Thread: Is this a secret?

Why not stop all at the rallies and ask for I.D.? If a crime is suspected (illegal entry into the U.S.), then let the authorities do their job and weed out the criminals. If a few people get their feathers in a ruffle along the way, well so be it then.

We put up with this sort of thing everyday in airports. The TSA doesn't just do a security check on people who appear Middle-Eastern...we ALL are subject to security checks.

I personally would have no problem presenting proof of my right to be in the U.S. if I was ever asked. Since I AM here legally (I'm a U.S. citizen), then why would I CARE???

And so it goes for everybody else. If you are here legally, then you should have nothing to hide and you shouldn't be all up in arms over having to briefly produce a document to prove it. And if it helps authorities to weed out all those who are NOT here illegally, then I say LET'S DO IT!!!

Furthermore....

That's the "scapegoat" or "out" that illegals use when it comes to any legislation being passed whereby authorities could check I.D. of anybody at will.

They KNOW they're here illegally, and they don't want to get caught. So they play the whole "racial profiling" card. It's crap and we all know it.

LOL.

Originally Posted by Gabriel

Originally Posted by Sam-I-am

From the Arizona chapter of MECHA:

http://clubs.asua.arizona.edu/~mecha/pa ... tzlan.html

Any questions? I thought not.

This can be interpreted so many ways. No wonder people haven't heard of the movement.

I suggest in the future that you don't waste my time using talking points on me, especially, ones you don't fully understand.

Originally Posted by Gabriel

Who said anything about not producing ID. Keep adding facts to the hypothetical and of course the circumstances change. So the Constitution goes out the window in pursuit of illegals justifed by the Patriot Act?
It is correct that in the lawful pursuit of criminals, civil rights are not infringed; but the issue is what is lawful pursuit. AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH LAWFUL ACTION, THE PROBLEM IS WHAT IS LAWFUL IS DIFFERENT ON THIS SITE. Here anything in pursuit of illegals is lawful. You can repeat illegals don't have civil rights until you are blue in the face, but find a case. Plyler v. Doe says opposite. The court found the state law in violation of the 14th Amendment. If in fact, illegals had no civil rights, there could not be a violation. Hint-hint, look at case law, not just your subjective views of what the Constitution should say according to what you want. Besides, common sense would tell you that people are not deported with hearing (aka Due Process). Due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution. If the rights did not apply to illegals, they would be deported without due process. Lastly, the infringements I was referring to was to LEGAL CITIZENS. How many times on this site was it stated that ICE should have been at the various rallies and deported individuals. There were thousands of legal citizens marching as well. Deport them too? Stop all and ask for ID? Will they ask the minutewomen who are also there in opposition for ID too? That's exactly the kind of infringements I am concerned with.

Diverting wont work.

I discredited your statement with facts and you claim you were just being hypothetical? Hmmm.

Because I don't want to violate the Constitution, and stomp on rights of anyone in search of every potential illegal does not make me a pro-illegal advocate.

Why not ask them all for ID. It's lawful and I pointed that out in my earlier post but you didn't want to see that. It's happened to me, on a couple of occasions. My name and birth date matches a long time missing person. I get checked all the time and I sit and wait on a nation wide check. So what are you doing to protect me from all this hype about infringements you are building up? I actually have civil rights granted by the Constitution. You going to call the ACLU on my behalf in the morning?

Why don't you just be honest. If illegal aliens are asked for ID or caught with fraudulent ID they are deported! You don't want them to be asked because you know what will happen to them. You want to keep hiding them behind citizens claiming infringement. Spare me.

Garsh, I really need help! My rights were infringed every time I went into the bar and I was asked for my ID. My rights are infringed every time I write a check! My rights are infringed every time a police officer ask me for my ID! Someone please help me!!!!!! I need the ACLU STAT!!!!!

Illegal aliens can't show ID so they get locked up and put in the immigration process. Once again, Patriot Act show ID or go to jail. Show fake ID, go to jail. Ask me for my ID, no problem because I belong here.

That's right Gab, your conflicted because illegals are caught red handed. I don't think a single one has ever won a case by claiming he was accidentally in America. Don't ask, don't show ID, so they don't get deported aint working any more!

Plyler v. Doe says opposite. The court found the state law in violation of the 14th Amendment. If in fact, illegals had no civil rights, there could not be a violation. Hint-hint, look at case law, not just your subjective views of what the Constitution should say according to what you want.

I don't need to look at the case law because I know what civil rights are and I can recite almost every one of them. Really, you need to look at case law because no where in Plyer v. Doe does it grant illegal aliens civil rights and neither does the 14th amendment.

Your just wrong and your digging your self deeper and deeper.

Pryor vs Doe
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/g ... &invol=202

14th Amendment
http://www.nps.gov/archive/malu/documents/amend14.htm

Now don't go over there and get all confused about findings, judgements and opinions.

Illegal aliens are not intitled to the protections of due process. Immigration court is a civil court. Ponder that thought.

Dixie

Dude, I know the difference between you, your, yours you're... in two languages. Get off it, I was tired. You're just nitpicking because your wrong and I pointed it out.

Did you not read this:"The illegal aliens who are plaintiffs in these cases challenging the statute may claim the benefit of the Equal Protection Clause, which provides that no State shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is a "person" in any ordinary sense of that term."

Holding: "A Texas statute which withholds from local school districts any state funds for the education of children who were not "legally admitted" into the United States, and which authorizes local school districts to deny enrollment to such children, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."

THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE IS A PART OF THE CONSTITUTION AND THE COURT HELD THAT BY DENYING FUNDS TO ILLEGAL ALIENS, IT WAS A VIOLATION OF THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE.

If Illegals weren't protected by the Constitution, how could this have happened?

It's ok, if this is too difficult to comprehend, ask someone you like to explain. Obviously you don't read very well, but I noticed that when you used the wrong "your." The word "you're" is equivalent to "you are." The word "your" is possessive, as in something belongs to you. Before you start demanding others learn another language, how about you master yours, or at least everything before the fourth grade.

Besides, the complexity of my statements are beyond 4th grade level.

You claimed:

Originally Posted by Gabbie

You can repeat illegals don't have civil rights until you are blue in the face, but find a case. Plyler v. Doe says opposite. The court found the state law in violation of the 14th Amendment. If in fact, illegals had no civil rights, there could not be a violation. Hint-hint, look at case law, not just your subjective views of what the Constitution should say according to what you want.

I repeat once again for you and your understanding! Illegal aliens do not have civil rights!

Originally Posted by Gabe

Did you not read this

Sure did and I understand what it is saying.

No where, no how and no way did Plyler v. Doe give illegal aliens civil rights. No where! It did say, that no State can bar an illegal alien an education because of the wording under the Equal Protection Clause. Try using that Equal Protection Clause in a Federal Case and the illegal aliens will be smacked down so hard. The 14th amendment regulates the States and does not grant any rights to an individual.

Do you know that the words "civil rights" are not even in the 14th amendment? Yet you claimed it grants aliens civil rights.

Really, Gabe I should let you talk to a man that was there fighting against this back then. I know him personally and he's a Mexican American and his father was born in Mexico and they fought hard against Doe. I believe it's a judge named Wilson out of Houston State Fed Court carried this decision. I do not believe it has met a US Supreme Court Challenge.

Geee! Got to go!

Dixie

Wow! I'm late to the party as usual but, "You Go Dixie!"
For someone as seemingly intellectual as Gabriel appears to be, he sure is clueless when it comes to the difference between right and wrong!
I was copying and ready to paste with a rebuttal after page 2 but Dixie, you just didn't leave me much to say! Not only did you send him back to school, you packed him a lunch and ate it for him too!

Besides, common sense would tell you that people are not deported with hearing (aka Due Process). Due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution. If the rights did not apply to illegals, they would be deported without due process.

It would be good to also point out that the civil hearing you referred to is to insure due process in order to prevent accidental forced deportation of a US citizen or someone here legally. Were it not for that safety valve in the immigration system to protect the civil rights of US citizens or the rights of guests in this country legally, you can bet that arrest would lead to immediate deportation. Too many people get human rights and civil rights confused, and that is exactly the confusion that Gabriel is trying to perpetuate. He knows the difference!