Calls To Ban Muslims From Entering the U.S. Are Offensive And Unconstitutional

[Eloy]

The United States did not have a recommendation from the UN Security Council to invade and destroy Iraq. This means that the invasion was illegal.

Damn, boy. wake up. The UN is not a body of law, it is not a court, it has no legal enforcement ability. Legal vs illegal via the UN is ridiculous.

Your ignorance is quite amazing. Did you finish grade school?

The UN Security Council does make law and can decide if a country has violated that law. Remember that international treaties have the force of law.

In order for a body to make law, that body must have judicial and enforcement powers. The UN has neither. There is no such thing as "international law".

International treaties are only binding if both countries have recourse if the other violates the treaty. The Iranians have violated the nuke treaty that Obama made with them, what court do you think we should take them to in order to make them comply? There is no court that would enforce such violations of treaties.

I am beginning to feel sorry for you since you obviously got a terrible education.

The UN does indeed make law and enforces it too. It was the UN which intervened in Bosnia to stop ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Orthodox Serbs.

Violations of international law, such as treaties, can be adjudicated by the UN and the International Criminal Court.
ICC- Welcome to the International Criminal Court

Guess what nimrod? We do not recognize the ICC! Never have, never will!

You don't have to tell me that the USA does not recognize the International Criminal Court. They dare not.

 

[Eloy]

...Says Mike Pence.

We all agree. Muslim bans are offensive. "Muslim Ban" means if you are Muslim, regardless, you are banned. That is a radical departure and differentiation from a temporary ban on countries are banned. Christians from Syria are temporarily banned from entering the US due to the state of the country's strife and violence. Can you stand with Christians from Syria?

The Ban on Muslims is judged to be illegal now so it really doesn't matter at all.

Wait a few minutes and it will be overturned. Than what will you say?

The federal judge in Washington state agrees with me.

 

[Eloy]

Please quit accusing me of ignorance. Insulting is easy to do. For example, I could accuse you of being ignorant of international law but I will not.
International law is found in many international treaties.
The UN Security Council clarifies what law applies in given circumstances. When George W Bush invaded and destroyed Iraq, he did so without the consent of the Security Council. This is illegal. The International Court in The Hague deals with violations but the USA is too big that it gets away with starting wars.

Key members of the United Nations were making a profit off of Saddam. They have not enforced one single resolution, when certain nations had their hand in Iraq's pocket. instead the UN chose to pass additional resolutions on top of what they already agreed upon, giving Iraq chance... after chance... after chance... after chance... after chance. The United Nations has no teeth behind any of their proposed "conditions" placed on Saddam, conditions that have proven to carry no more weight than a simple sheet of paper. EIGHT YEARS, we have seen a complete U.S. administration pass through after Iraq's cease fire conditions, and the United Nations were no further along in getting Iraq to comply with the UN than year one. The United Nations is a bureaucracy of red tape with no real enforcement, they are a road block with no proven historical significance in standing up to rogue Nations that don't comply.

The United States did not have a recommendation from the UN Security Council to invade and destroy Iraq. This means that the invasion was illegal.

Damn, boy. wake up. The UN is not a body of law, it is not a court, it has no legal enforcement ability. Legal vs illegal via the UN is ridiculous.

Your ignorance is quite amazing. Did you finish grade school?

The UN Security Council does make law and can decide if a country has violated that law. Remember that international treaties have the force of law.

Oh my God! You are the dumbest POS on this forum! When you finally get to high school and get an education, you will regret your ways.

Your insult is mild although I am shattered that Redfish agrees with you.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Damn, boy. wake up. The UN is not a body of law, it is not a court, it has no legal enforcement ability. Legal vs illegal via the UN is ridiculous.

Your ignorance is quite amazing. Did you finish grade school?

The UN Security Council does make law and can decide if a country has violated that law. Remember that international treaties have the force of law.

In order for a body to make law, that body must have judicial and enforcement powers. The UN has neither. There is no such thing as "international law".

International treaties are only binding if both countries have recourse if the other violates the treaty. The Iranians have violated the nuke treaty that Obama made with them, what court do you think we should take them to in order to make them comply? There is no court that would enforce such violations of treaties.

I am beginning to feel sorry for you since you obviously got a terrible education.

The UN does indeed make law and enforces it too. It was the UN which intervened in Bosnia to stop ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Orthodox Serbs.

Violations of international law, such as treaties, can be adjudicated by the UN and the International Criminal Court.
ICC- Welcome to the International Criminal Court

Guess what nimrod? We do not recognize the ICC! Never have, never will!

You don't have to tell me that the USA does not recognize the International Criminal Court. They dare not.

OK, please explain why you bring them up when you know that we do not recognize the ICC?

Are you normally prone to destroying your own arguments out of some pathetic self-hatred or what?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Key members of the United Nations were making a profit off of Saddam. They have not enforced one single resolution, when certain nations had their hand in Iraq's pocket. instead the UN chose to pass additional resolutions on top of what they already agreed upon, giving Iraq chance... after chance... after chance... after chance... after chance. The United Nations has no teeth behind any of their proposed "conditions" placed on Saddam, conditions that have proven to carry no more weight than a simple sheet of paper. EIGHT YEARS, we have seen a complete U.S. administration pass through after Iraq's cease fire conditions, and the United Nations were no further along in getting Iraq to comply with the UN than year one. The United Nations is a bureaucracy of red tape with no real enforcement, they are a road block with no proven historical significance in standing up to rogue Nations that don't comply.

The United States did not have a recommendation from the UN Security Council to invade and destroy Iraq. This means that the invasion was illegal.

Damn, boy. wake up. The UN is not a body of law, it is not a court, it has no legal enforcement ability. Legal vs illegal via the UN is ridiculous.

Your ignorance is quite amazing. Did you finish grade school?

The UN Security Council does make law and can decide if a country has violated that law. Remember that international treaties have the force of law.

Oh my God! You are the dumbest POS on this forum! When you finally get to high school and get an education, you will regret your ways.

Your insult is mild although I am shattered that Redfish agrees with you.

Oh, so my comment must be very close to the truth. In what year do you plan on dropping out of school to pursue being a an ignorant liberal slacker on a fulltime basis?

 

[Eloy]

The UN Security Council does make law and can decide if a country has violated that law. Remember that international treaties have the force of law.

In order for a body to make law, that body must have judicial and enforcement powers. The UN has neither. There is no such thing as "international law".

International treaties are only binding if both countries have recourse if the other violates the treaty. The Iranians have violated the nuke treaty that Obama made with them, what court do you think we should take them to in order to make them comply? There is no court that would enforce such violations of treaties.

I am beginning to feel sorry for you since you obviously got a terrible education.

The UN does indeed make law and enforces it too. It was the UN which intervened in Bosnia to stop ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Orthodox Serbs.

Violations of international law, such as treaties, can be adjudicated by the UN and the International Criminal Court.
ICC- Welcome to the International Criminal Court

Guess what nimrod? We do not recognize the ICC! Never have, never will!

You don't have to tell me that the USA does not recognize the International Criminal Court. They dare not.

OK, please explain why you bring them up when you know that we do not recognize the ICC?

Are you normally prone to destroying your own arguments out of some pathetic self-hatred or what?

You continually insult me in your posts. I do not consider it polite to get personal as it only lowers the tone of debate.

The world is bigger than the USA and the International Criminal Court (ICC) is an for the prosecution of war crimes. This thread is concerning Trump's illegal executive order and who can tell yet how many of his decisions are already illegal or will be. Of course the USA, like Israel, does not recognize the ICC. It would be clogged-up with cases if it did. I mention the court as an example of how justice is provided internationally. The USA can also veto decisions of the International Court of Justice. How convenient.

 

[Eloy]

The United States did not have a recommendation from the UN Security Council to invade and destroy Iraq. This means that the invasion was illegal.

Damn, boy. wake up. The UN is not a body of law, it is not a court, it has no legal enforcement ability. Legal vs illegal via the UN is ridiculous.

Your ignorance is quite amazing. Did you finish grade school?

The UN Security Council does make law and can decide if a country has violated that law. Remember that international treaties have the force of law.

Oh my God! You are the dumbest POS on this forum! When you finally get to high school and get an education, you will regret your ways.

Your insult is mild although I am shattered that Redfish agrees with you.

Oh, so my comment must be very close to the truth. In what year do you plan on dropping out of school to pursue being a an ignorant liberal slacker on a fulltime basis?

You do not expect me to answer your insulting question, surely.

 

[basquebromance]

I don't want anyone let into this country whose beliefs are still stuck in the 7th Century. do your mideival shit in the desert, but not here.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

In order for a body to make law, that body must have judicial and enforcement powers. The UN has neither. There is no such thing as "international law".

International treaties are only binding if both countries have recourse if the other violates the treaty. The Iranians have violated the nuke treaty that Obama made with them, what court do you think we should take them to in order to make them comply? There is no court that would enforce such violations of treaties.

I am beginning to feel sorry for you since you obviously got a terrible education.

The UN does indeed make law and enforces it too. It was the UN which intervened in Bosnia to stop ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Orthodox Serbs.

Violations of international law, such as treaties, can be adjudicated by the UN and the International Criminal Court.
ICC- Welcome to the International Criminal Court

Guess what nimrod? We do not recognize the ICC! Never have, never will!

You don't have to tell me that the USA does not recognize the International Criminal Court. They dare not.

OK, please explain why you bring them up when you know that we do not recognize the ICC?

Are you normally prone to destroying your own arguments out of some pathetic self-hatred or what?

You continually insult me in your posts. I do not consider it polite to get personal as it only lowers the tone of debate.

The world is bigger than the USA and the International Criminal Court (ICC) is an for the prosecution of war crimes. This thread is concerning Trump's illegal executive order and who can tell yet how many of his decisions are already illegal or will be. Of course the USA, like Israel, does not recognize the ICC. It would be clogged-up with cases if it did. I mention the court as an example of how justice is provided internationally. The USA can also veto decisions of the International Court of Justice. How convenient.

I insult you because you continue to trot out nothing but lies. You call it an illegal order. How can something that is codified in US law (signed by Obama BTW) be illegal? Are you that screwed up in the head? You are either incredibly stupid or ignorant to the point of needing a keeper!

You trot of the ICC as justification for some unknown reason and then claim you knew that you were wrong. Who does that? I can tell you who does that! A complete and utter moron!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Damn, boy. wake up. The UN is not a body of law, it is not a court, it has no legal enforcement ability. Legal vs illegal via the UN is ridiculous.

Your ignorance is quite amazing. Did you finish grade school?

The UN Security Council does make law and can decide if a country has violated that law. Remember that international treaties have the force of law.

Oh my God! You are the dumbest POS on this forum! When you finally get to high school and get an education, you will regret your ways.

Your insult is mild although I am shattered that Redfish agrees with you.

Oh, so my comment must be very close to the truth. In what year do you plan on dropping out of school to pursue being a an ignorant liberal slacker on a fulltime basis?

You do not expect me to answer your insulting question, surely.

Why not? All of your posts indicate that you have attained no more than a middle school level of understanding of any of the concepts being discussed. My grandson in 4th grade is more in tune with reality than you apparently can muster.

 

[Eloy]

The UN does indeed make law and enforces it too. It was the UN which intervened in Bosnia to stop ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Orthodox Serbs.

Violations of international law, such as treaties, can be adjudicated by the UN and the International Criminal Court.
ICC- Welcome to the International Criminal Court

Guess what nimrod? We do not recognize the ICC! Never have, never will!

You don't have to tell me that the USA does not recognize the International Criminal Court. They dare not.

OK, please explain why you bring them up when you know that we do not recognize the ICC?

Are you normally prone to destroying your own arguments out of some pathetic self-hatred or what?

You continually insult me in your posts. I do not consider it polite to get personal as it only lowers the tone of debate.

The world is bigger than the USA and the International Criminal Court (ICC) is an for the prosecution of war crimes. This thread is concerning Trump's illegal executive order and who can tell yet how many of his decisions are already illegal or will be. Of course the USA, like Israel, does not recognize the ICC. It would be clogged-up with cases if it did. I mention the court as an example of how justice is provided internationally. The USA can also veto decisions of the International Court of Justice. How convenient.

I insult you because you continue to trot out nothing but lies. You call it an illegal order. How can something that is codified in US law (signed by Obama BTW) be illegal? Are you that screwed up in the head? You are either incredibly stupid or ignorant to the point of needing a keeper!

You trot of the ICC as justification for some unknown reason and then claim you knew that you were wrong. Who does that? I can tell you who does that! A complete and utter moron!

This is the last insult of yours that I will see. You will not hear from me again.

 

[2aguy]

...Says Mike Pence.

We all agree. Muslim bans are offensive. "Muslim Ban" means if you are Muslim, regardless, you are banned. That is a radical departure and differentiation from a temporary ban on countries are banned. Christians from Syria are temporarily banned from entering the US due to the state of the country's strife and violence. Can you stand with Christians from Syria?

The Ban on Muslims is judged to be illegal now so it really doesn't matter at all.

Wait a few minutes and it will be overturned. Than what will you say?

The federal judge in Washington state agrees with me.

He also supports the openly racist Black Lies Matter...he should be impeached......racism has no place in a courtroom.

 

[Unkotare]

Damn, boy. wake up. The UN is not a body of law, it is not a court, it has no legal enforcement ability. Legal vs illegal via the UN is ridiculous.

Your ignorance is quite amazing. Did you finish grade school?

The UN Security Council does make law and can decide if a country has violated that law. Remember that international treaties have the force of law.

In order for a body to make law, that body must have judicial and enforcement powers. The UN has neither. There is no such thing as "international law".

International treaties are only binding if both countries have recourse if the other violates the treaty. The Iranians have violated the nuke treaty that Obama made with them, what court do you think we should take them to in order to make them comply? There is no court that would enforce such violations of treaties.

I am beginning to feel sorry for you since you obviously got a terrible education.

The UN does indeed make law and enforces it too. It was the UN which intervened in Bosnia to stop ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Orthodox Serbs.

Violations of international law, such as treaties, can be adjudicated by the UN and the International Criminal Court.
ICC- Welcome to the International Criminal Court

Guess what nimrod? We do not recognize the ICC! Never have, never will!

You don't have to tell me that the USA does not recognize the International Criminal Court. They dare not.

"Dare not"? Need not.

 

[Eloy]

The UN Security Council does make law and can decide if a country has violated that law. Remember that international treaties have the force of law.

In order for a body to make law, that body must have judicial and enforcement powers. The UN has neither. There is no such thing as "international law".

International treaties are only binding if both countries have recourse if the other violates the treaty. The Iranians have violated the nuke treaty that Obama made with them, what court do you think we should take them to in order to make them comply? There is no court that would enforce such violations of treaties.

I am beginning to feel sorry for you since you obviously got a terrible education.

The UN does indeed make law and enforces it too. It was the UN which intervened in Bosnia to stop ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Orthodox Serbs.

Violations of international law, such as treaties, can be adjudicated by the UN and the International Criminal Court.
ICC- Welcome to the International Criminal Court

Guess what nimrod? We do not recognize the ICC! Never have, never will!

You don't have to tell me that the USA does not recognize the International Criminal Court. They dare not.

"Dare not"? Need not.

The Americans were keen to be represented on an international court such as Nürnberg in the last century when they are not in the dock but shy away from courts that would convict them.

 

[Unkotare]

In order for a body to make law, that body must have judicial and enforcement powers. The UN has neither. There is no such thing as "international law".

International treaties are only binding if both countries have recourse if the other violates the treaty. The Iranians have violated the nuke treaty that Obama made with them, what court do you think we should take them to in order to make them comply? There is no court that would enforce such violations of treaties.

I am beginning to feel sorry for you since you obviously got a terrible education.

The UN does indeed make law and enforces it too. It was the UN which intervened in Bosnia to stop ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Orthodox Serbs.

Violations of international law, such as treaties, can be adjudicated by the UN and the International Criminal Court.
ICC- Welcome to the International Criminal Court

Guess what nimrod? We do not recognize the ICC! Never have, never will!

You don't have to tell me that the USA does not recognize the International Criminal Court. They dare not.

"Dare not"? Need not.

The Americans were keen to be represented on an international court such as Nürnberg in the last century when they are not in the dock but shy away from courts that would convict them.

Such 'courts ' only ever have whatever legitimacy we choose to give them, only when we choose to give it.

 

[Eloy]

The UN does indeed make law and enforces it too. It was the UN which intervened in Bosnia to stop ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Orthodox Serbs.

Violations of international law, such as treaties, can be adjudicated by the UN and the International Criminal Court.
ICC- Welcome to the International Criminal Court

Guess what nimrod? We do not recognize the ICC! Never have, never will!

You don't have to tell me that the USA does not recognize the International Criminal Court. They dare not.

"Dare not"? Need not.

The Americans were keen to be represented on an international court such as Nürnberg in the last century when they are not in the dock but shy away from courts that would convict them.

Such 'courts ' only ever have whatever legitimacy we choose to give them, only when we choose to give it.

That's handy.

 

[Unkotare]

Guess what nimrod? We do not recognize the ICC! Never have, never will!

You don't have to tell me that the USA does not recognize the International Criminal Court. They dare not.

"Dare not"? Need not.

The Americans were keen to be represented on an international court such as Nürnberg in the last century when they are not in the dock but shy away from courts that would convict them.

Such 'courts ' only ever have whatever legitimacy we choose to give them, only when we choose to give it.

That's handy.

That's reality.

 

[Redfish]

Damn, boy. wake up. The UN is not a body of law, it is not a court, it has no legal enforcement ability. Legal vs illegal via the UN is ridiculous.

Your ignorance is quite amazing. Did you finish grade school?

The UN Security Council does make law and can decide if a country has violated that law. Remember that international treaties have the force of law.

In order for a body to make law, that body must have judicial and enforcement powers. The UN has neither. There is no such thing as "international law".

International treaties are only binding if both countries have recourse if the other violates the treaty. The Iranians have violated the nuke treaty that Obama made with them, what court do you think we should take them to in order to make them comply? There is no court that would enforce such violations of treaties.

I am beginning to feel sorry for you since you obviously got a terrible education.

The UN does indeed make law and enforces it too. It was the UN which intervened in Bosnia to stop ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Orthodox Serbs.

Violations of international law, such as treaties, can be adjudicated by the UN and the International Criminal Court.
ICC- Welcome to the International Criminal Court

please let us know where we can find all of the international law statutes that every country on earth has agreed to be subject to and comply with.

Please do some research. You are making a fool of yourself.

It would take several volumes to enumerate all the international agreements between countries, companies, and institutions which make up international law. For example, shipping and navigation rights are bound by international law. "Merchant shipping is one of the most heavily regulated industries and was amongst the first to adopt widely implemented international safety standards."
ICS | The Regulation of International Shipping
Then there is international copyright law. "In general, copyright is a form of legal protection given to content creators through the assignment of specific rights to works that qualify for protection."
International Copyright Basics - RightsDirect
A book could be written on international postal regulations alone which are meant in part "to promote and encourage unrestricted and undistorted competition in the provision of international postal services and other international delivery services, except where provision of such services by private companies may be prohibited by law of the United States".
39 U.S. Code § 407 - International postal arrangements
Where do I stop?
I can assure you it is not I who is a fool.

Those are not LAWS. There is no enforcement body or court if they are violated. Do you really believe that the Chinese comply with copyright laws?

You really need to find another thread, you have made a complete fool of yourself on this one.

 

[Redfish]

...Says Mike Pence.

We all agree. Muslim bans are offensive. "Muslim Ban" means if you are Muslim, regardless, you are banned. That is a radical departure and differentiation from a temporary ban on countries are banned. Christians from Syria are temporarily banned from entering the US due to the state of the country's strife and violence. Can you stand with Christians from Syria?

The Ban on Muslims is judged to be illegal now so it really doesn't matter at all.

Wait a few minutes and it will be overturned. Than what will you say?

The federal judge in Washington state agrees with me.

His ruling will be overturned. Watch.

 

[Redfish]

In order for a body to make law, that body must have judicial and enforcement powers. The UN has neither. There is no such thing as "international law".

International treaties are only binding if both countries have recourse if the other violates the treaty. The Iranians have violated the nuke treaty that Obama made with them, what court do you think we should take them to in order to make them comply? There is no court that would enforce such violations of treaties.

I am beginning to feel sorry for you since you obviously got a terrible education.

The UN does indeed make law and enforces it too. It was the UN which intervened in Bosnia to stop ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Orthodox Serbs.

Violations of international law, such as treaties, can be adjudicated by the UN and the International Criminal Court.
ICC- Welcome to the International Criminal Court

Guess what nimrod? We do not recognize the ICC! Never have, never will!

You don't have to tell me that the USA does not recognize the International Criminal Court. They dare not.

"Dare not"? Need not.

The Americans were keen to be represented on an international court such as Nürnberg in the last century when they are not in the dock but shy away from courts that would convict them.

so you are a naïve brit. were you marching in the streets last night dressed up as a vagina?