Bush to focus on illegal immigration

[CAnnoneer]

Grofaz Claudius.

 

[Camp David]

What do we mean by "iron fist?"

Immediate construction of a mile-wide minefield stretching from south Texas border to Baja, California? That would work....

 

[lostone1413]

Immediate construction of a mile-wide minefield stretching from south Texas border to Baja, California? That would work....

Got my vote!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Waitone]

I've made two points before about a wall on the border and I'll do it now because no one has made it.

First, the cost is chump change. If we can afford to build an interstate highway system we can afford to build a wall.

Second, why are we fixated on a physical barrier? We have the most capable, mobile, informed, and interconnected military the planet has ever seen. We own the night. We have surveillance systems out the ying-yang. We have the ability to project power and move materiel never seen in history. So why do we insist on solving border hopping by building a barrier. Why not use the military and its mobility and communications to our benefit. Monitor the border, determine the paths of greatest use.

Use the mobile military to intercept, harass, and interdict border hoppers. Use our capability to to breakup human smuggling rings' lines of communication and logistics. They get smart and move to another area? Fine, we just pack up and move also. Create uncertainty in the smuggler's life. Make them expend money. Make them continually have to reconstruct their infrastructure. Make them invest in their business. Raise the cost of them doing business. Raise the uncertainty of success. If necessary we can enter Mexico and de-construct assembly areas. Hey, it works both ways, Vincente! I will guarantee you a visible, noisy and mobile presence along the border will have an effect. A year or so ago a civie chopper flew over an area of a city populated with illegal immigrants and caused chaos and panic because it had the same color scheme as the Border Patrol. Right now there is no fear of our laws.

What is happening to the US is no big mystery. It is the inevitable result of refusal to enforce existing law. Bush refuses to enforce laws already on the books. Why should anyone believe him that he will enforce the new ones he proposes.

 

[PinnedAndRecessed]

Immediate construction of a mile-wide minefield stretching from south Texas border to Baja, California? That would work....

How about we confiscate any American business using illegal/criminals as employees/subcontractors. Then we sell said business at auction. My guess is we wouldn't have to do this more than once or twice.

Then we refuse any aid or welfare to any illegals. That includes emergency room services since they use our ERs as their primary care providers.

 

[longeyes]

Too bad those of us on this thread aren't running ICE (or DHS). I think we'd come up with the solutions that Mr Chertoff and his Boss believe aren't feasible. We all know it isn't happening ONLY because they don't want it to. In the end this will blow up bigtime and a lot of misery will result.

 

[macavada]

I think we'd come up with the solutions that Mr Chertoff and his Boss believe aren't feasible.

Yeah. Like minefields and "walls of bullets".

Threads like these give gun owners a bad name.

 

[CAnnoneer]

Threads like these give gun owners a bad name.

Among whom exactly? Those that hate us anyway? The undecided are better off being given the hawkish perspective too, lest they get emaciated by the preponderance of bliss-ninnistic political correctness.

 

[longeyes]

Yeah. Like minefields and "walls of bullets".

Threads like these give gun owners a bad name.

I was referring to the kinds of decisive actions that would put American citizens first, removing the "carrot." What exactly we do qua "stick" has to reflect the realities of the situation we end up facing. There's a raft of effective actions we can take that do not include violence. Should violent action be excluded? My answer is no, provided it is the last resort for self-defense and defense of our nation.

Gunowners may have a "bad name" in certain circles, but no worse than the appeasers have in our circle. We understand that the potential for violence arises when people fail to take responsible action earlier in the process. Pacifism and blissninnyism will result in this country being swamped by uninvited aliens.

 

[Capteddie]

Said it before, will say it again...

Get rid of our welfare society in which people can choose to sit at home and get paid by the gov't with our tax dollars to do nothing and instead will be forced to go out and take the jobs that the feel are beneath them. Once the jobs are taken there is no need for migrant labor and no incentive for them to come here, ie. no jobs + no welfare = no food no food = very little incentive to migrate across that border, might as well stay home and suck up some hand outs from the Mexican gov't. At this point it would be safe to assume anyone illegaly crossing the border would be up to no good and not just trying to make a living by taking jobs that Americans think they are too good for.

 

[wheelgunner.41]

Part Of The Plan

Sold down the river for a vote. Several years ago while surfing the web I went to the cfr website and found a quote by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volker that said, "The American worker's standard of living must come down". Make no mistake about it, our way of life is being taken from us bit by bit.

 

[Camp David]

Yeah. Like minefields and "walls of bullets".

Threads like these give gun owners a bad name.

Why? You think we should ignore illegal immigration? Not worry about them until they rape our women and steal our jobs? We're talking a war here, right in our backyards... think illegal immigrants aren't a problem? Ask France about them... see what they say!

 

[RealGun]

Why? You think we should ignore illegal immigration? Not worry about them until they rape our women and steal our jobs? We're talking a war here, right in our backyards... think illegal immigrants aren't a problem? Ask France about them... see what they say!

I wasn't aware that immigration of the "illegal" kind was part of France's problem. I only know of a culture clash and definitely a lack of assimilation, something that usually takes a generation, possibly two.

 

[Camp David]

I wasn't aware that immigration of the "illegal" kind was part of France's problem..

It is....

France joins EU-wide trend of trying to reduce illegal immigration
12 May 2005
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2005_05_12/europe/france_joins_europe_trend.htm
"France, which says it has between 200,000 and 400,000 illegal immigrants, on May 11 announced tough new measures to end the flow of illegal immigrants. These measures include rules to stop arranged marriages and the use of biometric visas. France is just the latest European country to increase efforts to stop illegal immigration, adopting policies that favor the regularization of skilled foreign workers."

Also see:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-11/30/content_3855749.htm

 

[RealGun]

Would a "War on Illegal Immigration" of international scope be just as costly, futile, and abusive as a war on drugs? It seems like the only real solution is for people to be asked for ID on a routine basis and that such ID would need to be relatively foolproof. That would mean that anyone's sensibilities about being asked to show "their papers" would need to be set aside. There would be no racial profiling. Literally everyone would need to be asked for proof of ID.

As others have mentioned, the other component would be severe penalties for employing an illegal immigrant. Unfortunately I think that means gestapo like raids on businesses. How far do we want to see this taken?

 

[wingman]

[QUOTE"The American worker's standard of living must come down". Make no mistake about it, our way of life is being taken from us bit by bit.][/QUOTE]


I think this is key for our "global economy" or as viewed by those in power.

 

[RealGun]

It is....

France joins EU-wide trend of trying to reduce illegal immigration
12 May 2005
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2005_05_12/europe/france_joins_europe_trend.htm
"France, which says it has between 200,000 and 400,000 illegal immigrants, on May 11 announced tough new measures to end the flow of illegal immigrants. These measures include rules to stop arranged marriages and the use of biometric visas. France is just the latest European country to increase efforts to stop illegal immigration, adopting policies that favor the regularization of skilled foreign workers."

Also see:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-11/30/content_3855749.htm

This article in today's Washington Times addresses only legal immigrants. Apparently that is their main concern at this point. At least that is all this seems to address.

France toughens controls on aliens

By Emmanuel Georges-Picot
ASSOCIATED PRESS
November 30, 2005

PARIS -- French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin announced tightened controls on immigration yesterday as part of his government's response to the nation's worst civil unrest in four decades.

Authorities will better enforce requirements that immigrants seeking 10-year residency permits or French citizenship must master the French language and integrate into society, Mr. de Villepin said.

France also will implement a stricter screening process for foreign students and plans to crack down on fraudulent marriages that some immigrants use to obtain residency, he said.

Both Mr. de Villepin and Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, his rival, have announced law-and-order measures since rioting broke out this month in depressed suburbs where many immigrants live.

The two men -- members of President Jacques Chirac's conservative party -- are expected to vie for the presidency in 2007. Both want to appear firm in response to the violence and France's broader problems absorbing immigrants.
The roughly 50,000 foreign students who come to France each year to study now will be screened by French officials in their home countries, Mr. de Villepin said.

"We want to channel our efforts to receive the best students, the most motivated, those who have a high-level study project," he said.

Marriages celebrated abroad between French people and foreigners should no longer be automatically recognized in France, Mr. de Villepin said. A measure requiring consulates to screen a couple before a foreign spouse is granted French identity papers will be brought before parliament in the first half of 2006, he said. Marriage is the main source of legal immigration to France. About 34,000 French people married foreigners from beyond the European Union last year.

The government also will propose a law next year requiring legal immigrants who want to move their families to France to wait at least two years before they can apply, an increase from the current one year.

So-called family reunions are the second-biggest source of legal immigration to France, affecting about 25,000 people in 2004.

Mr. de Villepin also said the government should better enforce a law outlawing polygamy. There are 8,000 to 15,000 polygamous families in France, according to official figures.

Some French officials cited polygamy as one reason that youths from underprivileged immigrant households joined the rioting -- saying large polygamous families caused behavioral problems and difficulty integrating into French society.

Outraged opposition politicians and human rights groups warned against fanning racism and anti-Muslim sentiment.

The violence broke out Oct. 27 near Paris and spread throughout France. While promising to ease unemployment for youths and fight racial discrimination, the conservative government also promised tighter controls.

Also yesterday, France's lower house of parliament overwhelmingly approved a new anti-terrorism bill that would increase the use of video surveillance and allow police more time to question terror suspects.

The bill would allow mosques, department stores and other potential targets to install surveillance cameras and would lengthen prison terms for terrorists and those supporting them.

It also would enable police to monitor people who travel to countries known to harbor terror training camps and would extend the detention period for terror suspects from four days to up to six days.

France already has some of Europe's toughest anti-terrorism laws, enacted after a wave of terror attacks in the 1990s by Algerian Islamic militants. But officials want to fill perceived gaps exposed by the London attacks on July 7 that killed 56 persons -- including four suicide bombers -- and improve prevention.

The bill would be the fourth addition to France's already substantial anti-terror arsenal since 2001.

 

[R.H. Lee]

Authorities will better enforce requirements that immigrants seeking 10-year residency permits or French citizenship must master the French language and integrate into society,

HA! Even France is ahead of us.

 

[NCP24]

HA! Even France is ahead of us.

Now that’s a slap in the face.

 

[longeyes]

Said it before, will say it again...

Get rid of our welfare society in which people can choose to sit at home and get paid by the gov't with our tax dollars to do nothing and instead will be forced to go out and take the jobs that the feel are beneath them.

First, the likelihood that we are going to dismantle the welfare society is nil. We do not have to wait to take action on illegal immigration until we solve The Big Problem. Secondly, there is a difference between providing welfare benefits--reasonable ones--to American citizens, who have paid into the system for years--and providing them for illegal immigrants, many of whom are getting essentially a free ride.

I say start with employers and show them you mean business. Bush's priority is not the American citizen/taxpayer; it is the illegal immigrant and the businesses that profit from them. His plan needs to be laughed out of the house.

 

[longeyes]

I agree that the globalist poobahs who are running this country envision A Great Leveling, which will mean a lower standard of living, de facto, for American workers. But they are also the same people promoting consumerism and living off debt, both foreign and domestic. These folks have been invisible for a long time, basically doing what they are doing with no popular oversight or interference. We need watchdogs to examine closely and publicly what the Greenspans of this world are doing, for us and to us.

 

[Waitone]

Last night when I has some spare time I was noodling around, "Why 6 years?" Why not 4 to match elections, or 10 to avoid partisan claims, or the ever-popular 5 years for those who are math challenged? Bush's proposal emerged in 2004. 2004 + 6 years = 2010. 2010 is the announced year of the integration of Mexico, the US, and Canada per the CFR's proposal "North American Community and some of Bush's press releases.

Curious, I have yet to see anything in print about the legislative authority being cited to integrate borders.

 

[longeyes]

Bush wants to fight illegal immigration with drones. The real drones are in D.C.

Maybe he should move the White House to Baghdad where he is comfortable fighting for liberty and secure borders.

 

[Capteddie]

First, the likelihood that we are going to dismantle the welfare society is nil.

and THAT is the ROOT of the problem.