Immigration, good or bad

All things outside of Burning Man.
Post Reply
User avatar
Rabbi Dali Rick
Posts: 1848
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 9:28 am
Location: Red Rock City, California
Contact:

... Hot Damn! .......

Post by Rabbi Dali Rick » Tue Jun 22, 2010 9:51 am

Obama on Rumors of Executive Order Amnesty


http://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/ ... nesty.html





Yeah! Come on in everybody the waters fine....




the rebbi

User avatar
geekster
Posts: 4867
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:53 pm
Location: Hospice For The Terminally Breathing
Contact:

Post by geekster » Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:28 am

"but the red men were the keepers of this land long before us, i think that is undeniable."

True, but has nothing to do with the conversation.

The problem is a woman who is 14-1/2 months pregnant arriving here for the sole purpose of having her baby born here to claim citizenship. I don't believe there are very many other countries who allow that anywhere on earth. Mexico certainly doesn't allow it.

The other problem is that they then abuse a regulation that was designed to allow for family reunification. So the baby gets citizenship and can "sponsor" the parents. The baby is used as a "hook" to gain resident status for the parents. It is an abuse of the regulations. The regulations were not designed for that purpose and so we need to put a correction in place to ensure they can't be used for that purpose.

A baby born to parents here within the immigration regulations ... fine, no problem granting citizenship to the child. A baby born to someone who entered here outside of immigration regulations? Nope. And the fastest growing demographics are people from India and people from China.
Pabst Blue Ribbon - The beer that made Gerlach famous.

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:20 pm

Here's a short, interesting vid on Immigration reform. They fail to mention that securing the borders would severely cut into CIA funding.
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

User avatar
Trishntek
Posts: 3463
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:27 pm
Burning Since: 2010
Camp Name: Retrofrolic!
Location: Ventura, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by Trishntek » Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:38 pm

geekster wrote:"but the red men were the keepers of this land long before us, i think that is undeniable."

True, but has nothing to do with the conversation.

The problem is a woman who is 14-1/2 months pregnant arriving here for the sole purpose of having her baby born here to claim citizenship. I don't believe there are very many other countries who allow that anywhere on earth. Mexico certainly doesn't allow it.

The other problem is that they then abuse a regulation that was designed to allow for family reunification. So the baby gets citizenship and can "sponsor" the parents. The baby is used as a "hook" to gain resident status for the parents. It is an abuse of the regulations. The regulations were not designed for that purpose and so we need to put a correction in place to ensure they can't be used for that purpose.

A baby born to parents here within the immigration regulations ... fine, no problem granting citizenship to the child. A baby born to someone who entered here outside of immigration regulations? Nope. And the fastest growing demographics are people from India and people from China.
The Redman thing,,,,, don't know about you, but I'm third generation American and call this home. I was born here, my parents and grandmother were born here. Enough of this bullshit about who was here first! As you initiated this quote, it has no place in this thread. Native is native and immigrant is immigrant. I refuse to accept the accusation that I have a diminished right to live here because of what my ancestors did generations ago! It is bullshit IMHO.

Immigration, on the other hand, is about laws and the respect of those laws. The birth law was part of the 14th amendment which provided the slaves and children of slaves a way to citizenship. It was written for people who were in the United States against their will. It was never intended for those who came here willingly.
RETROFROLIC, the place of Pink, Pain and Pleasure!
http://www.retrofrolic.com
Some call me Tnt,,,, works for me!

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:30 pm

This is something that came in mail. I just haven't had time to properly look at it. LMK BS or no. There are links at the linked page that didn't come through on this page.

This is all somewhat reminiscent of the problem with Turkey. Turkey wanted in the Eurozone. They complied with everything that Brussels wanted. In the end, the door was shut in their face. It seems that Europe didn't want 75 million Muslim Turks to immigrate all over Western Europe.
It's doubtful that Americans will want 80 million Mexicans coming north and competing for scarce jobs.

Interesting new conference:


http://www.americanpatrol.com/


Merger or Sovereignty?
Arizona Must Confront Obama
Feature Photo
Glenn Spencer -- American Patrol Report -- June 30

On May 25 I attended a conference on border management, at a cost of $1,200. It was worth it. By being there, I was able to hear first-hand, a U.S Army General tell us that the best way to secure our southern border was to erase it.
Brig. General Felderman's speech was a stunning proposal to integrate our military with that of Mexico to fight the drug cartels and terrorism, implying that those were the only problems we face.
I have now been able to secure a copy of the slides Gen. Felderman used in his presentation. I urge everyone to listen to his speech while moving through his slides. (I should note that the first five minutes includes some background stuff, including how many generals wouldn't give this speech.)
Felderman leaves no doubt that the Obama administration is working to merge the U.S. with Mexico. It leaves no doubt that securing the border with a fence is out of the question.
It is time that the State of Arizona confront the Obama administration over this issue. The best way to do this is to get a general consensus on the definition of border security. Arizona should then move to establish a means of measuring border security -- setting a standard that must be met before an discussion of broader immigration reform can begin.
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Tue Jul 06, 2010 5:17 pm

This is a new report from FAIR. "Moreover, the study’s breakdown of costs on a state-by-state basis shows that in states with the largest number of illegals, the costs of illegal immigration are often greater than current, crippling budget deficits."
"immediately attacked FAIR's report and pointed out that it is the polar opposite of the Perryman Report, a 2008 study that found illegal immigration was actually a boon to the American economy."


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/02/im ... ts-reform/
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:32 am

I spent years in Mexico traveling around. It's against the law there to post a sign in English outside of the tourist areas. It's very much against the law to fly a foreign flag. The exception is at a port when they welcome a foreign-flagged vessel. This is common. In Havana, the port captain showed me his American flag that they keep for that purpose. He's never flown it, of course.
Fox has a poll asking whether the flying of the American flag should be banned to avoid insulting Mexican residents;
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/05/ ... d-america/
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:59 pm

Well, it looks like we don't have any more illegal aliens;


Arrest Made in US Forest Service Operation at Illegal Marijuana Site

REDDING, Calif - A U.S. Forest Service Law Enforcement Operation led to the arrest of an individual at an illegal marijuana cultivation site last week where 7,434 illegally grown marijuana plants were confiscated.

On Friday July 9, 2010 a marijuana eradication operation was conducted on the Shasta-Trinity National Forest in Trinity County, south of Hayfork, by law enforcement agents from the U.S. Forest Service, Trinity County Sheriff's Office Drug Task Force and the California Department of Justice, Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement. During the raid, a U.S. Forest Service K-9 team located Gauldry Almonte-Hernandez, a, displaced foreign traveler from Michoacán Mexico who had tried to flee the area and hide while officers were performing entry into the marijuana garden.

The defendant was arrested on federal charges in violation of Title 21 United States Code section 841, Manufacturing a Controlled Substance, if found guilty, he could receive a sentence of 10 years in prison.

During the week of July 5th, officers conducted marijuana eradication operations at six sites near Hayfork with the eradication of approximately 46,000 marijuana plants.

On July 6th, the team of officers eradicated two marijuana manufacturing locations on the National Forest where a total of 14,757 marijuana plants were destroyed. The operation continued on July 7th with the removal of 16,767 plants from two additional gardens. July 8th a fifth garden was eradicated by the team which contained 7,466 marijuana plants which were destroyed. The operation ended Friday with the arrest of the defendant and the eradication of 7,434 marijuana plants.

The public is encouraged to contact your local Forest Service office or Sheriff's Department with any information pertaining to illegal marijuana manufacturing on your public lands.
Now, they're all displaced foreign travelers. I suppose that they were all on their way to Disneyland. :wink: :roll:

The comments section of the blog mention that it will cost $ 600,000 to incarcerate him.
http://www.thetreeofliberty.com/vb/show ... ?p=1132153
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

User avatar
geekster
Posts: 4867
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:53 pm
Location: Hospice For The Terminally Breathing
Contact:

Post by geekster » Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:03 pm

The old displaced foreign traveler from Michoacán Mexico trick, eh?

Someone needs to fire an editor.
Pabst Blue Ribbon - The beer that made Gerlach famous.

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Tue Jul 27, 2010 7:42 pm

The Arizona law is raising hell. BUT, the extant Mexican laws are worse still;
"The Mexican government has also made changes to its own immigration laws after some rights groups, such as Amnesty International, claimed it was mistreating illegal immigrants in its country.

And the Mexican Interior Ministry said it will step up efforts to protect migrants here in response to a report by the United Nations that accused Mexico police of robbing migrants and extorting bribes from them."
If The U.N. knows about it, the cops must be pretty bad. Safer to be and illegal in the U.S. than an illegal Salvadorian in Mexico.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2010 ... p=obinsite
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

User avatar
geekster
Posts: 4867
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:53 pm
Location: Hospice For The Terminally Breathing
Contact:

Post by geekster » Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:25 pm

What I thought was funny was a report today that Arizona tourism is UP since they passed the law.
Pabst Blue Ribbon - The beer that made Gerlach famous.

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Wed Aug 11, 2010 6:08 pm

A Rep in Florida wants to get on the anti-immigration bandwagon;
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67A2XS20100811
He wants to force employers to check status before they hire someone. Why do I doubt his sincerity? :roll:
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Thu Aug 12, 2010 5:22 pm

Geekster, here's one to chew on;

>
Subject: Arizona...is relevant
>
This is interesting. I would think this part of the Constitution
> would also cover rulings made by judges that have locked up Oregon
>lands, like the one the judge in Okland, Ca. signed. It could probably be
>used to stop or reverse a lot of the land grab by liberal judges backing
>enviro's.
>
>WE DON’T EVEN KNOW OUR OWN LAWS…Stunning Information
>
In a stunning development that could potentially send the nation into a Constitutional
>crisis, an astute attorney who is well-versed in Constitutional law states that
>the ruling against the state of Arizona by Judge Susan Bolton concerning its new
>immigration law is illegal.
>
>Daniel Bayer/CBS News via Getty Images). The inept U.S. Attorney-General
>Eric Holder.
>
>The attorney in question submitted her assertion in a special article in the
>Canada Free Press. Her argument states in part,
>
>"Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers
>don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same
>goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this lawyer has read
>it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain
>as the nose on your face.
>
>"Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says: "In all Cases affecting Ambassadors,
>other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party,
>the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before
>mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction."
>
>In other words, the Judge in the Arizona case has absolutely no Constitutional
>jurisdiction over the matter upon which she ruled. As the Constitution makes
>abundantly clear, only the U.S. Supreme Court can issue rulings that involve
>a state.
>
>This means that neither Judge Bolton nor the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in
>San Francisco, to which the case is being appealed, have any legal standing whatsoever
>to rule on the issue.
>
Thus, U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder filed the federal government's lawsuit
>against the state of Arizona in a court that has no authority to hear the case.
>
>The attorney whose heads-up thinking concerning the Constitution provides the
>legal remedy for dealing with this blatant disregard for Constitutional law in
>the article at Canada Free Press, which can be accessed at the link above.
>
>In a related development, another explosive discovery was made by those who
>actually take the Constitution seriously.
>
>The Constitution specifically allows an individual state to wage war against
>a neighboring country in the event of an invasion, should there be a dangerous
>delay or inaction on the part of the federal government. This information was
>cited by United Patriots of America.
>
>From Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, we find these words: "No
>State shall, without the Consent of Congress, engage in War, unless actually invaded,
>or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."
>
>No one who is actually familiar with the crisis at the southern border can
>deny that Arizona is endangered by the relentless assault of lawless M>
Subject: Arizona...is relevant
>
This is interesting. I would think this part of the Constitution
> would also cover rulings made by judges that have locked up Oregon
>lands, like the one the judge in Okland, Ca. signed. It could probably be
>used to stop or reverse a lot of the land grab by liberal judges backing
>enviro's.
>
>WE DON’T EVEN KNOW OUR OWN LAWS…Stunning Information
>
In a stunning development that could potentially send the nation into a Constitutional
>crisis, an astute attorney who is well-versed in Constitutional law states that
>the ruling against the state of Arizona by Judge Susan Bolton concerning its new
>immigration law is illegal.
>
>Daniel Bayer/CBS News via Getty Images). The inept U.S. Attorney-General
>Eric Holder.
>
>The attorney in question submitted her assertion in a special article in the
>Canada Free Press. Her argument states in part,
>
>"Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers
>don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same
>goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this lawyer has read
>it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain
>as the nose on your face.
>
>"Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says: "In all Cases affecting Ambassadors,
>other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party,
>the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before
>mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction."
>
>In other words, the Judge in the Arizona case has absolutely no Constitutional
>jurisdiction over the matter upon which she ruled. As the Constitution makes
>abundantly clear, only the U.S. Supreme Court can issue rulings that involve
>a state.
>
>This means that neither Judge Bolton nor the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in
>San Francisco, to which the case is being appealed, have any legal standing whatsoever
>to rule on the issue.
>
Thus, U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder filed the federal government's lawsuit
>against the state of Arizona in a court that has no authority to hear the case.
>
>The attorney whose heads-up thinking concerning the Constitution provides the
>legal remedy for dealing with this blatant disregard for Constitutional law in
>the article at Canada Free Press, which can be accessed at the link above.
>
>In a related development, another explosive discovery was made by those who
>actually take the Constitution seriously.
>
>The Constitution specifically allows an individual state to wage war against
>a neighboring country in the event of an invasion, should there be a dangerous
>delay or inaction on the part of the federal government. This information was
>cited by United Patriots of America.
>
>From Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, we find these words: "No
>State shall, without the Consent of Congress, engage in War, unless actually invaded,
>or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."
>
>No one who is actually familiar with the crisis at the southern border can
>deny that Arizona is endangered by the relentless assault of lawless Mexican invaders
>who ignore our laws, inundate our schools and medical facilities with unpaid bills,
>and even endanger the very lives of citizens with criminal drug cartels that engage
>in kidnapping, murder, human trafficking, and other mayhem, including aiming missile
>and grenade launchers directly at U.S. border cities from just across the Mexican
>border.
>
This is every bit as much of an invasion as the nation of Iran sending in a
> fleet of warships to the Port of Charleston.
>
The Constitution that forms the basis of the rule of law in this country says
>that Arizona has legal right to protect itself in the case of inaction or delay
>on the part of the federal government, including waging war in its self-defense.
>
>This, when coupled with the clear Constitutional mandate that only the Supreme
>Court hear cases involving the states, should be ample legal basis for attorneys
>representing Arizona to go after the federal government with a vengeance.
>
>Governor Jan Brewer and the stalwart members of the Arizona legislature have
>ample legal reason to stand firm against the illegal bullying of an arrogant,
>lawless federal government.
>exican invaders
>who ignore our laws, inundate our schools and medical facilities with unpaid bills,
>and even endanger the very lives of citizens with criminal drug cartels that engage
>in kidnapping, murder, human trafficking, and other mayhem, including aiming missile
>and grenade launchers directly at U.S. border cities from just across the Mexican
>border.
>
This is every bit as much of an invasion as the nation of Iran sending in a
> fleet of warships to the Port of Charleston.
>
The Constitution that forms the basis of the rule of law in this country says
>that Arizona has legal right to protect itself in the case of inaction or delay
>on the part of the federal government, including waging war in its self-defense.
>
>This, when coupled with the clear Constitutional mandate that only the Supreme
>Court hear cases involving the states, should be ample legal basis for attorneys
>representing Arizona to go after the federal government with a vengeance.
>
>Governor Jan Brewer and the stalwart members of the Arizona legislature have
>ample legal reason to stand firm against the illegal bullying of an arrogant,
>lawless federal government.
>
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

User avatar
cowboyangel
Posts: 6987
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 10:32 pm

Post by cowboyangel » Sat Aug 14, 2010 3:16 pm

Deport all illegal lizard space aliens now!
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believe is false."- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

User avatar
Ugly Dougly
Posts: 17157
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 9:31 am
Burning Since: 1996
Location: เชียงใหม่
Contact:

Post by Ugly Dougly » Wed Sep 01, 2010 1:03 pm

The US military will soon find itself a reason to be in Mexico.

The government is being de-stabilized right now through drug wars (and we know who controls this). Meanwhile, neo-cons are being softened up with the immigration debate. I couldn't have planned it any better myself.

I'll give it 10-20 years, maybe less.

User avatar
Apollonaris Zeus
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:17 am

Post by Apollonaris Zeus » Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:39 pm

Reporters from the Michigan Messenger found that Hallmark Industrial, a Texas company also involved in the BP oil spill clean up efforts on the Gulf Coast, had been busing hundreds of undocumented workers from Texas to Battle Creek and forcing them to work nearly 100 hours a week in unsafe conditions.

http://www.care2.com/causes/environment ... -clean-up/

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Sun Sep 26, 2010 10:22 am

I've spent a total of about 10--12 years in other countries,,,44 of them. In general, native born people feel most comfortable in their own country with familiar language, customs, food, etc. The impulse to leave is most often a financial decision. This is most true of those who have limited opportunities because of caste, lack of motivation, lack of intelligence, etc. The most intelligent can usually rise above limitations like "wrong family"," wrong area" etc.

I know hundreds of immigrants. Most left to find work that was not available to them in their home country. There are generally 2 groups. I have an educated French friend who wanted to get into cinematography. She came here because the work wasn't available in Toulouse.
Then, there are the people who are only looking for manual labor.... or the dole. Only a fool claims that all people are of equal intelligence,,, equal motivation,,, equal morality.
Europe is finding that out with huge problems.
"He claims that the country is digging its own grave by admitting waves of immigrants he characterises as spongers, welfare cheats, and sub-intelligent beings copulating their way from ethnic minority to takeover majority."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/se ... ght-asylum
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

gunsmith
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:55 am

Post by gunsmith » Sun Sep 26, 2010 10:58 am

The R party likes illegals because it means slave labor to be exploited, the D party likes illegals because it means slave labor & a vote for them eventually.

Rapist/sex traffickers love illegals because it is so easy to exploit them.

Progressive pimp Craig Newmark

Of craigslist refuses to acknowledge his sites culpability in the trafficking/sex slavery of young asian women. When confronted he claimed "the community" should flag the offending add, yeah craig- what community? the pederast community?

They finally eliminated the so called adult section after looking the fool on TV a month or two ago-to late for the many young victims Craig Newmark helped rape
[/b]
I may not be here now but I was there then

User avatar
The CO
Posts: 1670
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:56 am
Burning Since: 1996
Camp Name: M*A*S*H 4207th/404://Village Not Found
Location: I-CORPS, M*A*S*H HQ, Van Nuts, CA

Post by The CO » Sun Sep 26, 2010 11:15 am

Tired of foreigners taking US jobs? Here ya go:

http://www.takeourjobs.org

Go ahead, sign up and take jobs back!

Whattaya mean you don't won't that job? Well, stop complaining then!
M*A*S*H 4207th: An army of fun.
I don't care what the borg says: feather-wearers will NOT be served in Rosie's Bar.
When I ask how many burns, I mean at BRC.

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Sun Sep 26, 2010 1:22 pm

Gunsmith, don't forget that the military likes immigrants for it's ranks. They get papers for signing up.
CO, the point that I was trying to make was about immigrants who come here to NOT work. The UK is far worse. "The ONS said there were a total of 3.9 million UK households where no adults worked, an increase of 148,000 on last year. "
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 73710.html
I spent a lot of time in London,,, mostly in Earls' Court. Go to the center of any large city. Look at the people walking by. Our increasingly complex and technical society has NO need or niche a percentage of these people. They would much rather be on the dole in a rich country than in a poor country.

The immigrants who come here to work in agriculture not only have back-breaking work, they have a huge exposure to pesticides. Yet, they continue. THAT is a work ethic.
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

gunsmith
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:55 am

Post by gunsmith » Sun Sep 26, 2010 8:46 pm

The CO wrote:Tired of foreigners taking US jobs? Here ya go:

http://www.takeourjobs.org

Go ahead, sign up and take jobs back!

Whattaya mean you don't won't that job? Well, stop complaining then!
tell that to taxi drivers in many cities, many people of all races cant get a taxi job in the town they were born in, teens in Napa county were beaten by thugs when they tried to apply for the 15 dollar an hour grape picking jobs.

Foreigners, as your using it, is a red herring- it's illegals that are taking jobs, legal immigrants are welcomed by most.

And Americans will take those jobs if they have a chance, lots of construction folks looking for work that is taken by illegals
I may not be here now but I was there then

User avatar
The CO
Posts: 1670
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:56 am
Burning Since: 1996
Camp Name: M*A*S*H 4207th/404://Village Not Found
Location: I-CORPS, M*A*S*H HQ, Van Nuts, CA

Post by The CO » Sun Sep 26, 2010 8:55 pm

(Sigh)

I've heard & had this argument before. The issue as I see it is people that hire illegals for less money instead of paying what is deserved to those in the careers you mention.

And that's all I have to say.
M*A*S*H 4207th: An army of fun.
I don't care what the borg says: feather-wearers will NOT be served in Rosie's Bar.
When I ask how many burns, I mean at BRC.

User avatar
Simon of the Playa
Posts: 19002
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 6:25 pm
Burning Since: 1996
Camp Name: La Guilde des Hashischins
Location: Rochester, Nevada.

Post by Simon of the Playa » Sun Sep 26, 2010 9:25 pm

can't sit still wrote:Here's a short, interesting vid on Immigration reform. They fail to mention that securing the borders would severely cut into CIA funding.

no, you're wrong bucko, its because sealing our borders is XENOPHOBIC AND JUST PLAIN FUCKING STUPID, you nutcase.
Frida Be You & Me

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Sun Sep 26, 2010 11:03 pm

Simon, I find no fault with your clarity. :)
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Sat Oct 16, 2010 3:40 pm

Subject: This is alarming
>
> The Manitoba Herald
> as Reported by Clive Runnels
> August 1, 2010
> The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week, sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration. The recent actions of the Tea Party are prompting an exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they’ll soon be required to hunt, pray, and to agree with Bill O’Reilly and Glenn Beck.
> Canadian border farmers say it’s not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal-rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night.
> “I went out to milk the cows the other day, and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn,â€
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

User avatar
ygmir
Posts: 29372
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 8:36 pm
Burning Since: 2017
Camp Name: qqqq
Location: nevada county

Post by ygmir » Sat Oct 16, 2010 5:43 pm

chuckling..........
YGMIR

Unabashed Nordic
Pagan

User avatar
Trishntek
Posts: 3463
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:27 pm
Burning Since: 2010
Camp Name: Retrofrolic!
Location: Ventura, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by Trishntek » Sat Oct 16, 2010 8:19 pm

Hilarious! Thanks CSS.
RETROFROLIC, the place of Pink, Pain and Pleasure!
http://www.retrofrolic.com
Some call me Tnt,,,, works for me!

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Sun Oct 17, 2010 7:46 am

SOUP or STEW
There has always been immigration. Do immigrants mix like stew and stay in clumps,, or mix like soup without ethnic or cultural grouping? Which is better? Do some groups mix better than others? Is this good or bad?
In General, the muslims resist mixing. They are also responsible for a disproportionate amount of the crime in some countries. Is resistance to mixing going to cause an insular attitude that results in more crime. It's obvious that if a group doesn't feel itself to be part of the larger society, they are more likely to prey on that society.
Merkel has come out and said that multi-culturism just does not work.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/germanymusl ... mmigration

some snips;
"Around the same number (35.6 percent) think Germany is being "over-run by foreigners""
"More than half (58.4 percent) of the 2,411 people polled thought the around four million Muslims in Germany should have their religious practices "significantly curbed."

"The integration of Muslims has been a hot button issue since August when a member of Germany's central bank sparked outrage by saying the country was being made "more stupid" by poorly educated and unproductive Muslim migrants with headscarves."
"Germany is in urgent need of about 400,000 engineers and qualified workers."

OK, so we get down to the real nitty-gritty. Germany needs smart, educated people. Germany does not need uneducated people who are attracted by the dole.
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Sat Nov 27, 2010 5:25 pm

Well, it looks like the U.S. is NOT in compliance with what the U.N thinks we should be doing for immigrants.
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/20 ... rumps-all/
I guess that we need to "share the pain" to a greater extent;
"2.4 million new immigrants (legal and illegal) settled in the United States, even though 8.2 million jobs were lost over the same period."
"Among those rights is the right to migrate wherever they want–effectively saying that in fact states have no right to control their borders."
No problema,,, send us millions !!.
"She implies that the developed world should be willing to take in 214 million (!!) international migrants. America is clearly not doing its share. "
Hey, NO PROBLEM. America has unlimited resources to support unlimited millions of non-producers. We like multi-kulti. We like high crime rates from peoples who have absolutely no interest in adopting a Western way of life. Send us your huddled masses who have not the slightest shred of self-control in their appetites. Their legions of welfare-ready offspring will be a fine addition to our society.
We stand ready to shred every natural resource that we have to fulfill their every wish.

Edit,, it looks like U.K. is going to have to build quite a few houses for immigrants.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ation.html
Funny thing though. 25 % of households in London do not have anyone employed. NO shortage of hungry mouths. Nobody to feed them though.
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

can't sit still
Posts: 4645
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by can't sit still » Sat Jan 01, 2011 7:16 pm

Reportedly, 5 states are enacting laws similar to Arizona's law on immigration. Some are trying to end the 'anchor baby" practice. They say that they don't care what the 9th circuit court says.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/01/us/01 ... s&emc=tha2
I don't post things because I believe that they are the absolute truth. I post them because I believe that they should be considered.

Post Reply

Return to “Open Discussion”