Good News For Illegal Immigration Apologists: more facts to ignore and rationalize

The BBQ Pit
161

[QUOTE=magellan01]
Come on, you know that is complete nonsense. The main part of the reason for the Amnesty Program was to get the illegal immigration problem under control. And, yes, it was rightly viewed as a problem. A problem they thought the amnesty program would fix. Part of it, we were told, was to really secure the borders and crack down on people sneaking in and overstaying their visas. Yeah, that worked real well.
[/quote]

And you are once again putting words in my mouth, I already said before there was little done in enforcement, but CIS shows their true colors with comments like that. Amnesty did work for many.

Your tricks are really, if not racist, crackpots are not looked with sympathy here either, the last cite is titled “broken record” for a reason.

162

What you think those words show is in your head. It’s clearly a commentary on the reason the program was suggested and implemented. It is not a commentary on your worth in the world. Lighten up. Seriously.

Yes, that was my point. Did you notice that Scylla called you on this same tactic of attacking the source minutes after I did. Does that tell you something?

163

:smack: Yikes! Coding help on Aisle 161, please, both of those quotes should be attributed to GIGObuster.

Thanks.

164

[QUOTE=CBEscapee]
Since history shows a decidely biased immigration policy against nonwhites, you’ll excuse me for coming to the conclusion that the persecution of certain ethnic immigrant groups is racially based. I mean there were massive deportations not only of Mexican immigrants but also Mexican-American citizens citizens in the 1930s. If they looked Mexican to the authorities they were sent south. Then you had the illustriously named Operation Wetback during the 1950s. This wasn’t a nickname mind you but the official name of the operation.

I wonder how an Operation Mick or Operation Squarehead would have been viewed? Would white American have stood for mass deportation of northern Europeans?
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I’m not denying past racism. The current “white north” vs. the “brown south” is bullshit. It’s a cheap trick to paint your opponent as a racist. Did I mention it’s a cheap trick?

Taking a look at US demographics reveals the US is 74.7% white.

Let’s look closer. 25.3% are definitely non-white. The 74.7% “white” includes 14.5% Hispanic. So if we consider Hispanics to be “brown skins” then we’re at 39.8% non-white. When we add the North African Americans, Middle Eastern Americans (e.g. Arab Americans), and Central Asian Americans we get - well I don’t know what we get exactly but what we do get is probably fairly close to the US being sorta kinda only 50% white, depending on which argument you’re in.

It’s just so easy to say “brown skins vs. whites” when what you really mean is Americans vs. Mexicans or Americans vs. Guatemalans, or Americans vs. whoever but unless you’re talking about Canada or Ireland it’s probably going to be “brown skins” because that’s so convenient.

165

[QUOTE=magellan01]

What you think those words show is in your head. It’s clearly a commentary on the reason the program was suggested and implemented. It is not a commentary on your worth in the world. Lighten up. Seriously.
[/quote]

Lighten up? :slight_smile: Really, I’m having fun realizing how that silly people in the CIS are so casual in disparaging people (not just me) that for example, even while illegal, tested electronic components that did go into the Tomahawks that later kicked Saddam’s butt.

The reality is that when I see someone demanding others to lighten up in front of a cite that has connections with racism that then I do suspect someone else’s gig is up.

:rolleyes:

The cite refers to the information coming from FAIR and CIS as a broken record.

Ooh boy :smiley: , my experience with him is to laugh in his face after he was just repeating the same debunked information, BTW no one else came to say my logic was bad in that discussion. As for the current one, I’m not dealing directly with the information by CIS, the other cite does already mention the problems, I’m only pointing out that the last paragraph of your CIS cite drops any pretension of fairness.

That I should laugh in your face too for never getting a clue and not looking for better sources? :slight_smile:

166

[QUOTE=Unregistered Bull]
I was pointing out some other widely based ethnic discrimination in addition to another post’s examples that were ongoing in a similar time frame. Ethnic hatred of Hispanics, which you demonstrate all the time regardless of their citizenship status, has been around for a while. You and your ilk are trying to bring it back with lies and factual omissions. You’re just the 21st century equivalent of something that is rotten to its very core.
[/QUOTE]

Define that “ilk” you have in mind, if you would be so kind. What kind of people are you referring to when you say “You and your ilk”?

While you’re at it, what are these “lies”? Please point to 1) the statement I made, 2)why you know it to be factually incorrect, and 3) evidence that I knew what I stated to be false.

167

[QUOTE=GIGObuster]
Lighten up? :slight_smile: Really, I’m having fun realizing how that silly people in the CIS are so casual in disparaging people (not just me) that for example, even while illegal, tested electronic components that did go into the Tomahawks that later kicked Saddam’s butt.
[/QUOTE]

You’re seeing offense where there is none. You are reading insult into it. I wish we had a better relationship so you would consider this possibilty more.

168

[QUOTE=levdrakon]
Yeah, I’m not denying past racism. The current “white north” vs. the “brown south” is bullshit. It’s a cheap trick to paint your opponent as a racist. Did I mention it’s a cheap trick?

Taking a look at US demographics reveals the US is 74.7% white.

Let’s look closer. 25.3% are definitely non-white. The 74.7% “white” includes 14.5% Hispanic. So if we consider Hispanics to be “brown skins” then we’re at 39.8% non-white. When we add the North African Americans, Middle Eastern Americans (e.g. Arab Americans), and Central Asian Americans we get - well I don’t know what we get exactly but what we do get is probably fairly close to the US being sorta kinda only 50% white, depending on which argument you’re in.

It’s just so easy to say “brown skins vs. whites” when what you really mean is Americans vs. Mexicans or Americans vs. Guatemalans, or Americans vs. whoever but unless you’re talking about Canada or Ireland it’s probably going to be “brown skins” because that’s so convenient.
[/QUOTE]

Your statistics are irrelevant and meaningless. Are you trying to tell me that a big segment of anti-immigrant groups in the US aren’t motivated by racism? I got news for you, güey. Racism is alive and vibrant in the US and many of the anti-immigrant factions are blatant, no holds barred racists along the lines of the KKK. Denying this fact won’t make it disappear.

It is what it is. There ain’t no fucking convenience involved.

169

[QUOTE=CBEscapee]
Your statistics are irrelevant and meaningless. Are you trying to tell me that a big segment of anti-immigrant groups in the US aren’t motivated by racism? I got news for you, güey.
[/QUOTE]

Here’s your problem, you assume that EVERYONE who holds their positions does so for the same reasons. Tha’ts simply a conclusion that you choose to make. It does not necessarily follow that their motivations or reasons are the same.

[QUOTE=CBEscapee]
Racism is alive and vibrant in the US and many of the anti-immigrant factions are blatant, no holds barred racists along the lines of the KKK. Denying this fact won’t make it disappear.

It is what it is. There ain’t no fucking convenience involved.
[/QUOTE]

And you are SOOOO wrong here. I think most peolpe on this board will attest to that. But nothing will change your mind. Happy frothing in your imaginary world for imaginary reasons.

170

[QUOTE=magellan01]
Here’s your problem, you assume that EVERYONE who holds their positions does so for the same reasons. Tha’ts simply a conclusion that you choose to make. It does not necessarily follow that their motivations or reasons are the same.

And you are SOOOO wrong here. I think most peolpe on this board will attest to that. But nothing will change your mind. Happy frothing in your imaginary world for imaginary reasons.
[/QUOTE]

You’re so full of shit the methane gas you exhale when you burb would satisfy the energy needs of Mexico City for a year.

171

[QUOTE=magellan01]
Regarding the findings from the Institutional Hearing Program, I’m not sure it pokes holds into what I’ve been saying. It was a while ago and found 25% to be aliens ( of any sort. I think TKOS’s cirte was from 2004. And they might not be that far off. From your experience, what would you estimate—in the study you cited—to be the percent of illegals in the statistic of aliens in prison? PLease calrify if I’m missing something.
[/quote]

If you are going to define “illegals” (a term that irks me to no end, in any case) as “people who entered the U.S. illegally, or overstayed their lawful period of authorized admission for reasons within their control” - well, it’s been quite a while, but I’d say a solid majority (maybe 60 - 80%) of the cases I saw were for people who were lawful permanent residents who were convicted of crimes, and were in prison for that reason. I only visited prisons in the Midwest (most frequently Stateville, near Chicago, but also prisons in Wisconsin, Ohio, Kansas, and Kentucky - my office also covered prisons in Minnesota and Michigan, but I never traveled there myself), so I don’t know whether those numbers would hold up nationwide.

It may or may not be noteworthy that our office covered Leavenworth, where substantial numbers of Marielitos were held - I don’t know how much the Marielitos may skew the statistics, but the current state of affairs with the Marielitos is that they physically cannot be deported, because Castro refuses to take them back. And prisoners cannot be held more than 6 months beyond the end of their sentences awaiting permission from their home country governments to be returned, so after 6 months, they are released under supervision and are out on the streets again. And with that particular population, hell yes, there have been problems with recidivism.

In citing immigration-related matters, it would be helpful if you spelled out abbreviations like CIS, which is also a commonly used abbreviation for Citizenship and Immigration Services (the former INS).

Why are you cherry-picking L.A. County, which is far from representative of the situation in the U.S. as a whole?

You know what would go a long way toward supporting your point? A nationwide study, conducted by an impartial organization using statistically valid research techniques, that provided even partial backing for your allegation that immigrants increase crime. So, do you have one up your sleeve somewhere?

172

[QUOTE=CBEscapee]
You’re so full of shit the methane gas you exhale when you burb would satisfy the energy needs of Mexico City for a year.
[/QUOTE]

Oh yeah? You’re so…for two years!! :rolleyes:

173

[QUOTE=Eva Luna]
It may or may not be noteworthy that our office covered Leavenworth, where substantial numbers of Marielitos were held - I don’t know how much the Marielitos may skew the statistics, but the current state of affairs with the Marielitos is that they physically cannot be deported, because Castro refuses to take them back. And prisoners cannot be held more than 6 months beyond the end of their sentences awaiting permission from their home country governments to be returned, so after 6 months, they are released under supervision and are out on the streets again. And with that particular population, hell yes, there have been problems with recidivism.
[/QUOTE]

Wow, that’s not great news.

[QUOTE=Eva Luna]
In citing immigration-related matters, it would be helpful if you spelled out abbreviations like CIS, which is also a commonly used abbreviation for Citizenship and Immigration Services (the former INS).
[/QUOTE]

What does INS stand for? Only kidding. I’ll try to remember that, particularly in discussions with you.

[QUOTE=Eva Luna]
Why are you cherry-picking L.A. County, which is far from representative of the situation in the U.S. as a whole?
[/QUOTE]

I was searching for what you described and came across that. I couldn’t find what I was looking for (what you described) and gave up. I thought that LA info was interesting in it’s own right, and also on point concerning illegals and crime.

174

Here’s a link that shines a bit more light on magellan’s CIS soulmates:

Connection of white supremicists and anti-immigrant groups

Yeah, magellan, it’s all imaginery.

175

[QUOTE=Bricker]
Question: is it heartless and cruel to want to revise our current jus soli approach to citizenship, and replace it with a jus sanguinis approach?

Are nations that now use the jus sanguinis method heartless and cruel?
[/QUOTE]

Do you talk like that when addressing a jury ? Could you please speak English?

176

CBEscapee, my reference to CIS, quoted from a different thread, was intended to show that even rabidly anti-immigrant groups agree, roughly, on the $20 billion/year figure. I should have known that magpie would sieze the opportunity of its introduction by someone who thinks he’s a xenophobic lunatic to pretend that it’s a clean source. As the farmer said. “Don’t feed 'im; but if ye do, be careful what ye feed 'im.”

He does have a point, though. You should consider that different people can reach the same conclusion for different reasons. For example, some people want to exclude Hispanics because they’ll debase our language, some because they’ll sully our culture, some because they’ll defile white women, some because they’re all criminals, some because they harbor disease. Most of the rest, well, they’re just bigots.

177

[QUOTE=CBEscapee]
Your statistics are irrelevant and meaningless. Are you trying to tell me that a big segment of anti-immigrant groups in the US aren’t motivated by racism?
[/quote]
I don’t think a “big segment” of “anti-immigration” groups in the US have even the tiniest amount of influence over what we do as a country as you think they do.

We got racists. We got KKK. Part of being American. They don’t own us, BTW.

I don’t think “it is what it is” means what you think it means.

178

[QUOTE=CBEscapee]
Here’s a link that shines a bit more light on magellan’s CIS soulmates:

Connection of white supremicists and anti-immigrant groups

Yeah, magellan, it’s all imaginery.
[/QUOTE]

That may be one of the most biased things I’ve ever read. I got through four paragraphs and was laughing too much to continue. Serioulsy, just read the first four paragrpahs. If you do not see the overt bias there is no helping you.

Unbelievable. Of course, YMMV.

179

[QUOTE=The King of Soup]
He does have a point, though. You should consider that different people can reach the same conclusion for different reasons. For example, some people want to exclude Hispanics because they’ll debase our language, some because they’ll sully our culture, some because they’ll defile white women, some because they’re all criminals, some because they harbor disease. Most of the rest, well, they’re just bigots.
[/QUOTE]

Bolding mine. Everything that you just listed were the arguments of a Bigot. Some of you old boys are just too fucking dumb to realize what you are.

180

[QUOTE=magellan01]
While you’re at it, what are these “lies”? Please point to 1) the statement I made, 2)why you know it to be factually incorrect, and 3) evidence that I knew what I stated to be false.
[/QUOTE]

Eva Luna, GIGObuster, and CBEscapee have done that in this thread several times. Every thread that you have ever made concerning immigration, supremacy of your culture in the US (and how it is the primary, best US culture), or Islam has always been your bigoted lies refuted by truth. You’re just too stubborn or stupid to realize it when someone hands you your ass on a consistent basis on about every thread participate in.