban on Muslims entering the country as well as tweets and remarks he has made since becoming president.
ADVERTISEMENT
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the travel policy does not comply with federal immigration law, including a prohibition on nationality-based discrimination. That court also put a hold on separate aspects of the policy that would keep all refugees out of the United States for 120 days and cut by more than half, from 110,000 to 50,000, the cap on refugees in the current government spending year that ends September 30.
Trump's first executive order on travel applied to travelers from the six countries as well as Iraq, and took effect immediately, causing chaos and panic at airports over the last weekend in January as the Homeland Security Department scrambled to figure out who the order covered and how it was to be implemented.
A federal judge blocked it eight days later, an order that was upheld by a 9th circuit panel. Rather than pursue an appeal, the administration said it would revise the policy.
In March, Trump issued the narrower order.
 

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
What does Trump think he's achieving by banning people from countries the US completely destabilised and ruined?
Technically, the US is pretty well destabilized too. We have a tremendous amount of debt that they have forced upon us to go into these other countries. In reality, we have nothing to offer. We have been all but officially bankrupted unfortunately.

I remember listening to the Benghazi investigation before this last election where Clinton literally says we joined the effort in Libya because the US was able to make a financial contribution. The only reason we can make any kind of financial contribution is because international banksters have decided to make it seem like the US is the only Federal Reserve bank that can continue creating money without consequence.

It is sad. It would be nice to help people who really needed help, but to do that will take a separate economic intervention. I support cryptocurrencies, but really any country should in theory be able to establish their own fiat currency separately that would allow them to rebuild their own countries. It might not be exchangeable for a foreign currency value so you wouldn't be able to leave to another country with it or anything, but it could be done within local areas.

You would just need some form of council to be created and establish a fiat currency. Then, you make enough of this fiat currency to use to build in whatever way you can. Everyone would need to be assigned to a job, given starting capital and then use the capital to exchange what the people work for. This should in theory work, but I don't know whether these people are taught to know how to jump-start an economic system that would alleviate these conditions. In theory, what we should be doing at an international level is educating people on economics so they could do something like this rather than trying to take in refugees. China, Russia, anyone could do this. It is unfortunate that no one mentions this.

I guess you would need a way to defend yourself as well from persecution for this as well. People may be trying to do this and are just being persecuted for it at the moment.

We could actually do this to create an independent default for regular people to replace the debt-based economic system that is about to fall in the US too. That is sort of what the Bitcoin community vision is about, which is the most viable form of cryptocurrency at the moment, but the solution to this situation is economic. Otherwise, if we don't, we are all at the mercy of the international banks that have indebted every country in the world practically, including the US. There is just a different strategy that is applied here, but they are committing the same abuses committed everywhere else. Economics is one of the most important aspects of life. That is why a global economy is so important to them. You can spend your whole life without interacting with a police officer or a judge, but everyone will go to some kind of grocery store or farmers market for their food at some point. It is basically a way to control the world.

It would be nice if Trump would suggest this as president, but this is like walking in a field of landmines. These people can blackmail us with the loans that are hanging over our heads for the past couple stimulus packages until we are able to find a way out ourselves. It is only because they haven't yanked the cord yet that it looks like we are in any condition to help anyone, but we are not.
 
Last edited:

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
Well the money is created out of thin air and is debt money, any country is capable of doing the same. Our debt is growing faster than our revenue, so no we don't have the money.

However, we could theoretically have the money if we weren't taxed the way we are, but people act like that would be a bad thing. If we got rid of taxes we would be in a better position to help.

It would still be debt money though. There is no real money anymore.
 

DesertRose

Superstar
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
7,676
@justjess:
Really sad but I really think that Americans have to begin the difficult journey of reclaiming sovereignty at every level from the local and up. The financial elite have every institution in a firm choke hold, right? This ruling and similar bills are slowly eroding away at the freedoms.....

@rainerann;
Electronic money is interesting but the financial elite may shut it down if it threatens them.
In Islam we have concepts dealing with the absolute necessity of prohibiting compound interest (called Riba in Islam) and the re-institution of gold and silver. The shaykh below discusses the necessity of reclaiming currency at the micro-level in villages etc.

 
Last edited:

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,510
Well the money is created out of thin air and is debt money, any country is capable of doing the same. Our debt is growing faster than our revenue, so no we don't have the money.

However, we could theoretically have the money if we weren't taxed the way we are, but people act like that would be a bad thing. If we got rid of taxes we would be in a better position to help.

It would still be debt money though. There is no real money anymore.
And how would getting rid of taxes help?

I'm all for Eliminating individual income tax but that would need to be replaced with more corporate tax - like how it used to be. Which seems increasingly impossible in our current globalized economy.
 

TMT

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
1,201
Yeah I saw that too.. that would be an absolute disaster.
Yes, and this how freedom dies, I wish people would wake up to how dangerous Trump truly is, he might have a stacked court before his first year in office is complete. The democrats are incapable of any actual resistance and I don't see them getting Congress back next year, and if some tragedy happens while this guy is in office..it's all over folks.
 

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,510
I agree 100%

The democrats have completely destroyed themselves by clinging to neo liberalism

And the part that concerns me most is the Supreme Court - those are lifetime appointments. These justices can be on the bench for decades. And we have quite a few right now who are very elderly and should have retired safely at the beginning of obamas second term to ensure this cluster fudge of a potential situation was avoided.
 

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
And how would getting rid of taxes help?

I'm all for Eliminating individual income tax but that would need to be replaced with more corporate tax - like how it used to be. Which seems increasingly impossible in our current globalized economy.
What you could do is keep a state sales tax and/or property tax and everything could be paid for at the state level. Then, what we would do is sponsor state representatives and senators to act in Congress and get rid of most of the federal government. So it wouldn't get rid of all taxes. Primarily the federal tax because smaller government serves the community better than the Federal government in matters of finances. A collective congress could implement Federal standards for some things. Like for example, I think the law that requires children to attend school should remain and most of what could be considered standard curriculum. However, these are things that don't require federal tax money to implement. They require a congress which could be sponsored at the state level. The states should be responsible for managing and distributing finances for school systems and other public institutions.

Then, without having to pay a Federal tax, individuals would have more money to fund relief efforts and organizations that work to help refugees. We can't do this because we owe too much money to the Federal Reserve and they won't allow it. The only way to get around this would be to audit the Federal Reserve and prove corruption that could be handled according to our present justice system, which they avoid at all cost and prevent all people who could be successful in accomplishing this from being in any kind of position of authority to do this.
 

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
@justjess:
Really sad but I really think that Americans have to begin the difficult journey of reclaiming sovereignty at every level from the local and up. The financial elite have every institution in a firm choke hold, right? This ruling and similar bills are slowly eroding away at the freedoms.....

@rainerann;
Electronic money is interesting but the financial elite may shut it down if it threatens them.
In Islam we have concepts dealing with the absolute necessity of prohibiting compound interest (called Riba in Islam) and the re-institution of gold and silver. The shaykh below discusses the necessity of reclaiming currency at the micro-level in villages etc.

Bitcoin is already pretty successful. More than likely what will happen is that the future economic system will be a closed source version of Bitcoin. For now, Bitcoin is part of the open-source community, which means that if you can read code and program, there is nothing hidden about Bitcoin. Everything is transparent.

If they were to close the source code, they would be able to control it. It wouldn't be a community effort the way an open-source project is because Bitcoin has really been too successful at this point to stop completely. It will more than likely have to convert to a point where it can be controlled. Other cryptocurrencies, who knows at the moment. They might die out, but Bitcoin is strong enough to use.

In theory, an open source cryptocurrency could work like this. You would have your own bank account. You would work and get a paycheck with Bitcoin. You would have a savings account that had a Bitcoin miner that belonged to you. This would increase on it's own at about the rate that an average savings account increases. This would in theory solve the social security problem we have in the US where they keep speculating that there will no money in this account by a certain year because the amount going out is greater than the amount going in.

This increase with your own Bitcoin miner savings account, would increase the circulating currency in the area that you lived without government intervention or approval. You would own the miner, not the government. Then, basically things could transition naturally without much disruption to what we are used to right now. Your currency would be exchanged with Bitcoin that is already presently mined and a miner would be given to you and we could trade and do business internationally the same way we do now.

However, where we are now is sort of like the DOS version before Windows created a user interface that makes computers easy for everyone to use, not just people who could program. So it is not very user friendly at the moment. There is a definite learning curve to using it. There is a long way to go, but it is already established. it is just a matter of keeping it open source and not hiding anything from the public to keep the form of currency free and transparent.

 

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
8,213
i am in favor of this ban, but discussion of this topic (at least with me involved) would be far too incendiary for this board.
perhaps at a later time. there are bigger fish to fry.
 

DesertRose

Superstar
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
7,676
i am in favor of this ban, but discussion of this topic (at least with me involved) would be far too incendiary for this board.
perhaps at a later time. there are bigger fish to fry.
Why....go ahead.....the US is just another country in the world.
......going there is not some holy rite.
 

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
8,213
Why....go ahead.....the US is just another country in the world.
......going there is not some holy rite.
this isnt the site for a political battle. it will go nowhere, especially with posters of islamic faith in here. i might as well go to a jewish forum and bring up the holohoax.

i am here to help shed some light on topics so others can be more strongly educated in deeper esoterica and conspiracy-related issues. i also want to pick up information that i missed in my research from other posters.
 

DesertRose

Superstar
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
7,676
Well I think you are mistaken because this is not a religious topic.
Guess what, I happen to agree with you regarding the ban but for entirely different reasons than you probably have.
It is a matter of principle for me, I have not visited the US since the fake 9/11.
I think people who come from countries that have been messed with by the US should seek other locales......but being a refugee is a difficult state and options are scarce for them. This judgement is unjust in the case of refugees.
We are a diverse lot with different political understandings.
brb.......
 
Last edited:
Top