For the past couple of years nothing has stirred the passions of the people more than this issue of "illegal" immigration. Let me warn EVERYONE who posts here. Over the next FOUR (4) months, this thread will be the ONLY THREAD WE DEVOTE TO THIS ISSUE. You can mention the topic in other threads here, but this one is the last word on the subject as a topic.
There are going to be some simple rules:
1) DO NOT quote entire posts from a previous poster on this thread. Copy and paste the sentences you want to respond to. Don't waste bandwidth nor the time of other posters by repeating the same text over and over. If someone posts something here you disagree with, copy and paste those sentences you disagree with - NOT the entire post.
2) Each post will be limited to twelve (12) paragraphs OR no more than two (2) consecutive posts of ten (10) pagagraphs. People simply will not read a chapter on any given issue by any single poster as a general rule.
3) Do NOT make a shotgun approach of making accusations. Make your posts so that someone can reasonable respond to the issue (s) without having to write a book. Don't force people to respond to 20 different issues when you post your opinion.
4) Be respectful toward one another and don't call people names nor post cartoons, pictures, etc. that detract from the spirit of this thread... and the spirit of this thread is the TRUTH.
Failure to observe the rules of this thread means that I will copy your response and send it back to you... and then I will delete your post here and you will have to post again, less the parts of your post that violated the rules.
I'll start off and you can start posting. Give me the facts.
Let me tell you up front, I am FOR Amnesty... and I don't mean this chicken squeeze bill before Congress right now. I'm FOR plain old AMNESTY.
I oppose the current immigration bill before Congress, not for the immigration parts, but for the attacks on privacy rights and the fact that this issue is being used to build up a bigger and more intrusive federal government.
It has been repeated many times that the American people hire, rent to, buy from, sell to, and do business with people they call "illegal aliens." So, IMO, my first argument with the build a bigger government concept is that you're doing this stuff to yourselves. And NO government can save you from yourself, no matter how big you build it.
If you've ever been to places like Chinatown in San Francisco, you've witnessed other cultures building communities within the United States that operate almost independently of "our" system. Most of those people, along with what you call "illegal aliens" are proving my point.
The situation we've created over the past few decades is quite complex. Judges have "illegal aliens" brought before them. The judge says, "Mr. Illegal Alien you were caught doing 50 in a 35 mph zone. You had no license and no tag. I fine you $1,000." The "illegal alien" pays the fine and goes about his merry way. The judge has committed a felony. He charged a fine for the misdemeanor in his jurisdiction, filling his local coffers, but then releases what you call an "illegal alien" (a suspected felon) back onto the streets. Who is going to send the judges to prison?
The landlord rents to people he has every reason to suspect are "illegal aliens." The current plan is to punish the so - called "illegal alien" while allowing the landlord to go free. Ditto for the employer... AND thousands of other people who are engaged in this scheme. Even the Bank of America OPENLY advertises that they will help them open accounts and send money to Mexico with NO CHARGE for the wiring services.
If we were to do "our" duty, most of America would be in prison and what was left of the government would own the houses and businesses in America. And in the final analysis, most of what the "patriot movement" proposes is unconstitutional, immoral, illegal, unconsciounable, and an absolute abomination. Why?
Justice is blind no matter what our feelings about race, foreigners, or immigration for that matter. The Pledge of Allegiance has the words "and liberty and justice for all" in it. Perhaps they missed it. It is not just that this condition has existed for decades and now the only punishment the "patriots" want to mete out is aimed at those least able to defend themselves. And it does NOTHING to punish those who helped facilitate the perceived "problem."
Finally, the solutions come at a cost. And that cost affects you and I in terms of freedom and liberty. I won't even begin to mention them, but will save some of it for a future post. So, bring on your opinions and convince me that I'm wrong.
A couple of days ago, someone asked on another board who the F... I thought I was writing about this "illegal immigration" stuff. This guy went on to say that I was just some dumb ass with a really bizarre opinion.
Well, it is partly true that I'm just another dumb S.O.B. with an opinion on this subject; however, I believe that we must debate and discuss this issue lest we allow forces that oppose us to take control of the subject matter. The flip side of this coin is this:
I manned the borders in the 1970s; spoke publicly about the issue throughout the 1980s; continued to speak out and go on tv and the radio along with doing more newspaper articles than I care to remember about the topic matter. I've had actual courtroom experience and know more about the legal issues than anyone posting on ANY of the so - called "patriot / militia discussion boards. In short, I'm a legend in my own mind.
But I care about my country. And I feel that the sheeple, drunken on the media attention they've gotten on this subject, fail to examine many of the issues and most of the long term ramifications of their failure to think before acting. If a cure is worse than a disease, you may be better off to start looking for a better cure or maybe a way to live with the disease.
In this crazy debate what we're seeing are people who understand only three basic things:
1) The undocumented immigrant broke the law
2) Some whiz kid who publishes a lot of political commentary told these folks the borders are "porous" (a term most of the anti - immigrationists cannot define and never use outside of this discussion)
3) That "illegal" immigration threatens our "borders, language, and culture."
What these people fail to see is that while the "illegal aliens" broke the law, so did the U.S. employer who hired them, the landlord who rented to them, and on and on that list goes. What is important to note is that when we are talking about companies like WalMart and Swift, the fact is those people paid fines for the criminal activity related to "illegal" immigration and were forgiven by our system of jurisprudence.
So, in my first analysis, the anti immigrationists cannot give us a single good reason that we cannot have an amnesty and do formally what the U.S. citizenry has done in reality... and that is to legitimize "illegal aliens.
Insofar as the borders being "porous" the borders have been wide open during the American Revolution, the War of 1812, the Invasion of Spanish Florida in 1819, the U.S. - Mexican War, War Between the States, the "Spanish - American War", the Banana Wars, U.S. occupation of Vera Cruz, World War I, World War II, The Cold War, the Korean War, Intervention in Lebanon, Second Indochina war, Vietnam War, Iranian Hostage Crisis, Lebanese Intervention, Grenada Invasion, First Persian Gulf War, Invasion of Panama, Second Persian Gulf War, No Fly Zone War, etc. etc.
The "open borders" argument is pretty lame considering America's history. I think that most people cannot differentiate between a safe border and one that has been "secured." And in government parlance, once the government OWNS the property, it will be secured. History shows that the border can be adquately secured AND remain OPEN.
Lastly on this matter, the part about "borders," language, and culture being objectives, the reality is that American patriots have no borders, are selling out their language (such as rappers destroying the English language.) The "culture" argument is one of race and that is all its about.
So, why should we bother to study this topic?
If you are over the age of 35, you have lived in the lap of luxury compared to virtually every other nation on the planet. You've had freedom, liberty, and some semblance of Rights for the most part.
But, the reality is that governments are really sophiscated and the wars we will be engaged in will be more psychological and propaganda as opposed to shooting it out on a battlefield. With that said, the facts point out very strongly that the anti - immigration sentiment is a diversion for bigger and more dangerous forms of legislation AND a tool to con us into accepting the New World Order / Absolute Police State goals and objectives of those behind the scenes.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? ..." (Mark 8: 36) Today, we have the ILLUSION that the patriot "movement" can win this war against "illegal immigration" without having to be accountable for their part in the status quo.
Not only is that logic absurd, it should tell the rational person that something isn't right and deserves to be examined to the fullest possible extent. Well, nobody has given me a single reason why amnesty should not be considered. Shall we continue?
Friends, I'm getting a lot of e mail on this, but nobody wants to jump in... at least just yet. That forces me to violate my own rules of the thread and post more consecutive responses.
Remember each response should be no more than one posting of 12 or fewer paragraphs or two separate consecutive responses of ten or fewer paragraphs each. Then, when someone else responds, you can reply once again within those same parameters. Let me try once more.
In the 1990s the militia "movement" took off like a rocket. The liberal news media hounded the individual militia groups. The MOG organization was infiltrated by some nutjobs trying to prove that I was turning the militia into a Christian Identity church. BTW, for those of you who know me, that would have been one hell of a trick.
For the most part, the militia rejected the notion of white supremacy and race in general. One of the most popular recruiting tools at the time was a book called Operation Vampire Killer 2000 distributed by Police Against the New World Order. Here is part of what they said:
4) "Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance. (Racial differences?)" That statement was made as part of a list of communist goals
"RACE WARS: We will see the fanning of the flames of their planned RACE WAR program in the months ahead as government, through some of their covert national organizations, promotes "whites hating people of color" and vice-versa. Aided by their controlled media, and N.W.O. government-paid agitators/"leaders" on both sides, the goal is to frighten Americans, of all colors, into accepting Martial Law." That book is still one of the best introductions to what we stand for AND bear in mind the prediction here was made prior to the year 2000. Read this book free at:
In 1990, the immigration condition existed, but it did not register on the list of goals and objectives of the militia nor any patriot group trying to save America. We understood that there were bigger fish to fry. But, the bottom line is that the New World Order seeks to divert your attention from the real issues so you will accept Martial Law AND even worse that you will participate in your own destruction under the pretext that this government can provide you with temporary safety - in this case that government can save you from the so - called "Hispanic takeover."
One of the prime examples of how you will be conned into accepting Martial Law lies in the silly notion of "securing the borders" via the fence idea and using all the new technologies available. Just yesterday, some guy by the last name of Morris was on the nationally syndicated radio show Michael Savage. Morris pointed out that it was Democrats who were opposed to National ID and using high technology while Republicans were the ones who wanted to employ all the latest gadgetry along the southern borders. Yet less than a decade ago, the militias in this country were opposed to the Orwellian concept (and I'll explain that term for the younger readers in a future post) as a way to make us feel safe.
One of those high tech tools being considered to observe activity along the borders is high tech drones. These drones are high tech airplanes which only carry cameras. They usually fly high enough to avoid being seen, are very small, and have an exceptional range. In Great Britain, these drones are being used to spy on the citizenry... exactly how they will be used against the American people once we beg for their use along the borders. For more information about this high tech nightmare and its implications toward privacy rights, see this link:
Okay, we're on my last posting this week - or until someone posts something which might require a response.
Today I got an e mail which says, "I don't have anything against immigrants. The illegals (sic) should just go to the back of the line like everybody else." I've responded on several boards and to several people sending me communications on this aspect. Of course, they say that and then go into the litany of media contrived excuses (allegations of free medical care, 1 out of 3 prisoners being "illegal" aliens, free federal handouts, etc., etc.) Let's address this subject once and for all.
No matter what your feelings on the subject, the federal government treats illegal border crossings as a CIVIL VIOLATION of the law. The correct definition of a crime is:
An act committed or omitted in violation of a law forbidding or commanding it and for which punishment is imposed upon conviction. http://www.answers.com/topic/crime
If you consider the facts, the only "punishment" the United States has ever meted out to so called "illegals" is a free bus ride back into Mexico. To call them "criminals" may make you feel better about yourself, but wishing it won't make it true. Furthermore, being in the United States is NOT a crime. The actual illegal border crossing is a crime as is over-staying one's visa. But if you aren't caught in the act, it is then treated as a CIVIL VIOLATION.
Next, everyone is talking about "sending those "illegals" to the back of the line like everyone else." Do what? There is no line for those people who want to enter the country as a Temporary Guest Worker. It simply does not exist. It is the double talking liberals who use doublespeak to get you into the mindset of thinking the debate is about citizenship.
The truth be told, we don't need any more "citizens" from foreign countries. We only have a finite amount of land for the people living here permanently as it is. However, we do have a situation where employers want to hire the foreigners AND we have a supply of foreigners willing to take the jobs. An employer should have the right to hire whomever he or she chooses. And our system should provide a way for people to come here and take advantage of the offer of a job, at least for a certain amount of time.
I truly feel that the facts and the laws will bear out that if America tried an all out conflict to remove all the so - called "illegal aliens," the American people would lose so big, the damage would be irreversible in short order. Hopefully, by the end of this thread, we can learn about the options available.
Let me explain: When some people are advocating this mass deportation stuff, they fail to realize that babies born in the United States to "illegal" parents, the baby is a legal citizen of the United States. As such, when that baby reaches 18, they have a right to petition the government to allow close family members to come into the United States (and I think that includes applying for citizenship as well.) With all these estimates floating around from 10 million to 20 million "illegal aliens" in the United States, you have to consider this:
Between legal immigrants and the children born to "illegal aliens" America has reached the point of no return with regard to having a major Hispanic presence in America. Legislation can only serve to fool you into believing that government is saving you, when the reality is, you have to save yourself and become the master of your destiny. Unless you are willing to forego the bigger and more intrusive government, the issue will grow so rapidly at a rate that will astonish you. It's one reason that the politicians have avoided doing anything about immigration per se and leaving the hard decisions to the New World Order advocates. Okay, that's all until next week.
Despite the position of this board, there is still ANOTHER "illegal immigration" thread on this board. Everybody wants you to have the benefit of reading what someone else said in support of building the bigger government to fight "illegal immigration" but, nobody is paying attention to the facts being brought out in this thread.
Barring any questions or input from anyone on this, I will do two (2) sets of postings as per the thread requirements and then allow people to commit national suicide. At least I gave this topic a shot.
If you clicked on the link in an earlier thread concerning the book, Operation Vampire Killer 2000, you may have read about the Hegelian Principle. What is the Hegelian Principle?
The Hegelian Principle was formulated by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, German philosopher. It is a process intended to produce Oneness of Mind through a process of 1) thesis: embodying a particular view or position; 2) antithesis: providing an opposing or contrary position; and 3) synthesis: which reconciles the two previous positions and then becomes the basis of a new thesis…in accordance with the laws of dialectical materialism (Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary). In theory, through a continual process of evolution, Oneness of Mind is achieved. This process can also be used to 1) create crisis, 2) opposition to crisis, to 3) effect the wanted solution.
In 2005 the New World Order fielded their prime candidate, Jim Gilchrist to come riding onto the patriot / militia scene like a knight on a white horse to "save" the downtrodden masses from "illegal immigration" on the southern border. In actuality, Gilchrist was fulfilling the role of helping the elitists to complete their mind game to con patriots and militia types to participate in their own destruction via the Hegelian Principle. Let's see how it all worked:
1) THESIS - The N.W.O. created the "problem" of illegal immigration by harping on it and at the same time having judges rule against the citizenry of America so as to preclude the possibility that you would ever be able to resolve the contrived "problem." For instance, in the case of Ranch Rescue, a land owner lost his property and the people protecting his property from "illegal alien" trespassers were jailed and fined. The land owner LOST his home and property because the CIVIL RIGHTS of "illegal aliens" trumped the rights of American land owners.
2) ANTI THESIS - The N.W.O. then began to generate the opposition to this contrived "problem." Jim Gilchrist was enlisted and funded by those within the N.W.O. All of a sudden, in 2005 the drums were beating heavy against the "illegal immigrants in America. All manner of statistics were created to instill fear, hysteria, and panic over this so - called "problem." All of a sudden you were just supposed to take a look and see the magnitude of "illegal immigration." The reality is, I manned the borders in the 1970s and knew the facts, figures, and statistics inside out - INCLUDING knowing when the situation would be at the point of no return. The condition became irreversible in the year 2000... So, forty some years AFTER the Kennedy Immigration Law went into effect, the Hispanic situation was totally irreversible.
3) SYNTHESIS - Having generated the "problem" over a period of years and having financed the fear, panic, and hysteria (and most of the anti - immigration stuff you hear is absolute B.S.) it became time to introduce the "solutions." Today, the solutions are based around a finite number that can be summarized very quickly: A) Building a militarized border around the southern border of the United States B) Creating National ID cards and "high tech" identity methods rivalling even Orwell's worst fears and C) Deportation schemes based on utilizing the solutions of A and B. (More in my next post.)
Every time I stop writing, a new e mail comes in to remind me, "but these people are illegal aliens." And then there are the baseless allegations that the "illegal" alien gets all these handouts.
In 1965 the black people were less than 15 percent of this country's population. Yet they committed over 65 percent of all the violent crime. And if that weren't enough, one in 4 black males between the ages of 18 and 34 was either in jail / prison, on probation, or on parole. The white people called them niggers. The police chased them during protests and hosed them with fire hoses.
Today, white children are more likely to be more acquainted with black history, black athletes, black singers, and black movie stars than they are ones of their own race. Inter-racial marriage is common-place and it's no big deal either way.
Back to the "illegal immigration" deal. Again, there exists NO practical, legal way for many of these people to come to America. There is no line for them to get into. There is no legalization process that will allow them to come here... unless they want to become citizens (and many of them do not.)
Then, there are those children who bear the brunt of the hatred of anti - immigrationists... most of whom are relying on faulty "facts' to bolster their claims. A case in point:
I have two quotes from a guy who posts as "Rufalo" on the news and politics forum over at myspace. Like most of my critics, Rufalo lacks the courage to meet me in public on a permanent thread to defend what he knows... yes knows is lies. For sport, let's look at them:
(Rufalo) "I worked one year in Housing Authority of New York, Section 8 rent assistace program. Illegal aliens are getting rent paid for them. Housing Authority actually gives them a fake number to put them through the system." And this: "As for medical care, they get it. They use other people's IDs, they have clinics that take them, and they use hospital emergency rooms, then just dont pay bill. But guess who does pay."
I'll expose one lie at a time. If an "illegal alien" enters the United States and has a baby, the baby is an American citizen by virtue of the 14th Amendment. It is not a loophole in the law. It is the wording of the Constitution. As such, the baby is entitled to ALL of the care and protection that we offer to any other citizen. And with respect to "fake" ssn information: Until the passage of the recent Real ID Act, those state agencies COULD NOT LEGALLY DEMAND AN SSN - so many government agencies simply fabricated a number. You may want to consider that the Privacy Act of 1974 stated: "Sec. 7(a) (1) It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny to any individual any right, benefit, or privilege provided by law because of such individual's refusal to disclose his social security account number."
If the parents of a LEGAL American citizen produced a valid birth certificate, they did their part under FEDERAL LAW which takes precedence over any STATE requirements to the contrary. Georgia once required an ssn on the drivers license until it was challenged on the basis of federal law. I should know... I worked actively on that issue and we won. I'm not sure how the recently passed "Real ID Act" impacts the law today. So, Rufalo did not see what he thought he saw - which was perfectly legal. You cannot blame "illegal aliens" for the politicians YOU elected!
Now, who pays for the hospitalization of "illegal aliens?" I'm going to do an entire posting on this because I have specifically refuted, factually that claim. But, the fact is, TAXPAYERS DO NOT PAY FOR MOST MEDICAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH "ILLEGAL ALIENS." Granted, we have some issues that need addressing with respect to "illegal aliens," but costs to "taxpayers" for their use of emergency rooms is NOT one of those costs. Stay tuned... we will debunk yet another myth.
In the previous posting I mentioned a guy named Rufalo on another forum. Well just today I heard from one of Rufalo's supporters on that same thread. "sillyduckhere" wrote this to me on that thread:
"I encourage you to do a bit of research, instead of just pretending you have any kind of real grasp of this issue."
To that I reply, show me your "facts and figures" and I will show you how well they have been researched. Now, in the last posting you were promised to have another myth debunked... which should show you that the allegations ARE being researched.
A couple of years ago someone sent me a link to a story which would "prove" to me that illegal aliens (sic) were a major drain on the hospital system in America.
http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/health_care.htm And so, the article was about one Saul Diaz who racked up $1 MILLION Dollars in hospital expenses. Diaz was an illegal alien (sic) who was unemployed, uninsured, and the victim of an auto accident. All that is true... HOWEVER, here's the rest of the story:
I ride down Hwy. 120 every day on my way to work. I pass the hospital where Diaz died at Monday through Friday and many times on the week-end. So, going there wasn't even out of my way. The week I received that link, I went to Gwinnett Medical and spoke with Paula Martin in person. We discussed Diaz and indigent care at length.
At one point, I told Ms. Martin that I wanted to know how "taxpayers" funded Diaz's treatment. Ms. Martin stated, "Gwinnett Medical Hospital is a non - profit corporation. We receive NO money nor reimbursement for the treatment of any indigent patient, legal or not." I pressed a bit harder: "So, you're telling me that the taxpayers are not paying for Saul Diaz's hospital bill?" Ms. Martin said quite adamantly: "the government does not pay anything for the treatment of "illegal aliens" nor any other indigent patient." This statement holds true for EVERY non-profit corporation operating as a health facility in the United States of America. The ONLY money that taxpayers pay for indigent care is for government facilities... like your local county health department. So, you're probably wondering, who does pay the bill when "illegal aliens" get treated?
From 1985 to 1990 I worked for Travelers Insurance Company. My job was paying claims to doctors and hospitals along with arguing with doctors and their records department(s.) We generally argued over what a "usual and customary" definition was - since Travelers paid "usual and customary" charges for services. And Travelers always paid a hell of a lot less than wha the doctors charged. Anyway, the trend now is that when you get insurance, the insurance companies and the doctors / hospitals negotiate preset prices for services.
If you are UNINSURED, the price is much different than an insured pays. Sometimes the difference can be THREE times higher. So, the insurance companies operate out of one set of books, and uninsured patients pay through a separate account. In layman terms, insured people are not paying for uninsured people.
If you go to the hospital and do not pay, the hospital sends out people to collect... and collect with interest... and nowdays I sometimes work in that field. Undocumented immigrants inside the United States sometimes live in the same community for a decade or longer. They have a job, a home, and their kids are in school. They do not want conflict. So, when they get a legal notice served on them by a sheriff, they are scared shitless. Many times they will call someone like me or the people in town who are called "notarios." And we help those people set up payment schedules to pay off their debts. In one recent case, a lady I helped PAID the hospital $11,000 plus interest for a hospital bill. Had she been insured, that same procedure would have been $3,800.
And that is where I get to the last part of this post. The people using so - called "facts and statistics" claim that illegal aliens (sic) cost a Picked From Air figure. And that gets real debatable. If the hospital can provide an insured a procedure for $3,800 but, they charge UNINSURED people $11,000 for the same procedure, WHAT IS THE ACTUAL COST THE HOSPITAL IS OUT? You and I both know they base their loss figures on the price charged to the UNINSURED. And obviously, if they can provide a service for $3,800 and stay in business, there is a profit margin in that $3,800 figure. So, if we take out the profit margin, the actual price the hospital is out becomes quite negligible. In any event, the price to treat ALL indigent patients is paid by uninsured patients in the price they are charged. Granted, some do not pay, but the ones who do pick up a lot of slack... and even YOU are entitled to that same treatment.
In 1993, Ron McLamb, writing in the book Operation Vampire Killer 2000 wrote:
"...the goal is to frighten Americans, of all colors, into accepting Martial Law. "
In 2007, a poster on a myspace discussion board posting as Rufalo wrote,
(June 17) "Ww should have deported ALL illegals in 1986, but Reagan--yes, Reagan--fucked up. They got amnesty, now there are millions more. Deportation----which is mild considering it's only sending them home----is answer. Martlal law, troops called in if neccesarry----anything needed to send them back to where they snuck in from must be done... "
In 1993, we were warned in Operation Vampire Killer 2000
"STATE GOVERNMENTS WILL HAVE TO BE ABOLISHED BEFORE THEY CAN FORCE REGIONAL, METROPOLITAN AND WORLD GOVERNMENT IN THE UNITED STATES"
Today, we have people calling for Martial Law just as the people at PATNWO predicted; the sheeple are calling for FEDERAL intervention into State's Rights. And One World Government?
There exists the plan to erase the borders between Mexico, Canada and the United States. This plan is based on a 2005 Council on Foreign Relations report entitled Building a North American Community.
Now, I want you to look over those links and think about four things:
1) Is the report real or is it something the right wing manufactured? (Yeah, we both know the answer already)
2) Just because the CFR is not a part of the government, does that mean they have no clout in gettng legislation considered and passed?
3) Suppose that we spend money to build a huge fence around the U.S. and militarize the border. We hire thousands of border patrol agents. Then the floodgates open up via the "superhighway" and the North American Union. And, as Rufalo demands, we live under Martial Law. Where do you suppose the border patrollers will be used when there would not be a reason for them to "man the border?"
4) After considering all of that, wouldn't you like to know what I haven't talked about yet?
Right now I'm about at the half way point with this thread and have yet to encounter any opposition on the board. Some people feel "safe" to respond on other boards or via e mail, but all of that will not be as permanent as this thread will be. So, at this point, I'm going to do a THREE part rant that will be more revealing than all the previous posting I've ever done on this - or any other topic, so let's get right to it.
In all the posting I've done on discussion boards over the past three years, nobody has been smart enough to ask me the $64,000 question. Allow me to conduct a one man interview... I'll be their interviewer and the guest being interviewed.
And the $64,000 question is, "Enforcer, where do you stand on this issue and how do you see things playing out?" And here comes a rant:
In the 1970s I manned to border. The federal government ran all the border patrollers off, telling us we were violating the "civil rights" of the illegal aliens (sic.) During the 1980s I would continue to object to the sell out of America. And those protests would be met with allegations of racism, hatred, bigotry, etc. The "liberals" were in charge and it was heresy to go against the powers that be.
In the 1990s I would continue to speak out, but for the most part this entire subject was about as exciting as discussion of nose hair. The focus became one of a fear of Y2K and then the possibilities of Martial Law.
Eventually with the abuses heaped against land owners we would get interested in eminent domain and the way that government and big business steal private property.
Then, in 2003 an incident occured and the courts reaffirmed what I had already been told in the 1970s. In the case of Ranch Rescue (which preceded the N.W.O. takeover of the militia "movement" via the so - called "Minutemen") the court ruled that American property owners violated the rights of illegal aliens (sic) by detaining them as they crossed over private property to get into the United States.
Bottom line: Your rights as an American citizen are SECONDARY to the "civil rights" of foreigners attempting to get into the United States via your private property. End of story. In a constitutional republic, one of the MAJOR cornerstones that we enjoyed was a right to own private property... which includes the absolute right to defend that property.
Prior to 2003, the so - called "patriot movement," the militia, and the neoconservatives NEVER got their panties in a bunch over "illegal" immigration. Then... all of a sudden, it became THE news. And today, it is the ONLY topic of many news and entertainment outlets. Furthermore, nobody is allowed to speak out against the majority sentiment lest they be castigated and then banished - never to be allowed to speak on the subject again. I've lost most of my friends; been shitcanned from the so - called "militia movement;" ignored by those who know me better than that. And the sad thing is, ALL of our fundamental God given Rights and Liberties hang in the balance over our inability to put all the issues on the table and see exactly what this "illegal immigration" subject is all about.
Now, back to that $64,000 question. So, let's begin once again:
I honestly don't know how many Hispanics (legal or not) are currently in the United States. Whether it is six, eight, or even 20 MILLION is totally irrelevant. Why? It's simply because ALL of the children born in the United States, whose parents were / are illegal are American citizens and there isn't one damn thing that can be done by any legislator which will reverse that. Under our Constitution, it simply cannot be done. I'll explain why and I'll tell you what is about to happen in the United States.
The Fourteenth Amendment specifically states: "Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States ..." There is NO section of the Constitution which makes any exceptions (like, you aren't a citizen if your parents are illegal.) You can call these people anchor babies or anything you damn well please, but it will not change the facts. Furthermore, once those children reach the age of 18, they are entitled to petition for the citizenship of their parents and other close relatives.
Sure, you could change the law... if you had TWO THIRDS MAJORITY OF ALL THE PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES. That is how many it takes to amend the Constitution... and then wait. In order to get that law to affect those already here, you would have to amend not only the 14th Amendment, but also Section 1, Article 9 of the Constitution which states: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed." In other words, what is LEGAL TODAY MAY NOT BE MADE ILLEGAL RETROACTIVELY." So, if you amended the 14th Amendment, it would not apply to those people already here. They are citizens with rights... end of story.
Even if you could overcome those objections, you still have to deal with the punishment you're asking for the parents. Many of you would split up families simply because those parents violated a questionable law that is treated as a CIVIL VIOLATION. Did you ever hear of the Eighth Amendment guarantee that prevents cruel and unusual punishment? Allow me to tell you exactly how this issue is going to be played out:
1) The LIBERALS using disinformation agents (a point I will prove in this rant) will get Congress to agree to militarizing the border. All manner of high tech devices will be brought in (unmanned drones, spy equipment, cameras, etc.) They will even go after the right to pursue "criminals" if such activity is "believed" to be on private property. This will completely destroy the Fourth Amendment.
2) Either Congress will pass some form of amnesty, guest worker bill, or a mass deportation bill. If the American people attempted to remove the "illegal aliens" by way of deportation, MILLIONS of children would be eligible for a guardian ad litem (that is a court appointed lawyer, paid by taxpayers, to represent the child's best interests.)
3) The decision would end up in the Supreme Court which would side with the children and they would say: A) You CANNOT deport the children as they are American citizens and B) You cannot split up the families via mass deportation as such would constitute cruel and unusual punishment... BTW, let's understand something right now: The anti - immigrationists will say that unless you are a citizen, you cannot share in the rights afforded to Americans and in the very next breath, they will say that foreigners here without documentation are "criminals." This is doublespeak. If you can suffer the penalties, you can enjoy the rights. I know the concept is foreign to Mexican haters, but it is well understood by the justices on the Supreme Court.
So, you militarize the border and if the courts don't rule against you at every turn for the next fifty years (while the population demographics change even more) then the politicians will sell you out with the North American Union, or some equally obnoxious piece of legislation. What my critics cannot come to terms with is the fact that they have been check mated. You're boxed in and there are no legal / legislative remedies available for the inevitable. So, why do they insist on militarizing the border?
I've left previous links (so I won't repeat this point) but, the manned drones that spy on people are a concern in other countries because they violate the sacred principles of privacy rights. And of course, the constant mantra for special ID is a socialist chant that will bring about National Gun Registration and an atmosphere that would make Hitler's tattoo notion look like a warm up party for the future... then again, maybe that is exactly what Hitler was. In any event, WHEN you are over-ruled by either back door legislators or those on the Supreme Court, all of those machine gun toting federals at the borders along with their high tech gadgetry will be unleashed on all of us... the sheeple AND those who refused to submit to the New World Order. Okay, one more post and you can have your say.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
