BREAKING NEWS: Federal Judge grants stay on Trump's Muslim ban

[Wiskers Von Pussyboots]

I see. A victim of economics. The only thing more prevelant than lawyers in the legal system is the giant dung heap of failed lawyers. Indeed there are so many lawyers in the legal profession that if you aren't shit hot then you will surely fail in your chosen career choice. I don't blame you though. I didn't want to put fourth the time an effort required to compeat on such a scale so I opted for a Masters in Military History instead. Nevertheless, your reasoning in why you feel so passionate is ideologically grounded which is my way of saying it is devoid of reason. And your ancestors did not find safe haven in either their country of origin nor their destination whereas they had to fight for their safe haven.

Today we benefit from your ancestors understanding of freedom and individual liberty. We do not benefit by importing those who believe in neither, i.e. those who have a culture of sanctioned rape, violence, oppression, and theocracy. The Somali refugees in Minnesota are an excellent example why we should not import those who neither know our concept of liberty nor want our concept of liberty. But they vote democrat so no matter how they present themselves I'm sure they're ok with you.

The very little you have presented in this and your other post has me terribly concerned about the value for dollar of your education. You are clearly not terribly familiar with the history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony; my greatx7 grandfather wrote much of it, so I am.

On another note - it's just sad when the best rhetorical device a debater can rely on is baseless personal attack. I am in no way a failed attorney; there are many attorneys who change careers despite enjoying success in the traditional use of their J.D.

Since you probably salivate over Kelleyanne Conway, you should already know that.

King Philips War.
King Philip's War - Wikipedia
John Leverett - Wikipedia

Before King Phillips War the Massachusetts Bay Colony was also regularly attacked. The fighting was exceptionally brutal on both sides. Both the colonists and the Indians would raid each other's camps pick up infant children by their foot and crack their heads open against a tree in an attempt to anialate the descendants of their enemies. Not bad for puritans. Certainly you've read about this?

Most of my education was paid for by the GI Bill. A reward for getting shot at for the very people you proclaim to care for. I know these people and they are perfectly capeable of defending and fighting for themselves.

King Philip's War was many years after my ancestors landed in 1620, finding safe haven from the religious persecution they had suffered in England - just as I asserted in my post.

I'm not really sure what you're driving at, other than clutching at straws to undermine my point? I assure you, you don't know more about the early history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony than I do.

History is a vast subject and no one can truly know it all. That why historians major in parts of history. Mine is Military History with a focus on Indian warfare. Indeed the Massachusetts Bay Colony fought the natives very early in their history but particularly after they recoverd from the illnesses the colonists brought with them during the first colony which prevented them from wageing as early and effective attacks as they could have, although, they did try from time to time. Nevertheless, they fought early, they fought often, and they are your kin.

I never asserted they didn't; I'm very well aware of the actions Governor Bradford - I call him Grandpa Bill - engaged in toward the native population once they ceased to be useful and became an obstacle to expansion of the colony.

I merely asserted that my ancestors found safe haven here as refugees fleeing religious persecution - of that there is no doubt. They promptly set about persecuting others for religious reasons once happily settled here, there is no denying that truth, either.

My larger point remains that we began as a country of refugees/immigrants, and it's nothing but ignorant xenophobia that compels a bunch of descendants of immigrants to support denying safe haven to refugees fleeing war-torn countries just because of the color of their skin or the religion that they practice.

Of note is the fact that none of the terrorist acts perpetrated in this country were perpetrated by people from the countries your Drumpfuhrer is attempting to ban. It's nonsensical in that regard; that he issues such a ban on Holocaust Remembrance Day when we have cause to consider the Jews we turned away who were later murdered by the Nazis is just indescribably disgusting.

Once again, an uneasy peace at best and attempted genocide at worst. Drop the ideology and look at the facts. They may have been in search of a safe haven but it was not granted to them; they had to carve it out for themselves via blood. This isn't ideology, this is factual history. Realism trumps ideology every time.

When I received my bachelors I was thinking of pursuing something along the realm of constitutional history and wrote a number of papers on constitutional disagreements and contraversies that never seemed to stay within the 25 page limit. In all of my studies I noticed a favoritism toward western immigration, and a very narrow favoritism at that. At first I came to the same concludsion. I thought it to be a racist policy. I quickly found out that they truly favored peoples that assimilated easily into their form of government in keeping with their ideas of liberty in which the law you once practiced was founded.

Throughout history peoples who made their own law founded in their own values have alway been weary of outsiders coming in and imposing opposite values not congruent with the foundations of liberty. This is why the right of return to Israel is denied. If the right of return was granted then Israel would cease to be a democracy.

Immigration policy should favor the citizens of a country in keeping with their safety, values, and laws. Peoples who do not beleive in individual liberty, have a high propensity toward violence, treat their women like garbage, and rape little children, are not in keeping with our ideas of liberty. I've been to these countries, I know these people, and I know how they act. It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with culture. Cultures have values, values are an indicator of politics, and politics dictate laws and policy. The Somali refugees in Minnesota are a perfect example of what happens when you import a group of people not congruent with the American experiment. That's not ideology, that's fact. Realism trumps ideology everytime.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Why do think that this is a great victory ?

A judge stopped one part of the effort.

The rest is moving forward.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Why do think that this is a great victory ?

A judge stopped one part of the effort.

The rest is moving forward.

as well as it is a temporary order

--LOL

 

[BoSoxGal]

I don't practice law anymore, except pro bono - I'll be actively volunteering in the resistance to Donald J. Trump's agenda, for instance. Along with thousands of my brethren.

I'm just responding to allegations with facts. And I didn't talk about my personal life, I referred to my professional education & experience, which is relevant to the questions raised about the content of my posts. I referred to my family history insomuch as it's highly relevant to explaining why I am so particularly disgusted by Drumpffuhrer's stance on immigration, especially re: refugees from war-torn countries.

I see. A victim of economics. The only thing more prevelant than lawyers in the legal system is the giant dung heap of failed lawyers. Indeed there are so many lawyers in the legal profession that if you aren't shit hot then you will surely fail in your chosen career choice. I don't blame you though. I didn't want to put fourth the time an effort required to compeat on such a scale so I opted for a Masters in Military History instead. Nevertheless, your reasoning in why you feel so passionate is ideologically grounded which is my way of saying it is devoid of reason. And your ancestors did not find safe haven in either their country of origin nor their destination whereas they had to fight for their safe haven.

Today we benefit from your ancestors understanding of freedom and individual liberty. We do not benefit by importing those who believe in neither, i.e. those who have a culture of sanctioned rape, violence, oppression, and theocracy. The Somali refugees in Minnesota are an excellent example why we should not import those who neither know our concept of liberty nor want our concept of liberty. But they vote democrat so no matter how they present themselves I'm sure they're ok with you.

The very little you have presented in this and your other post has me terribly concerned about the value for dollar of your education. You are clearly not terribly familiar with the history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony; my greatx7 grandfather wrote much of it, so I am.

On another note - it's just sad when the best rhetorical device a debater can rely on is baseless personal attack. I am in no way a failed attorney; there are many attorneys who change careers despite enjoying success in the traditional use of their J.D.

Since you probably salivate over Kelleyanne Conway, you should already know that.

King Philips War.
King Philip's War - Wikipedia
John Leverett - Wikipedia

Before King Phillips War the Massachusetts Bay Colony was also regularly attacked. The fighting was exceptionally brutal on both sides. Both the colonists and the Indians would raid each other's camps pick up infant children by their foot and crack their heads open against a tree in an attempt to anialate the descendants of their enemies. Not bad for puritans. Certainly you've read about this?

Most of my education was paid for by the GI Bill. A reward for getting shot at for the very people you proclaim to care for. I know these people and they are perfectly capeable of defending and fighting for themselves.

King Philip's War was many years after my ancestors landed in 1620, finding safe haven from the religious persecution they had suffered in England - just as I asserted in my post.

I'm not really sure what you're driving at, other than clutching at straws to undermine my point? I assure you, you don't know more about the early history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony than I do.

Religious persecution due to the Counter Reformation and the Council Of Trent by the Jesuits founded by Ignatius of Loyola? The very ones that killed 60 million heretics in Europe and then their disgusting military arm of the Vatican came over to America and founded Georgetown University? The same school you claim to have graduated from??? That one? The irony practically writes itself......

Actually, I would take issue with your understanding of who was persecuting the Pilgrims (Separatists), but that history is all readily available online as well as in actual history books, so I don't need to waste my time educating you. If you're actually interested in getting those fine points correct and not just in personally attacking me, you'll seek out the knowledge yourself.

Yes, life is rich in irony.

My Pilgrim ancestors were such tight ass prigs they didn't allow folks to celebrate Christmas (too much fun!) and flogged folks for all manner of behavior.

400 years later, here I am a once-Episcopalian, now agnostic-leaning-toward-atheism who attended a Jesuit law school with a significant population of Jewish professors/students - which guaranteed many more school holidays than we otherwise would have had, praise Jesus. (Ha! Get it?)

For all their many shortcomings, the Jesuits enjoy a fine tradition of educational excellence with a heavy emphasis on public service - that is what mattered most to me about Georgetown. FYI, while the undergraduate and graduate university still has crucifixes hanging in every classroom, that is not the case at 600 New Jersey Avenue - for obvious reasons there is a bit more arms' length distance in the law school re: all the Catholic stuff. Nevertheless, Father Drinan taught ethics wearing the collar and I was not offended by that just because Grandpa Bill hated the Catholic Church.

The finest thing about Georgetown is the tradition of reconciliation; the blue & gray are representative of the Union and the Confederacy and were adopted by the university in honor of the many patriots who died on both sides of our Civil War.

 

[BoSoxGal]

The very little you have presented in this and your other post has me terribly concerned about the value for dollar of your education. You are clearly not terribly familiar with the history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony; my greatx7 grandfather wrote much of it, so I am.

On another note - it's just sad when the best rhetorical device a debater can rely on is baseless personal attack. I am in no way a failed attorney; there are many attorneys who change careers despite enjoying success in the traditional use of their J.D.

Since you probably salivate over Kelleyanne Conway, you should already know that.

King Philips War.
King Philip's War - Wikipedia
John Leverett - Wikipedia

Before King Phillips War the Massachusetts Bay Colony was also regularly attacked. The fighting was exceptionally brutal on both sides. Both the colonists and the Indians would raid each other's camps pick up infant children by their foot and crack their heads open against a tree in an attempt to anialate the descendants of their enemies. Not bad for puritans. Certainly you've read about this?

Most of my education was paid for by the GI Bill. A reward for getting shot at for the very people you proclaim to care for. I know these people and they are perfectly capeable of defending and fighting for themselves.

King Philip's War was many years after my ancestors landed in 1620, finding safe haven from the religious persecution they had suffered in England - just as I asserted in my post.

I'm not really sure what you're driving at, other than clutching at straws to undermine my point? I assure you, you don't know more about the early history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony than I do.

History is a vast subject and no one can truly know it all. That why historians major in parts of history. Mine is Military History with a focus on Indian warfare. Indeed the Massachusetts Bay Colony fought the natives very early in their history but particularly after they recoverd from the illnesses the colonists brought with them during the first colony which prevented them from wageing as early and effective attacks as they could have, although, they did try from time to time. Nevertheless, they fought early, they fought often, and they are your kin.

I never asserted they didn't; I'm very well aware of the actions Governor Bradford - I call him Grandpa Bill - engaged in toward the native population once they ceased to be useful and became an obstacle to expansion of the colony.

I merely asserted that my ancestors found safe haven here as refugees fleeing religious persecution - of that there is no doubt. They promptly set about persecuting others for religious reasons once happily settled here, there is no denying that truth, either.

My larger point remains that we began as a country of refugees/immigrants, and it's nothing but ignorant xenophobia that compels a bunch of descendants of immigrants to support denying safe haven to refugees fleeing war-torn countries just because of the color of their skin or the religion that they practice.

Of note is the fact that none of the terrorist acts perpetrated in this country were perpetrated by people from the countries your Drumpfuhrer is attempting to ban. It's nonsensical in that regard; that he issues such a ban on Holocaust Remembrance Day when we have cause to consider the Jews we turned away who were later murdered by the Nazis is just indescribably disgusting.

Once again, an uneasy peace at best and attempted genocide at worst. Drop the ideology and look at the facts. They may have been in search of a safe haven but it was not granted to them; they had to carve it out for themselves via blood. This isn't ideology, this is factual history. Realism trumps ideology every time.

When I received my bachelors I was thinking of pursuing something along the realm of constitutional history and wrote a number of papers on constitutional disagreements and contraversies that never seemed to stay within the 25 page limit. In all of my studies I noticed a favoritism toward western immigration, and a very narrow favoritism at that. At first I came to the same concludsion. I thought it to be a racist policy. I quickly found out that they truly favored peoples that assimilated easily into their form of government in keeping with their ideas of liberty in which the law you once practiced was founded.

Throughout history peoples who made their own law founded in their own values have alway been weary of outsiders coming in and imposing opposite values not congruent with the foundations of liberty. This is why the right of return to Israel is denied. If the right of return was granted then Israel would cease to be a democracy.

Immigration policy should favor the citizens of a country in keeping with their safety, values, and laws. Peoples who do not beleive in individual liberty, have a high propensity toward violence, treat their women like garbage, and rape little children, are not in keeping with our ideas of liberty. I've been to these countries, I know these people, and I know how they act. It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with culture. Cultures have values, values are an indicator of politics, and politics dictate laws and policy. The Somali refugees in Minnesota are a perfect example of what happens when you import a group of people not congruent with the American experiment. That's not ideology, that's fact. Realism trumps ideology everytime.

You're clearly a xenophobe who is strong on ugly opinions without facts to support them.

Do you have any idea how many Muslims are in the United States? How many of them are 1st or 2nd generation Americans?

Honestly the kind of ugly opinions you hold and spew are the exact reason I don't visit here often. It makes me sick to realize how many people like you exist in this otherwise beautiful country.

 

[P@triot]

Sounds like Trump's first legal defeat.

Remember when you guys insisted that the U.S. President can do anything he wants when Obama was sitting in the Oval Office? Bet you guys are regretting that shit now.

 

[Wiskers Von Pussyboots]

I see. A victim of economics. The only thing more prevelant than lawyers in the legal system is the giant dung heap of failed lawyers. Indeed there are so many lawyers in the legal profession that if you aren't shit hot then you will surely fail in your chosen career choice. I don't blame you though. I didn't want to put fourth the time an effort required to compeat on such a scale so I opted for a Masters in Military History instead. Nevertheless, your reasoning in why you feel so passionate is ideologically grounded which is my way of saying it is devoid of reason. And your ancestors did not find safe haven in either their country of origin nor their destination whereas they had to fight for their safe haven.

Today we benefit from your ancestors understanding of freedom and individual liberty. We do not benefit by importing those who believe in neither, i.e. those who have a culture of sanctioned rape, violence, oppression, and theocracy. The Somali refugees in Minnesota are an excellent example why we should not import those who neither know our concept of liberty nor want our concept of liberty. But they vote democrat so no matter how they present themselves I'm sure they're ok with you.

The very little you have presented in this and your other post has me terribly concerned about the value for dollar of your education. You are clearly not terribly familiar with the history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony; my greatx7 grandfather wrote much of it, so I am.

On another note - it's just sad when the best rhetorical device a debater can rely on is baseless personal attack. I am in no way a failed attorney; there are many attorneys who change careers despite enjoying success in the traditional use of their J.D.

Since you probably salivate over Kelleyanne Conway, you should already know that.

King Philips War.
King Philip's War - Wikipedia
John Leverett - Wikipedia

Before King Phillips War the Massachusetts Bay Colony was also regularly attacked. The fighting was exceptionally brutal on both sides. Both the colonists and the Indians would raid each other's camps pick up infant children by their foot and crack their heads open against a tree in an attempt to anialate the descendants of their enemies. Not bad for puritans. Certainly you've read about this?

Most of my education was paid for by the GI Bill. A reward for getting shot at for the very people you proclaim to care for. I know these people and they are perfectly capeable of defending and fighting for themselves.

King Philip's War was many years after my ancestors landed in 1620, finding safe haven from the religious persecution they had suffered in England - just as I asserted in my post.

I'm not really sure what you're driving at, other than clutching at straws to undermine my point? I assure you, you don't know more about the early history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony than I do.

Religious persecution due to the Counter Reformation and the Council Of Trent by the Jesuits founded by Ignatius of Loyola? The very ones that killed 60 million heretics in Europe and then their disgusting military arm of the Vatican came over to America and founded Georgetown University? The same school you claim to have graduated from??? That one? The irony practically writes itself......

Actually, I would take issue with your understanding of who was persecuting the Pilgrims (Separatists), but that history is all readily available online as well as in actual history books, so I don't need to waste my time educating you. If you're actually interested in getting those fine points correct and not just in personally attacking me, you'll seek out the knowledge yourself.

Yes, life is rich in irony.

My Pilgrim ancestors were such tight ass prigs they didn't allow folks to celebrate Christmas (too much fun!) and flogged folks for all manner of behavior.

400 years later, here I am a once-Episcopalian, now agnostic-leaning-toward-atheism who attended a Jesuit law school with a significant population of Jewish professors/students - which guaranteed many more school holidays than we otherwise would have had, praise Jesus. (Ha! Get it?)

For all their many shortcomings, the Jesuits enjoy a fine tradition of educational excellence with a heavy emphasis on public service - that is what mattered most to me about Georgetown. FYI, while the undergraduate and graduate university still has crucifixes hanging in every classroom, that is not the case at 600 New Jersey Avenue - for obvious reasons there is a bit more arms' length distance in the law school re: all the Catholic stuff. Nevertheless, Father Drinan taught ethics wearing the collar and I was not offended by that just because Grandpa Bill hated the Catholic Church.

The finest thing about Georgetown is the tradition of reconciliation; the blue & gray are representative of the Union and the Confederacy and were adopted by the university in honor of the many patriots who died on both sides of our Civil War.

You just reminded me of a great segue. I went to a Quaker college for my BA and I began to gain an interest in why modern Quakers have turned into agnostic leftists. To be a Quaker you used to have to beleive in the Bible, they were very Lockian in their philosophy, and they could recite much of scripture from memory. Around World War I socialists and communists converted to Quakerism to avoid the draft. Quakers being this welcoming bunch of peace loving Christians let them in to the Religious Society of Friends. Gradually over time leftist reformed the religion until today where you no longer need to be a Christian or beleive in Jesus Christ to be a Quaker. Today Quakerism is a leftist political ideology, not a religion ( See the American Friends Service Cimmitee American Friends Service Committee ). The AFSC is and was so leftist that when they traveled to Cambodia under Pol Pot to help Cambodians they lied about the killing fields because they believed in Pol Pots vision. When they were found out to be liars they just blamed the killings on American involvement in Vietnam where they also rooted for the Vietcong.

This is what happens when the majority becomes the minority in their own society and a great way of explaining why we shouldn't import those who do not share our values and ideas of liberty. Today there are few traditional Quakers left. Why? Because they let outsiders in who did not share their values.

 

[BoSoxGal]

Sounds like Trump's first legal defeat.

Remember when you guys insisted that the U.S. President can do anything he wants when Obama was sitting in the Oval Office? Bet you guys are regretting that shit now.

I keep seeing Trump's brown shirts posting such nonsense, but never with any evidence to back up the claim.

I read lots of criticisms of Obama over the years coming from folks who voted for him - and of course the attacks from the right were incessant. I never heard a liberal say Obama could do anything he wanted - and SURPRISE! the ACLU kept plenty busy challenging governmental overreach over the past 8 years while Obama was in office.

Honestly you right wingers largely operate at the level of jr. high school - and now you have an administration in the White House that perfectly reflects that base, it's just like the Mencken quote in my signature.

I weep for the days of William Buckley.

 

[Tilly]

This is what a true American looks like.

Really,

True Americans have a stupid look on their face ?

And look like Hugh Grant even thoug female??? Lol.

 

[P@triot]

I never heard a liberal say Obama could do anything he wanted

That's because you're a progressive - you only hear what you want to hear. When you hear the truth...you immediately retreat to your "safe space".

 

[Wiskers Von Pussyboots]

King Philips War.
King Philip's War - Wikipedia
John Leverett - Wikipedia

Before King Phillips War the Massachusetts Bay Colony was also regularly attacked. The fighting was exceptionally brutal on both sides. Both the colonists and the Indians would raid each other's camps pick up infant children by their foot and crack their heads open against a tree in an attempt to anialate the descendants of their enemies. Not bad for puritans. Certainly you've read about this?

Most of my education was paid for by the GI Bill. A reward for getting shot at for the very people you proclaim to care for. I know these people and they are perfectly capeable of defending and fighting for themselves.

King Philip's War was many years after my ancestors landed in 1620, finding safe haven from the religious persecution they had suffered in England - just as I asserted in my post.

I'm not really sure what you're driving at, other than clutching at straws to undermine my point? I assure you, you don't know more about the early history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony than I do.

History is a vast subject and no one can truly know it all. That why historians major in parts of history. Mine is Military History with a focus on Indian warfare. Indeed the Massachusetts Bay Colony fought the natives very early in their history but particularly after they recoverd from the illnesses the colonists brought with them during the first colony which prevented them from wageing as early and effective attacks as they could have, although, they did try from time to time. Nevertheless, they fought early, they fought often, and they are your kin.

I never asserted they didn't; I'm very well aware of the actions Governor Bradford - I call him Grandpa Bill - engaged in toward the native population once they ceased to be useful and became an obstacle to expansion of the colony.

I merely asserted that my ancestors found safe haven here as refugees fleeing religious persecution - of that there is no doubt. They promptly set about persecuting others for religious reasons once happily settled here, there is no denying that truth, either.

My larger point remains that we began as a country of refugees/immigrants, and it's nothing but ignorant xenophobia that compels a bunch of descendants of immigrants to support denying safe haven to refugees fleeing war-torn countries just because of the color of their skin or the religion that they practice.

Of note is the fact that none of the terrorist acts perpetrated in this country were perpetrated by people from the countries your Drumpfuhrer is attempting to ban. It's nonsensical in that regard; that he issues such a ban on Holocaust Remembrance Day when we have cause to consider the Jews we turned away who were later murdered by the Nazis is just indescribably disgusting.

Once again, an uneasy peace at best and attempted genocide at worst. Drop the ideology and look at the facts. They may have been in search of a safe haven but it was not granted to them; they had to carve it out for themselves via blood. This isn't ideology, this is factual history. Realism trumps ideology every time.

When I received my bachelors I was thinking of pursuing something along the realm of constitutional history and wrote a number of papers on constitutional disagreements and contraversies that never seemed to stay within the 25 page limit. In all of my studies I noticed a favoritism toward western immigration, and a very narrow favoritism at that. At first I came to the same concludsion. I thought it to be a racist policy. I quickly found out that they truly favored peoples that assimilated easily into their form of government in keeping with their ideas of liberty in which the law you once practiced was founded.

Throughout history peoples who made their own law founded in their own values have alway been weary of outsiders coming in and imposing opposite values not congruent with the foundations of liberty. This is why the right of return to Israel is denied. If the right of return was granted then Israel would cease to be a democracy.

Immigration policy should favor the citizens of a country in keeping with their safety, values, and laws. Peoples who do not beleive in individual liberty, have a high propensity toward violence, treat their women like garbage, and rape little children, are not in keeping with our ideas of liberty. I've been to these countries, I know these people, and I know how they act. It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with culture. Cultures have values, values are an indicator of politics, and politics dictate laws and policy. The Somali refugees in Minnesota are a perfect example of what happens when you import a group of people not congruent with the American experiment. That's not ideology, that's fact. Realism trumps ideology everytime.

You're clearly a xenophobe who is strong on ugly opinions without facts to support them.

Do you have any idea how many Muslims are in the United States? How many of them are 1st or 2nd generation Americans?

Honestly the kind of ugly opinions you hold and spew are the exact reason I don't visit here often. It makes me sick to realize how many people like you exist in this otherwise beautiful country.

There are quite a few first and second generation muslims joining the Islamic state at the moment. However let's nail this thing down shall we?

Suppose there is a culture that values gang rape, eating their own feces, and murdering a random member of society every Tuesday. Now let's suppose they get invaded and oppressed. Question: Would you let them in as refugees?

Now the question is rediculous because no such people exist. I get that. But would you let them in to your country?

 

[BoSoxGal]

The very little you have presented in this and your other post has me terribly concerned about the value for dollar of your education. You are clearly not terribly familiar with the history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony; my greatx7 grandfather wrote much of it, so I am.

On another note - it's just sad when the best rhetorical device a debater can rely on is baseless personal attack. I am in no way a failed attorney; there are many attorneys who change careers despite enjoying success in the traditional use of their J.D.

Since you probably salivate over Kelleyanne Conway, you should already know that.

King Philips War.
King Philip's War - Wikipedia
John Leverett - Wikipedia

Before King Phillips War the Massachusetts Bay Colony was also regularly attacked. The fighting was exceptionally brutal on both sides. Both the colonists and the Indians would raid each other's camps pick up infant children by their foot and crack their heads open against a tree in an attempt to anialate the descendants of their enemies. Not bad for puritans. Certainly you've read about this?

Most of my education was paid for by the GI Bill. A reward for getting shot at for the very people you proclaim to care for. I know these people and they are perfectly capeable of defending and fighting for themselves.

King Philip's War was many years after my ancestors landed in 1620, finding safe haven from the religious persecution they had suffered in England - just as I asserted in my post.

I'm not really sure what you're driving at, other than clutching at straws to undermine my point? I assure you, you don't know more about the early history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony than I do.

Religious persecution due to the Counter Reformation and the Council Of Trent by the Jesuits founded by Ignatius of Loyola? The very ones that killed 60 million heretics in Europe and then their disgusting military arm of the Vatican came over to America and founded Georgetown University? The same school you claim to have graduated from??? That one? The irony practically writes itself......

Actually, I would take issue with your understanding of who was persecuting the Pilgrims (Separatists), but that history is all readily available online as well as in actual history books, so I don't need to waste my time educating you. If you're actually interested in getting those fine points correct and not just in personally attacking me, you'll seek out the knowledge yourself.

Yes, life is rich in irony.

My Pilgrim ancestors were such tight ass prigs they didn't allow folks to celebrate Christmas (too much fun!) and flogged folks for all manner of behavior.

400 years later, here I am a once-Episcopalian, now agnostic-leaning-toward-atheism who attended a Jesuit law school with a significant population of Jewish professors/students - which guaranteed many more school holidays than we otherwise would have had, praise Jesus. (Ha! Get it?)

For all their many shortcomings, the Jesuits enjoy a fine tradition of educational excellence with a heavy emphasis on public service - that is what mattered most to me about Georgetown. FYI, while the undergraduate and graduate university still has crucifixes hanging in every classroom, that is not the case at 600 New Jersey Avenue - for obvious reasons there is a bit more arms' length distance in the law school re: all the Catholic stuff. Nevertheless, Father Drinan taught ethics wearing the collar and I was not offended by that just because Grandpa Bill hated the Catholic Church.

The finest thing about Georgetown is the tradition of reconciliation; the blue & gray are representative of the Union and the Confederacy and were adopted by the university in honor of the many patriots who died on both sides of our Civil War.

You just reminded me of a great segue. I went to a Quaker college for my BA and I began to gain an interest in why modern Quakers have turned into agnostic leftists. To be a Quaker you used to have to beleive in the Bible, they were very Lockian in their philosophy, and they could recite much of scripture from memory. Around World War I socialists and communists converted to Quakerism to avoid the draft. Quakers being this welcoming bunch of peace loving Christians let them in to the Religious Society of Friends. Gradually over time leftist reformed the religion until today where you no longer need to be a Christian or beleive in Jesus Christ to be a Quaker. Now Quakerism is a leftist political ideology, not a religion ( See the American Friends Service Cimmitee American Friends Service Committee ). The AFSC is and was so leftist that when they traveled to Cambodia under Pol Pot to help Cambodians they lied about the killing fields because they believed in Pol Pots vision. When they were found out to be liars they just blamed the killings on American involvement in Vietnam where they also rooted for the Vietcong.

This is what happens when the majority becomes the minority in their own society and a great way of explaining why we shouldn't import those who do not share our values and ideas of liberty. Today there are few traditional Quakers left. Why? Because they let outsiders in who did not share their values.

I don't mean to be rude, but I sure hope you're not teaching history anywhere but here on usmessageboard where most of the audience is already full up with false facts from FAUX News and the mouths of Trump/Conway/Spicer.

 

[Dale Smith]

I see. A victim of economics. The only thing more prevelant than lawyers in the legal system is the giant dung heap of failed lawyers. Indeed there are so many lawyers in the legal profession that if you aren't shit hot then you will surely fail in your chosen career choice. I don't blame you though. I didn't want to put fourth the time an effort required to compeat on such a scale so I opted for a Masters in Military History instead. Nevertheless, your reasoning in why you feel so passionate is ideologically grounded which is my way of saying it is devoid of reason. And your ancestors did not find safe haven in either their country of origin nor their destination whereas they had to fight for their safe haven.

Today we benefit from your ancestors understanding of freedom and individual liberty. We do not benefit by importing those who believe in neither, i.e. those who have a culture of sanctioned rape, violence, oppression, and theocracy. The Somali refugees in Minnesota are an excellent example why we should not import those who neither know our concept of liberty nor want our concept of liberty. But they vote democrat so no matter how they present themselves I'm sure they're ok with you.

The very little you have presented in this and your other post has me terribly concerned about the value for dollar of your education. You are clearly not terribly familiar with the history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony; my greatx7 grandfather wrote much of it, so I am.

On another note - it's just sad when the best rhetorical device a debater can rely on is baseless personal attack. I am in no way a failed attorney; there are many attorneys who change careers despite enjoying success in the traditional use of their J.D.

Since you probably salivate over Kelleyanne Conway, you should already know that.

King Philips War.
King Philip's War - Wikipedia
John Leverett - Wikipedia

Before King Phillips War the Massachusetts Bay Colony was also regularly attacked. The fighting was exceptionally brutal on both sides. Both the colonists and the Indians would raid each other's camps pick up infant children by their foot and crack their heads open against a tree in an attempt to anialate the descendants of their enemies. Not bad for puritans. Certainly you've read about this?

Most of my education was paid for by the GI Bill. A reward for getting shot at for the very people you proclaim to care for. I know these people and they are perfectly capeable of defending and fighting for themselves.

King Philip's War was many years after my ancestors landed in 1620, finding safe haven from the religious persecution they had suffered in England - just as I asserted in my post.

I'm not really sure what you're driving at, other than clutching at straws to undermine my point? I assure you, you don't know more about the early history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony than I do.

Religious persecution due to the Counter Reformation and the Council Of Trent by the Jesuits founded by Ignatius of Loyola? The very ones that killed 60 million heretics in Europe and then their disgusting military arm of the Vatican came over to America and founded Georgetown University? The same school you claim to have graduated from??? That one? The irony practically writes itself......

Actually, I would take issue with your understanding of who was persecuting the Pilgrims (Separatists), but that history is all readily available online as well as in actual history books, so I don't need to waste my time educating you. If you're actually interested in getting those fine points correct and not just in personally attacking me, you'll seek out the knowledge yourself.

Yes, life is rich in irony.

My Pilgrim ancestors were such tight ass prigs they didn't allow folks to celebrate Christmas (too much fun!) and flogged folks for all manner of behavior.

400 years later, here I am a once-Episcopalian, now agnostic-leaning-toward-atheism who attended a Jesuit law school with a significant population of Jewish professors/students - which guaranteed many more school holidays than we otherwise would have had, praise Jesus. (Ha! Get it?)

For all their many shortcomings, the Jesuits enjoy a fine tradition of educational excellence with a heavy emphasis on public service - that is what mattered most to me about Georgetown. FYI, while the undergraduate and graduate university still has crucifixes hanging in every classroom, that is not the case at 600 New Jersey Avenue - for obvious reasons there is a bit more arms' length distance in the law school re: all the Catholic stuff. Nevertheless, Father Drinan taught ethics wearing the collar and I was not offended by that just because Grandpa Bill hated the Catholic Church.

The finest thing about Georgetown is the tradition of reconciliation; the blue & gray are representative of the Union and the Confederacy and were adopted by the university in honor of the many patriots who died on both sides of our Civil War.

[The following is the text of the Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction as recorded in the Journals of the 62nd Congress, 3rd Session, of the United States Congressional Record (House Calendar No. 397, Report No. 1523, 15 February, 1913, pp. 3215-3216), from which it was subsequently torn out. The Oath is also quoted by Charles Didier in his book Subterranean Rome (New York, 1843), translated from the French original. Dr. Alberto Rivera, who escaped from the Jesuit Order in 1967, confirms that the induction ceremony and the text of the Jesuit Oath which he took were identical to what we have cited below. – A. N.]

When a Jesuit of the minor rank is to be elevated to command, he is conducted into the Chapel of the Convent of the Order, where there are only three others present, the principal or Superior standing in front of the altar. On either side stands a monk, one of whom holds a banner of yellow and white, which are the Papal colours, and the other a black banner with a dagger and red cross above a skull and crossbones, with the word INRI, and below them the words IUSTUM NECAR REGES IMPIUS. The meaning of which is: It is just to exterminate or annihilate impious or heretical Kings, Governments, or Rulers.

Upon the floor is a red cross at which the postulant or candidate kneels. The Superior hands him a small black crucifix, which he takes in his left hand and presses to his heart, and the Superior at the same time presents to him a dagger, which he grasps by the blade and holds the point against his heart, the Superior still holding it by the hilt, and thus addresses the postulant:

(The Superior speaks

My son, heretofore you have been taught to act the dissembler: among Roman Catholics to be a Roman Catholic, and to be a spy even among your own brethren; to believe no man, to trust no man. Among the Reformers, to be a Reformer; among the Huguenots, to be a Huguenot; among the Calvinists, to be a Calvinist; among other Protestants, generally to be a Protestant; and obtaining their confidence, to seek even to preach from their pulpits, and to denounce with all the vehemence in your nature our Holy Religion and the Pope; and even to descend so low as to become a Jew among Jews, that you might be enabled to gather together all information for the benefit of your Order as a faithful soldier of the Pope. You have been taught to plant insidiously the seeds of jealousy and hatred between communities, provinces, states that were at peace, and to incite them to deeds of blood, involving them in war with each other, and to create revolutions and civil wars in countries that were independent and prosperous, cultivating the arts and the sciences and enjoying the blessings of peace; to take sides with the combatants and to act secretly with your brother Jesuit, who might be engaged on the other side, but openly opposed to that with which you might be connected, only that the Church might be the gainer in the end, in the conditions fixed in the treaties for peace and that the end justifies the means. You have been taught your duty as a spy, to gather all statistics, facts and information in your power from every source; to ingratiate yourself into the confidence of the family circle of Protestants and heretics of every class and character, as well as that of the merchant, the banker, the lawyer, among the schools and universities, in parliaments and legislatures, and the judiciaries and councils of state, and to be all things to all men, for the Pope's sake, whose servants we are unto death. You have received all your instructions heretofore as a novice, a neophyte, and have served as co-adjurer, confessor and priest, but you have not yet been invested with all that is necessary to command in the Army of Loyola in the service of the Pope. You must serve the proper time as the instrument and executioner as directed by your superiors; for none can command here who has not consecrated his labours with the blood of the heretic; for "without the shedding of blood no man can be saved". Therefore, to fit yourself for your work and make your own salvation sure, you will, in addition to your former oath of obedience to your order and allegiance to the Pope, repeat after me:

(Text of the Oath

I_______________ , now in the presence of Almighty God, the blessed Virgin Mary, the blessed St. John the Baptist, the Holy Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul, and all the saints, sacred host of Heaven, and to you, my Ghostly Father, the superior general of the Society of Jesus, founded by St. Ignatius Loyola, in the pontification of Paul the Third, and continued to the present, do by the womb of the Virgin, the matrix of God, and the rod of Jesus Christ, declare and swear that His Holiness, the Pope, is Christ's Vice-Regent and is the true and only head of the Catholic or Universal Church throughout the earth; and that by the virtue of the keys of binding and loosing given to His Holiness by my Saviour, Jesus Christ, he hath power to depose heretical Kings, Princes, States, Commonwealths, and Governments, and they may be safely destroyed. Therefore to the utmost of my power I will defend this doctrine and His Holiness's right and custom against all usurpers of the heretical or Protestant authority whatever, especially the Lutheran Church of Germany, Holland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway, and the now pretended authority and Churches of England and Scotland, and the branches of same now established in Ireland and on the continent of America and elsewhere and all adherents in regard that they may be usurped and heretical, opposing the sacred Mother Church of Rome. I do now denounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince or State, named Protestant or Liberal, or obedience to any of their laws, magistrates or officers. I do further declare the doctrine of the Churches of England and Scotland of the Calvinists, Huguenots, and others of the name of Protestants or Masons to be damnable, and they themselves to be damned who will not forsake the same. I do further declare that I will help, assist, and advise all or any of His Holiness's agents, in any place where I should be, in Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Ireland or America, or in any other kingdom or territory I shall come to, and do my utmost to extirpate the heretical Protestant or Masonic doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, legal or otherwise. I do further promise and declare that, notwithstanding, I am dispensed with to assume any religion heretical for the propagation of the Mother Church's interest; to keep secret and private all her agents' counsels from time to time, as they entrust me, and not to divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing or circumstances whatever; but to execute all that should be proposed, given in charge, or discovered unto me by you, my Ghostly Father, or any of this sacred order. I do further promise and declare that I will have no opinion or will of my own or any mental reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver (perinde ac cadaver), but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors in the militia of the Pope and of Jesus Christ. That I will go to any part of the world whithersoever I may be sent, to the frozen regions north, jungles of India, to the centres of civilisation of Europe, or to the wild haunts of the barbarous savages of America without murmuring or repining, and will be submissive in all things, whatsoever is communicated to me. I do further promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly and openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Masons, as I am directed to do, to extirpate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex nor condition, and that will hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle, and bury alive these infamous heretics; rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women, and crush their infants' heads against the walls in order to annihilate their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly I will secretly use the poisonous cup, the strangulation cord, the steel of the poniard, or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honour, rank, dignity or authority of the persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agents of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Father of the Society of Jesus. In confirmation of which I hereby dedicate my life, soul, and all corporal powers, and with the dagger which I now receive I will subscribe my name written in my blood in testimony thereof; and should I prove false, or weaken in my determination, may my brethren and fellow soldiers of the militia of the Pope cut off my hands and feet and my throat from ear to ear, my belly be opened and sulphur burned therein with all the punishment that can be inflicted upon me on earth, and my soul shall be tortured by demons in eternal hell forever. That I will in voting always vote for a Knight of Columbus in preference to a Protestant, especially a Mason, and that I will leave my party so to do; that if two Catholics are on the ticket I will satisfy myself which is the better supporter of Mother Church and vote accordingly. That I will not deal with or employ a Protestant if in my power to deal with or employ a Catholic. That I will place Catholic girls in Protestant families that a weekly report may be made of the inner movements of the heretics. That I will provide myself with arms and ammunition that I may be in readiness when the word is passed, or I am commanded to defend the Church either as an individual or with the militia of the Pope. All of which I,_______________, do swear by the blessed Trinity and blessed sacrament which I am now to receive to perform and on part to keep this my oath. In testimony hereof, I take this most holy and blessed sacrament of the Eucharist and witness the same further with my name written with the point of this dagger dipped in my own blood and seal in the face of this holy sacrament.

(He receives the wafer from the Superior and writes his name with the point of his dagger dipped in his own blood taken from over his heart.)

(Superior speaks

You will now rise to your feet and I will instruct you in the Catechism necessary to make yourself known to any member of the Society of Jesus belonging to this rank. In the first place, you, as a Brother Jesuit, will with another mutually make the ordinary sign of the cross as any ordinary Roman Catholic would; then one crosses his wrists, the palms of his hands open, and the other in answer crosses his feet, one above the other; the first points with forefinger of the right hand to the centre of the palm of the left, the other with the forefinger of the left hand points to the centre of the palm of the right; the first then with his right hand makes a circle around his head, touching it; the other then with the forefinger of his left hand touches the left side of his body just below his heart; the first then with his right hand draws it across the throat of the other, and the latter then with a dagger down the stomach and abdomen of the first. The first then says Iustum; and the other answers Necar; the first Reges; the other answers Impious. The first will then present a small piece of paper folded in a peculiar manner, four times, which the other will cut longitudinally and on opening the name Jesu will be found written upon the head and arms of a cross three times. You will then give and receive with him the following questions and answers:

From whither do you come? Answer: The Holy faith.

Whom do you serve? Answer: The Holy Father at Rome, the Pope, and the Roman Catholic Church Universal throughout the world.

Who commands you? Answer: The Successor of St. Ignatius Loyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus or the Soldiers of Jesus Christ.

Who received you? Answer: A venerable man in white hair.

How? Answer: With a naked dagger, I kneeling upon the cross beneath the banners of the Pope and of our sacred order.

Did you take an oath? Answer: I did, to destroy heretics and their governments and rulers, and to spare neither age, nor sex, nor condition; to be as a corpse without any opinion or will of my own, but to implicitly obey my Superiors in all things without hesitation or murmuring.

Will you do that? Answer: I will.

How do you travel? Answer: In the bark of Peter the fisherman.

Whither do you travel? Answer: To the four quarters of the globe.

For what purpose? Answer: To obey the orders of my General and Superiors and execute the will of the Pope and faithfully fulfil the conditions of my oaths.

Go ye, then, into all the world and take possession of all lands in the name of the Pope. He who will not accept him as the Vicar of Jesus and his Vice-Regent on earth, let him be accursed and exterminated.

 

[P@triot]

I never heard a liberal say Obama could do anything he wanted - and SURPRISE! the ACLU kept plenty busy challenging governmental overreach over the past 8 years while Obama was in office.

So wait...now you're saying that Obama routinely exceeded his authority? Why would he do that? I thought he was a (and I quote) "constitutional scholar"?

If what you're saying is true - then Barack Obama was either ignorant of the U.S. Constitution or he knowingly and intentionally violated it over his lust for power. Would you care to venture which it was?

 

[Tilly]

This is what a true American looks like.

That's a man .. .. right?

Yes. It's High Grant in his new film 'Ladyman'

 

[BoSoxGal]

I never heard a liberal say Obama could do anything he wanted

That's because you're a progressive - you only hear what you want to hear. When you hear the truth...you immediately retreat to your "safe space".

I'm actually very skeptical of all government and all political parties, and I don't agree that right-wing Tea Party discourse is 'truth' anymore than what I hear the pundits at MSNBC spouting. Nice try, though.

Go ahead, show me where any liberal said that about Obama, ever. Take your time, I'll wait.

I've been waiting 8 years already for such proof, what's a few more?

 

[BoSoxGal]

King Philip's War was many years after my ancestors landed in 1620, finding safe haven from the religious persecution they had suffered in England - just as I asserted in my post.

I'm not really sure what you're driving at, other than clutching at straws to undermine my point? I assure you, you don't know more about the early history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony than I do.

History is a vast subject and no one can truly know it all. That why historians major in parts of history. Mine is Military History with a focus on Indian warfare. Indeed the Massachusetts Bay Colony fought the natives very early in their history but particularly after they recoverd from the illnesses the colonists brought with them during the first colony which prevented them from wageing as early and effective attacks as they could have, although, they did try from time to time. Nevertheless, they fought early, they fought often, and they are your kin.

I never asserted they didn't; I'm very well aware of the actions Governor Bradford - I call him Grandpa Bill - engaged in toward the native population once they ceased to be useful and became an obstacle to expansion of the colony.

I merely asserted that my ancestors found safe haven here as refugees fleeing religious persecution - of that there is no doubt. They promptly set about persecuting others for religious reasons once happily settled here, there is no denying that truth, either.

My larger point remains that we began as a country of refugees/immigrants, and it's nothing but ignorant xenophobia that compels a bunch of descendants of immigrants to support denying safe haven to refugees fleeing war-torn countries just because of the color of their skin or the religion that they practice.

Of note is the fact that none of the terrorist acts perpetrated in this country were perpetrated by people from the countries your Drumpfuhrer is attempting to ban. It's nonsensical in that regard; that he issues such a ban on Holocaust Remembrance Day when we have cause to consider the Jews we turned away who were later murdered by the Nazis is just indescribably disgusting.

Once again, an uneasy peace at best and attempted genocide at worst. Drop the ideology and look at the facts. They may have been in search of a safe haven but it was not granted to them; they had to carve it out for themselves via blood. This isn't ideology, this is factual history. Realism trumps ideology every time.

When I received my bachelors I was thinking of pursuing something along the realm of constitutional history and wrote a number of papers on constitutional disagreements and contraversies that never seemed to stay within the 25 page limit. In all of my studies I noticed a favoritism toward western immigration, and a very narrow favoritism at that. At first I came to the same concludsion. I thought it to be a racist policy. I quickly found out that they truly favored peoples that assimilated easily into their form of government in keeping with their ideas of liberty in which the law you once practiced was founded.

Throughout history peoples who made their own law founded in their own values have alway been weary of outsiders coming in and imposing opposite values not congruent with the foundations of liberty. This is why the right of return to Israel is denied. If the right of return was granted then Israel would cease to be a democracy.

Immigration policy should favor the citizens of a country in keeping with their safety, values, and laws. Peoples who do not beleive in individual liberty, have a high propensity toward violence, treat their women like garbage, and rape little children, are not in keeping with our ideas of liberty. I've been to these countries, I know these people, and I know how they act. It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with culture. Cultures have values, values are an indicator of politics, and politics dictate laws and policy. The Somali refugees in Minnesota are a perfect example of what happens when you import a group of people not congruent with the American experiment. That's not ideology, that's fact. Realism trumps ideology everytime.

You're clearly a xenophobe who is strong on ugly opinions without facts to support them.

Do you have any idea how many Muslims are in the United States? How many of them are 1st or 2nd generation Americans?

Honestly the kind of ugly opinions you hold and spew are the exact reason I don't visit here often. It makes me sick to realize how many people like you exist in this otherwise beautiful country.

Is there anything that I can do or say to keep your lying, alleged Jesuit trained Georgetown ass out of MY country, troll????

Sorry poopstain, it's just as much mine as yours.

Actually I'd argue it's more mine than yours, because I actually believe in and fight to uphold and defend the Constitution upon which our democracy is based.

 

[BoSoxGal]

I never heard a liberal say Obama could do anything he wanted - and SURPRISE! the ACLU kept plenty busy challenging governmental overreach over the past 8 years while Obama was in office.

So wait...now you're saying that Obama routinely exceeded his authority? Why would he do that? I thought he was a (and I quote) "constitutional scholar"?

If what you're saying is true - then Barack Obama was either ignorant of the U.S. Constitution or he knowingly and intentionally violated it over his lust for power. Would you care to venture which it was?

All Presidents overreach, don't you know your own history?!

So doesn't Congress, all the time - R in control or D in control.

That's why we have the judiciary. And when they screw up, we have the other branches of government. Have you heard of checks & balances?

And over all of them is the watchful eye of the Fourth Estate.


Really, didn't you take civics or American government in middle or high school?

 

[Eloy]

No one is allowed to be sent back. woohoo

It is clear that Trump is a bigoted xenophobic lunatic. Since he has emasculated the Republican Congress, the only way left to put any checks on him will be by the judiciary. Trump is a vulgar loudmouth who is running the United States like a bad movie. He has no concept of American values and his brazen admission that Christians are allowed to enter the country from some countries but not Muslims is testimony of his discrimination on grounds of religion. This must be illegal.

 

[Dale Smith]

This is what a true American looks like.

Really? A administrator for the banksters that wears a black robe that pretends that she is a "judge" is a real American to you?


God help us.......