The whole time you all are agreeing upon the finer points of constitutional law, george w. is doing as he damn well pleases under the tenets of national security.

Yeah. If "what he damn well pleases" meant keeping out spics, I would support him 100%. Unfortunately, he is intent on bringing in as much mud as he can. He just wants the lemmings to feel "secure" while he pisses away any possible chance for security.

That's exactly right.
And constitutional law does not mean diddly shit to him. (or the zionist jews who back him).
National security supercedes constitutional law, whether we like it or not.
The issue is not constitutional law.
The issue is "national security" which is being used to override constitutional law.
Do you understand how many years in litigation it would take to override the tenets of "national security" as being in the present application a direct violation of constitutional law?
In the meantime, insist upon the laws that are still on the books.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS ILLEGAL. IT IS A CRIME.
And until such time that it is deemed to be legal, INSIST UPON THE LAWS BEING UPHELD.
I am so sick and tired of the "oh, well hell, might as well bitch and do nothing" attitude.
The whole time REAL activists are doing everything they can in their own way to keep our values and our race alive.
You may not agree with their philosophy, or you may not agree with their tactics, but they are doing POSITIVE things to turn this mess around against all odds.
And they are doing it intelligently and in a positive manner.
So you know what? Recognize the enemy and overcome.
Or shut the f*** up.

Or shut the f*** up.

Hmmm. That was nice!

Originally Posted by Shirt
Or shut the f*** up.

Hmmm. That was nice!

Yeah, where did that come from? Apparently I was in a heated debate and didn't realize it.

Yeah, it's a helluva way to get someone's attention.
One can debate the relevance of constitutional rights until hell freezes over.
The reality is that national security laws override the constitution.
This is why the constitution has become "oh, that's just a piece of paper".
In the meantime, there are existing laws that we can insist be upheld.
The existing immigration laws.
It is against the existing law for anyone to enter this country illegally.
And we have every right to INSIST that the laws be upheld.
You want a revolt?
A taxpayers revolt would be the most effective means of toppling the government.
Without taxpayers dollars, there would be no government.
But then, how many have the courage to stop paying taxes?

Can you say...Third American Revolution?

The American economy would collapse if Americas against illegal immigration (80 percent) threatened to stop paying taxes until the government deported illegal aliens back to Mexico. :box:

Yeah, it's a helluva way to get someone's attention.
One can debate the relevance of constitutional rights until hell freezes over.
The reality is that national security laws override the constitution.
This is why the constitution has become "oh, that's just a piece of paper".
In the meantime, there are existing laws that we can insist be upheld.
The existing immigration laws.
It is against the existing law for anyone to enter this country illegally.
And we have every right to INSIST that the laws be upheld.
You want a revolt?
A taxpayers revolt would be the most effective means of toppling the government.
Without taxpayers dollars, there would be no government.
But then, how many have the courage to stop paying taxes?

Well, asswipe, I wasn't arguing "constitutional rights." My single point was that the president doesn't need permission from anyone to secure the border.

Now, go ahead and start your little revolt. I'm sure that with your natural leadership abilities, everybody will be right there by your side.

Yeah, it's a helluva way to get someone's attention.
One can debate the relevance of constitutional rights until hell freezes over.
The reality is that national security laws override the constitution.
This is why the constitution has become "oh, that's just a piece of paper".
In the meantime, there are existing laws that we can insist be upheld.
The existing immigration laws.
It is against the existing law for anyone to enter this country illegally.
And we have every right to INSIST that the laws be upheld.
You want a revolt?
A taxpayers revolt would be the most effective means of toppling the government.
Without taxpayers dollars, there would be no government.
But then, how many have the courage to stop paying taxes?

Well, asswipe, I wasn't arguing "constitutional rights." My single point was that the president doesn't need permission from anyone to secure the border.

Now, go ahead and start your little revolt. I'm sure that with your natural leadership abilities, everybody will be right there by your side.

Asswipe....?

Most likely bush will not even use active duty U.S. forces. He'll simply pull National Guard troops into federal service instead of having them under the command of their state governors but then possibly have them patrol their own respective states. Just a possibility, but it is the little constitutional quibbling that this administration loves to do so much and as was mentioned below, when you bring the term "national security" into the picture after 9-11, well the whole playing field is rearranged usually to dubya's liking. I mean seriously, you have a president who for the last several years has done an absolutly inept job, (at best) and is being criticized even by other "conservative" republican political whores. The funniest thing about it is that his jew handlers are probably sitting there thinking "oy vey, why did we back this dumb ass."
To be crass, george bush would fuck up a wet dream. But he still seems to always land on his feet. He owes the kikes a whole hell of a lot.

14/88

Asswipe....?

You act like a 14 year old. Isn't that something you kids say today?

The Law:
1. It is 'aiding or abetting' to "encourage or induce an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law." 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv).

2. It is 'aiding or abetting' to"conceal or attempt to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, illegal aliens, including any building or any means of transportation."
8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii).

3. It is also 'aiding or abetting' to "engage in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts."
8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(v)(I).
4. It is a felonyto 'aid or abet' in the commission of the above acts.
8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(v)(II).

I am not a U.S citizen, so please excuse my ignorance , but I am amazed that mouthy mexishits like Guiterrez are still in circulation.Considering the above.

You act like a 14 year old. Isn't that something you kids say today?

You need to continue your childish argument with yourself.