How long do we let this crap go on?

[JustRalph]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/02/AR2010040204129.html

Arizona murder prompts calls to tighten security

DOUGLAS, Arizona (Reuters) - The murder of a prominent Arizona rancher near the Mexican border is spurring charges that Washington is doing too little to stop Mexico's raging drug war from spilling over into the United States.

Robert Krentz was shot last Saturday while working at his remote cattle ranch some 30 miles northeast of this city on the Arizona-Mexico border.

Investigators tracked the footprints of the suspected gunman about 20 miles south to the border with Mexico, prompting some authorities to blame smugglers or illegal immigrants for the killing.

"The ranchers have feared for their lives for a long time and they've told the people from Washington, but they don't pay attention to us," Michael Gomez, the mayor of Douglas, told Reuters.

"This continues to be a hot area for illegal crossings and they have to do something to stop it."

Krentz, 58, was well liked and respected in southeastern Arizona, where his family's ranch sprawled over 35,000 acres.

No arrests have been made and there is no clear motive or any named suspect, the Cochise County Sheriff's Office said.

The killing comes amid ever-more brazen and brutal attacks by cartels in northern Mexico that are fighting for control of lucrative drug smuggling routes into the United States.

Last month, gunmen killed two Americans in Ciudad Juarez, south of El Paso, Texas, renewing fears in the United States that escalating violence may spill north over the border.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security expressed "outrage" on Thursday at Krentz's murder and posted a $25,000 reward for "information leading to the arrest and prosecution of the individual or individuals responsible."

much more at the link

[Tom]

At least we have had bi-partisan blind eyes to this problem.
Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama should all be impeached for completely ignoring the security of our citizens and the sanctity of our borders.

Each the last four presidents have allowed far more damage to our nation that Osams Bin Laden caused. Who is our real enemy?
The worst of the four - Bush 43 by a landslide. He not only betrayed the country, he let two border agents rot in a jail cell to for politics. He will certainly burn in HELL for that act alone. I am glad of that.

[ElKabong]

[
"The ranchers have feared for their lives for a long time and they've told the people from Washington, but they don't pay attention to us," Michael Gomez, the mayor of Douglas, told Reuters.
]


and DC wonders why people are outraged at them.

0kaka has been in office for over a year, campaigned about "securing" our borders. All, bullshit. The buck stops at his desk.

[prospector]

either put troops on the border or get outta the way and let the citizens handle it..
you do have to give obama some credit..most of the jobs they come here for are now gone..:)

[46zilzal]

Murders happen everyday in every part of the country. The xenophobes are the ones not understanding what the long term ravages of poverty will do to ANYONE and blame it on them "furiners.......

Just like the Turks blamed the Armenians for all their woes, just like the NAZI'S blamed the Jews, just like the Romans blamed the Carthaginians, the tea baggers blame anyone who is not Lilly white for all their problems, the Apartheid government blamed the black for all their woes, the Hutsis blamed the Tutsis for all their problems, in the former Yugoslavia Bosnian forces knew all their woes were not of their making and started to kill Muslims, in the Sudan, the powers that be have to kill their reason for hard times.......

It goes on and on and on and NO one seems to figure it out:Times create hardship and to blame it all on an ethnic group is ridiculous.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Murders happen everyday in every part of the country. The xenophobes are the ones not understanding what the long term ravages of poverty will do to ANYONE and blame it on them "furiners.......

Just like the Turks blamed the Armenians for all their woes, just like the NAZI'S blamed the Jews, just like the Romans blamed the Carthaginians, the tea baggers blame anyone who is not Lilly white for all their problems, the Apartheid government blamed the black for all their woes, the Hutsis blamed the Tutsis for all their problems, in the former Yugoslavia Bosnian forces knew all their woes were not of their making and started to kill Muslims, in the Sudan, the powers that be have to kill their reason for hard times.......

It goes on and on and on and NO one seems to figure it out:Times create hardship and to blame it all on an ethnic group is ridiculous.

Sorry Charlie but when a non-citizen enters the country illegally and kills a citizen to preserve his illegal drug route - all wild cries of xenophobia are totally off point.

Who in this thread is blaming Mexicans for the problems of the world? The complaints seem to be that the border is so insecure that otherwise preventable murders are not being prevented. You seem to read a lot; I figure your reading comprehension to be a little better.

[boxcar]

Murders happen everyday in every part of the country. The xenophobes are the ones not understanding what the long term ravages of poverty will do to ANYONE and blame it on them "furiners.......

Are you justifying the murder of this white, rich rancher by an illegal alien?

Boxcar

[prospector]

"blame it all on an ethnic group is ridiculous"
which ethnic group belongs to the mexican drug cartel?

[bigmack]

Just like the Turks blamed the Armenians for all their woes, just like the NAZI'S blamed the Jews, just like the Romans blamed the Carthaginians, the tea baggers blame anyone who is not Lilly white for all their problems, the Apartheid government blamed the black for all their woes, the Hutsis blamed the Tutsis for all their problems, in the former Yugoslavia Bosnian forces knew all their woes were not of their making and started to kill Muslims, in the Sudan, the powers that be have to kill their reason for hard times.......
Do you feed yourself?

[boxcar]

Do you feed yourself?

Yeah, Zil, and if you do, who do you blame for that? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[PhantomOnTour]

The U.S. Gov't should peel back about a half mile from the border on our side. Then clear that land totally-no trees, no structures. That territory is no man's land, and I mean NO MAN. A half mile should be too far for tunnels, and would give our troops a good chance to spot crossers. Sit em in towers or run patrols with night vision, and shoot to kill. Nowhere to duck and hide if you just crossed over and hear the Federales comin. Believe me, fewer people will cross if they have to make a 1/2m mad dash for their lives. (esp if they can't get the half in good race horse time like :44 and change ya know? ;) ). Heck, throw lotsa rattlers and some other mean animals in no man's land too.

Just my opinion ya'll, but when one of my fellow citizens is killed because he lived too close to a lawless border (he lived on our side), it's time to do something.

[boxcar]

The U.S. Gov't should peel back about a half mile from the border on our side. Then clear that land totally-no trees, no structures. That territory is no man's land, and I mean NO MAN. A half mile should be too far for tunnels, and would give our troops a good chance to spot crossers. Sit em in towers or run patrols with night vision, and shoot to kill. Nowhere to duck and hide if you just crossed over and hear the Federales comin. Believe me, fewer people will cross if they have to make a 1/2m mad dash for their lives. (esp if they can't get the half in good race horse time like :44 and change ya know? ;) ). Heck, throw lotsa rattlers and some other mean animals in no man's land too.

Just my opinion ya'll, but when one of my fellow citizens is killed because he lived too close to a lawless border (he lived on our side), it's time to do something.

That would be like shooting fish in a barrel, which would be frowned upon a wee bit by the ACLU, various civil rights groups, peaceniks and an assortment of other types of bleeding hearts. (But ask any advocate of the Rule of Law or anyone in the NRA, for that matter, if we care.)

Animals, however, should not be put in harm's way because of man's foolishness. In lieu of them, I would heavily populate No Man's Land with Land Mines. So, not only would they have to outrun flyin' bullets, but while making their mad dash over to the Land of Opportunity, they would have to also concern themselves -- at minimum -- with losing limbs in the process.

You know, POT, I'm gettin' to like you. (Hmm...did that come out right?)

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

zilly has a terrible habit of just catching one or two KEY WORDS in a post or thread, then going off on his own very merry bullshit ride, promoting his biased view of the world at the total expense of the relevance of the topic at hand.

I attribute all this to my belief that he is not a real person, but instead an Artificial Intelligence project emanating out of M.I.T. and still obviously in BETA stage.

When you approach 46zilzal's postings with my kind of mind frame, it all starts to make perfect sense.

[boxcar]

zilly has a terrible habit of just catching one or two KEY WORDS in a post or thread, then going off on his own very merry bullshit ride, promoting his biased view of the world at the total expense of the relevance of the topic at hand.

I attribute all this to my belief that he is not a real person, but instead an Artificial Intelligence project emanating out of M.I.T. and still obviously in BETA stage.

When you approach 46zilzal's postings with my kind of mind frame, it all starts to make perfect sense.

:lol: :lol: I'm sure glad to hear Zil makes sense to at least one person on this forum. You deserve some kind of award -- maybe the Fickle Finger of Fate award or something. Some recognition for interpreting alien gobbledygook...

Boxcar

[Rookies]

The U.S. Gov't should peel back about a half mile from the border on our side. Then clear that land totally-no trees, no structures. That territory is no man's land, and I mean NO MAN. A half mile should be too far for tunnels, and would give our troops a good chance to spot crossers. Sit em in towers or run patrols with night vision, and shoot to kill. Nowhere to duck and hide if you just crossed over and hear the Federales comin. Believe me, fewer people will cross if they have to make a 1/2m mad dash for their lives. (esp if they can't get the half in good race horse time like :44 and change ya know? ;) ). Heck, throw lotsa rattlers and some other mean animals in no man's land too.

A guy by the name of Kruschev had this very same idea in 1961. How'd THAT work out ?

[newtothegame]

A guy by the name of Kruschev had this very same idea in 1961. How'd THAT work out ?

Why not just have them over the border for coffee and doughnuts!!! I am sure that would work well....Ohhh wait....thats almost what we have now :lol:

Now I don't propose what some have here....but there definitely needs to be more control along that border. And if need be, I have no problem with military intervention. We have already sent delegates south of the border to define and try to help the problem. But, for what purpose if people on this side are being killed at random?
Lets enforce the laws. I have no problem with a "buffer" zone....although the landmines might be a bit extreme. Would hate for children to somehow get maimed or killed in this. Lets be reasonable and fix the problem.

[boxcar]

A guy by the name of Kruschev had this very same idea in 1961. How'd THAT work out ?

I had no idea Russia was ever such a hot spot for "tourism". People were just dyin' to get in, eh?

Boxcar

[Rookies]

Boxcar... geez even YOU have heard about the Berlin Wall... :lol: :rolleyes: Your patron saint sure as hell did... ;)

Now, like NEWTTG, I do believe, that a serious fix needs to be made on the U.S. southern border- probably involving a fixed wall of some kind. But therein lies the rub, finding the proper balance between border security and the enforcement of law. Otherwise, on this issue, the U.S. stands side by side with the totalitarian communists. An arsehole idea indeed.

[boxcar]

Boxcar... geez even YOU have heard about the Berlin Wall... :lol: :rolleyes: Your patron saint sure as hell did... ;)

Now, like NEWTTG, I do believe, that a serious fix needs to be made on the U.S. southern border- probably involving a fixed wall of some kind. But therein lies the rub, finding the proper balance between border security and the enforcement of law. Otherwise, on this issue, the U.S. stands side by side with the totalitarian communists. An arsehole idea indeed.

Hey, doc...there's no parallel here. Hate to break this to ya. :rolleyes: The commies were the oppressors trying to keep people from escaping their brand of tyrannical occupation. Whereas the U.S. should be vigorously enforcing the law with very tight border security to prohibit foreigners from coming into our country illegally! Therefore, no "balance" needs to be struck because the U.S. has every legal right, as a sovereign nation, to enforce its own laws and to protect our borders. To compare our situation with the communists is absurd on the face of it! But then...why would we expect any better coming from you? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[NJ Stinks]

This is always dangerous but thinking aloud here - but why don't all the states on the Mexican border do what Governor Richardson in New Mexico did? Namely, get their state National Guard troops out there defending their borders? Obviously, it's a national border but there are not enough U.S. Customs & Border Patrol officers available to get the job done. (The U.S. Military is stretched so much around the world that it's not really an option today.)

Or maybe these border states could start drafting their residents into their state National Guards and get those draftees down to the border if they don't have enough people volunteering for the Guard currently.

God forbid these states should raise state taxes to pay for the additional National Guardsmen required but on the one hand these states want to be left alone far away from the long arm of the federal government, really want their state sovereignty, and in one case, is talking secession. And, of course, if these states don't want to pay for additional National Guardmen to protect their border with Mexico, draft militias and don't pay them.

You want to the master of your own domain or don't you?

[JustRalph]

Governor Richardson is just pussy footing around. Those Troops are there to "observe" only. It is all bullshit. They are not being issued ammo. They will be carrying Clip boards.

I like the landmine idea. 50 yrds wide. Chain link on each side. You go in and get past.......you get shot climbing the 2nd fence. No problem.

Btw, Rookies, your reference to the Berlin Wall proves the damn point for those in favor of a similar effort.

The Berlin Wall worked for 30 years............. Right now I would take that. Does anybody even think about or read what these idiots on the left post anymore?

Give me a break.........

[Tom]

A guy by the name of Kruschev had this very same idea in 1961. How'd THAT work out ?

How do possibly make the connection between a divided city and protecting a border? You lack some serious thought processes here.

Btw, it worked VERY good for decades.

Your point was.......?

[46zilzal]

When a single poster repeats and repeats the same articles: aliens do this and aliens to that, the suggested intent comes through loud and clear.

[Maverick58034]

The U.S. / Mexico border is almost 2,000 miles long. The Berlin wall was 96 miles long. I can't see how such a wall would work for the U.S., even beyond how incredibly expensive building and maintaining the wall would be, because patrolling such a wide area is nearly impossible.

I agree with the above poster who suggested that states use their National Guard in conjunction with U.S. Customs & Border Patrol - hopefully that would stop some.

In addition, there should be a much stronger consequence for illegally entering the country. I don't see how deportation is much of a punishment - being put back in the status quo. If you want people to stop doing something, you either (a) tax it or (b) criminalize it. The more difficult it is to detect and enforce, the harsher the penalty. Make a mandatory minimum 20 years federal imprisonment for illegal entry, and tack more on for possession of narcotics and firearms. Problem solved?

[46zilzal]

I ALWAYS get a laugh out of the clowns yelling `We REAL `Merkins` want then god damned furriners out of here....Then you review the origins of the speaker and find they are just two generations off the boat and are only TEMPORALLY different than the people they are complaining about.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I ALWAYS get a laugh out of the clowns yelling `We REAL `Merkins` want then god damned furriners out of here....Then you review the origins of the speaker and find they are just two generations off the boat and are only TEMPORALLY different than the people they are complaining about.

Brainless.

[boxcar]

When a single poster repeats and repeats the same articles: aliens do this and aliens to that, the suggested intent comes through loud and clear.

You meant to say the same kinds of articles, didn't you? The pattern of lawlessness is more than disturbing

I interpret his intent to mean that an awful lot of people would still be alive if the U.S. simply cracked down hard on illegal border crossings. A lot of people died needlessly at the hands of those who have no regard for the Rule of Law. Their blood is on the hands of lawless human debris who shouldn't even be in this country to begin with -- let alone accorded the opportunity by slimy, wicked, unethical politicians to break even more laws!

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

Right out of the alarmist new media who`s call letters start with F

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJrY3yCnlSg

[lsbets]

If you want people to stop doing something, you either (a) tax it or (b) criminalize it. The more difficult it is to detect and enforce, the harsher the penalty. Make a mandatory minimum 20 years federal imprisonment for illegal entry, and tack more on for possession of narcotics and firearms. Problem solved?

How's option b working for things like drugs, prostitution, and speeding?

If we want to do something about the problems with the drug cartels and our border, we have to look at real solutions, not sound byte solutions. We need to figure something out to control and document the flow of labor so that we know who is coming into the country and where they are coming in. Once we do that, we can safely assume that any illegal crossings are done not to find work, but to smuggle drugs or some other illegal activity. That will let us focus on actually solving the problem.

[Maverick58034]

How's option b working for things like drugs, prostitution, and speeding?

If we want to do something about the problems with the drug cartels and our border, we have to look at real solutions, not sound byte solutions. We need to figure something out to control and document the flow of labor so that we know who is coming into the country and where they are coming in. Once we do that, we can safely assume that any illegal crossings are done not to find work, but to smuggle drugs or some other illegal activity. That will let us focus on actually solving the problem.

I'm not sure I follow your parallels. Prostitution is legal in some states, speeding is a ticketable fine (discretionary as well), and the majority of drug offenses are misdemeanors. I'm talking about elevating illegal immigration far above these "minor" crimes.

Following your logic, is there any point in criminalizing murder? Are criminal penalties for murders not deterrents? Imagine if there were no laws against killing others - I assure you the kill-rate would be higher.

Why not impose criminal (mandatory multi-year sentence) penalties on those who hire illegal aliens, in addition to the above proposed solutions?

[JustRalph]

Hey Maverick, did you ever think that 20 yrs in a Federal Prison would be a much better life for many crossing illegal ?

It won't stop them.

I know people who have done the crossing. They tell me that the only thing that will stop it is a barrier that cannot be penetrated or the lack of opportunity on the other side.

There are millions here working off the books. What we are doing now is a joke. It's a damn invasion.

Oh Btw, 46zilzal, you act like you know me......you don't and stop posting shit in my threads, you might as well come out and call me a racist...I am not a racist, I am a realist.

[46zilzal]

it can mean a fear of or aversion to, not only persons from other countries, but other cultures, subcultures and subsets of belief systems; in short, anyone who meets any list of criteria about their origin, religion, personal beliefs, habits, language, orientations, or any other criteria. While some will state that the "target" group is a set of persons not accepted by the society, in reality only the phobic person need hold the belief that the target group is not (or should not be) accepted by society. While the phobic person is aware of the aversion (even hatred) of the target group, they may not identify it or accept it as a fear.

As with all phobias, a xenophobic person has to genuinely think or believe at some level that the target is in fact a foreigner. This arguably separates xenophobia from racism and ordinary prejudice in that someone of a different race does not necessarily have to be of a different nationality. In various contexts, the terms "xenophobia" and "racism" seem to be used interchangeably, though they can have wholly different meanings (xenophobia can be based on various aspects, racism being based solely on race and ancestry).

[Maverick58034]

Hey Maverick, did you ever think that 20 yrs in a Federal Prison would be a much better life for many crossing illegal ?

It won't stop them.

I know people who have done the crossing. They tell me that the only thing that will stop it is a barrier that cannot be penetrated or the lack of opportunity on the other side.

There are millions here working off the books. What we are doing now is a joke. It's a damn invasion.

Oh Btw, 46zilzal, you act like you know me......you don't and stop posting shit in my threads, you might as well come out and call me a racist...I am not a racist, I am a realist.

I had the same type of thoughts, until I learned more about the realities of the prison system. One book I found informative is Inside by Michael Santos - a federal prisoner. Needless to say, it's not a pretty picture in federal prison. I can't in any world see how living in Mexico would be worse than what goes on inside there.

[lsbets]

I'm not sure I follow your parallels. Prostitution is legal in some states, speeding is a ticketable fine (discretionary as well), and the majority of drug offenses are misdemeanors. I'm talking about elevating illegal immigration far above these "minor" crimes.

Following your logic, is there any point in criminalizing murder? Are criminal penalties for murders not deterrents? Imagine if there were no laws against killing others - I assure you the kill-rate would be higher.

Why not impose criminal (mandatory multi-year sentence) penalties on those who hire illegal aliens, in addition to the above proposed solutions?

Let me give you an example. It is almost certain that all of the Mexicans who work in my kitchen entered the country illegally. When I hired them, we filled out their I-9s, I made copies of their drivers licenses and social security cards, and I filed a new hire report with the state. I have never had a social security number come back as no good, although I know some people who have. If I did, the person would be fired. I've done my part as an employer. As far as I know none of my employees are illegal. If one of my employees turned out to be illegal, do you want to criminalize that? Should I only hire white people just to be safe? Its not as simple as you think.

To propose sending people to jail for 20+ years for nothing more than coming here to get a better life for themselves and their families is nothing short of stupid.

[46zilzal]

Believe me being outside is better than inside as I used to hold a clinic in the San Francisco County jail and it freaked me out every time I was there.

[46zilzal]

Oh Btw, 46zilzal, you act like you know me......you don't and stop posting shit in my threads, you might as well come out and call me a racist...I am not a racist, I am a realist.

You think you OWN a piece of conversation

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anat-shenkerosorio/stoking-racist-xenophobia_b_520383.html

Steve Poizner has clearly taken a page from a handbook on propaganda in his latest ad bating us to pin our economic troubles on illegal immigrants. This ad, the third in a series using different words to convey this same simplistic and racist idea, is another attempt to pull him out of Meg Whitman's shadow. Divide and conquer could be his campaign's theme.
Poizner not only calls for an end to services for immigrants, he uses propaganda to do so. Calling these immigrants "illegals" -- he creates a noun for what's traditionally an adjective. In other words, instead of people who have done something illegal (no doubt like every one of us at some point in our lives), he suggests that committing crime defines them. Breaking the law is not an act, it's an identity.
And then there are the images. Poizner is often shot from below, godlike. Look closely at this ad and you'll see a fence behind the car on the hill where he stands. A fence is a border -- it visually and physically divides space. In pairing language about illegal immigration with this image, the ad suggests that when California goes over the cliff -- it's headed for Mexico.
Poizner then pushes the car back from the brink -- demonstrating his strength in keeping us from going down with the Latinos. The message had been about restoring our economy, the perils of "doing too much for too many." But the ad ends with the words "let's save California" -- as if the state itself is under attack.

A very very old ploy that has whiskers on it down to his ass.

[Maverick58034]

Let me give you an example. It is almost certain that all of the Mexicans who work in my kitchen entered the country illegally. When I hired them, we filled out their I-9s, I made copies of their drivers licenses and social security cards, and I filed a new hire report with the state. I have never had a social security number come back as no good, although I know some people who have. If I did, the person would be fired. I've done my part as an employer. As far as I know none of my employees are illegal. If one of my employees turned out to be illegal, do you want to criminalize that? Should I only hire white people just to be safe? Its not as simple as you think.

To propose sending people to jail for 20+ years for nothing more than coming here to get a better life for themselves and their families is nothing short of stupid.

I should have clarified: knowingly hiring illegal aliens. The government needs to do better to detect (via SSN, drivers licenses, etc.) forgeries.

Sending people to jail for 20 years for violating immigration laws is stupid? That's a pretty serious crime - violating the sovereignty of our country. Would 10 years make it better? Sneaking into another country, setting down roots, working, using societies benefits (e.g. medicine, mass transportation, police and fire protection, etc.) while not following the rules cannot simply be set aside because someone wants a "better life." I want a better life for my family - why don't I go rob a bank?

[46zilzal]

another chapter in a very old story.
http://thepoliticalelite.com/jim-kouri-has-a-history-of-exploiting-xenophobia/

http://wphr.org/2010/emilywinslow/xenophobia-in-the-hospital/

No community was more significantly affected by the World War II "enemy alien" detentions than Japanese Americans. An estimated 110,000 were detained in internment camps during the war, detentions that the U.S. Supreme Court dubiously upheld in Hirabayashi v. United States (1943) and Korematsu v. United States (1944).

[46zilzal]

http://alittlereality.blogspot.com/2006/04/long-inglorious-history-of-xenophobia.html
The United States has a long history of xenophobia dating back to the beginnings of the country. The current wave of hatred for Mexican immigrants is only the latest example. It is funny how the trends repeat. What was said about Chinese laborers in the 1880's is being said again, word for word, about Mexican workers today. The faces and skin tone may change from decade to decade, but the hatred is consistent.

We are Republicans, and don't propose to leave our party and identify ourselves with the party whose antecedents have been rum, Romanism, and rebellion. We are loyal to our flag. ~ Samuel Buchard speaking to the Religious Bureau of the Republic National Committee, 1884

By the 1880's, the corruption and scandal within the Republican Party had diminished the party. In 1884, the Republican Party nominated for president the Tom Delay of their day, James G. Blaine was a notorious bride taker. (Oddly Democrat Grover Cleveland was the Bill Clinton of his day, having fathered a child out of wedlock.) Republicans were reduced to a three word platform, opposition to: Rum (appealing to the religious temperance movement), Rebellion (blaming Democrats for the Civil War), and Romanism (opposition to all things Catholic).

[boxcar]

You think you OWN a piece of conversation

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anat-shenkerosorio/stoking-racist-xenophobia_b_520383.html

Steve Poizner has clearly taken a page from a handbook on propaganda in his latest ad bating us to pin our economic troubles on illegal immigrants. This ad, the third in a series using different words to convey this same simplistic and racist idea, is another attempt to pull him out of Meg Whitman's shadow. Divide and conquer could be his campaign's theme.
Poizner not only calls for an end to services for immigrants, he uses propaganda to do so. Calling these immigrants "illegals" -- he creates a noun for what's traditionally an adjective.

And I thought you were very big on "change"? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: From Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary:

Main Entry:2illegal
Function:noun
Date:1939

: an illegal immigrant


In other words, instead of people who have done something illegal (no doubt like every one of us at some point in our lives), he suggests that committing crime defines them.

But the difference is that when we do something illegal, most of don't perpetuate that illegal act. Therefore, these illegal border crossings do indeed define the lawbreakers to some extent, but to an even greater extent it defines the thugs and thieves and crooks we have for politicians who look the other way -- who turn a blind eye to these lawbreakers. These politicians, therefore, are even more despicable.


But the ad ends with the words "let's save California" -- as if the state itself is under attack.

It is under attack literally...as well as politically, ideologically and economically via government policies.

Tell us, Zil, how long have you been anti-rule of law? How long have you been pro lawlessness?

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

http://www.cjd.org/paper/truth.html
There is always a touch of irony when a citizen of the United States complains about immigration. Except for those of pure Native American origin, every one of us is of immigrant descent. Native Americans inhabited the continent for over 12,000 years before the arrival of Europeans. The United States gained its territory largely through the dishonest and violent removal of the indigenous population. Yet somehow we maintain the idea that this land is ours alone and that it is not only harmful but immoral for other people to enter it.

With each new influx of immigrants, the older population has balked, claiming that the new arrivals would cause harm to the nation. Chances are, what is said today about Hispanic immigrants was once said about your own ancestors.

The Irish had been coming to America for years, but in the 1840's the potato famine crushed their homeland. During that decade, a fourth of the population died of disease and hunger, and many fled to the U.S.. Here, they lived at the bottom of the social scale, working as menial laborers and domestic servants, and living in squalid conditions. The native population looked down on them, considering them less clean and hygienic . Furthermore, the Irish, like today's Hispanics, were accused of stealing American jobs. This fear and resentment led to the famous sign often posted in store windows: "No Irish need apply." The sign was so common that it was frequently abbreviated simply to "NINA"

The arrival of the Irish and Germans in the U.S. prompted the formation of many anti-immigrant institutions. In 1849 the Order of the Star-Spangled Banner was formed; its goals included rigid immigration restrictions and the deportation of "paupers" . This animosity towards immigrants often exploded into violence. Irish and Germans were reviled for their Roman Catholicism, and in 1834 a Catholic convent near Boston was burned by a mob, followed by subsequent attacks on Catholic schools and churches. In 1844, a several-day riot in Philadelphia left thirteen citizens dead and fifty wounded. Violence against Catholics on the East coast was so common that insurance companies practically refused to insure them. It is difficult for us to imagine such malice being directed towards Irish or German people.

By the early twentieth century, these prejudices had developed into widespread and sophisticated theories about ethnic disparities. The Immigration Restriction League, formed in the late 19th century by Harvard graduates, proclaimed the superiority of the Anglo-Saxon, or ***** race. One founder, Prescott F. Hall, asked rhetorically if the U.S. was "to be peopled by British, German and Scandinavian stock, historically free, energetic, progressive, or by Slav, Latin and Asiatic [meaning Jewish] races, historically down-trodden, atavistic and stagnant"

[46zilzal]

http://blogcritics.org/politics/article/nobody-does-xenophobia-better-than-us/

At one time in our history, too many Americans held to an idiotic notion that civil and human rights were universal principles and not exclusive to some master race. Today we know better.

A friend of mine wondered why as a native Australian and a university professor who is currently teaching and residing in Japan, he is now required to undergo a 2 1/2 hour screening in order to enter and exit the United States, a screening that will soon be expanded to almost three hours since the government is now going to demand a full set of fingerprints from every foreigner entering and leaving this country.

Steven, our visitor's name, used to anticipate his twice yearly visits to the United States with excitement, attending international academic conferences. However, during his last few visits the experience of entering and exiting the United States has moved from extremely frustrating to horribly humiliating. In fact on his last visit he was honored as a "designated selectee" at airports in both Ithaca, New York and Detroit, Michigan and provided with an "intimate" full body search. In case you're wondering, Steven is a 49 year old, 6 ft. 2 in. white man who has that terrifying nerdy academic look that screams 'books' to some of us but 'kaboom' to airport security guards.

Furthermore, in case you're thinking that Steven's academic specialty is biochemistry or turbanology, he's actually a specialist in Japanese music history, traditional theatre and performing arts.

In fact, having explored this issue with Steven, he is in every conceivable way imaginable as far removed from "security risk" as anyone could possibly be.

And, as Steven would tell you after speaking with many of his academic colleagues who frequently visit the United States, his humiliation at the hands of United States agents is now the rule rather than the exception.

[boxcar]

http://www.cjd.org/paper/truth.html
There is always a touch of irony when a citizen of the United States complains about immigration. Except for those of pure Native American origin, every one of us is of immigrant descent. Native Americans inhabited the continent for over 12,000 years before the arrival of Europeans. The United States gained its territory largely through the dishonest and violent removal of the indigenous population. Yet somehow we maintain the idea that this land is ours alone and that it is not only harmful but immoral for other people to enter it.

With each new influx of immigrants, the older population has balked, claiming that the new arrivals would cause harm to the nation. Chances are, what is said today about Hispanic immigrants was once said about your own ancestors.

The Irish had been coming to America for years, but in the 1840's the potato famine crushed their homeland. During that decade, a fourth of the population died of disease and hunger, and many fled to the U.S.. Here, they lived at the bottom of the social scale, working as menial laborers and domestic servants, and living in squalid conditions. The native population looked down on them, considering them less clean and hygienic . Furthermore, the Irish, like today's Hispanics, were accused of stealing American jobs. This fear and resentment led to the famous sign often posted in store windows: "No Irish need apply." The sign was so common that it was frequently abbreviated simply to "NINA"

The arrival of the Irish and Germans in the U.S. prompted the formation of many anti-immigrant institutions. In 1849 the Order of the Star-Spangled Banner was formed; its goals included rigid immigration restrictions and the deportation of "paupers" . This animosity towards immigrants often exploded into violence. Irish and Germans were reviled for their Roman Catholicism, and in 1834 a Catholic convent near Boston was burned by a mob, followed by subsequent attacks on Catholic schools and churches. In 1844, a several-day riot in Philadelphia left thirteen citizens dead and fifty wounded. Violence against Catholics on the East coast was so common that insurance companies practically refused to insure them. It is difficult for us to imagine such malice being directed towards Irish or German people.

By the early twentieth century, these prejudices had developed into widespread and sophisticated theories about ethnic disparities. The Immigration Restriction League, formed in the late 19th century by Harvard graduates, proclaimed the superiority of the Anglo-Saxon, or ***** race. One founder, Prescott F. Hall, asked rhetorically if the U.S. was "to be peopled by British, German and Scandinavian stock, historically free, energetic, progressive, or by Slav, Latin and Asiatic [meaning Jewish] races, historically down-trodden, atavistic and stagnant"

This is all an easily destroyed straw man. I don't think any conservative on this forum is anti-immigration. We are, however, anti-lawlessness. We are PRO Rule of Law. We are anti-illegal aliens living here on U.S. soil because they have no business being here. They need to go through the lawful immigration process that my grandparents went through and that my wife's grandparents went through, etc.

Boxcar

[Greyfox]

it can mean a fear of or aversion to, not only persons from other countries, but other cultures, subcultures and subsets of belief systems; in short, anyone who meets any list of criteria about their origin, religion, personal beliefs, habits, language, orientations, or any other criteria. While some will state that the "target" group is a set of persons not accepted by the society, in reality only the phobic person need hold the belief that the target group is not (or should not be) accepted by society. While the phobic person is aware of the aversion (even hatred) of the target group, they may not identify it or accept it as a fear.

As with all phobias, a xenophobic person has to genuinely think or believe at some level that the target is in fact a foreigner. This arguably separates xenophobia from racism and ordinary prejudice in that someone of a different race does not necessarily have to be of a different nationality. In various contexts, the terms "xenophobia" and "racism" seem to be used interchangeably, though they can have wholly different meanings (xenophobia can be based on various aspects, racism being based solely on race and ancestry).

The above text word for word has been copied from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia
and you have presented it in Post 32 46zilzal "as if" you wrote it.
(Are you contributing to wiki too?)

[PhantomOnTour]

Ever heard of a group called 'Canada First Immigration Reform Committee'?
They are anti-illegal immigration into Canada. Their banner on their site reads: Love traffic gridlock? Then you will love immigration! 250,000 more this year.

They seem to hold the same view as many here. DON'T ENTER OUR COUNTRY ILLEGALLY...therefore avoiding the nagging inconvenience of paying taxes. Perhaps we should round up all the illegals we find and ship them to northern Montana so they can enter Canada...would you approve of them illegally entering your country?

Again, there is a distinction between a legal alien and an illegal alien. It's the illegal ones we don't want. And yes, I fear illegal immigrants. I have no problem admitting that. Now we just need to make them fear the USA, because up until now we haven't.

[46zilzal]

xenophobia is not limited to any one group on this planet as there are simpletons in every population who the thinking the answer to all their problems is to blame a group of the same religion, same lifestyle or skin color

[bigmack]

xenophobia is not limited to any one group on this planet as there are simpletons in every population who the thinking the answer to all their problems is to blame a group of the same religion, same lifestyle or skin color
See if you can find any info on psychosis. That might explain why you're addressing a man killed on an unsecured border with idiotic nonsense. Par for the course on your planet.

[JustRalph]

Zilly, Stop posting shit in my threads...........


PA, Close it down.......he killed another thread

[46zilzal]

Zilly, Stop posting shit in my threads...........


PA, Close it down.......he killed another thread
Wish I had a dime for every time, thinking something was YOURS, that you wanted comment to stop.....

Logic too much for you ?

[johnhannibalsmith]

Zilly, Stop posting shit in my threads...........


That's a rather complimentary way of describing the utter nonsense he's babbling.

[JustRalph]

Wish I had a dime for every time, thinking something was YOURS, that you wanted comment to stop.....

Logic too much for you ?

You don't get it.........nobody reads that crap you are posting. I am sure many don't read some of my links either............but you take the Friggin Troll Cake

You come dashing into threads swinging the same ole shit every time. You don't discuss, you preach. You don't use logic........you use a jackhammer of links and psychobabble to interfere. You have to be the center of conversation in every thread, you carry a digital version of a soapbox into every single thread you join. You don't further the discussion. You don't add to the narrative. You don't do anything but scream and holler your personal brand of bullshit. You remind others of your vast knowledge and education, at every opportunity. You think you know better in every subject in the world.

You follow me around like a puppy because you got a hard-on for Cops and Military types. Let me tell you something, I have a good time talking with about 90 percent of the folks on this board. And that includes the politics and the horse racing. I am the same way in person. There are a few people on this board that know me better than you do. When we talk the common theme is to not let "that asshole" keep me from posting. You are considered a pariah to most of the other members I talk with. Get with it man.......... you can't really be this obnoxious in person.

[Tom]

There is always a touch of irony when a citizen of the United States complains about immigration. Except for those of pure Native American origin, every one of us is of immigrant descent.

See, no this is pure ignorance. NO ONE is complaining about immigration. It is ILLEGAL immigration we are talking about. You have no clue what the answers are because you have no clue what the questions are. You really have no grasp of much, do you?

[Greyfox]

:lol: :lol: Tom and JR you guys are cracking me up.
With JR's post I had a vision of a Joe Friday monologue to a punk.
With Tom's I'm seeing poor doc zilly lost in a fog trying to blow into stethoscope. :lol: :lol:

At any rate, what is the solution to stopping the Arizona border problem?
I know that there's a Sherriff there with a pretty tough attitude if he catches them. Where's Jack Nicholson when you need him?

[JustRalph]

:lol: :lol: Tom and JR you guys are cracking me up.
With JR's post I had a vision of a Joe Friday monologue to a punk.
With Tom's I'm seeing poor doc zilly lost in a fog trying to blow into stethoscope. :lol: :lol:

At any rate, what is the solution to stopping the Arizona border problem?
I know that there's a Sherriff there with a pretty tough attitude if he catches them. Where's Jack Nicholson when you need him?

President Obama's Justice Dept has threatened Sheriff Joe with Prison and is currently following his Deputies around taking video of them every chance they get. They are going to prosecute him for Civil Rights Violations the first chance they get.

[Greyfox]

President Obama's Justice Dept has threatened Sheriff Joe with Prison and is currently following his Deputies around taking video of them every chance they get. They are going to prosecute him for Civil Rights Violations the first chance they get.

I wish you were kidding here, but I know you're not. What a waste of taxpayer money.

[ArlJim78]

we need about 2 million people from the states to cross over illegally into Canada and start making ourselves at home and demanding our rights. I wonder how long before they would get very xenophobic up there.

[Tom]

I wish you were kidding here, but I know you're not. What a waste of taxpayer money.

That is Obama's legacy - a waste of money.

[Rookies]

we need about 2 million people from the states to cross over illegally into Canada and start making ourselves at home and demanding our rights. I wonder how long before they would get very xenophobic up there.

"The following is a list of persons to be strip searched upon entry:

ArlJim
Boxcar
Tom

that is all ":lol:

Of course, this is NOT an issue on the Norther border, as few Canadians want to stay in the U.S. and vice-versa...

[Rookies]

Ralph, get a hold of yourself. It's the I-Net, a Horse Racing Forum and Off Topic politics. Go with the punches big boy and punch back...

There are lotsa things to worry about... not this... like say for instance right now... rooting Butler home @ +300 against Darth Vadar... aka the Puke-ies ! ;)

[Granite]

"

Of course, this is NOT an issue on the Norther border, as few Canadians want to stay in the U.S. and vice-versa...

What about all those dudes in Phoenix?

[Rookies]

What about all those dudes in Phoenix?
No clue, what you're talking about.
But the operative words in my sentence were: NOT and FEW.

[Granite]

No clue, what you're talking about.
But the operative words in my sentence were: NOT and FEW.

Well, there are MANY Canadians who reside in Phoenix.

[Rookies]

And what exactly ?

They don't leave ?
They don't have dual citizenship ?
They stay for 6 months less a day ?
They have valid work permits and/or run businesses employing Americans ?
They have valid scholarships and/or attend Arizona/State ?

WHAT ?????????

[Granite]

And what exactly ?

They don't leave ?
They don't have dual citizenship ?
They stay for 6 months less a day ?
They have valid work permits and/or run businesses employing Americans ?
They have valid scholarships and/or attend Arizona/State ?

WHAT ?????????

You made a remark about there not being a problem on the Northern border because few Canadians want to stay in the U.S. and vice versa.

That is not the reason. Just pointing out your error that's all. And you sure get riled up easily for a guy who was acting so cool a few posts back.

[newtothegame]

"The following is a list of persons to be strip searched upon entry:

ArlJim
Boxcar
Tom

that is all ":lol:

Of course, this is NOT an issue on the Norther border, as few Canadians want to stay in the U.S. and vice-versa...

Phew.....Im good!!! Not too mention my civil liberties do NOT allow for strip searches :)

[Rookies]

The definition of STAY in this context & this thread is permanently and illegally. You understand that, right ? Therefore, please enlighten us all as to whether Phoenix is overloaded by Canadians living there illegally and not any of the status situations I've just described.

I'll help you- you can't ! Because there is no issue. On my side of the continent, a sizeable condition of snowbirds go to Florida every winter. But the point is- THEY come back !

[Granite]

The definition of STAY in this context & this thread is permanently and illegally. You understand that, right ? Therefore, please enlighten us all as to whether Phoenix is overloaded by Canadians living there illegally and not any of the status situations I've just described.

I'll help you- you can't ! Because there is no issue. On my side of the continent, a sizeable condition of snowbirds go to Florida every winter. But the point is- THEY come back !

You made a remark which isn't true. You do understand that the reason for illegal immigration into the U.S. is a matter of haves versus have-nots don't you?

The reason Americans and Canadians don't illegally migrate back and forth is because we have laws that we abide by. In most cases the situation is not dire enough that a Canadian or American will consider moving and breaking a law to better his plight.

[Rookies]

You made a remark which isn't true.
And what is that exactly ?

You do understand that the reason for illegal immigration into the U.S. is a matter of haves versus have-nots don't you?
Normally. But, that is one of the reasons why people illegally immigrate. There are several.

The reason Americans and Canadians don't illegally migrate back and forth is because we have laws that we abide by. In most cases the situation is not dire enough that a Canadian or American will consider moving and breaking a law to better his plight.
It's not only abiding by any law. It is first and foremost that citizens of both countries like to live in their own country and do not have the desire/fear/ worry about needing to stay permanently in the other.

[Granite]

You made a remark which isn't true.
And what is that exactly ?


You said:
Of course, this is NOT an issue on the Norther border, as few Canadians want to stay in the U.S. and vice-versa...

This statement is not factual. There are many Canadians who would move to the U.S. if given a choice. You must concede that this is true.

Also, your commentary leads me to believe that you do not fully understand the reasons behind illegal immigration.

[Rookies]

You said:

This statement is not factual. There are many Canadians who would move to the U.S. if given a choice. You must concede that this is true.

.

I don't concede that at all. Where do you get that opinion ? As I've said, most Canadians are happy to live in Canada. They vote with their feet- literally.
And the factual point is: They DON'T (move) !

I'm a very good example. I can visit the U.S. anytime and could certainly obtain citizenship, as the rest of my family has, in order to stay permanently. I choose not to ( at this juncture).

[Granite]

I don't concede that at all. Where do you get that opinion ? As I've said, most Canadians are happy to live in Canada. They vote with their feet- literally.
And the factual point is: They DON'T (move) !

I'm a very good example. I can visit the U.S. anytime and could certainly obtain citizenship, as the rest of my family has, in order to stay permanently. I choose not to ( at this juncture).

Yes, I agree most Canadians love their country. However, you've proved my point by mentioning that the rest of your family has obtained U.S. citizenship.

[Rookies]

Yes, I agree most Canadians love their country. However, you've proved my point by mentioning that the rest of your family has obtained U.S. citizenship.

Let me help you out with this. I married an American and both she and my kids have dual citizenship. We have lived in Canada since I met her 39 years ago.

[Warren Henry]

I think we started off with an instance of an American citizen being murdered by someone whose tracks led to Mexico. The problem seemingly being lawlessness with the perp being an assumed illegal alien.

Who could disagree with the thinking that it is WRONG to have folks traipsing across the border and killing our citizens? If it were an isolated incident, it would be different, but it is an escalating problem on our southern border.

We have a huge problem in this country of ILLEGAL aliens. Immigration itself is NOT the problem as this country is a product of immigration. The problem is the cost of the ILLEGALS.

Most of the folks who come up from the south are coming because life here is better. I have no problem with that. However, I think it is something that we must control. As it stands now, part of what makes life better here is that we freely give the new arrivals whatever they need to have a better life. Perhaps if we weren't so generous, they wouldn't have the incentive to come.

It shouldn't be too difficult to get control of this situation if there were a will to actually do it. However, IMO, the problem persists because the politicians fear losing the Hispanic vote by taking a stand (or, actually want the Hispanic vote increased drastically).

I suggest that we could start to stem the flow by providing benefits only for actual citizens. Let anyone in who wants to work and wants to pay taxes, etc.

Here is an idea - microchip LEGAL aliens (who are not citizens and therefore not protected by Constitution). Allow removal of microchip when they become citizens.

Shouldn't be a big problem to have a prospective employee go down to local INS office and get verified and INS can authorize this person as elibible for hire. Strong penalties for employers employing non-chipped folks or paying "off the books"

Anyone caught in this country illegally gets deported and is denied access for a period of time. If caught here during that period of time, they go to prison for a few years. Once released from prison they are deported and denied access for a longer period of time. If caught again, longer prison term etc. If the breadwinner is in prison and the family gets no benefits, there is no incentive to stay.

The combination of "everyone is welcome" if done right coupled with the disincentive of having the welcome mat removed if done wrong should motivate potential immigrants to do it the right way.

Other tweaks possible include making Western Union and other conduits for quick transfer of funds verify that the sender is either a citizen or has a chip. No money to be sent out of the country by undocumented folks.

As for the problems of the lawlessness of the drug folks, one wonders what might happen if there were no financial incentive to traffic in drugs ;) (FYI, I am a Libertarian, not a Conservative).

[PhantomOnTour]

Never would have thought you are a Libertarian...your avatar is 'right wing nut'.

[Warren Henry]

Never would have thought you are a Libertarian...your avatar is 'right wing nut'.
Where else would I find refuge? :lol:

[Warren Henry]

Never would have thought you are a Libertarian...your avatar is 'right wing nut'.
More accurately, CORRECT WINGNUT

[46zilzal]

micro chip people? Why not just tattoo them or put a brand on their sides while you are at it?

[PhantomOnTour]

More accurately, CORRECT WINGNUT
Nice :ThmbUp:

[Warren Henry]

micro chip people? Why not just tattoo them or put a brand on their sides while you are at it?
Hey, it that is the requirement to be here, it becomes a personal choice.

No one is suggesting that it is a mandate that EVERYONE get a chip, only immigrants who want to come here to work. And, then only temporary until they become citizens.

What is your exact objection?

[46zilzal]

[QUOTE=Warren Henry

What is your exact objection?[/QUOTE]
Treating human beings no better than cattle for one.

take about totalitarianism,,,that is just like 1984 a la Winston Smith

[Warren Henry]

Treating human beings no better than cattle for one.

take about totalitarianism,,,that is just like 1984 a la Winston Smith
Asking them to obtain an instantly verifiable identification in order to partake of our bounties is not the same as owning them. All my policy would do is level the playing field for those who want to come here according to our laws. Not making anyone property. Just giving them an ID that will allow them access to the better life that they crave.

I bet if you went to the US Mexico border and asked everyone you meet if they would mind being microchipped temporarily in order to enter legally, find work and eventually become citizens, most would jump at the chance.

[Space Monkey]

Maybe straying a little off topic here, but the biggest problem with Mexico are the drug cartels. They are constantly killing government officials, citizens and their violence is spilling over to our borders. I believe that the Mexican government needs our help. After the recent outbursts by Karzai, I think our troops would be better served by helping the Mexican government destroy the drug cartels. The only reason we can't have the same good immigration relationship with Mexico that we have with Canada, is because of the drug trafficking and the gangsters associated with it.

[JustRalph]

Maybe straying a little off topic here, but the biggest problem with Mexico are the drug cartels. They are constantly killing government officials, citizens and their violence is spilling over to our borders. I believe that the Mexican government needs our help. After the recent outbursts by Karzai, I think our troops would be better served by helping the Mexican government destroy the drug cartels. The only reason we can't have the same good immigration relationship with Mexico that we have with Canada, is because of the drug trafficking and the gangsters associated with it.


Tried and failed on many fronts see the link below for more info. A snippet:

The Bush administration continued Reagan�s policy and intensified the pressure on some Latin American governments to militarise the "war on drugs". That was the case in Colombia, Peru and Bolivia (74). In Mexico, things were different, but not for too long. On October 23, 1995, William Perry, Secretary of the Department of Defence, and general Barry McCaffrey � Commander-in-Chief of the U.S.A. Armed Forces Southern Command co-ordinating all national security operations in Latin America at the time, and confirmed by the U.S.A. Senate as the Director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) on 29 February 1996 � visited Mexican Secretary of Defence, general Enrique Cervantes Aguirre in Mexico. Perry said Mexico and the U.S.A. already had political and economic ties, but that the "third link" was lacking: the military. He announced five co-operation areas, among them one concerning anti-narcotics operations. By 1996, almost a thousand soldiers had received special training in counter-narcotics tactics in the U.S.A. The militarisation of drug combat and public security had just begun (75).

http://www.unesco.org/most/astorga.htm

[skate]

At least we have had bi-partisan blind eyes to this problem.
Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama should all be impeached for completely ignoring the security of our citizens and the sanctity of our borders.

Each the last four presidents have allowed far more damage to our nation that Osams Bin Laden caused. Who is our real enemy?
The worst of the four - Bush 43 by a landslide. He not only betrayed the country, he let two border agents rot in a jail cell to for politics. He will certainly burn in HELL for that act alone. I am glad of that.

thanks for the reminder and you are correct, but i'm thinking he did get them off at the end of his term, no?

Also (not a defense of bush) but i think it was Fishbellybill that did open the flood gates for legal/illegals from all over the world, which in turn destroyed the wage earners of the USA.

AND and and unkGeorge did go along with the whole friggin program...

[chickenhead]

a conservative talk radio guy proffered an interesting idea the other day -- he may have stolen from some foreign policy think tank, but he was wondering if essentially it wasn't an understood at the higher levels that if Mexico did not have this release valve for people to easily go find work, if the economy of Mexico was actually asked to absorb all these people, and obviously would not be able to -- that ol' Mexico would fall fairly quickly to a left wing revolution type dealio, as we see in so many other SA countries.

With the drug cartels and corruption already present, he mentioned how highly they rank on the "instability" ratings of countries, much higher than most people realize. He wondered if it wasn't just an understood that closing the border would pretty much insure, and fairly quickly, a full blown marxist narco state on our border. And if it was simply a political calculation that what we have now, as screwed up as it may be, is overall of less damage to the US than the alternative.

Only a theory, but it would explain a few things.

[skate]

OK, yeh, and it's a good point.


Maybe that's why we really ONLY hear about the SA influx. AN awful lot of todays truck drivers are from Russia and Europe.

But i can see where your guy is coming from.

At the same time, i think it was a "keep wages down" issue. And taxes up, with more workers.

[Warren Henry]

a conservative talk radio guy proffered an interesting idea the other day -- he may have stolen from some foreign policy think tank, but he was wondering if essentially it wasn't an understood at the higher levels that if Mexico did not have this release valve for people to easily go find work, if the economy of Mexico was actually asked to absorb all these people, and obviously would not be able to -- that ol' Mexico would fall fairly quickly to a left wing revolution type dealio, as we see in so many other SA countries.

With the drug cartels and corruption already present, he mentioned how highly they rank on the "instability" ratings of countries, much higher than most people realize. He wondered if it wasn't just an understood that closing the border would pretty much insure, and fairly quickly, a full blown marxist narco state on our border. And if it was simply a political calculation that what we have now, as screwed up as it may be, is overall of less damage to the US than the alternative.

Only a theory, but it would explain a few things.

Now, that is a scary thought. However, one with merit.

I wonder if it would be better to have a narco marxist state on our border or to go broke ignoring the problems that state is causing us now. Just saying that maybe we are dammed if we do and also if we don't. Thus, hard choices to be made.

[Tom]

thanks for the reminder and you are correct, but i'm thinking he did get them off at the end of his term, no?



Too little, too late, which, btw, is Bush' true legacy.
Hey George, when you invade a country and move into the capital, THEN is when you "surge," not 5 years later. Moron.

He burns in Hell. Good.