quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Has anyone ever heard of the Iriqois confederation?
Just askin.

quote:

You are the one who is running your mouth about how there were no farmers or horses here before the spaniards showed up.
You are the one who is saying that the native americans were illiterate and illnumerate. You seem long on opinion and pretty short on facts.

quote:

Has anyone ever heard of the Iriqois confederation?

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Savages do not form Confederations.....asshole!

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

You are the one who is running your mouth about how there were no farmers or horses here before the spaniards showed up.
You are the one who is saying that the native americans were illiterate and illnumerate. You seem long on opinion and pretty short on facts.

this is too fat a softball too ignore.

i am not creative enough to make up the word "illnumerate"; nor did I make reference to AI population before colonization. However:

History central says 15-20 million for North America.
Wiki says a more reasonable 13 million.
There are scholarly estimates as low as 900,000, and that seems more reasonable to me.

You were asked to provide proof of no horses and no farmers and you give us your estimate of population...hmmmm

Stone age is tough. No medicine is tougher.

No cite ... just more of your ignorance?

Horses:
The Carnegie Museum of Natural History credits Europeans with bringing horses to North America. Cortez, in 1519, is usually named.

Newspaper rock state park utah. Rock paintings depicting men on horseback from the freemont culture 700 ad-1300 ad.



Illiterate. Well, duh. The Mayans had a written language, but a Cherokee named Sequoyah created the first written language for Indians in North America. Common knowledge.

Farming? A little, but most tribes were nomadic.

You might have been in the shithouse smoking but remember the crops that the locals helped the first illegal aliens with. Corn,beans,tobacco,squash, chocolate...just to name a few.
Then there were the anasazi 1200 bc-1300 ad...seems they built some pretty awesome irrigation projects in the four cornors area.

The aztecs had a calender that is more accurate than the one we use. Also had the wheel...treated it the same way the japanese did.

Btw: no wheel either.

Wrong again as noted above.
Your ignorance is clear...please do keep it up we all enjoy laughing at you.
Do you only open your mouth to change feet?

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

You are the one who is running your mouth about how there were no farmers or horses here before the spaniards showed up.
You are the one who is saying that the native americans were illiterate and illnumerate. You seem long on opinion and pretty short on facts.

this is too fat a softball too ignore.

i am not creative enough to make up the word "illnumerate"; nor did I make reference to AI population before colonization. However:

History central says 15-20 million for North America.
Wiki says a more reasonable 13 million.
There are scholarly estimates as low as 900,000, and that seems more reasonable to me. Stone age is tough. No medicine is tougher.

Horses:
The Carnegie Museum of Natural History credits Europeans with bringing horses to North America. Cortez, in 1519, is usually named.

Illiterate. Well, duh. The Mayans had a written language, but a Cherokee named Sequoyah created the first written language for Indians in North America. Common knowledge.

Farming? A little, but most tribes were nomadic.

Btw: no wheel either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Please note the section related to the employee signature.

"I am aware that federal law provides for imprisonment and/or fines for false statements or use of false documents in connection with the completion of this form".

Beneath that, an employee signature is required.

Pretty self explanatory there.

If the employee signs and does not mark one of the boxes what crime has he/she commited?

quote:

First: entering the country illegally is a federal crime a misdemeanor.
Second: what crime do illegal aliens commit when an employer illegally employes them?

quote:

The employer sanctions have huge benifits for small input of legal resources. The employee sanctions have miniscule benifits for large input of legal resources. So we have prima facia evidence of your xenophobic bigotry.
If you don't like being called on your bigotry then perhaps you might try not being one.

quote:

quote:

You want to try and paint me with that brush because its proves some twisted point you have. Have at it.

I have and will continue to do so.

quote:

quote:

And my contention is that any illegal who is working here is breaking a federal law.

Any illegal in this country is breaking a federal law...a misdemeanor...but then you knew that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Please note the section related to the employee signature.

"I am aware that federal law provides for imprisonment and/or fines for false statements or use of false documents in connection with the completion of this form".

Beneath that, an employee signature is required.

Pretty self explanatory there.

All that is self explanitory is your inability to read simple english.


If the employee signs and does not mark one of the boxes what crime has he/she commited?

The employee is stating with their signature that all information they provide is accurate on that form...

"I am aware that federal law provides for the imprisonment and/or fines for false statements or use of false documents in connetions with the completion of this form."

Its pretty simple to read and understand.

Obviously not simple enough for you to understand. Go back and try again.

quote:

First: entering the country illegally is a federal crime a misdemeanor.
Second: what crime do illegal aliens commit when an employer illegally employes them?

Working under the table or using false identifcation to obtain a job both are federal crimes.

I have shown you how easy it is to work here and not break the laws you cite yet you refuse to even respond to the actual facts.

quote:

The employer sanctions have huge benifits for small input of legal resources. The employee sanctions have miniscule benifits for large input of legal resources. So we have prima facia evidence of your xenophobic bigotry.
If you don't like being called on your bigotry then perhaps you might try not being one.

Your use of the word bigot is becoming... hmmm... redundant Im sorry i cannot be the bleeding heart liberal you seem to be on this topic.

Your bogotry is becoming tedious but I will continue to point it out to you when you litter this board with it. How is calling for the effective and most effecient use of existing laws to end illegal immigration a "bleeding heart liberal position"?

quote:

quote:

You want to try and paint me with that brush because its proves some twisted point you have. Have at it.

I have and will continue to do so.

What you are doing is becoming defensive... as you usually do when you are shown to be wrong about any issue.

When have you ever shown me to be factually wrong on any issue?

quote:

quote:

And my contention is that any illegal who is working here is breaking a federal law.

Any illegal in this country is breaking a federal law...a misdemeanor...but then you knew that.

Now who is the bigot?

Clearly the answer is you

The Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998 criminalized “knowingly transfer[ring] or us[ing], without lawful authority, a means of identification of another person with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, any unlawful activity that constitutes a violation of Federal law, or that constitutes a felony under any applicable State or local law. It also empowered the FTC to "log and acknowledge the receipts of complaints by individuals who certify that they have a reasonable belief" that their personally identifiable information has been “assumed, stolen, or otherwise unlawfully acquired.”

The Act provides an expansive definition of identity theft. It includes the misuse of any identifying information, which could include name, SSN, account number, password, or other information linked to an individual, to commit a violation of federal or state law. The definition thus covers misuse of existing accounts as well as the creation of new accounts.

Prior to passage of the Act, identity theft was not specifically regulated or investigated as a crime. Law enforcement had to relied instead upon a few federal statutes to protect the information necessary to commit identity theft and upon general anti-fraud provisions to punish and redress any injury. Only when identity theft rose dramatically in the 1990s, did Congress decide to address the issue directly.

The Act has two primary purposes: to make the unlawful transfer and use of identity information a federal criminal offense and to establish a right to restitution.[1]

The punishment for offenses involving fraud related to identification documents varies depending on the specific offense and the type of document involved.[9] For example, a fine or imprisonment of up to 15 years may be imposed for using the identification of another person with the intent to commit any unlawful activity under state law, if, as a result of the offense, the person committing the offense obtains anything of value totaling $1,000 or more during any one-year period.[10] Other offenses carry terms of imprisonment up to three years.[11] However, if the offense is committed to facilitate a drug trafficking crime or in connection with a crime of violence, the term of imprisonment could be up to twenty years.[12] Offenses committed to facilitate an action of international terrorism are punishable by terms of imprisonment up to twenty-five years.[13]

http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Identity_Theft_and_Assumption_Deterrence_Act_of_1998

Now, if you have never had your SS number stolen, consider yourself lucky. For many americans who have, its a long fight to correct the misinformation, prove anything that appears on your credit rating that isnt yours is a nightmare.

You act like this isnt a crime. It is. Most states consider it a felony.

http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=12538

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

tommy, are you in love with me? i swear you must be the way you follow me around responding to every post i make.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

i got that down to a science no help needed, thank you.

quote:

I have shown you how easy it is to work here and not break the laws you cite yet you refuse to even respond to the actual facts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Should it surprise anyone, that a deeply conservative state like Virginia would be for a draconian policy, over a more sensible and wise policy? They DID side with The South regarding 'slavery'. And there are a fair number of conservatives, who dont have the guts to admit, they are just bigots (i.e. Tea Party activists). Since 'illegal immigration' isn't about someone breaking laws. Since, quite a number of Americans, speed down highways, clearly over the posted speed limit, on a daily basis. New Yorkers, jay-walk frequently. People over draw on their bank accounts (aka as fraud in the old days). Its not about, the person breaking the law. Nor of the person taking a job, a Virginian wouldnt take to begin with. Its not about the illegal immigrant NOT paying taxes (since they too pay the taxes for cigaretts, gas, and tolls like everyone else). No, its none of that. Its being racist, plain and simple.

Here is the problem I see with the conservative thought regarding law(s) to 'fight' illegal immigrants in the USA. That they consider a person guilty, until proven innocent. And not in a court of law, but at the hang man's noose in a 'mob justice' room/space. Last I checked, a person is considered INNOCENT, until proven GUILTY. The prosecution has to make a better arguement. They have to show, EVIDENCE, above 'a reasonable doubt'. Conservatives, seem all to happy to ignore whole sections of the US Constitution and the reasons for our goverment to exist as intended, just for a petty arguement.

If a VA officer pulled me over. They could demand I prove I'm a US citizen. All I have to say is either:

A) I live in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in the town of ________. Just as it says on my driver's license, and verified through the system in MA. I'm in the US legally.

B) I plead the 5th. Which is equally valid, under the Consitution.

Now, it is up to the officer, to make an arguement and arrest me, for not being in the country legally. I'll be fair, and warn the officer, that such action is not good for his police department, given that I'm a citizen of the country. If the officer is STILL, a retarded moron, and arrests me. Once I see my F-ing lawyer (granted also under the Constitution), I sue that police station for $12 million dollars. Sure, I'll drop that number down to a cool, $2 million, if: They fire the police officer, his supervisor, and the captain/commander for not understand common sense in law. How fast do you think a town will do that, to settle out of court? Before, looking like fools to the rest of the state and nation in court? Before you can snap your fingers.

If conservatives are so comfortable with the goverment, violating the 4th Amendment to other Americans, or those, found under the goverment's control; why do they bitch, when it happens to them? Since to prove one isn't in the national legally, one, would need evidence beyond "oh, he sounds Mexican" or "his car looks like its from Mexico".