Posted on 10/10/2007 1:21:47 PM PDT by processing please hold
Edited on 10/10/2007 1:23:57 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The U.S. Supreme Court's hearing of the case, Medellin v. Texas, has reminded the American people of President Bush's terrible tendency to put the foreign interests of Mexico above those of the United States. But the case, being heard on October 10, is significant for another reason. It demonstrates the dangers of passing global treaties and getting involved with international courts and tribunals. The Senate should remember this lesson as it ponders ratification of the U.N.'s Law of the Sea Treaty, which creates an International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and various "dispute resolution panels" that will inevitably rule and act against the U.S. The Senate could vote on this treaty shortly and the odds are that it will pass unless the American people voice their objections immediately and vociferously.
(Excerpt) Read more at gopusa.com ...
I read the article. Horrible absolutely horrible. Those two poor girls.
I’ve heard that Vitter is fighting it but likr you, I think it’s a done deal.
Which is why I’m at a loss as to why our talkies just ignore it. Too many people don’t even know about it and the talkies really need to get people up to speed on it.
Meanwhile, Fox goes on US TV, promoting his new book...fielding questions on O’Reilly and Larry King with answers like (and I paraphrase, but you can imagine the sneer...) — “Mexico can’t enforce US border laws. This is your problem, not ours.” (Mexican migration is natural, right, a fact of life. Get used to it.)
Within a border State (who citizens keep insisting immigration is such an important issue? This policy or lack of, clearly needs to be re-thought).
An illegal alien rapes and murders two American girls and it isn’t “intellecdtually fair” in the illegal immigration debate?
Not in terms of where the Gov't current position is....within this specific case (at this specific point and time). This is an issue dealing with the death penalty and a foreign citizen not being told they could seek advice / counsel from their own Mexican consulate.
As I said, I believe our Gov't is involved within this case, as trying to confirm the precedent that American's in foreign lands should also have the guarantee of being able to seek help / advice from our representatives within those countries.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Got some news for ya: the next several Presidents (and some Democrat Presidents will probably be among them) will also be "leaders at war" -- the scourge of Islamofascism isn't going away anytime soon. ...probably not in our lifetimes, anyway. If (God forbid) Hillary's sitting in the WH the next term I seriously doubt you'd cut her slack with any "let's not get down on Prez. Clinton, she's a leader at war" nonsense.
If GWB deserves criticism then he should get it. Hiding behind "he's a leader at war" can (and will) cut both ways.
For all the unbelievable things that Bush has done and wants to do on the Globalist agenda, no Dems are making a campaign issue of it because they totally agree — including the Hill.
An American in mexico would have the common sense to ask. These are murdering, raping illegal alien bassturds.
If an American goes to another foreign country and commits the horrific crimes that these creatures did, I'd expect them to face mexican laws, not American.
The Supreme Court is gonna figure that out, not GWB. This protects Americans abroad as much as it works to help this piece of trash.
That's becoming a catch phrase.
(I personally think he never deserved a trial, just a bullet.)
(And a second for good measure.)
It sure has turned out that way.
Also, in many of the so-called sanctuary cities, the police are not even allowed to inquire whether a suspect is here illegally. It seems that would hamper enforcing any Vienna convention rights.
Hahahahaha
All of what you say above makes sense - Seems the appropriate policy for police (in such a case like this, murder) they should error on the side of caution. Simply say, if you are an illegal, you have a right to contact your Mexican consulate.....Nothing more, nothing less. It isn't something that is hard to do, time consuming, putting themselves at risk, none of that.
If that had been done, this scum would likely be, being put to death (as another member of his crew already has been).
Again, It seems are Gov't is simply stepping in here, because they want to make sure their are some protection put in place for American citizens abroad. Nothing more, nothing less.
This garbage and intellectually childish attacks against GWB "loving Mexicans", blah, blah, blah....is just foolishness...and lacks any serious thought. Sad.
Is your reasoning based on Americans being legally or illegally in a foreign country? I think it would be bad policy to intervene in cases where Americans are illegally present in a host country unless they are there under direction of the American government.
“Why President Bush Sided With Mexican Killers”
Because he was raised by an illegal alien Mexican nanny and she was a really, really nice person.
He is safe , he knows he will have to move on to South America!
If Bush wants to fight terrorists, then he should protect the borders, start deporting illegal aliens, and put a stop to immigrants from enemy nations. He is doing none of this. Just the reverse. A great leader he is not. He is not any kind of a leader. He even called those of us who opposed amnesty “racists.” He is letting Campean and Ramos sit in prison for a nonexistent crime and he gave no meaningful support to Terri Schiavo. Yet he is fighting for a horrible criminal. Sick.â€
He’s outdistanced Carter by miles.
snort, snort. Bush is an apple of Daddy’s eye. New world order type.
He won’t fear it too much. He will move to the family compound in South America. Well away from the citizens he betrayed.
“Also, why didn’t the police in this manner, tell this individual (scumbag) that he could contact the Mexican consulate??”
People keep throwing that out in these discussions, but has anyone established that this was police department policy in Houston, or anywhere else? It would had to have been an extension of the Miranda warning: and if you are a foreign national, you have the right to contact your consulate.
This is all very recent it seems, and these murders took place 14 years ago. If this had been part of the Miranda warning for 14 years, we’d all have heard about it.
It was a correct conviction. Fourteen years? They should have been dead over 13 years ago.
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.