This blows my mind : Link (http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/01/immigrant.day/index.html)

How do seek protection from something you don't want to particpate in?!?!?!?!?

Follow up:

WASHINGTON (AFP) Immigrants' rights advocates, elated by the resounding
success of Monday's "National Day of

Action," which drew the backing of hundreds of thousands of protester
across the United States, now are planning a national boycott which they
hope will have an even greater resonance.

Organizers are planning the May 1 "Great American Boycott," urging
illegal immigrants -- who cannot vote and who have only limited
political power -- to flex their economic muscle.

Protesters are being urged to refrain from shopping, and to stay away
from school and work.

You should take a moment to let that sink in.

This is a movement orchestrated by people who entered the US
illegally,and then want to scream about their "rights." WHAT RIGHTS?

Let's take a look at some of the many benefits that illegal aliens have
blessed our great country with: Street gangs, graffitti, drugs,
skyrocketing healthcare, depreciation of property value, illiteracy. The
list could go on. What they actually have to offer (cheap labor and a
strong work ethic) pales to what they have given our country to deal
with. I'll take expensive vegetables over expensive healthcare anyday!

And now, like terrorists, they are going to attack our economy. The
country they came to like locusts so they could reap the benefits is now
the focus of their boycott. You've seen it on TV: Marching on our
American streets waving their Mexican flags.

To all the real Americans, you can do one small thing on May 1st, 2006.
It won't be racist, nor will it be violent. It will not be boastful,
arrogant, selfish, nor distasteful. It will not be any of those things
that our "guests" have already displayed.

What it will do is nullify a movement.

All you have to do is buy something on May 1st. Make up for what they
will try to take away. It doesn't have to be a new car or house (unless
you were already planning on getting one). It simply needs to be a day
of trading.

Hold off grocery buying until May 1st. Take your wife out to eat that
night. Get the kids pizza, hamburgers, whatever! Make several trips to
the convenience store.

Buy your meals at work.

Fill up your tank.

Shop for clothes, furniture, outdoor equipment.

If it needs to be bought, BUY IT MAY 1st!

Those are just a few suggestions. We're not asking you to spend your
inheritance that day, but just to spend more than you

normally would. Even if it's only a few dollars, this will help soften
the blow that the Hispanics will try to inflict on our economy
that day. It sounds trivial at first, but if this idea gets around, what
the Hispanics set out to do will fail.

NOW COMES THE HARD PART:

This email will not self-destuct if you don't send it to someone. It
will not cause bad luck, nor will it make you impotent. It will not do
some trick or show a cute little animation if you send it to "X" amount
of people. You will not get paid for doing it.

It will not spread the message though, if it just gets deleted. Forward
at will.....

How do seek protection from something you don't want to particpate in?!?!?!?!?


The problem is Ken is that they have been participating... a quote from that link:

About 7.2 million illegal immigrants hold jobs in the United States, making up 4.9 percent of the overall labor force, according to a recent study by the Pew Hispanic Center. Undocumented workers make up 24 percent of farmworkers and hold 14 percent of construction jobs, the study found.

Yes they are illegal but it is also participation. They WANT to participate. They HAVE BEEN participating for years. They have served a clear purpose to our society ...cheap labor which can be used as a beast of burden. But look what happens when this beast starts to talk back... from your follow-up quote

And now, like terrorists, they are going to attack our economy. The
country they came to like locusts so they could reap the benefits is now
the focus of their boycott. You've seen it on TV: Marching on our
American streets waving their Mexican flags.

They get likened to murderers and pestilence. It's disgusting. No matter how you look at it, these immigrants are human and they will voice their opinion. The only way to stop that is to dehumanise them by comparing them to locusts and thus deny them their human qualities. Both sides are responsible, both sides are human. One side are illegal but this does not mean they are insects.

Yes Ken the situation is complicated but this does not mean we are dealing with terrorists. They are not flying planes into buildings and they are not driving car bombs into bus stops. If they cease working for a single day that means both the employers and illegal immigrants will not be breaking those employment laws that day. The situation will actually be more legal! How can a person be classed as a terrorist by the cessation of a criminal act for a day?
They can't, it's a simple exposure of the hypocrisy of American society.

You'll be happy to know that this time you will be proceeding without my input.

You'll be happy to know that this time you will be proceeding without my input.

It seems otherwise.

Yes, this was also on the news where I live. The News Media is making this situation worse.

If they had not of latched on to this story, this would not have been able to be spread nation wide as fast. Instead the media is exacerbating the problem.

I feel that anyone that is trying to harm the ecomomy of the country they live in is wrong. If you love the place you live in so much and want to stay, boycotting on a nation wide scale is not the way to do it.


These are just my random thoughts and can be picked apart if you wish.

Yes they are illegal.
'nuff said.

They get likened to murderers and pestilence. It's disgusting. Not everyone who is against any form of amnesty or thinks that these protests are not only 100% wrong but absolutely ridiculous , is guilty of racism... it's called pragmatism. You cannot intentionally hide from the law and then criticize it's protection of you. You cannot skirt the laws and regulations and think that there will be no retribution. That is asinine.

No matter how you look at it, these immigrants are human and they will voice their opinion. Technically, following the letter of the Constitution, yes... but that doesn't validate the argument.

They have served a clear purpose to our society ...cheap labor which can be used as a beast of burden. But look what happens when this beast starts to talk back... They are paid slave wages, expressly against minimum wage laws because they are illegal. They do not benefit from the protection of the law because they are illegal.

the situation is complicated Because we are allowing it to become so. They have broken, are breaking, and, as the protests show, intend to go on breaking the law. They are, by definition and admission, criminals and should be treated as such. If they want the protection of the law, they should abide by the law. Dire need does not excuse one's actions, it merely displays extenuating circumstances. We can accept the reasoning but sooner or later someone has to pay the price for the transgression and I do not feel that it should be the law abiding citizens nor the immigrants who put forth the effort to legally enter the US.

I feel that anyone that is trying to harm the ecomomy of the country they live in is wrong. If you love the place you live in so much and want to stay, boycotting on a nation wide scale is not the way to do it.


These are just my random thoughts and can be picked apart if you wish.

I'm confused, how can they be harming the economy, from what I've seen here on other posts on the subject they're all a bunch of welfare scroungers.
Could it be that a lot of businesses are going to be hurt by them withdrawing their labour? If that's the case then they must be contributing to the economy of the US and therefore have the right to protest as much as anybody else.
If they don't then they're no more than slaves

Yes, this was also on the news where I live. The News Media is making this situation worse. If they had not of latched on to this story, this would not have been able to be spread nation wide as fast. Instead the media is exacerbating the problem.
OK, I just can't resist:
DAH
Pretty much what I have been saying (just more eloquent) for awhile.

I'm confused, how can they be harming the economy, from what I've seen here on other posts on the subject they're all a bunch of welfare scroungers.
Could it be that a lot of businesses are going to be hurt by them withdrawing their labour? If that's the case then they must be contributing to the economy of the US and therefore have the right to protest as much as anybody else.
If they don't then they're no more than slaves

If you read what I said 'trying' to harm the economy. I didn't say they were or were not harming it.

Just because they are on welfare, they still have money. The government just gives it to them instead of them earning it. No matter what, they have money. Which with this boycott, they are attempting to harm the 'precious Country' they are trying to reside in. You tell me, would you be welcoming them with open arms?

hmmmm.... if hispanics stayed home from school today, there would be a 60% absence rate at my kids high school. I heard today on the news that illegal immigrants cost Florida $2 billion dollars a year, and most of that is education costs.

I have no problem with people wanting a better life and working hard to do so. But I've seen too many instances of people who enter the country and collect benefits from a system they haven't paid into and even more who abuse the system.

OK, I just can't resist:
DAH
Pretty much what I have been saying (just more eloquent) for awhile.

Great minds think alike.

I simply wish the news media would boycott some stories. The more they report on the subject, the bigger it gets. They are simply feeding the 'Machine'. Eventually it will be so large even the legal citizens will have no where to live. Eventually we will all self destruct.

If you read what I said 'trying' to harm the economy. I didn't say they were or were not harming it.

Just because they are on welfare, they still have money. The government just gives it to them instead of them earning it. No matter what, they have money. Which with this boycott, they are attempting to harm the 'precious Country' they are trying to reside in. You tell me, would you be welcoming them with open arms?
I still don't understand, are you saying they're no longer going to spend any money (welfare as you call it) in the US, how are they going to eat?
From what I've seen on the news it's American industry that's going to suffer and if that's the case then the majority of them cannot be classed as scroungers. As for not paying taxes etc. has anyone ever thought that they simply don't earn enough to contribute, should their kids therefore be denied basic care and education?

I'm confused, how can they be harming the economy, from what I've seen here on other posts on the subject they're all a bunch of welfare scroungers.
Could it be that a lot of businesses are going to be hurt by them withdrawing their labour? If that's the case then they must be contributing to the economy of the US and therefore have the right to protest as much as anybody else.
If they don't then they're no more than slaves
Geesh Rich, Mr. nothing is black and white, all of a sudden gives only black and white choices.
Here is where I have a problem with this. Define "Contributing to the economy".
Of the fact they work, alabit cheaply, does that contriute to the economy? More so that a slight price increase and hiring legals that pay income tax? Typically the illegals buy very little, hence pay a small amount of sales tax, partly due to their wages I admit, but could not this made up for in the burden they are to the legal society? (Ok I don't really know myself, just thinking out loud here). I mean, are they truly contributing? I think there is more gray area in this question than Rich's response let's on. But as in all society, we should at least fall back on the laws as a point of reference. If these are wrong, then they need to be changed, either direction. But currently they are illegal, so are in fact not having the same rights as Americans. There are certain human rights that not included in that statement, and that is where everyone seems to be messing up. There is a clear line between the two. No they are not terroist, but they aren't citizens of the US of A either.
Now the second part of the equation is, what effect on the US's economy do these illegals really play? If they are indespisable, then we should think about aministy. If however they are a drain on society, then ship um home might be more along the lines. But some maybe keepers, and some throw backs, then what? Who decides? What ever the case maybe, the laws need to change, and be enforced so we do not go through this every major election. :rolleyes:

Great minds think alike.

I simply wish the news media would boycott some stories.

You mean cover up what's really going on. You'll forgive me for mentioning that that already happens in the US

If they want the protection of the law, they should abide by the law.

Well put.

The question I have is why is it easier for a them to cross illegally than it is for them to be processed as a legal immigrant? Wouldn't that seem to be where we need to begin to look for a solution?

But currently they are illegal, so are in fact not having the same rights as Americans. There are certain human rights that not included in that statement, and that is where everyone seems to be messing up. There is a clear line between the two. No they are not terroist, but they aren't citizens of the US of A either.
Now the second part of the equation is, what effect on the US's economy do these illegals really play? If they are indespisable, then we should think about aministy. If however they are a drain on society, then ship um home might be more along the lines. But some maybe keepers, and some throw backs, then what? Who decides? What ever the case maybe, the laws need to change, and be enforced so we do not go through this every major election. :rolleyes:

Define illegal and remind me who the country belonged to originally?

Great minds think alike.

I simply wish the news media would boycott some stories. The more they report on the subject, the bigger it gets. They are simply feeding the 'Machine'. Eventually it will be so large even the legal citizens will have no where to live. Eventually we will all self destruct.
Actually I don't mind them reporting the story, even if it does lead to escalation, but they seem to report one sided. They make a much bigger deal about the people protesting, than they do about why, or what the effect maybe, or what a decision either way would mean to the average John/Jane Doe american citizen. Dang Hollywood intellect.

I still don't understand, are you saying they're no longer going to spend any money (welfare as you call it) in the US, how are they going to eat?
From what I've seen on the news it's American industry that's going to suffer and if that's the case then the majority of them cannot be classed as scroungers. As for not paying taxes etc. has anyone ever thought that they simply don't earn enough to contribute, should their kids therefore be denied basic care and education?

Exactly, they are refusing to contribute in anyway today. Trying to prove a point. I am assuming they have already stocked up, so they do not have to 'buy' anything today.

Also, they 'simply don't earn enought' becuase they are not legal citiziens, and do not have the rights of minimum wage.

I'm not saying they are not human beings and do not have needs. What I am saying, if you wish to live in this country, and reap the rewards of living in this land of freedom, then do it legally. Stop being paid under the table, and contribute to society. Pay taxes, support the education system they are using. Be a contributing person to society instead of 'taking' what society has to give.

Wasn't the saying by JFK ...'Ask not what the country can do for you, but what you can do for the country'?

Exactly, they are refusing to contribute in anyway today. Trying to prove a point. I am assuming they have already stocked up, so they do not have to 'buy' anything today.

Also, they 'simply don't earn enought' becuase they are not legal citiziens, and do not have the rights of minimum wage.

I'm not saying they are not human beings and do not have needs. What I am saying, if you wish to live in this country, and reap the rewards of living in this land of freedom, then do it legally. Stop being paid under the table, and contribute to society. Pay taxes, support the education system they are using. Be a contributing person to society instead of 'taking' what society have to give.

Wasn't the saying by JFK ...'Ask not what the country can do for you, but what you can do for the country'?


How about some of theose poor blacks who don't earn enough to support themselves, are they to be thrown out too?

Define illegal and remind me who the country belonged to originally?
Not worth the comment.

Not worth the comment.

You mean it's yours?

Define illegal
Illegal: prohibited by law or by official or accepted rules

remind me who the country belonged to originally?The "Native Americans".... being a descendent of the Blackfoot tribe I submit to you that is irrelevant at this juncture. There are a specific set of rules for entering the country so that we can make allowances for healthcare, welfare, public works, etc. If you bypass the rules, you defeat the purpose and your actions are creating the very problem you protest against.

How about some of theose poor blacks who don't earn enough to support themselves, are they to be thrown out too?

This is not about race and the welfare system. This is about illegial aliens coming into this country, using our system and refusing to do what is necssary to become legal citiziens of this country. Period, end of story.

They are wanting to prove a point, that they can ramine illegial and we can't do a darn thing about it. That is VERY childish and is a reflection of their mentality.



PS, I really don't feel this thread is the proper place to discuss the welfare system. I have VERY strong beliefs on that and I am sure we can make a HUGE thread on that alone.

Illegal: prohibited by law or by official or accepted rules

The "Native Americans".... being a descendent of the Blackfoot tribe I submit to you that is irrelevant at this juncture. There are a specific set of rules for entering the country so that we can make allowances for healthcare, welfare, public works, etc. If you bypass the rules, you defeat the purpose and your actions are creating the very problem you protest against.

Those rules were drawn up by a bunch of illegals to start with

Illegal: prohibited by law or by official or accepted rules

The "Native Americans".... being a descendent of the Blackfoot tribe I submit to you that is irrelevant at this juncture. There are a specific set of rules for entering the country so that we can make allowances for healthcare, welfare, public works, etc. If you bypass the rules, you defeat the purpose and your actions are creating the very problem you protest against.

Was about to say that. :D

The "Native Americans".... being a descendent of the Blackfoot tribe I submit to you that is irrelevant at this juncture. There are a specific set of rules for entering the country so that we can make allowances for healthcare, welfare, public works, etc. If you bypass the rules, you defeat the purpose and your actions are creating the very problem you protest against.
Yea! That's it, that was the problem. See the Native Americans didn't have any RULES on immigration. And look what happened! :D

(High fiving Bodisathva in the background).

This is not about race and the welfare system. This is about illegial aliens coming into this country, using our system and refusing to do what is necssary to become legal citiziens of this country. Period, end of story.



Then why are they working for your industry and therefore contributing to your economy?

Then why are they working for your industry and therefore contributing to your economy?

Let them work, I don't care. My concern is, they are working and not paying taxes. They don't pay taxes because they are being paid under the table. That is wrong!!!

Become a citizen and pay your debt to society like the rest of us.

Let them work, I don't care. My concern is, they are working and not paying taxes. They don't pay taxes because they are being paid under the table. That is wrong!!!

Become a citizen and pay your debt to society like the rest of us.
You mean everybody in your country pays taxes irrespective of their income, somehow I don't think so

Define illegal and remind me who the country belonged to originally?

I seem to recall RedCoats claiming authority somewhere along the lines.... I don't think they were fighting on the side of the Indians...:rolleyes:

I seem to recall RedCoats claiming authority somewhere along the lines.... I don't think they were fighting on the side of the Indians...:rolleyes:
We didn't all but wipe out the natives as part of our settlement policy:rolleyes:

You mean everybody in your country pays taxes irrespective of their income, somehow I don't think so

It comes out of our paychecks before we even touch our money. So, yes, if they were legal citizens they would be taxed on their check.

Tax fraud is also another subject.

It comes out of our paychecks before we even touch our money. So, yes, if they were legal citizens they would be taxed on their check.

Tax fraud is also another subject.
You mean if you were earning just $10 a week you'd be taxed, surely you have allowances?

You mean everybody in your country pays taxes irrespective of their income, somehow I don't think so Technically, yes. Last week was "Tax Liberation Day". The day is a representation of the amount of taxes we actually pay. If we got to keep no money out of our paychecks until our yearly taxes were paid, last week would have been the first time we would have seen any money:eek: Now for those who make less than what the government considers "poverty level", they will get a good portion of that back, if not all. We also have a program called Earned Income Credit where if your household does not make "enough" the government will actually give you more back than you paid in. A good rule of thumb is to take the gross pay you make and take 27% out for taxes...you should see roughly 73% of your gross paycheck as a net amount...that will vary based upon state and local tax rates, of course.

You mean if you were earning just $10 a week you'd be taxed, surely you have allowances?


Any time you get paid legally, some form of tax is taken out. I belive there is a min you have to make for Federal to be taken out, not sure. However, there is medicare and Soc Sec that is taken no matter what you make.

Technically, yes. Last week was "Tax Liberation Day". The day is a representation of the amount of taxes we actually pay. If we got to keep no money out of our paychecks until our yearly taxes were paid, last week would have been the first time we would have seen any money:eek: Now for those who make less than what the government considers "poverty level", they will get a good portion of that back, if not all. We also have a program called Earned Income Credit where if your household does not make "enough" the government will actually give you more back than you paid in. A good rule of thumb is to take the gross pay you make and take 27% out for taxes...you should see roughly 73% of your gross paycheck as a net amount...that will vary based upon state and local tax rates, of course.

Here everybody gets an allowance to start with before any tax is deducted, other benefits are paid back through tax/child benefits etc

We didn't all but wipe out the natives as part of our settlement policy:rolleyes:
Because we kicked your A$$ out before you had the chance
BuHAHA :p

Not everyone who is against any form of amnesty or thinks that these protests are not only 100% wrong but absolutely ridiculous , is guilty of racism... it's called pragmatism.

I didn't say they were, I just don't see why one has to compare a group of people to a swarm of insects to bolster their argument. Would you like me to refer you to some similar rhetoric used by the Nazi propaganda machine?


You cannot intentionally hide from the law and then criticize it's protection of you.

There are millions of imprisoned criminals in the US who are protected by the law. Would their criticisms of the law be valid if the law allowed members of the public to administer their own justice? What if a protester was being beaten to death by a group of American citizens - should he/she be exempt from the protection of the law?

You cannot skirt the laws and regulations and think that there will be no retribution. That is asinine.

Did I say anything about not taking responsibility for one's own actions? You are jumping to conclusions.

Technically, following the letter of the Constitution, yes... but that doesn't validate the argument.

How can an individual be a human 'technically'? What argument are you debating against precisely?

They do not benefit from the protection of the law because they are illegal.

Utter nonsense. What do you think would happen to society if criminals were not protected by the law?

Because we are allowing it to become so. They have broken, are breaking, and, as the protests show, intend to go on breaking the law. They are, by definition and admission, criminals and should be treated as such. If they want the protection of the law, they should abide by the law. Dire need does not excuse one's actions, it merely displays extenuating circumstances. We can accept the reasoning but sooner or later someone has to pay the price for the transgression and I do not feel that it should be the law abiding citizens nor the immigrants who put forth the effort to legally enter the US.

I'm afraid it's not just the illegal immigrants who have been breaking the law. It's the ones who have been giving them the jobs also. The point of fact is, is that they have been used in this way for precisely the reasons you have demonstrated. We have all enjoyed low prices at the supermarkets and as long as the means to those low prices are not troublesome then the situation has been ignored. However, as soon as this workforce starts talking then we get all upset.

The fact is that these people have been illegal for years and they have been PROTECTED by our society for years. It is has only become an issue for us when these people start talking. (Oh yes, put a large group of people together with a common circumstance and they will find something to talk about) Suddenly when they do start making noises they become terrorists and they're not allowed to talk. But they've been allowed to use their hands to pick our vegetables haven't they?

Do you get my point of hypocrisy? Our society has allowed them to work for years as long as they don't talk. You talk of responsibility for your own actions, well I'm afraid we are seeing the effects of a long-installed greed ethic in our society and what's the cop out? "These people are a bunch of insects!". That, my friend, is asinine.

Because we kicked your A$$ out before you had the chance
BuHAHA :p

Yes wasn't it supposedly because you didn't want to pay tax. Well as they say, what goes round comes round:cool:

Then why are they working for your industry and therefore contributing to your economy?

Oh yes indeed. Why do these illegals have such a big club to wield?

I think it has something to do with reaping what you sow.

Yes wasn't it supposedly because you didn't want to pay tax. Well as they say, what goes round comes round:cool:
Naw, that was a lie we made up.
We just hate royalty! :eek:

Naw, that was a lie we made up.
We just hate royalty! :eek:

Yeah just needed an excuse to throw your lousy tea into the harbor... yeuch!! :p

Yeah just needed an excuse to throw your lousy tea into the harbor... yeuch!! :p
It's ten times better than MacDonalds coffee:rolleyes: :p

We just hate royalty! :eek:
That's why you envy it so much:cool:

There are millions of imprisoned criminals in the US who are protected by the law. Utter nonsense. What do you think would happen to society if criminals were not protected by the law?
Protected by SOME laws. The criminals actually loose some rights (like freedom in the case of a jail term). Not being a lawyer (thank God) I don't know the specifics. But I do know you can't kill a criminal or illegal and expect to get away with it. Like said before, there is a line between US citizen rights, and human rights that exists.
How ever let them open a hunting season... :eek:

It's ten times better than MacDonalds coffee:rolleyes: :p
A bad cup of coffee is 10 times better than a good cup of hot tea any day.

now Ice tea, that is totally a different subject :)

Like said before, there is a line between US citizen rights, and human rights that exists.

I was just trying to expose the dangers of ignoring the human rights laws altogether. It's far simpler if you liken the problem to a swarm of locusts but unfortunately insecticide isn't going to work.

I was just trying to expose the dangers of ignoring the human rights laws altogether. It's far simpler if you liken the problem to a swarm of locusts but unfortunately insecticide isn't going to work.

Ok, I do agree with you on this point. They are humans and have the rights of humans, and should not be compared to lowly insects, but as FoFa said there is a line between US Citizen rights and Human Rights.

Ok, I do agree with you on this point. They are humans and have the rights of humans, and should not be compared to lowly insects, but as FoFa said there is a line between US Citizen rights and Human Rights.

Now that is the big step. Once you acknowledge the fact that there are millions of HUMANS wanting the same thing and prepared to speak out - you can begin to realise why some get scared and start refusing to acknowledge the situation.

You can shout 'illegality' all you like but this doesn't change the situation one jot. We have vast quantities of PEOPLE on our streets who are unhappy. How did they get here? What is their problem? Why are they so well organised? How come they are speaking as one voice?

It's too late to treat these people as criminals. The figures are too big. We can't throw all these people in jail and we can't deport them all at once. It's a fricken' sensitive situation and if we don't tread carefully things could get a hell of alot worse.

Now that is the big step. Once you acknowledge the fact that there are millions of HUMANS wanting the same thing and prepared to speak out - you can begin to realise why some get scared and start refusing to acknowledge the situation.

You can shout 'illegality' all you like but this doesn't change the situation one jot. We have vast quantities of PEOPLE on our streets who are unhappy. How did they get here? What is their problem? Why are they so well organised? How come they are speaking as one voice?

It's too late to treat these people as criminals. The figures are too big. We can't throw all these people in jail and we can't deport them all at once. It's a fricken' sensitive situation and if we don't tread carefully things could get a hell of alot worse.

Yes, it is a very sensitive situation, and everyone has their opinions on it. As such as it will never be agreed upon here.

Personally I was enjoying the short lines at the 711
(which by the way has good coffee).

I like to collect one line sayings and the one that I think fits this situation is, "There is not a right way to do a wrong thing." They are called illegal aligns because they are here illegally. They have broken the law. When you get to the bottom line....There's not a right way to do a wrong thing.

Shane

Would you like me to refer you to some similar rhetoric used by the Nazi propaganda machine? Not at all...at no point in time have I needed to stoop to racial or societal slurs to get my point across...events and actions speak for themselves.There are millions of imprisoned criminals in the US who are protected by the law. I see that as a problem that has been cascading out of control for ages. Appeals, more appeals, continuances, etc. The appeals process is an excellent theory, but creates problems when people forget that criminals should loose some of their rights and freedoms...it's called punishment...something I find to be increasingly devoid in our justice system. Is there not something wrong with granting concessions and lenience upon a segment of our society (illegal or not) that break the law?Did I say anything about not taking responsibility for one's own actions? You are jumping to conclusions.Because nowhere in the arguments against fences, deportations, more strict immigration laws, etc. has anyone offered any type of suggestion on exactly what kind of remuneration should be imposed upon these illegal immigrants. I'm not saying we need to round them up and ship them out...as much as I'd like to. But a beginning is necessary...how about start enforcing the laws? Just because the solution will take almost as long as the apocryphal "victory in Iraq" doesn't mean we shouldn't pick a starting point and do something besides ignore not only the illegals, but those who benefit from their employ.How can an individual be a human 'technically'? What argument are you debating against precisely?No, you misunderstood...not human technically...technically we believe in freedom of speech and therefore allow this idiocy to continue because we grant them that right.Utter nonsense. What do you think would happen to society if criminals were not protected by the law?Ah...so we now know why Charlie Manson is still alive, huh? Why the DC sniper is just now coming to trial... There are certain circumstances in which there should be no mitigation. Don't get me wrong, I do understand the theory behind it and it is a good idea...most of the time. Other times, there needs to be an "Express Lane"I'm afraid it's not just the illegal immigrants who have been breaking the law. It's the ones who have been giving them the jobs also. Agreed.However, as soon as this workforce starts talking then we get all upsetUntrue, the recent protests have merely brought the problem to light for those who don't experience it. I have been against the employ of illegals for many, many years. From the migrant apple pickers in the orchards each year to the seemingly unending line of Greek Resauranteurs who refuse to give up their status as Greek Nationals so they don't have to pay the taxes on their business incomes. We have an almost unending supply of welfare rats that could be used to fill these positions without importing more problems. (or sitting quietly buy and allowing it to happen)The fact is that these people have been illegal for years and they have been PROTECTED by our society for years. Well then, by all means...let them do as they wish. Maybe we can institute a "frequent law breaker" rewards program. If you can manage to stay illegal for 5 years, you're a citizen. Maybe the next "reality" TV series? We'll call it "Jose's Run" or maybe "Sneak Factor". They have broken the law and should be punished...right along with those who employ them. well I'm afraid we are seeing the effects of a long-installed greed ethic in our society and what's the cop out? "These people are a bunch of insects!". Again...agreed. BUT...we are realizing the effects of burning fossil fuels on the environment, we have seen the effects of pollution and are taking steps to correct it, we realized that lead-based paint caused problems, figured out asbesdos caused cancer, realized smoking causes cancer, and took and are taking steps to correct the problem. The solution will not be instantaneous but must be started

Again...agreed. BUT...we are realizing the effects of burning fossil fuels on the environment, we have seen the effects of pollution and are taking steps to correct it, we realized that lead-based paint caused problems, figured out asbesdos caused cancer, realized smoking causes cancer, and took and are taking steps to correct the problem. The solution will not be instantaneous but must be started

So you see immigrants as harmful and dangerous?:confused:

BUT...we are realizing the effects of burning fossil fuels on the environment, we have seen the effects of pollution and are taking steps to correct it, we realized that lead-based paint caused problems, figured out asbesdos caused cancer, realized smoking causes cancer, and took and are taking steps to correct the problem. The solution will not be instantaneous but must be started
The US government hasn't realised it yet:rolleyes: The USA is the worlds worst polluter yet Ol' Cross Eyes ignores international agreements restricting emissions because it'll upset the big business moneymen who pay him to keep his gob shut:rolleyes:

I honestly can't imagine that he thinks the rest of the world doesn't know this - its so transparent.

Col

So you see immigrants as harmful and dangerous?:confused:
It would seem so in the USA:confused:

Col

So you see immigrants as harmful and dangerous?:confused: Illegal immigrants are economically, socially, and logistically harmful, yes.

The US government hasn't realised it yet The USA is the worlds worst polluter Actually, I believe that honor falls to China, but that's irrelevant. Just because 'W' is an environmental idiot as well as a cultural one doesn't mean that the sane portion of the US doesn't understand it. Despite 'W's failure to commit to the Kyoto Accords, Americans are taking it upon themselves to invest in a "greener" future. Besides this administration can only screw up for another two years.

Illegal immigrants are not accounted for and by shear nature, hide from authorities. They therefore have placed themselves in a position to not be protected by the law. They are their own problem. I will not subscribe to the notion that I need to make up for the self-absorbed stupidity that placed them in that position. Nor do I accept that if we just ignore it, it will go away.

Actually, I believe that honor falls to China, but that's irrelevant.

Actually, I think not;) ref (http://www.vexen.co.uk/USA/pollution.html)
China and the EU, both lesser polluters than the US, have one thing in common: They are both committed to further reducing their rate of emissions. Despite economic growth China has cut emissions by 17% since the mid 1990s. The odd one out is the USA. Immensely richer than China, but with less population than Europe, it emits more harmful chemicals than both of them. In addition, it has so far stubbornly refused to endorse international protocols designed to reduce such emissions. The world looks on flabbergasted as the world's greatest polluter cares not to take care or responsibility in the face of international pressure.

Despite 'W's failure to commit to the Kyoto Accords, Americans are taking it upon themselves to invest in a "greener" future.
I don't think saving a few plastic bottles is going to help when the Government doesn't give a toss about it. Its obvious the arrogant US government is totally oblivious to international pressure and then wonders why people make fun and dislike the USA (policies) so much:rolleyes: the sad thing is that the average American gets tarred with the same brush

Col

Actually, I think not;) OK..an admittedly quick search shows the US to be the one mucking up the pool.:o I don't think saving a few plastic bottles is going to help when the Government doesn't give a toss about it. It's much more than that. While hybrid vehicles are a good start, many are modifying those hybrids to go totally electrical. People are converting homes to run on solar and geothermal power. But, right along with those who are striving for cleaner alternatives, are those that don't care, driving gas-guzzling SUVs the size of elephants but not as eco-friendly:eek: It will be a long journey, but even a journey of a thousand miles begins with but a single step.

I simply do not understand the mindset of the current administration. Even Daddy Bush has told 'W' that he's an environmental idiot, but it doesn't change anything. Unless we get the nerve to toss the idiot out of office, we simply have no choice but to tolerate it for another two years and trust that those who voted for the moron will remember their mistake when the next election rolls around.

Unless we get the nerve to toss the idiot out of office, we simply have no choice but to tolerate it for another two years . .
I know its not easy - Sadly though he'll take on Iran and christ knows who else before then - and believe me, saving a few % on emissions will be the last thing we'll be thinking about in a middle east v west war.:(

Col

Illegal immigrants are economically, socially, and logistically harmful, yes.

.
Well if they're econimically harmful why are so many in employment in your country? :confused:

Well if they're econimically harmful why are so many in employment in your country? :confused:
Because it is simple human nature...greed. Some will stop at nothing to increase their profit margin. Especially if it's as simple as hiring an illegal workforce that cannot be traced and work for less. Not only does the employer not have to pay at least minimum wage, but they don't have to pay in the Social Security and Unemployment taxes, either.

Because it is simple human nature...greed. Some will stop at nothing to increase their profit margin. Especially if it's as simple as hiring an illegal workforce that cannot be traced and work for less. Not only does the employer not have to pay at least minimum wage, but they don't have to pay in the Social Security and Unemployment taxes, either.
That's called capitalism, you either want some form of state control or you don't. All the evidence here suggests that as a nation you don't

That's called capitalism, you either want some form of state control or you don't. All the evidence here suggests that as a nation you don't

Actually, I believe it's called exploitation. No one seems to have a problem with breaking up "unfair" monopolies because of the detriment to the economic machine... what's the difference? Capitalism does not equate to anarchy...there are rules which are spelled out and must be adhered to.

Actually, I believe it's called exploitation. No one seems to have a problem with breaking up "unfair" monopolies because of the detriment to the economic machine... what's the difference? Capitalism does not equate to anarchy...there are rules which are spelled out and must be adhered to.

Well isn't Microsoft seen as an unfair monopoly or Boeing?:confused:

Well isn't Microsoft seen as an unfair monopoly or Boeing?:confused:uh...not last time I checked. Ever heard of LINUX, UNIX, MacOS? AirBus, Grumman, Cessna, Aerospatiale, Saab?

uh...not last time I checked. Ever heard of LINUX, UNIX, MacOS? AirBus, Grumman, Cessna, Aerospatiale, Saab?
Airbus, Grumman, etc aren't American, how about Walmart, isn't that an American monopoly?

Airbus, Grumman, etc aren't American, how about Walmart, isn't that an American monopoly?
I was not aware that it mattered they were not American (which, by the way, NorthropGrumman most certainly is)...if they're doing business here there cannot be a monopoly, can there? monopoly:(economics) a market in which there are many buyers but only one seller;
exclusive control or possession of something;
Wal-Mart isn't a monopoly, it's just the world headquarters for cheap, plastic, crap. It's where people go to buy sub-standard items they don't care about.

You can argue semantics if you like, to me huge conglomerates have the market share and are thus virtual monopolies, they wipe out all small competitors before them, we have them here too.
As far as Walmart goes, they might sell crap but then there must be a huge demand for it in the States for it to grow that large, these huge companies control the prices they pay to farmers, suppliers etc., squeezing their profits, I doubt you'll see many farmers growing wealthy on the backs of low paid illegals.
Like I said, capitalism at its worst

The point to this thread isn't monopolies, it is about illegal aliens boycotting.

You know, if they would put as much effort into becoming a legal citizen, they could be one by now. Instead they fuss, whine, moan and boycott.

They might sell crap but then there must be a huge demand for it in the States for it to grow that large
It's where the illegals shop, because they can't afford Target.

The point to this thread isn't monopolies, it is about illegal aliens boycotting.

.
Well since according to the majority posting here they contribute nothing, why all the fuss about them boycotting?:confused:

It's where the illegals shop, because they can't afford Target.
Well if they can't afford to shop then how can they afford to pay tax whilst the rich of course put their wealth into tax havens:rolleyes:

Not at all...at no point in time have I needed to stoop to racial or societal slurs to get my point across...events and actions speak for themselves.

Then why are you not sensitive to the fact that other people in the media do? Illegal immigrants are NOT locusts. That is my point, not whether illegal immigrants should face the penalty of the law.

But a beginning is necessary...how about start enforcing the laws?

Of course, but this beginning must not contain the premise that we are dealing with sub-humans. I reject the rhetoric, not the fact that there is an immigrant issue.

No, you misunderstood...not human technically...technically we believe in freedom of speech and therefore allow this idiocy to continue because we grant them that right.

This underlines the hypocrisy I spoke off. Our society has allowed the illegals the right to work for a wage. On paper they don't have this right but in reality they have been given it. However it is ludicrous to expect a vast group of people to remain silent over a long period of time in this situation. Our society allows them to work as long as they remain quiet, that is hypocritical.


Ah...so we now know why Charlie Manson is still alive, huh? Why the DC sniper is just now coming to trial... There are certain circumstances in which there should be no mitigation. Don't get me wrong, I do understand the theory behind it and it is a good idea...most of the time. Other times, there needs to be an "Express Lane"

I don't see the benefit of likening the criminality of the typical illegal immigrant to a psychotic. It just shows more flawed metaphoring.

Untrue, the recent protests have merely brought the problem to light for those who don't experience it.

Indeed, and even though they co-ordinate huge, peaceful and organised demonstrations through the USA, some still consider them to be a pestilence.

We have an almost unending supply of welfare rats that could be used to fill these positions without importing more problems. (or sitting quietly buy and allowing it to happen)

Why do you insist on using this pestilent theme? Why do you think it appropriate to liken people to rodents?

Well then, by all means...let them do as they wish. Maybe we can institute a "frequent law breaker" rewards program. If you can manage to stay illegal for 5 years, you're a citizen. Maybe the next "reality" TV series? We'll call it "Jose's Run" or maybe "Sneak Factor". They have broken the law and should be punished...right along with those who employ them.

Where are you getting the idea that people should not be subject to the penalty of the law? This is just a strawman argument, plain and simple.

BUT...we are realizing the effects of burning fossil fuels on the environment, we have seen the effects of pollution and are taking steps to correct it, we realized that lead-based paint caused problems, figured out asbesdos caused cancer, realized smoking causes cancer, and took and are taking steps to correct the problem. The solution will not be instantaneous but must be started


...and yet again your use of language is poor. Why are you likening people to a cancer? Why do you not get that this kind of rhetoric is wrong? What is this solution you speak of and in what way does it relate to chemotherapy?

May I refer you back to the start of your post...

Not at all...at no point in time have I needed to stoop to racial or societal slurs to get my point across...events and actions speak for themselves.

Well since according to the majority posting here they contribute nothing, why all the fuss about them boycotting?:confused:

Because it is completely asinine to boycott in the first place.

Because it is completely asinine to boycott in the first place.

I admit, it may do more harm than good for their cause because boycotting could be interpreted as coercion. However, I don't see why it comes as such a surprise to people that this happening. A huge group of people all wanting the same thing will always start making noises about their wants sooner or later, regardless of their legal status.

Because it is completely asinine to boycott in the first place.

It was just an excuse by the sorry _____'s to get out of work for the day...

Because it is completely asinine to boycott in the first place.
Why? :confused:

It was just an excuse by the sorry _____'s to get out of work for the day...

LMAO :D Yes back to the fields with them, next time we'll shackle them so they can't take the day off from the job that they're not supposed to have been given in the first place :rolleyes:

I admit, it may do more harm than good for their cause because boycotting could be interpreted as coercion. However, I don't see why it comes as such a surprise to people that this happening. A huge group of people all wanting the same thing will always start making noises about their wants sooner or later, regardless of their legal status.

They will accomplish more by doing everything the correct way. Rarely has boycotting EVER done any good. It has only hurt those who did it. There are better ways to make a point.

Why not all show up at the office to become legal citizens at once. If they have 10,000 people showing up at their door step to become legalized then it may make them citizens faster. It could make the government get rid of all the red tape and do a mass legalization.

Stuff like that will have more of an impact than boycotting.

Why? :confused:

Because I said so. :D :D

Stuff like that will have more of an impact than boycotting.

I doubt it, the boycott will hurt your businesses

I doubt it, the boycott will hurt your businesses


Apparently not in this situation.

I doubt it, the boycott will hurt your businesses


Apparently not in this situation.

You know, I had a huge windfall response, but thought better of it... so I'll diffuse with this:

Regardless of feelings and interpretations, there are rules that are to be followed. Throw out the touchy-feely stuff and enforce the rules. If we continue to cater to everyone who perceives a slight we are going to find ourselves in waaay over our heads and unable to find a way out. There are times, when for the collective good, feelings cannot be part of the decision making process.


I don't care how long they've been here.The longer they've been here, the more time they've had to make their presence legal.
I don't care how little they work for. If they were here legally, they would be paid at least minimum wage and be protected under the US Labor Laws.

I don't care if Barney Fife has been employing 36 illegals in a sweatshop for ten years at $.03/day. Punish him right along with the illegal work force.

I don't care if they like it here. I like Graceland, but if I just stroll on over the fence I don't think they'll let me live there.

I don't care if someone hurt their feelings and called them a bad name. It's called life. Get over it.

I don't care if a fence will force them into a desert crossing that is 90% fatal. Duh!:eek: Don't do that.

You know, I had a huge windfall response, but thought better of it... so I'll diffuse with this:

Regardless of feelings and interpretations, there are rules that are to be followed. Throw out the touchy-feely stuff and enforce the rules. If we continue to cater to everyone who perceives a slight we are going to find ourselves in waaay over our heads and unable to find a way out. There are times, when for the collective good, feelings cannot be part of the decision making process.


I don't care how long they've been here.The longer they've been here, the more time they've had to make their presence legal.
I don't care how little they work for. If they were here legally, they would be paid at least minimum wage and be protected under the US Labor Laws.

I don't care if Barney Fife has been employing 36 illegals in a sweatshop for ten years at $.03/day. Punish him right along with the illegal work force.

I don't care if they like it here. I like Graceland, but if I just stroll on over the fence I don't think they'll let me live there.

I don't care if someone hurt their feelings and called them a bad name. It's called life. Get over it.

I don't care if a fence will force them into a desert crossing that is 90% fatal. Duh!:eek: Don't do that.


That about sums it up!

I don't care how little they work for. If they were here legally, they would be paid at least minimum wage and be protected under the US Labor Laws.

I don't care if Barney Fife has been employing 36 illegals in a sweatshop for ten years at $.03/day. Punish him right along with the illegal work force.



Is that why Bush has lowered the minimum wage for the re-construction in the wake of Katrina.
And just look at who's going to reap the benefit of this cheap labour, Haliburton. Do me a favour corruption starts at the top:rolleyes: :mad:

Is that why Bush has lowered the minimum wage for the re-construction in the wake of Katrina.

Not the minimum wage. The Davis-Bacon act of 1931 was basically to level the playing field for contractors working on government contracts. All he did was suspend the "prevailing" wage for the area. The benefits go to those who built their homes below sea-level and want to rebuild it there with government support.:confused:

I don't care if someone hurt their feelings and called them a bad name. It's called life. Get over it.

No, it's called you don't care about people getting called names.

Unfortunately you will care about the potential consequences of this antagonistic standpoint. This is not a nerd at high school we're talking about. It's 11 million+ people. Poking this group of people with the insult-stick is a bit of a foolish thing to do don't you think?

Basically you've jumped from this:

Not at all...at no point in time have I needed to stoop to racial or societal slurs to get my point across...events and actions speak for themselves.


to this...


I don't care if someone hurt their feelings and called them a bad name. It's called life. Get over it.

It's not about hurting people's feelings, it's about rhetoric. Language that is designed to influence the way you think. Language that you have adopted in your own postings. Once you convince yourself that these people are, say, a 'cancer' then you can come to all sorts of absurd conclusions. That is why I'm pulling you up on it.

Not the minimum wage. The Davis-Bacon act of 1931 was basically to level the playing field for contractors working on government contracts. All he did was suspend the "prevailing" wage for the area. The benefits go to those who built their homes below sea-level and want to rebuild it there with government support.:confused:

So it's ok for the State to pay below the "prevailing" wage, but not other employers? :confused:

So it's ok for the State to pay below the "prevailing" wage, but not other employers? :confused:

The prevailing wage would be what the average, say, carpenter, would be paid in the area. If all carpenters average $20/hr then you cannot contract to the government as a carpenter for less. The minimum wage says we can't pay the kids at McDonald's less than $6/hr to flip hamburgers.

The prevailing wage would be what the average, say, carpenter, would be paid in the area. If all carpenters average $20/hr then you cannot contract to the government as a carpenter for less. The minimum wage says we can't pay the kids at McDonald's less than $6/hr to flip hamburgers.

Do they actually 'flip' the burgers or is that just a saying? :D

The prevailing wage would be what the average, say, carpenter, would be paid in the area.


But Bush has just lowered that surely?:confused:

Well I decided to put in my two cents worth.

Dan,
Your only argument has been that the illegal aliens are more important than the Americans living here.

Well, that’s your opinion, thank God you are the vast minority.

If I may, Dan's main argument is that it is hypocritical and unconcsionable to sanction illegal immigration while it serves our purposes to take advantage of them, and then turn around and blame them for society's ills and call them criminals.

I'm not convinced as to whether that point of view is accurate, but it is reasonable and valid nonetheless. Neither one of you is really listening to what the other has to say.

Oh, and as far as boycotting goes, all I have to say is... just try. How on earth can anyone boycott anything these days when just about everything you can purchase filters into a hanful of congolmerate corporations eventually. Sure, you can kill a small business or even hurt an individual location of such and such. But for the most part unless you refuse to purchase anything at all, ever, you're not really going to make much of a difference. <-- BTW, that's just my personal perception. I have no data to back up my claim. :D

Do they actually 'flip' the burgers or is that just a saying? :D
Depends on how you define "burger". :p :D

Well I decided to put in my two cents worth.

Dan,
Your only argument has been that the illegal aliens are more important than the Americans living here.
.

No I think he's saying that they are your equals and shouldn't keep being seen as somehow inferior

If I may, Dan's main argument is that it is hypocritical and unconcsionable to sanction illegal immigration while it serves our purposes to take advantage of them, and then turn around and blame them for society's ills and call them criminals.

You're most of the way there, apart from the fact that I do accept that they are illegal and still must face the penalty of the law. It's a 2-way relationship. Both sides have entered this 'illegal' relationship and thus both sides must take responsibility for it. If you begin the resolution process with the premise that it is all the 'illegals' fault then you are not accepting the true cause of the situation. Using terms like 'cancer' and 'infestation' is completely unnecessary and actually down-right dangerous when it comes to dealing with 11 million+ people who are marching our streets in protest.

Neither one of you is really listening to what the other has to say.

Errrm - I have pretty much agreed with most of what J has had to say apart from his use of language. Most of his points could have been validly made with just as much conviction without the derogatory labelling. There is no need for it, it serves no positive purpose and it obscures the reality of the situation.

Hey Kraj,
In the past you have pointed out that I am putting words in your mouth or otherwise telling you how you are thinking.

Well, that’s what you just did.

I read the entire thread before making a comment that wasn’t supposed to be funny.

My only point is that The United States will become Mexico, or worse, and the mission to divide and conquer the middle class will have been won.

So why bother to flee you home land if all your going to do is to incorporate your peasant ways in the new country.

This is an old story for these folks.

VIVA LA REVOLUTION!

No I think he's saying that they are your equals and shouldn't keep being seen as somehow inferior

On a base level yes. It's the 'if you cut me then do I not bleed' scenario.

This opinion often gets confused with the idea that I support amnesty. This is false. A valid law must be upheld. However, illegal immigrants are performing a perfectly natural act - it is called migration. The europeans performed the same act hundreds of years ago, the law of the land was different back then so their status was not universally deemed 'illegal'.

The law is different now, that is fine, but the act of migration is EXACTLY THE SAME. They are no less human for performing this act and there is nothing insidious about it.

So when the INS starts to process the deporteees back to their home countries, I pray that they are looked upon as human beings in search of a better life, NOT as a sarcoma.

My only point is that The United States will become Mexico, or worse, and the mission to divide and conquer the middle class will have been won.

So why bother to flee you home land if all your going to do is to incorporate your peasant ways in the new country.


I'm not sure I understand this point. Are you saying that every Mexiccan who crosses the border is on a conquering mission? Are you saying that is the conscious intent of each illegal immigrant?

This is where I get confused with your opinion. Do you believe that the harmful effects of this immigration process is actually contrived by the individual 'peasant' or is it simply a side-effect of their search for a better life of which they are unaware?

As far as Walmart goes, they might sell crap but then there must be a huge demand for it in the States for it to grow that large, these huge companies control the prices they pay to farmers, suppliers etc., squeezing their profits, I doubt you'll see many farmers growing wealthy on the backs of low paid illegals.
Like I said, capitalism at its worst

Damn, what's going on on, now I'm agreeing with Rich too. :confused:

Yep, I fricken' hate Walmart - our Town had 90% of its character ripped out of it when they put a Wal-mart in. All the local stores couldn't compete and had to shut down. Now when a kid has a birthday party, he/she will just get given a bundle of presents all bought from the same aisle. No character in the merchandise, all supplied with the minimum brain power required to choose, all for our own convenience.

Don't tell me that Wal-mart ain't monopolising our town.

You know what? You're right. I really had to go back through the threads to realize what was going on. I thought there was miscommunication due to the two of you failing to be receptive to what the other was trying to communicate, which is another way of saying you were not listening to each other. But I was mistaken. In actuallity, the two of you have simply failed to recognize that the only reasonable conclusion to the dicussion is an agreement to disagree. It is obvious that nothing Dan says will convince you that Mexico is not an inferior country and illegal Mexican immigrants are undeserving of being labeled as such. And nothing you say will convince Dan that such labels are deserved.

You've been at this for three weeks. In that time you've managed to repeatedly insult each other (directly or via inferrance) and have failed to reach just about any kind of reasonable agreement. Regardless of how strong your feelings are, two intelligent, reasonable human beings such as the two of you should have been able to do so by now if that's what you were actually trying to do.

You've been at this for three weeks. In that time you've managed to repeatedly insult each other (directly or via inferrance) and have failed to reach just about any kind of reasonable agreement. Regardless of how strong your feelings are, two intelligent, reasonable human beings such as the two of you should have been able to do so by now if that's what you were actually trying to do.

Errmm - this is a debating forum and this is a thread regarding illegal immigration. I don't believe there is a time limit for each topic and any participant can retire from the debate at any time.

If you are growing tired of our exchanges, you are free to ignore them.

Actiaully Kraj,

I think Dan and I agree more than we disagree.

All of the following thoughts have been mentioned by me on previous post, on this subject.

First we agree that the real evil doers are the employers.

Second we agree that any person faced with dire conditions has the right to better themselves and provide for their children.

Third we both believe that the people coming here are entitled to be treated with dignity and any rights accorded by our laws.

Forth we both agree they are probably going to stay.

Here is where I perceive us to differ.

It is my contention that the Spanish people have long accepted that a very few will control all of the wealth.

If you examine the portion of the population that exist in poverty in those countries you will see that it has been significantly higher than the United States for the last hundred years.

But that is changing. We now have a growth in that segment of our population that is very alarming and disturbing. That is the insidious aspect of this migration.

Another major disagreement is that I believe they Spanish are ensuring the continuum of poverty and are bring elements of their (inferior in this aspect) culture.

The mode of thinking of the peasant class has been to support a revolutionary figure, only to have him replace the previous dictator with the new one. That is what I mean by VIVA LA REVOTION they protest for rights that will ensure poverty in their ranks. And the worst part of this is that they are supported by Hispanic American Citizens. What a pile of horse droppings.

This is where I get very emotional, and is perhaps our greatest disagreement. How can they be so stupid as to wave their own flags in protest?

They have come here because for 500 years their system has failed them, now it looks like we will, with their help, create the very same system here.


It is this trend toward ignorance and stupidity, that is abhorrent in modern American life.

...and yet again your use of language is poor. Why are you likening people to a cancer? Why do you not get that this kind of rhetoric is wrong? What is this solution you speak of and in what way does it relate to chemotherapy?
I'm not getting that in that response. Seems to me DAN, that although I think you are right, but maybe just a little to teechy. Take a deep breath, it'll be OK. We get your drift.

I doubt it, the boycott will hurt your businesses
Turns out the majority of the business hurt, were the same minoritys as the illegals (humm, that doesn't sound right). Rephrase, most of the illegals work for business run by hipanics (not all mind you, but a good percentage here in Texas) and those are the ones that seem to have to close for the day. We did notice some construction work slowed down with the light work force turn out, but other than that I personally saw no impact from the protest.

One more thought.
The illegals come here looking for work. Would they come if there was no work? Also since their fellow contrymen employ the vast majority of the illegals, a crack down on the employers would seem as a crack down on the hispanic community, be labeld racist, and cause a new stir.
So where do you go?

One more thought.
The illegals come here looking for work. Would they come if there was no work? Also since their fellow contrymen employ the vast majority of the illegals, a crack down on the employers would seem as a crack down on the hispanic community, be labeld racist, and cause a new stir.
So where do you go?


This is in no small part why the legal Hispanic population is advocating the transfer of government document and road signs to Spanish.

Keep the peasants as peasants it’s worked for 500 years.

ok...I'll stick my neck out again...

While we don't have the amounts of immigrants this far north that you have in the southwest, we do have a very large contingent of migrant workers that descend upon the local orchard country (hold your ears Dan:eek: ...nothing meant by it) like the proverbial hoarde of locusts every year. Based upon that experience, I pose the following question:

ignoring all references to culture or origin...
Has it occurred to anyone else that we are talking about a group of people who, by definition, have already determined that their "special" circumstances in life are such that the laws do not apply to them? If they are capable of rationalizing one illegal act, how can we possibly believe that "minor" immigration infractions and tax evasion will be the extent of their wrongdoings?:confused:

Hey Kraj,
My only point is that The United States will become Mexico, or worse, and the mission to divide and conquer the middle class will have been won.

So why bother to flee you home land if all your going to do is to incorporate your peasant ways in the new country.

This is an old story for these folks.

VIVA LA REVOLUTION!

I posted this in the immigration thread

Has anybody ever considered that these "illegal" Mexican immigrants are part of a cunning plan for Mexico to recover the lands lost to America during America's expansion from "Sea to shining sea"

Brian

I posted this in the immigration thread



Brian
What are you saying Brian?

That I copied you?

Actually I was refering to the assault by the lap dog fascist in office, and their ulra rich masters.

What are you saying Brian?

That I copied you?

Actually I was refering to the assault by the lap dog fascist in office,

I always thought he was a puppet on a chain

I'm not getting that in that response. Seems to me DAN, that although I think you are right, but maybe just a little to teechy. Take a deep breath, it'll be OK. We get your drift.

May be I am. My reaction is to the media post at the beginning of this thread...

a snip...

And now, like terrorists, they are going to attack our economy. The
country they came to like locusts so they could reap the benefits is now
the focus of their boycott.

Now please don't let any-one miscontrue this as me calling any-one here a Nazi but I would like to post a link to a piece of 2nd world war Nazi propaganda.

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/pesthauch.htm

Now with this is mind, does anyone here think it appropriate that our media should be likening human beings to locusts? Basically I think the writer of that text should be firmly kicked up the rear-end.

It would just make me feel better if people would skip the labelling, that's all.
An immigrants culture has no impact whatsoever on their legal status.

It would just make me feel better if people would skip the labelling, that's all.
An immigrants culture has no impact whatsoever on their legal status.
Oh dang, I just have to play devils advocate on this :eek:
While agree with what you say, the facts of real life prove otherwise.
What if a peoples culture allowed for multi-wives, or incest with their children. How do you think that would go over in this country? Or what would happen if they just upped and killed their teenager cause their culture allowed for that if they were disrespectful?
So now lets bring it down to a more realistic level. Lets say a culture is not so, um, aware of litter as an example. Lets say this culture just uses stuff, and leaves the wrapper, waste, whatever on the ground instead of finding a suitable trash container, as an example. Now those that have more appreciation for clean areas, would call them dirty. And in one point of view, that would be true, yet on the other side it is normal, and they don't see an issue with it. The problem becomes, that the jump from dirty, to "a bunch of filty cockroaches" as an example is really short. Not a very big leap at all.
Anyway, I think that is how culture can play into the whole "label" thing.
At least my 2 cents worth.
:rolleyes:

The problem becomes, that the jump from dirty, to "a bunch of filty cockroaches" as an example is really short. Not a very big leap at all


For an individual who is unaware/indifferent to where such rhetoric has lead in the past. We're not talking about a passing remark in the street, but a piece of text distributed to a large group of people. The text was a deliberate attempt to incite hatred and you know it.

ok
ignoring all references to culture or origin...
Has it occurred to anyone else that we are talking about a group of people who, by definition, have already determined that their "special" circumstances in life are such that the laws do not apply to them?...

Are you referring to our elected officials?

Are you referring to our elected officials?
ahhh...I see you know PA's illustrious Governor Rendell:eek: (although that could be another thread in itself:D )

The problem is Ken is that they have been participating... a quote from that link:



Yes they are illegal but it is also participation. They WANT to participate. They HAVE BEEN participating for years. They have served a clear purpose to our society ...cheap labor which can be used as a beast of burden. But look what happens when this beast starts to talk back... from your follow-up quote



They get likened to murderers and pestilence. It's disgusting. No matter how you look at it, these immigrants are human and they will voice their opinion. The only way to stop that is to dehumanise them by comparing them to locusts and thus deny them their human qualities. Both sides are responsible, both sides are human. One side are illegal but this does not mean they are insects.

Yes Ken the situation is complicated but this does not mean we are dealing with terrorists. They are not flying planes into buildings and they are not driving car bombs into bus stops. If they cease working for a single day that means both the employers and illegal immigrants will not be breaking those employment laws that day. The situation will actually be more legal! How can a person be classed as a terrorist by the cessation of a criminal act for a day?
They can't, it's a simple exposure of the hypocrisy of American society.

If immigrants cant find jobs. They will steal things or vandalize property.
Causing mayhem, this will be an attack of a different sort on we the people.
We need stricture tightening up on freedom of speech; who knows what those immigrants might say. I propose we are going to need more cameras and tracking devices to see what people are up to. Someone needs to tell them what to do and how to behave in our country.

Terri321

If immigrants cant find jobs. They will steal things or vandalize property.
Causing mayhem, this will be an attack of a different sort on we the people.
We need stricture tightening up on freedom of speech; who knows what those immigrants might say. I propose we are going to need more cameras and tracking devices to see what people are up to. Someone needs to tell them what to do and how to behave in our country.

Terri321

That's the same sort of crap that Hitler and his cronies spouted against Jews!
Hell you'll be telling us next Lincoln freed the slaves:rolleyes:

We need stricture tightening up on
(STRIK-chur). A narrowing of a passageway. For example, esophageal stricture is the narrowing of the esophagus. Also called stenosishmmm...I'll beat Matt to this one. I'm willing to bet that's not what you meant:D tightening up on freedom of speech; who knows what those immigrants might say. I propose we are going to need more cameras and tracking devices to see what people are up to. Someone needs to tell them what to do and how to behave in our country.:eek: :eek: :eek:

...so, Terri...exactly what planet are you from?

(STRIK-chur). A narrowing of a passageway. For example, esophageal stricture is the narrowing of the esophagus. Also called stenosishmmm...I'll beat Matt to this one. I'm willing to bet that's not what you meant:D :eek: :eek: :eek:


I bet he meant scripture :eek: :cool: