Saturday, June 25, 2011

A Message to Mexican President Felipe Calderon....Shut up Will Ya?

Some of you may have heard that two Border Patrol Agents were forced to open fire on a border jumper as he hurled rocks at them and attacked them with a nail studded board and of course Felipe Calderon is demanding severe penalties for the Border Agents. Bullshit, give them a medal for marksmanship.

Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:
  • Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress." (Article 32)
  • Immigration officials must "ensure" that "immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents. (Article 34) (In other words, no public benefits)
  • Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets "the equilibrium of the national demographics," when foreigners are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when "they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy." (Article 37) (In other words, if it gets to 'white' you need to leave)
  • The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest." (Article 38)
Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:
  • Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)
  • A National Population Registry keeps track of "every single individual who comprises the population of the country," and verifies each individual's identity. (Articles 85 and 86)
  • A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).
Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:
  • Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)
  • Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)
Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:
  • Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)
  • Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)
  • Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico -- such as working with out a permit -- can also be imprisoned.
Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says,
  • "A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally." (Article 123)
  • Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)
  • Foreigners who "attempt against national sovereignty or security" will be deported. (Article 126)
Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:
  • A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)
  • Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)


When will Calderon wake up and smell what he is shoveling? 


This is a man who not too long ago stood on the floor of the Senate and tried to tell us how to run our country. Get your own house in order first Calderon. 


Illegal Immigration is a serious problem for our nation but it only equates to racism (according to liberals) when we try to tighten things up and secure our borders. 


Let's take a look at Mexico's Immigration Laws




Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:
  • in the country legally;
  • have the means to sustain themselves economically;
  • not destined to be burdens on society;
  • of economic and social benefit to society;
  • of good character and have no criminal records; and
  • contributors to the general well-being of the nation.
The law also ensures that:
  • immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;
  • foreign visitors do not violate their visa status;
  • foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country’s internal politics;
  • foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;
  • foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;
  • those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.



    Right now as I type, Mexico is suing any state which attempts to enforce any form of immigration reform. 

    America is not a welfare state Mr. Calderon, if your nation was able to take care of it's people, they wouldn't be such a burden to us.

    Thursday, June 23, 2011

    The First Amendment...What it really means

    Wouldn't it be a pity,
    if 'Under God' 
    was considered a prayer
    and removed from our schools?
    Red Skelton-1969




    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    That's the First Amendment..period. As you can see the is no statement of ' Separation of Church and State'  (which was a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802).  Essentially, the First Amendment states that the Government will not have an established organized religion such as Catholicism, Judaism , or any other form of established religion. It clearly states it will not have an established religion, nowhere does it state it can not, to some degree, acknowledge faith. 


    The purpose of the First Amendment is to avoid religious persecution as the forefathers did in Britain under the rule of the Church of England which is governed by the ruling monarch and which worshipers were taxed to participate in church services. This is why churches have tax exempt status here in America.


    The First Amendment is also in place to prevent creating laws based on religious doctrine. Now, granted people claim we based laws on the Ten Commandments, even though there are really only three Commandments which have been implemented as law and here they are:


    1) Thou shall not bear false witness
    (This is called perjury in a Court of Law)


    2) Thou shall not steal
    (Armed burglary, mugging, shop-lifting etc)   


    3) Thou shall not kill
    (Self explanatory) 


    Don't you think as a nation we would have passed those laws anyway?


    Anti-Religious organizations attempt to keep religion behind closed doors like it was some kind of 'dirty family secret' and take pride in taking away your right to pray or read a bible anywhere you chose to do so. 


    One of the most prevalent cases I can recall was the case of Kaye Staley, a woman who three years ago attempted to sue the City of Houston over a Non-Denominational Prayer which was cited before the City Council conducted it's business. Apparently, Miss Staley is offended by faith. She lost her case when the presiding judge basically told her, 'People have faith...get over it.' and dismissed her lawsuit with prejudice, meaning she can never sue over this issue again. 


    Another case that comes to mind is an agnostic couple who sued the Alvin School District over an upcoming graduation Invocation and stated their son will not walk across the graduation stage if the Invocation is recited. So, they were willing to deny their son a right of passage because of their beliefs? Good parenting don't you think? Of course they sued and initially won an injunction but it was overturned.  


    The denial of faith by Atheists/Agnostics is, in my opinion, their attempt to use their false sense of intellectualism to avoid having to answer to a higher power.


    The beliefs Anti-Religious Organizations think they have:
    1) The right as private individuals to stop people who have faith their right to practice their faith, even though the Government doesn't even have that power.
    2) Their belief that 'religion' is being forced down their throats. 


    Sorry but if you know there is going to be an Invocation or acknowledgement to a Higher Power at an event, you can either deal with it or not go to that event, but you do not have the right to stop those who wish to participate. 


    To sum up my views on Anti-Religious Organizers.
    Don't tell me where to pray and I won't tell you where you don't have to.