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.

 

Teapartiers: What an outrage!

page: 11
33
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Angus123
You're chastising tea partiers for not speaking out against a clearly racist law?
Yeah I know, I know... if there's one thing tea partiers can't stand it's being called racist.
If there's another thing they can't stand it's brown people.


You sir are the racist, I am BROWN and a proud supporter & active member of our Tea Party. Get your facts straight, but your comments do remind of that Joan Walsh personality when she was struck down today on Morning Joe.







posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


I was actually going to post that thought JPZ, glad I looked at your comment before posting another comment.

Yes, they have made a mistake, they should just have made it a criminal offense to hire, give government aid, or any befefits to an illegal alien. This would have made it the responsibility of employers or government officials to make sure the person receiving the job or benefits were citizens or otherwise legally here.

Now, with the problem we are in financially, I would like to see a state pass a law that shuts off the rights to even other legally authorized individuals here. Not a citizen of the US, well too bad.

I think we need to begin to diminish the legal emigration at this time as well.

Just my opinion though.

[edit on 4/21/2010 by endisnighe]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by nickoli
An illegal alien does not have any rights under the constitution,the tea party people are against illegal immigration with an emphasis on the illegal part.


The Constitution doesn't refer to "citizens" as having rights - it refers to "people."

Are you saying illegal aliens aren't "people?"



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by tyranny22
 


So...just empty rhetoric or what?

I appreciate everyone's opinions in this thread, that is why it is interesting. Just saying something that makes little sense to garner emotional responses seems to be that antithesis of honesty though.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by tyranny22
 


Citizenship comes with certain privileges beyond rights such as voting or running for office.

Immigration laws are fine and necessary to protect our borders, but the Bill of Rights was written specifically to prohibit the government from disparaging rights. It's really not that hard to understand.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Angus123
You're chastising tea partiers for not speaking out against a clearly racist law?
Yeah I know, I know... if there's one thing tea partiers can't stand it's being called racist.
If there's another thing they can't stand it's brown people.


I don't agree that this is a "racist" law.

I think it's an equal opportunity law.

Meaning, if it doesn't matter if you're Mexican, Africa, Chinese or English (predominantly Caucasian) ... if you're here illegally, you can be deported.

I realize that "profiling" is being used, but if we had the same problem with British people, I'm sure they'd be asking the same questions once an accent were heard.

[edit on 21-4-2010 by tyranny22]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


Thanks for pointing out their mistake in legal strategy. I had wanted to make that point myself, but have had limited time to post here lately, so if you could pick up the slack it would be more than greatly appreciated. I'll try to come back later and join in.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Angus123
You're chastising tea partiers for not speaking out against a clearly racist law?
Yeah I know, I know... if there's one thing tea partiers can't stand it's being called racist.
If there's another thing they can't stand it's brown people.


You may be on to something. But ill tell you if they were illegal white spaniards in that part of the country I would be concerned.


If they were Irish or Scotts I wouldnt give a dam.
As long as they were protestants.



[edit on 21-4-2010 by Logarock]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by tyranny22

Originally posted by Smack
The 4th in part reads: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated"

the 5th in part reads: " 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".


And these rights are guaranteed to citizens.

They do not apply to those that are here illegally.


You are incorrect. Just like the census counts all people that are in the country, the Constitution protects all people, regardless of their immigration status.

Illegal aliens and Constitutional rights

While many argue that "We the People of the United States," refers only to legal citizens, the Supreme Court has consistently disagreed.

Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886)
In Yick Wo v. Hopkins, a case involving the rights of Chinese immigrants, the Court ruled that the 14th Amendment's statement, "Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws," applied to all persons "without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality," and to "an alien, who has entered the country, and has become subject in all respects to its jurisdiction, and a part of its population, although alleged to be illegally here."

Wong Wing v. U.S. (1896)
Citing Yick Wo v. Hopkins, the Court, in the case of Wong Wing v. US, further applied the citizenship-blind nature of the Constitution to the 5th and 6th amendments, stating ". . . it must be concluded that all persons within the territory of the United States are entitled to the protection guaranteed by those amendments, and that even aliens shall not be held to answer for a capital or other infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law."

Plyler v. Doe (1982)
In Plyler v. Doe, the Supreme Court struck down a Texas law prohibiting enrollment of illegal aliens in public school. In its decision, the Court held, "The illegal aliens who are plaintiffs in these cases challenging the statute may claim the benefit of the Equal Protection Clause, which provides that no State shall 'deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is a 'person' in any ordinary sense of that term… The undocumented status of these children vel non does not establish a sufficient rational basis for denying them benefits that the State affords other residents."


It really helps your case if you have the slightest idea of what the Constitution says (and what the Supreme Court has consistently affirmed).



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by prionace glauca

Originally posted by Angus123
You're chastising tea partiers for not speaking out against a clearly racist law?
Yeah I know, I know... if there's one thing tea partiers can't stand it's being called racist.
If there's another thing they can't stand it's brown people.


You sir are the racist, I am BROWN and a proud supporter & active member of our Tea Party. Get your facts straight, but your comments do remind of that Joan Walsh personality when she was struck down today on Morning Joe.





Okay... so why exactly am I a racist? You know I'd bet cash money that the only part of your body that isn't white spews poop. Your mouth



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by tyranny22

Originally posted by Angus123
You're chastising tea partiers for not speaking out against a clearly racist law?
Yeah I know, I know... if there's one thing tea partiers can't stand it's being called racist.
If there's another thing they can't stand it's brown people.


I don't agree that this is a "racist" law.

I think it's an equal opportunity law.

Meaning, if it doesn't matter if you're Mexican, Africa, Chinese or English (predominantly Caucasian) ... if you're here illegally, you can be deported.

I realize that "profiling" is being used, but if we had the same problem with British people, I'm sure they'd be asking the same questions once an accent were heard.

[edit on 21-4-2010 by tyranny22]


So you have no problem with violations of Constitutional rights, so long as it's addressing a "problem."

Good to know. See you in the FEMA camps.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   
You guys can argue all you want. I'll say my two cents and withdraw from the conversation.

Nothing is going to change my opinion that illegal immigrants siphoning my tax dollars is WRONG.

There are plenty of LEGAL U.S. Citizens that are disabled or retired or simply too poor to afford decent health care or food that can use these dollars that end up going to illegals that are not contributing themselves.

I've known several Illegal Immigrants in my time. It'd be different if they paid taxes (that ended up going to school programs or to aid in welfare). Or if they spent the money they made here in the U.S. (again, going to state taxes and welfare), but most send it "home" ... and the bulk of the money they make goes out of the U.S.

It's not right.

If they want to come here and work. I think that is GREAT. We're glad to have you here. But, for the love of God, do it legally so that you can CONTRIBUTE to what we have. Those who're here illegally are ruining the same things that they come here for: schools, health care and employment.

You can call me racist. I'll call you blind.

[edit on 21-4-2010 by tyranny22]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by VintageEnvy
The problem I have with this is people will stand up for it because they don't like illegals but it is a clear violation of peoples rights. Just because you look like your from here you too could be detained temporarily, also meaning taken into holding for a short period of time, till all your papers check out. That can happen to anyone with an accent.


You people keep talking about rights, what rights are they going against? Because when you get pulled over you have to show you ID. Does that mean thats a violation pf peoples rights too.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by skunknuts

Originally posted by Jenna
I'm appalled that they might actually demand to see an Americans 'papers' as it were to prove they're truly American and I don't see this going any other direction. There's no way they can do this without it turning very ugly, very fast. I hope I never live to see the day when I'm asked to show anything to prove I'm an American and am here legally.


That, ladies and gentlemen, sounds like a quote from a TRUE American loving citizen that values their liberty. Funny how people are so willing to compromise their SUPPOSED values. How un-american.

Best,
Skunknuts


Funny how how that goes, Your a TRUE!!!!!!!! american with people agree with YOU. Your the un-american



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Angus123
 

Why are YOU a racist?
Don't know, but this link might help you in your therapy...

www.urbandictionary.com...

Umm, (topic)
this law is misguided, and I AM TEA PARTY.
(the REAL one)



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   
My only problem with this whole thing is giving officials too much power, power which they can abuse. This method would make it standard practice to "detain" a person based upon
physical features which is a slippery slope IMO. Then one should ask, what are the limits of this new authority? Do people have to show their ID's while shopping, enjoying a movie,
walking down the street, at the exit of church?

Surely we can conjure up a better way to address this concern?



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 



Now, with the problem we are in financially, I would like to see a state pass a law that shuts off the rights to even other legally authorized individuals here. Not a citizen of the US, well too bad.


The problem I see with that statement is that many people who live in the US legally who are immigrants pay their taxes, buy homes and American cars, and support and become involved with their local communities. Would you not agree that the US is founded on immigration, and most "Americans" are descendants of immigrants? Huddled masses? Will the Statue of Liberty be the next target? No rights for anyone but US citizens? I thought all men were created equal, or is this another 'pick and choose the parts of the constitution that suit your political agenda' thing?

The problem with the bill is that it enables people to be stopped, detained, and searched based solely on a hunch and appearance. That's not law enforcement, that's arbitrary mood and feeling.

If profiling is okay, based solely on appearance, why are the airports etc. not screening just the people who appear middle eastern? After all, it was ME people that were apparently responsible for the increase in security at airports. Why are there no tea party protests against increased security at airports?

I agree that employers should be responsible for hiring qualified staff (all papers in order), and it's true that presenting the right papers during a legal traffic stop is correct procedure. However, the basis of the bill is to allow impromptu stops at any time by law enforcement officials. Are you willing to leave extra early for work so you can go through a turnstile on every street corner and have your papers checked? No. Of course you are not. But that's the only way this would be a fair law, if EVERYONE is checked. I'm willing to bet that everyone in this thread who said, "I'd be happy to show my papers!" would get kinda tired of it after the thrid time in the same day, week.

In practice and in reality, it means that all hispanics will be submitted to scrutiny. They are not all illegals.

It's unjust, and it's wrong.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by tyranny22
You guys can argue all you want. I'll say my two cents and withdraw from the conversation.

Nothing is going to change my opinion that illegal immigrants siphoning my tax dollars is WRONG.



This is why I specifically questioned what you said. I agree with this sentiment and from reading the thread I have not found anyone yet claiming not to. I do not see anyone pushing for more rights for illegal immigrants in this thread. I see people not wanting American Citizens to be hampered with an unconstitutional law so that people who say the kinds of empty things you have said can feel better without actually addressing the problem.

I guess you only wanted to respond to people you could lash out to instead of actually converse with though.

Go ahead and withdraw and let me use you as an example.

You are conflating two very different issues. Your emotional response clearly comes from anger of the abuse of our system by illegals. I get that. I think pretty much everyone in this thread gets that. This bill tramples all over the constitution and American Citizens' rights and that is the issue here.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:27 AM
link   
What is an outrage is the fact that we are the ONLY country in the world that does NOT enforce our borders. A country w/o border control is no country at all.
I say this IS exactly what the Tea Party stands for. We are not limp wristed dorks who are AFRAID to enforce the law. Uphold the law, uphold the Constitution. If it wasn't for doorknobs like the author of this thread, we wouldn't be in this situation, and Californoa would not be about to declare bankruptcy. Hail the Immigrant, screw the illegal, and screw them hard!!!



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alien Mind

Originally posted by VintageEnvy
The problem I have with this is people will stand up for it because they don't like illegals but it is a clear violation of peoples rights. Just because you look like your from here you too could be detained temporarily, also meaning taken into holding for a short period of time, till all your papers check out. That can happen to anyone with an accent.


You people keep talking about rights, what rights are they going against? Because when you get pulled over you have to show you ID. Does that mean thats a violation pf peoples rights too.


Apples and oranges. Driving is a privilege, which requires a government-issued license. Therefore, a law-enforcement officer can ask to see your license - BUT he or she needs probable cause to stop you in the first place.

Walking, however, requires no permits and a police officer has no right to demand to see identification. Period.

I never thought I'd see ATS people supporting "Papieren, bitte."

Christopher Hitchens

More recently, I was walking at night in the wooded California suburb where I spend the summer, trying to think about an essay I was writing. Suddenly, a police cruiser was growling quietly next to me and shining a light. "What are you doing?" I don't know quite what it was—I'd been bored and delayed that week at airport security—but I abruptly decided that I was in no mood, so I responded, "Who wants to know?" and continued walking. "Where do you live?" said the voice. "None of your business," said I. "What's under your jacket?" "What's your probable cause for asking?" I was now almost intoxicated by my mere possession of constitutional rights. There was a pause, and then the cop asked almost pleadingly how he was to know if I was an intruder or burglar, or not. "You can't know that," I said. "It's for me to know and for you to find out. I hope you can come up with probable cause." The car gurgled alongside me for a bit and then pulled away. No doubt the driver then ran some sort of check, but he didn't come back.

Now, imagine Mr Hitchens with a darker complexion, and imagine this occurring in Arizona.

You don't HAVE to cooperate with the police. And you certainly don't have to do their jobs for them. If they have probable cause, fine. But the language you speak and the color of your skin is NOT cause.

ATS used to be a place where people mistrusted authority. But when it comes to illegal immigration, the jackboots are eminently trustworthy.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join