Hang in there, JUAN!!! Hey gang, let's see if we can get him a heart transplant! Contact CNN.com!
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? www.LayoffRemedy.com ��
Juan Gonzalez is in America legally, but his parents, who are farmers
in a small town in Guatemala, have no legal status here other than the
temporary emergency visa that was arranged for them thanks to CNN's
bringing Juan's plight to public attention.
KUDOS to Delta Airlines!! They flew Juan's parents, FREE of charge,
to America so they could see their possibly-dying son in the hospital.
Please THANK Delta for doing that! They'll appreciate that!
It was the couple's first time on a plane. They came to America on
this trip with nothing but the clothes on their backs and a Bible.
So THEY need help, too!
It is likely that a heart transplant could save Juan's life, but so
far no one's been talking about that possibility. So let's tweet, e-mail,
etc., CNN, and suggest that they mobilize an effort to raise those
funds. Let's do the same with the other major networks, too! Contact
ABC, CBS, and NBC.
Is Usenet really good anything beyond discussions?
Maybe not, and maybe so.
Let's make it SO!!
Forward this to everyone you know! Let's build some momentum
and enable Juan to become a healthy 78-year-old in 2069!
Sharon Scharf
> Cross posting crap."stermen"
I don't like cross posters either but I simply adore cross dressers.
Let me introduce myself. My name is Granny Sharon and if you like it
nasty I'm your girl. Yessiree I'm hot and very available. I'm in my
70's but don't let that bother you. I can still take 2 dicks up my
ass
at the same time. I adore rollplay and s&m. Let me be the big bad
witch and cast my spell on you! My picture is below:
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k244/thebucketsucks1/granny.jpg
I have a homosexual son named Scott Salberg and he's available if you
like to walk on the wild side and sample a little brown hole pussy
while I suck his dick. It sure is hairy and it squirts! I can travel
for the right situation. Minorities and Mexicans welcome if hung 10
inches or more. Please, no gang affiliations or pants hanging down to
your knees. You will need to look normal and presentable to taste
this
witchy pussy. Felchers get special attention. Email me:
sharonlikesitnasty @ yahoo.com
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? www.LayoffRemedy.com ��
<oldshar...@yahoo.com> ...
... nothing but MORONIC bullcrap. TYPICAL for that LOON!
<flush!!>
Original post follows:
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Sharon Scharf
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? www.LayoffRemedy.com ��
HATEFUL BIGOT, BILL TAYLOR (aka "Fritz Wuehler")
<fr...@spamexpire-200905.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
... NOTHING intelligent. As usual!
<garbage-flush>
SCREW the above subject header from the hateful and
BRAINLESS bigot, BILL TAYLOR.
(And to **ignoramus** Taylor -- Juan is from Guatemala --
NOT Mexico. What a mindless tool you truly are!)
Original post follows:
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Hang in there, JUAN!!! Hey gang, let's see if we can
get him a heart transplant! Contact CNN.com!
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? www.LayoffRemedy.com ��
Anonymous <cri...@ecn.org> wrote:
HATEFUL BIGOT, BILL TAYLOR (aka "Anonymous ")
<cri...@ecn.org> wrote:
... NOTHING intelligent. As usual!
<garbage-flush>
SCREW the above subject header from the hateful and
BRAINLESS bigot, BILL TAYLOR.
(And to **ignoramus** Taylor -- Juan is from Guatemala --
NOT Mexico. What a mindless tool you truly are!)
Original post follows:
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Hang in there, JUAN!!! Hey gang, let's see if we can
get him a heart transplant! Contact CNN.com!
Juan Gonzalez is in America legally, but his parents, who are
No_He_Can_Not
wrote:
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? www.LayoffRemedy.com ��
No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
> (�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed?
> <www.LayoffRemedy.com> �� wrote:
I honestly don't know. I haven't seen any details about that.
But since he IS a citizen (per CNN's report), that makes the
question moot.
He needs help, and he's entitled to it to whatever extend the
govrnment can assist him. And whatever help we in Usenet, and
else from the private sector can render, would be a very GOOD
thing.
No One
<snip>
User-name forgery from x-no-archive troll and pathlogical liar Bill Taylor;
text ignored.
No_He_Can_Not
wrote:
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? www.LayoffRemedy.com ��
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? www.LayoffRemedy.com ��
> (�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed?
> <www.LayoffRemedy.com> �� wrote:
>> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
> Good luck getting a heart transplant.
Thousands of successful ones have been done. If enough
good-hearted Americans act,Juan could become one of them.
No_He_Can_Not
wrote:
>> <www.LayoffRemedy.com> �� wrote:
>>
>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>
Baxter
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Fritz Wuehler" <fr...@spamexpire-200905.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote
in message
news:b8475c476f7032ad...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
>
> How does any "anchor baby" come to be in the US "legally?"
>
> It is time to retroactively apply a simple rule in the US. If
> your parents were illegally in the US when you were born, you
> were too. No citizenship. Just about every other country in
> the world looks at it this way except for the US.
>
All you need is a Constitutional Amendment. Get to work!
No_He_Can_Not
No_He_Can_Not
> In article <g13h159uiv860oft4...@4ax.com>
> "(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed?
>
>> On Sat, 23 May 2009 09:00:38 -0500,
>> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>
> It is time to retroactively apply a simple rule in the US. If
> your parents were illegally in the US when you were born, you
> were too. No citizenship. Just about every other country in
> the world looks at it this way except for the US.
>
>
>
>
sooner or later this stuff will be removed . congress is going to get
the message one day .
Ray Fischer
>Baxter wrote:
>> "Fritz Wuehler"
>> <fr...@spamexpire-200905.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote
>>> It is time to retroactively apply a simple rule in the US. If
>>> your parents were illegally in the US when you were born, you
>>> were too. No citizenship. Just about every other country in
>>> the world looks at it this way except for the US.
>>>
>> All you need is a Constitutional Amendment. Get to work!
>>
>No all that is needed is for the law to be upheld as it is written .
The Constitution says that people born in the United States ar US
citizens. That IS the law, as written.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
No_He_Can_Not
and should be interpreted differently.
Curt
james g. keegan jr.
No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
i'm not surprised you didn't even bother to manufacture some evidence to
support that whopper.
--
"Note: NOWHERE...and I'll repeat..NOWHERE do you see me mentioning the New York Times. " --scumbag heishman posting as Ospre...@hotmail.com in news:9a845215-1896-47e0-acb9-fca427f2c...@x38g2000yqj.googlegroups.com
apprently forgetting he had previously written:
"New York Times has all ready sent me a response stating you have been warned." -- prison clerk heishman lying as "Osprey" <noneedtok...@mail.com> in news:2rCdnZNy7LA...@comcast.com
No_He_Can_Not
your mouth.
Ray Fischer
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>>> Baxter wrote:
>>>> "Fritz Wuehler"
>>>>> It is time to retroactively apply a simple rule in the US. If
>>>>> your parents were illegally in the US when you were born, you
>>>>> were too. No citizenship. Just about every other country in
>>>>> the world looks at it this way except for the US.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> All you need is a Constitutional Amendment. Get to work!
>>>>
>>> No all that is needed is for the law to be upheld as it is written .
>>
>> The Constitution says that people born in the United States ar US
>> citizens. That IS the law, as written.
>>
>No it does not.It is not that cut and dry. It is open for interpretation
>and should be interpreted differently.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject
to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and
of the State wherein they reside.
14th Amendment
Looks like it does say that and it is that cut-and-dry.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
No_He_Can_Not
> In article <3q-dnU9CANJtQ4TX...@giganews.com>,
> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>
>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Baxter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Fritz Wuehler"
>>>>> <fr...@spamexpire-200905.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>> It is time to retroactively apply a simple rule in the US. If
>>>>>> your parents were illegally in the US when you were born, you
>>>>>> were too. No citizenship. Just about every other country in
>>>>>> the world looks at it this way except for the US.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> All you need is a Constitutional Amendment. Get to work!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> No all that is needed is for the law to be upheld as it is written .
>>>>
>>> The Constitution says that people born in the United States ar US
>>> citizens. That IS the law, as written.
>>>
>>>
>> No it does not.It is not that cut and dry. It is open for interpretation
>> and should be interpreted differently.
>>
>
>
> i'm not surprised you didn't even bother to manufacture some evidence to
> support that whopper.
>
>
us some of that stuff where it says any one born on this soil........ It
basically says any one who is a legal resident at the time of their
giving birth......
some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way,
without any regards for the law and with only thought for their personal
feelings. Empathy has no place in a court room.
Ray Fischer
It does not.
>some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way,
You're just another rightard who doesn't know or care about the law.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
james g. keegan jr.
No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
[...]
> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
game, set, match. you lost.
Curt
Sorry. Yeah, I was paying attention. I'll quit yawning. You weren't
boring me with your legal analysis, really. Honest.
Curt
The Chief Instigator
You're either not a native of this country, or you were exceedingly stupid
in your school days...it's the law, and no matter how you bitch about it,
you don't get to force your fantasy on anyone else. My ancestors were here
before there was a United States, and I'm an Appalachian who's spent a bit
over four-fifths of my life down here in southeast Texas. If you can't hack
that, that's your personal problem. My in-laws up in the Dakotas and
Minnesota would likely describe you succinctly: "Uff da!".
--
Patrick L. "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2008-09 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Houston 4, Manitoba 3 (2 OT, May 22: Moose lead, 3-2)
NEXT GAME: Monday, May 25 at Manitoba, 7:35 (Game 5)
No_He_Can_Not
>
> http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=85d3744a400ae010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD
>
> Home > Services & Benefits > Citizenship
>
> Citizenship of Children
>
>
> The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees citizenship at
> birth to almost all individuals born in the United States or in U.S.
> jurisdictions, according to the principle of jus soli. Certain
> individuals born in the United States, such as children of foreign
> heads of state or children of foreign diplomats, do not obtain U.S.
> citizenship under jus soli.
>
Justice doled out by a pile of shit judge with no respect for the law
but rules on his emotions based on empathy for foreign parasites.
Now show me where in the 14th amendment it says " if you are born on our
soil by illegal parents you are a citizen "
What it says is
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State
wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Jurisdiction thereof . Illegal foreigners are not under our jurisdiction
as they are not citizens but criminals of another country. Just like
foreign dignitaries are not under our jurisdiction when they visit and
thus their babies do not qualify.
Judges that base their decisions on empathy are nothing but activists in
power and should be immediately removed from the bench.
We can of coarse expect more of this kind of nonsense from the next
activist to be forced on us by Obama. His own words were he wanted a
justice with empathy. A trait not for the courts but for activist
groups. Judges are supposed to rule by the law not make up their own law
as they go . But then liberals do not care much about laws or the
constitution.
No_He_Can_Not
citizenship. they have simply avoided the matter to a degree. Congress
could put a stoop to it but with the liberal bleeding hearts in charge
it will never happen.
No_He_Can_Not
Just like these maggot terrorists are not under our jurisdiction there
babies would not have citizenship , except under Obama . These people
fall under a different category of jurisdiction.
The courts simply ignore the matter. They did of coarse have no fucking
problem saying that Native Americans were not citizens but China babies
were.
No_He_Can_Not
shows his disregard by saying he want to appoint a SCJ that has empathy
! Fucking empathy has no place in a court room. But then Obama is a
criminal lover and an American hater so we can expect that from him and
from most other liberals.
Jurisdiction thereof.
No_He_Can_Not
> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>>
>
> game, set, match. you lost.
>
>
simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
JSPTS
> Cringing Dittohead wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 May 2009 16:42:45 -0500, No_He_Can_Not
>
> >> Baxter wrote:
>
> >>> -
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
> >>> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
>
> >>> "Fritz Wuehler" <fr...@spamexpire-200905.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote
> >>> in message
> >>>news:b8475c476f7032ad...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
>
> >>>> How does any "anchor baby" come to be in the US "legally?"
>
> >>>> It is time to retroactively apply a simple rule in the US. If
> >>>> your parents were illegally in the US when you were born, you
> >>>> were too. No citizenship. Just about every other country in
> >>>> the world looks at it this way except for the US.
>
> >>> All you need is a Constitutional Amendment. Get to work!
>
> >> No all that is needed is for the law to be upheld as it is written .
>
> > Are you mentally ill or something?
>
>
> > Home > Services & Benefits > Citizenship
>
> > Citizenship of Children
>
> > The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees citizenship at
> > birth to almost all individuals born in the United States or in U.S.
> > jurisdictions, according to the principle of jus soli. Certain
> > individuals born in the United States, such as children of foreign
> > heads of state or children of foreign diplomats, do not obtain U.S.
> > citizenship under jus soli.
>
> Justice doled out by a pile of shit judge with no respect for the law
> but rules on his emotions based on empathy for foreign parasites.
>
> Now show me where in the 14th amendment it says " if you are born on our
> soil by illegal parents you are a citizen "
You provide exactly that cite below.
> What it says is
> All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
> jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State
> wherein they reside.
And what part of "ALL PERSONS BORN in the United States... are
CITIZENS of the United States..." are you not understanding?
"ALL persons born in the United States..."
JSPTS
Likely because the wording is quite clear:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to
the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the
State wherein they reside."
Has a U.S. court ever DENIED citizenship to a person born on U.S. soil?
JSPTS
>
> >>>> Baxter wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Fritz Wuehler"
>
> >>>>>> It is time to retroactively apply a simple rule in the US. If
> >>>>>> your parents were illegally in the US when you were born, you
> >>>>>> were too. No citizenship. Just about every other country in
> >>>>>> the world looks at it this way except for the US.
>
> >>>>> All you need is a Constitutional Amendment. Get to work!
>
> >>>> No all that is needed is for the law to be upheld as it is written .
>
> >>> The Constitution says that people born in the United States ar US
> >>> citizens. That IS the law, as written.
>
> >> No it does not.It is not that cut and dry. It is open for interpretation
> >> and should be interpreted differently.
>
> > All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject
> > to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and
> > of the State wherein they reside.
> > 14th Amendment
>
> > Looks like it does say that and it is that cut-and-dry.
>
> Looks as though you do not know the meaning of jurisdiction there of.
Actually, it appears that YOU are the one having trouble with that
section of the sentence.
> Just like these maggot terrorists are not under our jurisdiction there
> babies would not have citizenship , except under Obama . These people
> fall under a different category of jurisdiction.
No. They are under the jurisdiction of the United States government
if they are born in the United States.
You don't actually think that a person born here is under the
jurisdiction of, say, Zimbabwe, do you? You don't think that the
government of Zimbabwe can come over here and impose its rules on a
person born here, do you?
>
> The courts simply ignore the matter.
They've got no choice but to uphold the Constitution, which states
that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States
and of the State wherein they reside."
> They did of coarse have no fucking
> problem saying that Native Americans were not citizens but China babies
> were.
So you want to go back to the 1800s? You want to live under the rule
of law and culture that predominated in the 1800s? Is THAT what
you're saying?
JSPTS
> Fucking empathy has no place in a court room.
Oh. My. God.
JSPTS
>
> >>>>> Baxter wrote:
>
> >>>>>> "Fritz Wuehler"
> >>>>>> <fr...@spamexpire-200905.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote
>
> >>>>>>> It is time to retroactively apply a simple rule in the US. If your
> >>>>>>> parents were illegally in the US when you were born, you were too.
> >>>>>>> No citizenship. Just about every other country in the world looks
> >>>>>>> at it this way except for the US.
>
> >>>>>> All you need is a Constitutional Amendment. Get to work!
>
> >>>>> No all that is needed is for the law to be upheld as it is written .
>
> >>>> The Constitution says that people born in the United States ar US
> >>>> citizens. That IS the law, as written.
>
> >>> No it does not.It is not that cut and dry. It is open for interpretation
> >>> and should be interpreted differently.
>
> >> i'm not surprised you didn't even bother to manufacture some evidence to
> >> support that whopper.
>
> > Di not need to manufacture any. Just read your constitution. then quote us
> > some of that stuff where it says any one born on this soil........ It
> > basically says any one who is a legal resident at the time of their giving
> > birth...... some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a
> > liberal way, without any regards for the law and with only thought for
> > their personal feelings. Empathy has no place in a court room.
>
> You're either not a native of this country, or you were exceedingly stupid
> in your school days...
I'm going with the latter (while having a problem with the past tense
there).
> it's the law, and no matter how you bitch about it,
> you don't get to force your fantasy on anyone else. My ancestors were here
> before there was a United States,
Mine too.
> and I'm an Appalachian who's spent a bit
> over four-fifths of my life down here in southeast Texas. If you can't hack
> that, that's your personal problem. My in-laws up in the Dakotas and
> Minnesota would likely describe you succinctly: "Uff da!".
Yeah, being a native Minnesotan, "Uff da!" works here. In New York
City, "Oy!" would also do.
JSPTS
> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article <BMqdneGxCbr4nIfXnZ2dnUVZ_oudn...@giganews.com>,
> > No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > [...]
>
> >> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>
> > game, set, match. you lost.
>
> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
they reside" means.
james g. keegan jr.
<a25c8a8c-8012-4553...@o20g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
haters are not thinking beings.
james g. keegan jr.
No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
> Liberals care nothing about the constitution and that is a fact.
ooopsy, is that you?
No_He_Can_Not
No_He_Can_Not
empathy is letting your feelings interpret the law. the law is what it
is and is not open for some judge to decide it based on his personal
feelings.
Let me show you the difference and why it is not supposed to be.
A guy goes to court for killing his friend. His friend had beaten up his
wife. So the guy went over and killed his ass. the law clearly states
that he can not do this because that is murder. the judge feeling
empathy for him lets him go .
that is wrong and only happened because the judge did not follow the
law. We have laws for a reason . We do not change them when we feel they
should be changed in each situation. they apply to everyone or should
anyway.
This is how illegals are allowed in our country.
Guillaume Ier de Normandie
Uh huh... and what about that are you not understanding? Do you not
understand what "jurisdiction" means?
No_He_Can_Not
our jurisdiction not the country to which they belong. ambassadors do
not get this privilege and they are the most privileged of anyone. Hell
they can not even be charged with a crime on our soil. Yet they have no
birth right.
Jurisdiction is not the same jurisdiction as you have by living in your
town. It is total jurisdiction which illegals do not have here as they
are governed under the laws of their country and we can only prosecute
them fore crimes and deport them and such. they are not citizens and are
not under the jurisdiction of the United States.
No_He_Can_Not
> In article
> <a25c8a8c-8012-4553...@o20g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
> JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On May 25, 10:37 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article
>>> <BMqdneGxCbr4nIfXnZ2dnUVZ_oudn...@giganews.com>,
>>>
>>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>>>>>
>>>> game, set, match. you lost.
>>>>
>>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
>>> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
>>>
>> No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
>> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
>> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
>> they reside" means.
>>
>
> haters are not thinking beings.
>
>
wants the law enforced a hater.
The move of a person who is in the wrong and knows it.
I want burglers put in prison. Am I a hater for that also ?
Guillaume Ier de Normandie
> JSPTS wrote:
> > On May 25, 10:36 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Fucking empathy has no place in a court room.
>
> > Oh. My. God.
>
> Oh my god ?
>
> empathy is letting your feelings interpret the law.
Awwwwwwww quit yer whining.
> the law is what it
> is and is not open for some judge to decide it based on his personal
> feelings.
So you're talking particularly about judges who deal with
constitutional issues, and not those who preside over, say, criminal
trials.
Anyway, for a judge to DISALLOW citizenship to a person born on U.S.
soil would be unconstitutional. So it is in THAT situation that a
judge would be allowing his personal feelings to enter into his
decision. Not the other way around, as you imagine.
> Let me show you the difference and why it is not supposed to be.
>
> A guy goes to court for killing his friend. His friend had beaten up his
> wife. So the guy went over and killed his ass. the law clearly states
> that he can not do this because that is murder. the judge feeling
> empathy for him lets him go .
Oy jeez.
The fact that the friend beat up the wife would be considered a
"mitigating factor" in the killing of the friend, and might or might
not be considered "murder" by the prosecution.
Just killing someone isn't necessarily "murder". Juries decide that.
> that is wrong and only happened because the judge did not follow the
> law. We have laws for a reason . We do not change them when we feel they
> should be changed in each situation. they apply to everyone or should
> anyway.
But you want to change the Constitution.
Call your lawmakers.
>
> This is how illegals are allowed in our country.
A person BORN here is a citizen and is not "illegal".
No_He_Can_Not
of their parents and were conceived in Zimbabwe and are therefor
citizens of Zimbabwe.
yes they can impose their will on this person. they are their citizen
and they fall under their laws. they can demand the return of the criminal.
>> The courts simply ignore the matter.
>>
>
> They've got no choice but to uphold the Constitution, which states
> that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
> subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States
> and of the State wherein they reside."
>
>
>> They did of coarse have no fucking
>> problem saying that Native Americans were not citizens but China babies
>> were.
>>
>
> So you want to go back to the 1800s? You want to live under the rule
> of law and culture that predominated in the 1800s? Is THAT what
> you're saying?
>
sounds good. Lets do it. Shoot the bastards when they invade. On our
land, bullet in the head. that is good old American justice. Trespassers
die. No suing because you are brown. No suing because you invaded
someones property to steal their belongings and got shot.
Guillaume Ier de Normandie
Incorrect, and that's what I expected of you: you don't understand
the word "jurisdiction".
Let me explain:
People who are in the United States must follow U.S. law. They are
therefore under the jurisdiction of the United States.
> they are part
> of their parents and were conceived in Zimbabwe and are therefor
> citizens of Zimbabwe.
They may be citizens of Zimbabwe, but if they are in the United
States, they are under U.S. jurisdiction.
> yes they can impose their will on this person. they are their citizen
> and they fall under their laws. they can demand the return of the criminal.
But if, say, Zimbabwean law forbids X, but U.S. law does not forbid X,
and the person is in the U.S., the person may do X.
Example: the U.S. drinking age is 21. But if a teenager goes to
Spain, he can get a bottle of wine at the supermarket. He is under
Spanish jurisdiction while in Spain, not under U.S. jurisdiction.
>
>
> >> The courts simply ignore the matter.
>
> > They've got no choice but to uphold the Constitution, which states
> > that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
> > subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States
> > and of the State wherein they reside."
>
> >> They did of coarse have no fucking
> >> problem saying that Native Americans were not citizens but China babies
> >> were.
>
> > So you want to go back to the 1800s? You want to live under the rule
> > of law and culture that predominated in the 1800s? Is THAT what
> > you're saying?
>
> sounds good. Lets do it.
Well, I'm quite certain that, if you think about the 1800s, you will
not want to go back to that time and place. I'm quite certain.
james g. keegan jr.
No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> > In article
> > <a25c8a8c-8012-4553...@o20g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
> > JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On May 25, 10:37 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article
> >>> <BMqdneGxCbr4nIfXnZ2dnUVZ_oudn...@giganews.com>,
> >>>
> >>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>
> >>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
> >>>>>
> >>>> game, set, match. you lost.
> >>>>
> >>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
> >>> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
> >>>
> >> No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
> >> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
> >> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
> >> they reside" means.
> >>
> >
> > haters are not thinking beings.
> >
> >
> So now we are back to the old liberal cover up of calling any one who
> wants the law enforced a hater.
only if the person who says that is blatantly lying.
Guillaume Ier de Normandie
> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>
> > In article
> > JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> On May 25, 10:37 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article
> >>> <BMqdneGxCbr4nIfXnZ2dnUVZ_oudn...@giganews.com>,
>
> >>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> [...]
>
> >>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>
> >>>> game, set, match. you lost.
>
> >>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
> >>> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
>
> >> No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
> >> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
> >> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
> >> they reside" means.
>
> > haters are not thinking beings.
>
> So now we are back to the old liberal cover up of calling any one who
> wants the law enforced a hater.
You don't want to enforce the constitutional law, but rather you want
its very clear meaning to be changed so that you can forbid the babies
of illegal immigrants citizenship in the country of their birth.
slick watts
> In article
> <a25c8a8c-8012-4553...@o20g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
> JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 25, 10:37 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article
>>> <BMqdneGxCbr4nIfXnZ2dnUVZ_oudn...@giganews.com>,
>>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>>>> game, set, match. you lost.
>>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
>>> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
>> No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
>> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
>> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
>> they reside" means.
>
> haters are not thinking beings.
>
No_He_Can_Not
> On May 25, 12:13 pm, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>> JSPTS wrote:
>>
>>> On May 25, 10:36 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Fucking empathy has no place in a court room.
>>>>
>>> Oh. My. God.
>>>
>> Oh my god ?
>>
>> empathy is letting your feelings interpret the law.
>>
>
> Awwwwwwww quit yer whining.
>
>
>> the law is what it
>> is and is not open for some judge to decide it based on his personal
>> feelings.
>>
>
> So you're talking particularly about judges who deal with
> constitutional issues, and not those who preside over, say, criminal
> trials.
>
> Anyway, for a judge to DISALLOW citizenship to a person born on U.S.
> soil would be unconstitutional. So it is in THAT situation that a
> judge would be allowing his personal feelings to enter into his
> decision. Not the other way around, as you imagine.
>
It has just been left out there .
>
>> Let me show you the difference and why it is not supposed to be.
>>
>> A guy goes to court for killing his friend. His friend had beaten up his
>> wife. So the guy went over and killed his ass. the law clearly states
>> that he can not do this because that is murder. the judge feeling
>> empathy for him lets him go .
>>
>
> Oy jeez.
>
> The fact that the friend beat up the wife would be considered a
> "mitigating factor" in the killing of the friend, and might or might
> not be considered "murder" by the prosecution.
>
> Just killing someone isn't necessarily "murder". Juries decide that.
>
legal precedence.
empathy should not make constitutional law. Should not play any part in
it. Obama made a very big mistake when he stated that. Just watch as the
congress takes it all in. No one in their right mind thinks that the
constitution should be interpreted by ones personal feelings. It must be
interpreted by exactly what it states.
No_He_Can_Not
> In article <-s2dnRxJ45FXWIfX...@giganews.com>,
> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>
>>> In article
>>> <a25c8a8c-8012-4553...@o20g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
>>> JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On May 25, 10:37 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article
>>>>> <BMqdneGxCbr4nIfXnZ2dnUVZ_oudn...@giganews.com>,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> game, set, match. you lost.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
>>>>> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
>>>> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
>>>> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
>>>> they reside" means.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> haters are not thinking beings.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> So now we are back to the old liberal cover up of calling any one who
>> wants the law enforced a hater.
>>
>
> only if the person who says that is blatantly lying.
>
>
No_He_Can_Not
concept of the Mexican invasion to overthrow our government . They just
did not lay it out plain enough to cover the anchor babies. it was not
on their minds that one might enter illegally just to have a baby .
No_He_Can_Not
jurisdictions having control over said criminal. If the parent is a
criminal invader then so is the child as the child is part of the parent.
No_He_Can_Not
No_He_Can_Not
Let them be citizens.
mandatory no exceptions deport their parents never to be allowed back in
the country.
take the kids into custody for foster care or whatever. Or let them go
with their parents if said parents relinquish their kids citizenship.
case solved.
America is happy
Guillaume Ier de Normandie
They didn't have concepts about LOTS of things. They didn't foresee
the existence of the internet, for example. Or photography.
> They just
> did not lay it out plain enough to cover the anchor babies.
Problem for you is that they made it VERY clear that babies born on
U.S. soil are U.S. citizens.
> it was not
> on their minds that one might enter illegally just to have a baby .
Doesn't matter. All persons born on U.S. soil who are under U.S.
jurisdiction are citizens of the United States. In order to change
this, a new amendment would be necessary.
Guillaume Ier de Normandie
It isn't about only criminality but also legal rights. An adult in
the U.S. has the right to have consensual sex with the adult of his or
her choice. That is not the case in, say, Saudi Arabia. A Saudi
coming to the U.S. can have sex with the consenting adult of his or
her choice without legal repercussions from Saudi Arabia, because
Saudi Arabia has no jurisdiction in the U.S.
> If the parent is a
> criminal invader then so is the child as the child is part of the parent.
You're actually going so far as to call a newborn a criminal???
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Guillaume Ier de Normandie
Let's bring the discussion into the modern age, OK?
james g. keegan jr.
No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
i'm not surprised.
some imbecile wrote "So now we are back to the old liberal cover up of
calling any one who wants the law enforced a hater."
do you know who that was?
eat your veggies or the boogeyman will get you.
james g. keegan jr.
slick watts <un...@mars.bb> wrote:
> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> > In article
> > <a25c8a8c-8012-4553...@o20g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
> > JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On May 25, 10:37 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
> >>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article
> >>> <BMqdneGxCbr4nIfXnZ2dnUVZ_oudn...@giganews.com>,
> >>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
> >>>> game, set, match. you lost.
> >>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
> >>> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
> >> No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
> >> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
> >> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
> >> they reside" means.
> >
> > haters are not thinking beings.
> >
> We accept you are inhuman.
afraid to speak for yourself, eh? i can see why.
james g. keegan jr.
No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
nor of the invaders from mars either.
james g. keegan jr.
<3a0466fc-ac54-4e4c...@q2g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>,
Guillaume Ier de Normandie <guillaumed...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 25, 1:17�pm, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
> > They just
> > did not lay it out plain enough to cover the anchor babies.
>
> Problem for you is that they made it VERY clear that babies born on
> U.S. soil are U.S. citizens.
and that's what terrifies the haters.
slick watts
> In article <7801idF1...@mid.individual.net>,
> slick watts <un...@mars.bb> wrote:
>
>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <a25c8a8c-8012-4553...@o20g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
>>> JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On May 25, 10:37 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article
>>>>> <BMqdneGxCbr4nIfXnZ2dnUVZ_oudn...@giganews.com>,
>>>>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>>>>>> game, set, match. you lost.
>>>>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
>>>>> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
>>>> No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
>>>> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
>>>> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
>>>> they reside" means.
>>> haters are not thinking beings.
>>>
>> We accept you are inhuman.
>
> afraid to speak for yourself,
Um no...
Afraid to be human?
Curt
> JSPTS wrote:
> > On May 25, 10:36 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Fucking empathy has no place in a court room.
>
> > Oh. My. God.
>
> Oh my god ?
>
> empathy is letting your feelings interpret the law.
?? You're not even trying, here, are ya?
> the law is what it
> is and is not open for some judge to decide it based on his personal
> feelings.
>
> Let me show you the difference and why it is not supposed to be.
>
> A guy goes to court for killing his friend. His friend had beaten up his
> wife. So the guy went over and killed his ass. the law clearly states
> that he can not do this because that is murder. the judge feeling
> empathy for him lets him go .
This happened.. when?
> that is wrong and only happened because the judge did not follow the
> law. We have laws for a reason . We do not change them when we feel they
> should be changed in each situation. they apply to everyone or should
> anyway.
Only, see, it didn't happen. You just made it up.
>
> This is how illegals are allowed in our country.
W T F ..?
Curt
Curt
> > Uh huh... and what about that are you not understanding? Do you not
> > understand what "jurisdiction" means?
>
> yes i do. It is referring to the complete jurisdiction without any other
> jurisdictions having control over said criminal. If the parent is a
> criminal invader then so is the child as the child is part of the parent.
Just when I get to thinking you can't say something goofier..
Curt
Ray Fischer
>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way,
>>
>> You're just another rightard who doesn't know or care about the law.
>>
>Liberals care nothing about the constitution
And so the rightard bigots spews his hatred in order to spit on the
Constitution. Just another racist asshole.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>>> Fucking empathy has no place in a court room.
>>
>> Oh. My. God.
>>
>Oh my god ?
>
>empathy is letting your feelings interpret the law. the law is what it
>is and is not open for some judge to decide it based on his personal
>feelings.
Like a law that says that people born in the US are US citizens, you
fascist bigot?
There is a reason that judges are given sentencing GUILDELINES. They
get to use their judgement to decide what's best. You goose-stepping
fscist don't understand that, do you? You just want to throw people
into prison.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>>>
>>
>> game, set, match. you lost.
>
>Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter.
"Parasite". Is that anything like referring to Jews as "vermin"?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
Your racist paranoia isn't reality.
First, the 14th amendment was added to the constitution to deal with
racists who wanted to deny people their rights based solely upon skin
color.
Second, it was added in the 1860s. The "founders" were long dead by
then.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
>> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
>> they reside" means.
>>
>our jurisdiction not the country to which they belong. ambassadors do
>not get this privilege and they are the most privileged of anyone.
And they aren't subject to US laws, either.
> Hell
>they can not even be charged with a crime on our soil.
But the children of immigrants CAN be charged with crimes. That means
that they are subject to US laws and thus are US citizens.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>
>>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Fritz Wuehler"
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> It is time to retroactively apply a simple rule in the US. If
>>>>>>> your parents were illegally in the US when you were born, you
>>>>>>> were too. No citizenship. Just about every other country in
>>>>>>> the world looks at it this way except for the US.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> All you need is a Constitutional Amendment. Get to work!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> No all that is needed is for the law to be upheld as it is written .
>>>>>
>>>> The Constitution says that people born in the United States ar US
>>>> citizens. That IS the law, as written.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> No it does not.It is not that cut and dry. It is open for interpretation
>>> and should be interpreted differently.
>>>
>>
>> to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and
>> 14th Amendment
>>
>> Looks like it does say that and it is that cut-and-dry.
>>
>Looks as though you do not know the meaning of jurisdiction there of.
Looks like you're a racist bifot trying to justify your desrire to
trash the Constitution.
>Just like these maggot terrorists
Quite the nazi, aren't you? DO you also refer to Jews as being "vermin"?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Bill Shatzer
-snip-
> Has a U.S. court ever DENIED citizenship to a person born on U.S. soil?
Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884)
peace and justice,
No_He_Can_Not
No_He_Can_Not
resorted to calling me something I have not given you any reason to call me.
i am standing by what I think the constitution says.
I have not called any Jews anything nor was I posting anything about Jews.
I called terrorists maggots. Is that so bad. Should I apologize to all
the mass murdering child and woman murdering terrorists that I have
offended ?
Sorry no apology from me to terrorists . My name is not Obama.
Calling me a Nazi for calling terrorists maggots is just plain old
everyday liberal troll actions. You are looking for an argument based on
hatred and conjecture and nothing else. You will not get it from me.
another thing asshole. Where do you get this racist trashing the
constitution thing from ? Is that what racists do ? Or are you just so
low on things to start shit about that the usual racist republican
remark will not suffice ?
try to keep the conversation within the realm of opinions on the thread .
No_He_Can_Not
> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>
>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>
>
>
>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way,
>>>>
>>> You're just another rightard who doesn't know or care about the law.
>>>
>>>
>> Liberals care nothing about the constitution
>>
>
> And so the rightard bigots spews his hatred in order to spit on the
> Constitution. Just another racist asshole.
>
>
fun why not go some whee else and do it.
When I post something racist then you can feel free to call me a racist.
Just so you know the constitution is not a race of people.
" Liberals care nothing about the constitution " is neither racist nor bigot like. It is my opinion of most liberals. I think it fits quite well.
Let me know when you are finished trolling and would like to carry on a viable conversation.
No_He_Can_Not
> In article <7801idF1...@mid.individual.net>,
> slick watts <un...@mars.bb> wrote:
>
>
>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>
>>> In article
>>> <a25c8a8c-8012-4553...@o20g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
>>> JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On May 25, 10:37 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article
>>>>> <BMqdneGxCbr4nIfXnZ2dnUVZ_oudn...@giganews.com>,
>>>>>
>>>>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> game, set, match. you lost.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
>>>>> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
>>>>>
>>>> No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
>>>> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
>>>> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
>>>> they reside" means.
>>>>
>>> haters are not thinking beings.
>>>
>>>
>> We accept you are inhuman.
>>
>
> afraid to speak for yourself, eh? i can see why.
>
>
I believe that the law should be the law. Illegals should be deported
right along with their kids. Or their kids can be citizens and be put up
for adoption.
Illegals are a major threat to the US and I do not like what they do .
Anchor babies are not at fault in this but they must go along with their
parents or be put in state custody or with a relative. The only reason
people support that anchor baby crap is so that the parent can stay . Oh
the poor parents getting separated from their kids. fuck that. They did
it and they gambled and lost.
No_He_Can_Not
illegal aliens feeding off American citizens sucking the life right out
of the country with no worry about what they are doing. If the country
dies so what. that is a parasite and that is what they are.
No_He_Can_Not
But I bet it has happened before.
Ray Fischer
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way,
>>>>>
>>>> You're just another rightard who doesn't know or care about the law.
>>>>
>>> Liberals care nothing about the constitution
>>>
>> And so the rightard bigot spews his hatred in order to spit on the
>> Constitution. Just another racist asshole.
>>
>I see that you are also a troll .
I see that you're a racist America-hating bigot.
>When I post something racist then you can feel free to call me a racist.
And I did.
>" Liberals care nothing about the constitution " is neither racist nor bigot like.
Of course it's bigoted.
> It is my opinion
Bigotry is always an opinion. It's not fact.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>> slick watts <un...@mars.bb> wrote:
>>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>>> JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> On May 25, 10:37 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article
>>>>>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> game, set, match. you lost.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
>>>>>> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
>>>>>>
>>>>> No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
>>>>> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
>>>>> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
>>>>> they reside" means.
>>>>>
>>>> haters are not thinking beings.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> We accept you are inhuman.
>>>
>>
>> afraid to speak for yourself, eh? i can see why.
>>
>>
>I am not a hater
Someone who refers to people as "parasites" is a hater just like Nazis
who refer to Jews as vermin.
>I believe that the law should be the law.
You've already rejected the law.
> Illegals should be deported
>right along with their kids.
That's hatred.
>Illegals are a major threat to the US and I do not like what they do .
That's pure hatred. Nothing more.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
slick watts
> And so the rightard
And so the libitard
Ray Fischer
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> game, set, match. you lost.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter.
>>>
>>
>> "Parasite". Is that anything like referring to Jews as "vermin"?
>>
>No.
Yes.
> A parasite is something that feeds off of something else.
Vermin, in other words.
> Like
>illegal aliens feeding off American citizens sucking the life right out
>of the country with no worry about what they are doing.
Insane hatred.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Enos Penvy
> >>> JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> On May 25, 10:37 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article
> >>>>> <BMqdneGxCbr4nIfXnZ2dnUVZ_oudn...@giganews.com>,
>
> >>>>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> [...]
>
> >>>>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
>
> >>>>>> game, set, match. you lost.
>
> >>>>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
> >>>>> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
>
> >>>> No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
> >>>> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
> >>>> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
> >>>> they reside" means.
>
> >>> haters are not thinking beings.
>
> >> We accept you are inhuman.
>
> > afraid to speak for yourself, eh? i can see why.
>
> I am not a hater and you deserve no answer but I'll give you one anyway.
> I believe that the law should be the law. Illegals should be deported
> right along with their kids. Or their kids can be citizens and be put up
> for adoption.
>
> Illegals are a major threat to the US
How so?
> and I do not like what they do .
What is it that you imaging they're doing?
No_He_Can_Not
> On Mon, 25 May 2009 09:25:14 -0500, No_He_Can_Not
> <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Cringing Dittohead wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 24 May 2009 16:42:45 -0500, No_He_Can_Not
>>> <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Baxter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> "Fritz Wuehler" <fr...@spamexpire-200905.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote
>>>>> in message
>>>>> news:b8475c476f7032ad...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> How does any "anchor baby" come to be in the US "legally?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is time to retroactively apply a simple rule in the US. If
>>>>>> your parents were illegally in the US when you were born, you
>>>>>> were too. No citizenship. Just about every other country in
>>>>>> the world looks at it this way except for the US.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> All you need is a Constitutional Amendment. Get to work!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> No all that is needed is for the law to be upheld as it is written .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=85d3744a400ae010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD
>>>
>>> Home > Services & Benefits > Citizenship
>>>
>>> Citizenship of Children
>>>
>>>
>>> The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees citizenship at
>>> birth to almost all individuals born in the United States or in U.S.
>>> jurisdictions, according to the principle of jus soli. Certain
>>> individuals born in the United States, such as children of foreign
>>> heads of state or children of foreign diplomats, do not obtain U.S.
>>> citizenship under jus soli.
>>>
>>>
>> Justice doled out by a pile of shit judge with no respect for the law
>> but rules on his emotions based on empathy for foreign parasites.
>>
>> Now show me where in the 14th amendment it says " if you are born on our
>> soil by illegal parents you are a citizen "
>>
>
> Are you blind?
>
> just what part of...
>
> "The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees citizenship at
> birth to almost all individuals born in the United States or in U.S.
> jurisdictions, according to the principle of jus soli. "
>
> do you not understand?
>
>
>> What it says is
>>
>> All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
>> jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State
>> abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
>> nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,
>> without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its
>> jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
>>
>> Jurisdiction thereof . Illegal foreigners are not under our jurisdiction
>> as they are not citizens but criminals of another country. Just like
>> foreign dignitaries are not under our jurisdiction when they visit and
>> thus their babies do not qualify.
>>
>
> If they were no under US jurisdiction they couldn't be arrested and
> deported ..could they?
>
> Or are you so stupid you think illegal aliens have diplomatic
> immunity?
>
>
>> Judges that base their decisions on empathy are nothing but activists in
>> power and should be immediately removed from the bench.
>>
>> We can of coarse expect more of this kind of nonsense from the next
>> activist to be forced on us by Obama. His own words were he wanted a
>> justice with empathy. A trait not for the courts but for activist
>> groups. Judges are supposed to rule by the law not make up their own law
>> as they go . But then liberals do not care much about laws or the
>> constitution.
>>
>
> The United States Immigration and Citizenship Services say you are
> full of shit.
>
> end of story.
>
sure thing bleeding heart guy.
Ray Fischer
But you're the one whining that people reject your lies.
> you have
>resorted to calling me something I have not given you any reason to call me.
You refer to people as parasites. You lie about the Constitution.
You spew ridiculous nonsense about people taking over the country.
>i am standing by what I think the constitution says.
That's because you're nuts.
>I have not called any Jews anything nor was I posting anything about Jews.
It's an a-n-a-l-o-g-y.
Do you need help understanding what that word means?
>I called terrorists maggots.
And that apparently includes everybody that you hate.
> Is that so bad.
When accuse immigrants of being terrorist maggots, then yes, it is
that bad.
> Should I apologize to all
>the mass murdering child and woman murdering terrorists that I have
>offended ?
You're nuts.
>Calling me a Nazi for calling terrorists maggots
WHich I didn't, but you're not firmly anchored in reality, are you?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
james g. keegan jr.
No_He_Can_Not <nohec...@mail.com> wrote:
are you bailing out on yoru own words and also taking a shot at me
because of what your word show about you?
> I believe that the law should be the law.
on the contrary, you argue for law when it suits you and then blame your
boogeyman (liberals) for laws and rulings that don;t suit you.
if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, ......
--
"Note: NOWHERE...and I'll repeat..NOWHERE do you see me mentioning the New York Times. " --scumbag heishman posting as Ospre...@hotmail.com in news:9a845215-1896-47e0-acb9-fca427f2c...@x38g2000yqj.googlegroups.com
apprently forgetting he had previously written:
"New York Times has all ready sent me a response stating you have been warned." -- prison clerk heishman lying as "Osprey" <noneedtok...@mail.com> in news:2rCdnZNy7LA...@comcast.com
james g. keegan jr.
slick watts <un...@mars.bb> wrote:
> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> > In article <7801idF1...@mid.individual.net>,
> > slick watts <un...@mars.bb> wrote:
> >
> >> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> >>> In article
> >>> <a25c8a8c-8012-4553...@o20g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
> >>> JSPTS <js...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On May 25, 10:37 am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> james g. keegan jr. wrote:> In article
> >>>>> <BMqdneGxCbr4nIfXnZ2dnUVZ_oudn...@giganews.com>,
> >>>>>> No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> [...]
> >>>>>>> some idiot liberal judge just interpreted the law in a liberal way
> >>>>>> game, set, match. you lost.
> >>>>> Yes but he did not actually rule on the illegal parasite matter. He just
> >>>>> simply ignored it to put it in his empathy activist favor
> >>>> No empathy is needed to determine what "All persons born or
> >>>> naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
> >>>> thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
> >>>> they reside" means.
> >>> haters are not thinking beings.
> >>>
> >> We accept you are inhuman.
> >
> > afraid to speak for yourself,
>
> Um no...
how many of you are there?