Accumulator
Well-known member
Muslims in general or ones currently trying to immigrate into the US?
None of the Muslims I know are "a problem", they`re all upstanding US citizens.
Trump 2016
- Thread starter Trouble
- Start date
Muslims in general or ones currently trying to immigrate into the US?
None of the Muslims I know are "a problem", they`re all upstanding US citizens.
Ronkh
Wax Waster
Immigration. There needs to be a comprehensive vetting process. Maybe even looking at social media posts of individuals.. (gasp)
Accumulator
Well-known member
Rohkh- Thanks for clarifying. Not everybody differentiates that way these days 
Heh heh, I bet some [twit] will oppose scrutinizing the Social Media for some reason I`d rather not think up.
Heh heh, I bet some [twit] will oppose scrutinizing the Social Media for some reason I`d rather not think up.
Ronkh
Wax Waster
Actually it was against the rules. The girl from the San Bernardino shooting was all over it.
Old Pirate
AMG Classic Car Detailing
Here`s one : As many as 20 percent of Americans have tattoos, and now the government may be developing a system to track them >>> FBI tattoo-tracking program stirs concern - WLOX.com - The News for South Mississippi
What do you think about this?
What I say " Hillary Butt has a tattoo that say`s " Trump Was Here " . I stop looking at the news because of all the B.S. we are hearing and seeing. P.S. All my guns are loaded and I`m ready!
What do you think about this?
What I say " Hillary Butt has a tattoo that say`s " Trump Was Here " . I stop looking at the news because of all the B.S. we are hearing and seeing. P.S. All my guns are loaded and I`m ready!
Swanicyouth
New member
The prison system has been tracking tattoos for years for identification and gang affiliation. But, that`s for criminals.
Accumulator
Well-known member
JBM- Leaving aside any questions of credibility regarding your sources, none of the Muslims I know are pursueing Hijra any more than any of the Catholics I know are Crusading to convert (basically "exterminate") infidels. Nor were they/their ancestors when they immigrated to the US.
Seems like there are about as many interpretations/variations of Islam as there are of [some other Major Religions], so I`m not a fan of generalizing on that score.
[Gee, lest I be misconstrued, I`d better state explicitly that I`m no fan of Islam, huh? OK-I`m. No. Fan. Of. Islam. There...]
Seems like there are about as many interpretations/variations of Islam as there are of [some other Major Religions], so I`m not a fan of generalizing on that score.
[Gee, lest I be misconstrued, I`d better state explicitly that I`m no fan of Islam, huh? OK-I`m. No. Fan. Of. Islam. There...]
The Driver
Detailers Workshop
Pretty hairy hands, no chest. Isn`t photo shop wonderful. They do have some oval things in Leavenworth
Dave
Dave
Get ready to race!
Ronkh
Wax Waster
Interesting Bit of Legislative History - MacCarran Walter Act of 1952
Trump was recently severely criticized 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 the president called such a prohibition on immigration unconstitutional.
As Gomer Pyle would say, “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 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 period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”
The act was utilized by Jimmy Carter, no less, in 1979 to keep Iranians out of the United States, but he actually did more. He made all Iranian students already here check in, and then he deported a bunch. Seven thousand were found in violation of their visas, 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the United States in 1979.
It is of note that the act requires that an applicant for immigration must be of good moral character and "attached to the principles of the Constitution.”
Accumulator
Well-known member
Ronkh- I`d missed that about Carter (hey, I was 19 and focused on uhm...other things), thanks for posting it. Raises my opinion of him a bit.
Not sure how using a specific religion as a qualifier would stand up to scrutiny though.
Wouldn`t surprise me if O considers the M-W Act to be a HUAC-era mistake.
Not sure how using a specific religion as a qualifier would stand up to scrutiny though.
Wouldn`t surprise me if O considers the M-W Act to be a HUAC-era mistake.
Ronkh
Wax Waster
Especially if used by a Republican. Democrat, no sweat. (as was evidenced)
How Trump bankrupted his Atlantic City casinos, but still earned millions
June 12, 2016 12:00 AM
By Russ Buettner and Charles V. Bagli / The New York Times
ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. — The Trump Plaza Casino and Hotel is closed, its windows clouded over by sea salt. Only a faint outline of the gold letters spelling out T-R-U-M-P remains visible on the exterior of what was once this city’s premier casino.
Not far away, the long-failing Trump Marina Hotel Casino was sold at a major loss five years ago and is now known as the Golden Nugget.
At the nearly deserted eastern end of the boardwalk, the Trump Taj Mahal, now under new ownership, is all that remains of the casino empire Donald Trump assembled here more than a quarter-century ago. Years of neglect show: The carpets are frayed and dust-coated chandeliers dangle above the few customers there to play the penny slot machines.
On the presidential campaign trail, Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, often boasts of his success in Atlantic City, of how he outwitted the Wall Street firms that financed his casinos and rode the value of his name to riches. A central argument of his candidacy is that he would bring the same business prowess to the Oval Office, doing for America what he did for his companies.
“Atlantic City fueled a lot of growth for me,” Mr. Trump said in an interview in May, summing up his 25-year history here. “The money I took out of there was incredible.”
His audacious personality and opulent properties brought attention — and countless players — to Atlantic City as it sought to overtake Las Vegas as the country’s gambling capital. But a close examination by The New York Times of regulatory reviews, court records and security filings leaves little doubt that Mr. Trump’s casino business was a protracted failure. Though he now says his casinos were overtaken by the same tidal wave that eventually slammed this seaside city’s gambling industry, in reality he was failing in Atlantic City long before Atlantic City itself was failing.
But even as his companies did poorly, Mr. Trump did well. He put up little of his own money, shifted personal debts to the casinos and collected millions of dollars in salary, bonuses and other payments. The burden of his failures fell on investors and others who had bet on his business acumen.
In three interviews with The Times since late April, Mr. Trump acknowledged in general terms that high debt and lagging revenues had plagued his casinos. He did not recall details about some issues, but did not question The Times’s findings. He repeatedly emphasized that what really mattered about his time in Atlantic City was that he had made a lot of money there.
Mr. Trump assembled his casino empire by borrowing money at such high interest rates — after telling regulators he would not — that the businesses had almost no chance to succeed.
His casino companies made four trips to bankruptcy court, each time persuading bondholders to accept less money rather than be wiped out. But the companies repeatedly added more expensive debt and returned to the court for protection from lenders.
After narrowly escaping financial ruin in the early 1990s by delaying payments on his debts, Mr. Trump avoided a second potential crisis by taking his casinos public and shifting the risk to stockholders.
But he never was able to draw in enough gamblers to support all of the borrowing. During a decade when other casinos here thrived, Mr. Trump’s lagged, posting huge losses year after year. Stock and bondholders lost more than $1.5 billion.
All the while, Mr. Trump received copious amounts for himself, with the help of a compliant board. In one instance, The Times found, Mr. Trump pulled more than $1 million from his failing public company, describing the transaction in securities filings in ways that may have been illegal, according to legal experts.
Mr. Trump now says he left Atlantic City at the perfect time. The record, however, shows that he struggled to hang on to his casinos years after the city had peaked, and failed only because his investors no longer wanted him in a management role.
There are those here who fondly remember Mr. Trump’s showmanship, the thousands he employed in a struggling city, and the tens of millions of dollars in tax revenue his casinos generated.
“He was a great person for the company,” said Scott C. Butera, president of Trump’s company at the time of its 2004 bankruptcy. “With his oversight, his brand and marketing, he’s really adept.”
Others were hurt.
“He helped expand Atlantic City, but he just did not put the equity into the projects he should have to keep them solvent,” said H. Steven Norton, a casino consultant and a former casino executive at Resorts International. “When he went bankrupt, he not only cost bondholders money, but he hurt a lot of small businesses that helped him construct the Taj Mahal.”
Beth Rosser of West Chester, Pa., is still bitter over what happened to her father, whose company Triad Building Specialties nearly collapsed when Mr. Trump took the Taj into bankruptcy. It took three years to recover any money owed for his work on the casino, she said, and her father received only 30 cents on the dollar.
“Trump crawled his way to the top on the back of little guys, one of them being my father,” said Ms. Rosser, who runs Triad today. “He had no regard for thousands of men and women who worked on those projects. He says he’ll make America great again, but his past shows the complete opposite of that.”
Though he has acknowledged mistakes in piling crippling debt on Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts, Mr. Trump has steadfastly maintained that his resorts were the best-run and highest-performing casinos in Atlantic City.
“The casinos have done very well from a business standpoint,” he told Playboy magazine in 2004. “People agree that they’re well run, they look good and customers love them.”
In reality, the revenue at Mr. Trump’s casinos had consistently lagged behind their competitors’ for a decade before larger forces ravaged the industry. Beginning in 1997, his share of the Atlantic City gambling market began to slip from its peak of 30 percent.
Revenues at other Atlantic City casinos rose 18 percent from 1997 through 2002; Trump’s fell 1 percent.
Competition grew more intense in 2003, when the Borgata Hotel Casino and Spa opened. The $1.1 billion, 40-story resort redefined the concept of an Atlantic City luxury casino. Revenues at Mr. Trump casinos dropped an additional 6 percent in a little more than a year.
Had Mr. Trump’s revenues grown at the rate of other Atlantic City casinos, his company could have made its interest payments and possibly registered a profit. But with sagging revenues and high costs, his casinos had too little money for renovations and improvements, which are vital for hotels to attract guests. The public company never logged a profitable year.
“There’s something not right when every single one of your projects doesn’t work out,” said Marvin B. Roffman, a casino analyst at Janney Montgomery Scott, an investment firm based in Philadelphia.
Trump Marina was sold for $38 million, less than 10 percent of what the company paid Mr. Trump for it in 1996. The Plaza was shuttered. But Mr. Trump continued to earn money from the casinos. In 2011, the casinos reported leasing a Trump helicopter for $390,000 and spending $236,000 for “Trump labeled merchandise,” including $197,000 for Trump Ice bottled water.
In retrospect, David Hanlon, a veteran casino executive who ran Merv Griffin’s Atlantic City operations, said, Mr. Trump succeeded in repeatedly convincing investors, bankers and Wall Street that “his name had real value.”
“They were so in love with him that they came back a second, third and fourth time,” Mr. Hanlon said. “They let him strip out assets. It was awful to watch. It was astonishing. I have to give Trump credit for using his celebrity time and time again.”
Some of Mr. Trump’s former investors no longer see the value.
“People underestimated Donald Trump’s ability to pillage the company,” said Sebastian Pignatello, a private investor who at one time held stock in the Trump casinos worth more than $500,000. “He drove these companies into bankruptcy by his mismanagement, the debt and his pillaging.”
June 12, 2016 12:00 AM
By Russ Buettner and Charles V. Bagli / The New York Times
ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. — The Trump Plaza Casino and Hotel is closed, its windows clouded over by sea salt. Only a faint outline of the gold letters spelling out T-R-U-M-P remains visible on the exterior of what was once this city’s premier casino.
Not far away, the long-failing Trump Marina Hotel Casino was sold at a major loss five years ago and is now known as the Golden Nugget.
At the nearly deserted eastern end of the boardwalk, the Trump Taj Mahal, now under new ownership, is all that remains of the casino empire Donald Trump assembled here more than a quarter-century ago. Years of neglect show: The carpets are frayed and dust-coated chandeliers dangle above the few customers there to play the penny slot machines.
On the presidential campaign trail, Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, often boasts of his success in Atlantic City, of how he outwitted the Wall Street firms that financed his casinos and rode the value of his name to riches. A central argument of his candidacy is that he would bring the same business prowess to the Oval Office, doing for America what he did for his companies.
“Atlantic City fueled a lot of growth for me,” Mr. Trump said in an interview in May, summing up his 25-year history here. “The money I took out of there was incredible.”
His audacious personality and opulent properties brought attention — and countless players — to Atlantic City as it sought to overtake Las Vegas as the country’s gambling capital. But a close examination by The New York Times of regulatory reviews, court records and security filings leaves little doubt that Mr. Trump’s casino business was a protracted failure. Though he now says his casinos were overtaken by the same tidal wave that eventually slammed this seaside city’s gambling industry, in reality he was failing in Atlantic City long before Atlantic City itself was failing.
But even as his companies did poorly, Mr. Trump did well. He put up little of his own money, shifted personal debts to the casinos and collected millions of dollars in salary, bonuses and other payments. The burden of his failures fell on investors and others who had bet on his business acumen.
In three interviews with The Times since late April, Mr. Trump acknowledged in general terms that high debt and lagging revenues had plagued his casinos. He did not recall details about some issues, but did not question The Times’s findings. He repeatedly emphasized that what really mattered about his time in Atlantic City was that he had made a lot of money there.
Mr. Trump assembled his casino empire by borrowing money at such high interest rates — after telling regulators he would not — that the businesses had almost no chance to succeed.
His casino companies made four trips to bankruptcy court, each time persuading bondholders to accept less money rather than be wiped out. But the companies repeatedly added more expensive debt and returned to the court for protection from lenders.
After narrowly escaping financial ruin in the early 1990s by delaying payments on his debts, Mr. Trump avoided a second potential crisis by taking his casinos public and shifting the risk to stockholders.
But he never was able to draw in enough gamblers to support all of the borrowing. During a decade when other casinos here thrived, Mr. Trump’s lagged, posting huge losses year after year. Stock and bondholders lost more than $1.5 billion.
All the while, Mr. Trump received copious amounts for himself, with the help of a compliant board. In one instance, The Times found, Mr. Trump pulled more than $1 million from his failing public company, describing the transaction in securities filings in ways that may have been illegal, according to legal experts.
Mr. Trump now says he left Atlantic City at the perfect time. The record, however, shows that he struggled to hang on to his casinos years after the city had peaked, and failed only because his investors no longer wanted him in a management role.
There are those here who fondly remember Mr. Trump’s showmanship, the thousands he employed in a struggling city, and the tens of millions of dollars in tax revenue his casinos generated.
“He was a great person for the company,” said Scott C. Butera, president of Trump’s company at the time of its 2004 bankruptcy. “With his oversight, his brand and marketing, he’s really adept.”
Others were hurt.
“He helped expand Atlantic City, but he just did not put the equity into the projects he should have to keep them solvent,” said H. Steven Norton, a casino consultant and a former casino executive at Resorts International. “When he went bankrupt, he not only cost bondholders money, but he hurt a lot of small businesses that helped him construct the Taj Mahal.”
Beth Rosser of West Chester, Pa., is still bitter over what happened to her father, whose company Triad Building Specialties nearly collapsed when Mr. Trump took the Taj into bankruptcy. It took three years to recover any money owed for his work on the casino, she said, and her father received only 30 cents on the dollar.
“Trump crawled his way to the top on the back of little guys, one of them being my father,” said Ms. Rosser, who runs Triad today. “He had no regard for thousands of men and women who worked on those projects. He says he’ll make America great again, but his past shows the complete opposite of that.”
Though he has acknowledged mistakes in piling crippling debt on Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts, Mr. Trump has steadfastly maintained that his resorts were the best-run and highest-performing casinos in Atlantic City.
“The casinos have done very well from a business standpoint,” he told Playboy magazine in 2004. “People agree that they’re well run, they look good and customers love them.”
In reality, the revenue at Mr. Trump’s casinos had consistently lagged behind their competitors’ for a decade before larger forces ravaged the industry. Beginning in 1997, his share of the Atlantic City gambling market began to slip from its peak of 30 percent.
Revenues at other Atlantic City casinos rose 18 percent from 1997 through 2002; Trump’s fell 1 percent.
Competition grew more intense in 2003, when the Borgata Hotel Casino and Spa opened. The $1.1 billion, 40-story resort redefined the concept of an Atlantic City luxury casino. Revenues at Mr. Trump casinos dropped an additional 6 percent in a little more than a year.
Had Mr. Trump’s revenues grown at the rate of other Atlantic City casinos, his company could have made its interest payments and possibly registered a profit. But with sagging revenues and high costs, his casinos had too little money for renovations and improvements, which are vital for hotels to attract guests. The public company never logged a profitable year.
“There’s something not right when every single one of your projects doesn’t work out,” said Marvin B. Roffman, a casino analyst at Janney Montgomery Scott, an investment firm based in Philadelphia.
Trump Marina was sold for $38 million, less than 10 percent of what the company paid Mr. Trump for it in 1996. The Plaza was shuttered. But Mr. Trump continued to earn money from the casinos. In 2011, the casinos reported leasing a Trump helicopter for $390,000 and spending $236,000 for “Trump labeled merchandise,” including $197,000 for Trump Ice bottled water.
In retrospect, David Hanlon, a veteran casino executive who ran Merv Griffin’s Atlantic City operations, said, Mr. Trump succeeded in repeatedly convincing investors, bankers and Wall Street that “his name had real value.”
“They were so in love with him that they came back a second, third and fourth time,” Mr. Hanlon said. “They let him strip out assets. It was awful to watch. It was astonishing. I have to give Trump credit for using his celebrity time and time again.”
Some of Mr. Trump’s former investors no longer see the value.
“People underestimated Donald Trump’s ability to pillage the company,” said Sebastian Pignatello, a private investor who at one time held stock in the Trump casinos worth more than $500,000. “He drove these companies into bankruptcy by his mismanagement, the debt and his pillaging.”
Ronkh
Wax Waster
rlmccarty2000
Active member
If you can put a casino out of business you really don`t know what you are doing. Trump is in everything for the short term. Today`s business men have a "rape and pillage" attitude. Few care about their employees or their businesses. It`s a flip for more money attitude fueled by banks that are too big to fail. I don`t blame Trump for playing by the rules of the time and sucking the money out of everything he could. I just don`t think he is what the US needs as a president. What has Trump accomplished that makes him worthy of being our president? He is a showman and snake oil salesman who just might win because the majority of Americans would rather see a spectacle than actually have someone that can effectively govern the country. I don`t like Hillary either, but between the two she at least has some experience. Could she do worse than Trump? I don`t think so. Between the Devil and the deep blue sea. The lesser of two evils and all that stuff.
Ronkh
Wax Waster
4u2nvinmtl
New member
About the MacCarran Walter Act of 1952...
Parts of the Act remain in place today, but it has been amended many times and was modified substantially by the Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965.
"The Hart–Celler Act of 1965 marked a radical break from the immigration policies of the past. Previous laws restricted immigration from Asia and Africa while it gave preference to northern and western Europeans over southern and eastern Europeans.[SUP][2][/SUP] The United States faced both foreign and domestic pressures to change its nation-based formula, which was regarded as a system that discriminated based on an individual’s place of birth. Abroad, former military allies and new independent nations aimed to delegitimize discriminatory immigration, naturalization, and regulations through international organizations like the United Nations.[SUP][3][/SUP] In the United States, the national-based formula had been under scrutiny for a number of years. In 1952, President Truman directed the Commission on Immigration and Naturalization to conduct an investigation and produce a report on the current immigration regulations. The report, Whom We Shall Welcome, served as the blueprint for the Hart–Celler Act.[SUP][4][/SUP] At the height of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, the restrictive immigration laws were seen as an embarrassment by, among others, President John F. Kennedy, who called the then-quota-system "nearly intolerable".[SUP][5][/SUP] After Kennedy`s assassination, President Lyndon Johnson signed the bill at the foot of the Statue of Liberty."
"The bill still prohibited the entry into the country of "sexual deviants", including ````sexuals. By doing so it crystallized the policy of the INS to reject ````sexual prospective immigrants on the grounds that they were "mentally defective", or had a "constitutional psychopathic inferiority". The Immigration Act of 1990 rescinded the provision discriminating against ``` people"
That sounds to me like we tried to move away from being racist and prejudice with our immigration policies.
Provisions that excluded certain classes of immigrants based on their political beliefs were revoked by the Immigration Act of 1990.
"The Immigration Act of 1990 (Pub.L. 101–649, 104 Stat. 4978, enacted November 29, 1990) was signed into law by George H. W. Bush on November 29, 1990.[SUP][1][/SUP] It was first introduced by Senator Ted Kennedy in 1989. It was a national reform of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. It increased total, overall immigration to allow 700,000 immigrants to come to the U.S. per year for the fiscal years `92–`94, and 675,000 per year after that.[SUP][2][/SUP] It provided family-based immigration visa, created five distinct employment based visas, categorized by occupation, as well as the diversity visa program which created a lottery to admit immigrants from "low admittance" countries [SUP][3][/SUP] or countries where their citizenry was underrepresented in the U.S.
Besides these immigrant visas, there was also changes in nonimmigrant visas like the H-1B visa for highly skilled workers. There were also cutbacks in the allotment of visas available for extended relatives.[SUP][4][/SUP] TheTemporary protected status visa was also created where Congress established a procedure by which the Attorney General may provide TPS to immigrants in the United States who are temporarily unable to safely return to their home country because of ongoing armed conflict, an environmental disaster, or other extraordinary and temporary condition. It specifically benefited citizens of El Salvador.[SUP][2][/SUP]
Other aspects of the act include lifting the English testing process for naturalization which was imposed in theNaturalization Act of 1906 [SUP][5][/SUP] and eliminating the exclusion of ````sexuals under the medically unsound classification of "sexual deviant" that was present in the passage of the 1965 Act.[SUP][6][/SUP] George H. W. Bush is quoted in saying "I am also pleased to note that this Act facilitates immigration not just in numerical terms, but also in terms of basic entry rights of those beyond our borders."[SUP][7][/SUP] The administration, therefore, saw the importance of this amendment in extending a welcoming to those previously excluded nations/individuals"
Has for trying to compare what Trump said to what Carter did…
“There is no legitimate comparison between Carter’s action and Trump’s proposal. Here’s why: During the hostage crisis the U.S. and Iran were in a state of something that amounted to a war, without the shooting. It is a common practice to expel citizens of a hostile country during wartime, but Carter’s actions didn’t do that. He merely ordered deported any Iranians whose visas were invalid and refused to issue new visas to Iranian citizens. Carter’s actions were taken against anyone holding an Iranian passport, not against Iranians who were Muslim. In addition, those who were deported were not here because of refugee status, and they were not deported back to a war zone.
The charge of “racism” against Carter also doesn’t hold water. The author wants readers to believe that all Iranians are ethnically Persians. But like the United States, Iran is home to a number of different minority groups. Carter’s order didn’t block only ethnic Persians from entering the U.S. — it blocked anyone carrying an Iranian passport.
By contrast, Trump wants to keep all those who profess a certain religious belief out of the country. Muslims live in most of the world, including countries that are U.S. allies and those that are our adversaries. And, of course, there are Muslims who are American citizens. How exactly would this Muslim ban work? Muslims don’t carry passports that say, “I am a Muslim.”
President Carter took a reasonable, limited course of action during a time of tension between two sovereign nations. Trump is proposing actions that would bar all those who follow Islam from entering the U.S., no matter where they come from. If you wanted to send a message that America is at war with Islam, not just terrorists, there’s probably no better way to do it.”
Taken from: http://www.ifyouonlynews.com/politi...anians-was-not-the-same-as-trumps-muslim-ban/
Note: I don’t condone the writer calling Right Wing people “idiots” and that’s just stupid and ignorant but I think the points made within the article are still valid.
Ron, it`s 2016 times have changed. If you want to discriminate against Muslims and quote old acts that are mostly out of effect go for it. That`s like me pulling up a Slavery Act and quote from it as if it were still in effect... I like to move forward not back. Why the need to defend Trumps racist comment?
I don`t consider myself a Democrat or a Republican as I agree and disagree with both parties frequently (why segregate myself). To put it simply I`m an American and I`m as American as they come. I’m part; American Indian on all three fronts (USA, Canada, and Mexico), and I`m; American (Irish), Mexican (Spanish), and French (France), so if it weren`t for immigration, I wouldn`t be here, same for most people who call them self’s American, Mexican or Canadian.
I agree immigration is a bad thing for North America based on the grounds that the world is already overpopulated (for the most part) but I wouldn`t single out a specific race, religion, or culture, as that`s just a step in the wrong direction (there are exceptions of course such as WAR). Immigration and racism should be two separate issues not mixed together like days long since passed. I wouldn`t dare draft my own immigration policy (I`m no politician, I have an education) but I wouldn`t stand for one that instills racism either.
Bunky
Detailing Gnosis
Let`s start at 1798 and the Alien and Sedition Acts.
Just 250 years ago...sound familiar?
Wikipedia.
The acts were designed by Federalists to limit the power of the opposition Republican Party, but enforcement ended after Thomas Jefferson was elected president in 1800. The Alien and Sedition Acts were passed by Congress in 1798 in preparation for an anticipated war with France.
Just 250 years ago...sound familiar?
Wikipedia.
The acts were designed by Federalists to limit the power of the opposition Republican Party, but enforcement ended after Thomas Jefferson was elected president in 1800. The Alien and Sedition Acts were passed by Congress in 1798 in preparation for an anticipated war with France.