U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 11-21-2009, 11:04 AM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,198,311 times
Reputation: 2130

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
Two operative words – generally and majority. Does it matter if illegals aren’t “generally” terrorists, or if the “majority” of the 9/11 attackers weren’t here illegally? Remember, it didn’t take thousands of men to exact carnage on 9/11.

It simply cannot be denied that illegal immigration is a threat to our national security. We can only estimate how many enter our country seeking work. Do we know how many with nefarious intent stream across our borders on a daily basis? No we don’t.
The FBI Director Robert Mueller said that before they did away with "catch and release" many OTM's (other than Mexicans) from known terrorist countries came through our southern border and disappeared into our country. That is precisely why we need to know who is coming through both of our borders.

Off topic but I am leaving town this afternoon for a long Thanksgiving vacation. Probably won't be online again till the end of next week. Everyone have a Happy Thanksgiving.

 
Old 11-21-2009, 02:20 PM
 
3,424 posts, read 5,107,472 times
Reputation: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by that1guy View Post
Again attempt is the key word. I'm not being verbose. Not threatened, nor offended. Simply pointing out your style of writing. You seem rather edgy.

Of course you're threatened...Its really unwarranted but since you seem to think Im edgy you may want to refrain from being so hypersensitive. You're attempting to relegate my interaction with you to some simplistic conversing of your minimalist style of diction. Nothing wrong with that. Im just not biting.



You seem as if you try too hard. No substance with your posts, just a facade. An illusion hidden under the large words you liberally use.

Impressive, you know what the word 'facade' means. Careful with those big words there johnny, you dont want to start sounding educated. You may have a hard time understanding yourself...lol j/k, what have you said of substance other than some vague attempt to impress upon people your 'understanding of geopolitics'? (oops there goes another one of those HUGE words you hate)..lol..at anyrate, if you have a problem with my writing pattern, find someone who cares and talk to them about it. Or of course you could ignore my post altogether. Doesnt matter. But you will find that, the more you post these faux psychological hack rants to me, the less substance your own posts contain.




Didn't say that they confused me. Just stated that concise speech is actually perferred, especially in an argument. These are the accepted rules of any intelligent debate. Here, more simply put...you look like an unintelligent idiot trying to use overly complicated language. Simplicity is key. Sparingly use larger words. It's a style issue. I digress though. You obiviously don't understand that either. Instead you feel the need to "prove" your points by TRYING to find a flaw in others. This is really a horrible tactic. You haven't defended your points, simply attacked others. How can people take you seriously?

Maybe you should just, I don't know, calm down. You seem to acting in a tantrum and spouting more and more insults. Just calm, take a breath. It'll be fine.

You started this whole insult thing. I really had no intention with that. I tried diplomatically, but clearly you don't get that.

Just try to stay on topic.
Concise speech is exactly what I have used...Its so sad that you think I am trying to use "overly complicated language". Perhaps if you were to expand your own understanding of the topic at hand, you wouldnt feel so disoriented by my posts. Its disheartening that you are so easily flustered by clearly articulated diction. ...But you're right, Im sure you've got me all shook up inside.. Someone who pulls the phrase "equal access to resources globally" accuses others of obscure writing...lol every point you've tried to posit on this subject has been laughable and poorly executed at best. They have already been discredited.

In order for me to try to prove a point in finding a flaw with others, those "others" would have to actually make a point first. Tell you what, you do your best to post something of logic, and maturity and I may address it. If on the other hand you continue to confuse your vague diatribes about "geopolitics" and global resources with actually making cogent and pertinent arguments about the issue of illegal immigration, then you will continue to be handled and manipulated like a child. Simple as that. However if you would like to continue the insults that you and Inglorious initiated, then we can certainly stay on this path. Rather than wondering off into diatribes about global resources and geopolitics, why dont you yourself try to join everyone else on the actual topic of illegal immigration?

Anyway my friend, you go ahead and calm down, sober up, let the hangover subside, and then try to come back and put forth a intelligible argument.

I sincerely hope my words havent been too incomprehensible for you. They sell thesauruses on Amazon.

Last edited by solytaire; 11-21-2009 at 03:07 PM..
 
Old 11-21-2009, 03:05 PM
 
3,424 posts, read 5,107,472 times
Reputation: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by that1guy View Post
It's a public forum...there is no interuption. It was actually pretty sensical, but you didn't understand it seems like. Well, what is the driving motivation of moving North? What is causing illegal immigration? It may have something to do with how World Bank/IMF reforms haven't worked in Latin America. It may have something to do with how American leaders have pushed for the liberalization of southern markets...which have led to exploitative conditions. It may have something to do with how any and all aid has ridiculous string attached. Geo, economic, and political causes. Yet, your stance is that these should not be investigated?

It is indeed a public forum, but it is also a forum in which one must exercise etiquette, lest they be addressed for not doing so. If you or Inglorious expect me to seriously address your concerns, he/she would actually have to intelligently interpret the content of my post without falsely restating it. This is why most posters insist that incoming participants read the previous posts within the thread. Because if they dont, they will interject with such nonsensical posts as his. Inglorious did not read/or properly comprehend my previous posts, and he/she let emotions override a logical and intelligent response. And I called this to that person's attention.

Again, geopolitics have very little to do with this nation's failure to secure its borders, and prosecute corporations who hire illegal immigrants. But to be honest, I now realize that both you and Inglorious will be intent on misconstruing and mistating my words. Both of you have somehow failed to comprehend the exact same statement. I SAID: WE NEED NOT PRIORITIZE GLOBALISM ("geopolitics") OVER THE SAFETY OF OUR NATION AND SECURITY OF OUR BORDERS. Yet the both of you, insist on parroting the falsehood that I stated that we shouldnt consider/investigate foreign aid and foreign economic policy at all. Not only are geopolitics not crucial to my stance, but you, yourself have made an active attempt to impute words to me that I have not even stated. Considering both of these facts, there is scant reason for me to engage in any discussion about your selected point of emphasis.

So that comment flying over your head is cause to act like as such? It's not partisanship. I have no idea his/her politics. It seems that all you really are capable of is this...
Really? Its unfortunate that you seem content with derailing the thread by initiating an insulting dialogue with others, and throwing passive aggressive, if tacit, barbs at others. It really is not mature nor becoming of you, and it does nothing to advance your argument constructively. I can understand your empathy toward Inglorious' stance. Such is the nature of partisanship. But I cannot accept your dismissal and endorsement of both your and his/her disparaging comments, while you narrowly focus on my own. I am disappointed in your lack of objectivity in your understanding of how your comments, and his/hers have prompted my responses.
 
Old 11-21-2009, 03:16 PM
 
3,536 posts, read 5,095,243 times
Reputation: 822
Quote:
Originally Posted by solytaire View Post
Really? Its unfortunate that you seem content with derailing the thread by initiating an insulting dialogue with others, and throwing passive aggressive, if tacit, barbs at others. It really is not mature nor becoming of you, and it does nothing to advance your argument constructively. I can understand your empathy toward Inglorious' stance. Such is the nature of partisanship. But I cannot accept your dismissal and endorsement of both your and his/her disparaging comments, while you narrowly focus on my own. I am disappointed in your lack of objectivity in your understanding of how your comments, and his/hers have prompted my responses.

You started it. Just stop it. It's as if I'm talking to a wall. Fine. Lack of objectivity? I'm disappointed at your utter lack of thinking and comprehension. You're writing as if blinders are on you.You wrote many insightful posts, but now you seem to be absorbed in some personal vendenta. Fine. YOU derailed the conversation. AGAIN, just stick to the points. Why not take into consideration the greater picture when solving the illegal immigration debate? I agree with that stance. It's not patisanship but it's something that I feel is relevant towards the conversation. But, oh no it's not possible that two people agree. That's "unobjective". Instead I should agree with the poster that takes the narrowest view of the debate. You call me partisan? Geez...what a bunch of BS this is.

Good luck, you really don't get it. That's fine. Just move on. You obviously are more interested in fighting. That's a great attitude to take.
 
Old 11-21-2009, 03:24 PM
 
3,536 posts, read 5,095,243 times
Reputation: 822
Concise speech is exactly what I have used...Its so sad that you think I am trying to use "overly complicated language". Perhaps if you were to expand your own understanding of the topic at hand, you wouldnt feel so disoriented by my posts. Its disheartening that you are so easily flustered by clearly articulated diction. ...But you're right, Im sure you've got me all shook up inside.. Someone who pulls the phrase "equal access to resources globally" accuses others of obscure writing...lol every point you've tried to posit on this subject has been laughable and poorly executed at best. They have already been discredited.

Not it's not concise. You call me flustered, yet feel "equal access to resources, globally" is obscure? Equal meaning, well the same (parity). Acess, the abilty to obtain. Resources as in money, goods, services. Globally...the world. God, you're too much... YOU HAVE NOT POINTS!!! It's truly pathetic that you try so hard. I mean it clearly shows that you have a lack of basic understanding. You barely have the ability to read, much less write. Been discredited? It's obvious you haven't learned these things in a formal setting.

In order for me to try to prove a point in finding a flaw with others, those "others" would have to actually make a point first. Tell you what, you do your best to post something of logic, and maturity and I may address it. If on the other hand you continue to confuse your vague diatribes about "geopolitics" and global resources with actually making cogent and pertinent arguments about the issue of illegal immigration, then you will continue to be handled and manipulated like a child. Simple as that. However if you would like to continue the insults that you and Inglorious initiated, then we can certainly stay on this path. Rather than wondering off into diatribes about global resources and geopolitics, why dont you yourself try to join everyone else on the actual topic of illegal immigration?

God, pretty immature. Are you what? 15? 12? Sorry if you haven't learned these things yet...Just stop being dumb. Grow up. Make a point that is better than "I hate pressing 1 for English. It's more important to me than looking at the rationale of illegal immigration" That's all that I have gathered.

Anyway my friend, you go ahead and calm down, sober up, let the hangover subside, and then try to come back and put forth a intelligible argument.

Great, you again HAVE NO READING SKILLS!!!

I sincerely hope my words havent been too incomprehensible for you. They sell thesauruses on Amazon.

Make sense. Get an education. Grow up.
 
Old 11-21-2009, 03:56 PM
 
3,424 posts, read 5,107,472 times
Reputation: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by that1guy View Post

Not it's not concise. You call me flustered, yet feel "equal access to resources, globally" is obscure? Equal meaning, well the same (parity). Acess, the abilty to obtain. Resources as in money, goods, services. Globally...the world. God, you're too much... YOU HAVE NOT POINTS!!! It's truly pathetic that you try so hard. I mean it clearly shows that you have a lack of basic understanding. You barely have the ability to read, much less write. Been discredited? It's obvious you haven't learned these things in a formal setting.



Its truly pathetic indeed that you have been so flustered and disoriented by my posts..I didnt mean to frustrate you to this extent. I have not seen any cogent points posted by yourself beyond these infantile insults and postulations about "geopolitics"


God, pretty immature. Are you what? 15? 12? Sorry if you haven't learned these things yet...Just stop being dumb. Grow up. Make a point that is better than "I hate pressing 1 for English. It's more important to me than looking at the rationale of illegal immigration" That's all that I have gathered.

Thats all you have gathered because you have either chosen or have been unable to actually comprehend anything I have posted prior. Remember, if you expect others to behave maturely you yourself will have to conduct yourself as an adult.

Great, you again HAVE NO READING SKILLS!!!

Make sense. Get an education. Grow up.
Try to comprehend words beyond a first grade level, and it wont be so frustrating for you to try to understand adult content.

Change starts with you.
 
Old 11-21-2009, 04:02 PM
 
3,536 posts, read 5,095,243 times
Reputation: 822
Quote:
Originally Posted by solytaire View Post
Try to comprehend words beyond a first grade level, and it wont be so frustrating for you to try to understand adult content.

Change starts with you.
Wow, so you want to continue on? Fine... So instead of dropping it and staying on topic, you go on and continue to post. Yet, Just a second ago, I PM'ed you saying "I'll cut the sh_t if you cut the sh_t". You said "Deal THE END". Meaning that it was over. I understood that mean WE BOTH would drop it. Clearly, you want to contine.

A child is defined by impulse. The impluse to not follow verbal or written contracts. You followed your impluse, despite an agreement.

So I ask, do YOU want to end this silly tit for tat? I think it's best, but judging on how you handled the previous request...
 
Old 11-21-2009, 04:13 PM
 
3,424 posts, read 5,107,472 times
Reputation: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by that1guy View Post
Wow, so you want to continue on? Fine... So instead of dropping it and staying on topic, you go on and continue to post. Yet, Just a second ago, I PM'ed you saying "I'll cut the sh_t if you cut the sh_t". You said "Deal THE END". Meaning that it was over. I understood that mean WE BOTH would drop it. Clearly, you want to contine.

A child is defined by impulse. The impluse to not follow verbal or written contracts. You followed your impluse, despite an agreement.

So I ask, do YOU want to end this silly tit for tat? I think it's best, but judging on how you handled the previous request...
I already told you...Im beyond it already...However if you insist on continuing to submit these provocative posts online, and then try to make some backroom deal, then no, it will not matter to me how far we go.. I have no concerns about that aspect of our disagreement, as once it has reached its most fevered pitch, a moderator will close the thread anyway.

I would prefer be both adhere to the rules and debate the issue at hand. But, if we cannot reach an agreement to stop insulting one another, well then it is what it is. I never said I was above reciprocating disrespect. Call it childish or whatever else you want.
 
Old 11-21-2009, 04:26 PM
 
3,536 posts, read 5,095,243 times
Reputation: 822
So solytaire, what are you opinions. Trying to get off on a better foot. Don't really care about the past.

All my initial point was that the best way to find a viable solution is to look at certain drivers of illegal immigration and try to fix said drivers.

Specifically how the Global North is fairly exploitative of the Global South. Look at how "well" the IMF reforms worked in Argentina. Look at how "well" market libertization worked in Mexico. What happened was unsustainable growth in the higher echelons of society, thus not fostering true change within their respective nations.

I feel that many don't take into consideration these factors in these debates. That's all.
 
Old 11-21-2009, 04:35 PM
 
3,424 posts, read 5,107,472 times
Reputation: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by that1guy View Post
So solytaire, what are you opinions. Trying to get off on a better foot. Don't really care about the past.

All my initial point was that the best way to find a viable solution is to look at certain drivers of illegal immigration and try to fix said drivers.

Specifically how the Global North is fairly exploitative of the Global South. Look at how "well" the IMF reforms worked in Argentina. Look at how "well" market libertization worked in Mexico. What happened was unsustainable growth in the higher echelons of society, thus not fostering true change within their respective nations.

I feel that many don't take into consideration these factors in these debates. That's all.
I can understand that sentiment. However, I feel as the largest contributor to the world bank, we have more than fullfilled our obligation to aid in remedying of the economic disparities in South and Central America. A country like Mexico is actually fairly wealthy, and it has plenty of natural resources, which have actually earned it the classification of being a more middle class country. Therefore, international funding to that country (Mexico) isnt as robust as it would be in other, more impoverished countries. But that is to be attributed more to its corrupt mishandling of govt. resources than any lack of resources, natural or monetary.

I just dont think that in light of our contributions, even with the recently implemented reforms, it is prudent for our nation to continue prioritizing the welfare of those nations over our own border security.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top