Gunman Takes Hostages at Immigration Center in Bingham, NY (illegal aliens, represent, regular)

[antireconquista]

who do you know is pro-illegal? anyone?

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Luis Gutierrez, Antonio Villagairosa, Gavin Newsom, Janet Marguia, La Raza, MEChA, US Chamber of Commerce, ACLU, LULAC, MALDEF, etc.

b) pro-liberal reform maybe?

And what aspects comprise this "pro-liberal reform"? Amnesty? Please list some of them.

[that1guy]

Originally Posted by andreabeth

On what basis is this statement made? Ideally should I be able to move into Bill Gates' house if I want? Ideally should 200 million people who have no job skills and left school in the 8th grade be able to move into the US?

Imagine if all of the sudden a city in the United States said "No Non-Resident Entry" You could not buy a house, you could not get your children in said school district. Okay, that's restriction of movement. Going into somebody's house is different. If you seriously are trying to equate the two, that's really tugging at threads and is a really weak comparison. Ideally economic parity should exist between nations. There should not be a global north or global south. Ideally then, there should be the ability to move into a new town, work, and be a productive member of society.

Yes, even those with an 8th grade education should be given a chance. Ideally, they should be given the resources if they so decide to continue with their education.

Obviously there would be the difference between rich and poor. But the stark divide need not exist.

[catfishing]

Originally Posted by that1guy

Imagine if all of the sudden a city in the United States said "No Non-Resident Entry" You could not buy a house, you could not get your children in said school district. Okay, that's restriction of movement. Going into somebody's house is different. If you seriously are trying to equate the two, that's really tugging at threads and is a really weak comparison. Ideally economic parity should exist between nations. There should not be a global north or global south. Ideally then, there should be the ability to move into a new town, work, and be a productive member of society.

Yes, even those with an 8th grade education should be given a chance. Ideally, they should be given the resources if they so decide to continue with their education.

Obviously there would be the difference between rich and poor. But the stark divide need not exist.

Who will pay to give these people a second chance? If you as a pro-illegal (extremely liberal person that's VERY open minded to illegals being given free reign over the USA) want to help these people do you wish to propose that all of the US citizens pick up the bill to feed, educate, and employ them? How will they learn English? (or do you propose that WE learn Spanish?) I REFUSE to help support these illegals until EVERY US citizen has been fed, educated, and employed first.

[that1guy]

Originally Posted by antireconquista

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Luis Gutierrez, Antonio Villagairosa, Gavin Newsom, Janet Marguia, La Raza, MEChA, US Chamber of Commerce, ACLU, LULAC, MALDEF, etc.


And what aspects comprise this "pro-liberal reform"? Amnesty? Please list some of them

The majority names are not pro-illegal (La Raza I could see, though).

Okay, I can tell you it's not wasting money on a wall that won't work. It's not putting our already thin troops and guards on the border. It's not tying up public money to send policemen to racially profile people to determine legal status. It's not simply closing the border. It's not having ridiculous requirements to enter into the nation as an immigrant. These are the main things I hear for "anti-illegal".

It is more comprehensive guest worker program. It is amensty with certain provisions (proof of living in the US for a certain time...bills, any time stamped documentation, proof of work history, no criminal record), it is expediating the process to enter into the US, it is making classes to legalize immigrants (they may have to go to the back of the line to enter if they do not meet the provisions of amnesty). It is flexibility in saying okay how do we deal with the current immigrants here and placing more of an emphasis on that. There are some ideals I stated in the past, some however, some of those may not be feasible.

There could be a middle ground in all this. Like my dad always said, take the middle road. Compromise.

[that1guy]

Originally Posted by catfishing

Who will pay to give these people a second chance? If you as a pro-illegal (extremely liberal person that's VERY open minded to illegals being given free reign over the USA) want to help these people do you wish to propose that all of the US citizens pick up the bill to feed, educate, and employ them? How will they learn English? (or do you propose that WE learn Spanish?) I REFUSE to help support these illegals until EVERY US citizen has been fed, educated, and employed first.

I helped immigrants. I even help set up a community based free-school to teach them English. You could have a system in which college students can intern to teach English. They could get paid in the sense of reduction of tuition.

Educating illegals also means that America's poor would finally tended to as well. America's poor live with illegal immigrants. Thus, reduction of services and sub-par schools affects them. We shoot ourselves in the foot when we do not look after the poor of our entire society. Investing in education for illegals, who live in poor areas typically, means that Americans will also benefit. Again, the two are more intertwined than many believe.

[blacknight04]

Originally Posted by that1guy

The majority names are not pro-illegal (La Raza I could see, though).

Okay, I can tell you it's not wasting money on a wall that won't work. It's not putting our already thin troops and guards on the border. It's not tying up public money to send policemen to racially profile people to determine legal status. It's not simply closing the border. It's not having ridiculous requirements to enter into the nation as an immigrant. These are the main things I hear for "anti-illegal".

It is more comprehensive guest worker program. It is amensty with certain provisions (proof of living in the US for a certain time...bills, any time stamped documentation, proof of work history, no criminal record), it is expediating the process to enter into the US, it is making classes to legalize immigrants (they may have to go to the back of the line to enter if they do not meet the provisions of amnesty). It is flexibility in saying okay how do we deal with the current immigrants here and placing more of an emphasis on that. There are some ideals I stated in the past, some however, some of those may not be feasible.

There could be a middle ground in all this. Like my dad always said, take the middle road. Compromise.

If they insist on calling you something you are not, just refer to them as anti-immigrant back(which most are). That always seems to get them.

[harborlady]

Originally Posted by catfishing

Why point fingers at anyone? Most people post legitamate statistics backed by fact on this thread. Hatred may have been felt by the nutjob that commited this heinous crime, but please don't act as if people against illegal immigration on this forum endorse this sick behavior. To compare this radical to the hardworking citizens of the USA that only want to defend their nation from job, tax, and healthcare stealing scum from outside of the USA is reprehensable. (As far as the gunman, who also is dead, is concerned...I hope hell aint too hot for ya!)

I'm against illegal immigration. I'm also against people that are so angry about illegal immigration that they decide to just keep intensifying hatred and put it in their childrens ears. I'm saying that I've tried to be in the immigration forum and it can't help but bring out the ugliest crap in people. Their bile really doesn't have anything to do with the issue anymore.

I'm saying I wish for one moment everyone reading this forum would pause and consider their words a little better. Stick with merit arguments, and reach logical conclusions. Do not attack one another with foolish garbage. It always winds up being innocent people standing in your way who get slaughtered in the process.

[antireconquista]

Originally Posted by that1guy

The majority names are not pro-illegal (La Raza I could see, though).

The majority of people and organizations I listed aren't illegal? Really?

- Nancy Pelosi: claimed enforcing immigration laws is "un-American" and praised illegal aliens currently living in the US.

- Harry Reid: wants to grant amnesty to illegal aliens, wants to have open borders, wants current border fences removed and opposes e-verify.

- Luis Gutierrez: wants the US government to accept the presence of illegal aliens and matricular visas, visas issued by the Mexican gov. to illegal aliens, which cannot be verified.

- Antonio Villagairosa: made Los Angeles a sanctuary city and worked to stop prop. 187 from being enacted as a law which would prevent illegal aliens from receiving gov. services and would make illegal presence in the US a criminal offense.

- Gavin Newsom: made San Franisco a sanctuary city and shielded many drug-dealing illegal aliens from being deported.

- Janet Marguia: wants college tuition to be issued to illegal aliens, less border control and amnesty to illegal aliens

- La Raza: do I need to explain?

- MEChA: a radical pro-illegal Chicano group that believes in open borders, amnesty and opposes immigration raids.

- US Chamber of Commerce: believes illegal aliens should be granted some rights and privileges afforded only to Americans.

- LULAC: supports granting college tuition to illegal aliens and believes that illegal aliens are entitled to be in the US.

- ACLU: believes illegal aliens should never be denied from neither receiving gov. handouts nor buying or renting property and opposes English-only laws.

- MALDEF: see LULAC


So, that1guy and blacknight04, which of those whom I've mentioned aren't pro-illegal? And why aren't they?

[andreabeth]

Originally Posted by that1guy

Imagine if all of the sudden a city in the United States said "No Non-Resident Entry" You could not buy a house, you could not get your children in said school district. Okay, that's restriction of movement.

There are all kinds of places that I cannot go, where my movement is restricted. I cannot walk into the Pentagon any time I choose. I cannot walk into the River Oaks Country Club because I am not a member. I cannot walk into a movie theater and sit down to watch the show if I did not buy a ticket. To imply that anyone should be able to go anywhere they want anytime they choose is simply not in line with reality.

Going into somebody's house is different. If you seriously are trying to equate the two, that's really tugging at threads and is a really weak comparison.

Why not? Unless my memory fails me, you just got done saying there should not be restriction of movement. Now you are saying there should be some restriction on movement. Which is it?

Ideally economic parity should exist between nations. There should not be a global north or global south. Ideally then, there should be the ability to move into a new town, work, and be a productive member of society.

It would also be nice if it never snowed more than half a foot, our teeth brushed themselves and we did not have to pay any income taxes. Ready to grow up? This nirvana like scenario does not exist and it never has existed. This is simply being used as cover for individuals such as yourself to advance your agenda.

Yes, even those with an 8th grade education should be given a chance. Ideally, they should be given the resources if they so decide to continue with their education.

This statement reflects a lack of comprehension of the costs of this. When did it become out job to educate the entire world? Instead of criticizing these people's home countries for failing to educate them, you act as if the US is the bad guy. Our school system is in serious need of repair in parts of the country and you are suggesting we should be responsible for educating millions more?

Obviously there would be the difference between rich and poor. But the stark divide need not exist.

I suspect that you are very young. As people grow up, their views often change. Yours will probably not.

I am not wasting anymore time trying to reason with your Cosmic Convergence of the Global Tribal Village mindset. However, I will make two quick points.

1. Your posts sound alot like Travelin Fella's.

2. Quite frankly, you are Exhibit A as to why we should not allow unlimited immigration. If you are truly that appalled by life in the US and our 'unenlightened' immigration laws, it probably would not be too difficult for you to return to your mother's homeland. Who knows? Maybe you would like their immigration policy better.

[Mamama Mia]

My heart breaks for all affected by this tragedy. It is a sad day.