Giving my country away

[Danindetroit]

If you are refering to me kjm, I played the reality card. When the fed building blew up in Oklahoma city who do you think did it? I thought arabs. We have to think about things like who is getting into our country. The first time my brother-in-law saw an arab he thought she was italian. Maybe the next terrorist is going to have a russian accent, or be indonesian. The only thing I meant to point out is that nobody knows who is in our country or why they are here. It has been over 2 years and nothing has really changed. I do not want big brother on our back but someone has to figure things out. If you think that means something else, than that is fine.

 

[LAK]

KSFreeman

Mete, how is this giving away the country? Bush simply recognizes that immigrants are doing the heavy lifting in our economy since the native-born refuse to work.

The only ones that "refuse" to work are the ones getting handouts - from the Bush adminstration. Remove the handouts, and I'll bet they start working. If the vacancies are there of course.

In fact we do not have a "need" for any imported labor or immigrants, and swelling a cheap labor pool simply depresses wages all round.

Then there is the matter of culture, and last but not least the security issue. It is not just potentially common criminals - there is the very real threat of people who might be working their way into our system with criminal backgrounds, false identities etc.

Whose government integrity, database and records are going to be relied upon when processing these people for their true origins and identities, criminal backgrounds and "terrorism" potential?

All Bush and Co recognize - as well as their "democrat" cronies in crime - is their "Free Trade Area of the Americas". Which has already morphed from "NAFTA", and can be expected to continue to do so. If people want to know where it is headed, just study the political history of the European Union going back to it's inception as the "European Common Market" in the 1950s.

 

[LAK]

DanInDetroit

CC, It is illegal to have the army used as a "police" force except under extreme emergency, such as for a hurricane, or natural disasters. I think a State of emergency needs to be declared

The Federal government has a mandate to protect our borders; this is not a "police" function. Besides, there is no provision in the U.S. Constitution for any Federal agent or agency to hold or perform any civil "police" function. Hence regardless of what form a Federal agency takes, it is not Constutionally a "police" agency of any kind. It may as well be troops on the borders terra firma - this is currently performed by the Coast Guard on the waters and I do not hear anyone complaining about that.

It is funny that when any questions about our rights and liberties are raised in the current climate collide with that of the Federal government that the phrase "national security" and the "war on terror" are waved around like some trump card. But when it comes to preventing the destruction of our national culture, sovereignty, borders and a rational and tangible internal security and civil defense the dominant theme in Washington DC regardless of party is feigned impotence.

It is a complete cherade of course, and what they are doing amounts to treason. It is according to them that we have a defacto enemy which is trying to "destroy us" and with which we are "at war". These people are trying to play it both ways using it in a geo-political agenda both overseas and at home.

 

[wingman]

This info is pulled from "FAIR" web site and gives a view at what is happening
in the state of Texas and will be coming to your state in the future.


Immigration Impact - Texas






State Population 20,851,820
Population Increase 1990-2000 3,865,310
Foreign-Born Population 2,899,642
Percent Foreign-Born 13.9%
Illegal Resident Population 1,200,0001
2025 Population Projection 27,183,000
All numbers are from the U.S. Census Bureau unless otherwise noted.
Additional Census Bureau, INS, and other immigration-related data are available for Texas.

Immigration-driven population growth is taking its toll on Texas, the second fastest growing state in the U.S. In the last ten years, nearly 3.9 million new residents settled in Texas. Thirty-six percent of these new residents were immigrants. This large-scale population growth is bringing traffic, pollution, overcrowded schools, and lack of affordable housing to the state, decreasing quality of life and straining natural resources.

 

[Danindetroit]

lak

The Federal government has a mandate to protect our borders; this is not a "police" function.

The United States Border Patrol is the mobile uniformed law enforcement arm of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). It was officially established on May 28, 1924 by an act of Congress passed in response to increasing illegal immigration. As mandated by this Act, the small border guard in what was then the Bureau of Immigration was reorganized into the Border Patrol. The initial force of 450 officers was given the responsibility of combating illegal entries and the growing business of alien smuggling.

Another even older federal law enforcement group is the US Marshals, which my uncle is one. Read article I section 8 of the constitution.

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Having the army perform "police functions" was tried before 1900's I believe. The idea of having a large coherent armed force who might takes orders from a well liked commander scared the president and congress I believe I am not sure. It seems that the armed forces were not to be used lightly on americain soil. And by the way what state is the Gulf of Mexico in? or the great lakes?

I do not want big brother on our back but someone has to figure things out.

I believe in individual rights, Homeland security, and the fact the local news warns about people people acting suspicously reminds me of germany in the '30's. I am a libertarian, I don't trust either party.

But when it comes to preventing the destruction of our national culture, sovereignty, borders and a rational and tangible internal security and civil defense the dominant theme in Washington DC regardless of party is feigned impotence.

By the way what is our national culture? Do we shut down Italian americain clubs? Polish century clubs? Arab cultural centers? The biggest thing I am afraid of is that immigrants from "Freebie" cultures, will expect the same here.

It is a complete cherade of course, and what they are doing amounts to treason. It is according to them that we have a defacto enemy which is trying to "destroy us" and with which we are "at war". These people are trying to play it both ways using it in a geo-political agenda both overseas and at home.

Well somebody detonated a bomb at the WTC in the early to mid 90's, and crashed some planes into them, tried to blow up LAX during the 1999-2000 new years celebration. I rember palestians dancing in the streets after 9\11, and figured a couple of AC-130's overhead sound like a good idea. The reasoning I heard for the palestinians disliking us is that Isreal uses americain made military equipment. Bin Laden and his Ilk are so "tolerant" that just having "infedels" on Holy Saudia Arabia is a reason to destroy the US. If the military needed me, knew my limitations, and still wanted me, to go to afghanistan or Iraq, and I just had to cover guys more trained, or be on a nightime gurard shift(I have good night vision, and do not sleep much), I would do it for free.

I think companies being able to get visas for skilled workers, or trained workers, just makes it more likely that companies won't bother to invest in training in the states. At Oakland community college they had a program funded by IBM that had an integrated modular work station with a Rapid prototyping machine, networked robots, machine tools, and Computerized measuring machines. I got lucky and was able to learn a little bit on it. The other option is just send the work to a third world country because besides saving on labor, benefits, etc, you don't have to build a machine with expensive saftey devices.

 

[LAK]

DanInDetroit

The United States Border Patrol is the mobile uniformed law enforcement arm of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). It was officially established on May 28, 1924 by an act of Congress passed in response to increasing illegal immigration. As mandated by this Act, the small border guard in what was then the Bureau of Immigration was reorganized into the Border Patrol. The initial force of 450 officers was given the responsibility of combating illegal entries and the growing business of alien smuggling.

The erroneous term "law enforcement" is bandied around quite liberally these days, and with the help of the media it has become largely accepted by a great many people as applied to various Federal agencies. But while Congress can legislate and fund such federal agencies and give them any name they like, a Federal agent is still a Federal agent working for a Federal agency. Not a police agency.

I do not recall what the case subject was, but it was a part of a U.S. Supreme Court case I read recently among the observations (not the actual ruling, merely an aside so to speak) was to reiterate that the Federal government has no police function whatsoever. There is absolutely no basis in the U.S. Constitution for any Federal police agency.

Another even older federal law enforcement group is the US Marshals, which my uncle is one. Read article I section 8 of the constitution.

The U.S. Marshals Service have limited and specified tasks, but again they are not a police agency.

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States

And there are Federal Agencies like the BATF and U.S. Customs that are in the tax collection business. Again, not police agencies, and the U.S. Marshals Service is neither a police agency nor is there anything that can be construed in your quoted clause of the USC to allow any as a function of the Federal government.

Federal agencies are also limited by jurisdiction, which is another subject of course. But except as applied in places where the Federal government enjoys exclusive jurisdiction (like military bases under miltary jurisdiction for example) the notion that Federal agencies are police agencies is erroneous.

The Border Patrol note, is called the Border Patrol - not the Border Police. Substituting or supplementing one Federal agency or body with another in protecting our borders has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.

We've had National Guard troopers at airports after the attacks on the WTC and Pentagon, we had thousands of troops deployed as "security" in Atlanta in 1996 for the Olympics. The idea that they can not be deployed to protect our borders is nonsense. The Bush adminstration is selling us all out wholesale, and they know it.

 

[Danindetroit]

We had the national Gaurd called out during the riots in detroit, and on many occasions. Again Article 15 says they are called up. They don't just start walking around when they want. I am not sure if it is the govenor, or the president who calls them up.

Sign up for the NG and after a year say you want to quit, and see what happens. Well since you are so great at finding problems why don't you post a solution. You mind a Federal Law enforcement person, but don't mind the federal army? Or is it the national Guard, I hear nation, they wear uniforms, and carry guns, the problem is that the military code of justice greatly varies from the civilian code of justice. A marine does not have the right to remain silent, they have to give a report. I think a lawyer need to sort that out, because common defence mentioned in the constitution is ambiguous, and unless you are a constitutional lawyer it could mean the border patrol is the border police.What is your hang-up on the term. The Us marshals have a long history of tracking and trasporting prisoners, being a sort of baliff and protecting judges. The FBI did not have arrest powers when formed, and most did not even carry guns. I have no problem with police I have a problem with why they pull me over,what they can and can't do. I think unlimited wire taps, and whatever else the homeland security bill has in it is wrong. Now tell me which part of the constitution says congress can't pass a law making a federal POLICE FORCE. Did you read the constitution? The document is over 200 years old, many famous framers believe it gave the feds too much power. I agree. Look at the document, find the flaws figure out an amendment, and send it to your senaor or rep. As to the coast guard

Clause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
Clause 13: To provide and maintain a Navy;
Clause 1: The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

Send this to Bush. Tell him about Gen Pershing and Pancho Villa, and Patton. Tell him the texas is in trouble. Watch the movie Canadian Bacon, and then get the troops sent to the north. I am not a politician. I would rather watch reality TV with eye openers like in A clockwork Orange, and jump out a window than be a politician. Read the constitution.

We've had National Guard troopers at airports after the attacks on the WTC and Pentagon, we had thousands of troops deployed as "security" in Atlanta in 1996 for the Olympics. The idea that they can not be deployed to protect our borders is nonsense. The Bush adminstration is selling us all out wholesale, and they know it.

 

[Sammunition.44mag]

ahenry

I agree wholeheartedly with everything youve said in regards to this subject. I havent looked at your profile, but Im curious sir, what is your profession? Its a damn shame if you arent an attorney. I am certain you would be a first rate example of the breed. Id just like to say that if I ever need to be represented in any way, I would want you on my side.