Viva Texas! Viva Texas!

A fair trial? He was guilty, he admitted as much in his last words! There was conclusive DNA evidence! People can argue over the death penalty all they want but from a legal standing nothing that happened to this animal was wrong.

So filthy Mexicans can come to the US, lie and hide their citizenship their entire lives while stealing jobs and committing crimes until it's convenient for them to be Mexican again? And actually, this animal didn't even tell authorities he was Mexican! The UN needs to shut their mouths or move their offices off our land and stop taking our money that funds most of their existence!

Everyone's a moralist from a distance but I'd love to hear Navi Pillay's thoughts if that were his 16 year old daughter! And the same goes for the clown in the White House! Game, Set, Match!

Since win does the International community determine OUR laws and how to implement them? Go to he.l UN ! Get a life UN !

Time for the U.N. to be gone from America. We need to give them 6 months to get the He ll out of Dodge and then we can take over the building for something far more worthy. I think we should withdraw from the U.N. asap, we provide a major portion of the money they spend and we ARE the Peace Keeping Force for the U.N. as well.

Why 6 months? I say use the building as a holding facility for so called ambassadors or their staffs who have committed felonies on our soil.

This wasn't a case of the UN telling us how to implement our laws. This was a case where the state of Texas was in clear violation of a treaty the US signed.

I'm hardly a fan of the UN, and strongly support the death penalty, but I still think the US should maintain its word. Someday, the tables will turn, and it will be a US citizen not getting the consular representation they should receive.

A fair trial?

The right to counsel.

Is this the same UN that has Iran on it's Human Rights Council?

Realistically though, it is not the UN that is doing us any damage, it is the President. He could easily have articulated support for the US rule of law. But, that's not what he's about. It's all about how evil the US is. So, in truth, it is the Prez that is damaging US reputation abroad.

Are you kidding me? ... "a breach of international law"??? How about the breach of humanity that scumbag showed his victim!?

The UN is a worthless organization that has far exceeded it's usefulness in today's society. They should be made to pack up and move out of this country. Where was their enforcement of "international law" when thousands of Rwandans were machetted to death right before the UN Peacekeeping Forces eyes? Not to mention all the other atrocities they have simply turned a blind eye towards? Oh, they do make a lovely showing, don't they? Those sharp looking uniforms, colorful helmets, clean unused sidearms, graphically enhanced vehicles ablaze with the world-reknowned stenciled "UN" logo. They are nothing more than window dressing for mainstream media to focus their cameras on.

God bless Texas for having the nerve to show the rest of society that you either obey the laws of the land you're in, or suffer the consequences of your own actions! Adios Humberto! The world was a nicer place before your kind showed up and it is better off with one less!

So when they want a free US education and amnesty, it's "they are were children who were forced by their parents to the U.S., the only country they've ever known. They should be granted instant citizenship". But when they murder an innocent girl, then it's "they are Mexican citizens" let them just go back to Mexico???" Which is it, liberals?!!

Our country is ignoring other countries just as we did when we tortured prisoners in spite of our Geneva Convention promises not to do so. The comments above demonstrate a very unwise "the end justifies the means" mentality and gives other countries bases for refusing cooperation with us and breaking their promises to us if it suits their own interests.

In the interest of killing this guy as soon as possible, rather than dealing honorably with another country, so many of you think it is reasonable for us to break promises to, and disrespect, another country. I disagree with you.

he had his right to counsel...remember his free lawyers for the last 17 years

greaser?????? Billybigot

while I find your use of the derogatory word greaser offensive I also agree with your concern about what about the rights of his victim. He brutally stole from her all her rights including the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I am not one who is always putting our government down, Billiboy. I love my country and its government; it is self- and corporate-serving politicians that I have a problem with.

I use to live in Texas and moved before a year was up. Never saw so many crazy people in one place in my life! You can have it! Form your own country of Texas and stop mooching off the US Treasury - OUR tax dollars!

@ Brian - The treaty was signed but not ratified so it wasn't in force. It may never be ratified. If just signing it makes us enforce it then what's the point of ratification?

This is the UN we are talking about- remember, the pillar of all that is good in the world? That is, the same UN that allows countries with brutal dictators on human rights committees, that lets those in clear defiance of UN weapon inspectors and committees get prestigious seats on other committees, and demands others to fall in line with their wishes. These are the same fools that come to the US and completely disrupt NYC with "diplomatic immunity(impunity)" and spend $100s of millions on lavish parties around the world to discuss poverty (remember how they had a massive famine convention(party) at a posh hotel in Africa a few years ago)? These are the same folks whom feel "entitled" tocall US elections questionable, while certifying others where the pre-election polls say candidate #2 will beat the dictator by 40% and the next day's results say that the dictator won by 40%. Yeah, they really care. Face it those in the UN are so happy not to be in their own countries, enjoying all of the goodies that go along with the prestige and money, that they just live it up and have NOTHING they need to show for it.

Is this the group you want controlling your "small arms"? Is this the group that you want determining what rules we must abide by?

I still say that it would be the best $2 billion the US has spent in the last decade to build a new UN headquarters on Iceland and ship out the whole damn group of idiots out of here.

UN: Texas execution broke international law

Get effen real. The man came to America illegally, raped and killed a teen girl and he got what was coming to him.

We really do not need the UN. All they are is a bunch of bloodsucking leeches living off the people like the rest of governments do, and they accomplish nothing.

This wouldn't have been an issue if the PRESIDENT hadn't given this guy a means to appeal his CONVICTION. The President gave him massive press by telling him (and the world) that Texas would violate the Vienna Conventions by executing him. The President knowingly strung up Texas so as to reduce the US independent powers and put us in a bad light before the world. Great leadership again Mr. President! Thanks!

PS- How are those jobs going? No offense sir, but regardless of what your "people" are saying to the press it will be jobs that we hold against you during the 2012 election cycle. Bad policy, bad leadership, bad economy, bad debt, bad job prospects, bad regulations, primo future with Carter as the world's US detractors.

@ Brian, the treaty you speak of is not in place. President Bush (Jr) fought to have the treaty ratified, but the Supreme Court voted against him. Since President Obama has been in office there's been a bill in the Congress for three years now to basically ratify the treaty, but it's gone nowhere. Not to blame him, it isn't being held up by him, just under his watch. It's just that our Congress currently has MUCH bigger problems to deal with.

Beyond the treaty itself, from what I understand this man CHOSE to avoid the Mexican Ambassabor because of his illegal status. It's not really clear if access was denied by our government, or if he excerised his own will NOT to go for the help.

I'm not sure how it really matters. He did the crime in America, TEXAS of all places. Our rules apply to him. I'm not sure there's anything the Mexican gov't. could do; but I am in favor of getting that bill into law. The only change is we make sure foreigners can meet with their Amassabor's Office before we put them through our judicial system. I'd like that same courtesy if abroad.

Why didn't Holder order the local AG to go get a federal stay order ?

Texas did what needs to be done country wide. Execute the scum! Who cares what the UN thinks of does. We should expel them too or tell them to face execution in Texas. The UN is the biggest joke there is. They always come out with their stupid rhetoric about human rights...LOL. Most of the amgassadors sitting on their councils are criminals or from criminal supporting country's. Tell the UN to pound f*cking sand...preferrably Iranian sand.

Bottom line...if you do the crime...then youre gonna do the time (in this case time is an eternity).

Cygnus- I would! +1 for a US leader having the cajonies to apply US laws.

I gather that you don't have a problem with Syria constantly gunning down it's own citizens because they try to protest. I think the UN may have said something to them about that..... Oh well, that's their business- right?

Dirp, maybe it wan't the President's interest to actually stop Texas from executing the guy. Maybe he just wanted to make Texas look bad in front of everyone? Maybe the President had another plan in mind??

When they bring back that young woman he killed then they can b1tch. Until then STFU and kiss my American a$$. We The People should consider letting Texas try all terrorists in our custody since they have the highest execution track record in the nation.

Cygnus, what part of 'never ratified by congress' didn't you get? NEVER RATIFIED!!!The lowlife got what he deserved.

Texas sucks? Hold onto that attitude and keep on staying where you are, Texas is doing just fine w/out you.

As to the UN. The Supreme Court refused his stay, congress never voted in legislation to support the treaty so, if there is any blame, point to congress and the SCOTUS. It is time for the UN to go, this international law biz is dragging down the planet. Sorry but the anti-soverign nation nonsense is dragging down the globe. Look at the EU, think one country should be liable for carrying five other countries? As to the UN's corruption, mis-spent relief funds and general all around ineptitude, no mention of that.

I think every liberal here agrees that this man was guilty and should have been punished. I think more that a few liberals will even agree that he should have been put to death (although life in prison would have been cheaper). The main point is that Texas did not follow the LAW while arresting and prosecuting this scum. All of you righties screaming about justice for the victim, and this man getting what he deserved, we pretty much agree with you on this...but the law must be followed. How would you feel if the law hadn't been followed in 2000 and Al Gore had become President? Or if we bent the law a little to force a single-payer health care system?

Cygnus_X-1

I guess Perry just saw his presidential bid go out the door. Who wants a president that so willfully disregards international law and treaties that his country has signed into. He ought to be brought up on federal charges, and federal dollars should be withheld from Texas for prisons and law enforcement.

I'm tired of the U.S. being made to be subservient to the rest of the world. I think most Americans feel that is exactly what Obama has done.

lib50

Texas sucks.

Aren't you clever.

@lib50

Sounds to me like you support murderers and rapists.

hypocrisy: Go look at the facts rather than knee jerk reactions. When was the crime committed? How many years was he on death row? How many lawyers and appeals were filed? This last ditch effort was political theater, the treaty was never legislated into actuality, blame congress if you need to place blame. Then look at Medellin vs. Texas, 2008 and get some facts. This is a back-door attempt to get legislation to ratify the treaty, Obama is using this for political reasons and you supporting him follow words w/out knowing what all the issue centers on. The Supreme Court refused to hear his appeal, repeat, the Supreme Court of the United States of America refused to hear his appeal.

Id like to see what the UN will do about it, and I hope it results in the USA waking up and
treating the UN the same way it treats Libya. In fact id love the next war to be the "war on the UN". In fact we should get a grass roots movement to have the USA declare war on the UN going. the slogan could be " we will not rest until the UN is as small as the stain on monica lewinskis dress"... hill dog can be our spokes women.

I just want to ask this... What harm or trouble would it had been, from the beginning, to follow international law and get this man a council from his own nation. He would had still been found guilty but in following the law, the USA would not had broken international law and no one would be able to hold this against us.

Jim

I think you mixed up "subservient" with "honoring our promises." The Texas governor chose not to take the honorable action and instead decided to play to the death penalty crowd. But when you do not chose the honorable route you cannot be an honorable person.

Joe,

What the UN Might do is get all the nations to cancel their extradition treaties with the USA. Also the other nations might just stop helping our FBI (Who thinks they can go anywhere they please with-out permission ) deal with criminals overseas and in Canada and elsewhere.

The majority of people commenting here, plainly, did not read any of the discussions on this subject the day before, nor does it seem many bothered to read the original article.

Seventeen years have passed since Humberto Leal was convicted of this murder; in the past ten years, President Bush's attempt to require review of a convicted foreigner's case to determine whether they had access to their consulate was turned down. No Congress, since the Vienna treaty has come through its halls, has approved it. The US Supreme Court (though split on party lines, as usual) weighed in and against this issue.

A mountain is being made out of a molehill, here. All the organizations who think they can gain something by weighing in on a local murder case are doing so for no reason other than scoring political points. President Obama, Gov. Perry, the UN and the Mexican government all stand to gain by making the claims and taking the actions they have concerning Leal's recent execution.

The lot of us have been made complete fools of and are at each other's proverbial throats depsite being blind to the notion that all this pomp and circumstance is just that - little more than bread and circuses.

don97524:

I'd rather HONOR a little girl's death with this man's death.

There is no honor in letting this man go free or delay this execution. How long was he on death row for? Why just now are they making a isue about this.

Just so people know, Texas did not break any INTERNATIONAL LAW! There was a written agreement back in 1964 between Johnson and whoever was big chief in Mexico. It was never ratified by Congress. It's come up since this guy was first brought to the attention of the system. Congress still didn't act.

Let's face it, the guy appealed every which way he could and even the US Supreme Court was unimpressed. That being the case, he received justice. For the international, so-called court, to order the US to review it's cases is laughable. When the UN starts enforcing international law and human rights, then we can begin to talk. As an example, Hamas and the Palestinians can lob thousands of bombs on Israeli citizens, no response from the UN. Israel attacks these bomb throwing locations and the UN condemns them. Sorry, but you guys have no credibility. And the sad thing is we are the largest contributor to the finances of the UN. That's got to stop!

Great now Americans can go to mexico ILLEGALY rape and Murder minors and mexico will just send us back with no charges. I AM SURE OTRAUMA will be right their defending MY RIGHTS. Hooray for mexico and the un for allowing us this PRIVILEGE. Fair is Fair

They sneak across the border and fight to try and get amnesty and become US citizens. Then when they are convicted of a crime and sentenced to death, then they are all of the sudden Mexicans again looking to the Mexican government for help and say they were entitled to consular assistance. They want it both ways, Americans when it suits them and Mexicans when it suits them. You can't have it both ways. This SOB brutally raped and beat a girl to death. He has had numerous legally mandated appeals as required in all death penalty cases. There is no doubt that he is guilty of this crime. I am glad they put this animal to sleep permanently. They also need to round up all the illegals and ship them back where they came from.

So Texas seceded already? Cool.

Sigh, witchrunner:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Consular_Relations

Note that the Bush...sorry, Roberts Supreme Court undid a lot of how it applies to the U.S. (Albeit withdrawing from portions of it started under Rehnquist).

To dirp101, Holder did not order a stay of execution because that would intrude on state rights. This crime was a state matter, not federal. Holder had no authority to order a stay. President Obama knew this, and he even reached out to Texas to ASK them to. The answer was "H*ll no".

If the current administration is concerned, they have a bill sitting in Congress right now to ratify the UN treaty. All they have to do is put some pressure on it.

I'd rather they fix the budget mess first, so we'll have to wait.

JoeNY-- Apply this US Law...

+1 for a US leader having the cajonies to apply US laws

US Constitution, Article 6:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Treaty that was broken was the Vienna Convention, which has been given full effect by the congress long ago.

A ruling by the ICJ found that Garcia's consular rights had been violated. This is a right guaranteed by the constitution of the USA.

The US Supreme Court upheld this finding in 2008. That court also found that the the president could not compel a state to comply with the treaty without an act of congress. That is different than saying that the state is not obligated by that treaty.

As a right granted by an international treaty, denying Garcia access to his consulate at the time of his arrest is as serious a breach as denying him right to not self-incriminate, right to a speedy trial, or any other right granted by the constitution.

According to the Constitution, the treaty demanding Garcia be given access to his consulate at the time of his arrest is the supreme law of the land.

A natural course of law is that we punish actions, not outcomes. If I plan and execute an assassination on some foe while he lay asleep in his bed and it turns out later that the man had died in his sleep hours before I arrived I am still guilty. The state of Texas committed a crime in violating this mans rights even if the end result of the man's trial would surely have been the same.

Medellin vs Texas, 2008. Quit leaving out facts. Also, he never claimed foreign nationality at the time of his arrest, only after conviction. He had been here since he was two. Once he faced the needle he suddenly became Mexican. The liberals want to deny request of citizenship proof when someone is arrested. Then they want said arrestee to have access to consular assistance, question is, which consulate and how will they know?

Magnum Serpentine stated: "I believe since Fuhrer Perry, the Texas Governor, and the tea bag state of Texas committed criminal acts against international law,"

MS and Cygnus, can you please show proof that we ratified that agreement, that would make it binding?

Just some perspective here...this asshat spent 17 years on death row which is one year longer than he allowed his victim to stay here on earth.

Good riddance to bad rubbish, if you ask me...both Umberto and the UN.

Oh, in that case, we're sorry! Please forgive our grievous mistake.

I hope he didn't feel as much pain during lethal injection as the girl did during the rape and murder.

Again, please forgive us.

Local police are not allowed to ask a persons imigration status or have you forgotten the DOJ suing Arizona? Remember the argument about racial profiling etc..,etc..

Now they are saying Texas is in violation because they did not check to see if he was a U.S. citizen and inform him of his rights.

Sounds to me like the only way the U.S. can comply with a persons U.N. Consular rights is to require all police agencies to check the imigration status of every person otherwise how do they know?

Will the Obama administration now require the imigration status be checked any time a person is suspected of not being a U.S. citizen?

You cant have it both ways...

As an illegal and having no rights guaranteed (that's for Legal U.S. Citizens) Leal should have died the day he was sentenced. U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, Leal has been in the U.S. Illegally since he was 2 years old. As a High Commissioner, you should have known the O'Bama and his Democrats failed to accept your resolution. Now maybe the U.N. and Mexico don't consider rape and murder of children a Capital Offense, but in the U.S. we do. If Mexico would keep it's citizens on there side of the Border a legal U.S. Citizen would still be alive and Leal would have in all likely hood been killed in Mexico. The U.N. Human Rights Comm. is a joke, some of its members are the most known Human Rights abusers, yet they are honored by the U.N.. The U.N. is of of the most corrupt organizations in existence today

Let’s wait for the jerks at the UN to go to the Haig and demand arrest warrants for various Texas government officials. Oh wait, the Supreme Court allowed the execution proceed so get some arrest warrants for them too. While they’re at it, since we all know where the buck stops, get an arrest warrant for Obama.

The UN. Where the definition of a no-fly zone is the bombing of a country into rubble.

Very good point David. And if they did check, wouldn't that still be racial profiling? That would be going against what this administration wants.

If you're going to place blame at anyone's feet, it has to be both the murder's attorneys, and his family. They had 17 years to get Mexican consul engaged, and even then it wouldn't have mattered in the end. Justice has been served...and it took way too long.

#1.63, good point.

LJ Rhodes: The Bushes are from New England. George, Sr. is native to Massachusetts and his father, Prescott, served as a Senator for Connecticut.

George, Jr. was born in New Haven, Connecticut in the middle 1940's. Although part of his childhood was spent in Midland and Houston, please bear in mind the 43rd President spent his teenage years at a private academy in Massachusetts and ultimately wound up a Yale graduate - he's no scion of UT or Texas A&M.

The academy in question was the same George, Sr. attended, if I'm not mistaken, and both his father and grandfather were also Yale graduates.

To the best of my my knowledge, it was George, Sr. who first moved his family from the Northeast to Texas for the express purpose of becoming involved in the booming oil business.

These are facts, indisputable and unbiased. Make of them what you will.

This is all irrelevant. The US withdrew from compulsory participation in the International Court of Justice in 1996, after Nicaragua v. United States. Therefore rulings from this court only apply if we choose to allow them.

Regarding my post at 1.49, seems I made a mistake about whether or not the US had ratified the treaty - we have, but have since pulled out of particular parts of in within the last ten years. Clarification ensues, on behalf of Wikipedia:

In March 2005, the United States pulled out of the Optional Protocol to the Convention, which allows the International Court of Justice to have compulsory jurisdiction over disputes arising under the Convention. In June 2006, the United States Supreme Court ruled that foreign nationals who were not notified of their right to consular notification and access after an arrest may not use the treaty violation to suppress evidence obtained in police interrogation or belatedly raise legal challenges after trial (Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon[1]). In March 2008, the Supreme Court further ruled that the decision of the International Court of Justice directing the United States to give "review and reconsideration" to the cases of 51 Mexican convicts on death row was not a binding domestic law and therefore could not be used to overcome state procedural default rules that barred further post-conviction challenges (Medellín v. Texas [2]).

No way did we sign any agreement with the United Nations giving them the power to overturn our laws. They do NOT rule us... and OUR law is clear!

If you do the crime in the United States, you do the time where the crime is committed. And if you murder another person in the United States, you are subject to the laws of that state. Not a foreign power with which they purport to be a citizen.

And, by the way, this just happens to be the law by virtually all the countries participating in the UN. It is very interesting to Google Navi Pillay. She has alienated countries all over the world... Zambia, South Africa, Sri Lanka.. for what they term is middling in affairs that are none of her business.

She is herself, it is reported, from South Africa, but apparently she challenged them anyway in her UN role, not as a citizen of that country. Sounds like power-tripping to me.

It has also been said she is bent on establishing the UN as a world government, although I cannot verify any other claim as to that. However, her attitude towards "human rights" for which she got herself named High Commissioner at the UN, seems, from her record, to be that the Lawless Shall Rule... (cuz they are human, I guess)

ed3891,

There's more to breeding than birth, especially when it comes to how you think and act, what you believe and the decisions you subsequently make. These are influenced far more by your surrounding culture, and there's no doubt that Bush Sr. and Jr. were most strongly influenced by the culture of Texas, especially when they've thought, spoken and acted just as many other Texas politicians and legislators have over the years--including their accents.

Again, Texas fosters a seriously nihilistic culture, and their government behaves accordingly (i.e. recklessly and dangerously).

If an American did that to a girl in any other country, they would suffer whatever the punishment is for that country.

Screw the UN, its a waste of our taxpayer dollars to even give them a dime.

Brent

The Leal case went before the Supreme Court twice!!! They are the Supreme deciders of law in the US, NOT the UN. Both times they sided with the Texas handling of the case. The only thing TEXAS did wrong was giving the scumbag an extra 6 years of life.

Odumbo raised this issue for no other reason than to to throw Texas and the US under the buss. He did this not because he was concerned about breaking a treaty, but to suck up to that particular minority constituency for the sole purpose of getting their vote. Obama is the most despicable president ever, I'd take Jimmy Carter (the next worst president ever) 4X over the current clown.

In regard to the UN, STFU, your pathetic organization is the most anti-American, anti-democratic, anti-freedom, most worthless collection of bureaucrats ever assembled.

Why is it that liberals are always more interested in finding some technicality to get the guilty criminal off than they are in seeing justice done for the innocent victim.

We didn't win at the Alamo, we lost. If ever there was a dysfunctional group of people they are Texans. It would save the taxpayers billions of dollars a year if we just let them secede from our Union and if they refuse, just give them back to Mexico. Lost in the 18th century.

Any of you Lone Star State macho cowboy's make your way south of the boarder to whup it up a bit? Good luck!!

Actually, Texas is one of the few states that's creating jobs in this forsaken economy... In spite of the administration's policies.

We lost the Alamo and several heroes, but we won the war. It's Mexico who needs to accept it...

Steve, your generalization of liberal is ludicrous. Where do you find this to be a liberal problem? You think that everyone on here that don't believe what Texas did are liberal? If so you're off base.

Just look at the Casey Anthony case in Florida. She was found not guilty in an area that is strong Republican by a jury was from an area that votes Republican. But it was liberals that set her free? Dumb.

Ah yes. The beauty of being a *SOVEREIGN NATION*.

Oh... it was never a law with regards to the US... never ratified. I could care less if it is a UN law. Last I heard we were a sovereignty.

"A top United Nations' rights official said the United States was in breach of international law over the execution of a 38-year-old Mexican citizen in Texas."

Why blame the United States...the state of Texas alone did it, and I believe the US did give Texas a hint to be careful.

We lost the Alamo and several heroes, but we won the war. It's Mexico who needs to accept it...

Oh they accepted it. They just knew the place would be an albatross in the future.

Here is a list of the countries that still have the death penalty. Other than Japan, Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea, these are all pretty much 3rd world countries.

Doesn't it make you feel proud?

• Afghanistan
• Antigua and Barbuda
• Bahamas
• Bahrain
• Bangladesh
• Barbados
• Belarus
• Belize
• Botswana
• Burundi
• Cameroon
• Chad
• China (People's Republic)
• Comoros
• Congo (Democratic Republic)
• Cuba
• Dominica
• Egypt
• Equatorial Guinea
• Eritrea
• Ethiopia
• Gabon
• Ghana
• Guatemala
• Guinea
• Guyana
• India
• Indonesia
• Iran
• Iraq
• Jamaica
• Japan
• Jordan
• Korea, North
• Korea, South
• Kuwait

• Laos
• Lebanon
• Lesotho
• Libya
• Malawi
• Malaysia
• Mongolia
• Nigeria
• Oman
• Pakistan
• Palestinian Authority
• Qatar
• St. Kitts and Nevis
• St. Lucia
• St. Vincent and the Grenadines
• Saudi Arabia
• Sierra Leone
• Singapore
• Somalia
• Sudan
• Swaziland
• Syria
• Taiwan
• Tajikistan
• Tanzania
• Thailand
• Trinidad and Tobago
• Uganda
• United Arab Emirates
• United States
• Vietnam
• Yemen
• Zambia
• Zimbabwe

Read more: The Death Penalty Worldwide — Infoplease.com #ixzz1RY8dHaDg

Since win does the International community determine OUR laws and how to implement them? Go to he.l UN ! Get a life UN !

That depends on whether or not the agreement is by formal treaty. If so, it caries the weight of the Constitution of the United States...but then we are talking about Texas...

Since win does the International community determine OUR laws and how to implement them? Go to he.l UN ! Get a life UN !

That depends on whether or not the agreement is by formal treaty. If so, it caries the weight of the Constitution of the United States...but then we are talking about Texas...

Since win does the International community determine OUR laws and how to implement them? Go to he.l UN ! Get a life UN !

That depends on whether or not the agreement is by formal treaty. If so, it caries the weight of the Constitution of the United States...but then we are talking about Texas...

Since win does the International community determine OUR laws and how to implement them? Go to he.l UN ! Get a life UN !

That depends on whether or not the agreement is by formal treaty. If so, it caries the weight of the Constitution of the United States...but then we are talking about Texas...

Since win does the International community determine OUR laws and how to implement them? Go to he.l UN ! Get a life UN !

That depends on whether or not the agreement is by formal treaty. If so, it caries the weight of the Constitution of the United States...but then we are talking about Texas...

Richard - you and I agree.

CRY ME A RIVER. Who cares?

A MURDERER LIVED IN JAIL LONGER THAN HIS VICTIM.

He should have been deported years ago.

WHO CARES?

Don't give a fig!!! He murdered someone, he had his trial, he was convicted, he admitted it, what's the issue???? Such a waste of time and money!

Go Texas!!!!

John Williams, don't try to use fact on these dimwits. They keep blaming the UN but all the UN did was point out that the US may be in violation of an international agreement by executing a foreign prisoner without giving him the right to be represented by his country. All the Obama administration did was warn them that Texas may be in violation if they carried out the execution without giving the criminal the right to be represented by his native country. These people want to play politics an blame the UN and the US for Texas' mistake.

@ cautious optimistic one...not all states have the death penalty in the United States..my state doesn't..so just add the states that do to your list not the whole United States! Think its 34 have it and 16 don't.

Magnum Serpentine

I just want to ask this... What harm or trouble would it had been, from the beginning, to follow international law and get this man a council from his own nation.

That very likely would have happened, except he didn't tell the authorities he was a Mexican national - they believed he was American. And if the authorities had questioned his nationality, many would have claimed racial discrimination or profiling. If this POS really wanted to contact the Mexican consulate for help, he had 17 years to do it, but he chose not to. Only in the end did he claim to be a Mexican national, after he was put on the Green Mile for execution.

Murder while in the commission of a felony, in this case rape and beating of a 16 year old girl (also detention against her will and probably a whole slew of other charges) will get you the death penalty in states that do not do the whole time out thingy. When dealing with heinous barbaric crimes you must send a clear message that savages will be exterminated once proven guilty in the court of law.

So let me get this right...Mexico doesn't give two sh*s about it's people and this guy comes over here for "opportunity"....The left feels sorry for these types of people and say that they should be honorary citizens and get all rights due him because he lived here for so long...

And when he USES his opportunity to kill and rape someone and gets a Public Defender, which is the right for EVERY citizen who cannot afford and attorney, and then gets convicted of murder and sentenced to death, the left screams bloody hell because he's a Mexican citizen and should have been allowed to talk to the consulate....

So what will it be hypocrites?? Does he get the same rights as an American citizen since he lived here for so long, or does he get to reap the rewards, kill someone and then run back to the Mexican Consulate when it suits him because he is a Mexican citizen?? At least he manned up and said he did it and took it like he should have.....

So what will it be hypocrites?? Does he get the same rights as an American citizen since he lived here for so long, or does he get to reap the rewards, kill someone and then run back to the Mexican Consulate when it suits him because he is a Mexican citizen??

What is sad is how completely ignorant so many like yourself are of why this case is important.

I suppose it will hit home when you or a loved one are arrested in another country with no opportunity to call home for help.

International law? Hell, Texas violated UNITED STATES law.

Heck of a job, Texas!

A d i o s, Humberto.

Note to Mexico; Any more of your citizens come up here and kill 16 year old girls, we will kill them back. You are welcome to execute any of us who visit Mexico and kill 16 year old girls also.

And the rest of you lying libs who keep trying to twist the truth every time it's time to execute a killer, KMA. He was guilty. It's time to move on to the next scumbag.

Hooray for Texas!!

The US signed the treaty but the treaty was never ratified by the Congress of the United States which means it does not have any legal standing in this Country. The US Supreme Court already rules on this and until the Congress ratifies the treaty individual States are not required to adhere to the tenets of the Treaty.

Actually Ternan, only the Senate approves treaties.

The House is not involved at all.

This is from the US Constitution: Article 2, Section 2

He [The President] shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.

Honor your word? I don't disagree that the guy deserved to be executed. Now Mexico can arrest a US citizen, say for a small amount of drugs and not honor the Vienna Treaty. Life in prison! The regressives ideology is xenophobic and psychotic.

Thank you Texas!

This president and his tendency to side with foreign countries over the one he was elected to lead disgusts me.

One good thing that should come out of this is that hopefully that UN treaty never gets ratified now. And, as far as the UN goes, we should limit our funding to whatever the average security council countries fund. We currently fund 22% of the total UN and the other 191 countries total 78%. Let's pull that back to about 8% and see how they feel about that.

Cygnus_X-1

I guess Perry just saw his presidential bid go out the door. Who wants a president that so willfully disregards international law and treaties that his country has signed into. He ought to be brought up on federal charges, and federal dollars should be withheld from Texas for prisons and law enforcement.

I'd rather have a president that willfully disregards international law rather than Obama and his willfull disregarding of US law.

Lastly, Texas should turn around and bill the mexican consulate for this brutal killer's defense costs, housing and living for the last 17 years.

Is this the same UN that's killing innocent Libyans (after having taken sides in a civil war) that's telling the USA (whose president got the USA in that civil war without Congressional approval) that Texas broke an international law / treaty when it executed a murdering rapist more than 17 years after the event?

Pinche Naciones Unidas!

Did the UN condemn Saudi Arabia when they executed that Indonesian maid without even informing Indonesia of it?

Great-so now the Obama administration and the UN are advocating for child rapists- show you where their priorities are.

The UN needs to go the way of the League of Nations. It was created after WWII with 5 Permanent Members - US, Britain, France, Russia and China. Russia and possibly France shouldn't be Permanent Members. USA needs to create new entity with Britain, China (considering their status, they should be there,) Japan, and perhaps Germany, Brazil and India (though personally I would like to have only members who "rubber stamp" US policy.

What is sad is how completely ignorant so many like yourself are of why this case is important.

I suppose it will hit home when you or a loved one are arrested in another country with no opportunity to call home for help.

You can't even equate the two you tool.....Why is this case important...People like you cry for an ILLEGAL FUC*ING IMMIGRANT who raped and murdered a 16 year old girl, but don't give two shi*s about the girl....Who is the ignorant one??If a loved one sneaked into another country and brutally raped and murdered someone, admitted to it and was tried and convicted to death, guess what?? I'd be sad, but they screwed it up..Not the other country's court system and not the victim...You do remember that there was a victim yes??

This is a HUGE double standard.

The same authority (U.S. Constitution) which (supposedly) gives the US. Sup. Ct. the ability to strike down state's immigration law , is the same authority that the SC could have used to enjoin the execution...it would be enforcing a treaty, just like immigration..just like coinage)

Ritdog - That is perhaps the stupidest comment I've seen here today.

This wasn't a case of the UN telling us how to implement our laws. This was a case where the state of Texas was in clear violation of a treaty the US signed.

The UN is MISSING THE POINT.

NO ONE KNEW HE WAS MEXICAN UNTIL FAR LATER. He was as American as any Hispanic growing up here. Had he TOLD THEM he was a Mexican Citizen and then they DENY him, then it would have been one thing.. but he NEVER TOLD THE OFFICERS he was not American.

He was American enough to register and attend American schools and get access to American rights. He was American enough to face Texas justice.

You can't even equate the two you tool.....Why is this case important...People like you cry for an ILLEGAL FUC*ING IMMIGRANT who raped and murdered a 16 year old girl, but don't give two shi*s about the girl.

Thanks for making my point, and demonstrating your blind rage of ignorance.

Read my post again, if you have any vision left. And while you are crying for the "victim" maybe you should learn her name.

You may be happy being stupid, but some of us know that being an idiot, and ignoring the rule of law, leads to violence, poverty, and disease. Why don't you just bow to your nature and go join the Taliban? They may be the only ones in the world who match your thirst for blood and lack of respect for differing viewpoints.

Reading all these views, I have drawn the conclusion that there are not many that have traveled to other countries. It is very easy to discount the UN until you need them.

When you travel as an American to other countries, if you are accused of a crime and are not allowed to exercise your 'rights', the UN is the one who can and will make sure this is done.

The only person we can blame is Rick Perry. In an effort to thumb his nose at Obama, he has thumbed it at the UN community and has now put the lives of Americans traveling abroad in jeopardy.

This man was scum. He was well represented. Since we are a part of the UN, we should at least held off on the execution and follow the international law. The results would have been the same.

The next time a college student goes to Mexico or any other country and is arrested and charged for a crime they did not commit, should that country say to hell with the UN? They are American so what? This is our country and we do what we want to do. If the USA does not adhere to international laws, why should we?

We are so quick to discount every other country, because we think that as Americans we have rights that others do not. Who cares what the UN thinks, who cares what these 'other countries' do, who cares about international law? Until you, your kids or any other friend or family get accused of a crime while traveling in another country. There isn't always a US Consulate to go to and at this rate, they don't have to let them consult with you. Whats good for the rest of the world, is also good for America.

When you travel as an American to other countries, if you are accused of a crime and are not allowed to exercise your 'rights', the UN is the one who can and will make sure this is done.

WRONG:

It is the STATE DEPARTMENT that does this.

You know those hikers in Iraq? The State Department is trying to help them.

The link below is travel security information - general.

http://travel.state.gov/travel/travel_1744.html

The United Nations' members are sovereign countries. The UN does not protect individuals.

Here is their mission statement.

http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/index.shtml

The United Nations is an international organization founded in 1945 after the
Second World War by 51 countries committed to maintaining international peace
and security, developing friendly relations among nations and promoting social
progress, better living standards and human rights.

What point did you prove James...I have no blind rage against this guy...He got what the courts said...*I* know the name of the girl...But even if I didn't would it matter in my beliefs that people like you that blindly back this criminal because you feel he was wronged since he was Mexican are the idiots....

And then you bring up the Taliban...Do you even have any idea where your true beliefs lay??

You may be happy being stupid, but some of us know that being an idiot, and ignoring the rule of law

Uh...What law is that?? The UN dictates no laws in the country or any other country....And it's pretty telling when you say that some of you know about being idiots....Yep....That's the smartest thing you've ever said....

And Fletch...Big difference when one is charged with a crime the didn't commit...This guy DID commit a crime...And this Illegal American citizen did have the rights that he sneaked into the country to get....Education, Healthcare, Employment and the Courts.....

What is sad is how completely ignorant so many like yourself are of why this case is important.

I suppose it will hit home when you or a loved one are arrested in another country with no opportunity to call home for help.

that can be said for many things but to say that it is comparing the facts or specific issues of this story to one of something totally different is ludicrous...

if i was to be brought to mexico or some other country and a 2 year old, and grew up in that country and then chose to break major rules of society and was threated to be brought to justice under those rules, and then tried to claim i was not 'born there' and i have rights given to me from a different country, would be more akin to the facts of this case.

but to say that we cant euthanize this person for crimes committed while here as an acting citizen for fear that other countrys may violate international treatys already in place is comparing apples to toyotas...

but to say that we cant euthanize this person for crimes committed while here

Never said that, did I?

What's amazing is that you think you have a better understanding of international law than the White House, the Government of Mexico, and the U.N.

What were you saying about ludicrous?

If you ever stop to actually think, you can see that the issue here is not one of guilt or innocence, it is one of due process. It couldn't be more obvious that the man was guilty.

Uh...What law is that?? The UN dictates no laws in the country or any other country....And it's pretty telling when you say that some of you know about being idiots....Yep....That's the smartest thing you've ever said....

And again you just rage away with no relevance to what is happening or what's been said. Swelling with righteousness and the need to win at any cost, you simply make up conversations that never existed.

But then maybe it's me. Perhaps you could point out where I mentioned the U.N. before this post.

Please use your brain. Think about what you are writing. You are accusing me and others of being supporters of one of the vilest kinds of criminals.

You want blood? You think your ideology should rule, to the point of accusing myself and others of supporting murder?

Then yes, you sound a great deal like the Taliban.

Just like the Taliban using dynamite to destroy centuries of cultural heritage, you would use your ignorance and blood thirst to destroy decades of international law -- the world's cultural heritage.

You must love to read yourself on here and hear yourself talk....You go around and around and really say nothing....You argue semantics and things that aren't even there and sidestep the true issues here....You mentioned this:

You may be happy being stupid, but some of us know that being an idiot, and ignoring the rule of law,

What rule of law are you speaking of then if it isn't in regards to what the article is about?? You throw insults out as trying to prove your point, but all it is doing is making you look like an ass...If someone disagrees with you they are like the Taliban?? You have officially jumped the shark

This is just another battle in the never ending war of States Rights.

Does a corrupt and bloated central government have the the Right to sign away the Rights of the States and give those rights to the U.N or to any foreign government?

Each State and the citizens of those States have the exclusive Right to determine their own destiny as they see fit.

There is no United States without the States, but there can always be a United States even without a centralized federal government.The federal government has no right to usurp the powers of any State to determine their own destiny as a State within the Unites States.

@Karen, It's not wrong. In Iran the State Department is working through another country. When there are circumstances where countries have refused to work with America (The State Department), they have to go through the UN and/or another country that will work as an intermediary..

@Rob68......It's not a big difference. It is totally the same. Since this guy was tried, we know for a fact that he is guilty and I couldn't care less about the scumbag. The point I am making is that we should not discount the UN. When someone is arrested in another country, if they are innocent they still have to prove it. We need to respect international law, since we don't know if and when we are going to need it's protection.

I am an American, will not work for us anymore, unfortunately.

Fletch..I discount the UN because they have been nothing but a group of countries that get nothing done because they are just as corrupt as many of the governments involved...And the moment we start allowing the UN to impose "international law" upon our states, is the day we cease to exist.....We were a country long before the UN was ever created so no UN law will/should be able to dictate our state's actions.....

The point I am making is that we should not discount the UN. When someone is arrested in another country, if they are innocent they still have to prove it.

Yes and here in America you are innocent and have to be proven guilty...Now that that point is out of the way, what is YOUR point?? He was tried and found guilty and admitted to the crime....I'm guessing if that happened in another country he, too, would have been dealt with according to that country...

See we are an anomoly in the UN...We are a country with individual states, who have individual rights...How many countries in the UN can say that?? The UN should not be able to dictate an individual state's rights or laws....

And I am an American never SHOULD have been able to work....You screw up, you pay the price n...No matter where you are....

Never said that, did I?

What's amazing is that you think you have a better understanding of international law than the White House, the Government of Mexico, and the U.N.

actually yes, you did... albeit not word for word.. but your support of the whitehouse/UN position in that you disagree with putting the convict to death..

I for one dont believe everything that comes out of the whitehouse, especially with thier declaration that Libya is not a war/conflict and that they are not conflicting with the wars act as they are just reacting to UN mandates in a non major action...

I may not be as 'smart' or experienced as some in the whitehouse but i guarantee i have just as much 'sense' about what is right and wrong as they do.

as for due process, this convict did get due process... he got all the hearings and appeals afforded to any other 'citizen' would have rec'd... if youwant him to get the extra benefit of applying for and receiving special consideration just because he was born in a different country and was brought here when he was a minor, then i absolutely disagree...

as i stated... he and other immigrants cant have it both ways... and ultimately, i dont give a rats ass... if i go to another country and rape and kill someone over there, then i expect to be treated the same as they would treat their own citizens... i wouldnt expect to get away with murder based upon some obscure technicality..

Fletch

I proved you are wrong that the UN helps individuals who are in trouble in a FOREIGN COUNTRY.

Just because YOU say I'm wrong IS NOT PROOF.

I POSTED PROOF.

You must love to read yourself on here and hear yourself talk....You go around and around and really say nothing....You argue semantics and things that aren't even there and sidestep the true issues here.

Pot, meet kettle.

What rule of law are you speaking of then if it isn't in regards to what the article is about??

You do realize that you have to follow laws other than those written in the United States?

..If someone disagrees with you they are like the Taliban??

If someone wants to ignore law to exact blood vengeance? If someone curses those that have a different point of view, and demands blood regardless of circumstances? Yes, they are like the Taliban. How is your attitude different?

Does a corrupt and bloated central government have the the Right to sign away the Rights of the States and give those rights to the U.N or to any foreign government?

Nonsense hyperbole. We aren't talking about rights. There is no 'right to kill.'

There is no United States without the States, but there can always be a United States even without a centralized federal government.

...and more libertarian pipe dreaming. Tell it to Ron Paul.

See we are an anomoly in the UN...We are a country with individual states, who have individual rights...How many countries in the UN can say that?? The UN should not be able to dictate an individual state's rights or laws....

Lots of them. You're just making things up again. And you are confusing the colloquial term "state's rights" with the legitimate power states have to govern. State's have no "rights." I suggest you read the Constitution.

I don't know why you are fixated on the U.N. This is about international agreements between Mexico and the United States. Texas is still a part of the United States.

actually yes, you did... albeit not word for word.. but your support of the whitehouse/UN position in that you disagree with putting the convict to death..

I for one dont believe everything that comes out of the whitehouse, especially with thier declaration that Libya is not a war/conflict and that they are not conflicting with the wars act as they are just reacting to UN mandates in a non major action...

Really quite astounding.

Let me help you: if it isn't "word for word," then it IS NOT what I wrote. Fairly simple concept. Again, this isn't about the death penalty, and I am not defending this criminal.

This also isn't about what you believe. There are agreements. Written down. Verifiable. These are what are commonly called "facts."

Yes...you are defending this criminal for the sake of being adamant Texas broke a law....Show me this "internatonal law" that Texas broke...

YOU may not have an issue with the N exacting it's rules over the US, but I for one don't.....

.you are defending this criminal for the sake of being adamant Texas broke a law

That doesn't make sense. If you are going to make something up, why don't you come up with something less ridiculous?

Show me this "internatonal[sic] law" that Texas broke...

Here you go.

Larry (#1.80), no more ludicrous than painting all of Texas and all Texans with the same brush.

Reading all these views, I have drawn the conclusion that there are not many that have traveled to other countries. It is very easy to discount the UN until you need them.

When you travel as an American to other countries, if you are accused of a crime and are not allowed to exercise your 'rights', the UN is the one who can and will make sure this is done.

The only person we can blame is Rick Perry. In an effort to thumb his nose at Obama, he has thumbed it at the UN community and has now put the lives of Americans traveling abroad in jeopardy.

This man was scum. He was well represented. Since we are a part of the UN, we should at least held off on the execution and follow the international law. The results would have been the same.

The next time a college student goes to Mexico or any other country and is arrested and charged for a crime they did not commit, should that country say to hell with the UN? They are American so what? This is our country and we do what we want to do. If the USA does not adhere to international laws, why should we?

We are so quick to discount every other country, because we think that as Americans we have rights that others do not. Who cares what the UN thinks, who cares what these 'other countries' do, who cares about international law? Until you, your kids or any other friend or family get accused of a crime while traveling in another country. There isn't always a US Consulate to go to and at this rate, they don't have to let them consult with you. Whats good for the rest of the world, is also good for America.

Fletch,

Its not the UN that helps US foreign travelers, its the state dept.

Look at the 3 hikers that got caught in Iran. The UN is doing nothing. The US state dept is trying to get them out.

If you are going to mock people for never having been out of the US, make sure you have been out of the US also.

James...I read through all of it and nothing in there pertains to any of this...And page 28 was blurred out...So if you are going to post something that you think backs your argument make sure you know what it says....

Rob,

Maybe you didn't get the document because of some computer malfunction (it came through very clearly on my computer). Actually this document is exactly what was being discussed regarding Leal's case. Article 36 (page 15)

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202498324523&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1

Saw it...I stand corrected in regards to it being there. But even in your article Doc it states this:

In Medellin v. Texas (2008), the U.S. Supreme Court held that an international judgment based on the Vienna Convention could not be given effect as directly applicable federal law. Rather, Congress would have to adopt the necessary legislation to enable the United States to comply with its treaty obligations.

It was not and still hasn't been adopted...So there has been no law broken...And how do we know he was never given the option of contacting them?? I've seen nothing that says he was or wasn't. Regardless of that fact he committed a crime, confessed to it, and then was sentenced. As I have said before, he came into this country to live here and abide buy our rules and laws...He was afforded the same rights a legal citizen gets...Including the courts...We can't just stop everything and say he's not really an American now that he was in trouble, yet we allowed him to reap the benefits so many illegal immigrants get. He's doesn't get an out because he is Mexican.

Rob,

Take a second, and leave emotion out of it. Let's say the guy was falsely accused of robbing a bank, and was going to be sentenced to 30 years in Texas prison paid for by you the Texas taxpayer. Letting the man call his consulate would in that case do three things: 1. Free an innocent man 2. Let the taxpayer off the hook and 3. Deport an illegal alien.

Or would you rather PAY for 30 years worth of food housing and medical care for an innocent man?

It HAS been ratified. The problem is technical, and has to do with applying international law with state laws. The disconnect is temporary.

Regardless, Rick Perry allowing this guy to make a phone call to his consulate likely would not have changed the outcome, but would have helped innocent Americans abroad. In a sense, Rick Perry thought executing a foreigner was more important than justice for Americans abroad.

Think it through. You would want to be able to call your consulate if you are hauled into a foreign court on charges you don't understand.

This thing shouldn't have taken up so much time to debate. It's not rocket science.

Saw it...I stand corrected in regards to it being there. But even in your article Doc it states this:

I don't think, nor did I ever say, that it is cut and dry. I do believe that we should err on the side of preserving law and agreements, especially when it comes to executions. I don't think speed makes much difference. Then again, it wasn't my family that was affected.

Regardless, Rob68, I appreciate you taking the time to read my citation, and the effort you took to turn this into a constructive debate. Although we may still disagree, I think we may have both learned something.

To try to succinctly explain my position:

This guy was guilty as sin and deserved punishment. Nothing was going to change that. I sincerely believe that there were many other ways of handling this without significantly changing the outcome, ways that did not involve thumbing noses at Mexico, the White House, the U.N., and the Vienna Convention.

I also believe that the only ones that should be allowed to kill out of emotion and vengeance are those that were victims of the offender. The rest of us should be dispassionate and considered. That is our role in insuring that justice is done--not only in this case, but in all cases.

First we make a mockery of the Geneva convention. Now the Vienna Treaty. But you know The United States, this great beacon of light, is rapidly diminishing to a mere flicker.

@Rob68......Lets see if I can make my point a little clearer. What was asked of Rick Perry was to extend, almost as a courtesy, to this man and his country. This minute consideration that would not change anything except that it seems America is less arrogant and more humane.

No one is asking or allowing the imposition of international law on our states. We are not the oldest existing country. What was being asked of Texas was more of a courtesy than law, but we are so busy pounding our chest and blinded by arrogance we can't see beyond that.

@Karen, why would you reference something you haven't read. Go back and read the Rule of Law for the UN that you are using for proof. Your links proved nothing.

@John.....Re. the hikers in Iran..... Who is the State Department working with? What country are they working through? When you answer those questions it would be a good start for you......You are so busy finding mockery in a factual statement...

To make it easier, I should have said the countries that makes up the UN, rather than just say the UN and everyone thinks it's one person or a group of people. Just because these member countries do not jump up and down to be seen and take credit, does not mean they are not involved. It is sometimes even safer and better if everyone is not aware which UN country is working with the US on any particular case.

Read Marine Doc 2.35, it is the simplified explanation.

Take a second, and leave emotion out of it. Let's say the guy was falsely accused of robbing a bank, and was going to be sentenced to 30 years in Texas prison paid for by you the Texas taxpayer. Letting the man call his consulate would in that case do three things: 1. Free an innocent man 2. Let the taxpayer off the hook and 3. Deport an illegal alien.

I'm not sure why you think the consulate would be able to free this guy. They can't magically teleport him away from the Texas court. All they can do is protest or maybe provide another lawyer before his trail.

Gneisenau,

Stop nitpicking, it's in the realm of possibility to provide their citizen with a more competent attorney. There's nothing magical about that.

What is sad is how completely ignorant so many like yourself are of why this case is important.

I suppose it will hit home when you or a loved one are arrested in another country with no opportunity to call home for help.

Home? He's called the U.S. home his entire life since he was a toddler! THIS was his home, up until he was put on the Green Mile for execution! I'm sorry, but it just doesn't work that way.

FACT:

HERE ARE THE CLEAR IRREFUTABLE FACTS: The U.S. Supreme Court has made it very clear that

1) Treaties do not override the U.S. Constitution.

2) Treaties cannot amend the Constitution. And last,

3) A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S. Congress (or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so), when the State deems a treaty the performance of a treaty is self-destructive. The law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others. When you've read this thoroughly, hopefully, you will never again sit quietly by when someone -- anyone -- claims that treaties supercede the Constitution. Help to dispell this myth.

"This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty." - Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.

It means whoever thinks a treaty or international law supersedes our constitution has not done their homework. We the people get first say. The international world gets a backseat and has to deal with it. The UN does not have say over us and will not have say over us. The day they are allowed to do so is the day we may as well burn the Constitution and everything it stands for. That is the day we are no longer a sovereign, free nation.

although you maybe 'right' you do not seem to acknowledge the repercussions presented in the article and or in 'real life'. if we piss off other countries we in effect allienate ourselves from future deals/issues/benefits...

yea, we can do whatever the hell we want but damit, we still gotta live with our neighbors..

Sadly, we already have pissed off other countries. Americans aren't exactly popular in the world right now. And from what I know of others overseas, they have been experiencing the same issues we have with illegal immigration. I doubt too many who don't have their heads in the sand would blame us for deporting all of them.

don't get me wrong... i merely pointed out reasons why we might or maybe shouldn't just rely on 'constitution and or rules or policies... in that everything is negotiable or flexible

Im all for the execution of this guy...period... he deserved what he got and i personally dont give a rats arse about what other countries thing about what we did on this occasion... if they have a negative view on this action it only means they dont understand all the information and or history here...

I also personally think we should cut off all (or at least most of) foreign aide .... that single action will alienate almost every country out there... including Russia who recently blasted us as parasites, while they collect interest on the money we borrowed... wow. we pay them interest and they bitch???

we give them money and or lend them money and they bitch... it is clear, they will bitch no matter what...

yes many of them do. Many of them do not understand our constitution, or culture or why it's so important to us here. The environment they grew up in makes our country the black sheep in the world with the freedoms we have and many do not understand a lot of why we are the way we are or why we value certain things so much. It might just be an American thing. Just like many in the USA do not necessarily understand certain things about other cultures elsewhere in the world.

lkj2010-- I don't think you intended to be this wrong.

1) Treaties do not override the U.S. Constitution.

Well actually sometimes they do. The constitution establishes that treaties are on par with the constitution and its amendments as the "supreme law of the land". The Supreme Court in Whitney v. Robertson, 124 U.S. 190 (1888) essentially declared that when an executed treaty and a statute come into conflict they should both be enforced to whatever extent possible. When the conflict is fundamental then the most recently passed of the two should prevail.

2) Treaties cannot amend the Constitution. And last,

I don't think anyone proposed that they do. Treaties are acts of congress or (if self-executing) presidential orders specifically authorized in advance by congress. As such, later acts of congress can modify and revoke them. This came up during the Headmoney Case.

3) A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S. Congress (or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so), when the State deems a treaty the performance of a treaty is self-destructive. The law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others. ...

"This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty." - Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.

Two parts to this. Reid v. Covert did not address a conflict between an executed treaty and the constitution or federal statute. The case was about an executive order that declared that American civilians living on military bases abroad could be tried for capital crimes by a military tribunal.

After that ... there is no such thing as a sovereign US State. Nations are sovereign. The term 'state' is used often to mean the same as nation but that does not mean that everything that is a 'state' is also a 'nation-state'.

A sovereign state must possess:

• a permanent population;
• a defined territory;
• government; and
• capacity to enter into relations with other states

The last on the list definitively excludes US States (Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council, 530 U.S. 363 (2000)).

I think if wherever you clipped this list from had put the punchline earlier in the piece it would have saved you some reading.

Exactly the point. They were not permitted to be involved. A direct violation of the treaty our country signed. This was never about guilt or innocence. It was about violating a treaty that we signed. How would you feel if a country did that to one of our citizens - still believe what Perry did was right? I doubt it.

King County Superior Court Judge Michael Heavey think that the conviction of American student, Amanda Knox for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy is a fiasco. He also is of the opinion that the U.S. State Department, specifically the US Embassy in Rome, failed in its mission to protect her rights as a U.S. citizen.

http://diplopundit.blogspot.com/2011/06/seattle-superior-court-judge-questions.html

Where was the U.N. during/after Amanda Knox's court proceedings and final ruling ?

Is this called Pick and Choose ?

Sheesh....the U.N. is ALWAYS making comments against the United States of America.

Time for law enforcement officials in NYC to impound ALL CONSULATE VEHICLES which have parking violations which have not been paid.

It is also time for the U.S. to consider closing down the U.N. headquarters and turning the office spaces into a mini-high rise-mall and apartment complex.

The US owes the UN $1.3 Billion. We haven't been paying regularly since 1985.

and your point. Who cares if we own the UN any money. They should have been booted off US soil years ago. Let them go some place sunny and warm...Beirut perhaps or Islamabad?

My point is get your facts straight before blurting out stupid statements. What's yours?

What no one is bringing up:

The US is a signatory to the treaty, but the US Supreme Court found in 2008 that only Congress could mandate that states are bound to the treaty. Though bills to that effect have been introduced each year since that ruling, Congress has not approved such a law.

This isn't even law in the US!! WE DON'T CARE WHAT THE UN SAYS IN THIS CASE BECAUSE IT HAS NO MERIT!!

where was the Mexican consulate throughout this 17 year process?

Phil, think you missed a very important part of the issue. That is the whole issue. It isn't that he was found guilty and executed. The issue is that he was denied the right to counsel with his country. Up to this point, if you are imprisoned in another country, the US embasy could legally counsel and speak on your behalf. That was a right that every citizen in the world has had but was denied to this guy. Now, it puts every US citizen who is traveling in a foreign country at risk because since we didn't play by the rules, it will more than likely be denied to our citizens as well.

MytJoe: Exactly!! thank you for pointing out the facts.

It doesn't matter what the UN says, whether he was guilty or not, this was wrong. Don't expect other countries to treat our prisoners with any kind of fairness, and why should they? We're constantly violating laws and treaties, I don't want to hear any of you "GO TEXAS" supporters up in arms when U.S. prisoners are tortured or executed abroad. This case makes me sick, and so does everyone who supports it. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

laura: get the facts, look at Amanda Knox, think she isn't guilty, didn't get a fair trial? So, the treaty will do what, exactly? He had seventeen years, the process lasted for 17 years. He butchered his victim and was sentenced and had lawyers and now, all of a sudden, the treaty is invoked by the pres and the UN. BS.

MytJoe2134: You are CORRECT!

Piss off U.N. and don't mess with Texas.

I still do not understand how we broke international treaties. Sure, he has a right to talk to his embassy. But by international treaties are we required to tell him that? Did he ask to speak to the Mexican embassy and was refused?

We signed the treaty and are therefore bound by it.

Are you suggesting treaties are subject to selective enforcement? Perhaps countries should only follow laws when they "feel like it"?

Andrew547: Andrew, Supreme Court said, any treaties 'signed' by the "US" that are NOT RATIFIED by CONGRESS are not valid and we are not held to them.

Sorry, but I'll pick the Supreme Court (who are our fellow country men) over any other country.

Oh my goodness,

The beacon of Light of the world is not above the law, we broke it and we will pay the repercussions for it. This is a egg of the omelet if you will.

We will not scream that 1000's of others did it so why can't we.

We will follow the Rules as we helped create them.

The U.N. as useless as it may be is still UNITED and we should not be the perpetuates of breaking that bond.

We are one World and One people. Those that feel we are entitled Americans and can Pick and choose the laws we follow need to reevaluate what kind of world we would like to live in.

True we may have taken advantage of the way it has been for the past few years, I suggest a serious evaluation about what We the people stand for in this world.

We MUST be the change we want to see in this life (er whatever Ghandi said) ....

Be the bigger person people. Honor our Treaties, and agreements.

Otherwise we're no better than those we despise, those that would crush what we have if only becuase they don't.

Since Texas needs to fulfill their urge to exact revenge and put their want of keeping the death machine churning out body after body over the ultimate safety of other Americans abroad, they should suspend any and ALL federal money they receive until such time as they can look beyond their own need to be an "island unto themselves" when it comes to what the greater good for all may happen to be!
What will Texas do when one of their citizens is picked up in Mexico for no reason at all and put thru the system without the American consulate being notified? They will raise nine kinds of hell, but it won't do any good, because who started it first and what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right!

MarineDoc - Check your facts. As of early this year in a Reuters article the United States owe $736.2 million stated by a U.N. spokesman.

sumatymrolls says "What will Texas do when one of their citizens is picked up in Mexico for no reason at all and put thru the system without the American consulate being notified?"

Dude, this happens ALL THE TIME!!! They get held for ransom by the Mex Government

@american for israel:

The US ratified the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations in 1969.

You sound like a real peach...accusing me of spam and implying that the treaty was not ratified. I wonder if hegemonist is a word...or perhaps 'hegemonista' after TX secedes and is taken over by Mexico.

irene, if one of our (US) citizens goes to another country, does what this guy did, then they too deserve what they most assuredly have coming to them. And here's hoping the US cannot do anything to get them out of the mess. Accountability...way too little of it in this world today.

Andrew547: The law applies to the US Federal Government, not the States, unless Congress says so.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/06-984a.pdf

READ SOMETHING ONCE IN AWHILE!

The Court said Congress has to take responsiblity. Congress never did........

My question is, his lawyers are saying that the cops didn't advise him of his rights as a foreign national. WHY didn't his Lawyer do something when he was first arrested? If I were arrested, I would expect my lawyer to know what he/she is doing. If you want to complain about someone, complain about the original lawyers in the case.

That said..GOOOO TEXAS. Nice to see states like TX and AZ that will tell the Feds TOO BAD. We'll do it our way. We need to see some more gumption out our state and local governments, to keep the feds from taking over.

Mygirl, my favorite anti-everything person.

Yes, let's talk about Amanda Knox? She was able to get Consular assistance BECAUSE of the Vienna Convention!

DiggerNE, you have updated information and are correct....but the U.S. has been in arrears since 1985. My point still stands, the U.S. hasn't been paying it's bill to the UN as previously agreed....and last I checked $736 million is a hell of alot of cash.

This is one of those situations where the saying, "Don't mess with Texas" comes to mind.

Lonestar CBR

irene, if one of our (US) citizens goes to another country, does what this guy did, then they too deserve what they most assuredly have coming to them. And here's hoping the US cannot do anything to get them out of the mess. Accountability...way too little of it in this world today.

I'm inclined to agree with you... IF that is the scenario...

But what if an American tourist in another country get's arrested for that type of dispicable crime, BUT did NOT commit it? What if that tourist was a relative of yours? Wouldn't you want that country to allow your relative access to every avenue of defense and protection available under international law, to prove their innocence?

And by the way, this is not meant to imply that this douchebag in Texas was innocent...
Clearly he was guilty...

@!$%# that! If you come here and kill someone, you die here. We should send the bill to the Mexican government too for disposing of their trash.

We should consider executing the nest of spies that use the U.N. as cover and then boot the whole, freeloading, deadbeat, America hating, leftist, globalist den of thieves out of the country.

I don't have a problem kicking globalist thieves out of the country...let's start with Wall Street!

irenermiscione-1

Exactly the point. They were not permitted to be involved. A direct violation of the treaty our country signed. This was never about guilt or innocence. It was about violating a treaty that we signed. How would you feel if a country did that to one of our citizens - still believe what Perry did was right? I doubt it.

How can there be a violation of a treaty when he didn't tell the authorities he was Mexican until AFTER he was convicted??

I am certain the Supreme Court confirmed that the SENATE did not ratify the treaty.

The House of Representatives has nothing to do with ratifying treaties.

See, the United States Constitution, Article 2, Section 2.

MarineDoc....."The US owes the UN $1.3 Billion. We haven't been paying regularly since 1985."

Not true.

The administration of President Barack Obama repaid all the money the United States owed the United Nations last year. U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice told reporters on Thursday that Washington pays its U.N. dues "in full and on time."

She said there was an issue of "contested arrears" -- debts that Washington does not agree it owes the United Nations.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/10/14/us-un-usa-idUSTRE69D67220101014

MarineDoc....."My point is get your facts straight before blurting out stupid statements. What's yours?"

Yep, posters should get their "FACTS" straight before blasting other posters.

Those arrears are contested only by a hostile Congress. The point originally made was that the U.S. was paying for most of the UN missions...which of course is untrue since we've been holding out for going on 26 years, and we aren't current yet.

Exactly the point. They were not permitted to be involved. A direct violation of the treaty our country signed. This was never about guilt or innocence. It was about violating a treaty that we signed. How would you feel if a country did that to one of our citizens - still believe what Perry did was right? I doubt it.

They didn't know he was Mexican when they arrested him. He told no one.

So it's ok for an illegal alien to come to America and pretend to be American to get American benefits, but when it's convenient for him, he gets to be a Mexican citizen again?

Give me a break.

@ Mr Rogers - And as pointed out else where here, apparently it's illegal, according to Obama, for the Texas police to have checked his citizenship status.

So what I guess they expect to have happen is when ever a illegal alien is arrested and tried, if the court finds against them then they can suddenly admit to being a foreign citizen and demand a new trial with hopefully a better lawyer. I wonder how they are going to work the self incrimination angle? Thanks Obama for screwing over the US public once again.

Maybe you two should be "thanking" the Constitution of the United States. Again, what you folks are preaching is actually anti-American.

Instead of just blustering on and on, perhaps you should take a peak at the ACTUAL Constitution for once. It's all in there. And if you don't understand it, there are plenty of books in the library and low cost community colleges to walk you through the difficult parts.

One last time guys. When it was found out that the man was actually a Mexican Citizen, he should have been able to contact his consulate. What would have happened? They would have argued and stamped their feet a bit about their citizen, the Texas Judicial system would have shut them down and sent this man to the early hell that he deserved, having been found guilty and exhausted all avenues.

The United States looks good for following the international law. Rick Perry looks good and more Presidential after stepping on the international stage (instead of like the unhinged cowboy as he's now seen), the murderer gets to breath Texas air for a few more weeks. Americans traveling abroad won't be subject to revenge prosecution. Everybody wins. I don't see what the problem was.

So it's ok for an illegal alien to come to America and pretend to be American to get American benefits, but when it's convenient for him, he gets to be a Mexican citizen again?

There is an epidemic of mexican citizens illegally entering our country and murdering our citizens Mexico should consider itself lucky that we don`t consider this an act of war and declare war on Mexico.

Anytime a large armed group of people from one country illegally enter another country and kill it`s citizens that IS an act of war.What has or what will the U.N do to stop this act of war against the U.S. by the country of Mexico?

MarineDoc,

Thank you........If only everyone would think, rather than spout 'useless hate'.....

HERE ARE THE CLEAR IRREFUTABLE FACTS: The U.S. Supreme Court has made it very clear that

1) Treaties do not override the U.S. Constitution.

2) Treaties cannot amend the Constitution. And last,

3) A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S. Congress (or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so), when the State deems a treaty the performance of a treaty is self-destructive. The law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others. When you've read this thoroughly, hopefully, you will never again sit quietly by when someone -- anyone -- claims that treaties supercede the Constitution. Help to dispell this myth.

"This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty." - Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.

Again, the UN, just like Mexico, is S.O.L. They have no say in what we do to illegals here. And technically, when you come here illegally, you have NO RIGHTS. If Mexico gave a hoot about their people, they would have stopped the violence in Mexico years ago. They would stop helping and encouraging people to come here illegally. They would not have condemned Arizona and other states for reinforcing their state sovereignty and refusing to tolerate them being here illegally. The UN and Mexico speaking up at the last second is a BS show. Nothing more.

@ glenn pinter Right that's why "to hell" should be inserted to make it a correct statement.

This was argued all of the way to the SCOTUS. If any laws or treatises were being violated why did they refuse to halt this execution?

Based on recent events, after Texas succeeds, do you think they would still be asked to join the UN?

Billyboy...calm yourself. You are dealing with a bunch of girliemen liberals on here Billy. They dont understand how the real world works, and how real men handle problems...LOL. They think turning the other cheek will make the bad guys just go away. They will sit and watch a bad guy rape their own wife. Its called no cahoneys Billy...and they aint got any.

If you go to Texas and voice your opinion, you're more likely to get shot than listened to. Texas is resembling the middle east more and more every day.

LOL!!!!!

PrecededByNone: Show some facts about your statement. Unless you're referring to the Mexican Cartel attacking our borders?

But did they break the international treaty? Are we required to tell a piece of scum that he has the right to talk to his embassy, or does he just have that right. And as far as I know, he did not ask for and was not refused the right to talk to his embassy.

Apparently the concept of "treaty" was, like so many bedrocks of American life, selectively excluded from Texas school books.

I suggest you people look it up before commenting further. Oh, and while you're at it, look up fascism, communism, socialism, secession, the cause of the Civil War, separation of church and state, and while you're at it you really should read the Bill of Rights and the Constitution - it seems those concepts are foreign to you, and the documents are just an abstract concept.

Andrew547: Andrew, quit spamming #2.14 you already said this.

See my #2.15 post. There is your answer.

Never have I visited a place more full of religious zealots. Do I even need to bring up the textbook incident? No big deal--just changing history and injecting religious influence straight into our schools, right in the face of the first amendment. But really all they care about is the second amendment... to hell with the first! They have, by far, the most cumulative executions in the nation since 1976 (437 as of 2009, the next highest is Virginia at 103). And, as you can see by all the Texas supporters above, if you "mess with Texas" (aka--voice your displeasure at any decision they make) you'll be threatened with death. Just replace "fundamentalist Muslim" with "fundamentalist Baptist", and you'll get all the same problems.

PrecededByNone: That is an opinion not a fact.

There are a dozen mosques here in Dallas. They have never had any hate crimes there.

The First Amendment, go read the Federalist Papers and see why the fore fathers wrote it that way.

They put that piece in to not allow the government to PICK a religion, there were many sects of Christianity back then and each State had their own usually.

The States wanted to make sure the Federal Government didn't favor one over the other.

ALL of the other countries in that time period had their OWN NATIONAL RELIGION.

The fore fathers DID NOT want this to happen, hence the wording of the 1st amendment.

Its purpose was never to say God can't be in public school or government.

Go read the facts and history before spewing nonsense and hate.

@American for Israel Yours is an opinion - if you want to live in theocratic apartheid move to Israel.

That's your interpretation of it. Sounds like someone went to a school in Texas. It's not 1776 anymore--stop interpreting the constitution as if it was. The purpose of the law was to prevent any religion from having any place in government... because any influence is dangerous. And as for hate crimes? I literally just read an article about two men in Dallas attacked with bats as their assailants shouted gay slurs. "Never had any hate crimes"... hahahaha. A brief internet search tells me Dallas has had 8 as of March this year. Relatively low, yes, but that's still a far cry from "never".

How is this a violation of international treaties? He and his defense lawyer knew for several years of this right to seek the help of the Mexican government. Their own inaction is the only reason he did not get this help. Besides that, what happened the last time that Mexicans thought they could come here and do as they please? Remember the Alamo?

LOL, an opinion? Again, go read history books written from back then, go read the Federalist Papers. Knowledge is power, the Constitution should still be read as it was in 1776, it is not a living document that changes with the times.

Was speaking to hate crimes against Muslims.

@american for israel

Knowledge is power, the Constitution should still be read as it was in 1776, it is not a living document that changes with the times.

You espouse truth...then back it up with opinion.

You're too clever by half.

Constitution should still be read as it was in 1776, it is not a living document that changes with the times.

Are you f*&#$ing kidding me?! You just lost all credibility. You're not worth any further wasting of my time. Get your head out of the Texas textbooks. I guess slavery should still be in full force then, and women still not have the right to vote. Why didn't we just crumple it up and throw it in the garbage as soon as we won the Revolution? You have a seriously messed up view of history.

Preceded, when was the last time you were in Texas, and what type of bad experience did you have with a Texan when you were here?

Preceded, know your history. The Constitution came years after the revolution.

@Zucker:

Only a few years off. I think addressing the point, which still stands, would be a more productive use of this message board. Getting the timeline wrong does not make the issue disappear, or make you any more right, or wrong.

If we wanted to see who was right and wrong based on incorrect history...we could go back to Israel's comment about the Constitution being written in 1776, which it was not.

...and lonestar:

I live several thousand miles from TX, but I have a bad experience with Texans every day.

Your governor is a secessionist, your school system insists the Civil War was about state's rights, creationism is a "science", and kids should pray in public schools, your lawmakers insist that killing people - some of them innocent and/or mentally retarded and/or children - somehow reduces crime, and your citizens at large, on this message board, insist that international treaties need not be enforced for a variety of reasons that no doubt would be cause for invasion or nuclear war if another country did the same thing to us in return.

I don't see anything good for our future coming from your state. Not a thing.

I've only been to TX a few times. I have not been impressed. My brother went to SMU. He was not particularly impressed either. Of course not every Texan is a horrible person, but he said the good ones are few and far between. That observation is consistent with my experience as well as the experience of a lot of non-Texans posting on this message board.

You seem to be fairly universally disliked. At some point you have to wonder if there's anything to that...don't y'all think?

Point taken, Andrew547. With that said, I would actually like to disagree with American for Israel, thus lending support to the opinions of ProcededByNone.

The Constitution is a document that is the blueprint for the structure and operation of our government and that lays the foundation for the freedoms that make us one of the most unique countries in the world. However, it is a living, breathing document - allowed to be amended as we, as a civilization, grow intellectually.

As ProcededByNone pointed out, without changes and additions to our Constitution, we would still have a brutal slave industry and women would not be allowed to vote. I don't know about American for Israel's views, but I, for one, am glad our ancestors had the foresight to correct those injustices. Proving that not all Americans that support Israel feel that the Constitution should be left as it was written in 1787.

Andrew547, sorry about the earlier comment. Someone took the last muffin at the office and I was a little bitter.

Forget the muffin. They're sending out for frozen yogurt for the whole office - thus my more pleasant mood above.

To all you "Go to hell Texas" people... We don't start crap here in Texas but if it finds its way to us we will certainly finish it. So bring it on. We are ready.

Wow American for Israel.... your stupidity and the stupidity present on these boards continues to amaze me.... if the constitution was meant to be read as it was written in 1776 we'd still have slavery, only men would vote, and you wouldn't have the Bill of Rights. FYI, the constitution doesn't mention anything regarding the 2nd amendment. That was a change added in 1791. With intellects like the ones here, it's no wonder we're getting our ass handed to us in world rankings in math, science, and basic education....

American for Israel

The First Amendment... They put that piece in to not allow the government to PICK a religion... The States wanted to make sure the Federal Government didn't favor one over the other....

That is just one aspect of it... You also have to realize that the inquisition was not some distant memory to the founding fathers... it was VERY recent history, (and to a certain extent still continued on in Europe even after the founding of America)... They knew firsthand what happens when the church and a King became partners in crime... one would absolve the other, and allow despicable acts to be commited... this was another aspect of the reason for separation of church and state...

ALL of the other countries in that time period had their OWN NATIONAL RELIGION... The fore fathers DID NOT want this to happen, hence the wording of the 1st amendment.

Its purpose was never to say God can't be in public school or government.

If you are desiring to have God in a public school, then you are contradicting your first statement....

"to not allow the government to PICK a religion... The States wanted to make sure the Federal Government didn't favor one over the other...."

If you are inviting God into public schools, WHICH GOD? I feel fairly confident in assuming you are referring to the Judeo-Christian God... in which case, you have chosen one, above the others, and legitimized a belief system, and marginalized the rest... Do you want prayer in school? If so, are you also going to allow Muslim students to stop class and pray towards Mecca 5 times a day?

There is a bit of McCarthyism brainwashing going on with the whole God and country thing... God was not put into the pledge of allegiance until the 1950's, nor was "in God we trust" on money until the same era... the paranoid anti-communism witch-hunt era.

During the times of the founding Fathers, God was something you kept to yourself... It was no ones business... and had no place outside of your church, and your heart... Many of the Founding Fathers were Deists, and did not believe the Bible was even remotely accurate...

PrecededByNone is right. It's damn dangerous in Texas with all the exploding baptists. Baptists kids being set off at schools, restaurants and social events. Some set off in buses. First warning you get is some small voice screaming cowabunga then bam! They take over sporting events and kill the athletes.

My daughter's in the Navy and she says she's worried about some baptist going off his nut and shooting a bunch of people.

Airlines in Texas are prohibiting bibles on planes...just too dangerous.

What ever you do, stay away from Texas; just too dangerous!

"GO TEXAS"

My little niece is five years old, and she is inquisitive. When watching TV at my grandmother's house during the 4th of July, she turned to me and innocently asked me this funny little question: "Uncle, the man on teevee yelled, 'Go Texas'. ...so where does Texas go?"

Andrew(#3.25), virtually none of the issues you mentioned had a personal impact on you, it just differs with your personal brand of politics, so it's doesn't address the question I asked.

Regarding your brother...a fairly elitist university to be certain, and my guess is two-fold...your brother's elitist sense of being above most around him, and the fact that he probably didn't veer very far from the confines; basically he's based holed up in his little SMU world - like many campuses your exposure is reasonably limited to what's going on around you in the real world.

You've got a few hundred (primarily left-wing) posters on this thread, making numerous anti-Texas statements. That hardly makes anyone universally disliked.

I understand the problem some of you have; we're independent, more self-sufficient than a lot of you, successful in today's economy, many of your previously over-paid union jobs are now here, and I could go on and on as to the reasons why many people are anti-Texas. And then, how much of it is crap like "I have a brother who...".

And by the way, kids should be able to pray in schools if they like. There is no violation of church and state if kids elect to pray in school. It's a stupid-ass argument to think otherwise For the kids who don't want to pray, don't pray. It kind of gets you back to all of those freedom of religion, freedom of personal expression, freedom of speech, freedom of choice...freedom period. What I can't figure out is why someone is so threatened by a person's need to pray.

Lonestar, I lived in El Paso, Texas for 15 years. There are morons there who think that despite the border they crossed, they are still in Mexico and will say it. They think because they are there we should all speak Spanish. They think the US 'stole' land from Mexico, including Texas itself. Many of them will say in English nice things to you and because they think whites don't know any spanish (esp if you let them think that), you will hear them say in Spanish what they really think of Americans. Many of them can't move past a war that happened before even their grandparents were a thought in anyone's minds. They don't realize Texas separated from Mexico when it was still a Spanish territory and VOLUNTARILY joined the Union. Reality, despite what is taught in the schools there, is not something they have a grasp on. Yet they refuse to fix the issues of violence that plague the country they are so proud of. I can say I was more than happy to leave the city behind. If the INS actually went door to door there and actually deported illegals, half the city would be empty overnight.

This is obviously just a whole lot of smoke and mirrors from Obama. He is sooooo freakin' scared of Rick Perry running that they are now going to wage war on Texas to try to ruin Perry before he can get in the race. Nice try. This guy admitted to the murder and rape of the 16 year old girl, but they are worrying that the consul in Mexico was not involved. Whose rights were violated again? WTH?

Rick Perry is a Bible thumping political fool... The only way he would ever get into the white house would be by invitation, or by taking the tour with the other tourists...

Having said that.... this dude was guilty and deserved his sentence...

(Freedom is the distance between church and state).

CDA and Todd, do you even realize that Bush made the same request? That we consider that our citizens who commit crimes or are suspected of such may not get to contact OUR consulate? Although I agree this wetback should die, think first.

Then, go back to the kiddie table and let the adults talk.

LOL Perry won't even get close to the White House... Obama will smash him... the only person the GOP has that will have a chance is Romney, but oh noes, his record is pretty damn liberal... it warms my heart to know that the GOP's only chance at winning is with a liberal republican... Perry? LOL. Americans don't want another dumb Texan messing things up.

Get a clue CDA - both Obama AND your pal Bush wanted a stay of execution based on the same legal principles.

About the ONLY thing good about Texas is their death penalty.

Perry......hahahahahahahahahaha

breeze6839

About the ONLY thing good about Texas is their death penalty.

I got $20 that says you've never been to Texas...
There's lots of great things in and about Texas...
Their politicians unfortunately are not one of those things...

Please jimsepa, don't confuse the mob with facts and details. Thinking is painful for them.

nosferatu - perhaps the "adults" should be rememberig that Leal Garcia had been in the United States since he was about 2 years old - illegally - and enjoyed the bounty of America for many many years - and now after being convicted of this monstrous crime wanted an out from his death sentence by trying to fall back on his Mexican citzenship.

Perhaps instead of crying for Leal, you should be instead questioning why we are so concerned for the rights of people who are in our country illegally? And perhaps if people here illegally are concerned about their treatment in our legal system, they should consider returning home.

And loltexas? If Chris Christie were to throw his hat in the ring - he would CRUSH Obama. And he is most assuredly not a liberal. I hope he changes his mind.

Romney is an a$$ hat. Kind of like Obama.

The beached whale christie has no chance either... it is funny to watch the GOP be so desperate they'll fly to the guy and beg for him to run... sorry.. Americans don't want a beached whale as President... especially one that cries about spending while using tax payer dollars to fly his fat rear to his kids baseball game... Christie should stop working in politics and get on a treadmill

grilledcheesesandwich: apparently you don't live in NJ. If you did you would know that Christie is nothing but a fat, bigoted windbag spewing garbage to impress the GOP's national commitee. He is destroying the very fiber of our small towns and cities here by slashing budgets beyond reasonable levels, while giving tax "gifts" to his wealthy friends.

Chris Christie is a traitor to the American way of life.

people in Mass like RomneyCare

grilledcheese, the only way christie would crush obama is if he sat on him.

Let me let you people in on a little secret....
It really doesn't matter who get's elected...

Lib, Con, Repub, Dem, Right, Left, etc...
It's all a misdirection... to keep you looking at one hand, while the other hand is busy...
Us vs. Them... It's the Libs fault, It's the Rights fault...

All... I repeat... ALL politicians, of BOTH parties, are corrupt, career, con-men.

Mega-Global Corporations OWN them...
They FINANCE their campaigns...
They give them stocks, and get laws passed that make them both richer...
They promise them overpaid "consultant" jobs after they retire from politics...
Corporations and Politicians have killed the middle class, and we pay them to do it.

Romney, Obama, Republican, Democrat, Tea party, whoever.... it does not matter...
WE the people, are not represented by our President, or our congress...
Because we can't PAY enough to match the bribes...

bethcat - I most assuredly DO live in NJ - and you are obviously a whiney, greedy. self-entitled public union member.

And he's not giving tax gifts to anyone. That is such a blatant liberal lie. You have no credibility.

Chris Christie is as far from a traitor as it is possible for an American to be. It is people who think they are entitled to live off of the money OTHER people earned who are the real traitors.

And really? Fat jokes, hatr? You have nothing valid to say, so you resort to playground taunting. You are either 7 - or really really stupid.

grilled

This is not about "crying for Leal." This is about dealing honorably with another country in spite of the fact that the governor of the great state of Texas chose not to be honorable.

Rick Perry? As President of the USA?

Whahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!

Some of you Texans need to get out of the state and look around more!

(I lived there for almost a year and could not wait to get out! The only other place I have seen people like that was in Mississippi!)

@grilled: No tax gifts, huh? Ever hear of Xanadu?

@V... : You are absolutely correct. Lobbyists and corporations run our government.

krazy - Christie had nothing to do with Xanadu. Remember? Huh? He is just stuck with trying to fix the problem now.

don - Mexico is a country that literally pushes illegals over their border and calls us RACIST for having the balls to want secure borders and wanting these people expelled from our country. They can go f*ck themselves.

And Leal was in this country for decades - ILLEGALLY. I think that allowing him to fall back on his mexican citizenship at this point would be sickening. He wanted to have his cake and eat it too. Sorry, amigo, but there was nothing remotely unfair or illegal about his treatment, and the Supreme Court agrees with me.

grilled - you can't say he never gave tax gifts when he gave $200 million to Xanadu.

I do appreciate him stopping the tunnel, though. NJ would have been on the hook for all of the cost overruns, and you know that would have cost at least several billion dollars.

The WH, obviously, thought they could kill 2 birds with one stone - appease the Latino vote and corner Perry in a state with high Mexican population in an attempt to dissuade a presidential run.

This is the same thing going on in MN. The Governor was handed a budget with a 12% budget increase that was, also, balanced. However, it is more important attempting to affiliate Bachmann and Pawlenty with the shenanigans.

I got $20 that says you've never been to Texas...

Send me my $20 bucks. I've been there several times- Austin, San Antonio, Houston, and El Paso. You couldn't pay me to live in that state with all those idiots. I work international construction and by far all the Texans I have worked with are the dumbest and laziest. What's worse is their egos, they are is big as that state. You want to secede? Please do immediately, and take the people with you.

Don't know what polls you've been looking at or where you get your info but Perry is increasingly more popular now than ever. And how many times does he have to get re-elected to convince you the people like him? Have you seen Obama's popularity polls lately? Not too good. Re-election? Highly unlikely. Obama and his crew play very dirty and will not hesitate to start a smear campaign against anyone who they feel is a threat.

Firing federal attorneys because they don't tread the party line, I guess that's ok too?

With one of the best economies in the US, Texas would be missed. I have lived in 8 states including Texas. In none of the others have I seen the pride in their state that I have seen in Texas. So, you call me an idiot? Try PhD in Electrical Engineering. Hope your next "international construction" job is in Somalia.

Ohhh so you're a super sparkie? Is that supposed to impress me or something? Texas wouldn't be missed at ALL. Its the illegal labor that props that state up, plus the fact that you losers down there will work for nothing. But then again they should pay you nothing, because I can guarantee you that I can do in a half day what takes a full day for a Texan. That's why northerners go south, because its so easy for them to steal jobs from southerners. I could never do it, I can't handle working with idiots all day long. My next job? Greece. I'll love it too! Been there once before, beautiful country. Later loser. PhD Pile it High and Deep!

breeze6839

I've been there several times- Austin, San Antonio, Houston, and El Paso.

I've been to Houston, which is OK... and Austin which is an amazing city... love Austin... but I live in NYC, so I guess I'm a northern yankee, and yet...

You couldn't pay me to live in that state with all those idiots. I work international construction and by far all the Texans I have worked with are the dumbest and laziest.

... I somehow managed not to be an arrogant, condescending person, unlike yourself...

What's worse is their egos, they are is big as that state.

Ego issues? It seems to me that you looking down your nose at 25,000,000 Texans based solely upon your dealings with a few individuals, all in one industry, AND belittleing another poster because he has a PHD, tells me YOU need to do an ego check... your arrogance is noxious.

AnIndividual (4.2), where do you hail from originally?

belittleing another poster because he has a PHD, tells me YOU need to do an ego check

In true Texas egotistical fashion he's the one that brought up the "look at me, look at me I have a PhD", not me.

I don't give a crap what degree a person has, because I have seen just as many worthless people with college degrees as there are with none. Just because you have a college degree doesn't mean you know everything about that specific trade. I would rather have a guy with 10 years experience in the field any day then I would a college graduate with a PhD.

belittleing another poster because he has a PHD, tells me YOU need to do an ego check

In true Texas egotistical fashion he's the one that brought up the "look at me, look at me I have a PhD", not me.

I don't give a crap what degree a person has, because I have seen just as many worthless people with college degrees as there are with none. Just because you have a college degree doesn't mean you know everything about that specific trade. I would rather have a guy with 10 years experience in the field any day then I would a college graduate with a PhD.

I call your BS. You may have met folks with PhDs that are worthless. You may have met folks with no degree who are worthless. I doubt you have met as many PhDs as you have folks without a degree. I doubt, if you work off statistics, that you would even come close to generating a percentage of folks who are 'worthless' with doctorates as those without any degree.

Yup. BS.

breeze6839

In true Texas egotistical fashion he's the one that brought up the "look at me, look at me I have a PhD", not me.

Actually.... that's not accurate... follow the thread of the conversation...

You said this in post #4.26....

You couldn't pay me to live in that state with all those idiots.

And in post #4.29 vega1972-3673956 said...

So, you call me an idiot? Try PhD in Electrical Engineering.

So in fact, he was defending himself against your insult...
not egotistically posturing, saying look at me, look at me...
If you were able to make THAT mistake in judgement,
I wonder how many other people you condemned in error as idiotic ego maniacs?

The way you find so many people worthless, and to be idiots, and are willing to write off entire populations by your experience with very few, tells me that your are arrogant, and judgemental... and you know, they say you can tell a lot about a person by the company they keep... why do you seem to keep finding yourself amongst worthless idiots?

@ v... you are so right

When we instituted the electorial college to do our voting for us is when we screwed ourselves. Now it doesn't matter how we vote or even if we vote.

@ annettec7

Yeah, the electoral college is just an absurdity... it just makes you shake your head and wonder how that was even allowed to happen...

But even still, that's not the real problem... the real problem is corporate influence in congress, and politics in general... And the recent decision by the supreme court to allow corporations the same rights as individuals, and the ability to donate AS MUCH AS THEY WANT to campaign funds... (donate really means bribe)... was just the nail in the coffin.

If Walmart donates 2 million to a congressmans campaign, do you really think he will vote for any legislation that helps Americans, but hurts Walmart? C'mon... We didn't give him 2 million...

Did you know that during the Iraq war, in just one year, Dick Cheney's Haliburtion stock options went from being worth $241,498 to more than $8,000,000.... that's a jump of 3,281%... 3,000 percent in one year based on policies he helped facilitate!!!

There is so much going on behind the scenes, so many back room deals and favoritism...
We the people... have been dealt out of the game.
And been turned on eachother, in this partisan bickering of Libs vs Cons...
To keep us distracted, because divided we are impotent...
If we were to unite (left and right) and call them on their bull$hit...
MAYBE we could get our country back... MAYBE...
But no one party will do it without the other...
And they keep us at eachothers throats...
It's a very slick shell game they play...

@V... Absolutely. Couldn't agree more. The thing is there is no way to unite "we the people". Too many wedges have been driven to keep us divided i.e. religion and race.

The saddest part of this whole thing is that Rick Perry has chosen to put the life of every American traveling outside of this country in jeopardy. In his mind it seems as if Texas has already seceded.

Hey, wait just a minute! Dammit, our Governor in Florida has the worst approval rating of any sitting GOP Governor, not Rick Whats-his-name (both named Rick.....hmmmmm) . Quit trying to take our only claim to fame. Ha Ha Ha, our Governor is stupider than yours! (Wanna trade?)

Kevin, just an FYI - approval ratings on their face mean very little. Who did they ask when those polls were conducted?

Governor Christie's approval rating here in NJ isn't great either - and he's the best governor this state has seen in decades. He's not popular with the people who are seeing their taxpayer-funded goodies taken away from them - and guess who the pollsters always seem to poll? But trust me, he's VERY popular with most of us who voted for him.

Actually, the majority of NJ residents are not happy with Christie right now.

It's funny. When polls agree with your views, they are fine. But when they disagree, they must be using selective polling. Learn basic statistics before spouting off nonsense, grilledcheese.

krazymop - maybe YOU believe polls when they align with your point of view. But please point to where I ever said that. Or are you just assuming?

The "majority" that doesn't approve of him are the public union members and those on the dole who are seeing all of their taxpayer-funded goodies taken away from them. But trust me, the majority of the taxpaying, NON public union members are quite happy with him. If those people do not constitute the majority of the people in the state , than all that shows is that the democrats have done a damn fine job of building up their constituency with those who are dependant on government handouts - and of course those people are not happy with him. Because he is doing the right thing and not continuing to spend money we don;t have and isn't resorting to the old standby of raising taxes so that the government can keep spending irresponsibly.

Christie did not create the problems in NJ. That was DECADES of irresponsible spending, taxation, and redistribution of wealth that happened under previous administrations.

You said "guess who the pollsters always seem to poll". Meaning they are not using random sampling. I can assure you they DO use random sampling with a margin of error, and if the poll says the majority dislike him, then that's the case.

Has anybody seen Obama's approval rating lately? Oh, yeah, that's right. When his or any other democrat is bad it doesn't mean anything, only means something when it's GOP.

Yeah, CDA, Obama's approval rating is 47%.

If a conservative speaks, a lie is being told. That's almost a given and I say that based on months and months of reading comments that simply are not true...one after the other after the other.

You guys are just angry people without a reason...or maybe the reason has more to do with your own life and you should refrain from commenting on national politics. Making crap up does not endear you to anyone...just ask Glenn Beck who got dropped from FOX, of all places. Not that other FOX celebrities don't make things up, but even FOX has a limit - and that limit is when advertisers pull out because ratings drop, and ratings dropped because his brand of crazy no longer sold.

Long story short...consider dealing in reality and dropping the fantasy and the lies.

The fact that you claim the Christie is the best governor that NJ has had in decades speaks volumes about NJ. And none of it is good.

I wouldn't vote Christie to be Hamburger Taster.

Andrew547,

If a liberal speaks, a lie is being told. I'm an independent so neither apply to me. Both parties are about as screwed as screwed gets, but liberals pretty much take the cake. I used to swing left until I started really reading the MSM and all the crap they print. Then I read the forums and saw ignorant liberals regurgitating the same crap, then I was cured of party affiliation.

Think with your own mind, make your own decisions and come to your own conclusions instead of letting someone swing you, become an independent.

They may secceed before anyone has to kick them out. They have low taxes, aren't bleeding red ink, and aren't afraid to punish criminal behavior. States like this will soon tire of bailing out liberal welfare states like California....

Oh PLEASE do . The last secessionist movement got busted by the feds. All you damn Yankees can freeze in the dark or pay the true price for Texas oil & gas & fruits & vegetables, and beef etc. etc.

I give Texas high marks against most of the super lib states in the NE, and of course Californicate.

You can't blame the entire state for the actions of it's politicians...
Don't buy into the stereotypes....
There are many extremely intelligent Texans...
Texans are also very polite and courteous...

Of course there are certain counties that are a bunch of "good ol' boys" stuck in the mentality of the "bad ol' days"...

But condemning Texans for the actions of it's politicians and some of it's citizens,
Would be like holding all of America responsible for whatever evils Bush/Cheney did...

Judging by his avatar,T odd Pollard looks like he's a few chromosomes shy of actually being a human being.

V...I agree. I was born in Texas and have lived half of my life here. What you say is true, Texans are very polite and extremely proud of being Texan.

LOL the US can just blockade Texas.. move our boarder fence to the North side.. remove all federal funding (so bye bye NASA) and bye bye military bases... Texas would collapse in 5 years at best.

You can't blame the entire state for the actions of it's politicians...
Don't buy into the stereotypes....
There are many extremely intelligent Texans...
Texans are also very polite and courteous...

Of course there are certain counties that are a bunch of "good ol' boys" stuck in the mentality of the "bad ol' days"...

But condemning Texans for the actions of it's politicians and some of it's citizens,
Would be like holding all of America responsible for whatever evils Bush/Cheney did...

They aren't blaming a state. They are just mad because Texas is a conservative state and it's in much better shape that the liberal stalwart states. If it's conservative, they will bash it. If it's conservative and successful, they will try to BURY it.

beerjoust

Judging by his avatar,T odd Pollard looks like he's a few chromosomes shy of actually being a human being.

I wouldn't judge Todd or anyone else by their picture...

However, if you look at his other comments on his page...
It's clear he has gone way off the reservation...
He's so far right, he makes Karl Rove look like a Lib...

He blames the scandal of Murdochs newspaper on a Lib plot to destroy FoxNews...

And he justifies a father burning his 5 yr old son for touching a Bible, by saying...
"Has anyone thought that the boy might of been fixing to damage or do something disrresctful to the Bible?"
That sounds far too much like an Islamofascist talking about protecting a Koran to me....

Also the fact that Todd resides in a town called "White Settlement, Texas." is a bit unnerving...

But like I said earlier, there are many OTHER intelligent, and friendly, respectful people in Texas...

States like this will soon tire of bailing out liberal welfare states like California....

Yes, California, the Welfare State that collects $85 Billion more in Federal taxes from it's own population than Texas does from it's population....($314 Billion vs. $225 Billion)

California, the Welfare State that gets around $1700 dollars in Federal Aid Per Person - but pays out more than $8000 per person... Texas is really paying for their bill ...

You should probably check your numbers before increasing your Dumbassitude Quotient...

Blue states may be in the red, but they pay more in taxes than they take from the feds. Can Texas say that? Nope. Neither can most red states. Here's the 2005 data: 22 of the first 26 are red states and Texas comes in at 35, which is respectable, but still ahead of the bluest of the blue - MA, CA, NY, NJ. So who is supporting who?

I guess they teach myths in math and history classes as well as in science down there in Texas, huh?

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html

Federal Spending in Each State Per Dollar of Federal Taxes

FY 2005

State
Federal Spending per Dollar of Federal Taxes
Rank

New Mexico
$2.03
1

Mississippi
$2.02
2

Alaska
$1.84
3

Louisiana
$1.78
4

West Virginia
$1.76
5

North Dakota
$1.68
6

Alabama
$1.66
7

South Dakota
$1.53
8

Kentucky
$1.51
9

Virginia
$1.51
10

Montana
$1.47
11

Hawaii
$1.44
12

Maine
$1.41
13

Arkansas
$1.41
14

Oklahoma
$1.36
15

South Carolina
$1.35
16

Missouri
$1.32
17

Maryland
$1.30
18

Tennessee
$1.27
19

Idaho
$1.21
20

Arizona
$1.19
21

Kansas
$1.12
22

Wyoming
$1.11
23

Iowa
$1.10
24

Nebraska
$1.10
25

Vermont
$1.08
26

North Carolina
$1.08
27

Pennsylvania
$1.07
28

Utah
$1.07
29

Indiana
$1.05
30

Ohio
$1.05
31

Georgia
$1.01
32

Rhode Island
$1.00
33

Florida
$0.97
34

Texas
$0.94
35

Oregon
$0.93
36

Michigan
$0.92
37

Washington
$0.88
38

Wisconsin
$0.86
39

Massachusetts
$0.82
40

Colorado
$0.81
41

New York
$0.79
42

California
$0.78
43

Delaware
$0.77
44

Illinois
$0.75
45

Minnesota
$0.72
46

New Hampshire
$0.71
47

Connecticut
$0.69
48

Nevada
$0.65
49

New Jersey
$0.61
50

District of Columbia
$5.55
na

Source: Tax Foundation, Census Bureau

California's problems are from their own state debt, not from their federal spending and taxes. The problems stem from overly generous state benefits (including unsustainable pension obligations) and a lack of state revenue. But you already know that, don't you?

They may secceed before anyone has to kick them out.

They've been threatening that for years. Fine - go. Seriously ... just go. I am sick to death of the whole Texan jingoism.

They have low taxes,

Yes, but ...

aren't bleeding red ink,

Nearly 35 BILLION in outstanding bonds and notes, in my opinion, is kinda sorta bad. Sure, the taxes might be low, but the debt is ever-increasing due to the lack of revenue.

and aren't afraid to punish criminal behavior.

Or even kill people wrongfully accused of said behavior.

States like this will soon tire of bailing out liberal welfare states like California....

Do me a favor: find out how much the "republic" of Texas receives in Federal aid. Now, consider that all goes away when Texas finally leaves the Union ... along with all the federal jobs, military bases, etc.

Y'all'd be BEGGING back in our good graces within two years.

Reality check: According to the Wall Street Journal, over the next 2 years Texas is projected to have a budget shortfall of between $15 billion and $27 billion, depending on who is doing the calculation.

According to http://stimuluswatch.org/2.0/performance_places/state/TX

The total of cost of all the stimulus projects submitted by Texas is $10,678,745,829.43

I suppose that makes Texas a liberal communist welfare state too?

Every Texan I ever met was either a born again nutjob who believes they have personally met and spoke to Jesus, or they were just some punk with a chip on their shoulder about everything to do with Texas. I stay away from Texans, they're confrontational @!$%#s.

LOL the US can just blockade Texas.. move our boarder fence to the North side.. remove all federal funding (so bye bye NASA) and bye bye military bases

You mean the fence we never bother to secure? Or the military bases filled with Texan enlistees. Without Texas half the U.S. military would be dismal at best. Or perhaps you meant NASA which will be practically closed once this last shuttle mission is over.

Oh, Apples ... Texans really do overestimate themselves. Then again, if everything is bigger in Texas, that would be implicit of egos, as well so I shouldn't be surprised.

We would still have 60% of our military without the south. The south (not just Texas) makes around 40%, with about 15% being from Texas. So, no. It would still function just fine.

And, ironically, California has the most military bases thanks to the navy.

Sure! We get to keep the ports, the oil refineries, the oil reserves, the military bases, get to kick out the illegal immigrants, keep one of the biggest international airports that is also the central hub for all of corporate America.

Dallas is the number location for the most corporate headquarters.

Please! VOTE US OUT OF THE UNION!

radagast, I'm a Texan and I couldn't agree with you more.

If Texas leaves the union they would take with them their $27 billion dollar debt. They were able to balance their budget only using "accounting gimmicks" and the next budget process is going to be a major dilemma.

radagast (6.15), come down here and say that!

Sorry, couldn't resist. Just having a little fun since you threw it out there. Have a good day.

We would still have 60% of our military without the south. The south (not just Texas) makes around 40%, with about 15% being from Texas. So, no. It would still function just fine.

And, ironically, California has the most military bases thanks to the navy.

We aren't talking about bases, we're talking about enrollment. The south makes up a disproportionate number of military enrollments. Texas, in particular, has the highest enrollment. California, on the other hand, while being the most populous state, is #25 in enrollment. Ironic, not really.

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/mil_tot_mil_rec_arm_nav_air_for-recruits-army-navy-air-force

Click here for the chart of Army and Army Reserve accessions by state (FY 06-08).

You're right, as I said too, the south makes 40% of enrollment. But take Texas out, 15% of that 40%, and you still have a military. Like it or not, the military does not rely on Texas as you claimed.

California having the most military bases was a reply to "TAKE CALIFORNIA OUT". It is ironic that people who love this country want to kick out California while it has the most military bases and is used extensively by the navy and marines thanks to it being one big coastline.

Texas should secede if they are not going to respect the laws of the United States of America.

The Constitution states that treaties signed by the government are the law of the land.

If you aren't going to follow the law than get out and good riddance. Texans, please post a link where we can contribute to a secession movement. I'd make a generous donation to get rid of you.

Somehow I don't think God blesses this kind of thing.

thats national socialist peoples republic of texas to you dcrat.

Nobody is saying that he should not have paid the price for being guilty. However, he should have been afforded consular assistance, just as we expect the U.S. government to come to our assistance when we travel to a foreign country. Or would you have nothing to say if your kid was found guilty of murder in say Syria, and wasn't allowed to contact the U.S. Consulate?

We aren't on this planet alone you know.

@MarineDoc: How dare you try to use common sense and logic when dealing with a problem!

Whoops, sorry. It just slipped out. I can't help it.

OK - Just to put this in perspective a) The Child was 16 years old. b) The killer was 21 years old at the time.

Yes, he deserved to be executed, but don't make him sound like John Wayne Gacy

Ebeneezer Goode

You bring up an interesting point. how do we know this guy was not a serial killer? I wonder if they ever checked his DNA against other cold cases? I know if I had the control I would be going back over cold case files of unsolved murders. I'd be looking for the DNA match among similar mutilation and murdered young women for at least 5 years prior to his incarceration behind bars

The average age that serial killers claim their first kill is around 28.5 years according to J. Apsche, author of "Probing the mind of a serial killer"

Look no further than Angel Maturino Resendez for your Mexican illegal alien serial killer. Deported many times, returning many times and killing nine and probably many more people. Tried in 1999. A great case for border security, illegal alien criminality and murder and where is the Mexican consulate in this? They sure as hell didn't do diddly to stop him, keep him at home or prevent him from butchering nine people. 48 hrs after his last deportation he was back in the states and had killed four people, one women found with a hatchet buried in her face. Google the Railroad Killer

Hell, Mexico didn't want him. Mexican government bought the bus ticket back to the border so he could cross into the US again.

You are right, it can't be both ways.

Was he an American?

If not, he should have been allowed to contact the Mexican Consulate.

If yes afford the man the rights of an American...before he committed a crime.

Which is it?

Um - Americans get the benefits of International Treaties, just like Illegals do. It's kinda why they exist...

What no one is bringing up:

The US is a signatory to the treaty, but the US Supreme Court found in 2008 that only Congress could mandate that states are bound to the treaty. Though bills to that effect have been introduced each year since that ruling, Congress has not approved such a law.

Wait wait wait wait....

Congress has to do what?

We have a Chief of State er President, ... the figurehead dude... represents us to other nations, etc....

And when he signs a piece of paper in agreement with other nations or world bodies it means diddly squat?

ouch.

I think the point is this guy should have been deported years ago, before he had the chance to commit murder in the US. He came to the country as a toddler and no effort was made to become a citizen? Was he a legal immigrant?

As a Mexican citizen he should have been afforded access to the Mexican consulate, not that it would have saved him considering he was guilty....

I'm not clear, do we or they have to ask, or .... does the arresting police department's country have to offer the communication with the foreign consulate?

In the movies We americans are always screaming I want to talk to my Ambassador, and running to the buildings seeking asylum... so ?? who's responsability is it to seek the guidance of ones nations representatives?

and what about people from crappy countries like turkmekestan... do they even have legal representation for their citizens in this country? How would something like that go down?

Either way we broke some international rule and should live up to it and pay the fine or whatever it is.

How could they have known he was a Mexican citizen? They aren't allowed to ask or assume as that would be racial profiling...

right but who's job is it to make that declaration ?

do we have to offer it if we knew he was a Mexican, or does he have to ask for it?

the meeting with his countries reps?

We must:

b) if he so requests, the competent authorities of the receiving State shall, without delay, inform the consular post of the sending State if, within its consular district, a national of that State is arrested or committed to prison or to custody pending trial or is detained in any other manner. Any communication addressed to the consular post by the person arrested, in prison, custody or detention shall be forwarded by the said authorities without delay. The said authorities shall inform the person concerned without delay of his rights under this subparagraph;

The UN knows for some reason we feel bad when they say things about us...

Meanwhile they have twisted countries running their councils for Human Rights and Women's Rights and they point out that famine is rampant in eastern Africa... all at the same time they're planning billions of dollars to go to building a new tower in NYC and their staffs are getting extravagant salaries.

They need to shut up.

I doubt very highly that anyone on this board cares more about the murderer than his victim. If you actually read the words that have been typed thus far you would know that. The issue isn't whether or not he was guilty or deserves to pay. The issue is whether or not America stands by the rule of criminal law that we so often hold above all else. If we agree to treat foreign nationals, who are accused of crimes, by a certain process, then we should abide by that or else we are hypocrites. But instead we have to deal with the super ego of Texas who thinks treaties signed by the United States of America do not apply to them.

Please, please, please secede from the Union. Texans obviously don't feel they need to abide by the law yet they feel they need federal tax dollars for their people. Texas is like the guy who comes to the party empty handed and never volunteers to help a friend move. Useless.

For the record, Bush urged Texas to stay the same execution for the same reasons. This isn't Obama. Mexico made the first complaint on behalf of one of their citizens, then they took it up with the UN.

Last i saw its the Supreme Court that determines what the law is and they said very clearly that the states are NOT bound by that treaty until the federal government enacts the law so I guess Texas HAS followed the law why can't liberals accept that.

"Texans obviously don't feel they need to abide by the law yet they feel they need federal tax dollars for their people. Texas is like the guy who comes to the party empty handed and never volunteers to help a friend move. Useless."

Wow, generalize much?

nebraska - The Senate and President ratified these treaties - so we are bound. This illegal breach of these treaties started with the Reagan administration during the Iran-Contra affair. Reagan didn't like being caught doing illegal actions in other countries, so they violated the treaties.

international law was applicable and was ignored...but you Busy Repubs don't believe in the rule of law. That is why Texas needs to be it's own country (and stop the mooching off the US taxpayers).

correction: "Bushy Repubs"

International law does not trump our law unless it is in internatiuonal territories, like the middle of the ocean. That is not where he raped and killed her. You one world government types need to learn the meaning of the word sovereignty.

you need to learn the principles of law in " international treaty" -

oh, that's right - Texans think they are exempt from torture, too

Remember your attitiudes when an American is executed or tortured in another country!

until an american in a foreign country is arrested for no reason whatsoever and held for an unspecified amount of time. that's why you don't break international laws, cause when you do you forfeit any rights you have in any other country. if we don't follow those laws why should anyone else?

If he lives there 30+ years, rapes and murders a 16 year old girl, then I really don't care if the USA helps him or not, and I hope he suffers at least the same penalty!

Hugh,

What if the American lives there 30+ years" is WRONGLY accused of raping and murdering a 16 year old girl?

Again, we should abide by International laws which we have signed.

hugh, did you hear a whoosh? cause that was the point going right over your head.

in other countries they don't need you to commit a crime in order to arrest you. they arrest whoever they want and covict them of crimes with no evidence. next time they do and the government tries to intervene all they have to say is you have no authority here and to try to tell us not to do something that you have already done is hypocritical so mind your own business.

HATR_HURTER - until an american in a foreign country is arrested for no reason whatsoever and held for an unspecified amount of time. that's why you don't break international laws, cause when you do you forfeit any rights you have in any other country. if we don't follow those laws why should anyone else?

Like that girl in Italy? or.. the 3 hikers in Iran. or... the journalist in N. Korea... Etc. ? Nobody follows the rules but us. How were we supposed to know to contact the Mexicans when he didn't say he was one? You don't get to hold out on that till the appeals are all spent, remember

the hikers in ran,? you mean the ones who were allowed to contact the us embassy through the swiss embassy? which is exactly what we are arguing that was not allowed in this case? or the journalists who were allowed to contact the us embassy? they even called lisa ling, another journalist and one of the imprisoned's sister.

Right on HATR. Glad to see someone thinking this through and not just ranting and raving the RAH RAH song.

i thought it through cause i have to travel to other countries usually once a year. oh and the "consider the prisoners in iran beheaded" was exactly what i was thinking.

I fear enemies taking advantage of the UN frown upon this to take an American prisoner stating "Hey they can do it".

The man committed a crime yes, but was it too much to let him contact the Mexican government? Was the TX governor feeling too proud to relent?

HATR_HURTER, Tony-From-NJ.

Nobody denied this guy the ability to do anything, he didn't tell anyone he was a foreign national.
My point that you missed was, that Americans are arrested for no reason all the time before this happened, so why do you say that this will have an effect on how we are treated over seas? why should we act different?

they did not inform him of rights to have diplomatic representation or his right to consult with mexican consular authorities. try reading the article and you'll find they did actually deny him something, diplomatic representation. it actually says it in those EXACT words.

HATR_HURTER - they did not inform him of rights to have diplomatic representation or his right to consult with mexican consular authorities. try reading the article and you'll find they did actually deny him something, diplomatic representation. it actually says it in those EXACT words.

How can they be expected to inform him of his rights to have diplomatic representation or his right to consult with Mexican consular authorities, when he did not inform them that he was a foreign national?
Furthermore "it actually says it in those EXACT words" just because a Journalist writes it down, that doesn't make it gospel. You'll note it doesn't say that he told them he was a Mexican and wanted to speak with his Ambassador. What's not written down is often more telling than what is.