U.S.’s Toughest Immigration Law Is Signed in Arizona

[oc_civic]

CLEVELAND -- A U.S. immigration court granted asylum to President Barack Obama's African aunt, allowing her to stay in the country, her attorneys said Monday.

The decision was mailed Friday and comes three months after Kenya native Zeituni Onyango, the half-sister of Obama's late father, testified at a closed hearing in Boston, where she arrived in a wheelchair and two doctors testified in support of her case.

The basis for her asylum request hadn't been made public. People who seek asylum must show that they face persecution in their homeland on the basis of religion, race, nationality, political opinion or membership in a social group.

Her lawyer, Margaret Wong, said last year that Onyango first applied for asylum "due to violence in Kenya." The East African nation is fractured by cycles of electoral violence every five years.

In a November interview with The Associated Press, Onyango said she was disabled and was learning to walk again after being paralyzed from Guillain-Barre syndrome, an autoimmune disorder.

Onyango moved to the United States in 2000. Her first asylum request was rejected, and she was ordered deported in 2004. But she didn't leave the country and continued to live in public housing in Boston.

Onyango's status as an illegal immigrant was revealed just days before Obama was elected in November 2008. Obama said he did not know his aunt was living here illegally and believes laws covering the situation should be followed.

A judge later agreed to suspend her deportation order and reopen her asylum case.

Wong has said that Obama wasn't involved in the Boston hearing. The White House also said it was not helping Onyango with legal fees.

In his memoir, "Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance," Obama affectionately referred to Onyango as "Auntie Zeituni" and described meeting her during his 1988 trip to Kenya.

Onyango helped care for the president's half brothers and sister while living with Barack Obama Sr. in Kenya.

this is VERY bad... people should not be granted asylum based on living in a shitty waring country.. that just opens a HUGE door for anyone living in a shitty country with war to claim it as an excuse...

 

[vjf915]

Just shows what money can buy you these days, bullshit. I dont believe for one second that she wasnt being helped in one way or another.

 

[BuiltforSin]

I really don't understand how this is an issue?! Are people really that worried about racial profiling that they're willing to let this country go to s**t? I just don't understand the logic of, "Well.... they're already here.. hey... let's just give them free citizenship!" I for one am not gonna stand for it. Look what they do in other countries when people enter illegally. They get locked up, shot, or put in work prisons.

 

[cgpEJ6]

Are people really that worried about racial profiling that they're willing to let this country go to s**t?

In my opinion, allowing racial profiling would be letting this country go to s**t.

 

[oc_civic]

In my opinion, allowing racial profiling would be letting this country go to s**t.

racial profiling is a necessity in MANY cases..

Post 911.. airports on lock down.. looking for any additional threats..
middle age white women with a bomb? probably not.. its likely going to be someone of middle eastern decent..

patrolling the mexican border looking for illegals..
2 cars go by.. one filled with people of spanish ethnicity, the other with a bunch of black kids.. which do you think is more likely to be border jumpers?

you can not let feelings and emotions impede logical police work..

 

[cgpEJ6]

racial profiling is a necessity in MANY cases..

Post 911.. airports on lock down.. looking for any additional threats..
middle age white women with a bomb? probably not.. its likely going to be someone of middle eastern decent..

patrolling the mexican border looking for illegals..
2 cars go by.. one filled with people of spanish ethnicity, the other with a bunch of black kids.. which do you think is more likely to be border jumpers?

you can not let feelings and emotions impede logical police work..

I understand that it happens and it's always going to but that doesn't mean it's always right either. At the border they check everyone's ID and that's how it should be. If they catch anyone crossing the border illegally than they should be stopped. The problem that I have is that Hispanic Americans should not have to constantly prove they are in fact legal when nobody else does. If they have to prove they are legal at any given time so should you and I but that's not the case.

 

[copternadley]

the fact that SOME people are waking up and trying to change the situation we are in.. YES good news..

the fact that ILLEGAL immigration has to be deemed ILLEGAL is f**king absurd.. could you imagine if ALL laws were like that.. "sir.. you are stealing a TV right in front of me.." "oh.. i know stealing is illegal.. but is it REALLY illegal?" its just nuts to me that it even has to be stated..


to give some thought to the points brought up before.. that WE as a society have grown to accept illegals and actually build communities around them.. communities that WILL suffer when illegal immigration is cracked down on.. these ARE in many cases true.. BUT that does not change that it is the RIGHT thing to do.. i ask you to consider this.. while illegal immigration and slavery are wrong on different levels the outcome is VERY similar.. I am sure when the nation spoke of ending slavery MANY were up in arms claiming that was the way things had been done here for so long.. and it would have HUGE impacts on our nation.. that is obviously not a reason to NOT do the right thing.. the SAME applies here.. this whole open back door in which we allow these border jumping assholes to just stroll across and take as they please HAS to end as well.. SURE there are going to be some struggles.. SURE we will face some problems.. but MAYBE if we can get ILLEGAL immigration in check and get all these assholes out of here that DON'T belong here.. we can then focus on allowing some more people to legally enter.. as i have said many times.. i am FOR FAIR legal MANAGED immigration..

agreed on this one...

 

[oc_civic]

I understand that it happens and it's always going to but that doesn't mean it's always right either. At the border they check everyone's ID and that's how it should be. If they catch anyone crossing the border illegally than they should be stopped. The problem that I have is that Hispanic Americans should not have to constantly prove they are in fact legal when nobody else does. If they have to prove they are legal at any given time so should you and I but that's not the case.

they dont constantly have to prove it..... the concept of the law really changes NOTHING in practice.. what the law DOES do is empower STATE authorities to do what the FEDS won't...

 

[vjf915]

Exactly. However, the law just puts the person in prison for 6 months. It will take a little bit of time, but they will mostly leave Arizona.........and locate themselves somewhere else. In order for this to be effective......we need to have ALL states put this law in place....and enforce it too......and not take any flak from the federal government.

 

[Hecz]

The problem that I have is that Hispanic Americans should not have to constantly prove they are in fact legal when nobody else does.

i believe that's just something we'll have to live with for the rest of our lives, or for the rest of this empire's existence.

................

day one ; White guy living in home without anyone else bothering him.
day two ; random guy moves into White guys home.
day three; "um why are you living in MY home" "this home that took me effort and hard work to get" "the home i pay bills for, the home i maintain" says White guy.

/story

alot of people aren't understanding the story i just told.

 

[Hecz]

I also believe that if these illegals would put down some money in front of the usa government it would be a different story.

cartels will forever deal with usa, that's a no brainer. the bill will not stop the violence cartels promote. i can slow it down. i also believe cartels pay people off, again. MONEY is involved. MONEY talks. come on. my local government is corrupt. this whole entire nation is corrupt.

i believe there's more intentions behind this bill then just to get illegals out.

 

[Hecz]

well gentlemen,

i think it time for me to unsubscribe from this thread. I've been fallowing it since first day it was created. There's just no point for me to keep on reading people's opinions. i've said everything i wanted to say.

ttyl friends.

 

[vjf915]

Lol three posts FTW!!! Im assuming the "home" is a reference to America.

 

[Hecz]

yup!

 

[Melt]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

and if it hasnt been posted in this thread yet

The Arizona Corporation Commission

Dear Mayor Villaraigosa,

I was dismayed to learn that the Los Angeles City Council voted to boycott Arizona and Arizona-based companies — a vote you strongly supported — to show opposition to SB 1070 (Support our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act).

You explained your support of the boycott as follows: “While we recognize that as neighbors, we share resources and ties with the State of Arizona that may be difficult to sever, our goal is not to hurt the local economy of Los Angeles, but to impact the economy of Arizona. Our intent is to use our dollars — or the withholding of our dollars — to send a message.” (emphasis added)

I received your message; please receive mine. As a state-wide elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission overseeing Arizona’s electric and water utilities, I too am keenly aware of the “resources and ties” we share with the City of Los Angeles. In fact, approximately twenty-five percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.
If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona’s utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona’s economy.

People of goodwill can disagree over the merits of SB 1070. A state-wide economic boycott of Arizona is not a message sent in goodwill.

Sincerely,
Commissioner Gary Pierce

i no longer do any business or vist LA, SF, or berkeley either.

 

[vjf915]

Nice.

 

[oc_civic]

The Arizona Corporation Commission

Dear Mayor Villaraigosa,

I was dismayed to learn that the Los Angeles City Council voted to boycott Arizona and Arizona-based companies — a vote you strongly supported — to show opposition to SB 1070 (Support our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act).

You explained your support of the boycott as follows: “While we recognize that as neighbors, we share resources and ties with the State of Arizona that may be difficult to sever, our goal is not to hurt the local economy of Los Angeles, but to impact the economy of Arizona. Our intent is to use our dollars — or the withholding of our dollars — to send a message.” (emphasis added)

I received your message; please receive mine. As a state-wide elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission overseeing Arizona’s electric and water utilities, I too am keenly aware of the “resources and ties” we share with the City of Los Angeles. In fact, approximately twenty-five percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.
If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona’s utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona’s economy.

People of goodwill can disagree over the merits of SB 1070. A state-wide economic boycott of Arizona is not a message sent in goodwill.

Sincerely,
Commissioner Gary Pierce

pwned

 

[Melt]

just read the rest of this thread, the reason i jumped in earlier is cause i searched before putting up a new one

anyhow,

1) my parents did it legit, came here in 79, maintained legal "resident alien" (yes thats what it was called, my dad still has the card to prove it) status, and became citizens in the late 90s

2) my college B.S. is in Parks and Natural Resource Management. Which means on the low level to get "experience" means ill be doing landscaping among other general maintenance duties. To do that landscaping i have to take a job somewhere in the government, because if i do it in the private sector, ill be making minimum wage because of the illegals, and private sector wont look good on my resume, because its considered a "low skilled labor" job.

3) Armstrong and Getty morning radio show (found in northern california on AM 650 and 910) a while back mentioned that one of the guys in Arizona protesting the law, (who wouldnt give his name) was a STATE WORKER! thats right ... one of those jobs Americans supposedly "wont do"

 

[Melt]

1) my parents did it legit, came here in 79, maintained legal "resident alien" (yes thats what it was called, my dad still has the card to prove it) status, and became citizens in the late 90s

and while were on that subject, we are of dutch descent, they came from South Africa.

a good friend of the family who is a democrat and has served on the city council of a few towns at one time wrote an opinion piece in the local paper about how "brown people" get the short end of the stick, and how people like my folks dont get "profiled"

my dad then pointed out that people who arent from south of the border dont just walk across a border. There is documentation of them being here, and if they overstay a guest / temporary visa, its a lot easier to find them than it is to find someone who just walked over here and theres no records on file about them at all.

Which reminds me of another thing. Not sure if this is a nationwide organization, but in northern california they have what is called the "springbok club" for south Africans. They basically meet once a month and barbecue and have fun talking to each other in Afrikaans. Well there was a lady they knew, who overstayed her visa, was married to an American, had a house, lived in Windsor, CA. Well when the baby was born, she wanted to go to South Africa to visit relatives and such, and EVERYONE warned her not to do it, get her papers in order first. She ignored the advice, and as a result wasnt able to re-enter the US. Her AMERICAN husband then had to give up EVERYTHING they had worked so hard for here and go to South Africa so that he could live life with his wife and child.

 

[Melt]

this is being discussed in multiple threads on pirate4x4.com ... figured id link over some history someone put up

Three times in the history of the United States US Presidents took what would today be considered a politically unpopular position by rounding
up and deporting illegal aliens to create jobs for US Citizens. The
first attempt occurred shortly after the banker-induced Stock Market
Crash of 1929 when President Herbert Hoover ordered the round-up and
deportation of illegals by the US Immigration and Naturalization
Service. The program, dubbed "Operation Wetback," was carried out
without any protests from US government-funded Hispanic advocacy
groups—since there were none. The Clintonesque-liberal media political
correctness dictionary was still 63 years in the future and the
communist-left FDR (America's white Barack Obama) federal bureaucracy
was still some 4-years in the making.

The Hoover roundup sent over one million Mexican illegal aliens
packing—freeing up jobs for out-of-work US citizens. In addition, some
47 thousand Mexican nationals who were in the country legally, with
visas, also opted to leave due to rising animosity by out-of-work
Americans for any foreigner in the United States with a job. Operation
Wetback was launched in the Southwest: Arizona, California, New Mexico
and Texas. But deportees also came from Colorado, Illinois, Michigan,
and New York. Since Mexican illegals tried hard to remain under the
radar screen, few of them traveled far beyond the border States, thus we
can assume that most of the deportees from the States north of the
Mason-Dixon line were legal residents. During the Hoover years,
immigration to he United States was virtually stopped.

The Hoover deportations caused an outcry from the Mexican government
demanding to know what gave Hoover the right to deny Mexican citizens
the right to jobs in the United States under what was called the "Good
Neighbor Policy." At the end of World War II, President Harry S. Truman
was faced with the same problem that plagued Hoover in 1931—no jobs for
US citizens. Under Roosevelt's Public Law 78 agri-giants, who needed
dirt cheap labor were allowed to import labor from Mexico even though
25% of the American labor force was out of work—and in the dust bowl
farm states, unemployment stood at over 70%. Under Public Law 78, when
work contracts were fulfilled, the employer was responsible, under law,
to transport the migrant worker back to Mexico. As thousands of migrant
workers simply vanished into the human landscape, taking what few jobs
were available from American workers, Truman's solution was to issue a
terse public statement admonishing Congress, and telling the American
people that Congress assured him they would fix the problem. (Yeah, we
can see how well the buck stopped at his desk.)

During the prosperity of the war years (1943-54), illegal alien
immigration increased by 6,000%, triggering Operation Wetback II and
III. In 1954, the INS estimated that illegals—not legal migrant
workers—were crossing the US border at the rate of one million per year
and that they were penetrating much deeper into the nation that in
preceding decades because the INS concentrated their efforts only in the
border States. The INS, on orders from the White House, went through the
motions of rounding up both illegal aliens and migrant workers who
overstayed their visas. Truman deported about 30 thousand Mexicans
during his seven years in office.

Truman's blamed his poor record on guarding the border on Public Law 78,
enacted by FDR's 73rd Congress and S.984, which was enacted by the 82nd
Congress (that expanded the use of migratory workers from Mexico) and
made it more difficult to expel illegals under Woodrow Wilson's "Good
Neighbor Policy" with Mexico.

Truman became one of the three "deportion presidents" not for deporting
Mexicans under Operation Wetback II, but under Presidential Proclamation
2655, an edict requiring the deportation of potentially dangerous WWII
detainees from the Axis nations. Deported were several thousand men,
women and children of German and Italian ancestry who spend most of
World War II in internment camps. It appears that only about 900 Pervian
Japanese farmers, held by the US government in that country, were
deported to Japan at the end of war.

Eisenhower was stuck will cleaning up the mess created by the open door
polices 73rd and 82nd Congresses. As Eisenhower took office, illegal
immigrants were now crossing at the rate of about 3 million per year.

When Eisenhower assumed the Oval Office, illegal alien migration was one
of his top priorities. He attributed the lax attitude of Congress about
illegal immigration with a relaxation of Congressional ethical
standards. A Truman-initiated study on Mexican migratory labor in 1950
found that cotton growers in Texas paid migrant workers about half what
a US citizen was paid to chop cotton. As Eisenhower met with current and
retired border patrol agents he learned that the big ranchers and
farmers who relied on the cheap migrant labor had friends "in high
places" in government. Agents were subtlety warned not to arrest the
workers employed by what turned out to be powerful campaign donors. When
that didn't work, they were very bluntly told to back off, or they were
simply transferred where they would become someone else's problem. The
two most influential Senators who blocked the efforts of the INS to do
their job were then Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson [D-TX] and Sen. Pat McCarran
[D-NV].

Eisenhower hired Gen. Joseph May Swing to head the INS and with units of
the US National Guard, began what history now views as a quasi-military
operation to find and seize illegal immigrants As hard as Johnson tried
to get rid of Swing, Eisenhower protected his man in Immigration. On
July 15, 1953, the first day of Operation Wetback III, Swing's men
arrested 4,800 illegals. After the first day, the INS averaged the
seizure of 1,100 illegals per day. The INS devoted 700 men to the
project, hoping to scare enough more illegals to flee back across the
border. The INS claims that under Eisenhower's Operation Wetback, they
deported 1,300,000 illegals. The open-border social progressives insist
that all three phases of Operation Wetback were dismal flops, and that
only a few thousand people—all of whom, they claim, were legal
residents—were deported.

It was Truman who pushed the Federal Immigration and National Act of
1952 through Congress in the closing days of his administration. Under
Section 8 USC 1324[a](1)(A)[iv](iii) any US citizen that knowingly
assists an illegal alien, provides them with employment, food, water or
shelter has committed a felony. City, county or State officials that
declare their jurisdictions to be "Open Cities, Counties or States are
subject to arrest; as are law enforcement agencies who chose not to
enforce this law. Police officers who ignore officials who violate
Section 8 USC 1324[a](1)(A)[iv](iii) are committing a Section 274
federal felony. Furthermore, according to Federal Immigration and
National Act of 1952, if you live in a city, county or State that
refuses to enforce the law for whatever reason, the officials making
those rules are financially liable for any crime committed within their
jurisdiction by an illegal alien.

We now have approximately 25 million illegal aliens in the United States
(even though the Center for Immigration Studies estimates that number at
around 7.3 million). It's time to demand, under threat of impeachment,
that Barack Hussein Obama launch Operation Wetback IV, and complete the
job started by Hoover and Eisenhower.

Although they think they are, the President of the United States
(legitimate or illegitimate), and the members of Congress are not above
the law of the land. If Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-NV]
and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi [D-CA] and any other member of Congress
refuses to enforce Section 8 USC 1324[a](1)(A)[iv](iii), they need to
be impeached for committing a federal felony, tried and removed from
office, and then placed on trial in a US federal court (not of their
choosing), and sentenced to federal prison for harboring illegals.

Furthermore, the United States needs to seize all of the assets of those
individuals so that the people of the United States who have been
robbed, raped or otherwise injured by an illegal alien can be made
financially whole from their asset pool.

--
Nancy Pelosi, Democrat criminal, accessory before and after the fact, to
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel of New York's
million dollar tax evasion. On February 25, 2010, the House ethics
committee has concluded that Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B.
Rangel knowingly accepted Caribbean trips in violation of House rules that
forbid hidden financing by corporations. Democrat criminal Nancy Pelosi
is deliberately ignoring the million dollar tax evasion of Democrat
Charles Rangel.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had to be forced to remove Charles B. Rangel
from the House Ways and Means Committee.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: n...@netfront.net ---