Apparently Barack Obama is not content to make a federal case out of his immigration feud with Arizona; he just made it an international one.
The presidents first-ever report on U.S. human rights to the UN Human Rights Council contains a rich vein of offensive material. So far, one aspect has not been reported: our petty president used the situation to bash Arizonas immigration law -- and possibly transfer jurisdiction over the law from Arizona to the UN. Throughout the report, which sounds like an Obama campaign speech, the president discusses "the original flaw" of the U.S. Constitution, Americas tolerance for slavery, and his version of our long and despicable history of discriminating against and oppressing minorities, women, homosexuals, and the handicapped. After each complaint, he addresses how he is delivering us from ourselves, patting himself on the back for such initiatives as ending "torture," promoting Affirmative Action, and passing health care legislation.
In his section on "Values and Immigration," he praised the Department of Homeland Securitys efforts to provide better medical care for detainees and increase "Alternatives To Detention" (e.g., letting them go). Then he turned to the one state that has had the temerity to stand in his way of fundamentally transforming the American electorate:
A recent Arizona law, S.B. 1070, has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world. The issue is being addressed in a court action that argues that the federal government has the authority to set and enforce immigration law. That action is ongoing; parts of the law are currently enjoined.
#1
Please read this comment to be an obscene, profane, and vulgar rendition of our petty president's character, anscestry, stupidity, and staff. Any proper response should be banned.
#4
Seriously, does he WANT the states to start walking away? Bambie is just stoking the fires of succession with this drivel, and I can't say the states wouldn't be right in doing so either.
So much is riding on 2010 and the actions of the newly elected congressmen after that.
#5
and possibly transfer jurisdiction over the law from Arizona to the UN.
Can he cede authority from the U.S. to the UN? He has an oath to our Constitution not the UN charter. Would this not be grounds for impeachment proceedings?
#7
Sink trap this if you will. I swear on my life I will shoot every blue helmet in Arizona until my life is gone. UN human right violations will require UN troops to observe and be on site. He has to be kidding!
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
08/26/2010 17:13 Comments ||
Top||
#8
It will start with a few uniformed "International Observers" from Africa of course, then graduate to support personnel, something akin to the Mexican army units that assisted with Kartrina a few years back. There is a strategy in play here, believe me.
As the economy worsens, food stamps run out, and the cities turn into firey zones of anarchy, the UN can assist "Human Rights violations" there as well. We can't have predominately caucausion US Army or USMC personnel firing on inner-city dwellers we did during the riots of the late 1960's and 70's. That would be racist.
#9
C'mon, guys, the UN can't get enough blue helmets in Darfur, Lebanon, Somalia, Kashmir, Rwanda and Congo as it is. No way they're getting blue helmets into southern Arizona -- it's hotter there, and the locals are better shots ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/26/2010 18:04 Comments ||
Top||
#10
No way they're getting blue helmets into southern Arizona
#13
The UN Human Rights Council which includes Bahrain, Bangladesh, China, Cuba, France, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, and Saudi Arabia is going to rule on a Arizona law. Now isn't that special.
#14
Wait, I don't understand something. If I read this correcctly, the is the first time ever that the U.S. has reported to the UN Human Rights Council?
So obviously no other President has ever done this, and obviously no one asked us to do it. SO we VOLUNTEERED tp place ourselves under apparent UN jurisdiction? Tell me I'm missing something?
#18
I dont understand Bad, but my home town is as near a war zone as it gets. Across the street, literally, is Pinal County. We are number two in kidnappings, second to Mexico City. We are building a wall on our border that looks like the Fulda gap fence line. We have soldiers on our border. Swat team are nailing weapons caches with high power weapons. The National parks have warnings that they are not safe and we should not enter. The desert is a waste basket of litter from the trafficking and they are finding bodies there daily. Our president is playing left/right politics while the drug cartels are gaining strength in my city. SOCOM has reported that the southern border is the number one threat to the United States? And that POS president is talking UN? Just what we fucking need is some UN rep from some POS nation observing how we protect our citizens. So other than that what is it I'm missing? Pulling a triger is the very last thing I would ever do, or want to do. But I felt safer in Zamboanga or Bagram than I do when I try to take my two sons 20 miles away to go dirt bike riding. It is out of control and unless you here living through it you have no idea.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
08/26/2010 22:53 Comments ||
Top||
Oregon's federal prosecutors are cracking down on gold miners who reside on government-managed lands without approval.
U.S. Attorney Dwight C. Holton announced today the convictions of five people for unlawful occupancy on property managed by the U.S. Forest Service.
The latest of the convictions came today, when U.S. District Judge Michael W. Mosman sentenced Michael Backlund to one year of bench probation and ordered him to pay a fine of $700.
Map of federal lands. The gold *panning* is an excuse. The feds do not want the common man putting "footy prints" all over "their" land. The best of it is reserved for federally authorized purposes and persons only. Otherwise, the hoi polloi must pay use fees for what was once free.
#1
There are proper ways to file mining claims. Some of these folks try to pass off a small commercial operation off as recreational panning. Gets especially bad if they in effect claim a certain area and discourage others from working it.
If they had outbuildings and equipment that is a commercial operation on public lands and needs to be dealt with as such.
#2
No. This is they sort of BS the BLM is pulling because it's getting more and more Green aggressive as its urban masters dictate. One of my neighbors here in the Black Rock Desert has been mining the same opal claim for 30 years. In the last year, the BLM has suddenly come up with all sorts of reasons why he should be thrown off the land he's lived on almost since he got back from Nam.
Why, do you ask? Because the BLM is making way for more "Wilderness Areas." All part of the undeclared class war urban Americans are waging on rural Americans. If once can even consider city-dwellers to be genuinely American.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
