U.S. BORDER PATROL: Turn In Illegal Aliens (and employers)

I would call the builder and warn them to clean up their act immediately. Perhaps a huge ad will appear that they are hiring Americans and others with verifiable documents. That would send a good message.

BTTT

Loose your home? Not likely unless you branish a weapon in their face!

>>According to the article the vigilante group was guilty of hitting one of the illegals with a pistol,<<

Report business's that hire illegals

http://www.wehirealiens.com/default.asp

You stated: "Just get a Greeley, Colorado phone book and pick any packing plant or stockyard"

Reminds me of Monforts in Grand Island Nebraska. I'm not current but doubt anything has changed.

I knew guys that worked there. These were locals, they didn't even get a pay stub showing what the deductions were.

Once every year or so the paper would have a big story about an INS bust.

The illegals were all flown to somewhere in Mexico and released. However there families didn't go anywhere. The plant closed down for a week. When it opened a week later the illegals were all back at work.

They probably had round trip tickets.

Anybody here from Grand Island. That would would be a good place to check out on May 1st. They will probably be closed.

:)Easy Does It:)

We will not allowed our country to be conquered by third world invaders with third grade educations!

Semper Fi'
Jarhead

Like spitting in the ocean. Bottom line; Don't hire contractors that hire illegals. Ask them,"Do you hire illegal immigrants?" When they say no, ask to see proof of residency of their employees. It is too easy for them to claim they didn't know the prospective employee was here illegaly. If an illegal immigrant cuts your grass or cleans your house, then you are part of the problem.

BTTT!!

Did you know we can sue to combat this illegal immigration problem, using RICO? In case you’re not that familiar with RICO, perhaps now’s a good time to give you a basic orientation about the racketeering laws with which your creative and energetic mind may do as you wish. A popular definition is as follows:

“Racketeering” = “a pattern of illegal activity (as extortion and murder) that is carried out in furtherance of an enterprise (as a criminal syndicate) which is owned or controlled by those engaged in such activity (see also Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act).

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act is otherwise known as RICO (apparently pronounced ree-koh more often than it’s pronounced RIE-COH, for whatever indiscernible reason.). Meanwhile, a “pattern” can involve as few as merely two misdeeds. It helps if an ongoing threat still exists, legally speaking.

Anyhow, RICO enables victims to get financial indemnification as a result of ALL SORTS of activities, ******as well as TRIPLE damages and attorneys fees.******** To find the list of RICO acts (also known as “predicate acts”), one can go to:

http://uscode.house.gov/search/criteria.shtml

and look for: 18 USC Sec. 1961. So at that link, the “18” goes in the “Title” box, and the 1961 goes in the “Section” box. That’s quite a refreshingly comprehensive list, isn’t it? You see, the government can’t fight crime all on its own. The laws exist to incentivize “private prosecutors”.
Now then 18 U.S.C. 1964(c) says the following:

TITLE 18 - Sec. 1964. Civil remedies

(c) Any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962 of this chapter may sue therefor in an appropriate United States district court and shall recover threefold the damages he sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.

Threefold’s pretty impressive, huh?

In moving along, the substantive provisions of Section 1962 define the elements of a cause of action which must be assessed in connection with the definition of the terms in Section 1961 (mentioned above). Here goes:

18 U.S.C. 1962. Prohibited activities

(a) It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt in which such person has participated as a principal within the meaning of section 2, title 18, United States Code, to use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of such income, or the proceeds of such income, in acquisition of any interest in, or the establishment or operation of, any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.

A purchase of securities on the open market for purposes of investment, and without the intention of controlling or participating in the control of the issuer, or of assisting another to do so, shall not be unlawful under this subsection if the securities of the issuer held by the purchaser, the members of his immediate family, and his or their accomplices in any pattern or racketeering activity or the collection of an unlawful debt after such purchase do not amount in the aggregate to one percent of the outstanding securities of any one class, and do not confer, either in law or in fact, the power to elect one or more directors of the issuer.

(b) It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to
acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.

(c) It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise’s affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt.

(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section.

Here’s an article showing how RICO’s working for our cause:

Tyson Foods illegal hiring lawsuit set for March 2008 trial
BILL POOVEY
Associated Press
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. - A lawsuit that contends Tyson Foods depressed wages by hiring illegal immigrants and should pay damages to legal workers will go to trial in March 2008, a judge said Monday in a conference with attorneys.
The lawsuit contends Tyson hired illegal immigrants at eight plants since April 1998.
U.S. District Judge Curtis L. Collier set the March 3, 2008, trial date after agreeing to allow an attorney for the world’s largest meat company time to file a motion challenging the makeup of the class of plaintiffs before the court involves a mediator to attempt reaching a settlement.
“My client is not inclined to participate in anything that would lead to a settlement,” said Tyson’s lead attorney, Tom Green of Washington, D.C. Green said the legal fight is “about costing Tyson millions of dollars to be in a case we believe we ought not to be in.”
The lead attorney for the plaintiffs, Howard W. Foster of Chicago, said he believes the total number of legal workers in the class ranges from 50,000 to 100,000. He has asked the court to force Tyson Foods to provide him a listing of all Tyson employees and their Social Security numbers, to be compared with Social Security records.
“I don’t think we should be moving forward as a class action,” Green said. “Unlawful hiring is a very, very individual situation.”
He said businesses are required to examine identification documents that applicants provide and cannot discriminate if those documents appear valid.
“The test the government sets up does not guarantee that every employee in your plant is a lawful, documented eligible worker,” Green said. “We are not guarantors.” He said Tyson has also voluntarily participated in the government’s “Basic Pilot” program intended to prevent the hiring of illegal workers and has not knowingly hired any illegal workers.
Gary Mickelson, a spokesman for Springdale, Ark.-based Tyson, has said the claims in the lawsuit are “largely based on charges our company has already successfully defended.”
Green in 2003 successfully defended Tyson and three former managers accused of conspiring to hire illegal immigrants from Mexico and Central America for low-wage production jobs to boost profits. Two former Tyson managers who made plea deals were each sentenced to one year of probation.
Green and other Tyson attorneys had argued that if the company hired illegal workers, it was because of the underground market for phony immigration papers and the government’s flawed system of screening immigrants.
Before that case went to trial, four former employees at Tyson’s Shelbyville plant sued. The lawsuit by Birda Trollinger, Robert Martinez, Tabetha Edding and Doris Jewell contends the company violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act by knowingly hiring illegal immigrants who were willing to work for wages below those acceptable to Americans.
In May 2002, Tyson filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that because its workers are covered by a collective bargaining agreement, the union - not individual workers - would have to pursue claims of damage. A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit, but an appeals court disagreed and said it could proceed.
The eight Tyson plants named in the lawsuit are at Shelbyville; Corydon, Ind.; Gadsden, Ala.; Blountsville, Ala.; Ashland, Ala.; Sedalia, Mo.; Center, Texas; and Glen Allen, Va.

Yep. The 11th District allowed it in 2005 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1423292/posts

Interesting. Might you have any idea how the other circuits have ruled, especially ones like the 5th Circuit which borders with Mexico (through Texas, etc.)?

bttt

Ready for this? Now they want federal student loans for illegals (never to repay, of course):

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4875270.html

I guess we don’t really need those tax dollars, with our record high national debt (that doesn’t even figure in social security “obligations”)?

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm

It is amazing to see what we have allowed to happen.

Here’s a potential solution... Shouldn’t we have universally applied term limits on elected officials in D.C.? When left to individual states, some embraced the notion before realizing it was akin to unilateral disarmament in the committee appointment pork-barreling game...

Evidently elected officials in D.C. still have over a 90% likelihood of getting re-elected.