Screw 'em!
Posted on 11/20/2001 4:17:34 PM PST by flamefront
FAIR Action Alert
September 7, 2001
Section 245(i) Passed in Senate--House Will Vote Early Next Week
At the request of President Bush, the Senate passed S. 778, the Section 245(i) extension bill by unanimous consent on Thursday night. Section 245(i) permits illegal aliens who have established an employment or familial relationship while in the U.S. illegally to adjust their status with the INS after payment of a $1,000 fee. It also allows illegal aliens to avoid the State Department background checks for other immigrants coming from overseas.
I, for one, am sick of our contry being a doormat for socialist causes. Screw the migrants, seal the borders, and deport all illegal aliens. Economic consequences be damned.
Xenophobe? OK with me. Homophobe, too. :)
Somebody gets a kick (back) from cocaine...
And Marines machine guns - you forgot the machine guns. Being a part of the Navy, Marines are not subject to posse comitatus.
Shouldn't we at least insist that Anglo-americans get the same deal in Mexico that the Mexicans are demanding here? Should we demand street signs in English, bilingual ballots, voting for illegals, official celebration of the 4th of July, etc?
What you won't hear in Mexico: Hable usted Inglas? Press dos.
Not true. They can lease buildings and property, however it can be taken away from them at any time. Not a darn thing they can do about it either. Two cases I know of, friends in Puerto Penasco have had a family home there for years, however he cannot renew the lease on the land. He will lose his house in a few years. Also, there were several American "leasers" in Baja a couple of years back who had the threat of losing their homes, because the gov't deemed their leases "illegal". You must be Mexican to own property in Mexico.
U.N. Report
By Betsy Pisik
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
The United States last week deposited more than a half-billion dollars in U.N. accounts — a payment that would have felt far more newsworthy if not for the dramatic images from Afghanistan and the stream of diplomats lining up to address the U.N. General Assembly.
But the money is a milestone, and brings the United States about as close to fully paid up as it's going to get with the international organization.
The payment — $475 million in cash and another $107 million in forgiveness of U.N. peacekeeping debts to the United States — is the second and largest slice of the 1998 Helms-Biden money, which was authorized after the U.S. assessments were reduced a year ago.
The money will be used to reimburse governments that have contributed troops and materiel to peacekeeping missions over the years.
In all, the United States has paid a total of $1.56 billion to the organization this year, according to Patrick Kennedy, the U.S. diplomat in charge of financial and management matters.
That figure includes current and overdue payments to the regular budget and peacekeeping budgets, plus money for the U.N. tribunals and a $31 million contribution from Ted Turner to help other nations meet their suddenly increased peacekeeping assessments.
U.N. officials, needless to say, were pleased. "Substantially everything they said they would do, they did, in only about six weeks," said Joseph Connor, the U.N. undersecretary-general of administration and management.
He was referring to the Bush administration's embrace of the United Nations after the bombing of the Pentagon and World Trade Center.
Another $100 million for the regular budget is included in the pending State Department authorization bill, and should arrive by the end of the year.
The final installment of Helms-Biden money, $244 million, is mostly earmarked for the U.N. funds and programs in Geneva and Vienna, Austria, and is subject to various certifications and conditions that have largely been met, according to Mr. Kennedy.
According to U.N. accounting, the United States still owes about $600 million for long-disputed bills, such as an Ethiopian conference center that Washington says was unnecessary, and aid to Palestinians whom the United States considers terrorists.
Going without mail That $475 million was an electronic transfer of funds, by the way, not a check sent through the mail. And a good thing, too, because the United Nations has not had a general mail delivery since Oct. 24 — the day that postal workers in New Jersey became sick with anthrax.
The organization has decided it will not handle any outside mail until it can be irradiated for safety. But many others — from the U.S. government to media outlets to private companies — have had the same thought, and there aren't enough machines to go around.
U.N. officials have been trying to buy their own machine but there is, as Mr. Connor diplomatically put it, "a sellers' market," and the price has skyrocketed.
In the meantime, the organization is trucking the mail to an unnamed commercial facility where a limited amount of "priority" mail is being zapped and returned to New York. But for most staffers, the mailboxes remain empty.
Screw 'em!
Yes, Americans and other foreigners may obtain direct ownership of property in the interior of Mexico. However, under Mexican law, foreigners cannot own property outright within the restricted zone. Instead, a real estate trust must be set up to hold title for the foreigner. Since foreigners are not able to enter into contracts in buy real estate, they must have a bank act on their behalf, much as a trust is use to hold property for minors because they also can not contract. The following is a brief outline of the law regarding such trust, known as "fideicomisos", but potential buyers should always get advice and have all real estate transactions overview by a licensed Mexican attorney.
As long as he stays on our side of the border. Remember the Marine who went looking for his buddy in TJ a few years ago? He was stopped at the border, when he declared he had a dismantled firearm in his vehicle. He was whisked away into jail so fast, it would make Speedy Gonzales' head swim. It was quite the "international incident" but they tried to keep it "quiet." And we're supposed to look the other way?? Sorry San Diego. Your economy isn't worth risking the lives of our military. You'll just have to deal with it, like the rest of the state does.
Screw 'em!
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.