Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Lying Liberals, More Of A Continuing Series

Recently the NYT and a court interpretor combined to attack the limited immigration enforcement occuring recently, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/opinion/13sun2.html?_r=1&oref=slogin and http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/07/14/opinion/14ed-camayd.pdf. First, both whine that the laws against illegal immigration and misuse of another persons Social Security Number and ignore what happens to the real holder of the number, such has impact on credit and income not reported to the IRS, but both claim that immigration enforcement is increasing. While that is true compared to the collapse in immigration enforcement that occured after the start of the Bush Administration in 2001, but compared to the Clinton Administration, current arrests of illegals at work-sites has decreased.



But back to the main topic, which is the lies the NYT and Erik Camayd-Freixas, a professor at Florida Atlantic University. Both attack the Immigration and Customs Enforcement raid on the Agriprocessors Inc meatpacking plant at Postville, IA. Aside from the fact that it was the largest raid in ICE history, which, of course, has only been around since 2003, the NYT and Camayd gets everything wrong in his meandering complaint.

Like typical Bolsheviks, their first complaint is that those arrested were "Native Americans", as if that mattered. Apparently arrests for criminal violations should be based on a persons race or nationality. Now, of course, none of those arrested were "Native Americans", they were aliens. Now Camayd whines futher that their Guatamalan and Mexican nationality was imposed on them. Now, what does that mean? What it means is that Camayd hates white people and the nation-state. He believes in the neo-Marxist theory of the Noble Savage. Apparently societies were better when the native Mayans sacrificed humans and they Mayan nobility used forced labor to build useless pyramids. Apparently Bolsheviks have given up on the class struggle and gone over to the race struggle. As Gomer Pyle says, Surrrrrpriseee, Surrrrprrrrissssssse.

While Camayd goes on and on about how wonderful and objective interpretors are, though a quick scan of his university department faculty members, it appears Camayd is one of those Spanish language supremasists. Interesting for a race Marxist, since Spanish is the language of the conquistadors who oppressed the poor Mayans and other "Native Americans" who, of course, were barbaric practitioners of human sacrifice. I always thought that problem was solved when the Romans destroyed Carthage, but the modern liberal has reverted to the worship of those who practice human sacrifice. Note also that liberals are the primary defenders of Al-Queda and other modern practitioners of human sacrifice. Funny that the liberals who taught me in high school used the old movie short, The Lottery, to attack conservatives as small town, small minded human sacrificers, but it turns out that the modern liberal is the new Montezuma, braying for blood of whites and Christians.

But, I digress again. Back to the good professor and his lies. This part again shows that give a liberal a doctorate in anything, be it Spanish or Yoga, or whatever, he becomes a lawyer, even without any training in the law.

First, he claims that 18 USC 1028A Aggravated Identity Theft, requires that a person who steals and uses the identity of another, including an SSN, must know the victim. Huh? So if someone steals my identity or SSN, for it to be a crime he or she must know me? Nothing like that in the US Code. He then goes on to claim that the same law requires an illegal act by the person using the identity. That is true, but he then claims that working in the U.S. by an alien without authorization is not illegal. WTF? I guess this wannabe lawyer doesn't know that it is illegal for an alien to work in the U.S. without authorization. Guess Camayd never perused Title 8 of the US Code during his interpreting training. It is dry reading, but clear that aliens need authorization to work in the U.S.

Camayd then goes on to whine about the plea deals that were offered to those arrested for criminal offenses. Instead of being tried for multiple offenses, including 18 USC 1028A Aggravated Identity Theft, the criminals pled guilty to lesser offenses, including Title 42 U.S.C. 408(a)(7)(B) False Representation of a Social Security Number and received a five month sentence. Camayd then goes to complain that they could not work and provide for their families. He claims that the families are all overseas, but then goes on to complain about all the children and wives who fled to the local Catholic Church to seek refuge. He also complains that all the arrestees just wanted to be deported and did not want to spend any more time in custody. Then he says that they would all be victims of political violence in Guatamala. Problem is that the political violence ended in the 90s with the election a liberal government and prosecution of military leaders who led the violence in the 80s. But, of course, in next sentences he claims that the poor illegals just came to work because of poverty in Mexico and Guatamala.

Then he misrepresents federal sentencing guidelines, claiming that Chapter 11(c)(1)(C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedurerequires that a judge impose the sentence agreed upon by the attorney for the defendant and the government in their plea agreement. Not so. Nothing in the above requires a judge to impose any sentence in the guidelines. The judge could have given either harsher or lighter sentences.

Finally, he claims that ICE is "infiltrating" the judicial branch because the Department of Homeland Security hires and assigns attorneys to work as Special Assistant United States Attorneys in United States Attorney's Offices throughout the U.S. Apparently Camayd never studied American government when he was getting his degree at Harvard, because United States Attorney's Offices are part of the Department of Justice, part of the Executive branch of government, not the Judicial branch. Ever heard of the three branches of government professor?

No comments: