posted on June 13, 2006 08:57:19 PM
Here is a read that is being passed through the channels and has many great points. The need to close the boarders is greater than ever.
> Editorial
> Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 10:07:30 -0500
>
> A lady wrote the best letter I have seen in the Editorials in ages!!
>
> It explains things better than all the stuff you hear on TV.
> --------------
> "Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country
> protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of
> illegal immigration. Certain people are angry that the U.S. might
> protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this
> country and, once here, to stay indefinitely. Let me see if I
> correctly understand the thinking behind these protests.
>
> Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover
me
> in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, "I've made all the
> beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors;
> I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard-working and
> honest (except for when I broke into your house)."
>
> According to the protesters, not only must you let me stay, you must
> add me to your family's insurance plan and provide other benefits to
> me and to my family (my husband will do your yard work because he too
> is hard-working and honest, except for that breaking in part).
>
> If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends
> who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my right to
be
> there. It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than
> I do, and I'm just trying to better myself.
>
> I'm hard-working and honest ... um, except for ... well, you know.
>
> And what a deal it is for me!! I live in your house, contributing
only
> a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do
> about it without being accused of selfishness, prejudice and being
> anti-housebreaker.
>
> Did I miss anything? Does this sound reasonable to you? If it does,
> grab a sign and go picket something. If this sounds insane to you,
> call your senators and enlighten them because they are stumbling in
> the darkness right now and really need your help.
>
> Linda Myers
> April 10, 2006 New-Sentinel
.
.
.
Many misleading tricks in 2006. The new Demomoron slogan.
posted on June 19, 2006 08:43:07 PM
On June 6, 1944, almost 62 years ago, American, British, and Canadian forces totaling about 200,000 men, stormed the beaches of Normandy in what has been called the largest invasion in history.
On May 1, 2006, foreign nationals and their Quisling supporters, yelling in foreign languages (mostly Mexican/Spanglish), marching under foreign flags (mostly Mexican) stormed the streets of Los Angeles with forces totaling an estimated 500,000 people.
2 1/2 times as many as we put ashore in 1944. Someone please tell me why anyone can think we are not being invaded.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
posted on June 19, 2006 08:53:40 PM
You are right Bear, but their little demonstrations has had some negative backlash for the most part. I think that is why they are keeping thier mouths shut right now. Besides the senate is trying to hand them a silver platter which hopefully the house will stop.
posted on June 19, 2006 09:17:05 PM
I wonder if the only way that we the people will ever be able to do anything about law breakers that the bonified law enforcement agencies refuse to do anything about will be for we the people to take matters in our own hands and make citizen arrests of these law breakers. I also wonder if there may be constitutional law that provides for just such an action.
posted on June 20, 2006 08:44:32 AM
PI - the reason that traditional law enforcement does not arrest every illegal is because they are not charged to do so nor do they have the budget. That job and the budget belong to the INS. Thing is that the INS does not have the budget to arrest hold and deport every illegal that is picked up just for being an illegal.
You can make your citizens arrest, but you should probably be prepared to house feed and transport your prisoner yourself. No one else has the budget.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
People put their hand on the bible, and swear to uphold the constitution. They do not put their hand on the constitution, and swear to uphold the bible.
posted on June 20, 2006 11:23:03 AM
Transportation to the Mexican border, ok I can handle that but housing and feeding? What the hell do I care if they eat or if they're out in the elements awaiting deportation.
Did you know that if a citizen of the USA is put in a Mexican jail that they are not fed? It is expected that their family will provide food for them.
I believe it was the famous Texas poet, Antoinette that said while standing on her portal, watching the hoards of hungry illegals crossing the border, Let them eat cactus.
posted on June 20, 2006 05:52:03 PM
what police are saying now is that it is not so much a budget thing as a community trust thing.
Which is BS a criminal is a criminal.
However I did read where they have rounded up a few illegals in San Diego are last week and now the majority are hiding out.
Ron
[ edited by WashingtoneBayer on Jun 20, 2006 05:52 PM ]
posted on June 20, 2006 06:49:01 PM
Surprisingly Ron, there are not that many "illegals" in San Diego. The illegals tend to keep moving north or head east.
Most of those that people assume are "illegals" in the area generally live in Tijuana and cross the border each day legally with a border crossing card.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
People put their hand on the bible, and swear to uphold the constitution. They do not put their hand on the constitution, and swear to uphold the bible.
posted on June 20, 2006 09:43:03 PM
You're wasting your time trying to make sense here fenix, you know that?
____________________________________________
Now We Know... Uninformed People Elect Uninformed Presidents
posted on June 21, 2006 04:35:56 AM
Main Entry: 1il·le·gal
Pronunciation: ("i(l)-'lE-g&l
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French or Medieval Latin; Middle French illegal, from Medieval Latin illegalis, from Latin in- + legalis legal
: not according to or authorized by law : UNLAWFUL, ILLICIT; also : not sanctioned by official rules (as of a game)
Just so you fenix can understand profe. You two seem to have a skewed sense of right and wrong.
posted on June 21, 2006 05:52:46 AM
Prof - I know but I can't seem to help myself. It's a compulsion.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
People put their hand on the bible, and swear to uphold the constitution. They do not put their hand on the constitution, and swear to uphold the bible.
