@ lkalikl, Again this is proof that you are nothing but an emotional nutcase. You must be referring to the constitution in your head that states what you want it to state, because the immigration act clearly states that people who are caught entering the country illegally are automatically guilty of illegal entry and can be detained until whenever they can be deported. Typically, it should not take three years, but these two criminals made their own bed when they got caught in the wrong country. As I stated in response to your other non-sensical ramblings . . . until the constitution is amended it is what it is, even when it falls short.
However, if you truly believe what you say is indeed constitutional (not simply accepting your leader's position), please cite. I can work with the facts, not emotion.
He was mocking God. You, I, and the staunchest Fred Smith supporter know it was for dramatic effect, he was clowning around...not praying from the heart.
I'm more concerned about the dumb as Bahamians who support Fred Smith and his quest to turn the Bahamas into a safe haven for illegals and international criminals. You think this looks bad? Let's revisit this conversation when terrorists via Bahamas target the U.S. It's exactly the third world you seem to want for the Bahamas.
At present there is no law that determines how a unique situation like this is to be treated. The DOI attempted to deport these criminals quickly, but could not. They took them before the immigration board to decide on their release or incarceration, it was determined they remain in custody. No where in the constitution does it say that known international criminals/ illegal trespassers cannot be held indefinitely. So the Bahamas does not have to be Cuba in that regard because no laws were broken.
Only in the Bahamas do you have jacka sses who are more concerned with the so called inhumane treatment of foreign criminals than making the country better for all. We should all, including the "outspoken QC", be advocating for tougher immigration, border protection, human trafficking and proactive national security laws...not the plight of two low lives who deserve to be in prison.
I would expect better from someone with more common sense, but you prove yourself to be a typical dumb a ss...rowing about PLP and FNM when the problem at hand is much greater than that. But I guess that's how trained sheep are programmed to behave.
A law, that has not been deemed unconstitutional, is still law. Proposed legislation is not law and therefore, cannot be considered unconstitutional, because it doesn't exist. It's that simple!
Don Anthony...this man is calling something that is not even law, but a proposal for debate, unconstitutional. The debating process should include the discussion, and challenging, of whether its contents are constitutional or not. Even so the constitution can still be amended to include provisions that we believe to be unfair or unethical or inconsistent with our own or general interpretation, and they are the ones that are challenged. The law is about interpretation...
My common sense assumption here is that the proposed legislation is in accordance with the constitution, not contrary to it. If Parliament seeks to make changes in the law, I'm sure they are aware of the constitutional constraints, even if I'm not. Furthermore, the constitution can be amended. At this point it is a proposed legislation that is being debated and can be tweaked, it's absolutely too premature to call it unconstitutional when it's not even law. Fred Smith is an absolute alarmist.
Aren't you a lawyer? Then you should know that due process with regard to these illegal alien criminals was carried out. The hearing at the immigration board was their "trial" and it was determined that they remain in custody. I hope they are on a boat somewhere to infect another country, the Bahamas has enough home grown criminals...no need to import them.
My2cents says...
@ lkalikl, Again this is proof that you are nothing but an emotional nutcase. You must be referring to the constitution in your head that states what you want it to state, because the immigration act clearly states that people who are caught entering the country illegally are automatically guilty of illegal entry and can be detained until whenever they can be deported. Typically, it should not take three years, but these two criminals made their own bed when they got caught in the wrong country. As I stated in response to your other non-sensical ramblings . . . until the constitution is amended it is what it is, even when it falls short.
However, if you truly believe what you say is indeed constitutional (not simply accepting your leader's position), please cite. I can work with the facts, not emotion.
On Mitchell blasts critics yet won’t explain Cubans’ security risk
Posted 27 February 2016, 5:33 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
He was mocking God. You, I, and the staunchest Fred Smith supporter know it was for dramatic effect, he was clowning around...not praying from the heart.
On Mitchell blasts critics yet won’t explain Cubans’ security risk
Posted 27 February 2016, 3:59 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
I'm more concerned about the dumb as Bahamians who support Fred Smith and his quest to turn the Bahamas into a safe haven for illegals and international criminals. You think this looks bad? Let's revisit this conversation when terrorists via Bahamas target the U.S. It's exactly the third world you seem to want for the Bahamas.
At present there is no law that determines how a unique situation like this is to be treated. The DOI attempted to deport these criminals quickly, but could not. They took them before the immigration board to decide on their release or incarceration, it was determined they remain in custody. No where in the constitution does it say that known international criminals/ illegal trespassers cannot be held indefinitely. So the Bahamas does not have to be Cuba in that regard because no laws were broken.
Only in the Bahamas do you have jacka sses who are more concerned with the so called inhumane treatment of foreign criminals than making the country better for all. We should all, including the "outspoken QC", be advocating for tougher immigration, border protection, human trafficking and proactive national security laws...not the plight of two low lives who deserve to be in prison.
I would expect better from someone with more common sense, but you prove yourself to be a typical dumb a ss...rowing about PLP and FNM when the problem at hand is much greater than that. But I guess that's how trained sheep are programmed to behave.
On Mitchell blasts critics yet won’t explain Cubans’ security risk
Posted 27 February 2016, 3:40 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
A law, that has not been deemed unconstitutional, is still law. Proposed legislation is not law and therefore, cannot be considered unconstitutional, because it doesn't exist. It's that simple!
On Fred Smith: Jail or fine for violating bail 'completely unconstitutional'
Posted 27 February 2016, 3:03 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
Don Anthony...this man is calling something that is not even law, but a proposal for debate, unconstitutional. The debating process should include the discussion, and challenging, of whether its contents are constitutional or not. Even so the constitution can still be amended to include provisions that we believe to be unfair or unethical or inconsistent with our own or general interpretation, and they are the ones that are challenged. The law is about interpretation...
On Fred Smith: Jail or fine for violating bail 'completely unconstitutional'
Posted 27 February 2016, 1:02 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
lkalikl considering your limited mental capacity...I take no offense. Your emotional rants in lieu of substance speaks for itself.
On Fred Smith: Jail or fine for violating bail 'completely unconstitutional'
Posted 27 February 2016, 12:29 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
My common sense assumption here is that the proposed legislation is in accordance with the constitution, not contrary to it. If Parliament seeks to make changes in the law, I'm sure they are aware of the constitutional constraints, even if I'm not. Furthermore, the constitution can be amended. At this point it is a proposed legislation that is being debated and can be tweaked, it's absolutely too premature to call it unconstitutional when it's not even law. Fred Smith is an absolute alarmist.
On Fred Smith: Jail or fine for violating bail 'completely unconstitutional'
Posted 27 February 2016, 8:46 a.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
Finally someone admits what this vitriol toward this situation is really about...Fred Mitchell.
On Wanted alert for Cuban men
Posted 27 February 2016, 8:28 a.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
If the proposed legislation becomes law, how can it be unconstitutional? It's not currently in effect, is it? What an alarmist!
On Fred Smith: Jail or fine for violating bail 'completely unconstitutional'
Posted 26 February 2016, 8:56 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
Aren't you a lawyer? Then you should know that due process with regard to these illegal alien criminals was carried out. The hearing at the immigration board was their "trial" and it was determined that they remain in custody. I hope they are on a boat somewhere to infect another country, the Bahamas has enough home grown criminals...no need to import them.
On PM: Govt caught between a rock and a hard place over Cubans
Posted 26 February 2016, 6:30 p.m. Suggest removal