Is it really "illegal?"

[Unkotare]

(and since you do not know the definition of the word sovereignty go look it up).

What in your little pea brain gives you the idea that I don't know the meaning of the word "Sovereignty," idiot?

Because you think people moving to America, paying taxes and making the US government richer makes the US government less powerful.

Do you really imagine that there is anyone reading this who can't see your silly little straw men? Really? And it seems clear that YOU are the one who doesn't understand the word in question. Have you always been this stupid?

 

[Unkotare]

I've entertained you for free.

Not very well, idiot, not very well.

Remember this part?
The US will never embrace your asinine fantasy of open borders no matter how much a fool you make of yourself here playing Cliff Clavin.


That's the part you need to remember, missy.

Perhaps when ALL your posts are, “you idiot” it’s you whose the idiot

LOL! I know you don't understand what you did there, but - LOL!

 

[Unkotare]

Mr Grand Wizard, Sir:

The Know Nothing was a movement by the nativist American political faction of the 1850s, characterized by political xenophobia, anti-Catholic sentiment, and occasional bouts of violence against the groups the nativists targeted. It was empowered by popular fears that the country was being overwhelmed by German and Irish Catholic immigrants, who were often regarded as hostile to republican values and controlled by the Pope in Rome.

How come your intellectual ancestors never referred to early immigrants as "illegal"?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Which Federal Agency "legalized" aliens before 1888.

Please don't be a retard and purposely confuse NATURALIZATION with IMMIGRATION?



.

I leave all "retarded" commentary to you and assholes like DuddyDolt.

If Naturalization is the exclusive province of the Federal Government -- under the Constitution itself -- and it is, then the MANNER in which it may be granted is also up to the Federal Government ENTIRELY.

Quit stonewalling and answer the questions:

Even the case you cited , admits that the FEDERAL authority to deport is based on the fact that , at least , 5 Supreme Court "Justices" are racist white motherfuckers:


"Courts have long recognized the power to expel or exclude aliens as a fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the Government's political departments largely immune from judicial control. The Chinese Exclusion Case, 130 U.S. 581 (1889);


Courts, not the founding father nor the Constitution

SHAUGHNESSY v. UNITED STATES EX REL. MEZEI, 73 S. Ct. 625, 345 U.S. 206 (U.S. 03/16/1953)



But you and your ilk are willing to allow white judges to perpetrate crimes because it suits your racist inclinations

.

Your personal racism has no bearing on Constitutional Law, idiot.

 

[Liability]

Contumacious and starcraftzzz,

You guys may as well hang it up. Liability can type in big, bold and colorful letters along with put pictures into his posts. His comrade can call you all kinds of names as he hears them on Comedy Central.

There is no doubt that the federal government CAN do a lot of things that these guys claim relative to naturalization. The fact is, they do not actually do it. In most instances, you'd be hard pressed to find a law addressing the need and fact situations. Between the three of us, we can understand the difference between naturalization and immigration - or more accurately just people being GUESTS. Forget it guys, it's a concept that these NSM types cannot grasp.

The reality is, the xenophobes will argue against every ruling all the way to hell, knowing they are wrong. Let's take one of their arguments:

"Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory."

Sovereignty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So I don't get to say who visits my house? Private employers don't have the right to hire who they want - be sovereign over their business?

Who do you wish to be sovereign in this context? The people or the government?

Liability and his ***** hate foreigners. The only way they see for people to live is to sell their soul, wait twenty years standing in some imaginary line where they can become citizens. In the process, if that situation creates a bad precedent that you and I will be judged by, they are content to destroy American Liberty to rid this country of the brown people.

Yet, for all their bravado, neither of those men have ever volunteered to man the border. Neither of them has shot one of these people they claim are criminals. Neither of them has done anything except look for excuses to wage war at a cost to your Liberties and mine. Then they expect someone else to do their wet work. The only reason we are obliged to waste time on them is the hopes that they will offend the wrong bureaucrat and be hauled in for treason.

I don't care one way or another about the people from south of the border. I'm not related to them. I fight for their rights because I believe in Liberty. I am doing for them the things I would want them to do for me in a similar circumstance. Further, I am protecting my Liberty. As one of our founding fathers so aptly put it:

He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
- Thomas Paine

The price we're paying is for protecting others from oppression. The tyrants here will be held accountable at some point.

I couldn't help but notice that DummyDolt is quite "selective" on his "criticism" of the use of large sized fonts and color.

In any event, substantively, he still brings nothing to the table.

Hey DummyDolt, are you permitted to just walk over the Mexican border from any neighboring country without the permission of Mexico?

Or Canada? Can you just walk across the Canuck border without the permission and authority of the Canuck government?

Do other nations HAVE visas?

Or is it (in your fertile but always unsupported) imagination that only the United States which considers it lawful to control the entry/admission of foreigners into its own sovereign territory?

Is it only the evil empire U.S. Government that tries to tell aliens how long they can stay or whether they even can stay?

Get back to us if you ever buy a clue.

 

[Unkotare]

So I don't get to say who visits my house? .

Not if they are people the federal government has determined that should not be at loose in the country at all. Are you really this ******* stupid, or are you just becoming this desperate as your flimsy 'arguments' fall apart? It must be the latter, or you would not feel the need to cast false accusations about "hating foreigners" based on nothing at all. If you are feeling bitter and frustrated that your fantasy of open borders will NEVER become reality, that's too ******* bad.

 

[Liability]

Contumacious and starcraftzzz,

You guys may as well hang it up. Liability can type in big, bold and colorful letters along with put pictures into his posts. His comrade can call you all kinds of names as he hears them on Comedy Central.

There is no doubt that the federal government CAN do a lot of things that these guys claim relative to naturalization. The fact is, they do not actually do it. In most instances, you'd be hard pressed to find a law addressing the need and fact situations. Between the three of us, we can understand the difference between naturalization and immigration - or more accurately just people being GUESTS. Forget it guys, it's a concept that these NSM types cannot grasp.

The reality is, the xenophobes will argue against every ruling all the way to hell, knowing they are wrong. Let's take one of their arguments:

"Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory."

Sovereignty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So I don't get to say who visits my house? Private employers don't have the right to hire who they want - be sovereign over their business?

Who do you wish to be sovereign in this context? The people or the government?

Liability and his ***** hate foreigners. The only way they see for people to live is to sell their soul, wait twenty years standing in some imaginary line where they can become citizens. In the process, if that situation creates a bad precedent that you and I will be judged by, they are content to destroy American Liberty to rid this country of the brown people.

Yet, for all their bravado, neither of those men have ever volunteered to man the border. Neither of them has shot one of these people they claim are criminals. Neither of them has done anything except look for excuses to wage war at a cost to your Liberties and mine. Then they expect someone else to do their wet work. The only reason we are obliged to waste time on them is the hopes that they will offend the wrong bureaucrat and be hauled in for treason.

I don't care one way or another about the people from south of the border. I'm not related to them. I fight for their rights because I believe in Liberty. I am doing for them the things I would want them to do for me in a similar circumstance. Further, I am protecting my Liberty. As one of our founding fathers so aptly put it:

He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
- Thomas Paine

The price we're paying is for protecting others from oppression. The tyrants here will be held accountable at some point.

It is worth noting, as unkotare has already pointed out, that flaming losers like DuddlyDolt rely on baseless claims and outright lies.

That's a "tell" that they realize they have no VALID argument to offer.

Claiming that I hate foreigners is baseless since it is (a) false and (b) not premised logically (nor derived logically) from ANYTHING I have said in this discussion.

I am ALL for legal immigration, in fact.

Furthermore, I deem SOME of the "laws" which Congress passed in prior times to be founded on bigotry and racism. I have never supported an immigration law or quota founded upon such bigotry.

That said, there IS still a real world requirement that we manage the influx of folks desiring to come here to make their lives and their fortunes. It is not my fault that they got shit upon by destiny based on the location of where they WERE born. It is also not my fault that, as a practical matter, the United States cannot simply accept the massive numbers of would-be immigrants without placing SOME restrictions on those numbers. Our system, our polity, our society, our government are under no actual obligation to permit themselves to be destabilized.

For obvious example, we were never required (say in WWII) to admit any ******* Nazis. In other times, we had a similar right to exclude devoted communists. Today, we have every right to exclude adherents of Islamo-jihadist terrorist groups. We are NOT required (nor should most of us pretend that we would WANT) to take in very ill people with dangerously communicable diseases. We are not required to accept all folks who have a desire for a better life but who have no education, no job skills and no actual ability to contribute anything back to our society. Since our hospitals are required by law to treat those who present themselves for medical care (even those who cannot pay for it), there is EVERY legitimate reason to CONDITION immigration on the verifiable prospect of the alien having or getting a job.

NOT even ONE of those reasons is "racist."

But that doesn't stop lying sack of crap scum like DuddlyDolt from tossing out such dishonest claims.

This is an example of why DuddlyDolt 's "arguments" are generally just fraudulent and ultimately worthless.

 

[BuddyColt]

The slow kids at the back of the class appear to have missed that simple fact.

The very premise of the thread is absolutely true

The xenophobes call them illegal aliens because -- first -- they are aliens. And -- secondly -- they are not Aryans.

The Grand Wizards consider their skin color and accents a criminal matter as well as a serious societal issue.

.

You are wrong and you are blathering stupidly.

They are aliens because they are not U.S. citizens. They come from other lands.

They are here illegally because our LAW says what legal entry is, and when they come in by OTHER means they are breaking our law.

That YOU (being the pathetic ******* moron you are) do not CARE for the law or ascribe racist motivation to some or all of it is not illuminating -- except to underscore that you have silly opinions. Because, whether YOU like a law or not has nothing to do with whether or not it IS the law. And the law in question DOES impose CRIMINAL penalties for the violation thereof. That makes it a "CRIMINAL" Law.

,



,


;



,

For all the back and forth, the only thing we glean from Liability is that he has the ability to lie. Civil statutes are not crimes. Rather than to argue it back and forth and Google the hell out of it, ask an attorney or law professor if a civil statute is a crime.

They would probably ask you if the defendant in a divorce action was an illegal husband just because he was in the process of getting a divorce. Liability, you deliberately misrepresent the truth. In one article entitled What is the difference between a civil offense and a crime? the author states this:

"Another example of a civil offense is contempt of court. This can arise in any civil matter, but is often used in family law matters. If one parent is ordered to pay child support, but fails to make any attempts to pay their obligation, the other parent can move for contempt sanctions. Sanctions can include awarding the other parent attorney’s fees. In extreme cases, the court can hold the non-paying parent in contempt and order them to remain in jail for a period of time. Even though jail time is a consequence, the difference is that the underlying action arose from a civil or administrative dispute, not from the violation of a criminal statute..."

What Is The Difference Between a Civil Offense and a Crime?

You can cover up the facts with endless posts and you will because you don't want others to see your view, the views of others and then make up their minds. But you notice, the longer this thread goes on, the more your side loses to reason and the more united those who do not share your totalitarian views are becoming.

That which does not kill me makes me stronger. You're wrong and you realize it. Otherwise we could all make a closing post to sum up our points and let the rest of the posters decide. You'd rather clutter the thread up with B.S. posts because you're insecure and scared. It's okay. We understand. But, you're dangerous and you're wrong.

 

[IndependntLogic]

I don't really care about immigrants coming here - except the criminals.
But people just coming here to work or whatever is fine by me.

 

[Liability]

The very premise of the thread is absolutely true

The xenophobes call them illegal aliens because -- first -- they are aliens. And -- secondly -- they are not Aryans.

The Grand Wizards consider their skin color and accents a criminal matter as well as a serious societal issue.

.

You are wrong and you are blathering stupidly.

They are aliens because they are not U.S. citizens. They come from other lands.

They are here illegally because our LAW says what legal entry is, and when they come in by OTHER means they are breaking our law.

That YOU (being the pathetic ******* moron you are) do not CARE for the law or ascribe racist motivation to some or all of it is not illuminating -- except to underscore that you have silly opinions. Because, whether YOU like a law or not has nothing to do with whether or not it IS the law. And the law in question DOES impose CRIMINAL penalties for the violation thereof. That makes it a "CRIMINAL" Law.

,



,


;



,

For all the back and forth, the only thing we glean from Liability is that he has the ability to lie. Civil statutes are not crimes. Rather than to argue it back and forth and Google the hell out of it, ask an attorney or law professor if a civil statute is a crime.

They would probably ask you if the defendant in a divorce action was an illegal husband just because he was in the process of getting a divorce. Liability, you deliberately misrepresent the truth. In one article entitled What is the difference between a civil offense and a crime? the author states this:

"Another example of a civil offense is contempt of court. This can arise in any civil matter, but is often used in family law matters. If one parent is ordered to pay child support, but fails to make any attempts to pay their obligation, the other parent can move for contempt sanctions. Sanctions can include awarding the other parent attorney’s fees. In extreme cases, the court can hold the non-paying parent in contempt and order them to remain in jail for a period of time. Even though jail time is a consequence, the difference is that the underlying action arose from a civil or administrative dispute, not from the violation of a criminal statute..."

What Is The Difference Between a Civil Offense and a Crime?

You can cover up the facts with endless posts and you will because you don't want others to see your view, the views of others and then make up their minds. But you notice, the longer this thread goes on, the more your side loses to reason and the more united those who do not share your totalitarian views are becoming.

That which does not kill me makes me stronger. You're wrong and you realize it. Otherwise we could all make a closing post to sum up our points and let the rest of the posters decide. You'd rather clutter the thread up with B.S. posts because you're insecure and scared. It's okay. We understand. But, you're dangerous and you're wrong.

Civil statutes are NOT criminal. Dipshit deliberate liar, DummyDolt, finally says one thing correct.

HOWEVER, the law prohibiting aliens from entering the country EXCEPT as provided-for IN that very law is a criminal statute.

Denying it as he does, all the time, is simply DummyDolt being deliberately dishonest some more.

It has been proved to be a criminal statute.

That's all there is to it.

DummyDolt is an intentional liar.

Ho hum.

 

[Liability]

I don't really care about immigrants coming here - except the criminals.
But people just coming here to work or whatever is fine by me.

That's not the question.

The question is HOW they come here.

Legally or illegally.

 

[IndependntLogic]

I don't really care about immigrants coming here - except the criminals.
But people just coming here to work or whatever is fine by me.

That's not the question.

The question is HOW they come here.

Legally or illegally.

I don't care how they come here. Only why. If they coe here to work and make a better life for themselves, I'm good with it. If they come here to make a living on the drug trade or otherwise hurt people, I'm not good with it.

 

[Unkotare]

And the honest and honorable efforts of those who come here legally are made that much harder because some people can't be bothered or haven't the wherewithall to do things the right way, respecting our nation and its sovereignty. Legal immigrants are a great value to our country and should be welcomed. Instead, they STAND IN LINES, interminable lines, at great expense of money and time. They sometimes even face prejudice and suspicion from stupid people - like some of those on this thread - who can't or won't distinguish between legal and illegal immigration. Illegal aliens haven't the vested interest in really changing their lives, not just sneaking in to make a few bucks, and so may be expected on average to care less about integrating into existing communities and making a good life here rather than a temporary one they do not value in and of itself. This results in great cost (in many ways) to the US economically and socially. Dishonest apologists and idiots like BloodyDolt and StarSpazzzzz only make things worse for everyone. EVERYONE.

 

[IndependntLogic]

And the honest and honorable efforts of those who come here legally are made that much harder because some people can't be bothered or haven't the wherewithall to do things the right way, respecting our nation and its sovereignty. Legal immigrants are a great value to our country and should be welcomed. Instead, they STAND IN LINES, interminable lines, at great expense of money and time. They sometimes even face prejudice and suspicion from stupid people - like some of those on this thread - who can't or won't distinguish between legal and illegal immigration. Illegal aliens haven't the vested interest in really changing their lives, not just sneaking in to make a few bucks, and so may be expected on average to care less about integrating into existing communities and making a good life here rather than a temporary one they do not value in and of itself. This results in great cost (in many ways) to the US economically and socially. Dishonest apologists and idiots like BloodyDolt and StarSpazzzzz only make things worse for everyone. EVERYONE.

Interesting. I just scolled up to BuddyColt's last thread to see if he in any way, insulted you. he did not. He disagreed but he made a case for his opinion and without petty name-calling.

I completely respect what you wrote in the first part of your post. If you weren't so prone to insult, you would garner much more consideration for your views, which are often quite insightful.
have you ever considered the possibility that you can disagree with someone and still respect their opinion? People do that quite often. It's nice!

 

[Unkotare]

If you weren't so prone to insult, you would garner much more consideration for your views, which are often quite insightful.

Eh, whatareyougonnado? We all have our crosses to bear.

 

[IndependntLogic]

If you weren't so prone to insult, you would garner much more consideration for your views, which are often quite insightful.

Eh, whatareyougonnado? We all have our crosses to bear.

LOL! True! And I am certainly quick to fire back when fired upon. I'd like to just be above it.

 

[Unkotare]

If you weren't so prone to insult, you would garner much more consideration for your views, which are often quite insightful.

Eh, whatareyougonnado? We all have our crosses to bear.

LOL! True! And I am certainly quick to fire back when fired upon. I'd like to just be above it.

You can't transcend yourself until you embrace yourself.

 

[MaryL]

"The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941 .

You utter moron, that case and others like it refer specifically to US citizens travelling on public roads within the country. They were not intended or applied to some fantasy of negating US national sovereignty. They haven't even been successfully cited as negating speed limits or drivers licenses, idiot. You're like some dim-witted little kid playing at things he doesn't understand.

Tell me, why all the hostility? Be nice, ok, we are just idiots here. I mean, except YOU of course. How does this issue effect you and why the negativity? That isn't going to help anyone. What do you KNOW about this issue? Can you at least TRY to be civil here?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Typical neonazi conservative.

Any "law" which prevents brown skinned individuals from living in the US is good regardless of its Constitutionality.

.

Damn, you really are too stupid.

Damn, you really are too racist.

Are you also a KKK imperial wizard

.

That's a very nice picture of Senator Robert Byrd and Al Gore Sr.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Eh, whatareyougonnado? We all have our crosses to bear.

LOL! True! And I am certainly quick to fire back when fired upon. I'd like to just be above it.

You can't transcend yourself until you embrace yourself.

Oh I've been embracing myself since I was twleve! Of course, now that I'm married I don't have to because... oh wait.

In any case, I think anonymity does quite a bit to reveal character. It shows what we're like when there are no boundaries and no one will see what we have done.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Bud,

I appreciate the effort, but you need a better argument. Let me:

Read the thesis written by professor Julian Simon, University of Maryland:



Coming to America: The Benefits of Open Immigration

For centuries, the American culture has been a beacon of hope to the oppressed peoples of collectivist economies and authoritarian or totalitarian governments throughout the world. Why then do the American people—descendants of immigrants, beneficiaries of open and unregulated immigration, whose culture, economy, government, and way of life are so deeply tied to open borders—exude such a passion against free immigration? Why do they wish so desperately to deny late twentieth-century immigrants the benefits to which their own eighteenth- and nineteenth-century ancestors were privileged? What do Americans have against open borders?

.

What do Americans have against open borders?


Open borders don't work with a massive welfare state.
Reduce the welfare state to what it was in the 1950s and then we can discuss open borders.