2
102

[–] WokePham91 2 points 102 points (+104|-2) ago 

No shit. They actually read the law and aren't complete political hacks. Funny how that works

5
16

[–] LCCVC 5 points 16 points (+21|-5) ago  (edited ago)

Upvoat for you, fuckin kike, I came here to say that exact same thing. Get out of my head.

1
38

[–] WitnesstheSalt 1 points 38 points (+39|-1) ago 

It's real simple. The ban list consists of failed states and known terrorist sponsors. Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Saudi Arabia is a glaring omission on the terrorist sponsor side, but hardly an unexpected one.

0
10

[–] GIF-lLL-S0NG 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago  (edited ago)

cruise missiles into saudi arabia, no fly zones, then steal their oil and gold. Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc were all training missions for the saudi crown jewels...

0
6

[–] Gamio 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Fuck stealing oil just seize all of the funds they have amassed. They will tear themselves apart in a fortnight.

0
0

[–] AmazingFlightLizard 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Except we keep supplying them with bleeding edge weapons, some of which are better than our own.

2
-1

[–] Obergruppenkraken 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago 

There are millions of ethnic jews in saudi arabia. This will never happen.

1
30

[–] snurfle 1 points 30 points (+31|-1) ago 

Still not tired of winning.

1
7

[–] BeHereNow 1 points 7 points (+8|-1) ago 

Never seems to get old, does it? kek

1
4

[–] JuiceTown 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Long before we grow tired of winning, we'll grow tired of the meme "not tired of winning"

President Trump will continue to win, day after day. And each time, someone will post "not tired of winning" and we will yell "please! please stop posting you're not tired of winning! we're so tired of hearing how you're not tired of winning!"

But they will not. They will not stop posting about how they're not tired of winning.

That's how tired of 'tired of winning' we're gonna be.

And we'll just keep winning.

0
14

[–] litux 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

Awesome! Great news!

But...

The court said Monday the ban on visitors from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen could be enforced as long as they lack a "credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States." The justices will hear arguments in the case in October.

Is this enough? What if CAIR or some other bunch of hacks starts manufacturing "a bona fide relationship" with every Joe Abdullah Schmo in Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen?

[–] [deleted] 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
8

[–] SyriansAreTerrorists 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

There are no such thing as refugees in syria. They're an invading muslim army and are nothing but violent savages

0
6

[–] LCCVC 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

As far as I read it this seems correct. Visa's are key here.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] litux 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Oooooh. that's really smart on their part.

0
1

[–] locke-ama-gi 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Wasn't the lecturer example the kind of entry that was denied in Kleinstdat v Mandel?

1
13

[–] LCCVC 1 points 13 points (+14|-1) ago  (edited ago)

I had to go look at r/politics. They are in various modes of salt production, but trying hard to rationalize this in some positive light. Oh to be 15 again.

1
3

[–] ShineShooter 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Their comments are beautiful satire and they don't even know it!

1
1

[–] KeksMex 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

I was banned from faggid for three days for harassment. I cried salty tears for three whole days, kek.

1
13

[–] CHOOCHOOMF 1 points 13 points (+14|-1) ago 

Absolutely rediculous that any judges voted against this. I'm not surprised but if you can read the law is Crystal clear. Fuck the lefties on the supreme Court bunch of traitors.

1
1

[–] voatusernamevoat 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Need better prevention of such individuals getting in judge positions in the first place and a better removing mechanism for those that sneak through.

1
12

[–] Wulfgar 1 points 12 points (+13|-1) ago 

I would be shocked if a country couldn't control it's borders . Also, not a muslim ban.

0
10

[–] Caesarkid1 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

The constitution only applies to American citizens and as such a Muslim, Christian, scientology, or whatever ban on incoming travelers, "refugees", or green card applicants shouldn't be an issue at all.

0
7

[–] SyriansAreTerrorists 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Even if it is a muslim ban, who cares? They're filthy savages. Those cockroaches are a stain on the human race. I know we're not supposed to discriminate based on religion, but i don't think the founding fathers realized that a religion would include barbarians that murder other people for no reason

0
8

[–] Helios-Apollo 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Actually, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams had to deal with muslim pirates terrorizing our merchant ships. The muslims told them the Koran lets them murder infidels with impunity. Funny how little changes despite several centuries passing.

0
5

[–] KeksMex 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

I know we're not supposed to discriminate based on religion

It's not just a religion though, it's a political system as well. So yes we can discriminate against them because they seek to usurp the Constitution.

0
6

[–] InternetUser 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Only 90 days?

0
4

[–] greyhunter4 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago  (edited ago)

USA! USA! wait what? 90 days... Needs to be indefinitely.

0
4

[–] GoogleHatesVoat 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

You have to start somewhere. It gives those nations time to get their shit together. Good luck with that, sand niggers are 'gonna nig.

0
0

[–] 9648240 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Due to the timing and the way SCOTUS hears cases, the 90 days is essentially a moot point. Don't worry.

load more comments ▼ (26 remaining)