It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

AZ. All hispanics... Why not all be criminals?

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by prionace glauca
 





And for the LEGALS if you had any common sense and patriotism left in that soul of yours, you would step out of the way and help out.


Which do you want, for those to step out of the way or help out? Or are you suggesting that those who step out of the way and allow tyranny to have its parade this is helping out?




Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoudrel


~Samuel Johnson~

Those who are free and know it have no interest in this so called patriotism and only wish to remain free. When patriotism is offered as the better alternative to freedom, then those who offer this are scoundrels indeed.




Be a PATRIOT and stand up for your country, we are being destroyed from within. Help combat this ILLEGAL problem and pave the way for future generation.


Can you not even see the contradictions in your statements? If we are being destroyed from within, (and I believe you are correct on that point), then what has this to do with illegal immigration? If you were truly a patriot of the noble kind, you would be demanding those scoundrels who deign to call themselves our leaders be held accountable for the horrible job they have done protecting our borders. I assure you those scoundrels love it when the just anger is misdirected at someone else other than them.




posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Lets give you a lesson in English and maybe a lesson in patriotism at the same time.

Get out of the way and help out = Let the law enforcements do their job and help in NOVEMBER to vote the corrupt people out. Support the people who are standing up for the Laws.

Patriot = pa·tri·ot (ptr-t, -t)
n.
One who loves, supports, and defends one's country.

- Defend your country from the enemy that is constantly invading its borders and assimilating. You don't have problem as you are not a patriot but a leech who just wants to enjoy the benefits that the true patriots have fought for and are currently fighting for.




I assure you those scoundrels love it when the just anger is misdirected at someone else other than them.


The only scoundrels that I hate are the ones that are ashamed at what the Great of State of Arizona has done. If you have a problem with our laws then go someplace where they don't affect you. I suggest down south, hang out with those drug lords who are very appreciative of your kind.



[edit on 24-4-2010 by prionace glauca]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



If you were truly a patriot of the noble kind, you would be demanding those scoundrels who deign to call themselves our leaders be held accountable for the horrible job they have done protecting our borders. I assure you those scoundrels love it when the just anger is misdirected at someone else other than them.


It is just much easier to hate illegals for many. Your words are no doubt right on the money.

Unfortunately, many will choose to ignore them. Politicians love the words illegals. It has no doubt helped to keep some pressure off them especially during these bad economic times. And with the elections coming up, I anticipate the anti-illegal issue to increase and some politicians leading the charge for the sake of votes.


on your post



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by prionace glauca
 



The only scoundrels that I hate are the ones that are ashamed at what the Great of State of Arizona has done.


So you have no problem with natural born or legal Americans who are Hispanic being caught up in all of this?

Doesn't bother you that some of your fellow Americans will have to jump through loopholes to prove who they are while you provide the bare minimum?



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by prionace glauca
 



The only scoundrels that I hate are the ones that are ashamed at what the Great of State of Arizona has done.


So you have no problem with natural born or legal Americans who are Hispanic being caught up in all of this?

Doesn't bother you that some of your fellow Americans will have to jump through loopholes to prove who they are while you provide the bare minimum?



What loopholes? You call showing ID a loophole. Man you are one deluded individual. Everyone needs to present the same stuff, well if you have forged documents or can't even remember the address on your shown ID then I think there is an issue to demand more identification. But where do u get off about loopholes? There are no loopholes, its a document and if you have none to show, bye bye don't let the fence hit you on the way out.

Quit exaggerating and get with the program.


[edit on 24-4-2010 by prionace glauca]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by prionace glauca
 





Lets give you a lesson in English and maybe a lesson in patriotism at the same time.


Thank you for the lesson in English and perhaps a lesson in patriotism, and if your teaching represents at all the caliber of teaching that has been going on in the public schools across this nation then it should be clear why those public schools are in such disrepair.




Get out of the way and help out = Let the law enforcements do their job and help in NOVEMBER to vote the corrupt people out. Support the people who are standing up for the Laws.


Law enforcement in this land are required to take an oath of office to uphold the Supreme Law of the Land and the just laws that follow. This means they are tasked with the protection of rights! Further, there has also been much propaganda put out for too long that We the People should just get out of the way and let government do their job. In this country it is the People who are the government, and if that government gets in the way, it is time to reign them in and act responsibly.




Patriot = pa·tri·ot (ptr-t, -t) n. One who loves, supports, and defends one's country.


What good is your country if rights are abrogated and derogated on a regular basis? Why should any noble soul love that country? Indeed, what a grand irony you chose this issue to offer such empty rhetoric, for surely Mexicans love the country they left, as in its natural environment, but such beauty can not sustain the genuine need for freedom.




Defend your country from the enemy that is constantly invading its borders and assimilating. You don't have problem as you are not a patriot but a leech who just wants to enjoy the benefits that the true patriots have fought for and are currently fighting for.


I will defend my freedom and if that means defending my country too, then so be it. Of course, for too long have the people taken your foolish advice to stay out of the way and let law enforcement do its job and look at the result. Illegal immigration is out of control! Even a leech such as me can see the dramatic failure of law enforcement on this issue. It has always been a simple matter of protecting our borders, instead you advocate diminishing rights and do it in the name of patriotism.




The only scoundrels that I hate are the ones that are ashamed at what the Great of State of Arizona has done. If you have a problem with our laws then go someplace where they don't affect you. I suggest down south, hang out with those drug lords who are very appreciative of your kind.


Hate who you want brother, that is your choice. I have no problem at all with law, but I sure as hell have a problem with legislation pretending to be law. You suggest I hang out with drug lords, but would never dare find the courage to admit that simply repealing these stupid drug laws would eliminate those drug lords. Thanks for the lesson though.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 





Unfortunately, many will choose to ignore them. Politicians love the words illegals. It has no doubt helped to keep some pressure off them especially during these bad economic times. And with the elections coming up, I anticipate the anti-illegal issue to increase and some politicians leading the charge for the sake of votes.


All the more reason you and I and others must keep fighting for a reasonable debate where real answers can be found. I remain confident we can do this.

It is nice to have this opportunity to finally thank you personally for all you have done to protect our freedoms. My thoughts and prayers will always be with you.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by prionace glauca
 



Man you are one deluded individual.


You really got a problem. You should get it checked out. Maybe anger management classes would do you some good.


Quit exaggerating and get with the program.


No exaggerating. Just reality. While the white man is standing next to Mexicans at a local Home Deport, the mexicans will be asked to prove their citizenship while the white man walks away.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
reply to post by Janky Red
 


I agree 100% and I believe that this has nothing to do with the immigrants but them grabbing more control over all of us. If they wanted to stop the illegal aliens they would hold the employers accountable but they dont WHY?


Its because they dont care and only want more power otherwise they would stop the employment and they would go home its that simple.


I agree as well! The solution to the immigration problem is to prosecute the companies that employ them. If they weren't able to get jobs in America, there would be no reason for them to come here. (Well other than family). My point is, if there were no jobs available to them, it was defeat the purpose...they might as well stay in their country and try to get work. The big companies are responsible...but to say that on Fox news...would be blasphemous!



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by LurkerMan
 


Yes! You are right on! And your question asked of that poster in your post above is yet another great question. How do we honor the rights of People and still protect our borders? The thing is that there are immigration laws in place that are valid, and those who broke those laws, can not expect to use their rights as a "get out of jail" card. By that I mean, once an immigrant who ignored our immigration laws is caught and found guilty of this, deportation is the answer.

It is unfortunate that often times we do not catch this until other crimes have been committed and then we are faced with first housing them in a prison at our expense before deporting. We must protect our borders! Instead we spend too much time spending money on useless legislative acts that only serve to expand a government that has failed us in the simplest of matters. It will not be easy, but reasonable minds will prevail.

What a pleasure to meet you.



[edit on 24-4-2010 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]


i think i understand your angle now, i apologize if i came off as hostile. it seems your truly trying to tackle this issue, rather than just proving your point (something i myself am guilty of)

now this idea may seem kind of different, but im going to try to play it out anyway. what if there were some sort of physical jurisdiction or "buffer zone" somewhere in between the two nations where the flow of people can be somewhat controlled. that jurisdiction could act as an interim point in their transition from a mexican life to an american life. within this boundry we setup establishments for citizenship where they can become Americans the right way.

having a physical location will give the "refugee's" an actual haven where they are allowed to be until citizenships completed. this will also nullify any excuse for them being anywhere on our soil other than that jurisdiction.

each border state could donate some unused land for these havens. all immigration issues can be handled in that jurisdiction including deporation to individuals found elsewhere on american soil.

keep track of everybody coming in, and their progress with assimilation, and we'll have potential bonafied tax paying americans in no time...complete with rights and responsibilities.

employers would no where to go to find workers, the "racists" wont have to deal with anybody who hasnt completed their assimilation, and all associated crime if any will be compartmentalized to that area.

could take the cost out of their future tax's. and for those going there to abuse the system and get free refuge, they would at least be isolated from the rest of society to minimize repercussions

kind of like an ellis island reservation, with temporary interim transitional laws.

theres already a similar system established for native indians, and a bureau, and identification cards, and reservations. except they have soverignty, whereas these places would be under complete federal/state control...

we then start phasing out stuff that makes it easy for them to live anywhere but the interim area.

if their intentions are not to become americans they will be discovered at this stage rather than later on after they have joined society. no progress in furthering your citizenship after X amount of weeks and we start cracking down.

everybody gets 1 try, you screw it up and you get thrown on the "no mas" list.


any and all criticism welcome.

[edit on 24-4-2010 by LurkerMan]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by LurkerMan
 





i think i understand your angle now, i apologize if i came off as hostile. it seems your truly trying to tackle this issue, rather than just proving your point (something i myself am guilty of)


There is no need to apologize at all my friend, and truly I sensed no hostility from you at all. Also, thank you very much for your considered effort in finding answers to this problem.




now this idea may seem kind of different, but im going to try to play it out anyway. what if there were some sort of physical jurisdiction or "buffer zone" somewhere in between the two nations where the flow of people can be somewhat controlled. that jurisdiction could act as an interim point in their transition from a mexican life to an american life. within this boundry we setup establishments for citizenship where they can become Americans the right way.


My first thought when reading this was shanty towns. But then you when you said this:




kind of like an ellis island reservation, with temporary interim transitional laws.


And then my mind opened up more to your idea. I don't really know what it was with Ellis Island and I would have to do research on that before I can speak intelligently to it, but at least I know where to look to actually find data that could help in understanding this idea of yours better. But, let's back up and bit and consider some of your other thoughts.




having a physical location will give the "refugee's" an actual haven where they are allowed to be until citizenships completed. this will also nullify any excuse for them being anywhere on our soil other than that jurisdiction.


I am not so sure it will discourage any migration further North, and of course, this is the problem, not those who come here legally and work towards citizenship, but those who come here illegally with seemingly no intentions of ever becoming a citizen. Your idea would work for those who come here legally, but consider this; where they could once come here legally and move freely about the several states, now they must live in a sort of limbo until they are fully accepted. It becomes a sort of punishment for those who immigrate legally and places them in a general population filled with those who do not have the same motives.




keep track of everybody coming in, and their progress with assimilation, and we'll have potential bonafied tax paying americans in no time...complete with rights and responsibilities.


I am not sure if you are aware of this but many, many illegals do pay taxes in the U.S. and those who don't are the ones operating in the black market, and even they wind up paying some form of taxes through excises and imposts and such. Sorry to quibble with you on the rights thing, but those who immigrate here had rights from the moment they took their first breath. They left their own land to find a country where their rights would be protected. I know I am quibbling and perhaps all you meant was that with rights come responsibilities, and if that is what you meant you are right on the money.

I appreciate your concerns for assimilation and I understand this and do agree that it is foolish to immigrate here and never learn English or spit all over the cultures of those who have lived here all their lives and in this regard assimilation is a good thing. The first episode of Star Trek Next Generation I ever saw was that of the Borg. Resistance is futile you will be assimilated. Assimilation must be a personal choice lest we risk becoming the Borg.




theres already a similar system established for native indians, and a bureau, and identification cards, and reservations....so it would only take some minor tweeking.


This statement in my mind is what damns your idea the most. I mentioned in an earlier post that I grew up in New Mexico. In that state, I had the privilege of knowing a family within the Mescalero tribe, a tribe that was at that time, a fairly well to do tribe, considering they lived on a Reservation. There were also other tribes further Northwest that were not so well off, and indeed, shanty towns comes to mind. Poverty stricken people who appeared to be miserable.

Those reservations are sovereign lands separate from the United States, or at least they used to be. It is not that Native Americans on a Reservation which is their own sovereign land that I am against, and yet, those reservations stand as a monument to part of this nations atrocities. These reservations exist because The United States forced these Natives off of their lands and into reservations.

Further, there are many Mexican Nationals who firmly believe that much of the Southwest and California is their land that we stole from them. I am not advocating we give this land back, but to some extent you are, do you understand? If those who come here believe it is their land to begin with and a buffer zone is created for them to come to, why would they leave buffer zone they all ready believe to be their land anyway?

I think one of the root causes of the massive influx of people from South of the Border is the horrible conditions in Mexico they face. Part of that horror is this ridiculous drug war. I do believe that we can, without taxing the hell out of the people so that we can commit money to foreign lands, work towards a situation where we strongly influence a more affluent Mexico without intruding in their affairs. One way to do that is to destroy the black market and work towards fostering a truer free market. The way to get rid of illegal drug dealers is to stop having illegal drugs.

In business, if you are my competitor and you are engaging in unfair business practices that are killing my business, there is tort law that I can rely upon to stop your unfair practices. I can sue you. If you and are were drug dealers on the black market, and the same circumstances existed, I would not have the luxury of tort law, and would have to turn to the law of the jungle. This is the source of all the violence going on due to this war on drugs. Gangs killing each other because they can't sue each other. Kill the black market and open up a free market and things will change for the better. I believe this wholeheartedly.

Great ideas though. What fun to try to figure this out in a practical way that can lead to viable answers.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


How many white people do you know that were BORN in Mexico?

I don't know of any.

It's not racial profiling. It's common sense. And THAT my friend is an endangered species nowadays.



Peace



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 




I am not so sure it will discourage any migration further North, and of course, this is the problem, not those who come here legally and work towards citizenship, but those who come here illegally with seemingly no intentions of ever becoming a citizen. Your idea would work for those who come here legally, but consider this; where they could once come here legally and move freely about the several states, now they must live in a sort of limbo until they are fully accepted. It becomes a sort of punishment for those who immigrate legally and places them in a general population filled with those who do not have the same motives.


i think the idea is more to encourage the legal route and discourage the illegal route. there is currently a legal route but i believe from the perspective of the immigrant the illegal way seems easier. i think if we focused on providing a legal alternative that is as easy if not easier, and at the same time take steps to discourage the alternative...or make it at least seem harder.

i think a big factor in the issue is not very many of them have a "permanent stay" attitude. So when they weigh out their options before they cross the border, if the reason for them crossing is to have a better life then that puts them in a position where that better life is actually obtainable. Whereas somebody who is crossing to just smuggle drugs or whatever it wont be worth it to stay the 2 months learning the language and history and going through the process. hope that makes sense....it would also require shaping society outside the jurisdiction damn near impossible to live in without being a citizen.

as for assimilation...lol it is pretty borg sounding word... i just mean basic language skills and history. this limited schooling would of course only be provided to those serious about citizenship. and a test at the end to make sure nobody slips by. that way all the "super traditional" (racist) folk have less to complain over.


This statement in my mind is what damns your idea the most. I mentioned in an earlier post that I grew up in New Mexico. In that state, I had the privilege of knowing a family within the Mescalero tribe, a tribe that was at that time, a fairly well to do tribe, considering they lived on a Reservation. There were also other tribes further Northwest that were not so well off, and indeed, shanty towns comes to mind. Poverty stricken people who appeared to be miserable.


maybe reservation is the wrong word. they would only dwell on the establishment temporarily while they learn American life, couple months max. i only compared it to indian reservations because it is similar in the way the border/jurisdiction is a co-operation between the state/feds/inhabitants. rather than create an entirely new system, we could mimic the system that established reservations. im not sure if your familure with the bureau of Indian affairs, but there is a myriad of jurisdiction/court/and boundary issues with just the reservations alone. it would ease the establishment of the program to have state and federal cooperation i would think. we already know how much they butt heads on issues.


If those who come here believe it is their land to begin with and a buffer zone is created for them to come to, why would they leave buffer zone they all ready believe to be their land anyway?


because if they have already made the journey to the interim zone, then we are to assume they want to participate in "America". if not then they will be removed from the program. each person must register to be a part of the program, and the persons progress will be tracked. if they arent making an effort then they get the boot. the purpose of this zone is also to weed out the insincere folks, while still giving the sincere a fighting chance, and a little help.

the idea is that the ones who complete successfully will move on to be productive members of society. Then we all benefit.

anybody trying to do it any other way would get the book thrown at them, and punishments made tougher to the point where just doing it the right way is easier and less hassle.

just seems logical to me to condense them to one spot instead of spread across the country, and also to separate the regular families from the smugglers/gangs, while still giving them a legit route, and seeing them through it.

vocational and occupational training would probably be made available to them from the private sector right in the zone or as soon as they graduate, i would think. maybe tax breaks to companies that hire them or something.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:34 PM
link   
The United States of America started this problem a long time ago, and now we are having to solve it in this day and age. This started back during WWII. FDR, realizing that the labor force of the country was going off to war, would create a vacume and the production of the country would suffer, unless there was a solution, and that solution was to invite people, mainly the Mexican nationals into the country to help with the work that was needed here for the war effort. The problem came when WWII ended and the mexican workers were not told you can go home, thus creating this problem today. Illegale Immigration is a problem, as there is no guarantee as to who is coming across the boarders of the country, and there is one other issue here, if a person, who is an illegale immigrant, where does his loyality lie? Most likely it remains back in his home country, as he is here to seek employment and then to send money back home to his family. There are no ties, no responsibilities and no rights, and it creates a slave labor force that can and is exploited on all fronts, from cheap underpaid labor, with no rights or protections, to sex trafficing, and abuse. You complain about the law that was just past, and that is easy, we all can complain about a law or a policy, and not be happy about it. I can imagine that everyone on this board is not happy with something about the United States as it stands, however here is the real test and thing you should be thinking of. If you were in a position of authority to pass laws, what would your solution be, mind you that you have to not only uphold the current laws of the land, city, county, state and federal, but also listen and speak for those who you are suppose to govern and look after their well being, as they are paying for you to be in that position. The federal government when it comes to illegale immigration is just a joke, all bark, no teeth or action. They turn a blind eye on this issue, only to raise it up when someone wants to get elected. Build a fence, but it was stoped or there is no more funding for it. The Governor of Airzona and the state legislatiors of that state did what they were suppose to do, and that was listen to the voting citizens of that state. Over 70% of the population wants this, so it is the will of the people. And to make matters worse is that instead of protesting peacefully, those against it turned it violent. The moment that a fist, a rock, a stick, any weapon is raised, then the public will not support violence, and the side who throws the first punch, looses support, and all credibility to their argument. I may not agree or support illegale immigration, but when I saw that there was riots, no matter how just the cause might be, ends any respect and possible support I and others like me may have given to them. We are a nation of laws, some flawed, but 2 wrongs do not make a right. There are those who would say don't carry any id, and say nothing. To them I say, as long as it is peaceful I will respect that as an acceptable act of civil disobedience and may even be persuaded to support that, but right now, my view is the law is just, and it is the will of the people.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Janky Red
 





"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, and comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of great achievement, and who at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."


~Theodore Roosevelt~

My good friend, you are not at all one of those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat, because you are in the arena. Fear not error, embrace it, as I have seen you do so and expand because of it. Indeed, I have seen our brother End do it, and I have no doubt plenty here have seen me err as well. This site is filled with great writers, but out of that pool of greatness, there are still those who rise to the top, as cream always does. You Janky are a part of that cream!

You know, in regards to invented words, you are in good company, as the Bard himself was quite the inventor of words, and you poetry is worthy of such comparison. Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me. It is always a pleasure to, hell it is flat out exhilarating to read your words. You do remarkable things with words, and I look forward to reading the next great post from you.

We are in a time where souls such as you and I are needed. We are in a site that facilitates that need. I am proud to virtually stand beside you. Perhaps together we can sort out the horrible mess this world is in.


That's Awesome!

I have a FEW friends here who have grown into some very awkward political views
(myself included). There are nights when we are ablaze with u2u's bitching and moaning due to the onslaught and rank of more mainstream, defined political warriors.

We say things like;

"I can't take it anymore, everybody is frelling (TM.) insane, I am leaving this site" -

Usually the least frustrated will say;

" You can't do that man! This is literally the front line of ideas and our ranks are already thin as it is... It is our duty to keep up the fight however futile the attempt" (or something to that effect).

Anyhow, I think it is pretty cool that such a rational has been explored and established as a virtuous idea. The way you characterize this websight and your efforts herein are very much in line with my outlook. Its is fantastic to be reminded that there are notions more precious than victory or conquest.

I believe the public court is the most important aspect to any free society, people
seem to forget that every Monster of governance was first incubated in this arena.
Practically speaking, it is the TIME when we can slay any beast without lifting a finger. Also, some seem to forget that we essentially give up our greatest power once the birth has occurred; at this point the power is transfered to men who live to perpetuate
a positive public image of what they do, which is really all they do, by profession.

SO?

Will you get a blue eyed angel?

or a red, horned, 80 story cannibalistic beast?

Do you really care to find out???



[edit on 24-4-2010 by Janky Red]

[edit on 24-4-2010 by Janky Red]

[edit on 24-4-2010 by Janky Red]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 05:45 PM
link   
You know what? I'm Hispanic. Spanish is my first language, I was born in Costa Rica to Cuban parents. No everyone who speaks Spanish as a first language is against this new law. I'm all for it. If you can't come in through the front door you should be thrown out of it. Every country reserves the right to protect their borders. Just because it's illegal Mexicans who are creating the problem doesn't mean that the reaction to it is racist, or that nabbing these people is some how a kin to racism.

I would feel better if Nevada passed a law like this, as well as California, New Mexico, and Texas. The northern states need to do this as well as many illegals come through Canada as well. If my family and I can walk through the front door so can they. This is where political correctness deviates from reality. Illegal immigration by populations that don't even have an interest in assimilating, let alone obeying the laws of the nation the broke into, is a problem suffered by many countries around the world. With it comes government waste on services for illegals, violent crime, trafficking of drugs, weapons, women and children, and a whole host of other issues.

To turn a blind eye to that is ridiculous and naive.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Well, if you are speaking about Hispanics that are here illegally, they already are criminals. So no action is required of them at all.

I can't believe the outcry that legislation, designed to rid our streets of criminals -- which they are because they are already violating Federal Law -- is getting such attention.

Yet, our own citizens are being forced to go without proper housing, without proper food -- in part because our unemployment remains so high -- once again fall by the wayside. Other things to focus our attention on yet again -- how typical.


These are not innocent people.
They have already broken the law the minute they crossed the border.
They are already convicted criminals. Convicted when they pass the border signs that read:

Crossing this border without proper documentation and/or US citizenship is a crime.

If hispanics are so worried about being targeted -- why can't they simply carry proper ID?

If they are here legally, they have one of the following:

-- Driver's license
-- Passport
-- Green Card
-- Temporary / Student Visa

How many times do the people opposed to this leave their home with NO identification??

If you are here legally, you have ID.
Show it and move on with your life.

Meanwhile, get the criminals OUT and leave the citizens to pick up what's left of this country.

[edit on 24-4-2010 by lpowell0627]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by LurkerMan
American rights only apply to Americans

if your standing on American soil, then an American authority has every right to make sure you are American. after thats been established you then get to enjoy all the benifits and rights bestowed upon Americans.

if your not American then you will not have any rights until you either become an American or get the hell off American soil.


its just like being a member at a GYM.

if your inside the gym, a gym employee has the authority to ask to see your gym membership. members pay in to use the gym, since they are members they have a right to be in there and use the stuff. Just because its possible for someone to sneak into the gym does not make that person a member

and seeing as how you chose to become a member, you should have no problem showing your membership. if thats a problem maybe you should have thought about it before joining, or joined a different gym.

unfortunately the only way to preserve the rights of the rightful is... "foreign until proven American"

[edit on 24-4-2010 by LurkerMan]


You can't do anything but flatten things with a steamroller...

We may have a big problem here, but that does not mean we have to tamper or distort
our founding principles to find solution.

I believe you are angry and rightfully so, but this does not mean you have the right to use OUR founding document as a tool to execute your personal agenda. We are not unwavering, the Constitution is, do not let your emotions convince you otherwise.

This is EXACTLY what the Ben Franklin quote is referring to and why I used it...
Because it is desirable, easy or justifiable does not make it right, these two things
are not interlinked just because the first is present. Maintaining the constitution is
an act of restraint, it is not always enjoyable to do because it is not always gratifying.

I think we can all look to the last decade and see what we have traded for our
security can we not? Now is not the time to make the same mistakes for the sake of ease via the specter of frustration, we keep making that mistake and rarely enjoy the results.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


Well my friend, we have finally found that moment in which we can debate, as quibbling as it might be. What has always impressed me about your own sound reasoning and grasp of Constitutional issues has been in knowing that you are an immigrant. Indeed, I often feel that it is the legal immigrant who understands the American Dream best. You seem to embody that idea.

When I grew up in New Mexico, I had a friend named Aldo who came her with his parents as a political refuge from Cuba. His father built a raft with a make shift sail and took his family and sailed to America. They had to tie Aldo to the mast because of a big storm, which always amazed me. What a remarkable adventure.

I am not in any disagreement with your insistence that all who come here should come through the front door and knock before entering. Indeed, I don't think I've read a single post in this thread that would disagree with that assessment. There are those who attempt to frame we who are genuinely concerned about this legislation as pro illegal immigration, but I have not seen that, and what I have seen is a concern for the rule of law.

I understand that if an immigrant came here illegally they have violated law, and a valid law, but this is why it is imperative that our borders are protected. The trick is to keep people from getting in here illegally, which is far easier said then done, I realize, since many so called "illegals" are those who came here legally and simply never left after their visa's expired. The term "wet back" only reflects those who crossed the border illegally and does not accurately reflect the entirety of the illegal immigration problem.

I make this point to address your willingness to dismiss mine and the O.P.'s concerns as being that of political correctness. Janky and I both come from different angles of political views, but neither one of us are even remotely close to being "politically correct". I do have a tendency to place quotation marks around the term "illegal" simply because I have never been able to align my own understanding of inalienable rights with the idea that a person could be "illegal" by virtue of residence.

That said, when you say:




Illegal immigration by populations that don't even have an interest in assimilating, let alone obeying the laws of the nation the broke into, is a problem suffered by many countries around the world.


You are absolutely correct. Yet for so many, entering this country illegally is not just relatively easy, in spite of the "adventures" one has to go through to accomplish that, there is a federal government in place that is clearly facilitating this relative ease of illegal entry. While I hear lip service being paid to the fact that the federal government is responsible for protecting our borders, I see much more vehemence in advocating legislation that can very easily be used to trample all over the rights of all people, just to thumb noses at the federal government over a problem that must be addressed.

What has been exciting about this thread is the level of discourse by people who genuinely believe in rights and the rule of law and yet understand how vital it is to fix this immigration problem. There have been genuine efforts by people to find practical solutions to what seems to be an impractical problem. The discretionary use of force that has been granted our law enforcement has gone way beyond the pale of any rule of law and is increasingly leading us towards a police state.

I just can not, in good conscious, advocate legislation that ignores their own constitutional restraints. Of course, this rejection of state and federal restraints in favor of a more powerful government has been going on for too long and well beyond the immigration issue. In fact, when you say:




With it comes government waste on services for illegals, violent crime, trafficking of drugs, weapons, women and children, and a whole host of other issues.


Now we get down to the heart of the matter. When the 18th Amendment was passed, the rise of violent crime and government corruption was real and palpable. It only made sense to repeal that Amendment, as it is an odd Amendment to attach to the Bill of Rights, that people have the right to not drink. What is maddening, is that in spite of the "lessons" learned from the corruption and violence that came with prohibition, Congress didn't even bother to write an Amendment prohibiting drugs. The irony of that lies in the fact that of all psychoactive substances alcohol has proven time and time again to demonstrate some of the most aggressive behavior from its consumption.

Should alcohol be prohibited? Hell no! Should other psychoactive drugs be prohibited? If so, why? Because of what a person might do after consumption? Just where the hell do we draw the line? If we don't draw that line with the rule of law...well, look around my friend, even in Nevada where behaviors disapproved of by many can find more tolerance, there is still a problem directly linked to prohibitions.

The violence you make reference to is, in a large part, a product of this ill advised drug war that has helped to facilitate a prison nation in this country. But consider this site, that tends to pride itself on the freedom it fosters, but have a discussion about drugs? Well, okay, but lets whisper that discussion and bury the ideas where few can get at them, and welfare for illegals? I am not even for a government funded program of "welfare" for anyone. I see very little evidence that the social programs of this nation have done much to promote the general welfare of the people.

New technologies and great inventions are not a product of social programs, and even such programs as NASA, of which I do believe has some value, will be better facilitated by a free market. Can you imagine if government insisted that only they could handle inventing air planes? If we did rely on government for such a technology do you honestly believe that today people would be traveling across the skies with the ease they do? And NASA? I have a hard time believing that organization would even exist yet if we were that reliant upon government. NASA is as much a product of a free market that freely invents, as it is government funded.

What I am trying to communicate is that we had problems in this country long before this current mess of immigration, and this current mess is far more the product of government policy than it is the actions of those attempting to cross borders illegally. But, even so, we have steadily surrendered our power to an institution hell bent on controlling us. So, when you say:




To turn a blind eye to that is ridiculous and naive.


I couldn't agree more. But that awareness you appeal to goes well beyond immigration issues, and all is tied together, of this I remain certain.

As a final word, after considering how we might begin to genuinely fix this problem, I have an idea. Why not take those who have been found to be here illegally and instead of attempting to go through the crap required to deport them just put them on a bus, escorted by law enforcement and ship them to D.C. let each state dealing with this problem send those unwilling to do things proper to the city where improper behavior is the norm. I think then we will find a federal government more willing to re-consider their policies.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 





" You can't do that man! This is literally the front line of ideas and our ranks are already thin as it is... It is our duty to keep up the fight however futile the attempt" (or something to that effect).


I for one, am very pleased that you've made the choice to stay in the Arena.




Anyhow, I think it is pretty cool that such a rational has been explored and established as a virtuous idea. The way you characterize this websight and your efforts herein are very much in line with my outlook. Its is fantastic to be reminded that there are notions more precious than victory or conquest.


Knowing victory can be quite exhilarating, but you are right on, as fun as being victorious can be, it is no where near as precious as the interconnectedness that defines us all. What good is victory if it is at the expense of communication? What value has conquest if all we've managed to conquer is each others spirit?




SO? Will you get a blue eyed angel? or a red, horned, 80 story cannibalistic beast? Do you really care to find out???


Assuming this metaphor is describing government, and I hope it is, because I love the metaphor, I am fairly certain blue eyed angels have no interest in politics, which means when electing officials we are faced with electing red horned beasts. The trick is to keep those beasts chained and small. Blue eyed angels, or even brown or green eyed angels, are of a higher pecking order than red horned beasts. I love my dog, and no matter how many women come and go through my life, my dogs never leave me. They are faithful and protective and worth any effort they create, but they are dogs, and if a proper pecking order is not established, the relationship between man and beast is a dicey one at best.

Actually, that break down in pecking order can often be seen more clearly with people who own cats. I had a room mate years ago who had a cat, and he doted over this cat and did whatever the cat wanted. But when it came time to place controls on the behavior of that cat...fuggedaboutit! He couldn't understand why my obvious aloofness to his cat seemed to generate a better relationship with that cat. In fact, he was clearly jealous of the relationship his cat and I had. He confronted me one day and asked why I thought his cat would obey my orders and not his.

I tried to explain the pecking order to him and told him in this household there is a pecking order. At the top there was me, next was his cat "Sammy" then my dog "Max", (cats will have nothing to do with placing a dog at higher pecking order, to Max's great consternation), and finally at the bottom of the pecking order was my roommate. He did not like this answer and felt I was belittling him. I wasn't, only trying to show him how to climb up the pecking order. He dismissed my suggestion and chose to stay at the bottom of the pecking order, which only meant that in time his cat became mine. Sigh.

Based upon that, here is my understanding of how the pecking order should work in this country. At the top should be the people, next should be local government, then state, and finally at the bottom of that pecking order comes the federal government. It would be nice if that beast we know as the federal government was every bit as loving, fun and dumb as dirt as Max was, or as my current dog Jack is, but that is probably too much to ask for, which is why we need chains and leashes to control that beast. Neither Max or Jack, by the way, require/d leashes or chains, they are/were that well behaved and know/knew fully the consequences of their actions, and when they screw/ed up, it doesn't/didn't require any corporal punishment on my part, and both seem/ed to know my facial expressions intimately and know/knew damn well when they have/had screwed up and don't/didn't even hesitate to correct the problem.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join