On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Travis <[email protected]> wrote: We have a perfect bunch of congressmen we can assign to permanent duty as alien greeters and satisfyers.
==== <Grin>!!! > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:26 PM, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hey Jonathan! >> >> I switched threads on ya, but I wanted to come back to what Michael wrote >> earlier. >> >> Uhm...I don't think that is the clause that you are looking for there >> Jonathan...<Grin>!! >> >> Two of the clauses that I was referencing earlier, are these: >> >> Article One, Section Eight, Clause 3: >> >> To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, >> and with the Indian Tribes; >> >> and. >> >> Article One, Section Eight, Clause 3: >> "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the >> subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States"; >> >> Clearly, we all know, (accept for Lil'MarxistMoonbatTommyTomTomForNews) >> that the Congress has the ability to regulate damn near everything under the >> Commerce Clause, or at least the Courts have interpreted it as such. There >> has been some reversals of this doctrine, with the *Lopez* Case and *Sullivan >> v. Louisiana*, but the Congress has wide latitude. >> >> The Congress has regulated immigration, including the ability to >> immigrate into our Nation, since 1796, when it passed the "Uniform Rule of >> Naturalization of 1795". >> >> What we have now, is those socialists and Marxists, and a few who are >> just downright ignorant of our laws, (Again, >> *See*Lil'MarxistMoonbatTommyTomTomForNews) especially our Constitution, who >> have >> usurped power and corrupted our Congress, but I won't dwell on this tonight, >> hopefully we have a new start here next week. >> >> There is also Article 1 Section 8, Clause 1; which states in part: >> >> "The Congress shall have the duty to.....[P]rovide for the common Defence >> and general Welfare of the United States" >> >> Of course, this Clause shoots Michael's whole theory down, that the >> Preamble is nothing but fluff, and, as Michael stated, "There is no assign >> of Power contained within this 'mission statement' -- implied, inferred nor >> stated." >> >> Obviously, there is, and this was pointed out to Michael on May 11th of >> this year: >> >> >> http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/db218d176a3fea96 >> >> >> >> With regard to your "invasion" definition....I think that definition is >> still accurate. I would submit that there are numbers of illegal immigrants >> who have the intent to cause harm, damage and some have the intention of >> trying to cause a catastrophe, and/or they intend on trying to force the >> United States into ceding a portion of the Southwestern United States back >> to Mexico, or form some third world Nation-State. I think this qualifies as >> being invaded, and we have not only a right, but a duty to protect our >> borders from this invasion. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> .... >> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Jonathan Ashley < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Keith, >>> >>> You are stretching the definition of "invasion" beyond belief. >>> >>> 1828 definition: >>> >>> *INVASION*, n. s as z. [L. invasio, from invado. See Invade.] >>> 1. A hostile entrance into the possessions of another; particularly, >>> the entrance of a hostile army into a country for the purpose of conquest or >>> plunder, or the attack of a military force. The north of England and south >>> of Scotland were for centuries subject to invasion, each from the other. The >>> invasion of England by William the Norman, was in 1066. 2. An attack on >>> the rights of another; infringement or violation. 3. Attack of a >>> disease; as the invasion of the plague, in Egypt. >>> >>> However, in re-reading the Constitution, I did find the following in >>> Article I, Section 9: >>> >>> "The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now >>> existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the >>> Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax >>> or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for >>> each Person." >>> >>> So it appears the Supreme Court was correct in 1875. I stand corrected. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Keith In Tampa >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Yes, they do. Especially 3 and 4. The remainder of the clauses deal >>> with illegal immigration, which is, "invasion". >>> >>> As for the rest of your points, I will be back later. >>> >>> Keith >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:56 PM, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> The US Constitution provides the Executive Branch and the Legislative >>>> Branch with a number of inherent powers, to include the enforcement of >>>> immigration laws. For starters, let’s begin with the Preamble: >>>> *“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect >>>> Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the >>>> common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of >>>> Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this >>>> Constitution for the United States of America”. >>>> * >>>> >>>> >>>> We the People (of State unknown until ratification) in order to >>>> accomplish these six (6) goals establish THIS Constitution. >>>> >>>> There is no assign of Power contained within this 'mission statement' -- >>>> implied, inferred nor stated. >>>> >>>> They will waste but little time on the attempt to cover the act by the >>>> preamble to the Constitution, it being contrary to every acknowledged rule >>>> of construction to set up this part of an instrument in opposition to the >>>> plain meaning expressed in the body of the instrument. A preamble usually >>>> contains the general motives or reason for the particular regulations or >>>> measures which follow it, and is always understood to be explained and >>>> limited by them. In the present instance, a contrary interpretation would >>>> have the inadmissible effect of rendering nugatory or improper every part >>>> of >>>> the Constitution which succeeds the preamble. -- Jonathan Elliot _Debates >>>> on >>>> the Adoption of the Federal Constitution_ >>>> >>>> >>>> the Constitution mandates that the Congress (and the President) >>>> protect American sovereignty and the American People. Let’s begin with >>>> Article One, Section Eight, which deals with the Powers of the Congress, >>>> and >>>> all of these Sections are applicable : >>>> >>>> Clause 1: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, >>>> Duties, Imposts <http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#IMPOST>and >>>> Excises <http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#EXCISE>, to pay >>>> the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general >>>> Welfare<http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#WELFARE>of the United >>>> States; but all Duties, >>>> Imposts <http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#IMPOST> and >>>> Excises <http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#EXCISE> shall be >>>> uniform throughout the United States; >>>> Clause 3: “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the >>>> several States, and with the Indian Tribes”; >>>> Clause 4: “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform >>>> Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States”; >>>> Clause 11: “To declare War, grant Letters of >>>> Marque<http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#MARQUE>and >>>> Reprisal <http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#REPRISAL>, and >>>> make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water”; >>>> Clause 15: “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the >>>> Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions” >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> NONE of these Powers have *anything* to do with immigration. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Clause 20; “To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the >>>> Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the >>>> Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the >>>> Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia >>>> according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”; >>>> >>>> >>>> Which has NOTHING to do with immigration. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Even Article One, Section Ten, Clause Three gives the States the right >>>> to defend themselves with the invasion by illegal aliens: >>>> >>>> >>>> No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of >>>> Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any >>>> Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage >>>> in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not >>>> admit of delay. >>>> >>>> NOTHING here about "illegal aliens" (whatever that means) OR >>>> immigration. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I am rushed for time right now, but I will pick up on this thread later, >>>> and we’ll touch upon the other inherent powers by the Congress, and delve >>>> into the Executive Branch’s ability to stop the invasion and detriment to >>>> our Nation that illegal aliens pose. >>>> >>>> >>>> In other words LATER you will seek to 'make up' some justification for >>>> what simply does not exist. >>>> A cursory amount of research will reveal that "immigration" was a >>>> USURPATION ... first by the court in the very late 19th Century >>>> (paralleling the rise of the Nanny State) and then with seemingly innocuous >>>> requirements by the Congress in the 1920s (as the Nanny State begins to >>>> become firmly entrenched). >>>> >>>> The Constitution simply does NOT support this nonsensical Statist >>>> tyranny. >>>> Legitimate Government is to SECURE Natural Rights -- such as the right >>>> to migration -- not to tyrannically quash them. >>>> >>>> Regard$, >>>> --MJ >>>> >>>> Modern nationalism and collectivism have, by the restriction of >>>> migration, perhaps come nearest to the "servile state." …Man can hardly be >>>> reduced more to a mere wheel in the clockwork of the national collectivist >>>> state that being deprived of his freedom to move.... Feeling that he >>>> belongs >>>> now to his nation, body and soul, he will be more easily subdued to the >>>> obedient state serf which nationalist and collectivist governments >>>> demand. -- Wilhelm Röpke >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>> >>>> * Visit our other community at >>>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> >>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at >> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at > http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
