It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The suspected drunk driver who killed Indianapolis Colts linebacker Edwin Jackson in a crash on the morning of the Super Bowl is a Guatemalan citizen who is in the U.S. illegally and has been deported twice, police revealed Monday
originally posted by: bluechevytree
The suspected drunk driver who killed Indianapolis Colts linebacker Edwin Jackson in a crash on the morning of the Super Bowl is a Guatemalan citizen who is in the U.S. illegally and has been deported twice, police revealed Monday
www.foxnews.com...
I think Indianapolis should rethink their policy of not cooperating with ICE detainer requests.
The conundrum in this case is which side will the liberals back? The poor discriminated against black American citizen or the oppressed illegal dreamer who is just in America looking for a better life?
originally posted by: bluechevytree
a reply to: Zcustosmorum
it`s nothing like that, this about all the people who are in the country illegally who are criminals by the mere fact that they are here illegally,so any other crimes that they commit while here is just adding insult to injury nobody is asking for all immigrants to be deported,just the ones that are here illegally.
originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
a reply to: bluechevytree
It's like the Islamophobia thing, a Muslim who decides to strap a suicide vest on in retaliation because the U.S. raped his country,
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
a reply to: bluechevytree
It's like the Islamophobia thing, a Muslim who decides to strap a suicide vest on in retaliation because the U.S. raped his country,
Yes, please keep rationalizing terror attacks, it drives support away from your position in droves.
originally posted by: Eshel
I wonder if this post would even exist if it wasn't an illegal immigrant driving. Does this man's death have a different value when considering the person at fault?
The conundrum in this case is which side will the liberals back?
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: bluechevytree
The conundrum in this case is which side will the liberals back?
Who's to say that liberals, or anyone else for the matter, have to back either side you have described?
I find it in poor taste how cases such as these are politicized and it's value exploited.
As another member said, "never let a good crisis go to waste".
originally posted by: CulturalResilience
a reply to: bluechevytree
Which side will the liberals back you ask. The wrong one.
originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
originally posted by: CulturalResilience
a reply to: bluechevytree
Which side will the liberals back you ask. The wrong one.
Great, use the death of this guy to score political points, give it A rest already
originally posted by: CulturalResilience
originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
originally posted by: CulturalResilience
a reply to: bluechevytree
Which side will the liberals back you ask. The wrong one.
Great, use the death of this guy to score political points, give it A rest already
And your use of it to demonstrate sanctimony is so very noble, right?