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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-07-2008, 10:12 PM
 
307 posts, read 458,758 times
Reputation: 111

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by User 2 View Post
Pretty interesting concept though,

....that one set of propaganda can 'debunk' another.

Is that the best there was?
.
..
While parts of his article are a bit on what I would term the loony side. Other parts are quite correct. He does brake down the arguments, some of which I HAVE heard, used by the pro illegal side, and responds with fact and figures.

As an example

"Some fundamentals
History of the Southwest:

12000-15000 years occupation by migrants from Asia via Berling Stait ice bridge (areas near Tibet) & Europe (the Solutrean culture) via north Atlantic ice sheet.

50-100 years partial occupation by the Spanish, during which natives were enslaved and imprisoned. In California, those who returned to their hunter-gatherer culture were summarily shot.

30 years indirect control by Mexicans, by which time many natives had died from diseases, drought, and conflict. The Southwest was mostly devoid of humans.

Mexican-American war 1846-1848. USA conquers Mexico, occupies Mexico City. Being generous however, we paid them $3.25 million for the Southwest.

160 years of ownership by Americans, who are now the predominant native population.

The bogus principle of first occupation
You should always be skeptical when any groups says that its people were in a place long ago, therefore they get to occupy it. The Israelis used this argument to displace and commit atrocities against millions of Palestinians, sending them out of Palestine. Today racist Mexicans are trying to use the same principle to displace Americans out of America. The march and hold signs telling Americans to go back to Europe. Yet as you can see from the history above, Mexico had only the briefest hold over the Southwest as compared to North American tribes, nor over the USA, which paid Mexico for the Southwest. They do not have a strong argument therefore they use lies, like calling Americans racists, yelled loudly instead. Native-Americans from Mexico have even less claim to the Southwest. The empires of Mexican tribes like the Aztecs and Mayans never reached into the area of modern USA."

He even sites the source for some of these rumors

"In 2002, a Zogby poll found that most Mexicans believe that the American Southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico, and that they have a right to enter it without US govt permission. This is in line with the Voz de Aztlan call to arms.
In many US universities there are student chapters of a racist group called Mecha, which supposedly takes La Voz's ideas to heart."

The biggest problem I have with his article is his use of the word Mexican as a generic catch all. He sounds racist with it's use and quite possibly is. I am not sure if he truely is or if he has simply been sucked so deep into the Anti Illegal Imigration Movement that he sometimes confuses the two. An example is this sentence

" Mexicans can become model citizens.

This is just more bogus ethnic cheer-leading typical of the pro-Mexico camp.

The truth is, Mexicans especially in California are often as disrespectful toward America and Americans, as well as toward Mexican-Americans. Mexican-Americans have complained to me of their relatives in Mexico being petty even toward them."



Random U
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-07-2008, 10:15 PM
 
Location: Helena, Montana
2,010 posts, read 2,045,253 times
Reputation: 780
Quote:
Originally Posted by User 2
Oooooh, simple called me a tough guy....

Is that your problem?

You want to try to bait me by saying I'm not 'man' enough for you?

Your attentions are a little perverse, if you ask me?

I've answered those questions before and I'd answer them the same again if I felt any compunction to.

.....other than that, deal with your masculinity problem by 'calling out' someone who might be compelled to respond to puerile stunts.






My personal preference wasn't anything I addressed.

I heard not one peep from you or anyone else substantiating Zack from Newsarama....... (I'm not surprised no one wanted to defend Newsarama, Newsarama just doesn't have that credible ring to it, eh?)




I don't recall addressing anything to you before you initiated a conversation, seems strange and illogical of you to choose to address me, and then tell me not to talk.
.
..
Thanks for proving my point. No straight answers, more babbling and condescending like you actually think you're a better person. Arguing with you is pointless, as you never offer an argument, only misdirection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2008, 10:20 PM
 
1,252 posts, read 728,620 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimpleMan View Post
Thanks for proving my point. No straight answers, more babbling and condescending like you actually think you're a better person. Arguing with you is pointless, as you never offer an argument, only misdirection.
I see you still can't or don't choose to address the topic at hand, all you have is your case that you can marginalize others.....

Waaaaah....
.
..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2008, 10:21 PM
 
Location: Arizona
2,065 posts, read 3,177,880 times
Reputation: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by User 2 View Post
Zack Smith, journalist extraordinaire,

...he of the respected news organization Newsarama.

Get real....

His imaginative characterization of an entire supposed 'movement' and the supposed debunking of their 'myths' is more of his imagination than any objective look at any reality that he's able to identify.

Just who are these members of his supposed 'movement' that he's debunking?

He doesn't say.....
.
..

Pretty interesting concept though,

....that one set of propaganda can 'debunk' another.

Is that the best there was?
.
..
Because of your condescending attitude, I decided to actually go to the site referenced and see for myself the lack of credibility that you claimed. Funny, I found several references to data from places like the CDC, the SPLC, Zogby and several well-known newspapers. Links for these sources were also provided. I found most of the information there to be accurate and presented clearly. I didn't care much for the mis-spellings, but hey, you can't get everything.

Why do you have a problem with this info, does it not fit into your pre-conceived outlook?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2008, 10:31 PM
 
1,252 posts, read 728,620 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomU View Post
While parts of his article are a bit on what I would term the loony side. Other parts are quite correct.
Ah, there it is again, 'the pro-illegal' side.

I've only seen a couple of people here openly advocate what might be considered a 'pro-illegal' stance.

Most of the people I see who are labeled as 'pro-illegal' haven't ever advocated anything of the sort, yet the labeling, the generalization is bandied about as if it's not anything that can be questioned.

Just like trying to generalize about Mexicans, or any other class of people, making generalizations and attributing all the same characteristics to disparate peoples is more of that 'loony' stuff you speak of.

Just as all the people who are labeled anti aren't all in agreement about various points, not all people who are labeled pro have all the same attributes.

But that seems to be lost on people, .....kind of like when they say they don't make racial stereotypes..... (often right before or after posting one)......

Zack Smith's basic premise is that there is some 'pro-illegal' group which has all the same attributes.....

....that's laughably moronic.

He's created a paper tiger of all inclusive proportions not replicated anywhere in any reality he can cite....

....just as many here do the same.

It might be somehow handy or convenient to think that there's only two distinct separate views which can encompass all the people who may have a concern about immigration, or illegal immigration, but the reality doesn't support that, and it's not credible or productive to continue to push that simple black or white, pro or con premise. It just doesn't speak to the reality.

It does create divisive division, and if that's all that's desired, then finding an agreeable mutual solution is not the goal.

I guess it depends on how you want to be perceived, ....as one who only concerns themselves with an us or them mentality, or someone who might want to actually get something accomplished besides more rancor.
.
..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2008, 10:42 PM
 
Location: Helena, Montana
2,010 posts, read 2,045,253 times
Reputation: 780
Quote:
Originally Posted by User 2 View Post
I see you still can't or don't choose to address the topic at hand, all you have is your case that you can marginalize others.....

Waaaaah....
.
..
Mature and classy User 2. I wouldn't expect anything less from you though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2008, 11:02 PM
 
307 posts, read 458,758 times
Reputation: 111
You start out implying that people don't exist who make these statements.

such
Quote:
Originally Posted by User 2 View Post
Just who are these members of his supposed 'movement' that he's debunking?

Now you admit they do exist, but critisize that they are not made by the same person.

Quote:
Originally Posted by User 2 View Post
I've only seen a couple of people here openly advocate what might be considered a 'pro-illegal' stance.

His paper does deal with arguments made by real people. Just because all the arguments he addresses are not made by the same person is no reason to say his paper is invalid.

If I write a paper about all of the flaws with the JFK conspiracy theories it does not invalidate it just because no one group believes ALL the same theories. And they don't some believe there were 4 shots, some 5, and some 7. Some believe Castro did it, some the mob, others believe it was LBJ. But I can write a perfectly valid paper debunking all the myths even though it is impossible for someone to believe all the myths.

Random U

Last edited by RandomU; 02-07-2008 at 11:16 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2008, 11:12 PM
 
1,252 posts, read 728,620 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimpleMan View Post
Mature and classy User 2. I wouldn't expect anything less from you though.
I'm happy to meet your expectations, they grow more transparent with each of your posts....
.
..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2008, 11:15 PM
 
1,252 posts, read 728,620 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomU View Post
Yet you admit they exist. Thus his paper does deal with arguments made by real people. Just because all the arguments he addresses are not made by the same person is no reason to say his paper is invalid.

If I write a paper about all of the flaws with the JFK conspiracy theories it does not invalidate it just because no one group believes ALL the same theories. And they don't some believe there were 4 shots, some 5, and some 7. Some believe Castro did it, some the mob, others believe it was LBJ. But I can write a perfectly valid paper debunking all the myths even though it is impossible for someone to believe all the myths.

Random U
You could, but Zack goes a bit farther and attributes all those myths to one group.....

Which would only invalidate your earlier argument that making generalizations wasn't something you condoned....

(not to mention you failed to address any other point I mentioned, .....must have been inadvertent, eh?)
.
..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2008, 11:24 PM
 
Location: Helena, Montana
2,010 posts, read 2,045,253 times
Reputation: 780
Quote:
Originally Posted by User 2 View Post
I'm happy to meet your expectations, they grow more transparent with each of your posts....
.
..
Before I get a TOS violation from one of your blatent flame posts, I'm going to put you on my ignore list. It's not like I'm going to miss anything intelligent. I suggest everyone else on here who doesn't want to get banned do the same, arguing with this person will get you no where but to the point of wanting to punch your monitor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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
Similar Threads
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