Re: ACLU & Client, MxGov, To Sue Ice For Being Anti-Semetic

On May 14, 1:22 pm, "Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Crans...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> Don Gabacho wrote:
> > It appears the, now, Mexican Civil Liberties Union is wrong.
>
> Lie.  There is no Mexican Civil Liberties Union.

There is now. It was the ACLU.

> Lie.  The Mexican government is not a client of the ACLU.

The ACLU, now Mexican Civil Liberties Union, signed a "contract" with
the Mexican Government to co-litigate and even prosecute Americans,
and the American government itself, in U.S. Courts and even the
International Court in cases involving so-called "immigrants" which
includes Mexico's nationals, legal and illegal, in the jurisdiction of
the U.S.A. not Mexico.

Such is the equivalent of litigating and even prosecuting, as front
men, cases on behalf of the Mexican Government.

The National so-called Commission on Human Rights of the Mexican
Government has been re****ted by El Universal of Mexico City to have
issued an official communique (meaning a communique vetted by the
Mexican government) describing the accord even to, together, seek
"judgments (prosecute) against the U.S. Border Patrol" in cases
involving so-called "immigrants" (including Mexico's nationals) which
the Mexican Government deems itself representative.

The U.S. version of the re****t, despite glaring differences in what
the Mexican Government will communicate to Mexicans in Mexico and
Americans in the U.S.A., collaborates the accord.

Moreover, since the re****ts there has been no re****ts of the ACLU
renouncing the re****ts.

That the ACLU has, or thinks it has, enabled the Mexican Government
to, in this manner, achieve what the Mexican Government could not
openly do in the U.S. judicial system prior is the same as having
"contracted" the Mexican Government as a client representative of so-
called "immigrants," legally or otherwise, in U.S. jurisdiction.

In that the arrangement both cir***vents, or so they wish, the very
sovereignty of the U.S.A., which certainly includes its courts., is un-
Constitutional and even worse.

In that the ACLU even considered to "contract" much less "contract"
the very same Mexican Government Commission that, with the Mexican
Government's own money recently attempted to fund and publish 20,000
maps to distribute among illegals crossing the border is worse than
even having just violated the U.S. Constitution.

Particularly with that same government's history with its so-called
'Mexican Migrant Guides' and even mandate for instruction of its
nationals their own "pirated" version of "Follow Me to America."

For the ACLU to ignore the very transgression of the Mexican
Government (even 'cor****ative' as it is) in its disingenuous and
corrupt labeling of "autonomous" to its Commission's mission statement
makes the ACLU just as corrupt and disingenous.

The National so-called Commission on Human Rights of the Mexican
Government is, by U.S. law, NOT "independent" of the Government which,
by Executive decree, founded it still appoints it and still funds it.

The ACLU proclaims (even alone) to uphold even U.S. law in U.S.
courts.

So? Besides yourself and Herr Kimmler: Who is the "liar"?