Amnesty for illegal immigrants will not happen this time.....................

[Expert Humor]

Our politicians lead the league in all talk, no action.
Is blowing us some sunshine good enough?
Read what The Expert thinks:

http://www.ExpertHumor.com/







*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***

[Larry Dighera]

On 31 Mar 2006 04:48:52 GMT, (Expert Humor)
wrote in >::

>Our politicians lead the league in all talk, no action.

I wish the politicians were talking about how many of the 12 million
people currently in this country illegally have jobs, and how many of
those pay Social Security and Workers Compensation. Those
undocumented workers who have legitimate employment with the usual
deductions being made from their paychecks should be fined for illegal
entry and made to seek and secure naturalized US citizenship and the
ability to speak English; those unable to prove they are employed and
paying into Social Security and Workers Comp. need to be deported
along with their offspring.

While children of illegal aliens are currently considered to be US
citizens, perhaps it's time to amend the law (retroactively) to
exclude the children of those who cross the US border ILLEGALLY from
that right.

[Jose]

> While children of illegal aliens are currently considered to be US
> citizens, perhaps it's time to amend the law (retroactively) to
> exclude the children of those who cross the US border ILLEGALLY from
> that right.

It's the children's fault?

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jim Macklin]

To be more correct, we now have 12 million mostly unarmed
Mexican INVADERS with the goal of retaking Texas, New
Mexico, Arizona and California. And they are or appear to
be succeeding.


"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
| On 31 Mar 2006 04:48:52 GMT,
(Expert Humor)
| wrote in >::
|
| >Our politicians lead the league in all talk, no action.
|
| I wish the politicians were talking about how many of the
12 million
| people currently in this country illegally have jobs, and
how many of
| those pay Social Security and Workers Compensation. Those
| undocumented workers who have legitimate employment with
the usual
| deductions being made from their paychecks should be fined
for illegal
| entry and made to seek and secure naturalized US
citizenship and the
| ability to speak English; those unable to prove they are
employed and
| paying into Social Security and Workers Comp. need to be
deported
| along with their offspring.
|
| While children of illegal aliens are currently considered
to be US
| citizens, perhaps it's time to amend the law
(retroactively) to
| exclude the children of those who cross the US border
ILLEGALLY from
| that right.

[[email protected]]

Jose asked:
>> While children of illegal aliens are currently considered to be US
>> citizens, perhaps it's time to amend the law (retroactively) to
>> exclude the children of those who cross the US border ILLEGALLY from
>> that right.

>It's the children's fault?

I believe the children are only citizens if they are BORN in the US. I
don't think very many countries have that particular law.

I'm also not sure that "fault" applies.

The illegal immigrants, the people who hire them, and the various
governments have all allowed this mess to be created. It'll be
interesting to see how it works out.

This is rec.aviation.piloting, so to keep it in-field:
How many of the illegal immigrants come by small aircraft??

[Gary Drescher]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:NTbXf.7090$t22.1437@dukeread08...
> To be more correct, we now have 12 million mostly unarmed
> Mexican INVADERS

Uh, they're here at the behest of millions of American employers
(individuals and small businesses). That makes them invitees, not invaders.

> with the goal of retaking Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California.
> And they are or appear to be succeeding.

That's each immigrant's *goal*? As opposed to, say, wanting to provide for
their own family? Do you have evidence for this astonishing interpretation?
Or do you think evidence is unnecessary when you engage in ideological
bluster?

--Gary

[Jose]

> This is rec.aviation.piloting, so to keep it in-field:
> How many of the illegal immigrants come by small aircraft??

.... and how many children of illegal immigrants will learn to pilot
them, fuel them, or service them?

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:14:00 GMT, Jose >
wrote in >::

>> While children of illegal aliens are currently considered to be US
>> citizens, perhaps it's time to amend the law (retroactively) to
>> exclude the children of those who cross the US border ILLEGALLY from
>> that right.
>
>It's the children's fault?

If the US immigration law hadn't been broken by the parents, their
children would have been born outside the US, and been ineligible for
immediate US citizenship. To reward criminal conduct is unjust (with
the apparent exception of the Bush administration).

[Jose]

> If the US immigration law hadn't been broken by the parents, their
> children would have been born outside the US, and been ineligible for
> immediate US citizenship. To reward criminal conduct is unjust

To punish innocents is unjust. The parents aren't being rewarded, the
children would be punished.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Steve Foley]

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:14:00 GMT, Jose >
> wrote in >::
>
> >> While children of illegal aliens are currently considered to be US
> >> citizens, perhaps it's time to amend the law (retroactively) to
> >> exclude the children of those who cross the US border ILLEGALLY from
> >> that right.
> >
> >It's the children's fault?
>
> If the US immigration law hadn't been broken by the parents, their
> children would have been born outside the US, and been ineligible for
> immediate US citizenship. To reward criminal conduct is unjust (with
> the apparent exception of the Bush administration).
>

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 18:28:23 GMT, Jose >
wrote in >::

>> If the US immigration law hadn't been broken by the parents, their
>> children would have been born outside the US, and been ineligible for
>> immediate US citizenship. To reward criminal conduct is unjust
>
>To punish innocents is unjust. The parents aren't being rewarded, the
>children would be punished.

To profit from an illegal act is unjust.

The children wouldn't be punished; they'd be treated as though their
parents hadn't committed a crime by illegally crossing the US border.
To provide an incentive to illegally cross the US border is not very
intelligent.

[Jose]

> To profit from an illegal act is unjust.
>
> The children wouldn't be punished; they'd be treated as though their
> parents hadn't committed a crime by illegally crossing the US border.
> To provide an incentive to illegally cross the US border is not very
> intelligent.

Why your intense hatred? If you are born in America, you are American,
no matter what your parents did.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jim Macklin]

The ones carry and waving Mexican flags seek political power
"as Mexicans" and the over-throw of the US Government. They
are invaders. The law that has not been enforced makes it
illegal to hire undocumented workers, put the boss in jail
too.

I am all in favor of anybody wanting to be an American (USA)
citizen, but I am very unhappy with people wanting to make
American [USA] Mexico or any other country. I don't want
bribery, graft and oligarchy which are the rule south of the
USA.


"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
...
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:NTbXf.7090$t22.1437@dukeread08...
| > To be more correct, we now have 12 million mostly
unarmed
| > Mexican INVADERS
|
| Uh, they're here at the behest of millions of American
employers
| (individuals and small businesses). That makes them
invitees, not invaders.
|
| > with the goal of retaking Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and
California.
| > And they are or appear to be succeeding.
|
| That's each immigrant's *goal*? As opposed to, say,
wanting to provide for
| their own family? Do you have evidence for this
astonishing interpretation?
| Or do you think evidence is unnecessary when you engage in
ideological
| bluster?
|
| --Gary
|
|

[Jim Macklin]

That is a poem on a plaque where immigrants came ashore and
were kept in isolation quarantine for weeks while their
health and skills were checked. If we had a Ellis Island
along the Mexican border, it might apply.



"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
news:oReXf.117$v9.69@trndny01...
| Give me your tired, your poor,
| Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
| The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
| Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
| I lift my lamp beside the golden door.
|
| "Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
| ...
| > On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:14:00 GMT, Jose
>
| > wrote in
>::
| >
| > >> While children of illegal aliens are currently
considered to be US
| > >> citizens, perhaps it's time to amend the law
(retroactively) to
| > >> exclude the children of those who cross the US border
ILLEGALLY from
| > >> that right.
| > >
| > >It's the children's fault?
| >
| > If the US immigration law hadn't been broken by the
parents, their
| > children would have been born outside the US, and been
ineligible for
| > immediate US citizenship. To reward criminal conduct is
unjust (with
| > the apparent exception of the Bush administration).
| >
|
|

[Jose]

> I don't want
> bribery, graft and oligarchy which are the rule south of the
> USA.

That's not the rule here? Check out the DC area.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[[email protected]]

Jim Macklin wrote:
>That is a poem on a plaque where immigrants came ashore and
>were kept in isolation quarantine for weeks while their
>health and skills were checked. If we had a Ellis Island
>along the Mexican border, it might apply.

It was also written at a time when world and US population were much
lower, still mostly agrarian, and the US was much less socialistic than
it is today.

Ellis Island was a route for legal immigration. The major compalints
today are about IL-legal immigration, and what happens after that.

And to keep it in-group,
Jose asked:
>... and how many children of illegal immigrants will learn to pilot
>them, fuel them, or service them?
That depends on how long they get to hang around, the income status
they and their parents reach, etc. If the children were born here and
are therefore citizens (something that might need to be changed), then
they have a fair enough chance at gaining the income necessary to join
the club.

They'll have to work hard though. I hear today that our schools around
here let out at 2PM. No wonder we are not competitive.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

writes:

> Jose asked:
> >> While children of illegal aliens are currently considered to be US
> >> citizens, perhaps it's time to amend the law (retroactively) to
> >> exclude the children of those who cross the US border ILLEGALLY from
> >> that right.
>
> >It's the children's fault?
>
> I believe the children are only citizens if they are BORN in the US. I
> don't think very many countries have that particular law.
>
> I'm also not sure that "fault" applies.

One case I don't want to create, which has existed in Switzerland and
I think Germany and France (may have been fixed by EU action, my
experience with it is quite old), is where guest workers (from places
like Turkey) live their lives and raise their families in the country,
but their children have no legal right of residence there -- even
though they've rarely or never visited their "home" country, and in
some cases don't even speak the language. Possibly our approach goes
too far; and at the same time it *doesn't* cover children brought in
as infants and raised entirely here.

> The illegal immigrants, the people who hire them, and the various
> governments have all allowed this mess to be created. It'll be
> interesting to see how it works out.

Yes, lots of contributors, definitely.

> This is rec.aviation.piloting, so to keep it in-field:
> How many of the illegal immigrants come by small aircraft??

I haven't heard that it's very many.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, >, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>

[Larry Dighera]

>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:14:00 GMT, Jose >
>> wrote in >::
>>
>> >> While children of illegal aliens are currently considered to be US
>> >> citizens, perhaps it's time to amend the law (retroactively) to
>> >> exclude the children of those who cross the US border ILLEGALLY from
>> >> that right.
>> >
>> >It's the children's fault?
>>
>> If the US immigration law hadn't been broken by the parents, their
>> children would have been born outside the US, and been ineligible for
>> immediate US citizenship. To reward criminal conduct is unjust (with
>> the apparent exception of the Bush administration).
>>
>
On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 18:49:56 GMT, "Steve Foley"
> wrote in <oReXf.117$v9.69@trndny01>::

> Give me your tired, your poor,
> Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
> The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
> Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
> I lift my lamp beside the golden door.
>

Who wrote that? Is the lady with the lamp who graces the entrance to
New York harbor a French-horse? :-)

I believe the US has absorbed its share of immigrants over the
centuries.

It is anachronistic, negligent, perhaps reckless, and definitely
irresponsible for the world's leading nation to fail to appreciate the
necessity of controlled and documented movement across its borders.

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 19:17:47 GMT, Jose >
wrote in >::

>> To profit from an illegal act is unjust.
>>
>> The children wouldn't be punished; they'd be treated as though their
>> parents hadn't committed a crime by illegally crossing the US border.
>> To provide an incentive to illegally cross the US border is not very
>> intelligent.
>
>Why your intense hatred?

Why do you infer hatred in my words? I've expressed no enmity.

>If you are born in America, you are American,
>no matter what your parents did.

I believe that to be the current situation. I would suggest that it
should be changed.

[Jose]

> Why do you infer hatred in my words? I've expressed no enmity.

Disenfranchising American Citizens as a matter of policy just because
their parents committed a crime is an act of hatred. These American
Citizens did nothing wrong. (You did say that you wanted it to be
retroactive).

The Children of illegal immigrants also did nothing wrong. What is
special about =children= of legitimate citizens that they should be
citizens too, while children (born here) of foreigners (including
travellers or illegal immigrants) should not?

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Andrew Sarangan]

Larry Dighera wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2006 04:48:52 GMT, (Expert Humor)
> wrote in >::

>
> While children of illegal aliens are currently considered to be US
> citizens, perhaps it's time to amend the law (retroactively) to
> exclude the children of those who cross the US border ILLEGALLY from
> that right.


How far back retroactively are you proposing to go?

If some foreign guy shows up today wanting U.S. citizenship, and says
he wants to purchase slaves from Africa and murder the local natives,
you can bet that he will be shipped back immediately. What do you
proposed we do with the descendents of the people who did exactly that
a few hundred years ago?

[Jim Macklin]

Maybe it is, but we do occasionally have a trial, even in
DC.


"Jose" > wrote in message
m...
|> I don't want
| > bribery, graft and oligarchy which are the rule south of
the
| > USA.
|
| That's not the rule here? Check out the DC area.
|
| Jose
| --
| Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
| for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jim Macklin]

If we could just start now, citizenship if you are conceived
and born here, of parents who are here legally with a visa
that is not a student or tourist visa, in other words,
parents who come here legally with the intention of becoming
citizens.

Also, we need to have English as the official language.



"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
| Larry Dighera wrote:
| > On 31 Mar 2006 04:48:52 GMT,
(Expert Humor)
| > wrote in >::
|
| >
| > While children of illegal aliens are currently
considered to be US
| > citizens, perhaps it's time to amend the law
(retroactively) to
| > exclude the children of those who cross the US border
ILLEGALLY from
| > that right.
|
|
| How far back retroactively are you proposing to go?
|
| If some foreign guy shows up today wanting U.S.
citizenship, and says
| he wants to purchase slaves from Africa and murder the
local natives,
| you can bet that he will be shipped back immediately. What
do you
| proposed we do with the descendents of the people who did
exactly that
| a few hundred years ago?
|

[Jose]

> Also, we need to have English as the official language.

No, we need Americans to learn foreign languages. We need Americans to
learn math and science. We need Americans to get out of their coccoon
and realize that the world around them is different from Main Street.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Morgans]

"Jose" > wrote

> No, we need Americans to learn foreign languages. We need Americans to
> learn math and science. We need Americans to get out of their coccoon and
> realize that the world around them is different from Main Street.

So, Jose, what are we going to do, in our schools? How many languages are
we going to require our teachers to teach in? Should we have a different
school for each language?

America, that is USA, became what it is because it was a great melting pot,
and all
who came here made an effort to learn our ways, and contribute to our
society. Taking the approach that the rest of the US should learn the
newcomer's language does not contribute to the common good of the country.

Perhaps it is you that should get out of your cocoon.
--
Jim in NC

[Jim Macklin]

But all official transactions, such as voting and courts
should be in English.


"Jose" > wrote in message
m...
|> Also, we need to have English as the official language.
|
| No, we need Americans to learn foreign languages. We need
Americans to
| learn math and science. We need Americans to get out of
their coccoon
| and realize that the world around them is different from
Main Street.
|
| Jose
| --
| Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
| for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 21:35:21 GMT, Jose >
wrote in >::

>> Why do you infer hatred in my words? I've expressed no enmity.
>
>Disenfranchising American Citizens as a matter of policy just because
>their parents committed a crime is an act of hatred.

That is your opinion. It is certainly open to debate.

>These American Citizens did nothing wrong. (You did say that you wanted it to be
>retroactive).

Perhaps in the majority of cases that is true. But the law that
grants those born in the US US citizenship fails to address the point,
and its drafters probably overlooked the incentive it would cause if
it included those born to women who have entered the country
illegally. That needs to be fixed.

>The Children of illegal immigrants also did nothing wrong. What is
>special about =children= of legitimate citizens that they should be
>citizens too, while children (born here) of foreigners (including
>travellers or illegal immigrants) should not?

The family who nurtures and educates these children is ostensibly law
abiding and will instill that character trait in their offspring;
those who commit a crime to enter the US have patently indicated their
willingness to flout US law, and do not deserve the benefit of it.

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 23:15:28 GMT, Jose >
wrote in >::

>> Also, we need to have English as the official language.
>
>No, we need Americans to learn foreign languages.

While that may be true enough in its own right, it doesn't apply to
the issue of illegal immigrants. We are a country made up of a
diverse mix of people, and thus are subject to cultural fragmentation
pressure already. To encourage immigrants not to learn the language
spoken in the US, is to encourage deepening cultural fragmentation.
While the rich variety of individual cultural heritages is valuable
and desirable, it is subordinate to the unity of the nation.

>We need Americans to learn math and science.

And learn it better. But that doesn't seem to be germane to this
topic.

>We need Americans to get out of their coccoon and realize that the
>world around them is different from Main Street.
>

Aw, now you're picking on Mr. Honeck. :-)

At any rate, I fail to appreciate how enlightening the US citizenry
will have any impact on our failure to police our borders.

[[email protected]]

Morgans wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
"Jose" > wrote

> No, we need Americans to learn foreign languages. We need Americans to
> learn math and science. We need Americans to get out of their coccoon and
> realize that the world around them is different from Main Street.

So, Jose, what are we going to do, in our schools? How many languages
are
we going to require our teachers to teach in? Should we have a
different
school for each language?

America, that is USA, became what it is because it was a great melting
pot,
and all
who came here made an effort to learn our ways, and contribute to our
society. Taking the approach that the rest of the US should learn the
newcomer's language does not contribute to the common good of the
country.

Perhaps it is you that should get out of your cocoon.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
You are both right.
Americans need to learn more than one language, and more about the
world.
(These days, I'll settle if they will learn English and be able to find
the US on a World Map...)
However, a nation must have one official language. Observe Canada,
where in Quebec everything is and must be done in two languages. This
doubles the work. It's fine if a business wants to do this for its
customers, but to have all documents, etc. in multiple languages is
horribly inefficient. Especially in a real melting pot like
California. How many versions of a ballot or driver's ed book do you
need? English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Japanese, Chinese.......

And because this is r.a.p, in how many languages should the FARs be
published? Placards in the airplane???

[CJ]

Larry, you can never, ever whine about an off-topic post with this crap

Yes, I am speaking for the universe.

[Neil Gould]

Jim Macklin > blurted:
> m...
>>> I don't want
>>> bribery, graft and oligarchy which are the rule south of the
>>> USA.
>>
>
> "Jose" > wrote in message
>> That's not the rule here? Check out the DC area.
>>
Recently, Jim Macklin > posted:
>
> Maybe it is, but we do occasionally have a trial, even in
> DC.
>
Can you say "detainees"? I knew you could!

Neil

[Jose]

Morgans:
> So, Jose, what are we going to do, in our schools? How many languages are we going to require our teachers to teach in?

That is a red herring which addresses a different question.

Americans need to learn a foreign language. It opens many doors and is
part of a well rounded education. This is not an accomodation for
aliens, it is just good cultural sense. When you travel, you should not
expect foreigners to speak English for you. Aliens entering the US
(legally or illegally) should learn English. They should not expect us
to accomodate them any more than we should expect to be accomodated in
Germany or Hungary by English speaking storekeepers. This is a seperate
issue and a common courtesy. It works both ways.

Larry:
>>These American Citizens did nothing wrong. (You did say that you wanted it to be
>>retroactive).
>
> Perhaps in the majority of cases that is true. But the law that
> grants those born in the US US citizenship fails to address the point,
> and its drafters probably overlooked the incentive it would cause if
> it included those born to women who have entered the country
> illegally. That needs to be fixed.

Fails to address what point? As to incentive, our ancestors (of not too
many generations ago) entered this Indian nation illegally too. We just
about wiped the natives out in our self-rightousness, and now we want to
prevent others from doing the same to us? On what moral grounds?

Also Larry:
>> What is
>>special about =children= of legitimate citizens that they should be
>>citizens too, while children (born here) of foreigners (including
>>travellers or illegal immigrants) should not?
> The family who nurtures and educates these children is ostensibly law
> abiding and will instill that character trait in their offspring;
> those who commit a crime to enter the US have patently indicated their
> willingness to flout US law, and do not deserve the benefit of it.

The assumption that legitimate citizens are law-abiding is laughable.
Shall we disenfranchise the children of =all= who commit a crime?
Especially capital crimes? Certainly this is worse than failure to
submit paperwork for citizenship while working hard at low wages doing
things that Americans wouldn't be caught dead doing.

ibid:
> We are a country made up of a
> diverse mix of people, and thus are subject to cultural fragmentation
> pressure already.

And this makes us a strong nation.

> To encourage immigrants not to learn the language
> spoken in the US...

I am not encouraging that. They should learn English for the same
reasons we should learn French or Chinese.

> At any rate, I fail to appreciate how enlightening the US citizenry
> will have any impact on our failure to police our borders.

Policing our borders is not the problem (although it does contribute to
some problems). Enlightening the US citizenry may point this up. The
ADIZ is a form of policing a border too, it is equally silly, for
similar (underlying) reasons.

Websurf...:
> However, a nation must have one official language. Observe Canada...

Canada has two official languages. That's not the same as having none.
And yes, I imagine it's a bit of a problem for them, but I'm not
Canadian so I don't really know how much of an impact it has, nor
whether it is true that the French stuff is primarily for a small group
in Quebec.

When there is =no= official language, there is no mandate for multple
languages. The government can choose whichever one it wants, based on
the will of the populace. Why is that not good enough?

> Especially in a real melting pot like California.

The whole country was a melting pot once. We got by without an
'official' language fine. What's different now?

It is said that one difference is the unwillingness of new foreigners
(legal ones too) to learn new ways, and to discard old ways. I don't
know whether this is actually true, or merely xenophobic propaganda, and
I certainly don't think that foreigners should dicard old ways. Their
cultural (and language) heritage enrichens us all. I do think they
should learn the new ways (and languages) if they wish to live here.
But an "official language" doesn't address this.

What would address this is a change in our policy that every child needs
to be accomodated, and has no responsibility to accomodate himself.
This works for language, disability, religion, attitude, and anything
that can get more dollars into some district. And the underlying issue
is not with language or education, it is with money and pork.

> And because this is r.a.p, in how many languages should the FARs be
> published?

Does it matter? Can anybody read the excuse for English in which they
are written now? <g,d>

Jose




--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Flyingmonk]

Hey Larry, I thought you VERY VERY were opposed to OT posting.

The Monk

[Larry Dighera]

On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 15:22:45 GMT, Jose >
wrote in >::

>Larry:
>>>These American Citizens did nothing wrong. (You did say that you wanted it to be
>>>retroactive).
>>
>> Perhaps in the majority of cases that is true. But the law that
>> grants those born in the US US citizenship fails to address the point,
>> and its drafters probably overlooked the incentive it would cause if
>> it included those born to women who have entered the country
>> illegally. That needs to be fixed.
>
>Fails to address what point?

The point that the law permits the offspring of those who have
_criminally_ entered the US to be considered US citizens. I would
expect that Congress did not consider illegal aliens when that
provision of law was drafted.

>As to incentive, our ancestors (of not too
>many generations ago) entered this Indian nation illegally too.

Please cite the law which you assert was broken.

My ancestors entered this country legally through Ellis Island.

>We just
>about wiped the natives out in our self-rightousness, and now we want to
>prevent others from doing the same to us? On what moral grounds?

Your attempt to drag the immoral slaughter of native Americans by
European immigrants into this discussion is a reach too far for me.

>Also Larry:
>>> What is
>>>special about =children= of legitimate citizens that they should be
>>>citizens too, while children (born here) of foreigners (including
>>>travellers or illegal immigrants) should not?
>> The family who nurtures and educates these children is ostensibly law
>> abiding and will instill that character trait in their offspring;
>> those who commit a crime to enter the US have patently indicated their
>> willingness to flout US law, and do not deserve the benefit of it.
>
>The assumption that legitimate citizens are law-abiding is laughable.

The assumption that those who cross the US border illegally are
criminals is without question.

>Shall we disenfranchise the children of =all= who commit a crime?

No. We must remove the incentive to illegal immigration by rescinding
the law that grants US citizenship to those born in the US as a result
of their mothers _illegal_ immigration into the US.

>Especially capital crimes? Certainly this is worse than failure to
>submit paperwork for citizenship while working hard at low wages doing
>things that Americans wouldn't be caught dead doing.

I'm glad you raised the question of illegal immigrants doing work US
citizens won't do; that argument is a farce.

In the '60s and '70s the construction trades were filled with US
citizens (more than 80% of the work was performed by citizens). They
entered apprentice training, received a decent wage, and paid their
withholding taxes.

Now the building trades are dominated by illegal aliens who have no
training, work for peanuts, and are paid cash without contributing to
Social Security or Workers Compensation. They have taken good jobs
away from Americans, and reduced the quality of workmanship. Today
trained, SS and WC paying, union workers in the building trades
account for about 20% of those on the job.

Farm work is, and always has been, another matter. Those workers are
not needed in the Winter, and should migrate back home then.

The point is, if the illegal alien workers were paying into Social
Security and Workers Comp., they would price themselves out of the
labor market, and permit wages to rise to the point where US citizens
would consider working those jobs.

It is only through (further) flouting of US employment laws that
illegal aliens are able to secure employment in the US. Illegal
aliens are crooks, and should be dealt with as any criminals. If that
isn't true, our entire justice system should be ignored.

[Martin Hotze]

On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 16:37:13 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:

>Now the building trades are dominated by illegal aliens who have no
>training, work for peanuts, and are paid cash without contributing to
>Social Security or Workers Compensation.

... who gives them these jobs? Lawa abiding American companies?

>They have taken good jobs
^^^^
again, American companies have taken them. [1]

>away from Americans, and reduced the quality of workmanship. Today
>trained, SS and WC paying, union workers in the building trades
>account for about 20% of those on the job.

#m

[1] no US bashing here; this is true for almost every country.
--
"We're out of toilet paper sir!"
<http://www.webcrunchers.com/crunch/Play/history/stories/toilet.html>

[Jose]

> Your attempt to drag the immoral slaughter of native Americans by
> European immigrants into this discussion is a reach too far for me.

We invaded their nations, took over, and formed this one. Now we are
opposed to others "invading" ours?

> Now the building trades are dominated by illegal aliens who have no
> training, work for peanuts, and are paid cash without contributing to
> Social Security or Workers Compensation. They have taken good jobs
> away from Americans, and reduced the quality of workmanship. Today
> trained, SS and WC paying, union workers in the building trades
> account for about 20% of those on the job.

So, legal US citizens are inviting aliens to work here. The aliens are
accepting the invitation. Legal US citizens are choosing the resulting
buildings, probably because they are cheaper. Those legal US citizens
could just as easily pay more and buy Union-built houses if they want
to. They don't want to.

> The point is, if the illegal alien workers were paying into Social
> Security and Workers Comp., they would price themselves out of the
> labor market, and permit wages to rise to the point where US citizens
> would consider working those jobs.

That much is probably true. It points to the problem being elsewhere.

> Illegal
> aliens are crooks, and should be dealt with as any criminals.

That's not what you are proposing. You are proposing dealing with
=children= of illegal aliens, who are by rights US citizens by birth.

> We must remove the incentive to illegal immigration by rescinding
> the law that grants US citizenship to those born in the US as a result
> of their mothers _illegal_ immigration into the US.

I don't think that's a good idea.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Larry Dighera]

On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 19:34:55 +0200, Martin Hotze
> wrote in
>::

>On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 16:37:13 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:
>
>>Now the building trades are dominated by illegal aliens who have no
>>training, work for peanuts, and are paid cash without contributing to
>>Social Security or Workers Compensation.
>
>.. who gives them these jobs? Lawa abiding American companies?

If your competition is able to underbid you as a result of not paying
mandatory compensation (Social Security, Workers Comp., ...), if you
want to stay in business, you do the same. Failure to enforce one law
ultimately leads to failure of the entire legal system.

>>They have taken good jobs
> ^^^^
>again, American companies have taken them. [1]

Only because there are lawless workers willing to accept the jobs. If
the lawless were kept out, that worker pool would not be available,
and all workers would compete for jobs on an even playing field.

>>away from Americans, and reduced the quality of workmanship. Today
>>trained, SS and WC paying, union workers in the building trades
>>account for about 20% of those on the job.
>
>#m
>
>[1] no US bashing here; this is true for almost every country.

[Jim Macklin]

Congressman [Duke Cunningham], aides [Delay's guy just plead
guilty, for the history buffs out there, looked up Paul
Powell, Illinois Sec of State. Just to refresh the story,
as Sec of State he had all of the forms for the Sec. of
State [all registrations of cars, trucks, boats, etc.] "Make
your check payable to Paul Powell." He died suddenly and
the police found $600,000 in cash in his hotel room in shoes
boxes and another million dollars in checks he had not yet
cashed. Several of his business partners went to Brazil.
The former governor of Illinois, Otto Kerner was sent to
prison for race track fraud.
Oh, Bill Clinton plead guilty to lying to the court and gave
up his law license in a DC court.


"Neil Gould" > wrote in message
. com...
| Jim Macklin >
blurted:
| > m...
| >>> I don't want
| >>> bribery, graft and oligarchy which are the rule south
of the
| >>> USA.
| >>
| >
| > "Jose" > wrote in message
| >> That's not the rule here? Check out the DC area.
| >>
| Recently, Jim Macklin
> posted:
| >
| > Maybe it is, but we do occasionally have a trial, even
in
| > DC.
| >
| Can you say "detainees"? I knew you could!
|
| Neil
|
|
|

[Flyingmonk]

Hey Larry, I thought you were VERY VERY opposed to OT posting.

The Monk

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Jose" > wrote in message
...
>> If the US immigration law hadn't been broken by the parents, their
>> children would have been born outside the US, and been ineligible for
>> immediate US citizenship. To reward criminal conduct is unjust
>
> To punish innocents is unjust. The parents aren't being rewarded, the
> children would be punished.
>
> Jose


But I sort of doubt you'd say we should keep the child here and kick the
parents out.


But it would take a constitutional amendment to make the children born here
not citizens I doubt we could get it or any other amendment passed.

[Montblack]

("Gig 601XL Builder" wrote)
> But I sort of doubt you'd say we should keep the child here and kick the
> parents out.


You've got that flipped around. Keep the uncle, send back the kid.

<http://www.survivalarts.com/images/the_taking_of_elian_gonzalez.jpg>

<http://www.notgonnatakeitanymore.com/images/im_from_the_govt.gif>
With caption


Montblack

[Jose]

> But I sort of doubt you'd say we should keep the child here and kick the
> parents out.

No, the child should go with the parents. But the child is an American
citizen. At 18 he or she can return on their own with full rights as an
Ameican citizen. While travelling through this country, the child is
equally a citizen. That is as it should be.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

You do realize that if an illegal shows up with a social security card and a
drivers lic the employer has no way to know they are illegal?

TO make matters worst when the Soc. Sec Administration sends the employer a
letter a year or so later that says the SS number isn't correct and that the
employer should go and "Check" with the employee to see if there was a typo.
If not and the employee shows you the ID with the known bad SS#, the
employer can take NO adverse action and everything just keeps on going like
it was. In fact to take "adverse action" is a violation of federal law.

If the employee stays around more than a year you get the same letter a year
later.

So don't say the employers want to hire illegals in many cases we don't have
a choice.


"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 16:37:13 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:
>
>>Now the building trades are dominated by illegal aliens who have no
>>training, work for peanuts, and are paid cash without contributing to
>>Social Security or Workers Compensation.
>
> .. who gives them these jobs? Lawa abiding American companies?
>
>>They have taken good jobs
> ^^^^
> again, American companies have taken them. [1]
>
>>away from Americans, and reduced the quality of workmanship. Today
>>trained, SS and WC paying, union workers in the building trades
>>account for about 20% of those on the job.
>
> #m
>
> [1] no US bashing here; this is true for almost every country.
> --
> "We're out of toilet paper sir!"
> <http://www.webcrunchers.com/crunch/Play/history/stories/toilet.html>

[[email protected]]

Jim Macklin wrote:
>That is a poem on a plaque where immigrants came ashore and
>were kept in isolation quarantine for weeks while their
>health and skills were checked. If we had a Ellis Island
>along the Mexican border, it might apply.

Close enough for the cigar, especially since many people connect Ellis
Island with the Statue of Liberty on Liberty Island. But this is
closer:

The New Colossus is a poem that American poet Emma Lazarus (1849-1887)
wrote in 1883 for the Statue of Liberty, New York.

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

[Dylan Smith]

On 2006-04-01, Jose > wrote:
> That's not what you are proposing. You are proposing dealing with
>=children= of illegal aliens, who are by rights US citizens by birth.

The other issue about the children is that depending on the home country
of their parents, they may well end up being a citizen of nowhere if you
strip their US citizenship. Their parents home country might also class
them illegal immigrants. There are a few of these completely
disenfranchised people around (they carry a grey UN passport,
apparently) - usually they are this way because their home country
ceased to exist and what replaced it won't grant them citizenship. They
are pretty unfortunate - they don't have the right of abode anywhere on
the planet.

--
Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net

[Larry Dighera]

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 10:25:14 -0000, Dylan Smith
> wrote in
>::

> they may well end up being a citizen of nowhere if you
>strip their US citizenship.

Perhaps that would be sufficient deterrent to illegal immigration to
cause their parents to be more law abiding.

[Dylan Smith]

On 2006-04-06, Larry Dighera > wrote:
>> they may well end up being a citizen of nowhere if you
>>strip their US citizenship.
>
> Perhaps that would be sufficient deterrent to illegal immigration to
> cause their parents to be more law abiding.

It's highly unlikely - they may not even be aware of this consequence,
and besides they are usually fairly desperate people trying to get away
from the grinding poverty of their home countries (that's why they are
illegally immigrating in the first place).

--
Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Few of the illegal aliens that we are talking about have or will ever have a
passport form their home country be it the USA or Mexico.


"Dylan Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2006-04-06, Larry Dighera > wrote:
>>> they may well end up being a citizen of nowhere if you
>>>strip their US citizenship.
>>
>> Perhaps that would be sufficient deterrent to illegal immigration to
>> cause their parents to be more law abiding.
>
> It's highly unlikely - they may not even be aware of this consequence,
> and besides they are usually fairly desperate people trying to get away
> from the grinding poverty of their home countries (that's why they are
> illegally immigrating in the first place).
>
> --
> Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
> Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
> Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
> Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net

[Dave Stadt]

"Dylan Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2006-04-06, Larry Dighera > wrote:
>>> they may well end up being a citizen of nowhere if you
>>>strip their US citizenship.
>>
>> Perhaps that would be sufficient deterrent to illegal immigration to
>> cause their parents to be more law abiding.
>
> It's highly unlikely - they may not even be aware of this consequence,
> and besides they are usually fairly desperate people trying to get away
> from the grinding poverty of their home countries (that's why they are
> illegally immigrating in the first place).

In some cases that is true but many of them now are saying they want to make
this country just like Mexico. In other words they want to turn the US into
a corrupt third world country with no economy.

> --
> Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
> Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
> Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
> Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net

[Larry Dighera]

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 13:54:06 GMT, "Dave Stadt" >
wrote in >::

>many of them now are saying they want to make
>this country just like Mexico.

Actually, from what I hear, Mexico is continuing its surreptitious
invasion of the USA in the attempt of regaining the land it lost.
Don't laugh. Hispanics are now the majority in Los Angeles.

[Jose]

>>they may well end up being a citizen of nowhere if you
>>strip their US citizenship.
>
> Perhaps that would be sufficient deterrent to illegal immigration to
> cause their parents to be more law abiding.

Don't be silly.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Matt Barrow]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
et...

> In some cases that is true but many of them now are saying they want to
> make this country just like Mexico. In other words they want to turn the
> US into a corrupt third world country with no economy.
>

IOW: Just like the place they are/were
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO so anxious to leave.