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.

 

I mean seriously! Why do we (America) even have border security officers?

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2010 @ 07:20 PM
link   
If… we are going to argue that “illegal’s” provide us benefits?

If… we invite the President of Mexico to speak against the good folks of Arizona and their new laws? Trying to up-hold ‘federal’ mandates against immigrants that are already on the books?

Shouldn’t we just save the money and let them in?

Thoughts?

OT

PS: After all… the annual budget is over 10 Billion, with a “B”

Is our leadership really saying the money could be better spent? For more see: www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on May, 24 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Illegals contribute ZERO benefit to the country. They cause LOTS of problems. They cost the country HUGE amounts of money. It is VERY beneficial to eliminate them all. For the sake of the country and its legal citizens, its a HANDS DOWN WIN to get them OUT ASAP!!!!!!!!



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 07:33 PM
link   
One woud have to show how much money the illegals save us versus the monies that the illegals use up. Take for example the anchor baby laws alone, as they were designed during the slavery era to grant children of slaves citizenship because their parents were removed from their original country. They were not meant for people bent on breaking laws to jump the fence and attain benefits through their anchors such as food stamps, cell phones, subsidized housing, & healthcare.

Also for every job the illegal occupies, a citizen now has to be placed on food stamps and unemployment benefits.

Open borders thinking is utter nonsense, how about these criminals have some balls and go back to save their own country.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shine71
Illegals contribute ZERO benefit to the country. They cause LOTS of problems. They cost the country HUGE amounts of money. It is VERY beneficial to eliminate them all. For the sake of the country and its legal citizens, its a HANDS DOWN WIN to get them OUT ASAP!!!!!!!!


Thank you for the reply....

Its really simple in my mind...really...

Go back to the end of the line and take your spot...

Do what you have to...and we'll let you in!

Am I wrong?


OT



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 07:44 PM
link   
I have the feeling the border states would be really upset if something like the OP mentioned became law.

I am sure out of all the illegal immigrants that make their way in to this country; there are some illegals that are honest, hard working, and great people. The violence, gangs, crimes, and drug cartels that seem to be happening are good enough reasons to not open our border.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by prionace glauca
......

Also for every job the illegal occupies, a citizen now has to be placed on food stamps and unemployment benefits.

Open borders thinking is utter nonsense, how about these criminals have some balls and go back to save their own country.



prionace glauca, thx for the post!



Others, OK....


Take for example Michigan and Ohio....ready?


The two states that built American have 15% and 10% unemployment, respectively. Don't you think there are a few million that would be ready and willing to take a JOB....of course they would!!!!!!


Is our leadership contributing to the un-employment rate by offering amnesty to the illegals? Why don't they see this? Is it about getting the latino vote?


Come on now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


OT



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by XtremeDethBear
I have the feeling the border states would be really upset if something like the OP mentioned became law.

I am sure out of all the illegal immigrants that make their way in to this country; there are some illegals that are honest, hard working, and great people. The violence, gangs, crimes, and drug cartels that seem to be happening are good enough reasons to not open our border.


????????????????



It IS ALREADY Law.......



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by XtremeDethBear
........
I am sure out of all the illegal immigrants that make their way in to this country; there are some illegals that are honest, hard working, and great people. .....


You are OFF TOPIC friend!!!!!!!



Do you have a point that is relevant?



Sure 2 and 2 is 4....but your truth has no effect on the OP's truth....surely you see that???????



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 


Honestly, I have yet to see a well thought through argument on why we should not enforce our immigration laws.

For the most part, I see highly emotional, (and I am sure sincerely felt) diatribes on how it is racist to enforce our laws, how it will result in racial profiling, etc. I dont see any evidence that the person feeling these noble emotions has considered what it means to be a nation with no borders.

But you are right, why pay for services we have no intention of using? Unless we are just trying to employ people, and we dont care at all about getting our money's worth. We might as well save the money and use the personnel for other things.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by prionace glauca
Take for example the anchor baby laws alone, as they were designed during the slavery era to grant children of slaves citizenship because their parents were removed from their original country. They were not meant for people bent on breaking laws to jump the fence and attain benefits through their anchors such as food stamps, cell phones, subsidized housing, & healthcare.


There are no anchor baby laws in the constitution.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:29 PM
link   
I would say that to the busnisses that hire them they offer a bigger profit margin. Their work creates wealth for their employers and indirectly the nation.

This is not in the best interests of the nation but only the few. I guess if you believe that the money made by those that employ illegals trickles up, down or out (Reaganomics style) then you could say it's good.

[edit on 24-5-2010 by daskakik]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by OldThinker
 


Honestly, I have yet to see a well thought through argument on why we should not enforce our immigration laws.

For the most part, I see highly emotional, (and I am sure sincerely felt) diatribes on how it is racist to enforce our laws, how it will result in racial profiling, etc. I dont see any evidence that the person feeling these noble emotions has considered what it means to be a nation with no borders.

But you are right, why pay for services we have no intention of using? Unless we are just trying to employ people, and we dont care at all about getting our money's worth. We might as well save the money and use the personnel for other things.


Thx! I think it is about VOTES...

We are SOOOOOO inconsistent as a nation...policy-wise....

John Adams is rolling over in his graves, didn't he say... "Be not intimidated... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberties by any pretense of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice!"

hm?????


Any one listening here??????



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
I would say that to the busnisses that hire them they offer a bigger profit margin. Their work creates wealth for their employers and indirectly the nation.

This is not in the best interests of the nation but only the few. I guess if you believe that the money made by those that employ illegals trickles up, down or out (Reaganomics style) then you could say it's good.

[edit on 24-5-2010 by daskakik]



EGO-centric vs. NATION-centric?

Which is more LONG-TERM?

OT



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
EGO-centric vs. NATION-centric?

Which is more LONG-TERM?

OT


Of course NATION-centric is LONG-TERM but we all know EGO-centric is the MO. Especially when EGO=CORPO.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   
You got to have someone to stop tourists and low-end drug runners. We wouldn't want government sponsored cartels and criminal organizations that can fly or ship in their wares have competition on the street now would we?



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by PatesHatriots
You got to have someone to stop tourists and low-end drug runners. We wouldn't want government sponsored cartels and criminal organizations that can fly or ship in their wares have competition on the street now would we?



yeah....

of course....

so why do we invite their President to piss all over our federal law, trying to be inacted by a state? and why do the Bill Mayers of the world and his ilk, supossedly a majority....shI& all over the good folks of Arizona?



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 


Hey, I didn't say it was good logic. I was just answering the original question.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by PatesHatriots
reply to post by OldThinker
 


Hey, I didn't say it was good logic. I was just answering the original question.


oh, OK...I got it.

OT thanks you for stopping by



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRokkyy

Originally posted by prionace glauca
Take for example the anchor baby laws alone, as they were designed during the slavery era to grant children of slaves citizenship because their parents were removed from their original country. They were not meant for people bent on breaking laws to jump the fence and attain benefits through their anchors such as food stamps, cell phones, subsidized housing, & healthcare.


There are no anchor baby laws in the constitution.


Nope none in the constitution but an ammendment. I didn't state it was in the constitution, but something added during the civil war.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Shine71
 



Illegals contribute ZERO benefit to the country. They cause LOTS of problems. They cost the country HUGE amounts of money.


Substitute the word "illegals" for "Americans".


Illegals didn't rack up 13 trillion and country.


Prionace,
you just don't give up


Take for example the anchor baby laws alone, as they were designed during the slavery era to grant children of slaves citizenship because their parents were removed from their original country. They were not meant for people bent on breaking laws to jump the fence and attain benefits through their anchors such as food stamps, cell phones, subsidized housing, & healthcare.


That my friend is the way you see it and the way you would like it to be.

Unfortunately for you, the law sees it otherwise.

Here you go. Hope you like this anchor baby draped in a US flag.


New York Times reports that Henry Cejudo, the son of unauthorized migrants, has just won the gold for the U.S. For most nativists, however, Henry Cejudo is not a U.S. citizen. He is an "anchor baby".

"This is the American dream," said a joyful Cejudo, still wrapped in the U.S. flag. "The United States is the greatest country in the world."
Kevin Baxter - Los Angeles Times


www.citizenorange.com...

Shame on this Anchor Baby for showing such much pride for Mexico the USA.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join