Here's a conversation that each of you should read, heed and forward to
everyone you
know. It should be the start of a national conversation....May God and
the people
save America.
On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 21:46:26 -0600, "johnny@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <johnny@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
Government Abandons Current "No Match" Rule Harmful to Legal Workers
(11/24/2007)
SAN FRANCISCO - The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) abandoned its
attempt to enforce its proposed "no match" rule that would improperly
use social security records for immigration enforcement. In a late
Friday afternoon court filing the day after Thanksgiving in federal
court in San Francisco, DHS requested that a lawsuit challenging the
rule be put on hold until March 2008. The government plans to publish a
revised rule in December 2007 that it claims will pass legal muster.
>>> http://www.aclu.org/immigrants/workplace/32870prs20071124.html
fbarnes wrote:
Is it possible that the ACLU and DHS are working together to try to
fool us into thinking DHS is attempting to get tough on employers of
illegals? I mean like, "We'll announce a new tough policy and you get
one of your pet judges to strike it down by pretending that it's
unconstitutional."
johnny@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I think you are right. Chertoff overruled the judge that stopped the
border fence for national security reasons. He could have done the same
in this case. 90 days is plenty of time for anyone to straighten out a
mismatched social security number.
fbarnes wrote:
And isn't it strange that in areas where there are few if any illegal
aliens, and in businesses where there are no illegal aliens employed,
not one single American employee or employer had the least concern
about any hardship he or she might suffer from the no match rule.
Stuart Jackson wrote:
Yes, this is EXACTLY what is going on. The gov't doesn't want to
enforce any laws pertaining to illegal immigration, illegal
employment, etc. BUT..... they have to pretend they are "getting
tough on those damn illegals" (in order to calm the pissed off average
American Joe's). Of course it's all just a dog and pony show; it's
all fake. If we had someone like Dwight Eisenhower as President, he
wouldn't take this crap, he'd get the job done by issuing an executive
order and tie it to a national security issue. That way, the ACLU
couldn't touch it.
Mike wrote:
With all the squawking about hardship for small businesses and errors
in the system, let us not forget that Judge Breyer's decision last
October ultimately ensured that rampant document fraud and stealing of
SSNs would continue unabated. This is a charade put on by corrupt,
greedy interests who have managed to thwart the greater public good so
they can continue to profit from their wholesale law-breaking.
These employers know exactly what they are doing. They hire their
workers across the border. Who can you write to about this? When
it's pending legislation like shamnesty, the public can channel their
extreme displeasure to their representative's offices en masse through
phone calls, faxes & e-mail like we did last summer. But this is an
appointed judge who answers to no one and is a law unto himself,
overuling established law and replacing it with his own.
|
