[QUOTE=tomndebb]
So, you are saying that if you arrive from Mexico aboard an airliner that departed Mexico City, Acupulco, or Cancún you are treated differently than people arriving at the same airport from other places in the world?
Or, are you saying that people who arrive aboard ships in the Ports of New York, Los Angeles, Miami, or Seattle are treated differently depending on whether they arrive from Mexico, China, Ghana, or Portugal?
Or, are you saying that an illigal alien discovered roaming around Des Moines or Indianapolis or Peoria is treated differently, depending on what country the person left to get here?
Or, as seems much more likely, are you pointing out that there happens to be a procedure in place to deal with the limited number of people (at one time) who enter the U.S. through the confines of an airport terminal, which coincidentally affects rather more people from places other than Mexico than people from Mexico, and you have drawn the fallacious inference that we have a policy of treating people differently by nation of origin when, in fact, we simply have a policy that addresses one form of transportaion more effectively than other forms of transportation.
If one class of people use only one main means of transportation to do something illegal, such as Latin Americans, and you use different means and penalties to deal with them different from others who do the same thing, then indeed that is discrimination of a racial kind. An example would be passing city ordinances to prohibit the wearing of certain kinds of suits, when only one class of people in the main wear such clothing, is indeed discriminatory of a racial kind. If a city were to pass an ordinance against wearing kilts, I would consider that to be discriminatory against Scots, even though it would apply to myself as well and not just Scots.
The same is true when the majority of illegals from south of the border are from Latin America and when they are caught, they get a different standard of treatment from the authorities who let a good percentage of them go on their way. Others who enter illegally from other points on the border are not so treated. I would suggest that if you wish to be non-discriminatory, either all who cross the borders illegally get prison, or that an equal percentage of those on our other borders get the same kind of break. Then I would agree it would not be preferential.
Turning people away at the gate does nothing to address the issues surrounding “voluntary deportation” and you seem to have drawn some rather inaccurate inferences based on your anecdotal awareness of one particular situation.
[/QUOTE]
The situation that affected our crewman was that he was not totally illegal, just out of date on his permits. I wish that he had been shown the same kind of consideration given to the illegals who were caught crossing the border, but were given a ticket to appear. That they are given such an option in many cases and he was not, is rank discrimination. AS it was he was not allowed to work the flight and resulted in a major delay. We had to fly another pilot up to take his place so that we could leave Canada. I think that issuing a ticket, as many illegals who have no documentation at all get would have been right. He should have been from south of the border and he probably would have been allowed in with all the hell that could have been raised with racial discrimination charges.