Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
The Attic
The Democrats and Their Refusal of Law
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
Jul 20, 2019 15:47:57   #
sirlensalot Loc: Arizona
 
RichinSeattle gets it. It was also amended in 1990, but I cannot see anything that said they got rid of it.
The discussion is in its proper category. aside from the feelings about the content.

Reply
Jul 20, 2019 15:48:33   #
GeorgeH Loc: Jonesboro, GA
 
Bill P wrote:
I know someone will get pissed off at me for stating this, but I see this far to often to remain silent. Perhaps it's the result of autocorrect made by noon native english speakers. The point isn't mute, it's moot.


"...noon native english speakers.?" While you are right about the "mute" vs. "moot," you are not exempt from censure from....The Grammar Police! "To correct and serve!" is our motto.

Reply
Jul 20, 2019 15:52:08   #
Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States
 
GeorgeH wrote:
"...noon native english speakers.?" While you are right about the "mute" vs. "moot," you are not exempt from censure from....The Grammar Police! "To correct and serve!" is our motto.

Haha, I was gigged first thing this morning for a post on another thread I made yesterday.

Reply
 
 
Jul 20, 2019 15:58:04   #
Bill P
 
Shellback wrote:
LOL - yeah, auto-correct got it - and I didn't double check - my bad... Looks like auto-correct got your non to noon


Yup same thing. Auto correct is society's enemy.

Reply
Jul 20, 2019 21:21:47   #
toxdoc42
 
There was the alien and sedition act under Adams, the anti-Chinese immigration act in the 1880s, the Japanese confinement during WWII. So, if what is needed by neocons is the fact that we have never been a perfect nation, then you have it! Somewhere I remember reading that this country was designed in order to build a "more perfect union"! If we fail to learn from our mistakes, we are destined to repeat our errors.

Reply
Jul 20, 2019 22:47:57   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
RichinSeattle wrote:
For all you folks with tender sensibilities, this was posted in the "Chit-Chat" section, described only as "Non-photography" discussion. None of the facts presented by the poster are incorrect, though he doesn't give any mention of how the law has been amended. However, it's still on the books and was last used by GW Bush following the 9/11 horrors.


It is one of the non-photography forums, but controversial political discussions belong in the Attic, which is probably where admin will put it with a subject line like that.

Reply
Jul 21, 2019 00:28:16   #
jdedmonds
 
Longshadow wrote:


The Act was not repealed in 1990, nor at any time since. It was AMENDED 1990 by provisions that merely changed its quotas and procedures.

Reply
 
 
Jul 21, 2019 09:32:55   #
Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States
 
That's why I posted the link.

Reply
Jul 21, 2019 09:48:03   #
sb Loc: Florida's East Coast
 
Not sure the constitutionality of this has been challenged to the Supreme Court, which is why Trumps Muslim ban was challenged in court. This is the process. This act was mentioned during the process. Trump's previous statements were fuel for the litigation arguing that he was doing it not for security but out of racism and religious fanaticism.

Our relationship with Iran is a long love-hate relationship. In the 1970's, when we liked Iran, they financed a half-dozen graduate students to study nuclear engineering at MIT. I have to laugh when I hear pundits say that we don't know how Iran obtained the nuclear technology that it has.....

Reply
Jul 21, 2019 10:10:41   #
Tex-s
 
davesit wrote:
"Carter used it 40 years ago, in 1979 to keep Iranians out of the United States. But Carter actually did more.

He made ALL Iranian students, already in the United States, check in with the government, then he deported a bunch of them. Seven thousand were found in violation of their visas and a total of 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the USA in 1979."

This is not a place for this kind of discussion. But if you do that, don't cherry pick the facts. We were "at war" with Iran back then because of the American hostages situation. Last time I looked, we weren't at war with Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador and numerous other Central and South American countries.
"Carter used it 40 years ago, in 1979 to keep... (show quote)


I'd say we are suffering at the hands of Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador, etc far more than we were suffering at the hands of Iran in 1979. So, if a 1979 'war' of threats and sanctions justifies policy in '79, I suggest a virtual 'invasion' of thousands of illegal crossing every month should be better justification in 2019.

Reply
Jul 21, 2019 10:22:35   #
Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL
 
Shellback wrote:
Yeah - and it was repealed in 1990 - mute point at this time...


Moot, too!

Reply
 
 
Jul 21, 2019 10:25:19   #
Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL
 
Longshadow wrote:
Haha, I was gigged first thing this morning for a post on another thread I made yesterday.


I 'goggled' at some photos I saw on another site when I googled.

Reply
Jul 21, 2019 12:22:53   #
Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM
 
davesit wrote:
"Carter used it 40 years ago, in 1979 to keep Iranians out of the United States. But Carter actually did more.

He made ALL Iranian students, already in the United States, check in with the government, then he deported a bunch of them. Seven thousand were found in violation of their visas and a total of 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the USA in 1979."

This is not a place for this kind of discussion. But if you do that, don't cherry pick the facts. We were "at war" with Iran back then because of the American hostages situation. Last time I looked, we weren't at war with Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador and numerous other Central and South American countries.
"Carter used it 40 years ago, in 1979 to keep... (show quote)




I’m pretty sure we did not declare war on Iran, so maybe you should use facts when jumping on others about alleged cherry picking.

Reply
Jul 21, 2019 12:37:42   #
One Rude Dawg Loc: Athol, ID
 
davidrb wrote:
Well, surprise, surprise!

THE McCARRAN ACT OF 1952. TRULY INTERESTING!!!

Wouldn't it have been interesting if, at some point during the presidential campaign, if one of the candidates asked, "Oh, by the way, has anyone in Washington, D.C., ever heard of the McCarran-Walter Act Of 1952 ?"

I did not know of this act until recently, but it has been a law for almost 65 years. Here are the historic facts that would seem to indicate that many, if not most, of the people we elect, to work for us in Washington, do not have the slightest idea of what laws already exist in OUR country.

After several terrorist incidents were carried out in the United States, Donald Trump was severely criticized and sued for suggesting that the U.S. should limit or temporarily suspend the immigration of certain ethnic groups, nationalities and even people of certain religions (Muslims).

The criticisms condemned such a suggestion as, among other things, being un-American, dumb, stupid, reckless, dangerous and racist.
Congressmen and senators swore that they would never allow such legislation, and our former president called such a prohibition on immigration unconstitutional.

As Gomer Pyle would say, "Well, surprise, surprise!", It seems that the selective immigration ban is already law and has been applied on several occasions.

Known as the [ McCarran-Walter Act ], the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 allows for the: “suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by the president, whenever the president finds that the entry of aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States."

“The president may, by proclamation and for such a period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens, immigrants or non- immigrants, or impose any restrictions on the entry of aliens he may deem to be appropriate."

Who was president when this was passed ?

Harry Truman

Who do you suppose last used this process?

Jimmy Carter

Carter used it 40 years ago, in 1979 to keep Iranians out of the United States. But Carter actually did more.

He made ALL Iranian students, already in the United States, check in with the government, then he deported a bunch of them. Seven thousand were found in violation of their visas and a total of 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the USA in 1979.

So, what do you say about all of the criticism that Donald Trump received from the Democratic senators, representatives and the Obama Administration ???

Additionally, it is important to note that the McCarran-Walter Act also requires that an " applicant for immigration must be of good moral character and in agreement with the principles of our Constitution." !!! WOW !!!

Therefore, one could surmise that since the Quran forbids Muslims to swear allegiance to the U.S. Constitution, technically, ALL Muslims should be or could be refused immigration to OUR country.

Incidentally, both McCarran and Walter were democrats.
Well, surprise, surprise! br br THE McCARRAN ACT... (show quote)


Problem, just getting the dumbasses to read the law and realize the truth. Oh I forget they don't care what the truth might be, especially if it doesn't suit their agenda.

Reply
Jul 21, 2019 13:59:00   #
Bill P
 
One Rude Dawg wrote:
Problem, just getting the dumbasses to read the law and realize the truth. Oh I forget they don't care what the truth might be, especially if it doesn't suit their agenda.


That statement is sad but true, and applies equally to people of all political persuasions.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
The Attic
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.