https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk8b_xqi_nm.
this is self explanatory.
please if you are in a commonwealth country write /phone /fax your local member to support tr release from his current place of imprisonment.. you may not receive any reply but do so anyway.
I have never back tracked . Show me.where I have.
Simon I have shown which portions of the constitution apply to non citizens. The SCOTUS has ruled that the only constitutional rights that are expressly prohibited from non citizens is the right to vote and the right to hold.a governmental office/job .I
You can not defend your argument with case law ,hence your argument has no merit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk8b_xqi_nm.
this is self explanatory.
please if you are in a commonwealth country write /phone /fax your local member to support tr release from his current place of imprisonment.. you may not receive any reply but do so anyway.
That should say moderated debates
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk8b_xqi_nm.
this is self explanatory.
please if you are in a commonwealth country write /phone /fax your local member to support tr release from his current place of imprisonment.. you may not receive any reply but do so anyway.
Tell you what Simon there is a site that.allows for moderates debate . It is ranked.and the debate is.judged by the members of the site. if you are interested we could debate in that forum. Let me know if you are interested.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk8b_xqi_nm.
this is self explanatory.
please if you are in a commonwealth country write /phone /fax your local member to support tr release from his current place of imprisonment.. you may not receive any reply but do so anyway.
Lol I keep.presenting legal opinions and court citations . It is you who can not back up your claims with any proof. You have not showed that constitution does not apply to non citizens. All you have done is claimed that it did not. A claim is not proof.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk8b_xqi_nm.
this is self explanatory.
please if you are in a commonwealth country write /phone /fax your local member to support tr release from his current place of imprisonment.. you may not receive any reply but do so anyway.
Simon you just won't accept facts. Please give a court citation supporting your contention. You can not.
Btw The constitution is what ever the U.S. courts interpret it to be.
Here is a quote.from the faculty of one of preeminent law.schools in the U.S.
THOMAS JEFFERSON LAW REVIEW 1. ALIENS, CITIZENS, AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS [Vol. 25:367
The Constitution does distinguish in some respects between the rights of citizens and noncitizens: the right not to be discrimi-natorily denied the vote and the right to run for federal elective office are expressly restricted to citizens.12 All other rights, how-ever, are written without such a limitation. The Fifth and Four-teenth Amendment due process and equal protection guarantees extend to all "persons." The rights attaching to criminal trials, including the right to a public trial, a trial by jury, the assistance of a lawyer, and the right to confront adverse witnesses, all apply to "the accused." And both the First Amendment's protections of political and religious freedoms and the Fourth Amendment's protection of privacy and liberty apply to "the people." The fact that the Framers chose to limit to citizens only the rights to vote and to run for federal office is one indication that they did not intend other constitutional rights to be so limited. Accordingly, the Supreme Court has squarely stated that neither the First Amendment nor the Fifth Amendment "acknowledges any distinction between citizens and resident aliens."13 For more than a century, the Court has recognized that the Equal Protec-tion Clause is "universal in [its] application, to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to differences of ... nationality."14 The Court has repeatedly stated that "the Due Process Clause applies to all 'persons' within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent."15 When noncitizens, no matter what their status, are tried for crimes, they are entitled to all of the rights that attach to the criminal process, without any distinction based on their nationality.16 There are strong normative reasons for the uniform exten-sion of these fundamental rights. As James Madison himself ar-gued, those subject to the obligations of our legal system ought to be entitled to its protections: [I]t does not follow, because aliens are not parties to the Con-stitution, as citizens are parties to it, that whilst they actually conform to it, they have no right to its protection. Aliens are not more parties to the laws, than they are parties to the Con-stitution; yet it will not be disputed, that as they owe, on one hand, a temporary obedience, they are entitled, in return, to their protection and advantageP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk8b_xqi_nm.
this is self explanatory.
please if you are in a commonwealth country write /phone /fax your local member to support tr release from his current place of imprisonment.. you may not receive any reply but do so anyway.
Simon you know full well that the constitution does not give non citizens the right to vote. I have never claimed it did. However I did point out that it does afford many rights to non citizens. You may not like it , but that is U.S. Law.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk8b_xqi_nm.
this is self explanatory.
please if you are in a commonwealth country write /phone /fax your local member to support tr release from his current place of imprisonment.. you may not receive any reply but do so anyway.
You can say what you want, no U.S. court has ruled that this is indeed the interpretation of the constitution is as you say. The courts have indeed applied the constitution to noncitizens. Here are some court rulings to consider
Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 413 U.S. 266 (1973). See also Bridges v. Wixon, 326 U.S. 135, 161 (1945) (Murphy. J., concurring) (arguing that noncitizens are protected by the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments); Wong Wing v. United States, 163 U.S. 228 (1896) (holding that noncitizens charged with crimes are protected by the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments); Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U.S. 698, 724 (1893) (observing that foreign nationals are entitled to all "the safeguards of the Constitution, and to the protection of the laws, in regard to their rights of person and of property, and to their civil and criminal responsibil-ity"); Nishimura Ekiu v. United States, 142 U.S. 651,660 (1892) (noting that foreign nationals incarcerated here have a constitutional right to invoke habeas corpus). Chief Justice Rehnquist suggested some limitation on the rights of some foreign na-tionals in the United States in his plurality opinion in United States v. Verdugo-Ur-quidez, 494 U.S. 259, 271 (1990), in which he suggested that a Mexican citizen who had been involuntarily brought into this country for criminal prosecution was not part of "the people" eligible to invoke the Fourth Amendment. However, he was unable to gamer a majority for that view, and Justice Kennedy, whose vote was necessary to the majority in that case, expressly rejected Rehnquist's suggestion that the Fourth Amendment did not extend to all persons present in the United States. !d. at 276-77 (Kennedy, J., concurring). Justice Kennedy rested instead on the fact that the search took place beyond our borders, a factor also relied upon by Chief Justice Rehnquist. [d. at 278.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk8b_xqi_nm.
this is self explanatory.
please if you are in a commonwealth country write /phone /fax your local member to support tr release from his current place of imprisonment.. you may not receive any reply but do so anyway.
Being a Muslim of course should not be an instant pass. Never said that. I would.object to an Isis member being allowed to immigrate. Not because of their religion ,but because of their political belief in a theocracy and their use of terrorism to achieve it. However ones religion should never be a determinant in immigration policy according to the U.S. Constitution. If you can find a different opinion of a U.S. court .please let me know.
lol here we go with the names again. The last resort for those that can not defend their position logically. I am a big boy the name calling really does.not.affect.me.however.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk8b_xqi_nm.
this is self explanatory.
please if you are in a commonwealth country write /phone /fax your local member to support tr release from his current place of imprisonment.. you may not receive any reply but do so anyway.
Who's saying that should happen?
Cofty said that quote. Others have claimed that you Simon do not claim , that all Muslims are evil.
Your above comment seems that you are again making that claim.
Islam the.religion is not united in all it's beliefs. There are some factions who are coolant and are oppressive just like their are christian and jewish sects who have a penchant for forcing their beliefs on others.
Islam, like Christianity, is not a homogenous religion. It is divided into many traditions, the main ones being Sunni, Shi'ite, and Sufi.
A very small, radical, hate-filled, extremist, fundamentalist, terrorist wing does exist. Many of its followers follow a fundamentalist version of Islam called Wahhabi. However, Islam also has a much larger peaceful, moderate wing. Unfortunately, the former seem to capture all the media's attention, while the latter is rarely heard from or even discussed by non-Muslims.
It obvious that no one individual speaks for all Muslims. Islam has no single central human authority, comparable to the pope and Vatican for the Roman Catholic Church, or to various General Assemblies and the Lambeth Conferences for the Anglican Communion. Rather, it is divided into many traditions and schools.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk8b_xqi_nm.
this is self explanatory.
please if you are in a commonwealth country write /phone /fax your local member to support tr release from his current place of imprisonment.. you may not receive any reply but do so anyway.
Simon I have backed.up my argument with facts to which you counter.with emotional arguments. How have I mischaracterized what you said? Are the quotes I have attributed to you not yours? Are you now telling me that you know support the first amendment of the U.S.Constitution? Are you telling me that now you support the immigration of Muslims ? Or.are.You going to reiterate your previous objection to their immigration?
The funny thing is I think all religion is a croc . The only reason for my stance is purely on constitutional grounds. My ethnocentric mind thinks that the U.S. Constitution is one of the best frameworks for government. do you know of a better system?
