Migrants sell up and flee Arizona ahead of crackdown

reply to post by Xcathdra


I don't buy what you're saying.

You mean to tell me that these white supremacists actually want Mexicans to go the legal route just to live in this country?

You're forgetting that part of this country once belonged to them!

Keep on bellyaching about the bilingual billboards, etc.

No one asked for the white man to come to this land and rape the people already living here. It happened anyway.

Those idiots on the Arizona border with guns? Their ancestors weren't here legally. They're hypocrites.

Ask any Indian (or native american if you must) what they think of the white man and their borders and you'll get an earful.

I could care less if Mexico wishes to annex the Southwest. The military (and not your shrivel-dicked white militias) will take care of these cartels with ease.

Step aside little boys and let the MEN handle this problem. Hint: The U.S Army/Navy/Marines/Air Force, not your lilly-white ass militia.

reply to post by whatukno


Give me a break...

Originally posted by Perseus Apex
reply to post by Prove_It_NOW

 

Hmmmmm, the Bureau of Land Management BLM(Federal ?authority?)just attempted to take one of my mining claims through a procedural flaw on their part when the claim was paid a year in advance. You see the flaw resides in some recently added fine print to the 'process'. BLM expected myself to 'visit' the claim this year to keep the claim. I have already paid for the claim till 2011. This is a clear case of fraud and most probably an inside operation. I advised a BLM litigator to look into the issue (and multiple other recent lawsuits about this very same issue) since I was not even 'informed' as per my legal right of any changes or policies regarding 'visiting' a mine claim when it has been prepaid for the next year. This is a good example of a run-on sentence so I've been told.
If there are multiple lawsuites around a simple issue such as this then there is a problem. I told the BLM lawyer to Fix the obvious problem. This is your job. You work for the 'people', not some faceless, litigating pencil pusher who is obviously conning the people out of assets. There is a Federal attack on Arizona at the time. This is obvious. Clean up 'YOUR' state. It belongs to U. Make sure the Feds don't pick there own judge to hear you case either. I understand it never worked out in the end for neither party. Maybe I'm just getting ahead of myself here, sometimes I do that, with good intention. This is what matters but you know this. Yes, you do. Take back 'YOUR' rights or be a 'subject'.

If amnesty takes place, the country will cease to exist by design, not a good one. Again, alex jonas is right on spot here.

Don't let these things slide folks.
Fight or flight?
Where to?

[edit on 26-7-2010 by Perseus Apex]

I belive the phrase you are looking for is called Caveat Emptor. The other part of that would be ignorance of the Law is no excuse. Now with that being said, trying to manipulate through fine print added after the fact can be construed as theft by deception.

There is no issue with American Immigration Law. It is there, and has always been there. To me, people are upset because the people want it enforced.

I personally haven't experienced much crime with illegal aliens and I would say that other races are far worse with crime. From my own experiences, I have found illegal aliens to be very hard working people who are not only nice, but would give you the shirt off their back if you needed it. I have been "helped" on several occasions by illegal immigrants as a child and I couldn't be more appreciative.

With that being said, they are still illegal and we still can't afford them. Not only can we not afford the strain on our social services, but we also can't afford to be losing our jobs to these foreigners.

I hate when I hear people say something to the affect of them taking jobs that nobody else wants and that just isn't true, however they do take the jobs that Americans don't want for the pay that the employers are willing to pay. You see, they work for cheap here, while sending most or all of that money back to Mexico, where the cost of living is much cheaper. So, while they may be able to support their families on such little wages, Americans can't do the same.

If we expelled all of the illegal immigrants, I'm sure than millions of unemployed Americans would be more than happy to take those jobs for a fair wage.

Also, something that many people don't realize, if we give them amnesty, then why on earth would they still be willing to work those crap jobs for such little pay? They wouldn't, they would simply move on to the next tier of employment and put a whole new swath of Americans out of work, while still leaving the same alleged employment vacuum. It just doesn't make any sense, how the pro-amnesty types try to justify illegals living and working here.

As far as securing the border goes, I think this is of the ut-most importance. How could we even think of anything else, when our borders resemble swiss cheese? Just by the sheer number of illegal aliens in our country, it is so obvious that secure borders aren't something that we don't even come close to having. When people say, "wow, look at all these illegals, lets take care of them and allow them to stay", people are completely ignoring the obvious problem and they should be saying, "wow, look at all of these illegals, our border must be wide open so lets fix it".

I think the problem here, is that people are thinking things through. They are throwing reason to the wind, while betting with their emotions. This is only going to get us further in our current pickle. No other country in the world has such laxed border control and no other country in the world is so easy on immigration. Do you think Mexico would allow you to do the same in their country?

--airspoon

Ok, so y'all are fine by this law? You all are just peachy with the new broad sweeping tyrannical powers given to police?

Superior Court Judge Roland Steinle, who appeared before Bolton when she was a Superior Court judge and he was a defense attorney, said that her ruling - whatever it is - will be unambiguous.

"Everybody is going to get a clear explanation of why it is or isn't constitutional," he said.

Bolton was direct in her questioning.

She indicated that if she issues an injunction, it would likely stop only certain provisions of SB 1070 from going into effect and not the entire law, which covers 14 separate statutes that range from picking up day laborers to keeping employee records.

She said she wasn't concerned with the portion of the law forbidding law enforcement from restricting the enforcement of federal immigration law. But she did have concerns or questions about several other portions:

• Any person who is arrested shall have the person's immigration status determined before the person is released.

Bolton said that "goes well beyond explicit enforcement provisions."

"Does this have the potential to violate the Constitution on reasonableness of detention?" she asked.

• A peace officer without a warrant may arrest a person if the officer has probable cause to believe the person to be arrested has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States.

"Who gets arrested that couldn't get arrested before?" Bolton asked. "The determination of what makes an individual removable from the U.S. is a determination only the federal government can make."

• In addition to any violation of federal law, a person is guilty of willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document if the person is in violation of 8 United States Code Section 1304(e) or 1306(a).

"Isn't that really just an attempt to get around the fact that Arizona can't have its own alien-registration law?" Bolton asked.

Read more: www.azcentral.com...

I want to be clear, because apparently people are of the assumption that I want illegal immigration. I want our federal government to enforce immigration laws. I guess I'll have to include that in every post on this subject from now on so that it's clear and because some people can't be bothered to read.

What is the difference between the federal government enforcing our immigration laws and Arizona enforcing our immigration laws?

Article I Section 8 of the United States Constitution.

The Congress shall have Power To...

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization...

Now further down in Article I Section 10 of the United States Constitution.

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

Which is exactly what Arizona did, they passed a Bill of Attainder and an ex post facto Law.

They not only made up their own law (which you say mirrors the Federal law) but they added to it.

It's the Federal Government's job, and YES DAMMIT THEY SHOULD BE [SNIP] ENFORCING IT!

The Arizona law is not uniform with the federal law, they are violating Article I section 10 of the United States constitution.

Besides the fact that this law was promoted by white supremacist groups and pushed through by Kris Kobach & Russell Pearce


[edit on 7/26/2010 by whatukno]

reply to post by The Sword


Some valid points.. some not so valid.
Native Americans have a seperate treaty that makes them autonomous, essentially their own country, within the United States. As it stands, local Law Enfocrcement has no jurisidiction on tribal lands, and has to go through either the Tribal authorities or Bureau of Indian Affairs.

What was done in the past is in the past and cant ever be undone. The argument you made can be made for every single country on this planet, as at some point in time, it was controlled by somone else. My advice there would be for people to quit their bellyaching over something that is done.

Immigration is the issue. Lumping everyone into the same category who wants a secure border is naieve at best. I dont condone have any type of Neo Nazi group on the border to kepp the "brown skins" out. They are seizing on an issue to move their agenda (sounds fmiliar? 1939 comes to mind).

As it stands now, no crime has been comitted by these groups as they are within their rights to do what they are doing. Would you rather Law Enfrocement arrest these groups for crimes they "could" commit? I for one dont want anything to do with that slippery slide.

All people are asking is for them to use the system in place to come to this country.

Why is this so hard to do?




[edit on 26-7-2010 by Xcathdra]

[edit on 26-7-2010 by Xcathdra]

reply to post by whatukno


Wait... first The State of AZ are neo-nazis enforcing it, and now your tune is changing to include you want the entire Fed to enforce it? How many personalities do you have running around in that melon of yours? Or are you just butthurt about being called out? What's your angle here, man?



If you're confused about the conversation (or maybe which personality is doing the typing), you may not want to inject yourself into it.

reply to post by whatukno


I understand what you are saying, however the FEderal Governments argument in court is skewed to show that Arizona law is unconstitutional / invalid due to the Supremacy clause of the Constitution.

The argument Arizona is making is this. They are not wanting their own seperate imiigration Laws, and they acknowledge as much. They want their officers to be able to detain people who are in this country illegally.

The Police dont act as judge or juror... The people detained would still go before a FEDERAL immigration judge to argue their point on why they are here illegaly.

As it stands now, any Law Enforcement Officer in any of our states has the authority to check immigration status if they are dealing with someone on a call (non consent contact IE crime, 911 call etc).

Checking immigration status is hit or miss. Our computer system are linked into Canada and Mexico. I have run Mexican drivers license before and have gotten a nomal return (Valid driver, no warrants in US or MExico and no interpol warrant hits).

If they show a passport, this can be run also through the Law Enforcement network. The difference here is the specialized number on the Passport that is entered to get the Federal return to see if the passport is still valid (valid as in being in the country legally).

Everything else being argued is nothing more than semantics. If the Federal Government was so concerned about locals doing this then they need to do 2 things:

A - Stop the Federal program that allows local Law Enforcement to enforce Federal Law (Obama administration did this for Sheriff Joe Arpyo (sp))

B - Enforce the laws we have on the books and actually do their jobs.

This would never have been brought to this point had the Federal Government (ALL PARTIES) had done their job and secured the border.

Instead, we want to make it about Politics, and who is racist and who gets what based on some past injustice.

reply to post by EnkiCarbone


No the state of Arizona is pushing the Neo Nazi agenda. The difference is the Federal law is uniform, the Arizona law gives police carte blanche to violate everyone's 4th Amendment rights.

I am blown away by the close minded, bordering on racist, statements and arguments posted here... do you have any friends or acquaintances who are so called 'Illegal Aliens'?

i didn't think so... open your minds and hearts to people trying to better their lives... and if you think they are stealing your jobs go pick your own fruits and vegetables in the fields...not to mention the millions of dollars in unclaimed tax refunds that go the IRS because undocumented workers do not file for refunds.

reply to post by whatukno


Once again, they arent pushing a neo nazi agenda, they are enforcing laws that are already on the books........

Second, Illegal aliens dont have 4th amendment rights.....

3rd..Everyone else that is a citizen here legally wont mind being bothered by being ID , if it helps cull the riff raff.....

I got pulled over once because I matched the description of a man that they were looking for......so is that racial profiling too because the guy matched my skin tone? Or is it only racial profiling and racially motivated when it comes to illegals or someone in the black community?

i was more then happy to provide my id and information, why? Because it brought them one step closer to getting the criminal off the streets and away from my family....

I have to say, I have A LOT of friends that are mexican and are here legally, I also have a lot of friends from Ukraine, its really funny, not ONE OF THEM is against this procedure in Arizona, not ONE......they feel, rightly so, that if you want to be here, you take the steps and wait as long as they did to earn it.

Youre argument isnt valid........sorry

[edit on 26-7-2010 by ManBehindTheMask]

reply to post by The Sword


Wow, what a racist you are.

No one asked for the white man to come to this land and rape the people already living here. It happened anyway.

I'm a "white man" and I haven't raped anyone, nor have I stolen any land. Also, nobody alive today has ever experienced what some (a very small percentage of at least one race) white people did back then.

Furthermore, many Mexicans are of European ancestry, generally speaking either Spanish or German. If you knew your history, the Spaniards were some of the worst tyrants to ever land on this continent. According to your logic, Mexicans are just as much at fault as Americans.

In sum, not one single Mexican has been kicked of their land because the "white man" has claimed it away from Mexico, for America. It's good however to see your racist intent in such an obvious manner, as we now know you aren't using logic, but instead choosing to revert to racism in an effort to argue your point. When people don't have a good, solid argument to make, they tend to fall back on bigotry or racism as a sort of "last stand".

--airspoon

I'm a native american and I have a right to throw # in the face of whites.

Get used to it. White people have no business crying about racism when they've perpetuated it for over 200 years in this country.

reply to post by The Sword


So? congratulations your native american and YOUR perpetuating racism.

So every person who is white now days and is NOT a racist, has to suffer because YOU are?

Do you see how you make NO sense?

My fathers side of the family is full blood Comanche, and they arent racist? In fact, its quite against their spiritual beliefs to hold this kind of attitude toward people........sounds like you have the wrong handle on your ancestry

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

Second, Illegal aliens dont have 4th amendment rights.....

But Legal Immigrants DO have 4th Amendment rights. But this Arizona law just stripped that away from them. They are now presumed guilty of being an illegal before having to prove they are innocent.

[edit on 7/26/2010 by whatukno]

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by EnkiCarbone

 

No the state of Arizona is pushing the Neo Nazi agenda. The difference is the Federal law is uniform, the Arizona law gives police carte blanche to violate everyone's 4th Amendment rights.

Try looking t it this way. In my state the Federal authorities have absolutely no jurisidction in enforcing local / state laws. However their are provisions in place that allow Federal Officers (with arrest authority) to take action when local / state laws are broken.

Are they empowered to enforce local /state laws - No they are not.

Is it a big deal if they do - No it is not

Why? because in the end the accused still has to go to court. The Officer still has to show why they took action. The P.A. has to decide if charges will stay, or if it will be dropped.

Does this type of setup violate any law? no

There is enough crime to go around for everyone.

Your continued insitance on invoking Neo Nazi agenda is perplexing to me. Are you also saying the fEderal Government, who is fighting the Arizona Law, is also pushing a Neo Nazi agenda? After all the Federal Law is what Arizona adopted.

and again, the 4th amendemnt does not apply to the individual, it applies to the government. Why is this such a hard concept to understand.

reply to post by The Sword


You don't have any right to throw anything in the face of whites. What have white people done to you? *Some white people may have had a bone with your ancestors, but it doesn't hurt you now.

Furthermore, blaming a whole race for something that a very small minority of people in a race have done, is not only ignorant, but also retarded. I was once mugged by a black man and I experienced anti-white racism during my entire youth, yet I don't blame "black people". I blame those who actually affected me.

Again, you were not affected by the actions of the Europeans hundreds of years ago so your little pitty party is self percieved.

--airspoon

Edited to add:
You seem to be the only racist here, as you can't get past race. By your logic, black people have no right to accuse of others of crimes, because they have been committing them for hundreds of years.

You should judge people by their actions and their intent, not the color of their skin, as you seem to be doing.

[edit on 26-7-2010 by airspoon]

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

 

Second, Illegal aliens dont have 4th amendment rights.....

But Legal Immigrants DO have 4th Amendment rights. But this Arizona law just stripped that away from them. They are now presumed guilty of being an illegal before having to prove they are innocent.

[edit on 7/26/2010 by whatukno]

OK.. last time - The 4th Amendment DOES NOT apply to the individual.. It applies to the Government. It prevents the Government from seizing evidence / items / you without a reason.

If you stop someone on the streets, place them in handcuffs and search them, you would be guilt of felonious restrain and theft at most, pssibly assault depending on the state you are in.

If a Law Enofrcement Officer did the same, it would be a civil rights violation - 42 USC 1983.

And yes, it has been ruled that once you set foot in this country, you have protection under our laws. No issues there.

Why is it though you argue they have protection, yet argue they should be exempt from having the laws enforced on them?

I mean hell, I have seen an FBI agent do a traffic stop before. Can you show me where they get that authority, since in state law it clearly establishes what an emergency vehicle is and who qualifies for one?

The Source Quoted proves that Politicians are Liars.

Illegal Immigration Can Be solved. All it takes is Enforcement.