From - Mon Jun 11 11:03:16 2001 Message-ID: <3B0A800E.B3E89CBA@clark.net> Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 11:04:46 -0400 From: Tiny Human Ferret Reply-To: klaatu@clark.net Organization: copyright 2001 all rights reserved -- non-UseNet transmission prohibited. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.politics.immigration,alt.mexico,alt.california Subject: Re: How to Handle Illegal Immigrants References: <3af89f44$1@nntp.corridor.net> <0m4K6.81362$U4.17914227@news1.rdc1.tn.home.com> <3AFD58AF.59BD697@clark.net> <3afd5e6e$1@nntp.corridor.net> <3afd7593$1@nntp.corridor.net> <3b055357@nntp.corridor.net> <3B07CD8D.1E7798C7@earthlink.net> <3B0907A0.E73A0315@earthlink.net> <3B0A5DAF.24F63720@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.214.47.4 X-Trace: 22 May 2001 11:04:57 -0400, 206.214.47.4 Lines: 171 X-Authenticated-User: tjh22isp Path: vienna7.his.com!206.214.47.4 Xref: vienna7.his.com alt.politics.immigration:159378 alt.mexico:30168 alt.california:324140 Dot wrote: > > Oliver Costich wrote: > > > On Mon, 21 May 2001 14:20:40 GMT, Dot > > wrote: > > > > The breaking of laws is also a choice and subject to the consequences. > > There's no need to rewrite the whole book to respond to change. The > > problematic laws can be changed. Allowing laws to be broken creates a > > major problem, namely who decides which laws can be broken and by > > whom. Do you want a situation like the US south when whites and blacks > > were treated differently with resoect to enforcement off laws? > > That condition exists now, in various forms. Traffic laws are the most blaring > example. Enforcement of drug laws is an example of a more serious nature. Driving > While Black or Brown is a very relevant and current example, which also addresses your > last comment about being treated differently. Are you blind to these things? No, but none of them have anything whatsoever to do with ILLEGAL ALIENS. ILLEGAL ALIENS are breaking the laws simply by being in the country. Aer we supposed to turn a blind eye to ILLEGAL ALIENS lawbreaking because some cops 20 states away from the border have a tendency to arrest Black Citizens at a rate indicative of racism? You are suggesting that not only do two wrongs make a right, but two totally unrelated wrongs make an unrelated right? > > > > > > > I an not upset about anything, but I am annoyed at the genuinely bad > > logig presented in this discussion. My motivation is not difficult to > > grasp and if you missed it in recent posts, try the archives. > > I'm not interested in the archives, as the position of yours that caught my attention, > and continues to hold it, is the one where you assert that you have the right to make > the choice about who gets admitted to our country. You do not, nor does any single > person. Your presumption that you know best for the rest of us is annoying to say the > least, and parlous at worst. But you surely won't deny that he has the riht to demand that laws which are already in place must be upheld! That's all that he's doing, demanding that the government, elected to make and enforce laws, should do its job. > > > The US > > needs to act in its own best interest. > > The U.S. is a conglomeration of many people from many cultures and many ethnicities and > many nationalities. The U.S. is a government, not an entity that has the ability to > act. It is these people that make up the U.S. that have the ability to act, or not to > act, as they see fit. There is no imperative, except in your own mind, for the U.S. to > do anything at all. It is absolutely imperative that the US uphold the laws that were enacted on behalf of all of those different cultures and ethnicities, by those elected to that office by all of those different cultures and ethnicities, and it is further imperative a cops and INS officials and Border Patrol agents -- drawn from all of those cultures and ethnicities -- enforce those laws in an evenhanded way. By the way, when you suggest that those empowered and paid to enforce the law should refuse to do so, that's "dereliction of duty" if not actual "malfeasance". So! You are demanding that cops break the law! See how you are! > > > Illegal immigration is not in > > its best interest economically because of the large burden imposed on > > US taxpayers, > > Balderdash! Often spoken, and never proven by posters in this, or any other forum!Care > to try? See the Huddle Report. See Senator Kyl's bill for Emergency Funding to prop up borderlands Emergency Rescue outfits and hospitals which are going bankrupt from all of the ILLEGAL ALIENS they have to transport and treat, and who seldom -- if ever -- pay for these services. But you know all of this already, whenever all of the facts are put in front of you, you deny them or ignore them. > > > If the best interest of the US is best served by > > allowing more work visas or immigration from Mexico, then change the > > laws and policies to permit it. > > As a proponent of our system of government, and of democracy, you of all should know > that the system was not designed to respond in that fashion. Democracy is a long and > tedious exercise that usually consumes much of it's time pondering the various sides of > the issue before offering a conclusion in the form of a law. Often, by the time the law > is on the books, the issue has been codified by the public and is already part of > culture. Laws more commonly reflect the angst of the community than they do prescribe > future behavior. Balderdash and tendentious speculation. Next stupid remark, Dot? > > > > > > > I don't see a clear majority of opinion here at all. The real problem > > is the polarization that occurs rather than admitting that there is a > > diversity of opinion here, one of which is that illegal immigration > > should stop based on something other than racism. > > There is lots of opinion, a little bit of fabrication when 'proof' is called for or > offered, and much blaspheme. As I have already mentioned, present a position on > immigration that is not based on the immigrants, but on the merits of immigration alone, > and see if you get a response. You won't! Would that be immigration, or ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION? Don't pretend there's not a difference. Most of us have no problem with limited levels of immigration THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS AND PROCESS -- but you endlessly try to mudle the issue so that people's acceptance of reasonable levels of immigration are confused with your own policies favoring Open Borders if possible and uncontrolled ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION if you can't get Open Border. There ARE NO MERITS TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. There are a variety of merits to controlled LEGAL immigration, and no sensible person will argue very hard against LEGAL immigration. But ILLEGAL ALIENS and CRIMINAL ALIENS must be apprehended and expelled, after serving time for any actual crimes committed against US Citizens. This is the LAW, fool! > The majority of the posters here, and in > most of the other forums, came with prepared speeches reflecting their own biases, most > slightly tailored to overcome embarrassing defeats in previous debates when their agenda > was exposed, not to discuss why the status quo will remain the status quo until the > reasons for it's existence change. And the blueprint for that change is not contained in > any of their rants. That is what is happening, and that eludes most. No, the blueprint for change is simple: 1. Identify, and relentlessly prosecute, unscrupulous employers of ILLEGAL ALIEN SCAB WORKERS. 2. Identify and compromise -- and prosecute if possible -- corrupt officials who will not wholeheartedly pursue step (1), above, prosecuting the unscrupulous employers. 3. Identify and prosecute slumlords feloniously aiding and abetting ILLEGAL ALIENS. 4. Identify and prosecute CRIMINAL ALIENS, and if possible convict and jail them until the time for deportation. 5. Identify and apprehend NON-CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIENS, advise them about the proper way to seek legal permission to visit, visit and work, or acquire permenant resident alien status. Do as much paperwork for them as can be done, and then deport them as required by law. Then since these were noncriminal status offenders who may have been needed decent workers, if they do the paperwork and they have sponsors who want or need them, they will be given priority to enter THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS AND PROCESS. Now, you can't argue against any of that because it is sane, legal, nondiscriminatory, nonracist, and in some elements, actually humanitarian. -- Be kind to your neighbors, even though they be transgenic chimerae. Non-UseNet re-transmission of this article is a willful violation of US Copyright Law and the Berne Convention. Statutory damages are $250,000.00 Whom thou'st vex'd waxeth wroth: Meow. <-----> http://earthops.net/klaatu/