Author Topic: Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.  (Read 10540 times)

Desertdog

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,360
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« on: October 05, 2006, 07:57:10 PM »
To me, this is reason enough to build a wall big enough to stop a tank.

Quote
In Mexico City on Thursday, Fox reached out to the millions of Mexicans living north of the border.
 
"I have always believed that there is one Mexico, and that no walls can divide it," he said. "There are no barriers or borders or even fences that can keep Mexicans apart."
Mexico angered by lack of immigration reform, decision to increase security at border  
The Associated Press

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/10/05/america/LA_GEN_Mexico_Border_Fence.php
 
 
TIJUANA, Mexico Mexico lobbied for six years for a comprehensive immigration reform that would allow millions to cross into the United States legally. Instead, it got a wall.
 
Mexicans  from leading politicians to migrants preparing to cross illegally  consider the U.S. plan to fence off much of the border shameful, offensive and ill-conceived.
 
U.S. President George W. Bush on Wednesday signed a bill that would allot US$1.2 billion (¬940 million) for hundreds of miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border and for more vehicle barriers, lighting and infrared cameras.
 
The measure capped months of debate on immigration. Mexican immigrants in the U.S. and the Mexican government lobbied lawmakers for more ways to cross the border and work legally.
 
While Bush had proposed a temporary worker program, it didn't garner enough support in Congress for passage. The idea has been dropped by Washington, at least until after the November congressional elections.
 
Congress focused on security over immigration, arguing that the porous border could be used by terrorists who want to sneak into the U.S. undetected. There is no evidence that has happened, however.
 
The Mexican government this week sent a diplomatic note to Washington criticizing the plan for 1,125 kilometers (700 miles) of new fencing along the border. Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez called it an "offense" and said Wednesday his office was considering taking the issue to the United Nations.
 
But Ruben Aguilar, the spokesman for President Vicente Fox, said Thursday that Mexico had ruled out that possibility. He added he was "confident" the additional fencing would never become a reality because an immigration accord would eventually replace it.
 
"We regret that we haven't been able to find a solution," so far, Aguilar said.
 
In Mexico City on Thursday, Fox reached out to the millions of Mexicans living north of the border.
 
"I have always believed that there is one Mexico, and that no walls can divide it," he said. "There are no barriers or borders or even fences that can keep Mexicans apart."
 
Mexican President-elect Felipe Calderon, speaking in the Chilean capital of Santiago, called the wall plan "a deplorable decision" that "does not solve our common problem, which is emigration."
 
After he takes office Dec. 1, he said, "the first thing I will do is continue to insist on the defense of the rights of Mexican immigrants in the United States." Calderon added that he will try to tackle the root cause of migration by creating more jobs in Mexico.
 
Guillermo Alonzo, a migration expert at the Tijuana-based Colegio de La Frontera Norte, said fences will do little to stop the illegal migration tide and instead will force migrants to look for new ways to sneak into the United States and find new routes through deadlier terrain.
 
"When migrants are determined to cross, they find a way to jump the fences," Alonzo said. "Walls don't stop anything."
 
Alonzo cited the construction of a fence between Tijuana and San Diego, known in Mexico as "the tortilla wall." It was completed in the 1990s and forced migrants into the sparsely populated and dangerous Arizona desert.
 
While there are walls at various points along the border, the one in Tijuana is the longest stretch, running 14 miles (22 kilometers) west from the Otay border crossing and plunging into the Pacific Ocean.
 
It has become a symbol of the divisive issue of immigration, a blank slate for graffiti, crosses, photos and other remembrances of those who have lost their lives trying to sneak into the United States. Some families, divided by the border, even meet at the fence, talking through the metal wires.
 
While the wall downgraded Tijuana from the illegal migration mecca it was in the 1990s, when it was common to see groups of migrants rush across the border, dodging traffic and Border Patrol agents, hundreds of migrants still come here, Alonzo said.
 
"Now smugglers hide migrants in trunks of cars or get false documents," he said.
 
Arrests of migrants trying to sneak illegally into California sharply increased in the San Diego area this past fiscal year after enforcement was increased along the Arizona border. That upward trend will likely continue with the increased security ordered by Bush on Wednesday.
 
Luis Kendzierski, a priest who directs a Tijuana migrant shelter, said building a wall is an unfriendly gesture that will lead to a hike in smugglers' fees and more migrant deaths.
 
"We are supposed to be neighbors and friends, and instead of building bridges and doors, we're building obstacles," Kendzierski said.
 
Between 2001 and 2006, almost 2,000 migrants died while trying to sneak into the United States, according to El Colegio de la Frontera Norte.
 
Migrants resting at a Tijuana shelter after being deported from the United States said more walls wouldn't deter them.
 
Alfonso Martinez, a 32-year-old from southern Mexico, had been working as a farmhand for six months in Vista, California, when he was arrested and deported last week.
 
Martinez said he would try to cross again through Tecate, a mountainous town about 35 miles (55 kilometers) east of Tijuana .
 
"Wall or no wall, I will try at least three times," Martinez said. "I have three girls that I have to support, and in Mexico there is no work."
 

 TIJUANA, Mexico Mexico lobbied for six years for a comprehensive immigration reform that would allow millions to cross into the United States legally. Instead, it got a wall.
 
Mexicans  from leading politicians to migrants preparing to cross illegally  consider the U.S. plan to fence off much of the border shameful, offensive and ill-conceived.
 
U.S. President George W. Bush on Wednesday signed a bill that would allot US$1.2 billion (¬940 million) for hundreds of miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border and for more vehicle barriers, lighting and infrared cameras.
 
The measure capped months of debate on immigration. Mexican immigrants in the U.S. and the Mexican government lobbied lawmakers for more ways to cross the border and work legally.
 
While Bush had proposed a temporary worker program, it didn't garner enough support in Congress for passage. The idea has been dropped by Washington, at least until after the November congressional elections.
 
Congress focused on security over immigration, arguing that the porous border could be used by terrorists who want to sneak into the U.S. undetected. There is no evidence that has happened, however.
 
The Mexican government this week sent a diplomatic note to Washington criticizing the plan for 1,125 kilometers (700 miles) of new fencing along the border. Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez called it an "offense" and said Wednesday his office was considering taking the issue to the United Nations.
 
But Ruben Aguilar, the spokesman for President Vicente Fox, said Thursday that Mexico had ruled out that possibility. He added he was "confident" the additional fencing would never become a reality because an immigration accord would eventually replace it.
 
"We regret that we haven't been able to find a solution," so far, Aguilar said.
 
In Mexico City on Thursday, Fox reached out to the millions of Mexicans living north of the border.
 
"I have always believed that there is one Mexico, and that no walls can divide it," he said. "There are no barriers or borders or even fences that can keep Mexicans apart."
 
Mexican President-elect Felipe Calderon, speaking in the Chilean capital of Santiago, called the wall plan "a deplorable decision" that "does not solve our common problem, which is emigration."
 
After he takes office Dec. 1, he said, "the first thing I will do is continue to insist on the defense of the rights of Mexican immigrants in the United States." Calderon added that he will try to tackle the root cause of migration by creating more jobs in Mexico.
 
Guillermo Alonzo, a migration expert at the Tijuana-based Colegio de La Frontera Norte, said fences will do little to stop the illegal migration tide and instead will force migrants to look for new ways to sneak into the United States and find new routes through deadlier terrain.
 
"When migrants are determined to cross, they find a way to jump the fences," Alonzo said. "Walls don't stop anything."
 
Alonzo cited the construction of a fence between Tijuana and San Diego, known in Mexico as "the tortilla wall." It was completed in the 1990s and forced migrants into the sparsely populated and dangerous Arizona desert.
 
While there are walls at various points along the border, the one in Tijuana is the longest stretch, running 14 miles (22 kilometers) west from the Otay border crossing and plunging into the Pacific Ocean.
 
It has become a symbol of the divisive issue of immigration, a blank slate for graffiti, crosses, photos and other remembrances of those who have lost their lives trying to sneak into the United States. Some families, divided by the border, even meet at the fence, talking through the metal wires.
 
While the wall downgraded Tijuana from the illegal migration mecca it was in the 1990s, when it was common to see groups of migrants rush across the border, dodging traffic and Border Patrol agents, hundreds of migrants still come here, Alonzo said.
 
"Now smugglers hide migrants in trunks of cars or get false documents," he said.
 
Arrests of migrants trying to sneak illegally into California sharply increased in the San Diego area this past fiscal year after enforcement was increased along the Arizona border. That upward trend will likely continue with the increased security ordered by Bush on Wednesday.
 
Luis Kendzierski, a priest who directs a Tijuana migrant shelter, said building a wall is an unfriendly gesture that will lead to a hike in smugglers' fees and more migrant deaths.
 
"We are supposed to be neighbors and friends, and instead of building bridges and doors, we're building obstacles," Kendzierski said.
 
Between 2001 and 2006, almost 2,000 migrants died while trying to sneak into the United States, according to El Colegio de la Frontera Norte.
 
Migrants resting at a Tijuana shelter after being deported from the United States said more walls wouldn't deter them.
 
Alfonso Martinez, a 32-year-old from southern Mexico, had been working as a farmhand for six months in Vista, California, when he was arrested and deported last week.
 
Martinez said he would try to cross again through Tecate, a mountainous town about 35 miles (55 kilometers) east of Tijuana .
 
"Wall or no wall, I will try at least three times," Martinez said. "I have three girls that I have to support, and in Mexico there is no work."

grampster

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,450
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #1 on: October 05, 2006, 08:07:27 PM »
Good walls make for good neighbors.  Those walls should have holes in them to allow the entry of those who are willing to assimilate, become Americans, take on our language and elevate our culture.  It should be fairly easy to come if you are willing to subscribe to those virtues.
"Never wrestle with a pig.  You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."  G.B. Shaw

wingnutx

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 927
  • Danish Cartoonist
    • http://www.punk-rock.com
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #2 on: October 05, 2006, 08:25:19 PM »
Quote from: grampster
Good walls make for good neighbors.  Those walls should have holes in them to allow the entry of those who are willing to assimilate, become Americans, take on our language and elevate our culture.  It should be fairly easy to come if you are willing to subscribe to those virtues.
What he said.

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,425
  • My prepositions are on/in
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #3 on: October 06, 2006, 03:27:24 AM »
Quote
Mexico angered by lack of immigration reform
More press bias.  Mexico doesn't want reform, the Minutemen are the ones who want reform.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

280plus

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19,131
  • Ever get that sinking feeling?
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2006, 03:45:10 AM »
Hmmm, let's take a look back at another wall, Berlin I think it was. How did that one work? As long as there is something to be gained on the other side of the fence people are going to figure out ways to get over, under, around or just plain though it. I agree with grampster though, there should be uncomplicated ways for those that would be an asset to the US to get here. Just process them in, check for disease, check for criminal backgrounds. Then we would know those who are STILL trying to get in illegally must be undesirable and subject to things like unlawful entry being a felony and being dealt with harshly. I'd be all for that.
Avoid cliches like the plague!

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,425
  • My prepositions are on/in
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #5 on: October 06, 2006, 04:26:51 AM »
Nice try with the wall comparison there, 280.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #6 on: October 06, 2006, 04:33:00 AM »
Its a valid comparison.  Only totalitarian dictatorships erect walls to control their borders.  Free societies welcome people.
But I hope we arent going to have this discussion yet again.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

Ron

  • Guest
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #7 on: October 06, 2006, 04:37:28 AM »
Quote
Hmmm, let's take a look back at another wall, Berlin I think it was.
That wall was to keep people in. It had armed guards who would shoot escapees.

Our wall is to be a deterrent, with as Grampster said, an organized legal way to cross into the States.

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,425
  • My prepositions are on/in
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #8 on: October 06, 2006, 04:46:09 AM »
Quote from: The Rabbi
Only totalitarian dictatorships erect walls to control their borders.
Another nice try.  Might sound good, but it ain't true.

 
Quote
Free societies welcome people.
And we do.  It is also very cute to equate any concern about immigration with closing our borders entirely.  It's also stupid or dishonest.  I know you're not stupid, Rabbi.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #9 on: October 06, 2006, 05:09:43 AM »
I can see we are going to have this discussion again.

There is an easy solution. Open immigration.  Those opposed to that can tell me how laws will stop people from doing things they want, how we are waging a War On Immigration that is expensive and wasteful and curtails everyone's liberties, how the state has no right to tell people where they can live and what they can do, how immigrants don't hurt people, how we shouldn't punish all people just because of some people, etc etc.  The funny thing is the very people supporting drug legalization and using those self-same arguments find no irony in being on the other side.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

280plus

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19,131
  • Ever get that sinking feeling?
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #10 on: October 06, 2006, 05:14:15 AM »
I wasn't comparing REASONS for the walls, just walls in general. None are totally infallible is all I'm saying.
Avoid cliches like the plague!

Werewolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,126
  • Lead, Follow or Get the HELL out of the WAY!
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #11 on: October 06, 2006, 05:22:23 AM »
Quote
"We are supposed to be neighbors and friends, and instead of building bridges and doors, we're building obstacles," Kendzierski said
Neighbors and friends don't just walk into your home, eat your food, take your money, use your stuff uninvited.

In most places that kind of behavior would land one in jail.
Life is short, Break the rules, Forgive quickly, Kiss slowly, Love
truly, Laugh uncontrollably, And never regret anything that made you smile.

Fight Me Online

mtnbkr

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 15,388
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #12 on: October 06, 2006, 05:28:17 AM »
Quote from: The Rabbi
The funny thing is the very people supporting drug legalization and using those self-same arguments find no irony in being on the other side.
Nor can those favoring anti-drug laws see the irony in supporting lawless immigration.

I fully support the right of a person to immigrate to the US LEGALLY.  I welcome them all.  I do not, however, support illegal immigration and the various crimes that tend to go with it (tresspassing, ID theft, forged ID, etc).

Chris

Lee

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,181
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #13 on: October 06, 2006, 05:30:26 AM »
"..to allow the entry of those who are willing to assimilate, become Americans, take on our language and elevate our culture."

THAT is the part that really needs to be reformed.  It's far too difficult of a process for law abiding immigrants who really do make an effort to go through legal channels to become loyal, productive citizens.

The whole illegal immigration issue is another story.  A country that doesn't have some control over it's borders is doomed...particularly nowdays. Fox and Co. are simply nuts.

Stand_watie

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,925
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #14 on: October 06, 2006, 05:50:38 AM »
Quote from: 280plus
... None are totally infallible is all I'm saying.
That's certainly true. You can't deny though, that Berlin's wall did keep in the majority of those who would have escaped otherwise. If we can keep out even a substantial minority (serious criminals and terrorists) of those coming in, and document and keep in the legitimate marketplace the majority of the rest, a wall would be a major success.

Quote
THAT is the part that really needs to be reformed.  It's far too difficult of a process for law abiding immigrants who really do make an effort to go through legal channels to become loyal, productive citizens.
+1

Like "illegal" drugs, "illegal" immigrants being illegal is the majority of the problem. Most illegal immigrants would be harmless and even beneficial, if they didn't support an underground economy of crime.

The corrupt Mexican government is by far the worst bad guy, but regarding lesser evils, Democrats and Repubs are both to blame on this.
Yizkor. Lo Od Pa'am

"You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead fingers"

"Never again"

"Malone Labe"

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #15 on: October 06, 2006, 05:52:42 AM »
Quote from: mtnbkr
Quote from: The Rabbi
The funny thing is the very people supporting drug legalization and using those self-same arguments find no irony in being on the other side.
Nor can those favoring anti-drug laws see the irony in supporting lawless immigration.

I fully support the right of a person to immigrate to the US LEGALLY.  I welcome them all.  I do not, however, support illegal immigration and the various crimes that tend to go with it (tresspassing, ID theft, forged ID, etc).

Chris
An easy solution is to abolish the INS and immigration laws.  Then all those people will be here legally.
But since you already agree that legal immigration is a good thing (and it is) and here is a solution to make all immigrants legal, then you'll also agree that immigration benefits society while drugs damage society.  So there is a huge difference between the two on that score.
As for assimilating, there are Chinatowns and (to a lesser degree) Little Italys as well as Koreatowns and Little Odessas where English is not the predominant language.  And yet no one is backing statist action to eliminate those.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

lupinus

  • Southern Mod Trimutive Emeritus
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,178
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #16 on: October 06, 2006, 05:59:17 AM »
Sorry, we can't absorb millions of people.

If you are willing to become americans sure we welcome you, if not stay the hell out.

There is a difference between controling your borders and closing them.  We have a right to control them as we see fit and there is no reason we shouldn't other then some people want some more ilelgal votes.  There is no right to migration, there is a right to control who comes into your country.
That is all. *expletive deleted*ck you all, eat *expletive deleted*it, and die in a fire. I have considered writing here a long parting section dedicated to each poster, but I have decided, at length, against it. *expletive deleted*ck you all and Hail Satan.

Stand_watie

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,925
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #17 on: October 06, 2006, 06:00:23 AM »
Quote
But since you already agree that legal immigration is a good thing (and it is) and here is a solution to make all immigrants legal, then you'll also agree that immigration benefits society while drugs damage society.  So there is a huge difference between the two on that score.
swap the words around...

Quote
But since you already agree that legal drugs are a good thing (and they are) and here is a solution to make all drugs legal, then you'll also agree that drugs benefit society while immigration damages society.  So there is a huge difference between the two on that score.
Just as much logic.
Yizkor. Lo Od Pa'am

"You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead fingers"

"Never again"

"Malone Labe"

Art Eatman

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,442
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #18 on: October 06, 2006, 06:01:47 AM »
There are some areas of the border where walls make sense as an aid to the Border Patrol guys.  Some areas, it's pointless.  You only need a wall in an area that's a jumping off point for illegals.  A wall between Columbus, New Mexico, and El Paso, Texas, would be a waste of time and money.  I get fed up with these single-solution, one-size-fits-all BS ideas about the idea of a wall.

The bottom line is that until the incentive to come here illegally is removed, people are going to make the effort.  As long as we have young and able-bodied people who don't need to hold steady jobs, we'll need some number of immigrants.  Fine; we need a rational program for this to happen in a controllable manner.  Regardless, we're not now enforcing the laws now on the books as to employer responsibilities.

I'm sorta hard-hearted about employers:  If you can't find enough employees without breaking the law, take up a new line of work.  Nowhere is it written that anybody "deserves" to be in the chicken business or be a homebuilder.  A particular occupation is not an entitlement.

Any guest worker program and any citizenship program should involve a push toward assimilation into OUR way of doing things.  It is not up to us to change in order to accomodate other countries' ways, other societies' cultures.  

My 2¢,

Art
The American Indians learned what happens when you don't control immigration.

lupinus

  • Southern Mod Trimutive Emeritus
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,178
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #19 on: October 06, 2006, 06:06:07 AM »
well said Art
That is all. *expletive deleted*ck you all, eat *expletive deleted*it, and die in a fire. I have considered writing here a long parting section dedicated to each poster, but I have decided, at length, against it. *expletive deleted*ck you all and Hail Satan.

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,295
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #20 on: October 06, 2006, 06:16:26 AM »
Fistful

Did you have sand burrs in your corn flakes this morning?

-C
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #21 on: October 06, 2006, 06:22:02 AM »
Quote from: Stand_watie
Quote
But since you already agree that legal immigration is a good thing (and it is) and here is a solution to make all immigrants legal, then you'll also agree that immigration benefits society while drugs damage society.  So there is a huge difference between the two on that score.
swap the words around...

Quote
But since you already agree that legal drugs are a good thing (and they are) and here is a solution to make all drugs legal, then you'll also agree that drugs benefit society while immigration damages society.  So there is a huge difference between the two on that score.
Just as much logic.
But I dont think legal drugs are a good thing.  I think narcotics are inherently bad and their use is a detriment to society.  Will you argue that narcotic use is beneficial overall?  Thanks, you proved my point maybe better than I could.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

Tallpine

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 23,172
  • Grumpy Old Grandpa
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #22 on: October 06, 2006, 06:30:12 AM »
"I have always believed that there is one Mexico, and that no walls can divide it," Fox said.


How about "one USA" with no walls to divide it. Wink

Why don't we just invade Mexico and annex it to the United States?  That way all the Mexicans could live in the US without moving an inch.  Tongue

Would have made as much sense as invading Iraq, anyway ....
Freedom is a heavy load, a great and strange burden for the spirit to undertake. It is not easy. It is not a gift given, but a choice made, and the choice may be a hard one. The road goes upward toward the light; but the laden traveller may never reach the end of it.  - Ursula Le Guin

280plus

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19,131
  • Ever get that sinking feeling?
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #23 on: October 06, 2006, 06:39:34 AM »
Let me make sure we have one thing straight. I do NOT percieve drugs, prostitution ar other such vices as "good". Even if they WERE all legal I would partake in of none of them. I just think making these things illegal and spending the trillions we do on enforcement is simply detrimental to our society on many levels. Same with the wall, I don't want illegals flooding in here anymore than anyone else. I just don't think a WALL is the answer. As far as absorbing them, I'd say a fair amount of those who would come have ALREADY been absorbed. Now let them contribute and help pay for all the benefits they seek or are receiving.
Avoid cliches like the plague!

Moondoggie

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 523
Mexico angered by decision to increase security at border.
« Reply #24 on: October 06, 2006, 07:10:50 AM »
I believe that LEGAL narcotic use is a good thing.

Would The Rabbi care to volunteer for surgery without drugs?

I believe that LEGAL immigration is a good thing.

What do you think America would look like in 10 years if everybody on the planet that wanted to live in America just showed up?  Try Somolia, Haiti, or any other 4th world hellhole.

Pie in the sky is wonderful in theory.  Ever heard the phrase "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"?  Care to discuss how that worked out?

What The Rabbi is advocating in reality is anarchy.
Known from coast to coast, almost!