Will the "Immigrant Boycott" shut down any airports?

JH wrote:
We are finding it
truly enjoyable to watch as all the corrupt hoteliers who hired illegal
aliens in the first place -- basically everyone else in the lodging
industry -- panics about their plight.

I ran out of gas near the Arlington Semetary once and hitched a ride on
a tour buss full of hoteliers, here in DC for their hoteliers'
convention. 90% of the them on the bus were Indians (East). Looks
like the hotel business are "monopolised" by Indians, the Police used
to be by the Irish, the construction industries will be the Latinos,
more and more of them are becoming subcontractors and general
contractors now, not just laborers or mechanics any longer.

The Monk

Jay Honeck opined

snip

As others have pointed out, due to the post 9/11 security checks, there can be
no illegals working at airports. So, the boycott will have no effect on commercial
aviation .


-ash
Cthulhu in 2005!
Why wait for nature?

Anyone have any idea if the airlines have contingency plans for this
sort of thing? What'll they do if there's no one to unload the
planes?

Same thing they do when there's any other kind of strike - make the
passengers wait and claim there's a "malfunction" or somesuch.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jay Honeck wrote:


Given the number of "immigrants" working at major big city airports, I
can foresee some major problems if this thing really takes off. From
my casual observances as an airline passenger, LAX, LAS and ORD seem to
have literally hundreds of Hispanic laborers working in all aspects of
operations, from baggage handling to ground ops. If they all boycott
work tomorrow...


Jay

You are making the assumption that most Hispanic laborers at airports
are all working illegally. This is one type of misunderstanding that
aggravates the situation. Just because someone looks different does not
mean they are an immigrant, or even illegal. I know bona fide Americans
who are still referred to as immigrants.

("Andrew Sarangan" wrote)
You are making the assumption that most Hispanic laborers at airports are
all working illegally. This is one type of misunderstanding that
aggravates the situation. Just because someone looks different does not
mean they are an immigrant, or even illegal. I know bona fide Americans
who are still referred to as immigrants.


The misunderstanding is on your part. The influx of "ILLEGALS" has been
massive, and rapid.

The INS, on their best day (so to speak), couldn't process a tiny fraction
of the people who have invaded our country over the last 10 years. The INS
is clogged and broken down - we know, we've had a number of friends needing
to deal with the INS, becoming citizens.

And BTW, aggravate WHAT situation? Oh, I know! The situation of 10's of
millions of ILLEGALS flooding our shores.

When I see a Mexican on the streets of Minnesota, my assumption is
"Illegal". I bet I'm right over 75% of the time. I'm giving you 1 in 4 ...as
a peace offering to the God of Diversity.


Montblack :-o
http://www.filipino-americans.com/
"Hey, I'm not Mexican, I'm Filipino ...No problem, I get that a lot these
days."

"Montblack" wrote in message
...
The misunderstanding is on your part. The influx of "ILLEGALS" has been
massive, and rapid.

Andrew never said it wasn't. All he said (implied, actually) was that most
Hispanic airport workers are legal. Given the background checks they
presumably go through, I'd say that's a pretty safe assumption, regardless
of what one might think about the prevelance of illegals in other jobs.

The INS, on their best day (so to speak), couldn't process a tiny fraction
of the people who have invaded our country over the last 10 years. The INS
is clogged and broken down - we know, we've had a number of friends
needing
to deal with the INS, becoming citizens.

INS is screwed up, as is much of our government. No doubt about that. I
have plenty of personal experience with the INS to confirm your assertion.
I'm not clear on how that is relevant to the question of who should be
permitted to immigrate to the US, or what to do with those who decide to do
so illegally.

And BTW, aggravate WHAT situation? Oh, I know! The situation of 10's of
millions of ILLEGALS flooding our shores.

I love it when people use vague terms like "flooding". A word like that, in
this context, has no use but to evoke an emotional response in an attempt to
bypass rational analysis of the issue. Especially when you use made-up
numbers like "10's of millions". As of 2003, the *TOTAL* estimated number
of illegal immigrants living in the US was fewer than 10 million (7 million,
to be exact). It's not even ONE ten million, never mind "10's of millions".

Compare that to the US birth rate (4 million annually), and the *legal*
immigration rate (about 1 million annually).

In other words, every 18 months the United States adds the same number of
legal residents as the TOTAL number of illegal residents. With an estimated
annual increase of illegal residents of only 350,000, illegal residents
account for less than 7% of the population growth in the US. A significant
number, to be sure, but hardly "flooding" IMHO.

When I see a Mexican on the streets of Minnesota, my assumption is
"Illegal". I bet I'm right over 75% of the time.

It seems to me that that has more to do with the relative proportion of
legal and illegal Mexicans within the US than it does with the total number
of illegal immigrants (even assuming you're right as often as you think).

Pete

I love it when people use vague terms like "flooding". A word like that, in
this context, has no use but to evoke an emotional response in an attempt to
bypass rational analysis of the issue. Especially when you use made-up
numbers like "10's of millions". As of 2003, the *TOTAL* estimated number
of illegal immigrants living in the US was fewer than 10 million (7 million,
to be exact). It's not even ONE ten million, never mind "10's of millions".

Well, Pete, Reuter's thinks you're wrong by a few million:
************************************************** *************************************************
WASHINGTON - A one-day nationwide strike and business boycott gathered
steam on Monday to demand legal rights for millions of illegal
immigrants, with many U.S. businesses shutting down voluntarily to
avoid disruption. Early reports suggested many of the estimated 11.5-12
million illegal immigrants in the country were staying away from work,
despite a mixed message from immigrant-rights organizations, some of
which opposed the action.
************************************************** *************************************************

I wonder how they estimate the number of illegal aliens? It's not like
they're standing around, asking to be counted.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
I love it when people use vague terms like "flooding".
A word like that, in this context, has no use but to evoke
an emotional response in an attempt to bypass rational
analysis of the issue. Especially when you use made-up numbers
like "10's of millions". As of 2003, the *TOTAL* estimated number
of illegal immigrants living in the US was fewer than 10 million
(7 million, to be exact). It's not even ONE ten million, never
mind "10's of millions".

Well, Pete, Reuter's thinks you're wrong by a few million:

************************************************** ************
WASHINGTON - A one-day nationwide strike and business boycott
gathered steam on Monday to demand legal rights for millions of
illegal immigrants, with many U.S. businesses shutting down
voluntarily to avoid disruption. Early reports suggested many of
the estimated 11.5-12 million illegal immigrants in the country were
staying away from work, despite a mixed message from immigrant-rights
organizations, some of which opposed the action.
************************************************** **************

I wonder how they estimate the number of illegal aliens? It's not
like they're standing around, asking to be counted.


The actual number is irrelevant. The point is there is a ****-load of them
here, and they are still coming at a rate of about 1,000,000 a month (give
or take a few thousand).

This is a direct result of the out of control birth rate in 3rd world
countries. The population explosion is coming home to roost, so to speak.
Like global warming, we probably have passed the point of no return in
regard to getting the world's population under control. Do not expect life
for your children to be better than yours. Until the world's population is
stabilized, and then reduced, expect more illegal immigration, terrorists,
wide-spread diseases, social unrest, and anything else that results from
over-crowded countries unable to contain their hordes of uneducated,
starving, and desperate masses. Granted, Mother Nature will probably
stabilze and correct this problem, but her solution will be
non-discriminatory and affect everyone, whether you are the problem or not.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
Well, Pete, Reuter's thinks you're wrong by a few million:

Well, when Reuter's explains how they get their number, then we can discuss
that. Until then, the US Census Bureau seems to have a pretty good handle
on things:

http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/shared...eport_1211.pdf

Even accounting for an estimated 1.8 million added since 2000, that's only 9
million. In any case, even if you believe Reuter's, the numbers are ALL in
the same ballpark, and not anywhere close to Montblack's claims.

I wonder how they estimate the number of illegal aliens? It's not like
they're standing around, asking to be counted.

They use a very similar process to that used to count the rest of us. Do
you stand around, asking to be counted?

If you really care about the details, it's all in the report. Read it. You
might learn something.

Pete

("Peter Duniho" wrote)
[snips]
INS is screwed up, as is much of our government. No doubt about that. I
have plenty of personal experience with the INS to confirm your assertion.
I'm not clear on how that is relevant to the question of who should be
permitted to immigrate to the US, or what to do with those who decide to
do so illegally.

Stop them. Turn them back. Return them.

I love it when people use vague terms like "flooding". A word like that,
in this context, has no use but to evoke an emotional response in an
attempt to bypass rational analysis of the issue. Especially when you use
made-up numbers like "10's of millions". As of 2003, the *TOTAL*
estimated number of illegal immigrants living in the US was fewer than 10
million (7 million, to be exact). It's not even ONE ten million, never
mind "10's of millions".

Compare that to the US birth rate (4 million annually), and the *legal*
immigration rate (about 1 million annually).

Three points:
1. "INS is screwed up, as is much of our government. No doubt about that."
Total 2003 estimated numbers of "illegals" is a GOVERNMENT driven number. I
chose to believe my own lying eyes.

2. What do you see more of when you're out and about - babies or Mexicans?
Between 1947 and 1967 that answer would have been babies. g

3. I've lived next to the Mississippi River all of my life - "flooding" is
not a vague term

In other words, every 18 months the United States adds the same number of
legal residents as the TOTAL number of illegal residents. With an
estimated annual increase of illegal residents of only 350,000, illegal
residents account for less than 7% of the population growth in the US. A
significant number, to be sure, but hardly "flooding" IMHO.

You're in love with the numbers, but unfortunately, lost in them too. The
parade is over here, Pete.

When I see a Mexican on the streets of Minnesota, my assumption is
"Illegal". I bet I'm right over 75% of the time.

It seems to me that that has more to do with the relative proportion of
legal and illegal Mexicans within the US than it does with the total
number of illegal immigrants (even assuming you're right as often as you
think).

Somewhat agree here, however, we're now back to square one - what is the
real number of illegals hunkering down within our infrastructure? My eyes
tell me our Government has lost ALL control of even counting them!

Pete, they're everywhere - in numbers.


Pablo Montblack