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.

 

Los Angeles Students to Be Taught That Arizona Immigration Law Is Un-American

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 04:08 AM
link   

The Los Angeles Unified School District school board wants all public school students in the city to be taught that Arizona's new immigration law is un-American.

The school board president made the announcement Tuesday night after the district's Board of Education passed a resolution to oppose the controversial law, which gives law enforcement officials in Arizona the power to question and detain people they suspect are in the U.S. illegally when they are stopped in relation to a crime or infraction.

Critics of the law say it will result in racial profiling.

The school board voted unanimously on Tuesday to “express outrage” and “condemnation” of the law, and it called on the school superintendent to look into curtailing economic support to the Grand Canyon State. About 73 percent of the students in the school district are Latino.

But supporters of the law say the school board is way out of bounds and that the measure will just distract from the children's education.


Read more of this garbage

I would encourage anyone who wants a good laugh to read the rest of the article.

It includes gems like this: ""We need to do everything in our power to help our students be global citizens".

How about teaching them to be American citizens first?

Not surprisingly, the people in charge of the LAUSD have hispanic names, and surprise surprise, they hate the new AZ law.

Too freaking bad they cant keep their politics out of the curriculum.




posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 04:27 AM
link   
Well, I don't really agree with the level of "indoctrination" (if that is the correct word) going on here. Despite how you feel about the legislation, its way beyond the scope of a classroom to be discussing politics (especially from only one point of view) to students like this.

We have the same problem in Texas, where they are letting politics dictate school curriculum. Education should be as unbiased as possible, and mandating that schools teach a certain point of view and only that point of view is going to dumb down children even more.



That being said, the law in AZ is patently un-American. Not only does it violate the 4th and 14th amendments, it also allocates federal powers to state officials. In addition to constitutional violations, it also violates AZ citizens' rights to travel in public without proof of citizenship, under pain of arrest.

However, despite how I personally feel about the AZ legislation, there is still no need for such partisanship in primary schools. It's unnecessary and counter-productive. This is a frightening trend and I certainly hope we can pull our collective heads out of our asses and realize that proper education comes before our political differences.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 04:30 AM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


The AZ law is no more stringent than the federal version.

Honestly, have you read either of them?



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by brainwrek
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


The AZ law is no more stringent than the federal version.

Honestly, have you read either of them?


There is no federal law that requires citizens to carry ID on them in public.

Even if there was, the very fact that the AZ legislation re-allocates those powers from the federal level to the state level violates the constitution.

Immigration laws are federal laws. Immigration matters are federal matters. The state has no place in handling these matters, regardless of how terribly the federal government is doing its job.

This is the Constitution, and unless we wish to willingly dismantle it, we can't allow legislation like the AZ bill to "slip under the radar". We have these laws for a reason, and that reason is to protect the fundamental rights of America's citizens. When we allow one state to violate the Constitution to solve one problem, then we are opening the door for any state to violate the Constitution.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 05:47 AM
link   
Not many American or "other than Hispanic" kids are in public schools here in Los Angeles anymore.

The illegals and "hispanics" make up the majority. I don't even see a white kid when I drive by any public school here. I drive by any given public elementary school, or middle school here, it's all Hispanic kids running, with the secondary groups being black. And many of the kids yell in Spanish.

Los Angeles is a complete failure of a city.

I was 'educated' in the L.A. Unified system. It was a dung heap then, it's a dung heap now. And yes, ,many school board race pimps are Hispanic too. Or people who sympathize with Illegal Immigrant children, or Anchor Baby students. The whole system has been infiltrated and run over.

Like I said in other threads, if YOUR city or county doesn't fight Illegal Immigration, you too will suffer the same fate as Los Angeles over time.

Heed the warning.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 06:24 AM
link   
Isn't this ironic,being california has a bill similar to Arizonas,ready to be passed,I grew up in So Calif,when I went to high school was about 2% hispanic,and 2 blacks out of 2000 students,depends where you live I guess,and I'm Basque so I was one of the 2% so was my brother



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Excellent Post!! You beat me to it by 3 hours!! This is a damn joke!

I love Cali but come on! Sign your damn treaty with Mexico already and we will pay tribute to the new "Calimexicana"!!

Enough! These idiots, so called educators are brainwashing, manipulating and down right using our children, the soon to be future of this country to re-write history just to enforce their sick agenda!!

They are telling our kids that it is okay to break the law "Sometimes"!!!

I really feel for all parents who have their kids in public school in Ca. Didn't they recently pass a law forbiding a child to be home schooled by a parent/gaurdian if they did not hold a bachelors degree in Education?

This has got to stop! How in the hell can they claim Arizona's law is "Un American" as it pertains to non-Americans?

I say we Boycott L.A.

If I'm rambling it's because I am really pissed sorry! Excellent thread S&F!

Thanks,
Pax



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


Do states have a natural right to defend themselves against invasion? Of course they do.

This law violates neither the 4th or the 14th Amendment. Unfortunately anchor babies are still considered citizens in AZ, but their parents are not.

The law also does not grant authority to randomly stop people to ask for ID. If they are already involved with the police, then they may be asked for ID, which is nothing new. One must have ID on them at all times, or they may be detained until ID can be verified.

Hell, last week I got a ticket after being pulled over because I left my license at home on accident.

Immigration is indeed a federal matter, AND a state one. States reserve the right to control who enters its boundaries, and who may remain there.

Hell, if they wanted to, AZ could arrest illegals for trespassing.

You never answered my original question: Have you read the AZ or the federal law for that matter?



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


no req to carry id?
have you ever got pulled over driving?
First thing they ask is for driver's liscence and insurance.
Tell the cop that ask's for your id next time you don't have to show him or you dont have one.
You will be in jail simple as that...mexican or black or white..color wont matter.

Ever try to rent a government run apartment?
they ask for your ORIGINAL birth certificate..not certificate of live birth like obama has shown us.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   
This is an excerpt from a plaque on the statue of liberty: “Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door.” Emma Lazarus, 1883 Perhaps you will understand its message.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   
Perhaps they will let the Nation of Aztlan activists teach that the southwest portion of the US should be annexed by Mexico.

Or maybe LA prefers that students learn about the Republica del Norte.


Best of luck to the students that are taught "social Justice" from such an early age.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by brainwrek

Do states have a natural right to defend themselves against invasion? Of course they do.


No. They absolutely do not.

An 'invasion' would be an act of war. States do not have the right to respond to an act of war. That is another federal power.

Immigration is not an "invasion", but it is still a federal issue. Constitutionally, it is not up to the state to handle matters of immigration.


Originally posted by brainwrek
This law violates neither the 4th or the 14th Amendment.


The fourth amendment to the US Constitution:


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.


The fourteenth amendment to the US Constitution, section 1:


Section 1. 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; 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.



Obviously, it can be very easily argued that the Arizona legislation violates both.



Originally posted by brainwrek
Immigration is indeed a federal matter, AND a state one. States reserve the right to control who enters its boundaries, and who may remain there.


Simply put, you are wrong on this. States have no control over who enters their borders. States can prohibit residency based on certain factors, but the only legally defensible borders in the United States are the national borders (Canada and Mexico), and those must be defended by the federal government, not the state.



Originally posted by brainwrek
You never answered my original question: Have you read the AZ or the federal law for that matter?


There is no specific federal immigration law, federal immigration policy in this country is a large assortment of various measures. And yes, I have read sb1070








Originally posted by TheAmused
no req to carry id?
have you ever got pulled over driving?
First thing they ask is for driver's liscence and insurance.
Tell the cop that ask's for your id next time you don't have to show him or you dont have one.
You will be in jail simple as that...mexican or black or white..color wont matter.


Does being in public necessarily mean that you are driving?

Think before you speak/type.


Obviously, if you are operating a motor vehicle, you are required by law to carry ID (your drivers license) on you.

However, there is no federal law requiring citizens to carry ID at all times in public. Basically, you have the right as an American citizen to walk around in public without ID on you. You do not have to carry ID with you (in any state except AZ) to walk to the grocery store and pick up a loaf of bread. You do not need to carry ID with you (in any state except AZ) to walk your dog in your neighborhood. You do not need to carry ID with you (in any state except AZ) to ride your bicycle or go for a jog.

If you can't see how this is a dangerous affront to the rights of US citizens in Arizona, then I really can't help you.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   
I'm glad for this. Students have been bombarded with anti-immigration propaganda. Its about time they get to hear the opposing point of view. Especially considering it is absolutely correct.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by brainwrek
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


Do states have a natural right to defend themselves against invasion? Of course they do.

This law violates neither the 4th or the 14th Amendment. Unfortunately anchor babies are still considered citizens in AZ, but their parents are not.

The law also does not grant authority to randomly stop people to ask for ID. If they are already involved with the police, then they may be asked for ID, which is nothing new. One must have ID on them at all times, or they may be detained until ID can be verified.

Hell, last week I got a ticket after being pulled over because I left my license at home on accident.
Immigration is indeed a federal matter, AND a state one. States reserve the right to control who enters its boundaries, and who may remain there.

Hell, if they wanted to, AZ could arrest illegals for trespassing.

You never answered my original question: Have you read the AZ or the federal law for that matter?


You know whats wrong with the bill your apparently supporting? If you were of Mexican/American decent or just about anything else besides white in the state of AZ, you would have been taken in held until you were able to prove you were a US citizen instead of just being ticketed. You think a white person would be held like so if they didn't have their license/Id on them?



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 





No. They absolutely do not. An 'invasion' would be an act of war. States do not have the right to respond to an act of war. That is another federal power. Immigration is not an "invasion", but it is still a federal issue. Constitutionally, it is not up to the state to handle matters of immigration.


A common misconception that people make is that an invasion is ONLY a military matter. You couldnt be more wrong.



n.
1. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer.
2. A large-scale onset of something injurious or harmful, such as a disease.
3. An intrusion or encroachment.

See #'s 2 and 3?

Sure one could argue the harmful effects of illegal immigration in regards to #2, but #3 is dead on accurate.

From yet another dictionary:

1 : to enter for conquest or plunder
2 : to encroach upon : infringe
3 a : to spread over or into as if invading

Again, see #2 there?

Foreign nationals flooding over the border without our permission is indeed an invasion.

As for states not having the right to defend themselves : Ever read the 10th Amendment? How about the 9th?



Obviously, it can be very easily argued that the Arizona legislation violates both.


What planet are you from?

As I previously said, and as stated in the AZ law, police may not just stop people randomly to check ID's. That would in fact be a violation of the 4th.

The law (which you should know if you actually read it as you claim) states:

Requires officials and agencies to reasonably attempt to determine the immigration status of a person involved in a lawful contact where reasonable suspicion exists regarding the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation.

Lawful contact, such as a traffic stop, or arrest. Not just stopping people on the sidewalk and asking for proof of citizenship.





There is no specific federal immigration law


Really? I guess Title 8 of the USC is just a bunch of "measures" right?



Simply put, you are wrong on this. States have no control over who enters their borders. States can prohibit residency based on certain factors, but the only legally defensible borders in the United States are the national borders (Canada and Mexico), and those must be defended by the federal government, not the state.


Again, refer to the 9th and 10th Amendments which gives the states and the people that right.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


The fourteenth amendment applies to "Citizens". If someone is not a citizen, they do not have the same rights. Unfortunately this is not a black and white issue, meaning clear cut, It's a catch 22, if you are not a citizen you do not have the same rights, and we should be allowed to question you and throw you out of the country, but if you are a citizen, you have a right to not be harassed. What to do, what to do, I guess we can just fight about it, and let the Feds sit on their hands another 5, 10, 30 years. Won't recognize the new USA from the old, but so what, huh?

There is a reason for Amendments.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Phoenicians are trying to prevent what happened to Los Angeles.
Too much mass illegal immigration leads to the balkanization of the country.

LA is the new capitol of the Reconquista and La Raza Movement.
The local politicians are race radicals with as much allegiance to Mexico and Latin America as the United States. They are tools of the elite and want to bring about a reconciliation and economic merger of the N. American economies. They think Latin America will come up to our standards, but I think the plan will in reality bring US citizens down to the status of the peasant serfs that comprise much of the population of Mexico. Easier to rule and control.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAmused
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


no req to carry id?
have you ever got pulled over driving?
First thing they ask is for driver's liscence and insurance.
Tell the cop that ask's for your id next time you don't have to show him or you dont have one.
You will be in jail simple as that...mexican or black or white..color wont matter.

Ever try to rent a government run apartment?
they ask for your ORIGINAL birth certificate..not certificate of live birth like obama has shown us.



In the state of Texas I can confirm that your statement is untrue. They will ticket you for it but thats just about it.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by brainwrek


As for states not having the right to defend themselves : Ever read the 10th Amendment? How about the 9th?

...

Again, refer to the 9th and 10th Amendments which gives the states and the people that right.




Getting into a semantics argument over the word "invasion" is getting you nowhere. The states simply do not have the power to:

a.) secure their own borders

b.) respond directly to military action or use military action

c.) raise a militia or army


All of these are federal powers, as directly stated by the constitution. Your fantasy of Arizona 'defending itself from invasion' is all well and good, but it's just that: a fantasy. The state actually has no right to do any of the things you have mentioned.


Now, as per your references to the 9th and 10th amendment.

I'm completely unsure as to why you brought up the 9th. The 9th guarantees rights to citizens, and has absolutely no bearing on the discussion whatsoever.

The 10th, as you know, grants powers to the states that are not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. However, foreign policy is specifically granted to Congress and the Executive branch in the Constitution. States have no right to enact foreign policies. Immigration is a foreign policy. Immigration is therefore enumerated to the federal government, and not the states. Arizona has no legal militia, and it is not allowed to defend itself. That is the duty of the US Military and the National Guard.




To put it very plainly: Because these rights are already specifically granted to the federal government, neither the 9th or 10th amendment has any bearing at all on them, as both amendments only pertain to powers that are not specifically enumerated.

Understand? It's really very simple.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   
I believe that it is a sad state of affairs that the children are now the new political pawns in the running of the country. I often wonder if those in the LA school district realize that they are setting up a group of students to be discriminated against based off of the color of their skin. Schools should be used to teach the facts and prepare the students to think and be a productive part of society.
It used to be a politician would, when trying to get elected, the only role of the children would be to shake hands and babies would get kissed, photo ops, and now school children are used as pawns.
The other aspect of this, is that I feel it will lay the seeds for a new group of racist and people who will not seek to be members of society, but rather only to be a society unto their ownselves, and hate all others who are different, or are precieved as being different or of a group that they have been told is evil or racists.




top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join