"Concerned Citizens of the United States" Looking Out for Our Interests!

[Laudenum]

@ivan_astikov

There were no cities when you fucking got there.

There were. They were soon empty though.

[The_Hamster_King]

@Gangster_Octopus

… I also think it is one of those issues where it just makes people feel good to blame the “brown man” for all the ills of the world. But I find this kind of behaviour beyond the pale … .

Clearly it’s not beyond the pale. The pale love to blame the brown.

[Shot_From_Guns]

I hope every person who had any part in compiling and diseminating this list gets raped by a bear.

Twice.

[Laudenum]

@Shot_From_Guns

I hope every person who had any part in compiling and diseminating this list gets raped by a bear.

Twice.

Why?

Are you against illegal immigrants being caught and punished for their crimes?

[bup]

So, did you just not know how to spell Laudanum, or what’s the deal?

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Laudenum

Why?

Are you against illegal immigrants being caught and punished for their crimes?

Personally, I’m against some assclowns illegally publishing a list of 1300 names, WITHOUT BOTHERING to figure out that the list was inaccurate, and that some people on the list were, in fact, legal residents.

I hope they get their asses sued off, for their ILLEGAL actions that harmed the reputations of LEGAL immigrants.

[Ludovic]

@Shot_From_Guns

I hope every person who had any part in compiling and diseminating this list gets raped by a bear.

Twice.

“It’s not about hunting illegals, is it?”

[Jeff_Lichtman]

I’d like to send the names of the people behind this to media outlets on a list of “suspected” child molesters. After all, what’s wrong with reporting criminals to the authorities? Isn’t that the duty of every citizen?

[jayjay]

Not just names, either. Social security numbers, also, and several pregnant women’s DUE DATES (Helloooo, HIPPA violation!). The due dates I interpret as “Get those anchor babies out of the country before they drop!”

[jayjay]

@Euphonious_Polemic

Personally, I’m against some assclowns illegally publishing a list of 1300 names, WITHOUT BOTHERING to figure out that the list was inaccurate, and that some people on the list were, in fact, legal residents.

And strangely enough, most of them were Latino.

But, of COURSE, this current fixation on illegal immigration isn’t about racism! Never!

[Shot_From_Guns]

Sorry, **Laudenum **[sic], it’s almost time for me to head home–too late to try to explain things to a retard who’s just going to ignore everything, anyway.

[BlankSlate]

@Ludovic

“It’s not about hunting illegals, is it?”

Ha ha. “You’re not here for the illegal aliens, are you?”

[Bricker]

@tdn

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
Unless they’re Mexican

Ah, yes. The Lazarus Doctrine.

Well, America has changed a bit since President Lazarus proclaimed that pos…

…Hey, wait a second! Emma Lazarus was never our President. She wasn’t even in Congress. She, in fact, held no Cabinet positions, no elected offices in federal government, and had absolutely no power to define national policy.

So howabout stopping the inane practice of quoting her poetry as though it were part of the freakin’ Constitution?

[Bricker]

@Gangster_Octopus

Especially when it turns out that the folks are not necessarily illegal in any sense of the word.

@Death_of_Rats

The problem here is that at least some of the adults on the list and all of the children listed are not law-breakers and ‘Media Outlets’ are not relevant authorities.

@Euphonious_Polemic

Personally, I’m against some assclowns illegally publishing a list of 1300 names, WITHOUT BOTHERING to figure out that the list was inaccurate, and that some people on the list were, in fact, legal residents.

I hope they get their asses sued off, for their ILLEGAL actions that harmed the reputations of LEGAL immigrants.

All three of you have uncritically and wholeheartedly accepted the idea that the list contains inaccuracies.

So far as I can tell, here is the evidence for that belief:

Two women on the list who were contacted by The Salt Lake Tribune said they are in the country legally. One said she recently became a permanent legal resident.

Of course, I have no idea what evidence was used to compile the list in the first place. But I find it interesting that you uncritically accept the idea that the list publishers are criminal, but accept without any skepticism the uninvestigated and self-serving denials of two people that were contacted by the paper.

Nor is it clear how the conclusion that “all of the children” are not illegally present is reached.

[DianaG]

On what are you basing your assumption that this illegally obtained list is entirely accurate?

[Bricker]

@jayjay

Not just names, either. Social security numbers, also, and several pregnant women’s DUE DATES (Helloooo, HIPPA violation!). The due dates I interpret as “Get those anchor babies out of the country before they drop!”

According to this HHS site about HIPAA requirements:

The Privacy and Security Rules apply only to covered entities. Individuals, organizations, and agencies that meet the definition of a covered entity under HIPAA must comply with the Rules’ requirements to protect the privacy and security of health information and must provide individuals with certain rights with respect to their health information. If an entity is not a covered entity, it does not have to comply with the Privacy Rule or the Security Rule.

I have no idea how the this group got their information, but it seems safe to say that the group itself is not a “covered entity,” within the meaning of the HIPAA requirements.

Here (PDF) is a guide to determining if a given entity is covered by HIPAA rules. As an example, I am on the board of a non-profit pro-life pregnancy counseling and assistance service. We do not charge for our help, but provide material assistance and vocational training for mothers-to-be and mothers of newborns. As we track our clients through their pregnancies, we would naturally have due date information available… but would NOT be subject to HIPAA penalties for disclosing it.

It goes without saying that we would never particpate in such a reprehensible and abhorrent action, but it would not be a HIPAA violation.

[Bricker]

@DianaG

On what are you basing your assumption that this illegally obtained list is entirely accurate?

1. I make no such assumption. In fact, I specifically said: “I have no idea what evidence was used to compile the list in the first place.”

2. Your question assumes a fact not in evidence: that the list was obtained illegally. How do you know this?

My position is: I don’t know. I take no position on the issue.

My post is intended to highlight the fact that several of you have immediately accepted the version of events in which the list-makers are criminal and the unsubstantiated denials of two list members are accurate. Unlike my approach, which is to accept neither the list’s accuracy nor the unsubstantiated denials. It seems to me that the proper skeptical attitude, on a board supposedly interested in fighting ignorance, would be my position.

[DianaG]

The day I see you mount a similar defense of the people on the list, I’ll believe that your motive is pure, unfettered skepticism.

[Bricker]

@DianaG

The day I see you mount a similar defense of the people on the list, I’ll agree with you.

So… my logical claim is correct only if I personally take some action?

The rules of skeptical inquiry and logical analysis are dependent on what I do?

Um…

Wow, are you dumb.

[DianaG]

Not dumb enough to fall for your typically disingenuous patented Bricker Bullshit. Nice try though.