OMG! Ultra-Libbie on tape (Audio Link Inside)

C

CrazyIvan007

New member
Local Denver talk radio show host Peter Boyles was discussing the rape and murder of the 2 girls by an illegal immigrant.

A call came in with a man saying it was the parents fault. ?!?!?!?

One comment is "I don't beleive in guns." Of course not. What I am packing in my pocket is a figment of my imagination I suppose...lol (I know he meant he doesn't believe in the 'use' of guns, but just thought his wording was worth noting.)

This guy is disgracefull on many levels. Can anyone else agree with me that he subjects his children to a dangerous environment on a daily basis?

It is the Ultra-Libbies like this who we must beware of now and in the future of this country.

Here is the audio:

http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/18...CAT=Spoken_Word&PCAST_TITLE=The_Complete_Pete
 
Garand, your sig line says it all. This man is a loathesome, pusillanimous wretch, an abject coward, a poltroon.

Between snickers, I was thinking of Michael Dukakis's answer to a similar question regarding the rape and murder of his wife. This guy cribbed his answer from Desert Fox Dukakis.
 
Too sad. :D
I do agree with Bush on this one tho'. (I know, horror of horrors). We have an agreement with Mexico and we can't just go around disregarding agreements whenever we feel like it.
In light of this case we may want to nullify our treaty, but that's something best contemplated dispassionately.
While it would be highly satisfying to give this guy the sleepy-needle, it's just not worth the cost IMO.
Let the child-murderer-rapist rot for the rest of his natural life.
 
We have an agreement with Mexico and we can't just go around disregarding agreements whenever we feel like it.
Click to expand...

Oh My....

So, International Law should supercede American Law???

That is a DANGEROUS precedent to set.

What if the UN or Mexico or some other nation we have an "agreement" with decided that they don't like the US public to have guns and demanded our Govt. remove them from our hands? Then what would you say?
 
No, international law does not supercede our Constitutional law. But when we enter into agreements we are expected to abide by them. Please don't twist my words. It smacks of strawman arguments.
Is taking the extra step to fry this...thing...really worth the cost of destroying our international reputation?
Do we really want other countries around the world ignoring our input into how they treat American prisoners? Do we really want the entire world community doubting our word when we sign treaties? All over one piece of garbage?

I don't think so. I'd rather release him into general population. Child rapist murderers don't do so well there.
This isn't about ceding our sovereignty, it's about the long-term ramifications of hasty decisions made in a fit of anger.
 
Twist your words? I am simply restating the obvious:

"Give em an inch, they will take a mile."

Besides, you are missing a BIG GIANT point here.

When US citizens travel to other countries and commit crimes, they are done in the majority by folks who have gotten a passport to travel out of country. Of course we are going to request certain treatment of people who we have authorized to leave our country.

Illegal Immigrants have not done such things. They break a law coming over here and they break the laws when they get here. Obviously, by coming here illegally, and living here illegally, they have abandoned their Mexican citizenship. This guy was not on a leave of absence. He was not on vacation. He was not on a business trip. He did not make anyone officially aware of his leaving Mexico. And, he certainly did not get proper approval to enter our country.

He was here illegally for years. How does that constitute him being a Mexican citizen? If anything, he is a terrorist with no country affiliation who committed an act of War. He defied his country's citizenship and left without warning. He infiltrated another country. He murdered people. How is he any different than say Osama Bin Laden going into Afghanistan or Mohamed Atta coming here, but on a small scale?

In my opinion, he is without citizenship of any country, and therefore should stand in judgement by the laws of the land where he commits a crime. Even without this opinion, Mexico is supporting someone who illegally has crossed their border, evacuated their land to live here and basically say: "I reject the life of living in Mexico, so I came here." What is the motives behind Mexico offering him support?

If someone went AWOL from the United States to go live illegally in another country and committed a crime in that other country, do you REALLY believe anyone here would give a crap HOW he was treated?

We also have an agreement of "The United States of America." If a crime is commited by someone traveling through Texas, where Capital Punishment is legal, if that criminal came from a state which does not allow Capital Punishmentm, does that state have the right to tell Texas how to punish that criminal in Texas? I don't think so.

And as far as "agreements" go. I don't remember voting on some "agreement" with Mexico. Do you? Perhaps it was passed by our elected officials, but I believe an "agreement" on this scale is an injustice to our society. This is how NAFTA went through. This is how the Trans-National Highway went through. Seems our elected officials are not doing their duty when it comes to keeping our country sovereign from others...
 
In my opinion, he is without citizenship of any country, and therefore should stand in judgement by the laws of the land where he commits a crime.
Click to expand...
I believe an "agreement" on this scale is an injustice to our society.
Click to expand...
That's the problem: your opinion has no legal basis. I understand where you're coming from and all, but the way things are doesn't coincide with the way you think things should be. The fact that he's an illegal alien has no bearing on the fact that he's legally a Mexican citizen. As such, Mexico legally has a say in this.
 
So should Mexico have a say on our Immigration laws against Mexican Nationals? Can they tell us to keep the illegals if we decided to ship them back?

Your position is VERY concerning.
 
Garand, I thought it was funny too until I thought about this idiot (and probably many more millions just like him) will be casting a vote to decide who is our Commander in Cheif and other political figures.
 
The problem is allowing Mexico to preach and dictate to us about ANY of our methods of law enforcement and persecution opens a door to a house with MANY doors.

It is like the Brady Campaign. Some of their early suggestions on laws against some firearm ownership were a good thing. But, it has snowballed into a bunch of B.S. and a toal feeling of wanting to disarm EVERYONE COMPLETELY.

That is why we shouldn't allow this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top