Apple Joins Nearly 100 U.S. Firms to File Legal Brief Opposing Trump's Immigration Ban

[Romanesq]

Not seeing your point. A very wealthy Syrian used his power and wealth to do his Doctorate in the US. While in the States, he met Jobs' mother and got her pregnant.

What does any of that have to do with the Syrian refugee crisis? Or are you being racist and saying any Syrian who visits America is the same thing? Did you just mention it because his father was Syrian and you're basically saying one Syrian is the same as any other?

Not if they're Christian Syrians. The people most impacted by religious persecution were by some miraculous outcome led by Dear Leader to not escape the ISIS torture and savage murders.

Of all Syrian refugees brought into the US, less than 1% were Christian even though they are 10% of the population and target number one for ISIS.

Then again Dear Leader was backing ISIS and Hillary knew Saudi Arabia and Qatar were big funders.
You don't field an army of tens of thousands by Allah's mercy.

Apple is merely acting like a lot of greedy tech firms. They import H1Bs at 65K a year. Those jobs would be worth double to an American stateside without them. Apple isn't using Sudanese and Somali developers. They just want to score points with the politically correct crowd, the lemmings who are clueless and of course signal their globalists friends.
[doublepost=1486410813][/doublepost]

Because you only read breitbart.

The Muslim community isn't silent on Islamic terrorism.

No, they're not silent. A significant percentage support ISIS. A larger percentage are Islamicists and support Sharia Law.
Explain to us how a little "snip, snip" on girls supports women's rights. We won't even go into the gays thrown off a roof thing.

 

[gnasher729]

You and the others DO realize he has legal authority to do this, right? Right?

Well, not quite. Trump can issue orders, but if they are illegal or unconstitutional, they will be shot down. This order has not quite been shot down yet, there is just a preliminary injunction, but I read what the judge had to say about it, and according to that judge Trump is causing major damage to the states that are suing, and the judge had a list of seven reasons why the states are highly likely to succeed. Now that's _one_ judge, and Trump has been sued in several states, so there are some judges who are a bit slower

 

[Romanesq]

But of course when the white supremacists at Breitbart say its true it must be.

Understand this is a Leftist talking point repeated unceasingly and against Steve Bannon.
Show some proof. Any proof.

 

[TechGeek76]

Understand this is a Leftist talking point repeated unceasingly and against Steve Bannon.
Show some proof. Any proof.

They can't provide proof of anything, they may point you to CNN as proof. LOL!

 

[DUIduckSAUCE]

Interesting you bring that up. It appears police have made arrests in wake of the attack on them in October, after which they had demanded greater freedom in addressing the problem of drug gangs there. Arresting people doesn't sound like a no-go zone to me.
[doublepost=1486408907][/doublepost]
A no go zone refers to an area in which police can't intervene and do their jobs safely.

 

[Romanesq]

As would some Christian fundamentalists. No religion has a monopoly on fundamentalism.

Islamic fundamentalists make a very strong argument or have you not noticed they exceedingly out punch their weight in terrorism, murder, torture and delivering hell to their neighbors wherever they plant their flag.

 

[gnasher729]

I didn't vote for Trump and don't trust him, but every time this popular vote nonsense is brought up, it makes any valid point a liberal would want to make less credible. Both candidates ran campaigns to WIN the Electoral College votes - NOT the popular vote.

Someone said the majority voted for Trump, and the majority is the popular vote, and Trump didn't win the popular vote, so anyone who says "the majority voted for Trump" is just plain wrong. It doesn't matter what strategies they used, and who got the most votes in the Electoral College - fact is that anyone says "the majority voted for Trump" is wrong.

 

[morcutt11]

Nobody is for uncontrolled immigration, that's a straw man argument. The lack of an overreaching unconstitutional EO doesn't change the fact that there are many controls over immigration already in place.

Well, 1) it isn't unconstitutional (unless you're aware of a recent SCOTUS ruling on this that's I'm not) and 2) Trump's position (which isn't unique to Trump) is that the vetting process for issuing visas to these countries isn't sufficient to ensure the security of this country from those traveling on those visas. Immigration, as the courts pointed out during the State of Arizona's attempt to crack down on immigration, is solely in the purview of the Federal government.

 

[macs4nw]

Silly move and symptomatic of Apple's exaggerated sense of its own importance. Trump had a good majority of americans agreeing with him so Apple is now telling most of its customers they are stupid.

This is a temporary, limited pause in immigration from a select few terrorism havens, and the courts will decide if the Trump administration is within their legal right to do so. No need for political grandstanding by the Facebooks, Googles, Microsofts, Netflixes, Snaps, Ubers, Twitters, Intels, Levi Strausses, Chobanis and Amazons of the world.

Consider these company's motives: It's all about them wanting to look good, and tolerant, and PC, but in fact what they really want is to save on labor costs by hiring cheap immigrant workers, which makes them look a bit hypocritical. If they really cared as much about the newcomers as they want us to believe they do, they would pay them on par with American workers.

On the above picture Cook has that look of disgust on his face as he looks at Trump, very telling.

 

[TechGeek76]

This is a temporary, limited pause in immigration from a select few terrorism havens, and the courts will decide if the Trump administration is within their legal right to do so. No need for political grandstanding by the Facebooks, Googles, Microsofts, Netflixes, Snaps, Ubers, Twitters, Intels, Levi Strausses, Chobanis and Amazons of the world.

Consider these company's motives: It's all about them wanting to look good, and tolerant, and PC, but in fact what they really want is to save on labor costs by hiring cheap immigrant workers, which makes them look a bit hypocritical. If they really cared as much about the newcomers as they want us to believe they do, they would pay them on par with American workers.

On the above picture Cook has that look of disgust on his face as he looks at Trump, very telling.

He's, by law, legally allowed. The courts should have 0 say in this.

 

[gnasher729]

We've had issues with all those countries in the past so why did no previous President do the same? Not to mention if you actually do the research those 7 countries are ISIS strongholds. But I guess hatred of Trump takes it all.

If you think that Iran is an ISIS stronghold then you are so wrong, you couldn't be wronger.

If it was up to Iran, they would kill every single ISIS member without hesitation, and vice versa. ISIS is made up of Sunni muslims who went bonkers and said "goodbye" to being human beings. The huge majority in Iran are Shia muslims. To ISIS that's the wrong kind of muslims, the kind that need to be killed. Iran is _the_ enemy of ISIS in the middle east.

 

[bradl]

The U.S. constitution only applies to its citizens.

Again, this is not correct.

BL.

 

[malexandria]

I think they are allowing this beacause it is a perfectly reasonable comment that doesn't attack any specific forum member.

Yes, but calling all Liberals scum, all Muslims and other immigrants rapist and terrorist is ok? I'm done with this site if they are going to have such a vile double standard.

 

[cfedu]

Someone said the majority voted for Trump, and the majority is the popular vote, and Trump didn't win the popular vote, so anyone who says "the majority voted for Trump" is just plain wrong. It doesn't matter what strategies they used, and who got the most votes in the Electoral College - fact is that anyone says "the majority voted for Trump" is wrong.

The majority did vote for Trump (electoral college voters) just not the majority of citizens. It really depends how how it was worded.

 

[jlc1978]

He's, by law, legally allowed. The courts should have 0 say in this.

Actually, the courts get to decide if they a say on everything the government does; SCOTUS gets the final say.

 

[malexandria]

now I can't even go to a Tech site without seeing all of this vile garbage.

 

[macs4nw]

He's, by law, legally allowed. The courts should have 0 say in this.

Based upon what I've read, I also believe he's on solid legal ground, however once legal challenges have been launched, the final decision reverts back to the courts.

 

[oneMadRssn]

The U.S. constitution only applies to its citizens.

The US constitution applies to anyone in the US, even illegal immigrants.

 

[TechGeek76]

Based upon what I've read, I also believe he's on solid legal ground, however once legal challenges have been launched, the final decision reverts back to the courts.

I have no doubt he is legal. It's the law that he has the option to do this.

 

[jlc1978]

The majority did vote for Trump (electoral college voters) just not the majority of citizens. It really depends how how it was worded.

Exactly, except Trump appears to be obsessed with the notion he lost he popular vote and cannot accept that; that obsessive behavior and other personality traits may be his eventual undoing. Unless he accepts that he will lose battles, people will embarrass him in public, openly disagree with him, and in general not treat him with the deference and respect he thinks is his due he is in for a very tough four years.

 

[DUIduckSAUCE]

All of this blowback to the travel ban plays right into Trumps hands. It is inevitable that somebody who wouldn't be allowed into this country under the ban will commit some kind of crime. Trump can now say I told you so.

 

[bradl]

This is literally insane.

Since when do companies meddle in American national security policy?

Immigration and National security are mutually exclusive. You can have both without them interfering with eachother. our idiot of a POTUS has now crossed the line that separates the two, basing it not only on colour of skin, but possibly on type of religion the people in those countries practice.

And depending on status of the person, those are clearly violations of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution.

Those are clear, undeniable facts. Feel free to look them up.

Where were these leftists scum during the Iraq war? Why didn't they try to stop that?

Where were the Reds who didn't do their job to verify the facts and data before authorizing the POTUS with AUMF? you do realize that going into Iraq was BASED ON A LIE, correct? Or is it that people are too naive to remember that?

Or how about the Libyan regime change?

Civil war, which while we had diplomats there, we did have the airspace protected to prevent any other influence coming in.

Where were the Reds on that? Let alone trying to take Qaddafi out back in 86?

Oh, wait, I forgot: Unpatriotic. UnAmerican. "Shut up and Sing or your life will be over".

Absolute scum of the earth.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

We can go tit-for-tat all day with this.

BL.

 

[MrX8503]

Oh boy, here we go. You want to keep trotting out those numbers as fact? YOU prove it. YOU claimed it.

Show me facts that refutes my source.

 

[TechGeek76]

[QUOTE="bradl, post: 24277359, member: 194760"[/QUOTE]
Those are clear, undeniable facts. Feel free to look them up.
[/QUOTE]Yawn...pretty sure if you're not a legal resident, you have no rights here. But hey, let's make stuff up to defend your position, right?

 

[iMi]

By the way... This is what I think is really happening in Tim's head.