Klan growing, fed by anti-immigrant feelings, report says

[phoenix_fire]

Quote by: dilligras "Jane, you ignorant slut." I'm just sitting here wondering when exactly it was that someone who crossed our sovereign borders illegally became known as "immigrants"??!!?? That is simply and very obviously a semantical perversion of truth designed to support criminal behavior under the guise of "tolerance". Perhaps if some of you bleeding hearts were to move to El Paso or Laredo YOU would get a first-hand opportunity to be murdered by trained Mexican troops, working for the drug kingpin there. Maybe YOU could find five charred and tortured bodies in the ditch in front of your property. Maybe YOU could have the pristine wilderness and wildlife that enticed you to the area turned into a vast toilet (when they gotta go, they gotta go) that will not support any critter that does not eat feces or discarded plastic water bottles. Maybe YOU could have 50 or 60 of your states hospitals go bankrupt and close, meaning that you now have NO emergency services within 50 miles of your hometown. Maybe. But, until you come to your senses, I will be here, trying to take back America, one dumbass at a time. As you were.:rolleyes:

Cut 'n Shoot idn't really that close to the border.

[Kamehameha34]

I never understood why someone would have to come to America legally. If they'd be valuable to our economy, shouldn't it be easy to come legally?

[phoenix_fire]

Quote by: Kamehameha34 I never understood why someone would have to come to America legally. If they'd be valuable to our economy, shouldn't it be easy to come legally?

It depends on how you look at it. Cheap labor only really benefits a few people: the fat cats. It puts native workers out of jobs, or causes them to have to accept lower wages and it exploits immigrants who are forced to accept pay that only barely keeps their family alive.

[Kamehameha34]

But how is it difficult to come into the country legally?

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: grandpa How does enforcing laws against people not strengthen state power?

Then, if you are against strengthening "state power" you advocate not enforcing the laws against murder, rape, burglary, etc.?? Seems to me that those are also laws against people.

Quote by: grandpa Would you have agreed with fugitive slave laws? People who have any common sense don't agree with something just because it's a law. Why? Because we know laws are made by humans with judgments that are fallible and potentially alterable.

Fugitive slave laws were made invalid by proper legislative process. You, on the other hand, seem to be condoning the violation of valid laws without that process. Are we all free to determine on our own which laws are valid and worthy of respect??

Quote by: grandpa Fines aren't going to solve the problem. You're just going to end up criminalizing more people, which would still not get rid of costs. More jobs would probably "sneak out" of the country.

How would those jobs that "Americans won't do" going to sneak out of the country? Can you hire, say, an Indian working in Islamabad to pick lettuce growing in Bakersfield?

Quote by: grandpa The real solution is to challenge the guest worker program, the INS and all hierarchical institutions which regard people merely as cheap, disposable labor. We don't do this by strengthening the state through fines, deportations and yes, xenophobia. Grandpa h.

Horseshit. You, and the people that continue to exploit these unfortunates are the ones that regard "people merely as cheap, disposable labor", not me. Your solution to the sub-minimum wages currently paid to these people seems to be to let more of them in to drive wages down even further.

And your claim of "xenophobia" is an obvious total fucking lie, typical of your dishonest discussion submissions. I challenge you to provide ANY evidence that my position is related to anything other than fiscal considerations. Put uip or shut up, it's as simple as that.

[dilligras]

Quote by: phoenix_fire Cut 'n Shoot idn't really that close to the border.

That is true enough......it's 40 miles N of Houston......what's your point?

[grandpa]

Quote by: dilligras PEOPLE!!?? Don't you mean illegal aliens?

How is it outlandish to call them people?

Quote by: dilligras I have noticed that the left seldom uses general labels like that unless they want to semantically ignore any specifics about real identities.

The master status of "illegal alien" is what denies specific aspects of real identies. They are real people, but you can convert them to some imaginary status if you'd like. I'd prefer to be honest and consider them as human beings with interests.

Quote by: dilligras Why not just call them homo sapiens? You could even get more general than that, if you really want to obscure the issue.

That does not obscure the issue at all. If we actually examine them as people they become harder to dismiss.

Quote by: dilligras Waal, if Zee was a Democrat back then, its quite likely that he would have........the Dems were the most racist party in the US for over 90 years, right up to the Vietnam War.

You obviously are interested in partisan bickering, which has nothing to do with the discussion.

Quote by: dilligras True enough......but it isn't agreement that the law requires, it's obedience. You don't like a law? You have legal and election day recourse in this country......you don't get to independently and arbitrarily decide that all those duly elected REPRESENTATIVES may be vetoed by your mere disagreement, sir.

I wasn't suggesting I can take down positions of authority all by myself, if that's what you mean.

Quote by: dilligras That you apparently think you do, somehow makes me question the wisdom of maturity you foist with your name.

This is neither here nor there.

Quote by: dilligras Yes, they will, as part of a coordinated and equally applied enforcement of the LAW. Those profit-greedy businesses who cheat the American laborer and treat the Mexican nationals as modern slaves will use that same profit motive to get rid of their illegal, wage-cutting workers if they think their precious bottom line is about to be screwed by fines. Any jobs leaving the country would be more than compensated for by the jobs opened by ILLEGAL ALIENS leaving the country, n'est pas?

The labor will just shift elsewhere (and not to Americans unless we lower our standards). Either that or a job will just disappear altogether. After all, capitalist dogma places profits ahead of the type of work done to get them (or avoids work itself to get them, if possible).

Quote by: dilligras I would also challenge the guest worker program -- as it is little more than another lobbyist-perpetrated outrage upon my country's sovereign right to have secure borders and the absolute right to decide who gets to feed at our public trough.

When you say "country" you mean your right to determine who gets to do what for any reason. You are arguing for your right to determine who should be able to live on a large expanse of land. Others have a live and let live attitude, which clearly violates the principles of the INS and the Minutemen, you make other people's mere presence here into an epic ordeal.

Quote by: dilligras I am sick and tired of pandering politicians soliciting the votes of thieving corporate "massas" and foreigners who never intend to owe my country any allegiance and are only here to get what they can take.

First of all, you're grossly generalizing. I'm sure plenty of "illegals" do have respect for Americans, but the mere possibility of this is simply blotted out. No one is supposed to listen to what they have to say, ever. But why should they pledge allegiance to any abstract entity in order to be anywhere and do anything?

Quote by: dilligras They should go home and start their own damn revolution if they don't like the corruption that has been as a jackboot on the neck of their hopes and aspirations, instead of taking the easy way out by stealing the birthrights of our citizenry, purchased with the honorable blood of our forefathers.

Here come the religious overtones. "Honorable blood of our forefathers." It's an emotional appeal to overlook the actual issue. There is this bizarre insistence that because the "illegals" haven't staged a revolution against their corrupt government they have no right to be here. Well, where does that leave us "legals?" Just about everyone will agree there is corruption in our government, but nobody's saying we need to overthrow it simply to exist here.

Grandpa h.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Zeebadee Then, if you are against strengthening "state power" you advocate not enforcing the laws against murder, rape, burglary, etc.?? Seems to me that those are also laws against people. .

And we've seen state power grow in the name of preventing all of these things, yet these things still continue. It's almost as though states--which are incredibly adept at murder, theft and yes, even torture and rape--don't actually do anything to prevent crime and instead foster it.

Quote by: Zeebadee Fugitive slave laws were made invalid by proper legislative process. You, on the other hand, seem to be condoning the violation of valid laws without that process. .

Yes, I am. That's the rational and even the couragous position to take. Without it, decidedly more unjust laws could go on indefinitely.

Quote by: Zeebadee Are we all free to determine on our own which laws are valid and worthy of respect?? .

Yes we are. If we have brains that's one thing we can use them for.

Quote by: Zeebadee How would those jobs that "Americans won't do" going to sneak out of the country? Can you hire, say, an Indian working in Islamabad to pick lettuce growing in Bakersfield? .

Workers can still be imported or the job may simply disappear.
You also fail to examine how the illegal immigrant status is precisely what prevents their standard of living from being raised and what prevents them from being able to have solidarity with us. You are creating your own problem by thinking they should be declared illegal. We could accept them and speak of improving working conditions on a general basis.

Under existing conditions, companies are not interested in taking losses in short-term profits, so they'll do whatever they can to maximize them. If it means increasing the cost of living while lowering working standards, that's what they'll do (this is what we are seeing now and there's no good reason to believe it'll change just because we replace or deport a few workers). Another crucial point is none of this is being determined by any "illegals." They are purposely deprived of participation in any decisionmaking, thus helping to create the problem you would like to solve.

Quote by: Zeebadee Horseshit. You, and the people that continue to exploit these unfortunates are the ones that regard "people merely as cheap, disposable labor", not me. Your solution to the sub-minimum wages currently paid to these people seems to be to let more of them in to drive wages down even further. .

This position makes no sense. Deporting people who are merely trying to make a living is not going to exploit them less. Nor does it mean legally recognized citizens will be exploited less. The power of the state which protects these private interests will undoubtedly grow and the cheap labor will still exist anyway. Again, their illegal status is what makes them more vulnerable. If they were regarded as equals the problem would be less pronounced. Instead, because of thinking like yours, we have divisions within divisions, rather than class solidarity around the board.

Quote by: Zeebadee And your claim of "xenophobia" is an obvious total fucking lie, typical of your dishonest discussion submissions. I challenge you to provide ANY evidence that my position is related to anything other than fiscal considerations. Put uip or shut up, it's as simple as that.

Such anger!
But first of all, when you admit your position isn't "related to anything other than fiscal considerations," it debunks your previous claim that you don't dismiss illegal immigrants as "cheap, disposable labor."
If you're only concerned about the fiscal aspects of the totally invented problem, then what does that mean about the "illegals?"
Are they not, from a purely economic standpoint, cheap disposable labor?
If you can show otherwise I'd be pretty impressed. But I'm afraid you can't, as that's the only view capitalist "fiscal considerations" seems to allow.
And again, the illegal alien status does NOTHING to debunk this perspective. It feeds it by creating an underclass, which creates the problem you are so concerned about. Get rid of the status and you weaken the politio-economic system.

Xenophobia is "Fear and contempt of strangers or foreign peoples." Can you honestly deny that this is a factor here? Are you not actually expressing fear and contempt of foreign people, even dismissing them as "illegal" and "alien?" Do you not also suggest we should do something to remove their presence from this country? That's xenophobia in action. If you don't believe so then the word may just as well mean nothing.

Grandpa h.

[GHook93]

QUOTE=grandpa;338385 Racist issues aside, what gives you the right to say someone can or cannot exist on a huge expanse of land? What makes you so special?

It is not me smart guy, it is the US policy makers by identifying them as illegals. Legals fine, guest worker program fine. Illegals I have a problem with that.

And your talk about a "melting pot" doesn't really qualify as an argument, either. Especially when the melting pot historically meant cheap, exploitable labor. Grandpa h.

Like most things your wrong on this, the melting pot meant the mixing of races, cultures, religions etx. Specifically the flux of LEGAL immigration at the in the late 1800s and early 1900s.

Melting pot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The melting pot is a metaphor for the way in which homogeneous societies develop, in which the ingredients in the pot (people of different cultures and religions) are combined so as to lose their discrete identities to some degree, yielding a final product which has a more uniform consistency and flavor, and which is quite different from the original inputs. The term gained popularity in describing ethnicity in the United States after the metaphor was used in the 1908 play of the same name that modernized Romeo and Juliet [1] where the protaginist declared "Understand that America is God's Crucible, the great Melting-Pot where all the races of Europe are melting and reforming! A fig for your feuds and vendettas! Germans and Frenchmen, Irishmen and Englishmen, Jews and Russians—into the Crucible with you all! God is making the American." This process is sometimes equated with cultural assimilation, but the two are not necessarily the same; the "melting pot" metaphor implies both a melting of cultures and intermarriage of ethnicities, while cultural assimilation often occurs without intermarriage. For example, many groups in the United States such as US-born Japanese-Americans and Armenian-Americans tend to be fully culturally integrated into American culture and institutions, yet have not, for the most part, intermarried with other ethnicities.

[GHook93]

Take away an illegal immigrates motivation to come here, by hitting them in the pocket book.

(1) Fine the Employers and enforce it:
Much like the do not call affect on telemarketers, if you make the law fine devastating enough, companies will follow it. Create whistle-blower protection laws that cover this. Create a special agency that makes pop in visits and does employee audits. Then when their is an infraction make it sting.

(2) Hit the Land-Lords:
Do a similar fine if the landlord rents to an illegal or knows that an illegal is staying with legal immigrants or US citizens. It will pass the FHA test.

(3) Legalize Drugs:
Not say even a majority of illegal immigrants sells or traffic drugs. The lucrative business of transporting drugs over the border would vanish. Not too mention that the war on drugs is a much more losing cause then the Iraq war

(4) Hit the Illegal Immigrant Transports and guides Hard:
Make devastating criminal penalites for the transport or guide of immigrants across the border, sea or desert.

[dilligras]

Quote by: grandpa Quote by: dilligras PEOPLE!!?? Don't you mean illegal aliens? How is it outlandish to call them people?

Please don't put words in my mouth in order to mischaracterize my observations vis a vis your intentional use of generalization to obscure the issue at hand by referring to "people" as though illegal aliens were no different than Americans in respect to where they rightfully may travel, live, or work without incurring a breach of our duly enacted legislation as to what constitutes an illegal incursion.

You have inaccurately attributed the word "outlandish" to me in a rather transparent attempt to mischaracterize my position as unfair to folks who are only 'people, just like you and me', conveniently ignoring that is not their classification as people that is at issue, but rather their status as those who tresspass onto the territory of a country not their own in order to gain ECONOMIC leverage over their own country's workforce, while (admittedly) inadvertently burdening our own by lowering the wage scale with unfair competition.

Quote by: grandpa Quote by: dilligras I have noticed that the left seldom uses general labels like that unless they want to semantically ignore any specifics about real identities. The master status of "illegal alien" is what denies specific aspects of real identies. They are real people, but you can convert them to some imaginary status if you'd like. I'd prefer to be honest and consider them as human beings with interests.

Deliberate obtuseness is no substitute for rational analysis, mon ami.....any high school student possessing a passing familiarity with the language will know that the term, "illegal alien" is easily more specific than the word, "people", in any discussion of this topic. To deny that fact proves only the weakness of your argument and the wholly political agenda it serves.

Quote by: grandpa Quote by: dilligras Why not just call them homo sapiens? You could even get more general than that, if you really want to obscure the issue. That does not obscure the issue at all. If we actually examine them as people they become harder to dismiss.

Do you even bother with a moments reflection before posting such drivel?

Quote by: grandpa Quote by: dilligras Waal, if Zee was a Democrat back then, its quite likely that he would have........the Dems were the most racist party in the US for over 90 years, right up to the Vietnam War. You obviously are interested in partisan bickering, which has nothing to do with the discussion

YES to the first, bullshit to the second. What is debate, if not bickering? How does one have a debate without taking sides, ie, becoming partisan?

So, yes I am here to participate in all the "partisan bickering" of the site. Can you support another claim for yourself? Are we now to believe that you participate only to manifest "solidarity"? :rolleyes:

Ring up a "no sale", pilgrim.

Quote by: grandpa Quote by: dilligras True enough......but it isn't agreement that the law requires, it's obedience. You don't like a law? You have legal and election day recourse in this country......you don't get to independently and arbitrarily decide that all those duly elected REPRESENTATIVES may be vetoed by your mere disagreement, sir. I wasn't suggesting I can take down positions of authority all by myself, if that's what you mean.

More BS........you have done nothing ELSE but suggest that you have the authority, yea, the responsibility, to ignore those legally passed laws with which you disagree. That is anarchy, not representative democracy, and has no place among civilized folk.

Quote by: grandpa Quote by: dilligras Yes, they will, as part of a coordinated and equally applied enforcement of the LAW. Those profit-greedy businesses who cheat the American laborer and treat the Mexican nationals as modern slaves will use that same profit motive to get rid of their illegal, wage-cutting workers if they think their precious bottom line is about to be screwed by fines. Any jobs leaving the country would be more than compensated for by the jobs opened by ILLEGAL ALIENS leaving the country, n'est pas? The labor will just shift elsewhere (and not to Americans unless we lower our standards). Either that or a job will just disappear altogether. After all, capitalist dogma places profits ahead of the type of work done to get them (or avoids work itself to get them, if possible).

This is so ludicrous as to make response into abuse of one's time. Oh well, it's not like I need to watch more TV, so what the hell.........I assume you meant to say that the JOBS will shift elsewhere, since you follow with an assertion that they will not shift to Americans. WRONG. Even intuitively WRONG.

What kind of convoluted logic leads you to believe that the profit motive that induced American businesses to use an illegal labor pool in order to unfairly compete with those who give jobs to Americans will keep them from going back to fair and legal practices once that pool is no longer available to them? As for all those jobs going out of the country, I must confess that you have thus afforded me some modicum of entertainment, as I now ROFLMBFAO.......

Will every restaurant in LA then send their dishes to Mexico for washing?

Will wealthy homeowners have their lawns cut into little squares of turf to be loaded onto flatbed trucks and shipped south for mowing?

Will home construction no longer take place, simply because there are no Mexicans to build them?

No, no, and, not surprisingly to any with a mere scintilla of common sense, no.

Prima facia buffoonery, sir.

Quote by: grandpa Quote by: dilligras I would also challenge the guest worker program -- as it is little more than another lobbyist-perpetrated outrage upon my country's sovereign right to have secure borders and the absolute right to decide who gets to feed at our public trough. When you say "country" you mean your right to determine who gets to do what for any reason.

Stop......yer killin' me here, pard......I'm trying to balance the keyboard, mouse, TV dinner and 3 remote controls here on the Lazy Boy, and you're trying to crack me up........now does that seem fair?

You are arguing for your right to determine who should be able to live on a large expanse of land.

Two fallacies in one sentence.....bravo. First, I am arguing, as I have plainly stated in a language with which you purport to be familiar, that EVERY country, including my own, has the Inalienable right to determine their own immigration policy.

Second, you again seek to define a term so vaguely as to obfuscate the real issue, in that you refer to America as just so much land, conveniently (to your argument--coincidence? I think not) ignoring her status as a justly designated political entity (the same BS that "palestinians" and their racist supporters pull on Isreal, BTW) with a sovereign right to her borders, language, and culture.

Quote by: grandpa Others have a live and let live attitude, which clearly violates the principles of the INS and the Minutemen, you make other people's mere presence here into an epic ordeal.

I have a laissez faire attitude as well, so long as my heritage and rights are neither impinged nor infringed, n'est pas?

Quote by: grandpa Quote by: dilligras I am sick and tired of pandering politicians soliciting the votes of thieving corporate "massas" and foreigners who never intend to owe my country any allegiance and are only here to get what they can take. First of all, you're grossly generalizing. I'm sure plenty of "illegals" do have respect for Americans, but the mere possibility of this is simply blotted out. No one is supposed to listen to what they have to say, ever.

I know you are, but what am I? [/Pee Wee Herman]

I never mentioned anything about "respect for Americans", so your addressing my post as though I did constitutes the familiar man of straw, and little else.

How can one not "listen to what they say", when they block traffic on our nation's highways, waving their own country's flag, and claiming ownership of the American Southwest?

But why should they pledge allegiance to any abstract entity in order to be anywhere and do anything?

As for allegiance, perhaps you are living in a world where such is not regarded as one of the lynchpins in the foundation for a nation's continued existence.....but many others here are aware that there are no assurances in that regard, given the oft-noted propensity to gobble up neighboring entities displayed by so many countries at one point or another in their histories--such as Germany, Russia, China, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, America, England, France, Spain, Italy, etc, etc, etc, ad friggin' nauseum.

Quote by: grandpa Quote by: dilligras They should go home and start their own damn revolution if they don't like the corruption that has been as a jackboot on the neck of their hopes and aspirations, instead of taking the easy way out by stealing the birthrights of our citizenry, purchased with the honorable blood of our forefathers. Here come the religious overtones. "Honorable blood of our forefathers." It's an emotional appeal to overlook the actual issue.

The only thing coming here, mon ami, is your obvious attempt to paint me as some evangelical nutjob.......there is nothing whatsoever religious about reference to the sacrifices of those who came before and secured for all of us those freedoms we claim to cherish, and I emphatically resent and condemn your implication to the contrary, sir.




to be cont.......

[dilligras]

Quote by: grandpa There is this bizarre insistence that because the "illegals" haven't staged a revolution against their corrupt government they have no right to be here. Well, where does that leave us "legals?" Just about everyone will agree there is corruption in our government, but nobody's saying we need to overthrow it simply to exist here.

Again, you misstate my position in order to facilitate its rebuttal. That they have no right to be here is a matter of law and the internationally accepted right of ANY country to secure its borders against possible incursion by those who mean to kill them, as well as those who mean to manifest naught but their own selfish economic gain.

Your arguments are unworthy of a moments consideration, mon frere, and I will now excuse myself from responding to such obvious tripe, lest I be accused of entertaining a debate with the unprepared, in order to best ensure the otherwise inappropriate approval of my postition and abilities of argument.

I bid you adieu.



As you were.

[dilligras]

Quote by: GHook93 Take away an illegal immigrates motivation to come here, by hitting them in the pocket book. (1) Fine the Employers and enforce it: Much like the do not call affect on telemarketers, if you make the law fine devastating enough, companies will follow it. Create whistle-blower protection laws that cover this. Create a special agency that makes pop in visits and does employee audits. Then when their is an infraction make it sting. (2) Hit the Land-Lords: Do a similar fine if the landlord rents to an illegal or knows that an illegal is staying with legal immigrants or US citizens. It will pass the FHA test. (3) Legalize Drugs: Not say even a majority of illegal immigrants sells or traffic drugs. The lucrative business of transporting drugs over the border would vanish. Not too mention that the war on drugs is a much more losing cause then the Iraq war (4) Hit the Illegal Immigrant Transports and guides Hard: Make devastating criminal penalites for the transport or guide of immigrants across the border, sea or desert.

A most astute analysis of possible remedies, Mr Hook.

Bravo.


.

[phoenix_fire]

Quote by: dilligras That is true enough......it's 40 miles N of Houston......what's your point?

Just making an observation.

[dilligras]

Quote by: phoenix_fire Just making an observation.

I see.......so you might just as well have "observed" that Phoenix is "not very close to the border?"

OK.

[phoenix_fire]

Quote by: dilligras I see.......so you might just as well have "observed" that Phoenix is "not very close to the border?" OK.

Well, unless your location is inaccurate, you do not live in Phoenix.

[grandpa]

Quote by: GHook93 It is not me smart guy, it is the US policy makers by identifying them as illegals. Legals fine, guest worker program fine. Illegals I have a problem with that.

It is you and the policymakers you might happen to agree with. Both you and they assume a right to determine who can exist on a large expanse of land. I don't agree. That is a form of tyranny that you support, hence I asked what gives you (or anyone else) the right to to enact policies preventing someone simply from existing on a large expanse of land.