again, I owe you zilch...as to my ability to express my opinion, well, I have done exactly that...if I think illegals are dirtbags, that is my opinion...there is no law that states I cannot express my view about a particular law breaking individual....nor is it inaccurate to state that these illegals have no respect for our laws; those are statements of fact......their very actions reinforce that statement...and if I think you are a moron, well, that is my opinion....
as to anyone's ability to read, write or speak English, in relation to their ethinicity, well, that cannot be determined exclusively by their apparent skills...but it might be determinable by the phrases they choose...and I have never suggested that a person is an illegal merely because they have posted grammatically incorrect English sentences; in fact, many USCs have done so, which is a sad commentary on our public education system and/or their (the USCs) motivation to apply themselves towards achieving a better level of reading, writing and understanding the English language.

and it doesn't matter to me what country any illegal alien came from....illegal is illegal, whether of Mexican, Polish, British or middle Eastern heritage....

ur still running away from the anaswer .hahahahahah what a joke ur,,just say it ,,ok everybody i will answer that question on the behalf of someone12,,,,the name of the law office is stinky indian for immigration services,,,he serve in the army in hes dreams,,the unit is rambo 3,,hahahhahahah,,someone12,,where in vietnam u were back in the old days?and do us a favour ,,can u do a copy of ur military id and post it on here ,,u can cover all ur personal info ,,,we just wanna c ur military id john rambo

wow what a great guess..."stinky indian for immigration services"....are they a member of AILA?? Why not give 'em a call? What a moron you are....and you clearly show your racist tendencies by referring to the Indian culture as "stinking"....of course, I wouldn't want to be downwind of you...but the cloud of flies swirling around your head would provide ample warning to maintain a distance of at least 20 feet from anyplace you were standing....

Is Jordan in India? I think, originally, mike_2007 said he was Jordanian? Am I right, Mike? I know I passed geography in college and Jordan is not part of India!

In any case, carry on. You two seem to be having too much fun!

In case you guys want to bring each other to Court, you may wish to have a look at USSC Landmark decisions on Freedom of Speech and of the Press

1. Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919) Established the idea that "clear and present danger" in certain speech is not protected by the First Amendment. Schenck's attempts to obstruct recruitment processes were perceived as a "clear and present danger that will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent".


2.
Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942)Established the “fighting words doctrine” that some words are not protected under the First Amendment because they are tantamount to violent actions.


3. Roth v. United States (and Alberts v. California), 354 U.S. 476 (1957)Obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment.


4. New York Times v. Sullivan (and Abernathy v. Sullivan), 376 U.S. 254 (1964) Public officials, to prove they were libelled, must show not only that a statement is false,but also that it has been published with malicious intent.


5.
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) Mere advocacy of the use of force, or of violation of law (in this case, by a Ku Klux Klan leader) is protected by the 1st Amendment free speech clause. Only inciting others to take direct and immediate unlawful action would be without constitutional protection.


6.Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969) Wearing armbands is a legitimate form of protest under the First Amendment, even on public school grounds.


7.
Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971)One should not be convicted for wearing a jacket in a courtroom emblazoned with the phrase "**** the Draft" (in the Vietnam War context), as this is communication, protected by the free speech clause of the 1st Amendment. The word "****" itself, clearly not directed at the hearer, is not in this particular instance a fighting word, and so not without constitutional protection.


8.
New York Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)Government's desire to keep so-called "Pentagon Papers" classified is insufficient to overcome 1st Amendment hurdle.


9.Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) To be obscene, a work must fail several tests to determine its value to society, essentially having "no redeeming social value" to be so declared.


10. Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988) A public figure shown in a parody must show actual malice to claim he is libelled.


11. Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989)Law prohibiting burning of the American flag is unconstitutional as violating the First Amendment


12. Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., 501 U.S. 560 (1991) Nude dancing is not protected by the 1st Amendment.


13.
Reno v. ACLU, 520 U.S. 1113 (1997)The Communications Decency Act, regulating certain content on the Internet, is so overbroad as to be an unconstitutional restraint on the 1st Amendment.


14. Erie v. Pap's A. M., 529 U.S. 277 (2000) Upholding the 1991 ruling that Nude dancing is not protected by the 1st Amendment.


Links:

Cornell University Law School: Supreme Court Collection, Historic Supreme Court Decisions by Party Name

Landmark Decision

I think you will find that the only war that S12 has participated in and only army he has been apart of is an online wargame.

Jordan is located in the Middle East and borders Syria, Saudi Arabia, the Red Sea, Palestine, Israel, and Iraq. Covering some 89342 sq.km.,