Letter to the Editor

The big apple

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Dear Editor,

Looking at the article by Ellen Hirst on the immigration rally at the capitol, I found it quite revealing that the organization behind the rally was not mentioned.

I am sure if it was a Tea Party rally everyone would know it. Several small groups were identified, but the big apple was no where to be found. Appleseed. Below is their description from their own website. neappleseed.org.

WHAT IS NEBRASKA APPLESEED?

Nebraska Appleseed is a non-profit public interest law firm that works for equal justice and full opportunity for all Nebraskans. Appleseed works to protect the rights of Nebraskans and improve public programs, especially for immigrants, children in the foster care system, and low-income families.

As Tea Party members we rallied behind Jan Brewer as she was sued by our own federal government for enforcing immigration law and protecting her citizens from drug cartels. It is definitely a hot political issue. Unfortunately the political forces behind the propaganda have little to do with facts.

I am in support of LB 48 because it is the STATE's responsibility to enforce immigration law, not the federal government's. Let me step back in history to Keller vs the US. I'll give you a clip ...

http://supreme.justia.com/us/213/138/

Argued March 1, 1909

Decided April 5, 1909

213 U.S. 138

Syllabus

Speaking generally, the police power is reserved to the states, and there is no grant thereof to Congress in the Constitution.

Notwithstanding the offensiveness of the crime, the courts cannot sustain a federal penal statute if the power to punish the same has not been delegated to Congress by the Constitution.

Where there is collision between the power of the state and that of Congress, the superior authority of the latter prevails. While Congress has power to exclude aliens from, and to prescribe the terms and conditions on which aliens may come into, the United States, Turner v. Williams, 194 U. S. 279, that power does not extend to controlling dealings with aliens after their arrival merely on account of their alienage.

Not exactly what you've been hearing in the news is it?

Now there is the 14th Amendment issue of anchor babies. Guess what? It was for slaves born in the U.S., not every baby dropped on the soil. In fact people used to be deported all the time who were born here. You can study that one for yourself, it's all over the national news. Well ... on Fox news anyways.

What people don't realize is the illegal immigrant worker is exploited on our soil and is nothing more than slave labor. They are subject to human trafficking abuses. They also dilute our national culture. They are a heavy burden on our medical, housing, education and welfare finances. The drain our financial resources. Our national and border security is at risk. This has to stop.

LB 48 is actually a weak bill. It doesn't even enforce immigration law to the extent of the federal ones. It just says to the federal government, Nebraska has a right to protect its resources, enforce our laws, protect our own citizens and our way of life. We are going to do it, in spite of your objections and unfounded political lawsuits. We determine our own destinies, we decide what we can and can't afford. Enforcement is our perogative and right.

I support border control FIRST, and legal immigration. I support a return to the true intent of the 14th Amendment starting now. I support deportation of illegal immigrant workers. I support heavy fines on employers and property owners for violating law. I support the end to all education and welfare funds to illegal immigrants. I want them to go home and change their own country to something they want to live in. I want them to fight for their rights on their own soil, not mine. Demand change from their government, not mine. Go protest on your own doorstep. Get your own constitution and quit treading on mine.

I'm not ashamed of LB 48. I don't hate immigrants. I want law and order, due process and enforcement of law.

Jerie Quinty

McCook

Comments
View 6 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Jerie, well thought out, well documented, well presented. I agree.

    I received an e-mail today stating that Missouri has a good, working, system, that, of course, irritates the Federal side, but, as they state: Missouri does not have an Illegal problem, any more. (I don't know how completely accurate that is, but it sure sounds good)

    -- Posted by Navyblue on Tue, Feb 1, 2011, at 5:26 PM
  • Definitely on target Jerie.

    What I would like to see happen in our state is, if someone suspects someone of breaking the law and being in this country illegally, to be able to contact law enforcement and that they have the power to investigate. If we can do this, it will put some power into our law enforcement being able to enforce the laws. Not the agencies that handle illegal immigration, because it seems they are doing everything to do just the opposite of the law.

    -- Posted by jam24u on Tue, Feb 1, 2011, at 5:45 PM
  • *

    Mexican law requires local police to check ID. Thus, Mexico's immigration law is no different than Arizona's, which empowers local police to check the documents of people suspected of entering the America illegally. Article 67 of Mexico's immigration law requires that all authorities, "whether federal, local or municipal," demand visas if approached by a foreigner--and to hand over migrants to immigration authorities. Yet the Mexican government criticizes Arizona's immigration statute (SB1070). Whoa! How about that for bigoted gall, Senator Reid?

    Mexico's Foreign Ministry declared that SB1070 "violates inalienable human rights, because the law requires verification of identification documents in connection with some other process, such as a traffic violation; and further permits Arizonians to file lawsuits against local authorities for not enforcing immigration laws! Why the nerve of us gringos! The greater hypocrisy came when Democrats applauded Mexican President Felipe Calderon's criticisms of the Arizona law, in his pompous speech before the U.S. Congress. Since President Calderon believes that Mexico's immigration laws are superior to those of the United States, then we should adopt Mexico's legislation on immigration...

    Immigrants must be:

    * 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

    Immigration authorities keep a record of each foreign visitor--Oh my God! They are Profiling! ..

    * Foreign visitors must 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 shall be sent to prison.

    And from Articles of Mexico's Ley General de Poblaci--n (General Law on Population):

    * 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)

    * 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)

    * The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest." (Article 38)

    * 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 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)

    Failure to obey the rules would result in the following sanctions:

    * 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 without a permit -- can also be imprisoned.

    For illegal immigrants:

    * "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)

    And for Americans who provide assistance to illegal immigrants:

    * A Mexican citizen 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)

    So, there you have it --- the complete list of the most duplicitous hypocrisy ever to blot the printed page--but we stupid "gringos" are expected; nay commanded, to keep silent and not make waves. Otherwise, we shall be branded "racists," bigots," and other such tripe from the Progressive play book.

    Here is the kicker: A report published by the National Human Rights Commission stated that "in just one six-month period, from September 2008 through February 2009, at least 9,758 migrants were kidnapped and held for ransom in Mexico -- and 91 of these were committed with the direct participation of the Mexican police." Another survey, conducted during one month in 2008, demonstrated that "Mexican authorities were responsible for attacks in 35 of 240 cases." Abuses by Mexican authorities continue, although Mexico has modified its immigration law in recent years, according to the National Human Rights Commission.

    In 2008, Mexico reduced the punishment for violations of its immigration statutes, from a maximum 10 years in prison to a fine of $461. Those suspected of violating immigration laws are taken to detention centers--and then bused back to their own country. Hey, that would be a boom for America's tourist industry! Go Greyhound--and leave the deporting to us! Did you know that Mexico's Law requires six to 12 years in prison--and a maximum fine of $46,000 for anyone who shelters or transports illegal immigrants? In 2008, the Mexican Supreme Court ruled that this law applies only to people who commit such acts for money--Bummer for the slave labor trade.

    A bill passed by the Mexican Senate on Oct. 6, 2009 proposed to eliminate the ID requirement in Article 67, and replace it with language saying "No attention in matters of human rights or the provision of justice shall be denied or restricted on any level (of government) to foreigners who require it, regardless of their migration status." The Mexican House of Representatives approved a similar measure on March 16, but added language that required the government to reserve funding to take care of foreigners during times of disaster.--they must be taking their cues from Pelosi, Reid & Co. The Bill is in limbo in the Mexican Senate's Population and Development Committee. They must all be racists, eh, Felipe?

    -- Posted by Bruce Desautels on Tue, Feb 1, 2011, at 9:44 PM
  • *

    "And for Americans who provide assistance to illegal immigrants:"

    Correction...

    "And for Mexicans who provide assistance to illegal immigrants:"

    -- Posted by Bruce Desautels on Tue, Feb 1, 2011, at 9:50 PM
  • *

    The points that Rep McClintock (R-CA) makes in this speech are absolutely relevant and applicable to the discussion now occurring here in Nebraska. Mr McClintock's words are worth remembering--and repeating, loud and clear--to those misinformed foolish individuals, who would subvert this nation's laws and culture with their disingenuous arguments about "fairness" and "rights" ... None of which they could possible exercise, if not for the very culture they desire to supplant.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ldx8gZDwZWs&feature=player_embedded#

    Excerpt of speech, by Representative McClintok, in his response to Mexican President Calderon's incendiary remarks, as were given in the House Chamber, Washington, D.C., May 20, 2010

    "M. Speaker:

    I rise to take strong exception to the speech of the President of Mexico while in this chamber today.

    The Mexican government has made it very clear for many years that it holds American sovereignty in contempt and President Calderon's behavior as a guest of the Congress confirms and underscores this attitude.

    It is highly inappropriate for the President of Mexico to lecture Americans on American immigration policy, just as it would be for Americans to lecture Mexico on its laws.

    It is obvious that President Calderon does not understand the nature of America or the purpose of our immigration law.

    Unlike Mexico's immigration law -- which is brutally exclusionary -- the purpose of Americas law is not to keep people out. It is to assure that as people come to the United States, they do so with the intention of becoming Americans and of raising their children as Americans.

    Unlike Mexico, our nation embraces immigration and what makes that possible is assimilation. ..."

    -- Posted by Bruce Desautels on Tue, Feb 1, 2011, at 11:36 PM
  • so, we should be more like mexico?

    -- Posted by president obama on Wed, Feb 2, 2011, at 5:10 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: