What a bunch of Killjoys

when you are afraid of Hallowe'en............
what a frightened bunch these radicals seem to be. not hate so much as fear.

Bear

If you are having trouble viewing this email click here.

	Special Dispatch |3329|October 28, 2010 Islam in the West   Islamist Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad on His Website: 'To Believe In or Participate in Halloween is an Act of Shirk (Associating Partners with Allah) - The Greatest Crime Any Person Can Commit' MEMRI | MEMRI TV | THE MEMRI BLOG | MEMRI ECONOMIC BLOG | JIHAD AND TERRORISM THREAT MONITOR TURKISH MEDIA PROJECT | IRAN BLOG | THE MIDDLE EAST CULTURE BLOG| THE URDU-PASHTU MEDIA BLOG
	In an undated article titled "Halloween: Trick or Shirk," Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad warns Muslim youth to not participate in Halloween celebrations. The article was posted on his English-language website Izharudeen.com, which is registered to Mr. Izharudeen (izharudeen@hotmail.co.uk/+1.0793016766).  The site is hosted from http://www.weebly.com/, a San Francisco, CA-based do-it-yourself website/blog site.The company can be reached at questions@weebly.com, or at phone number (415)375-3268. Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, who is Syrian-born, is the former leader of the Islamist "Al-Muhajirun" organization in Britain. He has been living in Beirut since 2005, when the British Home Office informed him when he was on a visit there that he would not be allowed to reenter the U.K. The following are excerpts from the article:[1] "It is Important to Take All Necessary Steps to Safeguard Ourselves and Children from Any Practices That Will Lead to Hellfire" "Every year, thousands upon thousands of young children are encouraged to dress up as devils, witches, ghosts and many other various demonic figures. This act is followed by knocking from door to door requesting a treat or being tricked as part of the Halloween festival. "During the Halloween season, schools, movies, cartoons, shops, etc. work very hard in promoting and legitimizing Halloween as a celebration worth celebrating. "As Muslims who are firm believers in the Day of Judgment and responsible guardians of our children, it is important to take all necessary steps to safeguard ourselves and children from any practices that will lead to Hellfire, a punishment which is 70 times hotter than the fires of this world. Allah (SWT) said, 'O you who believe! Save yourselves and your families a Fire (Hell) whose fuel is men and stones.' (66:6)  "Before we encourage our children or ourselves to participate in the Halloween celebrations we must know what does Halloween stands for, and what effect will it have on our deeds on the Day when we will stand before Allah, giving an account for every single deed we do in our lives. "Halloween is a mixture of pagan (idol worshippers) and Christian belief and practice. The idol worshippers believed that during the night of the 31st of October the gods would play tricks/pranks on their worshipers that would bring danger and cause fear on them. To be safeguarded from the mischief of these gods, the worshippers would offer treats to their gods in the form sacrifices, food, gifts etc., hence the notion 'Trick or Treat.'   "In current time, children as well as adults dress up as creatures of the evil, scaring people (trick) unless they give a sacrifice (i.e. a treat). For the Christians, Halloween is a celebration of all the saints that have passed away or were martyred/killed in the path of serving and establishing Christianity. Christians would spend the previous night at all-night vigils." "To Believe In or Participate in Halloween is an Act of Shirk (Associating Partners with Allah) – The Greatest Crime Any Person Can Commit" "To summarize Halloween is: -  "Belief in evil gods -  "Imitating evil gods -  "Offering sacrifice to evil gods to be free from their mischief - "Praying and remembering dead Christian activists. "Realizing this reality of Halloween, the true believer in the One and Only true God (Allah) must ask what the Islamic ruling is on belief in false gods, pretending to be a false god, offering sacrifice to a false god and praying for the dead from the non-Muslims. What is the Islamic ruling on celebrating Halloween, i.e. dressing up in costumes, asking for treats, offering treats, decorating houses, and displaying pumpkins? "To believe in or participate in Halloween is an act of shirk (associating partners with Allah), the greatest crime any person can commit, so severe that Allah (SWT) will never forgive the one that commits shirk and dies upon it. For Allah said, 'Verily! Allah forgives not (the sin of) setting up partners in worship with Him, but He forgives whom he pleases sins other than that, and whoever sets up partners in worship with Allâh, has indeed strayed far away.' (4:116)" "Any Person Who Offers A Treat On The Night Of Halloween – The Curse Of Allah Will Be Upon Him" "Any person who offers a treat on the night of Halloween – the curse of Allah will be upon him, for verily the Messenger of Allah (SAW) said, 'Allah curses him who sacrifices to other than Allah' ([Hadith by] Muslim).  "Those who practice any non-Islamic celebrations or imitate the behavior of any people is the same as them, because the Messenger of Allah said, 'Whoever imitates a group of people, he is one of them' ([attributed to] Abu Dawood). "As Muslims, we are responsible for purifying the lands from any corruption hence we are duty bound to eradicate all evil and the worst is Shirk (giving the right of Allah to another)." Muslims Must "Understand That Any Practices [Or] Celebrations That Do Not Come From Islam Are Evil" "Dear Muslims: We must realize and understand that any practices [or] celebrations that do not come from Islam are evil, because if it was good then Allah (SWT) would have included it in our Deen. Halloween is an evil celebration which promotes worship and sacrifice to false gods, an evil that pollutes one's belief and worship to Allah. Halloween is a form of Shirk and disobedience introduced by Shaytaan [Satan] in the form of a trick, enjoyment, and celebration. "Therefore, do not participate in this evil. Do not purchase any item to do with Halloween, do not let your children go knocking from door to door for treats, do not give any treats, and warn your family members, warn your relatives, warn other Muslims and the non-Muslims about this great evil."       [1] http://www.izharudeen.com/halloween-article.html. The text has been lightly edited for clarity. Please remember the environment before printing.
	For assistance, please contact MEMRI at memri@memri.org. The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an independent, non-profit organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle East. Copies of articles and documents cited, as well as background information, are available on request. MEMRI holds copyrights on all translations. Materials may only be used with proper attribution. MEMRI P.O. Box 27837, Washington, DC 20038-7837 Phone: (202) 955-9070 Fax: (202) 955-9077 www.memri.org UNSUBSCRIBE | DONATE | CONTACT US

unsubscribe

 

 

 

 

nonprofit software

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

You quote a nice document but that document IS NOT LAW, nor is it CONSTITUTIONAL. That document was a call to war for disenfranchised colonists. 

THIS is the meaning of that tiny recurring phrase "the people" which you seem so fast to dismiss.

It did not cover the French or the Mexican just "The People" subject to EVERY following phrase and clause and those that grew from them. 

We the People of the United States

The Framers were an elite group — among the best and brightest America had to offer at the time. But they knew that they were trying to forge a nation made up not of an elite, but of the common man. Without the approval of the common man, they feared revolution. This first part of the Preamble speaks to the common man. It puts into writing, as clear as day, the notion that the people were creating this Constitution. It was not handed down by a god or by a king — it was created by the people.

in Order to form a more perfect Union

The Framers were dissatisfied with the United States under the Articles of Confederation, but they felt that what they had was the best they could have, up to now. They were striving for something better. The Articles of Confederation had been a grand experiment that had worked well up to a point, but now, less than ten years into that experiment, cracks were showing. The new United States, under this new Constitution, would be more perfect. Not perfect, but more perfect.

establish Justice

Injustice, unfairness of laws and in trade, was of great concern to the people of 1787. People looked forward to a nation with a level playing field, where courts were established with uniformity and where trade within and outside the borders of the country would be fair and unmolested. Today, we enjoy a system of justice that is one of the fairest in the world. It has not always been so — only through great struggle can we now say that every citizen has the opportunity for a fair trial and for equal treatment, and even today there still exists discrimination. But we still strive for the justice that the Framers wrote about.

insure domestic Tranquility

One of the events that caused the Convention to be held was the revolt of Massachusetts farmers known as Shays' Rebellion. The taking up of arms by war veterans revolting against the state government was a shock to the system. The keeping of the peace was on everyone's mind, and the maintenance of tranquility at home was a prime concern. The framers hoped that the new powers given the federal government would prevent any such rebellions in the future.

provide for the common defence

The new nation was fearful of attack from all sides — and no one state was really capable of fending off an attack from land or sea by itself. With a wary eye on Britain and Spain, and ever-watchful for Indian attack, no one of the United States could go it alone. They needed each other to survive in the harsh world of international politics of the 18th century.

promote the general Welfare

This, and the next part of the Preamble, are the culmination of everything that came before it — the whole point of having tranquility, justice, and defense was to promote the general welfare — to allow every state and every citizen of those states to benefit from what the government could provide. The framers looked forward to the expansion of land holdings, industry, and investment, and they knew that a strong national government would be the beginning of that.

and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity

Hand in hand with the general welfare, the framers looked forward to the blessings of liberty — something they had all fought hard for just a decade before. They were very concerned that they were creating a nation that would resemble something of a paradise for liberty, as opposed to the tyranny of a monarchy, where citizens could look forward to being free as opposed to looking out for the interests of a king. And more than for themselves, they wanted to be sure that the future generations of Americans would enjoy the same.

do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America

The final clause of the Preamble is almost anti-climactic, but it is important for a few reasons — it finishes the "We, the people" thought, saying what we the people are actually doing; it gives us a name for this document, and it restates the name of the nation adopting the Constitution. That the Constitution is "ordained" reminds us of the higher power involved here — not just of a single person or of a king, but of the people themselves. That it is "established" reminds us that it replaces that which came before — the United States under the Articles (a point lost on us today, but quite relevant at the time).

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 12:02 PM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:

<sigh>
You claimed:

"Also the Constitution and the amendments refer to citizens.  Citizens  are all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction therein. Clearly it does not apply to illegals."

I simply cited ALL the occurrences of 'Citizen'.
In Article III, the jurisdiction of the supreme Court included matters between "Citizen" and <insert 2nd party>.

ALL people have the SAME right to life and its corollaries.  Legitimate Government is to SECURE such.  MOST (all) Governments instead violate these with impunity.

NOW are you instead suggesting that Amendment V, for instance:

     No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise
     infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand
     Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the
     Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor
     shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in
     jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case
     to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or
     property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be
     taken for public use, without just compensation.

Somehow applies DIFFERENTLY depending upon your arbitrary groupings?  It clearly does not.  The US Government (created and defined by the Constitution) is to adhere to its plain language in its dealings.

Regard$,
--MJ

Today, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this
point, it cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution
is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals
-- that it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals,
only the conduct of the government -- that it is not a charter
_for_ government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection
_against_ the government. -- Alyssa Rosenbaum

At 01:50 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

You cited Art III as using the word citizen.  I responded to your inclusion.  Is it your position that all people (citizens vs non citizens) have equal rights?
----- Original Message -----
From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>
To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 1:41:42 PM
Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans


Article III deals with the JUDICIARY.

There you go again with that silliness about 'illegals'.
Citizens relate (re: US Constitution) SPECIFICALLY as denoted.

Items like -- for example -- Amendment  IV (for simplicity)

  The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
  papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
  shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon
  probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
  describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to
  be seized.

restrict the GOVERNMENT from action against PEOPLE -- regardless of
whether they are Citizens, Visitors, have the Government's unconstitutional
permission, etc.  It plainly LIMITS the Feds from doing as stated.

Naturalization (or naturalisation), of course, is the acquisition of
citizenship and nationality by somebody who was not a citizen or
national of that country when he or she was born.
Naturalization has NOTHING to do with entering/exiting.

There was no claim that Citizens were something else.

Regard$,
--MJ

I was about to say that I'd hate to live in a country
where the law could mean whatever its rulers said
it meant, when it occurred to me that I already do.
-- Joseph Sobran



At 01:28 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

Art. III referenced the Constitution and treaties, but was changed by the XI amendment.  Citizens do not refer to illegals that roam onto U.S. soil and do not become naturalized.

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 1:14:13 PM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

This is becoming silly.  Have you actually READ the Constitution?

Occurrences of 'Citizen'

In Article III (describing JURISDICTION for the supreme Court):

  between a State and Citizens of another State; -- between Citizens

  of different States; -- between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands

  under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens

  thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In Article IV (ensuring reciprocity between States):

  The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges

  and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Amendment XI (more jurisdiction):

  The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to

  any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United

  States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any

  Foreign State.

Dubiously Ratified Amendment XIV (aiding Lincoln's illusion):

  All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and

  subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and

  of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law

  which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United

  States;

Amendment XV (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be

  denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of

  race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Amendment XIX (preventing voting disqualification by group)"

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or

  abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Amendment XIV (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any

  primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for

  President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in

  Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any

  State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Amendment XXVI (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen

  years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the

  United States or by any State on account of age.

The Constitution, of course, CREATED and LIMITS the Government it created.

STILL do not know what the Bible has to do with anything.

Regard$,

--MJ

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers

At 12:53 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

Look at Romans 1:26-27.  Also the Constitution and the amendments refer to citizens.  Citizens  are all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction therein. Clearly it does not apply to illegals.

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 12:01:43 PM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

THIS does not answer the request.

Someone will need to explain this silliness about 'legal' and 'illegal' immigrants.  The US Constitution provides no power whatsoever for the Feds to extend or withhold permission for entry (or exit) into any of the Sovereign States.  Besides, 'migration' is a natural right.

Additionally, rights are inherent in Man's being -- not permissions as you imply.

Not certain WHAT the Bible may have to do with anything.

As an aside, do you have any problem/difficulty with the THEFT and SLAVERY promoted by both the Ds and Rs?

Regard$,

--MJ

"Under the law of nature, all men are born free, every one comes into the world with a right to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it at his own will.  This is what is called personal liberty, and is given him by the Author of nature, because necessary for his own sustenance." --Thomas Jefferson

At 11:42 AM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

What rights do immigrants have unless they are legal?  In reference to the Bible have you read the verses on homosexuality?

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 11:24:30 AM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

Can you POINT me to a 'platform' or similar that suggests such?

Thanks in advance.

Regard$,

--MJ

"Any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error.

" -- Marcus Tullius Cicero

At 09:18 AM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

>But it seems obvious that the biggest reason to vote Democrat is to

>take one good look at the crazies in the Grand Opressive Tea Party and

>what they will do to oppresss LGBT people, as well as a whole slew of

>demographic minority groups, including immigrants, Latinos,

>African-Americans and women who have been raped or victims of incest.

>If you don't vote for the Democrats, you are opening the door for

>bigoted hateful theocrats like the Fred Phelps Wesboro "Church" who

>totally ignore Jesus' actual message of love, acceptance and inclusion

>and fail to know what their Bible really says.

>The Republican Agenda is anti-American. Their number one priority is

>to obstruct and make The President of The United States fail. Welcome

>to the Recorporate Party of Greed.

>

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Let's hope this guy is right

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/a-pre-election-day-prediction-massachusetts-will-retire-barney-frank/

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Nullification: What You'll Never Learn in School

Nullification: What You'll Never Learn in School
Friday, October 29, 2010
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Having just finished a course on the New Deal for the Mises Academy, I'm now offering one on state nullification, the subject of my most recent book. I thought my New Deal course covered issues and sources left out of the typical classroom, but in that respect this course has that one beat.

Nullification is the Jeffersonian idea that the states of the American Union must judge the constitutionality of the acts of their agent, the federal government, since no impartial arbiter between them exists. When the federal government exercises a particularly dangerous power not delegated to it, the states must refuse to allow its enforcement within their borders.

I can hear people saying that such a response doesn't go nearly far enough. No argument there. The trouble with nullification is not that it is too "extreme," as the enforcers of opinion would say, but that it is too timid. But it gets people thinking in terms of resistance, which has to be a good thing, and it defies the unexamined premise of the entire political spectrum, according to which society must be organized with a single, irresistible power center issuing infallible commands from the top.

That's at least a pretty good start.

The course, Nullification: A Jeffersonian Bulwark Against Tyranny, will cover the basics, to be sure, and after the first week everyone will be well-grounded in the relevant issues. But then I want to dig into the primary sources. I want to examine the long-forgotten debates on this subject in detail. In particular, we'll study the exchanges between Daniel Webster and Robert Hayne, Andrew Jackson and Littleton Waller Tazewell, and Joseph Story and Abel Upshur.

Hardly anyone, including graduate students in American history, has actually read these texts as opposed to just knowing of their existence ­ and if my own experience at Columbia University is any indication, even that is more than some grad students know.

The various commissars who have taken it upon themselves to ensure that no one strays from officially approved opinion ­ or to appropriately scold anyone who in fact does so ­ have become apoplectic at the return of nullification. I confess to taking mischievous delight in this. They are accustomed to setting the terms of debate. They are not used to seeing people promote ideas of their own.

And the commissars have not read these sources, either. But you will. You will know the arguments of both sides inside and out.

You will also enjoy the discussions that ensue at the end of each lecture. You can sign off whenever you like, of course, but during the course I just completed on the New Deal I stayed around for an hour and a half to two extra hours answering questions and directing discussion, and then shooting the breeze about anything people wanted to discuss. We had a great time. As always, the lectures are available for viewing, along with a full transcript of the chat box, for people who cannot watch them live.

I understand the impatience that many of us feel regarding nullification, particularly the complaints that

1. the Constitution per se isn't what matters anyway; what matters is freedom; and
2. the states are no angels, either.

These criticisms are by no means misplaced. But nullification remains a useful quiver in the liberty arsenal all the same. As I've said, it gets people thinking in healthy ways. And it can be employed for good purposes, as when the Principles of '98 (as the ideas culminating in nullification came to be known) were cited on behalf of free speech and free trade, and against unconstitutional searches and seizures, military conscription, and fugitive-slave laws. In our own day, Janet Napolitano said the reason the Real ID Act failed was that the states refused to cooperate in its enforcement.

And the states are indeed rotten, too ­ which is why we may as well put them to some good use by pursuing nullification. Liberty is more likely to have room to flourish in a world of many competing jurisdictions rather than under a single, irresistible jurisdiction.

In short, this course will introduce you to a chapter of American history that has fallen down the memory hole but which is much too interesting and valuable to leave down there. In the process of pulling it out, you'll acquire a much deeper understanding of American history.

I hope you'll join me.

Here is the Mises Institute's Jeffrey Tucker interviewing me on the subject:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2YaTVRR90g&feature=player_embedded


Thomas E. Woods, Jr. (visit his website) is a senior fellow at the Mises Institute, where he will be teaching "Nullification: A Jeffersonian Bulwark Against Tyranny" this fall at the Mises Academy. He is the author of the New York Times bestseller Meltdown: A Free-Market Look at Why the Stock Market Collapsed, the Economy Tanked, and Government Bailouts Will Make Things Worse. His other recent books include 33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask, The Church and the Market: A Catholic Defense of the Free Economy, Nullification, and The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History (a New York Times bestseller). Send him mail. See Thomas E. Woods, Jr.'s article archives.

http://mises.org/daily/4811

Re: Constitutional Protections Against The Invasion of Illegal Aliens

Yes, they do.   Especially 3 and 4.  The remainder of the clauses deal with illegal immigration, which is, "invasion".

 

As for the rest of your points, I will be back later.

 

Keith

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:56 PM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:

The US Constitution provides the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch with a number of inherent powers, to include the enforcement of immigration laws.  For starters,  let's begin with the Preamble:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America".

We the People (of State unknown until ratification) in order to accomplish these six (6) goals establish THIS Constitution.

There is no assign of Power contained within this 'mission statement' -- implied, inferred nor stated.

They will waste but little time on the attempt to cover the act by the preamble to the Constitution, it being contrary to every acknowledged rule of construction to set up this part of an instrument in opposition to the plain meaning expressed in the body of the instrument. A preamble usually contains the general motives or reason for the particular regulations or measures which follow it, and is always understood to be explained and limited by them. In the present instance, a contrary interpretation would have the inadmissible effect of rendering nugatory or improper every part of the Constitution which succeeds the preamble. -- Jonathan Elliot _Debates on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution_

the Constitution mandates that the Congress (and the President) protect American sovereignty and the American People.  Let's begin with Article One, Section Eight, which deals with the Powers of the Congress, and all of these Sections are applicable :

Clause 1:  "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Clause 3:  "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes";
Clause 4:  "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States";
Clause 11:  "To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water";
Clause 15:  "To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions"

NONE of these Powers have *anything* to do with immigration.

Clause 20; "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress";

Which has NOTHING to do with immigration.

Even Article One, Section Ten, Clause Three gives the States the right to defend themselves with the invasion by illegal aliens:

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

NOTHING here about "illegal aliens" (whatever that means) OR immigration.

I am rushed for time right now, but I will pick up on this thread later, and we'll touch upon the other inherent powers by the Congress, and delve into the Executive Branch's ability to stop the invasion and detriment to our Nation that illegal aliens pose.

In other words LATER you will seek to 'make up' some justification for what simply does not exist.
A cursory amount of research will reveal that "immigration" was a USURPATION  ... first by the court in the very late 19th Century (paralleling the rise of the Nanny State) and then with seemingly innocuous requirements by the Congress in the 1920s (as the Nanny State begins to become firmly entrenched).

The Constitution simply does NOT support this nonsensical Statist tyranny.
Legitimate Government is to SECURE Natural Rights -- such as the right to migration -- not to tyrannically quash them.

Regard$,
--MJ

Modern nationalism and collectivism have, by the restriction of migration, perhaps come nearest to the "servile state." …Man can hardly be reduced more to a mere wheel in the clockwork of the national collectivist state that being deprived of his freedom to move.... Feeling that he belongs now to his nation, body and soul, he will be more easily subdued to the obedient state serf which nationalist and collectivist governments
demand. -- Wilhelm Röpke

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

Uhm ... no.

HERE you have "the People" ... what does *it* mean within you delusion?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

Regard$,
--MJ

In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and
say to us, 'Make us your slaves, but feed us.
--  Dosteovsky's Grand Inquisitor



At 01:53 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

MJ, it does not say "The right of ALL people" It says "The right of ****the people**** indicating a specific group.  As in WE THE PEOPLE OF****

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:41 PM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:

Article III deals with the JUDICIARY.

There you go again with that silliness about 'illegals'.

Citizens relate (re: US Constitution) SPECIFICALLY as denoted.

Items like -- for example -- Amendment  IV (for simplicity)

  The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,

  papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,

  shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon

  probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly

  describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to

  be seized.

restrict the GOVERNMENT from action against PEOPLE -- regardless of

whether they are Citizens, Visitors, have the Government's unconstitutional

permission, etc.  It plainly LIMITS the Feds from doing as stated.

Naturalization (or naturalisation), of course, is the acquisition of

citizenship and nationality by somebody who was not a citizen or

national of that country when he or she was born.

Naturalization has NOTHING to do with entering/exiting.

There was no claim that Citizens were something else.

Regard$,

--MJ

I was about to say that I'd hate to live in a country

where the law could mean whatever its rulers said

it meant, when it occurred to me that I already do.

-- Joseph Sobran

At 01:28 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

Art. III referenced the Constitution and treaties, but was changed by the XI amendment.  Citizens do not refer to illegals that roam onto U.S. soil and do not become naturalized.

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 1:14:13 PM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

This is becoming silly.  Have you actually READ the Constitution?

Occurrences of 'Citizen'

In Article III (describing JURISDICTION for the supreme Court):

  between a State and Citizens of another State; -- between Citizens

  of different States; -- between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands

  under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens

  thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In Article IV (ensuring reciprocity between States):

  The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges

  and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Amendment XI (more jurisdiction):

  The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to

  any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United

  States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any

  Foreign State.

Dubiously Ratified Amendment XIV (aiding Lincoln's illusion):

  All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and

  subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and

  of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law

  which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United

  States;

Amendment XV (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be

  denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of

  race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Amendment XIX (preventing voting disqualification by group)"

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or

  abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Amendment XIV (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any

  primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for

  President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in

  Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any

  State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Amendment XXVI (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen

  years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the

  United States or by any State on account of age.

The Constitution, of course, CREATED and LIMITS the Government it created.

STILL do not know what the Bible has to do with anything.

Regard$,

--MJ

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers

At 12:53 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

Look at Romans 1:26-27.  Also the Constitution and the amendments refer to citizens.  Citizens  are all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction therein. Clearly it does not apply to illegals.

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 12:01:43 PM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

THIS does not answer the request.

Someone will need to explain this silliness about 'legal' and 'illegal' immigrants.  The US Constitution provides no power whatsoever for the Feds to extend or withhold permission for entry (or exit) into any of the Sovereign States.  Besides, 'migration' is a natural right.

Additionally, rights are inherent in Man's being -- not permissions as you imply.

Not certain WHAT the Bible may have to do with anything.

As an aside, do you have any problem/difficulty with the THEFT and SLAVERY promoted by both the Ds and Rs?

Regard$,

--MJ

"Under the law of nature, all men are born free, every one comes into the world with a right to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it at his own will.  This is what is called personal liberty, and is given him by the Author of nature, because necessary for his own sustenance." --Thomas Jefferson

At 11:42 AM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

What rights do immigrants have unless they are legal?  In reference to the Bible have you read the verses on homosexuality?

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 11:24:30 AM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

Can you POINT me to a 'platform' or similar that suggests such?

Thanks in advance.

Regard$,

--MJ

"Any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error.

" -- Marcus Tullius Cicero

At 09:18 AM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

>But it seems obvious that the biggest reason to vote Democrat is to

>take one good look at the crazies in the Grand Opressive Tea Party and

>what they will do to oppresss LGBT people, as well as a whole slew of

>demographic minority groups, including immigrants, Latinos,

>African-Americans and women who have been raped or victims of incest.

>If you don't vote for the Democrats, you are opening the door for

>bigoted hateful theocrats like the Fred Phelps Wesboro "Church" who

>totally ignore Jesus' actual message of love, acceptance and inclusion

>and fail to know what their Bible really says.

>The Republican Agenda is anti-American. Their number one priority is

>to obstruct and make The President of The United States fail. Welcome

>to the Recorporate Party of Greed.

>

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

ROTFLMAO!
Now you are going to appeal to authority as though MORE fallacy will support your absurdities?

If the drafters of the Constitution MEANT "Citizen" they would have used the word "Citizen" just as they did where it was warranted.

Regard$,
--MJ

Today, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this point, it cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals -- that it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government -- that it is not a charter _for_ government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection _against_ the government. -- Alyssa Rosenbaum



At 01:53 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

That is one convoluted, and I might add, WRONG interpretation Michael.  "The People"  mean the Citizens of the United States.   Not illegals, not, "The People of France", etc., etc., etc....Numerous case law citations on this very premise, again, I'll come back to it maybe tonight.
 
Keith
 


 
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:41 PM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:

Article III deals with the JUDICIARY.

There you go again with that silliness about 'illegals'.

Citizens relate (re: US Constitution) SPECIFICALLY as denoted.

Items like -- for example -- Amendment  IV (for simplicity)

  The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,

  papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,

  shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon

  probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly

  describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to

  be seized.

restrict the GOVERNMENT from action against PEOPLE -- regardless of

whether they are Citizens, Visitors, have the Government's unconstitutional

permission, etc.  It plainly LIMITS the Feds from doing as stated.

Naturalization (or naturalisation), of course, is the acquisition of

citizenship and nationality by somebody who was not a citizen or

national of that country when he or she was born.

Naturalization has NOTHING to do with entering/exiting.

There was no claim that Citizens were something else.

Regard$,

--MJ

I was about to say that I'd hate to live in a country

where the law could mean whatever its rulers said

it meant, when it occurred to me that I already do.

-- Joseph Sobran

At 01:28 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

Art. III referenced the Constitution and treaties, but was changed by the XI amendment.  Citizens do not refer to illegals that roam onto U.S. soil and do not become naturalized.

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 1:14:13 PM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

This is becoming silly.  Have you actually READ the Constitution?

Occurrences of 'Citizen'

In Article III (describing JURISDICTION for the supreme Court):

  between a State and Citizens of another State; -- between Citizens

  of different States; -- between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands

  under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens

  thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In Article IV (ensuring reciprocity between States):

  The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges

  and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Amendment XI (more jurisdiction):

  The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to

  any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United

  States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any

  Foreign State.

Dubiously Ratified Amendment XIV (aiding Lincoln's illusion):

  All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and

  subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and

  of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law

  which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United

  States;

Amendment XV (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be

  denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of

  race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Amendment XIX (preventing voting disqualification by group)"

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or

  abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Amendment XIV (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any

  primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for

  President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in

  Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any

  State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Amendment XXVI (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen

  years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the

  United States or by any State on account of age.

The Constitution, of course, CREATED and LIMITS the Government it created.

STILL do not know what the Bible has to do with anything.

Regard$,

--MJ

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers

At 12:53 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

Look at Romans 1:26-27.  Also the Constitution and the amendments refer to citizens.  Citizens  are all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction therein. Clearly it does not apply to illegals.

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 12:01:43 PM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

THIS does not answer the request.

Someone will need to explain this silliness about 'legal' and 'illegal' immigrants.  The US Constitution provides no power whatsoever for the Feds to extend or withhold permission for entry (or exit) into any of the Sovereign States.  Besides, 'migration' is a natural right.

Additionally, rights are inherent in Man's being -- not permissions as you imply.

Not certain WHAT the Bible may have to do with anything.

As an aside, do you have any problem/difficulty with the THEFT and SLAVERY promoted by both the Ds and Rs?

Regard$,

--MJ

"Under the law of nature, all men are born free, every one comes into the world with a right to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it at his own will.  This is what is called personal liberty, and is given him by the Author of nature, because necessary for his own sustenance." --Thomas Jefferson

At 11:42 AM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

What rights do immigrants have unless they are legal?  In reference to the Bible have you read the verses on homosexuality?

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 11:24:30 AM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

Can you POINT me to a 'platform' or similar that suggests such?

Thanks in advance.

Regard$,

--MJ

"Any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error.

" -- Marcus Tullius Cicero

At 09:18 AM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

>But it seems obvious that the biggest reason to vote Democrat is to

>take one good look at the crazies in the Grand Opressive Tea Party and

>what they will do to oppresss LGBT people, as well as a whole slew of

>demographic minority groups, including immigrants, Latinos,

>African-Americans and women who have been raped or victims of incest.

>If you don't vote for the Democrats, you are opening the door for

>bigoted hateful theocrats like the Fred Phelps Wesboro "Church" who

>totally ignore Jesus' actual message of love, acceptance and inclusion

>and fail to know what their Bible really says.

>The Republican Agenda is anti-American. Their number one priority is

>to obstruct and make The President of The United States fail. Welcome

>to the Recorporate Party of Greed.

>

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

<sigh>
You claimed:
"Also the Constitution and the amendments refer to citizens.  Citizens  are all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction therein. Clearly it does not apply to illegals."

I simply cited ALL the occurrences of 'Citizen'.
In Article III, the jurisdiction of the supreme Court included matters between "Citizen" and <insert 2nd party>.

ALL people have the SAME right to life and its corollaries.  Legitimate Government is to SECURE such.  MOST (all) Governments instead violate these with impunity.

NOW are you instead suggesting that Amendment V, for instance:

     No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise
     infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand
     Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the
     Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor
     shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in
     jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case
     to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or
     property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be
     taken for public use, without just compensation.

Somehow applies DIFFERENTLY depending upon your arbitrary groupings?  It clearly does not.  The US Government (created and defined by the Constitution) is to adhere to its plain language in its dealings.

Regard$,
--MJ

Today, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this
point, it cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution
is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals
-- that it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals,
only the conduct of the government -- that it is not a charter
_for_ government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection
_against_ the government. -- Alyssa Rosenbaum


At 01:50 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

You cited Art III as using the word citizen.  I responded to your inclusion.  Is it your position that all people (citizens vs non citizens) have equal rights?
----- Original Message -----
From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>
To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 1:41:42 PM
Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans


Article III deals with the JUDICIARY.

There you go again with that silliness about 'illegals'.
Citizens relate (re: US Constitution) SPECIFICALLY as denoted.

Items like -- for example -- Amendment  IV (for simplicity)

  The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
  papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
  shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon
  probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
  describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to
  be seized.

restrict the GOVERNMENT from action against PEOPLE -- regardless of
whether they are Citizens, Visitors, have the Government's unconstitutional
permission, etc.  It plainly LIMITS the Feds from doing as stated.

Naturalization (or naturalisation), of course, is the acquisition of
citizenship and nationality by somebody who was not a citizen or
national of that country when he or she was born.
Naturalization has NOTHING to do with entering/exiting.

There was no claim that Citizens were something else.

Regard$,
--MJ

I was about to say that I'd hate to live in a country
where the law could mean whatever its rulers said
it meant, when it occurred to me that I already do.
-- Joseph Sobran



At 01:28 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

Art. III referenced the Constitution and treaties, but was changed by the XI amendment.  Citizens do not refer to illegals that roam onto U.S. soil and do not become naturalized.

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 1:14:13 PM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

This is becoming silly.  Have you actually READ the Constitution?

Occurrences of 'Citizen'

In Article III (describing JURISDICTION for the supreme Court):

  between a State and Citizens of another State; -- between Citizens

  of different States; -- between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands

  under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens

  thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In Article IV (ensuring reciprocity between States):

  The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges

  and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Amendment XI (more jurisdiction):

  The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to

  any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United

  States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any

  Foreign State.

Dubiously Ratified Amendment XIV (aiding Lincoln's illusion):

  All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and

  subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and

  of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law

  which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United

  States;

Amendment XV (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be

  denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of

  race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Amendment XIX (preventing voting disqualification by group)"

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or

  abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Amendment XIV (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any

  primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for

  President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in

  Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any

  State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Amendment XXVI (preventing voting disqualification by group):

  The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen

  years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the

  United States or by any State on account of age.

The Constitution, of course, CREATED and LIMITS the Government it created.

STILL do not know what the Bible has to do with anything.

Regard$,

--MJ

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers

At 12:53 PM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

Look at Romans 1:26-27.  Also the Constitution and the amendments refer to citizens.  Citizens  are all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction therein. Clearly it does not apply to illegals.

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 12:01:43 PM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

THIS does not answer the request.

Someone will need to explain this silliness about 'legal' and 'illegal' immigrants.  The US Constitution provides no power whatsoever for the Feds to extend or withhold permission for entry (or exit) into any of the Sovereign States.  Besides, 'migration' is a natural right.

Additionally, rights are inherent in Man's being -- not permissions as you imply.

Not certain WHAT the Bible may have to do with anything.

As an aside, do you have any problem/difficulty with the THEFT and SLAVERY promoted by both the Ds and Rs?

Regard$,

--MJ

"Under the law of nature, all men are born free, every one comes into the world with a right to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it at his own will.  This is what is called personal liberty, and is given him by the Author of nature, because necessary for his own sustenance." --Thomas Jefferson

At 11:42 AM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

What rights do immigrants have unless they are legal?  In reference to the Bible have you read the verses on homosexuality?

----- Original Message -----

From: "MJ" <michaelj@america.net>

To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 11:24:30 AM

Subject: Re: Tea party antics could end up burning Republicans

Can you POINT me to a 'platform' or similar that suggests such?

Thanks in advance.

Regard$,

--MJ

"Any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error.

" -- Marcus Tullius Cicero

At 09:18 AM 10/29/2010, you wrote:

>But it seems obvious that the biggest reason to vote Democrat is to

>take one good look at the crazies in the Grand Opressive Tea Party and

>what they will do to oppresss LGBT people, as well as a whole slew of

>demographic minority groups, including immigrants, Latinos,

>African-Americans and women who have been raped or victims of incest.

>If you don't vote for the Democrats, you are opening the door for

>bigoted hateful theocrats like the Fred Phelps Wesboro "Church" who

>totally ignore Jesus' actual message of love, acceptance and inclusion

>and fail to know what their Bible really says.

>The Republican Agenda is anti-American. Their number one priority is

>to obstruct and make The President of The United States fail. Welcome

>to the Recorporate Party of Greed.

>

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.