Posted on 07/17/2005 9:11:04 AM PDT by Mamie2010
To the Members of Congress: WAKE-UP!!!
a drug dealer is not an "unlicensed pharmacist"
a burglar is not an "uninvited guest"
and an "illegal alien" is not an "undocumented immigrant" or an "illegal immigrant" – they're "ILLEGAL INVADERS" in violation of the laws of nations!
The United States is "occupied territory" – occupied by Mexican nationals and "other than Mexican" with no allegiance to this country and the Senate of the United States voted NOT to fund the hiring for 2,000 border patrol agents even though the American people want to secure our borders.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer said "That's the problem here. It's not in strengthening the borders. It's in taking away money from the people every day who defend us and, since 9/11, have new duties," and a spokesman for Senator John Kerry said "Homeland security isn't served when we steal from firefighters, police officers and other first responders to hire Border Patrol agents," "If the Republicans who run Congress had drafted a bill that actually meets our needs, none of these votes would be necessary." Congress is "stealing" and "taking away money from the people every day" and are giving it to aliens that are not entitled to the privileges of citizenship -- money that can be used to secure our borders, care for our veterans and care for our elderly.
President Ronald Reagan said "A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation" – America is a continent, an "occupied territory" with a bilingual language – not a sovereign nation and "the problem here" is Congress – those who are elected to represent the American people and defend the Constitution – have forgotten their allegiance, their duties and their "just" powers under the Constitution. The Senate for Mexico is more concerned about granting amnesty to "illegal" aliens that have invaded our borders and providing them benefits than they are about securing our borders.
In an address to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in Albuquerque, New Mexico on August 15, 2001, the President of the United States, George W. Bush, who I voted for twice, said "Mexico is a friend of America. Mexico is our neighbor. And we want our neighbors to succeed. We want our neighbors to do well.... And that's why it's so important for us to tear down barriers and walls that might separate Mexico from the United States." That's nice, but the people and the states haven't given their consent to "open borders," dissolving national sovereignty or being under foreign occupation. You know, I like my neighbors and want them to do well too, but I'll keep my fence and the locks on my doors thank you and like the saying goes "good fences make good neighbors." My neighbors can live next door, that's what "good neighbors" do, and your friends don't try to take your property or your identity -- if Mexico wants to be part of the United States it can become a U.S. Territory. And for the record, President Vincente Fox doesn't hold the same feelings as President George W. Bush and while in Spain in 2002 he said that Mexico has "an identity of values which unites us with the European nations, even more than with our neighbors of North America."
Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D. did an incredible commentary on "Hospitals 'Mugged' by Illegal Aliens" where he set out the agenda of the Mexican government and its people. In The Great Invasion: Mexico Recovers Its Own, July 20, 1982, Carlos Loret de Mola said "A peaceful mass of people, hardworking, carries out slowly and patiently an unstoppable invasion, the most important in human history. You cannot give me a similar example of such a large migratory wave by an ant-like, stubborn, unarmed, and carried on in the face of the most powerful and best-armed nation on earth" and the United States "seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without the firing of a single shot, nor requiring the least diplomatic action, by means of a steady, spontaneous, and uninterrupted occupation." . The Great Invasion: Mexico Recovers Its Own goes on to say "The territory lost in the 19th century by Mexico ...seems to be restoring itself through a humble people who go on settling various zones that were once ours on the old maps. Land, under any concept of possession, ends up in the hands of those who deserve it.'"
And in 1997 the former President of Mexico Ernesto Zedillo said "I have proudly affirmed that the Mexican nation extends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders, and that Mexican migrants are an important - a very important part of it!" Then later, while in Madrid, Spain on May 16, 2002 in his speech on "Mexican Foreign Policy in the 21st Century," Mexican President Vincente Fox said that "In the last few months we have managed to achieve an improvement in the situation of many Mexicans in that country, regardless of their migratory status, through schemes that have permitted them access to health and education systems, identity documents, as well as the full respect for their labor and human rights. . . . The second axis of Mexico's foreign policy has been the construction of a strategic association for prosperity with the United States and Canada.... " and he said "Eventually our long-range objective is to establish with the United States, but also with Canada, our other regional partner . . . and the movement of capital, goods, services, and persons."
There is a movement that "Aztlan is a country with no borders and no government, but it has a militant student movement with big plans. Some of the activists dream of the day when they can 'liberate' a large portion of the southwestern United States, which they consider to have been stolen by gringos, and raise their own flag over it" and just recently in Los Angeles, California a billboard was displayed with "CA" crossed out and "Mexico" added in its place.
These are not people "doing the jobs American's won't do" nor is this a country that wants to be our "friend" – they want our country and the American government is paying them to take it without the consent of the people!
The powers of Congress are clearly defined and the only power delegated to Congress under the Constitution FOR THE United States and it's citizens was the power to "repel invasions" -- invasion from "any foreign nation or Indian tribe" – including "our neighbor" – and every state in the union was granted the power to defend themselves when "actually invaded" – even by "our neighbor." The invasion by "foreign nationals" is a violation of the laws of nations, not the laws of the United States.
In 1799, James Iredell, an Associate Justice for the Supreme Court, said in a charge to the grand jury that
"It is believed that it never was suggested in any other country, that aliens had a right to go into a foreign country, and stay at their will and pleasure without any leave from the government. The law of nations undoubtedly is, that when an alien goes into a foreign country, he goes under either an express or implied safe conduct . . . Besides, any alien coming to this country must, or ought to know, that this being an independent nation, it has all the rights concerning the removal of aliens which belong by the law of nations to any other; that while he remains in the country in the character of an alien, he can claim no other privilege than such as an alien is entitled to; and consequently, whatever risk he may incur in that capacity, is incurred voluntarily, with the hope that in due time, by his unexceptionable conduct, he may become a citizen of the United States."
Congress was granted the power to "establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization" and under the laws of the United States no individual who is in this country "illegally" can become a naturalized citizen or a "legal" resident. The power to "establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization" does not confer unto Congress the power to absolve "aliens" of the "illegal" invasion of our country and it does not restrict nor prohibit any state from defending itself when "actually invaded" – the states and their citizens can do the job Congress won't do – they can apprehend and prosecute aliens that are in their state "illegally" in violation of their laws.
Article I Section 8 of the Constitution FOR THE United States and its citizens grants Congress "power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States" – not the welfare of "foreign nationals" or in pursuance of Mexico's foreign policy for its "strategic association for prosperity with the United States" and it's "schemes that have permitted them access to health and education systems, identity documents, as well as the full respect for their labor and human rights." The power of Congress was expressly restricted to "regulate commerce with foreign nations" – not providing health care and education to aliens or "illegal aliens" whose very presence in this country is a criminal act – it is ‘unconstitutional. But nonetheless, Mexican President Vincente Fox demanded lawmakers in OUR country to "facilitate access to health care and education services for all those who share our border…. Without this, it is impossible to think about the path to greater integration and shared prosperity." I realize we are the Senate for Mexico, but Mr. President, you don't rule here.
There is NO Constitutional authority for the Congress FOR THE United States to grant amnesty to "foreign nationals" that have actually invaded our country in violation of the "law of nations" – not even the President FOR THE United States has that authority. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution FOR THE United States provides "The President ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment" – pardons for citizens under the jurisdiction and sole authority of the United States. In Federalist No. 74, Alexander Hamilton wrote that the President would be
". . . authorized to grant "reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." Humanity and good policy conspire to dictate, that the benign prerogative of pardoning should be as little as possible fettered or embarrassed. The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel . . in seasons of insurrection or rebellion, there are often critical moments, when a well-timed offer of pardon to the insurgents or rebels may restore the tranquility of the commonwealth" or republic of the united states.
"Illegal aliens" are not "undocumented immigrants" or "illegal immigrants," nor are they the victims of an "unfortunate guilt" – they are "foreign nationals" under the authority of a sovereign nation deliberately and methodically invading what was once another sovereign nation in violation of the "law of nations" – "aliens" that neither Congress nor the President, without a Constitutional amendment ratified by the states, has the authority or the discretion to pardon -- it is ‘unconstitutional.'
Aliens, "legal" or otherwise, are not entitled to the rights and privileges guaranteed under the Constitution to the citizens of the States and the 14th Amendment does not guarantee to "aliens," "legal" or otherwise, equal protection of the law. The 14th Amendment guarantees that "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" – "aliens" are not "citizens" of any state and therefore are not entitled to any "the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."
The Alien Tort Statute – a statute that provides that "the district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States" does not confer to ‘foreign nationals' the privilege of filing suit in violation of the laws of the United States, the privilege of ‘habeas corpus' or the protection of the laws of the United States -- their only protection is under the law of nations because "an alien, he can claim no other privilege than such as an alien is entitled to."
The Supreme Court has long held that 'habeas corpus' is a privilege of citizens and in 1861 in Ex Parte Merryman Chief Justice R. B. Taney, held "a writ of habeas corpus is made to me under the 14th section of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which renders effectual for the citizen the constitutional privilege of the habeas corpus. . . passed by the First Congress of the United States, sitting under a Constitution" and William Rawl, in 1826 in "A View of the Constitution of the United States" that was taught to the officers of West Point, stated "The Constitution seems to have secured this benefit [habeas corpus] to the citizen by the description of the writ. . . . congress, which has authorized the courts and judges of the United States to issue writs of habeas corpus in cases within their jurisdiction, can alone suspend their power."
In Rasul v Bush Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy extended "habeas corpus" to ‘foreign nationals' outside of the United States and stated "And indeed, §1350 explicitly confers the privilege of suing for an actionable "tort … committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States" on aliens alone" and "Petitioners contend that they are being held in federal custody in violation of United States laws" – so which is it Justice Kennedy? a violation of the "laws of nations" or the " violation of United States laws"? – you can't have it both ways.
The detainees held at Guantanamo Bay were not held being held "for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations " – they were detained under the "laws of war" and criminal violations of the "law of nations" and the Supreme Court had no authority to extend to ‘foreign nationals' the privilege of filing suit in the federal courts or granting "habeas corpus" to "aliens" -- "habeas corpus" is a privilege not available for a "civil action by an alien" – even a "citizen" would not be entitled to ‘habeas corpus" when captured under the laws of war in a foreign country. In a nutshell, 'enemy combatants' are not tortfeasors, Guantanamo Bay is not a territory under Article IV and Guantanamo Bay was not "within their respective jurisdictions." Justice Antonin Scalia in his dissent wisely stated "the court boldly extends the scope of the habeas statute to the four corners of the earth."
Thomas Paine, an American Patriot and revolutionary writer educated the American people through his pamphlet "Common Sense" and inspired a nation to achieve freedom , and he also wrote 'The Crisis' which is as relevant today as it was in 1776 – America is in a crisis of it's own making. Thomas Paine wrote that "These are the times that try men's souls. The Summer soldier and the Sunshine Patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands now, deserves the love and thanks of men and women. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly; it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated."
American citizens are losing their ‘rights' and their private property guaranteed under the Constitution while our fellow citizens and fellow countrymen are dying to keep us free – but "illegal aliens" are given all the privileges of citizenship without the risks.
An "alien" immigrant that does not sneak through an open window or make one, is welcomed through the front door of this country by following the laws of nations and the laws of the United States. Title 8 U.S.C. § 1185(b) makes it "unlawful for a United States citizen to attempt to depart from or enter the United States without a valid passport" and 18 U.S.C. § 1541 also makes it a crime for consular officers to verify passports for persons not owing allegiance to the United States, even if they are citizens. An "unconstitutional" amnesty for "illegal" invaders is not only an affront to the citizens of this country, but also an affront to the many immigrants that entered this country legally and given their oath of allegiance to the United States of America.
"Illegal aliens" are in violation of the laws of nations and the ONLY power granted to Congress under the Constitution FOR THE United States is to "repel invasions" and "define and punish ... felonies ... Offences against the law of nations" – amnesty and federal benefit programs are not an option.
What drivel.
Do you believe in enforcing our laws?
Most Americans would gladly trade some hard-working foreigners who are Americans at heart with some of these whiney "American Patriot" types any day.
But the kind the moonbats of the right love to eat up.
what Constitutional authority refutes it?
Illegals should be deported immediately.
If they really want to immigrate, why don't they file the paperwork and take the citizenship tests beforehand? Instead, we have a colossal problem on our hands...
"Illegals should be deported immediately"
I agree, the Constitution does not grant the power of Congress to do otherwise -- amnesty and benefits is a violation not a right
" whiney "American Patriot" types "
typical
They also give all immigrants - including those from allied countries who legally immigrated, filed all the paperwork, understand the Constitution and speak English - a bad name...and there are at least 8 million of these illegals!
Go move to Santa Ana, Ca. and we'll see how pro illegal immigration you are.
BTTT
"But the kind the moonbats of the right love to eat up."
Easy on the crackpipe you two...
I believe COEXERJ145 was talking about the Satanic Right - those who embrace and proselytize all the vices and none of the virtues.
what does "BTTT" mean?
Oh, and anti-tinhat conspiracy nonsense and anti-preaching of hopelessness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.