ROTFLMAO!
You can, of course (and do), continue to pretend, but reality always fails you.
You have provided no such article, section and clause or amendment as such is non-existent.
Be certain to maintain that pleasing vision of yours.
Regard$,
--MJ
"As for the welfare state, they ["illegals"] are welcome to milk it dry, as far as I'm concerned. The sooner the damn thing is on the brink of collapse, the better. Besides which, receipt of government benefits is not ipso facto a violation of anyone's rights -- it's the funding that's the problem, but illegal immigrants aren't complicit in the existence of taxation -- and insofar as they are able to receive some minimal pay-outs from the State, that may as well count as partial restitution for the daily threats, terror, and
violence that the state and federal governments routinely inflict against the property and liberty of all undocumented immigrants." -- Charles Johnson
At 01:49 AM 6/19/2011, you wrote:
LOL!
Again, we can agree to disagree. I have pointed out the very sections of the Constitution that does exactly that, several times.
This is where you are just being oblivious, and ignoring what the Constitution says.
And you ask why I don't respond all that frequently to your cut and paste articles anymore.
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:38 PM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:
- Except that it does no such thing ... as there is no article, section and clause or amendment which supports your insistence.
- Regard$,
- --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
- At 05:35 PM 6/18/2011, you wrote:
- We've been down this road, and we obviously disagree. The United States Constitution most definitely authorizes the Congress to controll immigration into our Nation.
- On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:01 PM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:
- Unconstitutional ones? Not at all familiar with the Mexican Constitution (if one exists).
- Regard$,
- --MJ
- The Constitution does not authorize the federal government to control immigration. Nor does it say anything about illegal aliens. ... Sadly, lawmakers have repeatedly interpreted this silence as license for ill-conceived legislation. Congress began barring entry to the nation in 1875 with prostitutes and convicts. Soon, all sorts of people fell short of congressional glory: ex-convicts in 1882, along with Chinese citizens, lunatics, and idiots. Paupers, polygamists, and people suffering from infectious diseases or insanity made the list in 1891, while the illiterate were banned in 1917. -- Becky Akers
- At 04:58 PM 6/18/2011, you wrote:
- Sounds to me as if Mexico has adopted the United States' immigration laws as they stand today.
- On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 10:48 PM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:
- Mexico Reforms Its Immigration Laws
- by Mark Nestmann
- The Nestmann Group, Ltd.
- Perhaps attempting to persuade its powerful neighbor to the North to do the same, last month, major revisions to Mexico's immigration laws came into effect.
- The law has now become more "humane" and immigrant friendly. Among the changes announced are:
- 1) Illegal entry into Mexican territory is de-criminalized. This means that it is no longer a criminal offense to enter Mexico illegally, and violators will merely be sent back to where they last came from. Previously, illegal immigration was a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who were deported and attempted to re-enter Mexico could be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators could be sentenced to six-year terms. Mexicans who helped illegal immigrants were also subject to criminal prosecution.
- 2) Illegal migrants will no longer be jailed. They will be taken to a facility run by the Instituto Nacional de Migracion (INM) where they will be fed, clothed, given medical care and the ability to contact their families in their country of origin.
- 3) Illegal migrants will have the right to seek political asylum or refuge in Mexico and will have a right to a hearing before a judge.
- 4) Local police, the military, customs and even the Policia Federal will no longer have the authority to question any foreigner's migratory status. They no longer have any authority to arrest or detain any person suspected of being in the country illegally. Only officials from the INM can do this.
- 5) Illegal migrants can be given the opportunity to regularize their status and obtain a work/residence permit.
- 6) Controls are loosened for citizens/nationals of Belize who find an employment in certain Mexican states (i.e. Quintana Roo) to ease the process of a work/residence permit.
- The official line from a Mexican government spokesman that my friend and business partner P.T. Freeman listened to on the radio was that Mexico has amended its immigration law to take into account human rights and refugee rights. However, I don't believe this is the full story.
- I think the real reason that Mexico changed its law was to send a message to the United States. Under federal law, any non-U.S. national who enters or attempts to enter U.S. territory in a manner other than through ordinary channels has committed a crime. Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison.
- Numerous states, most notably my home state of Arizona, have attempted to enforce their own immigration laws. The most controversial aspect of the Arizona law – which never came fully into effect due to a successful court challenge – is that state and local police can ask anyone for proof of legal status in the United States. In other words, "your papers, please."
- In this environment, it's a welcome change to see Mexico implementing more humane immigration laws. And, I hope that U.S. policymakers get the message – although I'm not holding my breath.
- Reprinted with permission from The Nestmann Group, Ltd.
- --
- 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment