The ABA convention's most burning question: "Are asylum-seekers endangering national security?"
At the recent American Bar Association annual convention in
San Francisco, I managed to come up with several burning questions. For
instance, why are they serving us giant pretzels? It's San Francisco,
for crying out loud. Shouldn't we be getting crab salad and sourdough
instead?
And here's another burning question. "When the ABA showed us the film And Then They Came for Us
regarding the 1940s illegal concentration camps for Japanese-American
citizens, why did the rows and rows of barracks in the movie remind me
so much of the rows and rows of barracks in the current concentration
camps at our southern border?"
https://www.thentheycamedoc.com/
https://www.thentheycamedoc.com/
And my next burning question? "If Japanese-Americans were incarcerated
illegally because they were accused of being a threat to national
security, then how come that threat was never proven?"
According to an ABA panel that spoke on this subject the other day,
the answer is, "Hell, no!" A threat was never proven and, in fact, what was proven later
was that our government had actually even doctored the evidence. Even
that freak J. Edgar Hoover said that Japanese-Americans never posed a
threat to America.
So. Next burning question. "Do the Honduran refugees who are legally
seeking asylum at our southern borders actually pose a threat to
America's national security -- or is this just another trumped-up
charge?" I think that asylum seekers are getting a bum rap. And
apparently the ABA thinks so too.
Who in their right mind can possibly prove that two-month-old babies
are a clear-and-present danger to America's national security? Nobody
can.
But if two-month-old babies actually do
pose such a huge threat to America's national security, then why the
freak is our government spending 800 billion dollars a year on nuclear
weapons, tanks and killer drones to defend us against babies? Get real. Shouldn't they be spending all that money on diapers and cradles instead?Another interesting thing that I learned from this ABA panel was with regard to the Rule of Law. "The Rule of Law isn't as important than the content of that Rule." Nazi Germany was famous for its extensive Rule of Law. GWB followed his own Rule of Law. Obama and Clinton instigated NATO's phony "humanitarian" Rule of Law in their illegal invasions of Syria and Libya and just look where that got us. And Donald Trump's so-called Rule of Law? Yeah, right. I rest my case! https://unac.notowar.net/2019/08/09/another-perspective-on-middle-east-peace/
__________________________________________
Stop Wall Street and War Street from destroying our world. And while you're at it, please buy my books. https://www.amazon.com/Jane-Stillwater/e/B00IW6O1RM
