Thread: Amend the Constitution NOW!!

Originally Posted by NoIllegalsAllowed

One of the members here, Ayatollah Gondola found out recently he owns 3 houses that illegals are living in. They picked his Hispanic Name and information to use.

but they are NOT criminals!! Can't he seize these houses himself? I mean after all, they are HIS! And all those involved are guilty of various felonies. And considering the federal government is an 'accessory after the fact' and failed to protect his 'personal property'-- his personal identity -- he could hold them accountable too . . .

I have repeatedly stated the citizens along the border need to sue the federal government for compensation for their 'private property' being used for 'public use' -- an alien crossing.

Originally Posted by Bowman

Originally Posted by Federali

Only way we can solve this problem in the long run is to Amend the Constitution.

I. Denying citizenship to Illegals and their "anchor babies." So, No Illegals can ever become Citizen in our Country, nor their anchor babies.

An amendment is not needed to do this, all that is needed is for Congress to pass a law or the President to issue an executive order (anchor babies anyway).

Of course first we will need to kick the Globalists out for thia to happen.

Unfortunately, Wall Street Globalists are too busy counting thier money to care about this Country. They are ruining the Republican Party, just as Feminist/Socialists have ruined the DemocRATS.

This just made me think of something. Is anyone around here other than me old enough to remember 1979. Iran was holding a whole bunch of Americans hostage because the Ayatollah Khoumeini organized a band of murderers to take over Iran in the name of Islam.

Yeah, I am also old enough
It seems to me that whenever it is to the government advantage they can freeze any bank accts., I guess this is one more proof of where our government stands regarding the illegals.

Originally Posted by NoIllegalsAllowed

One of the members here, Ayatollah Gondola found out recently he owns 3 houses that illegals are living in. They picked his Hispanic Name and information to use.

but they are NOT criminals!! Can't he seize these houses himself? I mean after all, they are HIS! And all those involved are guilty of various felonies. And considering the federal government is an 'accessory after the fact' and failed to protect his 'personal property'-- his personal identity -- he could hold them accountable too . . .

I have repeatedly stated the citizens along the border need to sue the federal government for compensation for their 'private property' being used for 'public use' -- an alien crossing.

Yea he needs to go get an eviction notice and have the sheriff serve it on them

Wouldn' t that be poetic justice just like they took away the Arizona ranches from taxpaying Americans

I don't see any harm in him trying to get one after all the property is in his name.

Originally Posted by ScottyDog

Wouldn' t that be poetic justice just like they took away the Arizona ranches from taxpaying Americans

at least he has a case.

As for the Arizona rancher, he too could have poetic justice . . . the courts ruled in favor of ‘aliens' that were ‘subjects' of a ‘foreign nation' not citizens of Arizona, aliens who had no legal right to sue in any court of the United States – state or federal, under the Constitution and laws of the United States. Because these "illegal aliens" were legally incapacitated, the judgement of the court is "void ab initio" — a legal nullity as though it never was.

I have not found out whether this was in state or federal court -- I hope federal -- they could go to state court go have it overturned. The real justice is the judge of the court does not have immunity from prosecution.

the Supreme Court held in Elliott v. Peirsol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (182 "without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities . . . all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers." Therefore, issuing judgements and orders "under color of law" without jurisdiction — renders all judgements and orders "void ab initio" — a legal nullity ---- and an attempt to execute them is considered "trespass" and accordingly the action taken against the Arizona rancher was "under color of the law" without the sanction of the law and without immunity."

Originally Posted by Mamie

--- these are STATE'S RIGHTS' issues NOT immigration reform issues.

How so?

One of the members here, Ayatollah Gondola found out recently he owns 3 houses that illegals are living in. They picked his Hispanic Name and information to use

.

I don't own them. they do, but aquired them through fraudulent means. No, it doesn't appear that I can seize anything. the authorities can, if I can gather the proper, overwhelming evidence that cannot be denied or ignored, and encourage them to do so. The better strategy sseems to proceed with a lawsuit though, and see if I can implicate the lenders and other companies that helped them carelessly. Unfortunately, lawsuit money is hard to find these days. I'm poor, and already in a serious legal battle with a, believe it or not, worse person than an identity thief.
By the way, we appear to be down to only two houses now. One has already been tranferred out of my name. still researching.

Also,

This just made me think of something. Is anyone around here other than me old enough to remember 1979. Iran was holding a whole bunch of Americans hostage because the Ayatollah Khoumeini organized a band of murderers to take over Iran in the name of Islam.

Ayatollah Khomeini was not really capable of the take over of Iran. He was freed after the rebellion and became a more powerful influence afterwards. before, he was mainly a religious type leader. The rebellious lot that performed the coup were likely acting without his orders. But in the void created by the shah of Irans hasty departure, Khomeini slid right into a cabinet post of sorts. The hold that many of Irans Mullahs' and Ayatollahs' enjoy over power and subjects in Iran back then only differs from our growing problem with our own neocon elite in that they slay their in country opponents publicly and pray facing a special direction before and after.
Iran did, and still does have western leaning inhabitants that wish to retain their religion without succumbing to extremism. I don't believe George bush is going to allow them to be counted though