Escaped Syrian ISIS women tell their stories
POSTED BY: kpo
UPDATED: Monday, June 8, 2026 20:44
VIEWED: 5266
PAGE 2 of 6
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:That was in deference to the slave trade*, you nitwit, not immigration. And it'll be a cold day in hell when you get me to agree that it was the slave trade that made this nation great.
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight... The Bill of rights unmistakably state here that the congress does not have the right to stop immigration by its own authority. Clearly what many like you and JAYNZTOWN are calling for.
*You should have picked that up from the wording, because you don't "import" refugees.Quote:Tell that to the natives who we exterminated and whose land we stole.
We grew through inclusion SIG not exclusion.
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
It is in the Bill of Rights Nitwit and says nothing about slaves. Even if true it still stands as being in the Bill of Rights Nitwit and therefore applies to todays immigrants and that Nitwit is the point. You don't wish to recognize this because it is a premise you do not believe in being a comrade troll. And it is the premise this country is built on.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I can't help it if you cant' read. It says IMPORT or MIGRATE. IMPORT - to purchase and take delivery of. MIGRATE- BETWEEN states.
Weren't YOU the one who made such a fuss about "context"? Well, here is the CONTEXT of that clause and - yep- it's all about the slave trade!
http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/60/slave-tra
de
The line was carefully carved out, it has been discussed and adjudicated a million times over by now, and somehow you're the only one who hasn't heard the conclusion yet.
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I can't help it if you cant' read. It says IMPORT or MIGRATE. IMPORT - to purchase and take delivery of. MIGRATE- BETWEEN states.
The line was carefully carved out, it has been discussed and adjudicated a million times over by now, and somehow you're the only one who hasn't heard the conclusion yet.
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
Right stupid, it says to migrate or import. Apparently you lack the reasoning power to recognize there is a difference between importing persons and migrating persons. We have since had changes in our society from impetrating persons against their will but people sponsor importing people (family) all the time.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Right stupid, it says to migrate or import. Apparently you lack the reasoning power to recognize there is a difference between importing persons and migrating persons. We have since had changes in our society from impetrating [sic] persons against their will but people sponsor importing people (family) all the time.
THUGR, these are the arguments that came before that clause (in the Constitutional Convention) and the problem it was meant to resolve
Quote:
Although the first debate over slavery at the Constitutional Convention concerned representation (see Article I, Section 2, Clause 3), the second debate arose when Southern delegates objected that an unrestricted congressional power to regulate commerce could be used against Southern commercial interests to restrict or outlaw the slave trade. That the resulting provision was an important compromise is underscored by the fact that the clause stands as the first independent restraint on congressional powers, prior even to the restriction on the power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus.
Taking Southern concerns into consideration, the draft proposed by the Committee of Detail (chaired by John Rutledge of South Carolina) dealt with trade issues as well as those relating to slavery. The draft permanently forbade Congress to tax exports, to outlaw or tax the slave trade, or to pass navigation laws without two-thirds majorities in both houses of Congress. Several delegates strongly objected to the proposal, including Gouverneur Morris, who delivered one of the Convention's most spirited denunciations of slavery, calling it a "nefarious institution" and "the curse of heaven."
When the issue came up for a vote, the Southern delegates themselves were sharply divided. George Mason of Virginia condemned the "infernal traffic," and Luther Martin of Maryland saw the restriction of Congress's power over the slave trade as "inconsistent with the principles of the Revolution and dishonorable to the American character." But delegates from Georgia and South Carolina announced that they would not support the Constitution without the restriction [on Congress] with Charles Pinckney arguing that failing to include the clause would trigger "an exclusion of South Carolina from the Union."
Unresolved, the issue was referred to the Committee of Eleven (chaired by William Livingston of New Jersey), which took the opposite position and recognized a congressional power over the slave trade, but recommended that it be restricted for twelve years, and allowed a tax on slave importation. Although that was a significant change from the Committee of Detail's original proposal, Southern delegates accepted the new arrangement with the extension of the time period to twenty years, from 1800 to 1808.
Agitation against the slave trade was the leading cause espoused by the antislavery movement at the time of the Constitutional Convention, so it is not surprising that this clause was the most immediately controversial of the so-called slave clauses of the proposed Constitution (see Article I, Section 2, Clause 3; Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3; and Article V). Although some denounced the Slave Trade Clause as a major concession to slavery interests, most begrudged it to be a necessary and prudent compromise. James Madison, for example, argued at the Convention that the twenty-year exemption was "dishonorable," but in The Federalist No. 42, he declared that it was "a great point gained in favor of humanity, that a period of twenty years may terminate for ever within these States" what he called an "unnatural traffic" that was "the barbarism of modern policy."
Some claimed that the Commerce Clause gave Congress the power to regulate both the interstate and the foreign slave trade once the twenty-year period had lapsed. James Wilson of Pennsylvania argued, "yet the lapse of a few years, and Congress will have power to exterminate slavery from within our borders."NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight.
I think the time is up on this one.
SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight.
I think the time is up on this one.
HAHAHA!!!
That too!
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The fact that it remains means it applies today. We use it differently than in the 1800's but nonetheless it applies to migrants and refugees. Besides, most of what I speak of is inclusion. A point lost on you.
I hear the same cries today from some that resemble the propaganda of the Nazis of yesterday.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The fact that this clause ... no matter WHAT it means ... had its time limit expire some 200+ years ago should have given you pause.
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
BACK TO THE TOPIC ...
So, this is what I learned:
Very little of the USA-official narrative of "Assad created ISIL" fits into this story. I mean, Where are Assad's barrel bombs? Where is this Syrian-based ISIL, and its burning desire for revenge against Assad?
No, the story plays out almost exactly as I read in a MUCH more realistic coverage elsewhere: Documents recovered when a major ISIL figure (Haji Bakr, true name Samir Abd Muhammad al-Khlifawi) was killed, which detail how ISIL foreigners gradually took control of Syria: ISIL implants would spy on a city or town, identify its major families (those with influence, or resources). They would find evidence of crimes or corruption, and threaten to expose the patriarch or sons unless certain concessions were made- among them, marrying off their daughters to foreign ISIL fighters and making these foreigners "part of the family", able to access family assets.
Quote:
This blueprint was implemented with astonishing accuracy in the ensuing months. The plan would always begin with the same detail: The group recruited followers under the pretense of opening a Dawah office, an Islamic missionary center. Of those who came to listen to lectures and attend courses on Islamic life, one or two men were selected and instructed to spy on their village and obtain a wide range of information. To that end, Haji Bakr compiled lists such as the following:
List the powerful families.
Name the powerful individuals in these families.
Find out their sources of income.
Name names and the sizes of (rebel) brigades in the village.
Find out the names of their leaders, who controls the brigades and their political orientation.
Find out their illegal activities (according to Sharia law), which could be used to blackmail them if necessary.
The spies were told to note such details as whether someone was a criminal or a homosexual, or was involved in a secret affair, so as to have ammunition for blackmailing later. "We will appoint the smartest ones as Sharia sheiks," Bakr had noted. "We will train them for a while and then dispatch them." As a postscript, he had added that several "brothers" would be selected in each town to marry the daughters of the most influential families, in order to "ensure penetration of these families without their knowledge."
The spies were to find out as much as possible about the target towns: Who lived there, who was in charge, which families were religious, which Islamic school of religious jurisprudence they belonged to, how many mosques there were, who the imam was, how many wives and children he had and how old they were. Other details included what the imam's sermons were like, whether he was more open to the Sufi, or mystical variant of Islam, whether he sided with the opposition or the regime, and what his position was on jihad. Bakr also wanted answers to questions like: Does the imam earn a salary? If so, who pays it? Who appoints him? Finally: How many people in the village are champions of democracy?
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-str
ucture-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html
So the next time you hear John McCain choking on his spit about "Assad's" creation of ISIL, please remember that you're listening to a man so twisted by rage that there is nothing he wouldn't say and no ally too heinous that he won't use to satisfy his warmongering desires. (And the next time you see Hillary sidling somewhere near McCain, just note that she's just doing what she's always done best: Triangulating.)
The number of foreign fighters is truly astounding. Look at who these young women get married to: A Saudi (a wealthy one at that), an Iraqi, an Egyptian. Women from Britain and Tunisia and Saudi Arabia and France were within their own morality brigade. This isn't so much a homegrown revolution but a foreign takeover.
In post WWII Europe, these women w
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The fact that this clause ... no matter WHAT it means ... had its time limit expire some 200+ years ago should have given you pause.
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
You can't dismiss something just because it doesn't fit into your agenda. It is a part of the Bill of Rights and the changes made are in the 13th amendment. "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. The part dealing with migration and importing persons stands.
Sorry SIG, once again you are full of shit because you offer as an argument wishful thinking and not fact.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME