recovering

Joined

• started 48 topics
• posted 853 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by recovering

• 
  11

  A Walk in the Moonlight

  by compound complex in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  a walk in the moonlight will do me good.

  i shall understand inner turmoil in a new light, that proffered by the softly suffused illumination della bella luna.

  the black shadow of the walking dead, cast upon a meandering path by the gracious moon, will be my companion.. treading my way slowly, reverentially, to the frosty view above that patiently awaits me, i stop dead at land's end.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  An what beautiful prose. It is reminiscent of Robert Frost.
• 
  193

  tommy Robinson --update

  by zeb in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  Precedent has been set as far as the constitution applying to non citizens. Law in the United States is codified by constitution and by the legislation branch of government. Courts interpret these laws and set precedent. Our legal system in the U.S. relies on precedent to judge similar cases before them. I have provided precedent setting cases with regards the constitution, and its application to non citizens.

  I don't believe that illegal immigrants should have the same rights or that it's settled law yet (with supreme court ruling on that specific point)

  It really does not matter what you believe .

  In the modern legal system, the term precedent refers to a rule, or principle of law, that has been established by a previous ruling by a court of higher authority, such as an appeals court, or a supreme court. Courts in the U.S. legal system place a high value on making judgements based on consistent rules in similar cases. In such a system, cases based on similar facts have a fair and predictable outcome. To explore this concept, consider the following precedent definition

  https://legaldictionary.net/precedent/
  E
• 
  193

  tommy Robinson --update

  by zeb in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  Exactly humbled. That is the law.
• 
  193

  tommy Robinson --update

  by zeb in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  The constitution and the rights defined under said constitution either apply in whole) or they don't. You can't have some rights but not others. You have them as rights if you are a citizen, you don't if you are not.
  That's simple, right?

  Wrong just so wrong Simon

  The constitution has many rights afforded only to certain groups of.people. Does this mean that the rights of the others is not protected by the rest of the constitution? No. I will give you one.of the simplest examples.

  Who has the right to be elected to the presidency of the United States? The constitution affords that right to the following...

  No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

  Article In U.S. Constitution

  Does the fact that only persons 35 and over, and natural born citizens are excluded from the rest of the rights afforded the people? Of course not.
  BTW the words you used "unalienable rights. " is not found in the constitution. The declaration of independence and the constitution refer to "inalienable rights " . Furthermore the concept of unalienable rights does not apply to all the rights granted in the constitution. Please read the following to understand the topic better.

  https://legaldictionary.net/inalienable-rights/
  
• 
  510

  What Music have you Been Listening to this Last Year ? Post You tubes if you Like !

  by flipper in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wktxjuyiat4.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=p4c9Iyu4feg
  
• 
  193

  tommy Robinson --update

  by zeb in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  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.
• 
  193

  tommy Robinson --update

  by zeb in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  That should say moderated debates
• 
  193

  tommy Robinson --update

  by zeb in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  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.
• 
  193

  tommy Robinson --update

  by zeb in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  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.
• 
  193

  tommy Robinson --update

  by zeb in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  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