It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Tardacus
one would think the politicians learned their lesson from the cuban boatlift,but obviously not.
if you aren`t familiar with the cuban boatlift that was when cuba emptied it`s prisons and asylums and put all those people on boats headed for the U.S. The U.S. welcomed them with open arms because they thought they were refugees escaping from mean ole cuba.
I have no doubts that mexico is doing the same thing, taking people out of their overcrowded prisons and asylums,driving them to the border and setting them free.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MysticPearl
There's something wrong with the story. If someone has been deported and returns, it is a felony. That means it is a criminal conviction.
Bonifacio Oseguera-Gonzalez, 29, has no significant prior criminal convictions, but ICE asked Oregon authorities to turn him over to them if he's released from custody in the current case, the agency said in a statement to The Associated Press on Friday.
originally posted by: Phage
Here is the statement from ICE:
“After conducting a comprehensive review of Mr. Oseguera’s immigration and criminal history, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has designated this as a federal interest case. To that end, the agency filed a notice of action with the Marion County Jail asking to be alerted if or when Mr. Oseguera is slated for release so the agency can take custody ot pursue further administrative enforcement action. Relevant databases indicate Mr. Oseguera has no significant prior criminal convictions. However, he has been repatriated to Mexico six times since 2003, most recently in 2013”
www.kxl.com...
So yes, Fox is wrong (they lied, surprise) in saying he was deported six times. Repatriation is not the same thing as deportation. Deportation means that a person has gone through the court system and returning after having done so is a felony. A person who has been deported and caught is going to prison.
Repatriation means someone has crossed the border illegally, and is sent back. No court processes. No crime.
Does the system need fixing? You bet.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: 727Sky
That is the old world we grew up in Phage.... in this new world they are given housing, welfare, medical and a voter registration card that says welcome back.
False.
Many illegal immigrants live in public housing
Posted 1/1/2009 10:31 AM
The Associated Press
Untold thousands of illegal immigrants live in public housing at a time when hundreds of thousands of citizens and legal residents are stuck waiting years for a spot.
Illegal immigrants make up a tiny portion of the 7.1 million people in federal housing, according to government statistics. But authorities may be unaware of thousands more, and critics say no illegal immigrant should get housing benefits.
The issue made headlines in November with news that Zeituni Onyango, an aunt of President-elect Barack Obama, was living in Boston public housing while in the country illegally.
The federal government, which funds the lion's share of the nation's public housing, requires only that illegal immigrants share a home with at least one family member who is in the country legally and pay their share of the rent.
While there are no hard numbers on illegal immigrants in public housing, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development reports that 29,570 people — 0.4% of all those in federally funded housing — are "ineligible noncitizens." Some may be on temporary visas, such as highly educated workers or college students, but many are believed to be illegal immigrants.
usatoday30.usatoday.com...
In a stunning ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down an Arizona law requiring voters to present citizenship proof to register in state and federal elections.
The law clears the way to illegal alien undocumented immigrants voting in national elections without substantive means of preventing it for many states. The highest court in the land ruled 7-2 that federal law “precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,” as Justice Scalia wrote. Professor Tom Caso of the Chapman University School of Law in California told the Associated Press that the decision “opened the door” to noncitizen voting.
“The court’s decision ignores the clear dictates of the Constitution in favor of bureaucratic red tape,” Caso said. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the court’s ruling.
The Constitution “authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied,” Thomas wrote in his dissent.
www.truthandaction.org...