Comments on Clueless Reconquista Isabel Garcia

From CCIR member - 10/26/02

While Garcia's group, "Derechos Humanos" (Human Rights) purports, by it's very name, to support "human rights", specifically as enumerated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), it appears they've never even read it.

The UDHR states that no nation my prevent it's own citizens from leaving to another nation that will have them. It also states that no nation may prevent it's own citizens from returning from abroad. This is important, because why would the UDHR even bother to say that much if nations do not have the right to exclude ANYONE from entry, as Garcia and her group asserts?

If ALL people have an inalienable "human right" to "migrate" across international borders, unrestricted, then why doesn't the UDHR just say that? Since it doesn't, and says that only citizens may not be prevented from entry, the clear, albeit implied, meaning is that ALL non-citizen persons may be excluded from entry, having NO "human right" to do so without LEGAL permission to do so.

The UDHR also states that "nationality" is a "human right", or, in other words, to be a "citizen" of a sovereign nation. Without national sovereignty, and sovereign borders, nations themselves become meaningless, ceasing to exist as vehicles of the socio-political expression of like minded groups of people, sharing a common citizenship, language and culture. When you rob a nation, and the citizens thereof, of it's sovereignty, you rob the citizens of their right to their "nationality", which is a "human right" specifically enumerated by the UDHR.

In essence, the UDHR affirms that nations indeed can, and should, control who crosses their borders, and that it is a "human right" of the citizens living within those borders to do so as they see fit.

It is the DUTY of citizens, AS HUMAN BEINGS, to protect their own "human rights" by asserting and protecting their national sovereignty, and by so doing, protect their "nationality", which is a fundamental "human right" as defined by the UDHR.

The question then becomes, how does such an organization, having the nerve to call itself "Derechos Humanos", justify and base it's assertion that all people have an inalienable "human right" to enter any country they so choose, that they are not citizens of, at any time, and in as many numbers as they desire, and regardless of the "human rights" and desires of the citizens of that country, when no such rights of non-citizen entry are enumerated in the UDHR, which they claim to support?

What about the citizens of a country, who also have "human rights", as defined in the UDHR, to sovereign and secure borders, with the right to entry guaranteed ONLY to it's own citizens, and in support of the citizen's "human right" to their "nationality", as is stated in the UDHR?

Isabel Garcia is obviously using "human rights" as a front and a smokescreen for her activities and agendas, which have nothing to do with "human rights". She has obviously never read the UDHR, even though it can be found on the website*. I am sure they are counting on a general human tendency toward ignorance, illiteracy, and laziness that most people will just take HER word for what constitutes "human rights", and not study the UDHR itself, which is the most definitive and widely accepted document in existence that makes an attempt to define what they are, and are not.

We should ALL become familiar with the UDHR, so that every time one of these buffoons tries to equate open borders with "human rights" we can show them that it is not so, that nowhere in the UDHR does it say it is so, and that the UDHR does the opposite, as it enumerates and affirms that "human rights" of nations of citizens to control their own borders and protect their own "human right" to their sovereign "nationality".

* -- This website is not Isabel Garcia's or Coalicion Derechos Humanos (Arizona). It is registered to Grupo Interconect of Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.

| | |