RE: SHADES OF THE PAST.

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST.

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: SHADES OF THE PAST.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/26/2017 5:28:04 PM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

That would be your ignorant unsubstantiated opinion which is worth a little less thanj the price of used shit paper.

unsubstantiated?

You lack the capacity to make simple spelling corrections to your typos, your syntax usage is simplistic and redundant, you cannot form competent or coherent counterpoints, you resort to insults constantly. Every post you make is proof of your lack of education and incapability to perform higher thinking tasks easily.

Unsubstantiated indeed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Did the 9/11 bombers come across the border?
Yes.

How about the Boston Bombers?
Yes

San Bernideno Shooters?
The san bernardino shooters also came across the boarder.

All Wrong.

9/11 attackers obtained Tourist and Student Visas. They flew into respective airports legally went through just about as much trouble as the average business man goes through when exiting an airport.

The Boston Bombers where apart of a Refugee family which claimed political asylum.

The San Bernideno shooters entered a false marriage to gain a J-1 Visa, committing Immigration Fraud.

the one over arching facet which connects all 3 is that they all had Visa's and Flew into the United States... not actively crossing any boarders in a traditional sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Nope I did not say that you said that. What I said is that your post show that the emphasis is on level one threats.
That you don't think that level one threats should be prioriotized is not my problem it is yours.

That is not what the data you posted says.

Why do you not want to deport priority 1 illegals.

This is all intentionally nitpicking which is intended to cause disinformation and argumentative statements which really serve no purpose other then to attack the speaker. it is a common argument tactic you try and use... but in all honesty it is an ignorant form of argument. You are taking statements out of context, and attacking individual phrases rather then the idea as a whole. It is not constructive nor does it contribute, and thus won't be addressed.

come back with cogent responses and they will be replied to.

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/26/2017 7:58:09 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: InfoMan
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Did the 9/11 bombers come across the border?
Yes.

How about the Boston Bombers?
Yes

San Bernideno Shooters?
The san bernardino shooters also came across the boarder.

All Wrong.

9/11 attackers obtained Tourist and Student Visas. They flew into respective airports legally went through just about as much trouble as the average business man goes through when exiting an airport.

The Boston Bombers where apart of a Refugee family which claimed political asylum.

The San Bernideno shooters entered a false marriage to gain a J-1 Visa, committing Immigration Fraud.

the one over arching facet which connects all 3 is that they all had Visa's and Flew into the United States... not actively crossing any boarders in a traditional sense.

The were not born here nor did they magically appear. They crossed the border into amerika. Your question did not reference legality. I am not paid to read your mind.

Nope I did not say that you said that. What I said is that your post show that the emphasis is on level one threats.
That you don't think that level one threats should be prioriotized is not my problem it is yours.

That is not what the data you posted says.

Why do you not want to deport priority 1 illegals.

This is all intentionally nitpicking which is intended to cause disinformation and argumentative statements which really serve no purpose other then to attack the speaker.

Referencing the data you post is not attacking the speaker.
Pointing out that :
Jesus you are phoquing stupid is

it is a common argument tactic you try and use... but in all honesty it is an ignorant form of argument. You are taking statements out of context, and attacking individual phrases rather then the idea as a whole. It is not constructive nor does it contribute, and thus won't be addressed.

come back with cogent responses and they will be replied to.

It is not my job to construct your arguement. If you cannot defend your mindless,peurile bullshit then don't it is of no matter to me that a fool refuses to defend his/her ignorance

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/27/2017 3:33:28 AM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Do you know the difference between a removal and a return?

Removal is a formal court proceeding in which the individual is prosecuted, documented, then deported if found guilty.
Commonly they are housed in a US holding facility several days to upwards of a week, before stepping before a judge, then being deported while being legally branded as a 'removal' preventing them from legally entering the country for a period of time (5-10 years)

Return is when an individual which has been found as being illegal simply chooses to accept that they are caught and leaves of their own will and withdraws their applications for visa.
No court proceeding is formed and punishment is usually more clerical (don't apply again for 30 days)

the Bush administration started the trend of not giving a people the option to voluntarily return, especially with border crossing as an attempt to document and track these illegal aliens, and to identify potential threats that might be entering the country. the Obama administration re-tooled this system effectively treating all border crossing immigrants as felons and identifying them as priority 1 cases which has produced a massive spike in the apparent deportation of 'High Priority' aliens, while at the same time resulting in the lowest deportation rates since Nixon.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/27/2017 3:48:30 AM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

The were not born here nor did they magically appear. They crossed the border into amerika. Your question did not reference legality. I am not paid to read your mind.

Crossing the border denotes that they physically walked across a land based International Line which divides countries. This is why in the language of the law there is a distinction 'Port of Entry' which describes any water based landing which may offload passengers and immigrants. "Crossing the Border" is such a common colloquialism you should know that if you made it through grade school.

quote:

It is not my job to construct your arguement. If you cannot defend your mindless,peurile bullshit then don't it is of no matter to me that a fool refuses to defend his/her ignorance

You do not have an argument.

You have simply said 'Nuh-uh' like a child.
and the ignorant counter point 'You don't want to deport Terrorists?'

with out fully understanding what was said.

That is what happens when you take things out of Context, the words and phrases around the things you quote, they provide expanded meaning on the statements made and add clarity to statements which you clearly are missing.

here is a simple way to look at it:
Which one of these is Not considered a Priority 1 threat according to Obama's customs law?

Osama Bin Laden, leader a major terrorist group.
Pablo Escobar, lead of a major drug cartel.
Juan the illegal day laborer in front of Home Depot
Adolph Hitler, leader of the Nazi Party

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/27/2017 5:01:27 AM

Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Do you know the difference between a removal and a return?

Removal is a formal court proceeding in which the individual is prosecuted, documented, then deported if found guilty.
Commonly they are housed in a US holding facility several days to upwards of a week, before stepping before a judge, then being deported while being legally branded as a 'removal' preventing them from legally entering the country for a period of time (5-10 years)
Return is when an individual which has been found as being illegal simply chooses to accept that they are caught and leaves of their own will and withdraws their applications for visa.
No court proceeding is formed and punishment is usually more clerical (don't apply again for 30 days)
the Bush administration started the trend of not giving a people the option to voluntarily return, especially with border crossing as an attempt to document and track these illegal aliens, and to identify potential threats that might be entering the country. the Obama administration re-tooled this system effectively treating all border crossing immigrants as felons and identifying them as priority 1 cases which has produced a massive spike in the apparent deportation of 'High Priority' aliens, while at the same time resulting in the lowest deportation rates since Nixon.

So, it's a good thing, right? Instead of letting them leave on their own, they get prosecuted and removed, which is worse than a return, even if the are simply caught crossing the border illegally.

This graphic, while stating they are "deportations," is a graphic of "removals."

Obviously, not an all-time low, is it?

_____________________________

What I support:

A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
Personal Responsibility
Help for the truly needy
Limited Government
Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/27/2017 6:37:34 AM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Do you know the difference between a removal and a return?

Removal is a formal court proceeding in which the individual is prosecuted, documented, then deported if found guilty.
Commonly they are housed in a US holding facility several days to upwards of a week, before stepping before a judge, then being deported while being legally branded as a 'removal' preventing them from legally entering the country for a period of time (5-10 years)
Return is when an individual which has been found as being illegal simply chooses to accept that they are caught and leaves of their own will and withdraws their applications for visa.
No court proceeding is formed and punishment is usually more clerical (don't apply again for 30 days)
the Bush administration started the trend of not giving a people the option to voluntarily return, especially with border crossing as an attempt to document and track these illegal aliens, and to identify potential threats that might be entering the country. the Obama administration re-tooled this system effectively treating all border crossing immigrants as felons and identifying them as priority 1 cases which has produced a massive spike in the apparent deportation of 'High Priority' aliens, while at the same time resulting in the lowest deportation rates since Nixon.

So, it's a good thing, right? Instead of letting them leave on their own, they get prosecuted and removed, which is worse than a return, even if the are simply caught crossing the border illegally.

This graphic, while stating they are "deportations," is a graphic of "removals."

Obviously, not an all-time low, is it?

No... because it doesn't serve any purpose aside from simply bloating the value of Removals.

This is because the 'Punishment' for removals is that they cannot legally enter the country for 5-10 years... And well considering that you just caught them for trying to illegally trying to enter the country (as in they where not trying to legally enter in the first place) this punishment literally does nothing.

It is like catching a Pedophile, Labeling him a Pedophile, then dropping him off in front of a grade school.

Furthermore - if you pull up actual numbers of Deportations (Returns + Removals) you actually get quiet a different image.

He has Half the Deportations then the previous 2 Presidents.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/27/2017 7:17:26 AM

Posts: 522
Joined: 6/16/2016
Status: offline

too many spiteful male and female BITCHES here.

(in reply to bounty44)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/27/2017 7:19:49 AM

Posts: 522
Joined: 6/16/2016
Status: offline

OMG HOW MY SIMPLE POST has now developed into so many different threads , most of which have nothing to do with Your Trump.

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/27/2017 7:21:10 AM

Posts: 522
Joined: 6/16/2016
Status: offline

DOES NO ONE HAVE A MIND OF THERE OWN. SO MUCH COPY AND PASTE . GENUINE USA MORONS .

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/27/2017 10:06:47 AM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bondageerone

OMG HOW MY SIMPLE POST has now developed into so many different threads , most of which have nothing to do with Your Trump.

You made an ignorant post, what did you expect?

(in reply to bondageerone)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/27/2017 10:10:27 AM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bondageerone
DOES NO ONE HAVE A MIND OF THERE OWN. SO MUCH COPY AND PASTE . GENUINE USA MORONS .

And what are you exactly?

you can't seem to understand the capslock function of a keyboard.
you don't know the difference between 'There' and 'Their'
and it seems that the only punctuation you have is periods, because you refuse to use any other form of punctuation.

What shining country do you hail from where every one is sensible, violence is a non thing, and people communicate via telepathy?

(in reply to bondageerone)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/27/2017 7:02:51 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

The were not born here nor did they magically appear. They crossed the border into amerika. Your question did not reference legality. I am not paid to read your mind.

Crossing the border denotes that they physically walked across a land based International Line which divides countries. This is why in the language of the law there is a distinction 'Port of Entry' which describes any water based landing

Which of the 9/11 punks came by water?

which may offload passengers and immigrants. "Crossing the Border" is such a common colloquialism you should know that if you made it through grade school.

You are entitled to your own opinion but you are not allowed your own facts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_entry

It is not my job to construct your arguement. If you cannot defend your mindless,peurile bullshit then don't . It is of no matter to me that a fool refuses to defend his/her ignorance

You do not have an argument.

Thank you for agreeing with me that it is not my job to make your arguement.

here is a simple way to look at it:
Which one of these is Not considered a Priority 1 threat according to Obama's customs law?

So far this is the only thing you have given us as to what constitutes "priority 1"

"In FY 2016, 98 percent of initial enforcement actions – a set of actions that includes USBP apprehensions, OFO determinations of inadmissibility, and ICE administrative arrests – involved individuals classified within one of the three enforcement priority categories. Ninety-one percent were among the top priority (Priority 1), which includes national security threats, individuals apprehended at the border while attempting to enter unlawfully, and the most serious categories of convicted criminals as well as gang members."

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/27/2017 7:25:15 PM

Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

How is a return a deportation?

_____________________________

What I support:

A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
Personal Responsibility
Help for the truly needy
Limited Government
Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/28/2017 2:05:24 AM

Posts: 522
Joined: 6/16/2016
Status: offline

obveeowslee eye did not reealiz that yew ar all morons .BUT GLAD I HAVE GIVEN YOU SOME ENTERTAINMENT. XX HAVE A NICE DAY. USA.

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/28/2017 4:29:02 AM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

Crossing the border denotes that they physically walked across a land based International Line which divides countries. This is why in the language of the law there is a distinction 'Port of Entry' which describes any water based landing which may offload passengers and immigrants.

9/11 attackers obtained Tourist and Student Visas. They flew into respective airports legally went through just about as much trouble as the average business man goes through when exiting an airport.

Both of the above are your statements re: the "border".
In your world do Ocean liners dock at airports? Does a 747 land in the ocean?
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 2/28/2017 4:30:03 AM >

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/28/2017 8:03:00 AM

Posts: 10540
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

"Fake news" is part of the press as well. Either they're free to publish stories that whichever fuckwit the morons in your country elected doesn't like, or they're not a free press.
It's a pretty simple concept, I'd have thought.

Oh no, the press is only to be righteously free if it reinforces their partisan political prejudices.

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to WhoreMods)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/28/2017 9:47:38 AM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

How is a return a deportation?

Deportation is any non-national individual expelled from a country.
Returns are technically a 'deportation' however, when we commonly talk about deportation we are talking specifically about Forced Removal.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/28/2017 3:43:30 PM

Posts: 10540
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

You're going to tell me that people who risk their lives to swim across a river and hike across a desert just to get a minimum wage job are a bigger threat then poorly screened Visa holders which have consistently produced Terrorists which attack American Citizens?

Americans being victim of a terrorist act by American visa holders is 1 in 3.4 million. You have a greater chance of being stuck by lightening...twice. I have cited this before.

The canard is that Trump and the right are now and have consistently better at such spin.

Examples:

Trump to a speech before the Sheriffs Assoc. 'Violent crimes and murder are all time highs.

They are at or near all 30 year lows.

Trump: 'The military is decimated and badly needs rebuilding.'

The military is as strong or stronger than in 2001 or 2003 when Bush II started two wars.

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/28/2017 6:57:06 PM

Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
How is a return a deportation?

Deportation is any non-national individual expelled from a country.
Returns are technically a 'deportation' however, when we commonly talk about deportation we are talking specifically about Forced Removal.

Interesting point there.

Clinton Removals: 869,646
Bush 43 Removals: 2,012,539
Obama Removals: 3,094,208

All time low, eh?

_____________________________

What I support:

A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
Personal Responsibility
Help for the truly needy
Limited Government
Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: SHADES OF THE PAST. - 2/28/2017 8:08:31 PM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
How is a return a deportation?

Deportation is any non-national individual expelled from a country.
Returns are technically a 'deportation' however, when we commonly talk about deportation we are talking specifically about Forced Removal.

Interesting point there.

Clinton Removals: 869,646
Bush 43 Removals: 2,012,539
Obama Removals: 3,094,208

All time low, eh?

So are you retarded or something?
I ask because this statistic has been genuinely debunked and has been proven several times over to be completely misleading because Obama has been intentionally flagging 'returns' as 'removal'. With changes to what constitutes a priority one threat, the horrendously low interior deportations, and the 'return' statistics is abysmally low.

So either you are mentally incompetent and we can properly response to your statements or you are being selective in exactly what you want to hear and just ignore the facts and data which scream you're wrong...

(in reply to DesideriScuri)

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: SHADES OF THE PAST.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.150