Arizona = Arian Zone - Page 2

Chuck Schumer and Lindsey Graham have an even better idea:




Looks like a fun future in America.


If anyone was serious about dealing with immigration (most politicians and their friends in the media are not) they would begin by asking and answering a few basic questions:

Why must immigration be controlled in the first place?

Is immigration a good thing or bad thing? Why?

If it is a good thing why should there be any limits on it at all?

These are questions that should be sorted out before assuming that we must enforce existing or pass even more stringent immigration laws and implement them.

Right now it seems we are begging the question here and we're also dealing only with symptoms rather than diving into root issues.

Just a couple of questions:

If one is living in Mexico without the required documentation, how does the Mexican government treat "illegals"? (From various first hand accounts, "harsh" and "gnarly" are the operative words). Are there *any* countries on Earth that allow undocumented immigration with impunity? Why should Mexicans be regarded as a "special case"... perhaps its for the benefit of big agribusiness?

At what point in US history did a "settler" become an "illegal immigrant"?

Any president who can "get things done" is dangerous, IMO. It means the counter-balances built into the "system" are no longer working and government stomps onward regardless of the consequences.

Oh, and anybody who continues the myth that somehow Libertarians are linked to Republicans by saying "where were you when Bush was president"... for the last time, I didn't vote for Bush (considering adding that to my sig).

Wouldn't a guest worker program also require all participants to have "papers"?

Study your history. In case you hadn't forgotten, people from SPAIN are as you would term them WHITE PEOPLE. The Mexican people are a mix of white and Indian. The native Indian people in Mexico were treated about as well as Indians/Native Americans were treated in the United States and continue to be treated that way. The reason the term HISPANIC exists in the first place is because you have mixed race people trying to claim their Spanish heritage over Indian heritage in a quest to control various lands. If you go into Mexico now, the children begging and selling gum and the mothers close by, those are Indians and you will watch people of Mexican descent treat and speak about them very badly in a majority of cases.


Of course they do. For people who realize that the game is always the same, all the changes are the labels and names, this isn't hard to understand. Mexico has the same problem with Guatemala that the U.S. has with Mexico. I've gone down and personally seen the Guatemalans being exploited. The state of Chiapas is often involved with problems as well because in ethnic make up, they are much more Indian, very much more like the Guatemalans and thus actually relate do them and have an agenda much more in line with those people rather than the more white, often U.S educated Mexicans who are often in control. Likewise this trait, that the white or Spanish looking Mexicans exploit of control darker or Indian looking Mexico is not only true in Mexico but throughout most of Central America.

Shouldn't you at least know what you are talking about before you go around calling people names? Who do you think does most of the exploiting up here of the folks who are illegal? Is it white folks who own all the farms and run all the Construction companies? Perhaps it was a couple generations ago. Now it it U.S. born Mexicans or legal immigrants who are often exploiting the illegal immigrants. Go down and watch where day laborers are being picked up and see who picks them up, pays them and works them. It is very rarely white folks.


Who needs to reissue 300,000,000 cards? It is about proof of work. Sadly very few people do that in this day and age. Far too many folks are working as middle men, pushing around paper and agreements and taking their cut while doing nothing. Also why is it cheap to give 40,000,000 people health care but too expensive to give people a card? Talk about your insane double standards!

That is a great article. Puts many of Mexico's complaints against the US in perspective.

Freaking Illegal Immigrants!

Taking away those jobs white/black people feel are beneath them!

Have you read the Arizona law to which you refer? I suggest you do. It is not what you suggest.

The action taken here by Arizona is long overdue and was taken due to inaction at the federal level to control our borders. I hope all border states take such action as a measure of homeland security. The law gives local state level law enforcement the tools to control and take in hand illegal immigrants. That is what the federal government is suppose to do. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has done more for Homeland Security than Janet Napolitano and both are from the same location. I salute Arizonians and Governor Jan Brewer for taking a stand.


Absolutely! I hope all border states take such action to control our borders. This is not Republicans wanting to expand government but state government acting where the Federal government has failed to act. Any person breaking US immigration law has no expectation of privacy - that person is a criminal, hence the name: illegal alien. I am tired of these criminals breaking our laws, taking our jobs, ignoring our immigration law, and burdening our entitlement programs. They need be identified, punished, and if necessary, exported. The years of illegal aliens polluting our southern border, committing acts of illegality against citizens of our border states, and burdening our state and federal government are coming to an end. Moreover, the canard that this border control action is somehow racially motivated needs be addressed: it is not. Every state supports legal immigration and this action in Arizona is not against legal immigration. Instead, it is meant to address the aspect of illegal immigration.

So what matters is solely the Law?

Put another way: if a law was passed tomorrow making this form of immigration legal you would support it because those doing it are legal?

What defines a criminal is whether they break the law - that's fine. But to define your own opinions in deference to lawmakers sounds a bit odd to me....


Ah..it becomes clearer...

They come over here.... taking our women with their enormous manhoods....



Exported???????

After being turned into what????


So what's the problem then? If they are ending just chillax...


Canard??? Isn't that some sort of duck?

No; I was quite specific. The reference was to an illegal alien. Specific to those who make a choice to ignore our immigration law and commit a crime. Millions of Americans have chosen to follow our law, stand in long ines, and become citizens legally; these illegal aliens choose to ignore our law, ignore the immigration process, and enjoy our nation while flaunting our law and avoiding punishment. They are illegal aliens; criminal in intent.


The lexicon definition of a criminal is one guilty of crime while illegal is something not authorized by law. An illegal alien is a foreigner attempting to skirt our immigration laws; criminal in the sense of admitted guilt. You can question the terms but their application is solid under law.


Depends upon how the arresting officer feels when he issues you a speeding citation. Technically, yes, a violation of the speed limit is an illegal act and if upheld by a judge that would make you criminal. Much like those illegal aliens in this nation attempting to steal this nation's jobs while not having this nation's residency under immigration law. You seriously think that those sneaking across our borders are worried about being thought of as a criminal? They don't care! That's the problem... and it is hardly equitable to comparing such illegality as going 1 mile over the speed limit. Citizens along our border states have for decades suffered from crime from illegal aliens! That is why Arizona acted. You should be angry at Washington - not Arizona - for not enforcing this nation's border laws. You can't blame Arizona for acting, when the fault here is inaction from Washington.

I suspect many people would because then the states could sue for compensation related to that immigration and costs associated with it. Right now they really have no standing to do so. Likewise states could also demand compensation for employment lost due to federal policies, etc.

Right now none of this happens because the federal government expects the states to deal with the nebulous area between legal and illegal. The states shoulder all the costs and burdens.


Could you clarify this? You appear to be saying it is odd to want the rule of law followed. Most would consider that the odd position.



It becomes clearer after you caricature his position and then set up a strawman to knock down? Stop being silly.



Do you have a serious rebuttal to the position or just caricature and editorial comments about word choice?


Do you have a serious rebuttal to the position or just caricature and editorial comments about word choice?


Could you please just stop making crap up? Intent is indeed part of the law. Law officers deal with intent of parties all the time. It is bad logic in a discussion but uncovering a crime is not the same as a logical debate. Officers are allowed hunches, suspicion, etc in their attempt to uncover a crime. It may or may not end up being a crime, but they are allowed these tools. If you are swirving in your car, they can pull you over for suspicion of being drunk as an example. In logic you cannot say that swirving = drunk. The officer is empowered to work on the suspicion though and follow it through.

Please prove where civil issues have ever been indisuptable non interpretable fact. They've been the exact opposite, constantly being fought over and reinterpreted. That is perhaps the most ridiculous comment I have read in recent memory, however what can one expect from people who advocate genocide.

The answer is one of expediency actually in terms of criminal justice and the difference between civil and criminal. Not to sidetrack the issue, however, violation of immigration law is a criminal act (check the penalties yourself if you are in doubt).


Again, not to quibble but that's reality... not saying it is right or wrong but we have to acknowledge fact here. You blow past a police officer and he has had a bad day and you are even 1 mile over speed limit he has a responsibility, and he likely will, issue you a citation. Has nothing to do with reliability.


Enforcing it is a federal responsibility. They have failed. That is why Arizona acted, and other states will act.


Not arguing here, per se, but when they cross the border illegally that is a pretty clear violation of criminal law. Moreover, when they refuse to comply with immigration law - such as declaring their status - that is yet another violation. So any illegal alien stopped by Arizona law enforcement has already, likely, broken at least two laws, perhaps several more... Pretty clear that the criminal title is deserved at this point!

I see..that makes sense...


Ok..I get it now. It's just a financial stance. Fair enough.


Yeah, they probably would. But from my pov, what I believe and want to do has no relation to what some idiot politician deems 'illegal' or otherwise.

I don't currently want to take shed-loads of drugs for example but if I did then it wouldn't even be on the radar whether it was legal or not.

And so it is with anything else I want to do or believe.


Well, I did (do) find his position something of a caricature in itself...I mean really...come on...it's like something out of Viz.


Err...just caricature I guess... I didn't think his points are really worthy of contention though now you have explained above I might retract that if his concerns are based on that rather than 'them immigrants' which is how it came over.

Check again. I steer you to Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien," which states that any citizen of any country other than the United States who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or (3) Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact; has committed a federal crime. Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense.

Lest you disagree, let me cite it from FindLaw:
8 U.S.C. § 1325 : US Code - Section 1325: Improper entry by alien
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/8/12/II/VIII/1325

It goes a bit beyond this because in states like California, there is also a very strong environmental lobby and as such, infrastructure doesn't get built as well. The belief has expressed clearly as "If you don't build it, they won't come." This leads to very bad problems when you add a couple million more people to an infrastructure that the government refuses to improve. It dramatically lowers the quality of life.


I'm sure many feel the same way. The problem comes with the wealth redistribution. Turns out they keep running out of other people's money to give away and so they then start trying to find a way to ratchet down costs. To do this they start dictating your lifestyle to you.

They say dear sir who took the shed-load of drugs. Sorry but we don't want to pay for your care.


You would have a point if you weren't substituting his words and thoughts and then addressing those instead. I love a good joke and mocking as well as anyone but, as my own sig currently suggests (and we do know you love monitoring my sig) just use the person's actual words.

Seriously? You are kidding right?

Your facts have no place here!

(please keep posting!)

Oh I'm pretty sure that bullets would be much cheaper. Think about the reduction in land use and also the shrinking carbon footprint. Also think about all the future offspring they won't have if you do this.

Your sig addresses what you think is the best solution for this matter. Hell you could turn them into fertilizer and still call the food organic on your farm.

You're not the first to think this way " If they would rather die,'' said Scrooge, ``they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. "rolleyes:

Brillant trumpy brillant!

As always your solutions are always much more simple.

Sarcasm escapes you it seems...

Look at the sig and click the link Jimmac. It isn't my solution.

It would be awesome if the OP had any clue what the law actually says and does.

Well he does now, not that it changes anything. The law is not convenient to his view of the way things should be.

It is worthwhile to note that Arizona has now tightened up the law; the Arizona legislature incorporated fixes to their new immigration law =>

In response to critics, Arizona tweaks new immigration law
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
04/30/10 10:02 AM EDT
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-92495249.html
"In recent days, some critics of the new Arizona immigration law have said the measure will lead to Arizona becoming a police state. Many of the criticisms some including the words Nazi and fascist have been based on a general objection to the law and to the enforcement of the countrys immigration laws. But some have been specifically focused on a few key phrases in the law. Now, Arizona lawmakers have made some changes intended to clarify their intent and, perhaps, silence some of the critics."

Despite the fact that Arizona is well within its rights to tighten its US Border in view of the lack of federal action in this area, there still seems to be quite a bit of shameless racial pandering on this subject by the open borders folks during weekend protests...

Yeah I looked at the link. And......??????

I don't think Wormhole meant that either.

Wow! I think it's absolutely great that trumpy has someone to interpret his rambling for him!

Actually I think originally he was more serious than you think he was.

Hey, I have interpreted for many on these forums. Few seem willing to give the benefit of anything here... Your post included.

Gee I wonder why that is?

Lack of ability to sift through the sarcasm and venting for the actual thought behind the post perhaps?