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.

 

Napolitano: Illegal Immigration NOT a Crime?

page: 4
23
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


I have read your post about a $250 fine for illegal entry.
Here is Tom Tancredo quoting the law and the $5000 fine for illegal entry into the U.S.

photos.bravenet.com...




posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


Amen brother!!

Obama promised change and here it comes.. Forget that I might be running from the Mexican government and a fugitive. I have rights in the USA along with welfare and SS! This is bullsh!t!

Thnx Obama!!



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
"Crossing the border per se is not a crime". The 'per se' is vital. It means, 'in itself'. Crossing the border, in itself, is not a crime. This is true, if you think about it.

All that means is that there is no law against crossing the border. If you ever leave this country and return, you've crossed the border twice. Does that make you a criminal?

The crime isn't crossing the border; the crime is doing it without obtaining the proper authorization to do it.

So all this woman is saying, if you strip away the hysterical misquoting, is that shady employers and the coyotes are worse offenders than those who cross the border illegally. The employers are deliberately breaking the law, just to save some money. They can pay the illegals much less than minimum wage, and the workers will never complain. They can ignore their rights, take advantage of them, work them half to death, expose them to dangerous machinery and chemicals, and not have to worry about someone going to OSHA. This is about as close to slave labor as you can get, without going to China. And these employers do it for profit. Greed.

The coyotes are scavengers who prey on people who want to come here for a better life. These coyotes will take as much money as they can from their victims, and will often dump them in the middle of the desert where they can die from lack of water or exposure. They abandon locked trucks filled with illegals if they think they might get caught. Most of the time, the trapped illegals suffocate in those trucks. The coyotes are often cold-blooded murderers, exposing people to danger for a few dollars.

Then you've got the illegals themselves. Mostly they're just trying to find a better life. Yes, what they do is illegal, but the harm they do is negligible, and mostly hurts themselves. I'm sure there are some criminals and druggies among them, but overall these are simply honest, hard-working people. They pay taxes (deducted from their pay, sales tax on items they buy, etc.), but do not generally avail themselves of the benefits of those taxes. They can't - they're here illegally, and don't want to alert any authorities. The troublemakers wind up getting deported. The damage the illegals do, compared to the employers and coyotes, is minimal.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 03:17 PM
link   
Regardless of Napolitano's wordsmithing, there is no 'gray' area, you either ARE legally residing in the United States or YOU ARE NOT.

Whatever the motivation, it is clear that the speaker has an agenda to promote.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Remember Jack Nickleson in A Few Good Men- "You can't handle the truth!". Well, most of us apparently cannot handle the truth regarding the so-called "illegals". Consider the following:

All federal laws, including those regarding immigration, are predicated upon legal jurisdiction and authority to act on the subject in question. This is the bedrock upon which all the laws stand or fall. Such authority is contained in the US Constitution. Acts, statutes and laws notwithstanding, it is not possible to "create" authority via any other method than a constitutional amendment specifically enumerating such.

Contrary to popular belief, the Feds were never granted power over immigration. Instead, the individual states, as before the Confederation, retained the right to decide who took up residency or obtained citizenship within their borders. The fact that the US federal government has enacted several colorable "laws" regarding US federal citizenship (AKA 13th amendment citizenship) is moot, as they had no power to do so. I suspect the states didn't complain for the same reason they never do- they were bought off cheaply or threatened.

This begs the question-- doesn't the Federal government have the right to protect our borders? Sure, against armed invasion, they do. Congress can declare war, muster up an army, and repel the invaders. Try as we might to twist the facts in a fit of xenophoic rage, unarmed job seekers do not fall into that category. Our country was never meant to have closed borders, lest we fall into the 'last one in syndrome', which is pretty obvious what's happening now.

The other reason the feds are specfically prohibited from handling immigration matters is their powers (in this case under the comically-abused commerce clause) apply equally to all states, tribes, or people. In other words, if Washington DC can decide who may enter, reside and earn a living in Idaho or Nebraska, they would necessarily have the identical right over people in China, India or Russia. Most would agree that is not happening, although our government does tend to think they can dictate how folks in foreign countries live within their borders.

So barring a constitutional amendment, the question over immigration, residency and citizenship remains where it has for the past 230 years-- with the states themselves.

I have exhaustively researched the accuracy of the above as well as a multitude of Supreme Court decisions confirming these facts.

Just for fun, check your inidividual state consitutions- many still have a section which covers the procedure for state residency-- typically a year's stay, unlike the Byzantine procedure and multi-year process demanded by DHS. State citizenship, similarly, requires a simple oath of fidelity to the state in question, and sometimes property ownership.

Don't even bother to question why our benevolent leaders would engage in such subterfuge-- it's what they do. There's much more to this issue than a mere Fed power grab. Let me know when you're ready for the rest.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by h5mind

The other reason the feds are specfically prohibited from handling immigration matters is their powers (in this case under the comically-abused commerce clause) apply equally to all states, tribes, or people. In other words, if Washington DC can decide who may enter, reside and earn a living in Idaho or Nebraska, they would necessarily have the identical right over people in China, India or Russia. Most would agree that is not happening, although our government does tend to think they can dictate how folks in foreign countries live within their borders.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just for fun, check your inidividual state consitutions- many still have a section which covers the procedure for state residency-- typically a year's stay, unlike the Byzantine procedure and multi-year process demanded by DHS. State citizenship, similarly, requires a simple oath of fidelity to the state in question, and sometimes property ownership.


If I may ask, WHERE is the fed 'specifically prohibited' from handling immigration? Stress the word 'specifically', please. Also, at what point in history, or currently, did the US Constitution apply to China or Russia? This is a novel reading of the Constitution, I must say, Which allows DC politicians to make and enforce laws in foreign sovereign nations.

In regards to the second section I've quoted above, is it your position that 'citizenship' and 'residency' amount to the same thing?

These answers would go a long way in explaining Napolitano's odd notion that the federal government is not in the business of enforcing federal laws, or rather the notion that federal laws are not really laws at all, which is the only way I can read her comments.

nenothtu out

[edit on 2009/4/21 by nenothtu]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   
this is par for the course for the obama regime the great socialist american revolution since november 2008.

yes if you were born raised and worked all your life and schooled in this united states of socialist shame you are not above the law.

however

if your an illegal immigrant who comes to this country who gets drunk gets in a car without having a valid state driver license kills a couple of teenagers on the way home or go rob a bank ACCORDING TO THE NEW OBAMA REGIME dont worry you havent commited any crimes go call your family and friends come to america we'll give you free health care and social security as well.

THIS IS TOTAL AND UTTER NONSENSE but that is exactly what is happening people the average american born and raised here isnt above the law doesnt have those same things that obama is freely givng illegals and this totally is a slap in the face for ever hard working honest citizen.

2009 2012 make the real change for america vote these #$%$@# ! out of washington.



[edit on 21-4-2009 by neo67]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Originally posted by chiron613

"Crossing the border per se is not a crime". The 'per se' is vital. It means, 'in itself'. Crossing the border, in itself, is not a crime. This is true, if you think about it.

All that means is that there is no law against crossing the border. If you ever leave this country and return, you've crossed the border twice. Does that make you a criminal?


Unless you do not have the proper documentation, 1,000s cross every day to work or trade. They go back.

"illegal alien" is a definition for those who cross w.out intention of going back. (Try playing "word games" at the border.)

Are you asleep, or just denying the truth?


Then you've got the illegals themselves. Mostly they're just trying to find a better life. Yes, what they do is illegal, but the harm they do is negligible, and mostly hurts themselves.


So, the point of your introductory sntence is ...?


They can't - they're here illegally, and don't want to alert any authorities. The troublemakers wind up getting deported. The damage the illegals do, compared to the employers and coyotes, is minimal.


This figures into your original statement , how?

Illegal is ILLEGAL, no?

jw



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


This woman is a butt kissing immigration groups advocate she is in position of power that she doesn't' qualify for it and that she doesn't have business to be in.

She dares to call our vets terrorist but she sees illegals as a good thing?

She needs to go, she needs to resign!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by h5mind
 


very well stated, but the matter remains, even if it is not a FEDERAL crime, it is nonetheless a crime. Mincing words doesn't change the very real fact that the mere existence of a 'border' denotes sovereignty. Citizens of a union of states have (and pay for) freedom to move about within the national boundaries freely. The same freedom is not extended to citizens of other countries who skirt due process getting here.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Originally posted by h5mind

doesn't the Federal government have the right to protect our borders? Sure, against armed invasion, they do. Congress can declare war, muster up an army, and repel the invaders.


You have no idea, do you. Show me the Constitutional support, or stay away.

You don't have it, so -- bye.

jw



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Please explain how 8 USC section 1325 is NOT a valid law?

(Do so, and you get an appointment to DHS.)

There is, in fact, a law regarding oue borders. See, abive.

jw



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:58 PM
link   
Men and Women of the UNITED STATES,

The time is getting near and WE THE PEOPLE are going to have to do something that none of us want to do to save our beloved country.

There is so much disinformation and misdirection out there anymore it is hard to know who is telling the truth and leading us in the right direction.

Our congress and senate are more corrupt now than they have been in anytime in history and quite frankly they DO NOT REPRESENT THE WILL AND IDEAS OF THE " WE THE PEOPLE". It is time.

Keep your eyes and ears open and when you see a " PEACEFUL MARCH" on its way to the DC, join in. It is going to take every last one of us to make this crap end peacefully.

YOU ALL KNOW WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO OR YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE EVERYTHING YOU HAVE WORKED YOUR WHOLE LIFE TO ACHIEVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I AM A VETERAN OF FOREIGN WARS,
I AM TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOT,
I AM THE

EYE OF EAGLE



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Please explain how 8 USC section 1325 is NOT a valid law?

(Do so, and you get an appointment to DHS.)

There is, in fact, a law regarding oue borders. See, abive.

jw


If I implied that it wasn't, it was accidental. My point was most border states have laws which parallel the Federal equivalent. Am I mistaken?



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


I'm sorry.

What?


Illegal immigration, is not illegal?

Then why the Hell would the word illegal be put in front of the word immigration?

If this is the case, you can not call it illegal immigration, it would just be called, immigration.



[edit on 21-4-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas

Then why the Hell would the word illegal be put in front of the word immigration?

If this is the case, you can not call it illegal immigration, it would just be called, immigration.


If you can explain this to BHO's Napolitano, we will all be grateful.

More likely, you will be arrested as a subversive "patriot" or "states' rights" activist.

Of course, extraordinary measures will govern your interrogation, not the cotton candy our friends of Al Qaeda and the Taliban are entitled to.

jw

[edit on 21-4-2009 by jdub297]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


I wouldn't want to explain it to Napolitano, nor President Obama.

I'm not sure either of them would understand it.

You know, and I know, the little word il before legal means not legal.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 



Please explain how 8 USC section 1325 is NOT a valid law?


It is a valid law. However, just because it is a law does not mean people have to be charged with it. It is up to the feds to decide whether to charge them or not.

Should states that have sodomy laws on the book enforce those laws?

How about states that have outdated laws that no longer make sense in today's society, should those be enforced as well? After all, they are laws. Adultery itself has the potential to get many of us in trouble in many states.


However, there are still approximately 20 states in the U.S. that have an adultery law on the books, with punishments ranging from a $10 fine to three years in prison. While these laws are rarely ever enforced, there are cases where adultery laws come into play.


www.myfamilylaw.com...



Point of the matter is that cost wise, it is more convenient for the government to have them deported then to charge them with a crime.

One thing is perfectly clear and that is that the whole immigration issue, legal or illegal, is totally whacked and needs a major overhaul.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I am an illegal immigrant who has lived in this country (not by choice) for over 8 years. I am now pursuing a degree as a Chemical Engineer, I am halfway there. I have basically been raised in this country and my mastery of the English language is superior to that of my original one in terms of accumulation of vocabulary, figures of speech, etc. I've never received a ticket, never been drunk, never done drugs, never been in jail, never committed any crimes... except being brought here by my parents at a young age when my voice wasn't important.

There are millions of students like me out there and it would be a shame if we all could not reciprocate back and thank this country for the opportunities given to us. I am not looking forward to steal anyone's job, in fact, last time I read Texas needs more Engineers. Some of these students have it worse than me because if anything were to happen and they would have to go back to their countries of origin a lot of them would have no one or nothing to do back there, some may not even speak the language anymore. Many of them did not have the choice of being brought here in the first place, yet here they are lost and confused because of a nine-digit number.

An immigration reform will take place whether people want it or not. It is almost impossible to throw out or imprison all these millions of peoples without first having to make changes to your constitution and local state laws, spending exorbitant amounts of money, dealing with human right organizations, and even conflicting with the interests of other nations. What would happen after the immigration reform came to an end? Illegal immigration is more likely to continue because at some point the funds and even the personnel needed to protect the borders will be more likely to be put into something more worthy of need of attention, E.G. health care, war, education, technology, etc.
And NO, you cannot put motion sensing turrets or fill the lands with mines, well you could try but it wouldn't last long anyway haha!

To be honest with all of you, I would also hate the idea of people invading my country and my government not doing anything about it, especially when the majority of these (uneducated) people do nothing more than reducing the living standards of the communities they inhabit, not adapting and assimilating with the local culture, and what's worse... not willing to learn the language. Unfortunately immigration is a natural phenomena, one can only try to stop it but it will always prevail regardless of legalities.

As for me if this bill doesn't pass (S.2205) I'll just have to wait until I finish my education and later find a job that will sponsor me and return to the US or even go to Europe. I would be more than happy to pay few thousands of dollars instead of having to go back to my country of origin and struggle to get back in here. Ah, yes I didn't mention this but a good portion of these students already speak over two languages, it would be a shame losing smart and capable individuals to other nations.

I never thought I would be posting a thread of this nature on a site of strong American sentiment, it's almost blasphemous in nature for an individual in my current situation LOL, but there you have it, the other side of the story.



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Next_Heap_With
 


"Xenophobia" is a pejorative you rely on to deny the obvious, and the culprits are linked to one group.

No American made Somalia overthrow its government without a viable substitute.

No American makes Somalis kill each other and innocent third parties.

No American makes Somalis kidnap and RANSOM aid workers from 'Medicins Sans Frontiers.' the U.N., or other aid agencies.

What do you PROPOSE? NOTHING?

This is not our fault. We are the victims.

Go there. Do something!

jw


[edit on 22-4-2009 by jdub297]



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join