The Solution to the Immigration Problem

If a foriegn government openly supports their citizens crossing a border and occupying another soveriegn nation's territories;

http://www.workpermit.com/news/2006_01_12/us/allow_immigrants.htm

And that nation goes so far as to have their leader appear publicly on international news programs unapologetically confirming the mass migration of their populus;

http://www.vdare.com/awall/060330_fox.htm

And that foriegn government even publishes guides on how to illegally enter a soveriegn nation and occupy its territory;

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42207



Then isn't that considered an INVASION?


Well, the best solution is to just march down there and make Mexico our 51st state and bring the benefits of US society to ALL Mexicans, which, according to Vicente Fox, is what they all want. Then they can get rid of the small-time Kleptocracy they call a government and revel in real American-style theft in office! And start paying taxes!

Ken & Sb88

Thank you for your statements, they are appreciated very much.

The most effective way to combat illegal immigration is to raise the public consciousness of the crime committed by illegals. Skip over the academic/philosophic discussions, don't get bogged down in the red herring race issue, and go directly to criminal acts committed by illegals. Publish names and photos. The goal is to equate illegal immigration with criminal activity in the mind of the public at large.

There are, what, an estimated 2 million illegals in American prisons. Their trials are a matter of public record, correct? That should provide a good start; emphasize illegal crime against American citizens. Make it a national security and public safety issue. Counter the propoganda coming out of Washington DC that 'they're just here to do the work Americans won't do' with facts, and only facts, of the numerous violent criminal activities committed by illegals.

Quote
"Texas has kicked the mexicans out once..... "

Texas did not kick the Mexicans out, they defeated the Mexican Army, and it's President, Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, signed a treaty agreement with the Republic of Texas, in the month of April of 1836, which relenquished any and all claims of the Mexico, against the lands of Coahuila y Texas, in consideration of Sam Houston releasing him.

Many Mexicans stayed on their Spainish land grantes, and fought alongside the Anglo colonists for Independence from Mexico, and one of the main reasons was the Mexicans inside Texas did not like the system of government they were forced to live under at the time by the Federalists in Mexico City, which was the "Ayuntamiento" system, consiting of government agents that were appointed by the highest ranking military officer of the Mexican Army within the "ciudad" or "villa", depending on the size of the community. The Mexicans within the area, wanted to be able instead, to vote for their "Alcade", or Mayor, etc. instead of the Military appointing them. They disliked the retired military living in the ciudad, being given preferential treatment in all matters. So they simply revolted, much like the Anglos did against Britain in the late 1700's, due to the corruptin inherent in a system that allowed the Military leadership in a small town so much political power.

So the "Reconquistadores" who have been taught revisionist history designed to make them think the Mexican Government was simply booted out by Anglos alone, in order to steal land, in my opinion would not much care for replacing that system of government. Heck, I think the corruption may be why they are leaving Mexico by the millions today, when you come to think about it.

I don't believe you, nor the majority of America wants to kick out Mexicans. I think what we want, is to remove Illegal Aliens from within our borders, no matter what race, because it is an illegal invasion of our borders, and we have no idea whatsoever who they are, and therefore any one of them could be a threat to our national security.

We the People, would simply like Congress to take certain Constitutionally described steps, to make certain our border is secure, and our shores are defended.

That is after all, their main legislative job isn't it?

Ira, the issue for the vast majority of folks--not just THR et al--has been about the illegals. Race or nationality has nothing to do with it, except for a foolish few.

Seems to me like the biggest problem, overall, is that the race-card efforts play better in the media and thus in the minds of the Congress. This diverts attention from serious efforts at efficacious changes in the laws.

Art

Art, Howdy:

I understand what you are saying, I think.

But take another look at the post, and unless I had a typo (or went off on one of my tin hat wacko diatribes) what I was pointing out by quoting him and clarifying who it is we threw out, and hope to remove in the future, is Illegal immigrants, wherever they are from.

His post said in part, "We threw the Mexicans out once, and we'll do it again"

I think his meaning was first, Texans removed the Mexican Army, not every Mexican, and that we hope to remove ILLEGAL Immigrants, be they Mexican, Syrian, Guatamalan, Iranian, etc., but often people will see the use of the word "Mexicans" as a racial thing, and not a description of Nationality.

equal but separate - America's future?

Omaha Schools Split Along Race Lines
Apr 13 10:44 PM US/Eastern
Email this story

By SCOTT BAUER
Associated Press Writer

LINCOLN, Neb.

In a move decried by some as state-sponsored segregation, the Legislature voted Thursday to divide the Omaha school system into three districts _ one mostly black, one predominantly white and one largely Hispanic.

Supporters said the plan would give minorities control over their own school board and ensure that their children are not shortchanged in favor of white youngsters.

Republican Gov. Dave Heineman signed the measure into law.

Omaha Sen. Pat Bourne decried the bill, saying, "We will go down in history as one of the first states in 20 years to set race relations back."

"History will not, and should not, judge us kindly," said Sen. Gwen Howard of Omaha.

Attorney General Jon Bruning sent a letter to one of the measure's opponents saying that the bill could be in violation of the Constitution's equal-protection clause and that lawsuits almost certainly will be filed.

But its backers said that at the very least, its passage will force policymakers to negotiate seriously about the future of schools in the Omaha area.

The breakup would not occur until July 2008, leaving time for lawmakers to come up with another idea.

"There is no intent to create segregation," said Omaha Sen. Ernie Chambers, the Legislature's only black senator and a longtime critic of the school system.

He argued that the district is already segregated, because it no longer buses students for integration and instead requires them to attend their neighborhood school.

Chambers said the schools attended largely by minorities lack the resources and quality teachers provided others in the district. He said the black students he represents in north Omaha would receive a better education if they had more control over their district.

Coming from Chambers, the argument was especially persuasive to the rest of the Legislature, which voted three times this week in favor of the bill before it won final passage on the last day of the session.

Omaha Public Schools Superintendent John Mackiel said the law is unconstitutional and will not stand.

"There simply has never been an anti-city school victory anywhere in this nation," Mackiel said. "This law will be no exception."

The 45,000-student Omaha school system is 46 percent white, 31 percent black, 20 percent Hispanic, and 3 percent Asian or American Indian.

Boundaries for the newly created districts would be drawn using current high school attendance areas. That would result in four possible scenarios; in every scenario, two districts would end up with a majority of students who are racial minorities.

naw, no typo. Odds are that "Mexican army" was the intent.

I tried Googling--unsuccessfully--for a list of names of those who died defending the Alamo. I know there were a fair number of Latin-surname folks. Heck, just look at the names of Texas counties for Mexican guys who helped in the Revolution.

Legend has it that Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna was descended from a long line of bachelors.

Art

Make it so any non-citizen is unable to receive welfare benifits. I don't give a [Edited, don't do it again -- LawDog] if their baby was born on American soil.

Bienvenido a América, ahora habla inglés

The US did takeover Mexico and the Mexican-American War. That's how we got the Western States. Why when we got to Mexico City did we not simply say "Hah, you are now a territort, state, etc."

It was well understood at that time that Mexico proper was a stinking pile of cow feces rolled in warm spoo. Why cause a situatuation that would eventually lead to Mexicans demanding full citizenship and voting rights? (Which might also mean social services and a tax drain)

It seems our forebearers had it right the first time. I just wish our current political crop could understand this.

Good Lord, time to head for the Beam. I'm sure, however, that the Bush admin. will start enforcing existing laws against these employers.
No bout adoubt it...
Shot glasses are too slow...
Biker

Our future is our past, a hundred years ago, and China's present: a vast class of lowly-paid migrant workers with no bargaining rights who work 13 hours a day, seven days a week, and sleep 12 to a room in single-sex hostels. China has untold millions in this category, flanked by a small, well-off consumer class and 750 million impoverished peasants who can no longer afford education or health care.

We keep talking about what we want, what we could do, what we should do. The point is, our government is not going to do ANY of this because it's not in the interest of the people who really run America now. And that's not us. Until we get right in the face of the people in D.C. and the friends in business they pimp for we are just blowing smoke up our own behinds.

Pass the Beam.

750 million impoverished peasants who can no longer afford education or health care.

Click to expand...

I object to this statement. A more accurate statement would be "who never could afford". Why do all of those workers work 7 days a week, 13 hours a day, in those conditions? Because its' better than what they'd have otherwise.

Give it another 3-4 generations at we'll see the majority of the peasant class gone.

It's sad and all that, but uplifting people takes generations.

Ira Aten -

For the record, I like the way you think and the way you express yourself.

Education and health care used to be free for them; it no longer is.

China is loaded with new millionaires, who profit mightily off the factory towns--usually one product per town--that have sprung up to feed the consumer lust of countries like our own. The peasants have no bargaining power because they're not allowed any; they also lack residency rights.

As you say "it's sad and all that." I'm sure our own robber barons would feel right at home in today's China witnessing progress before their very eyes.

You'll see the peasant class gone all right. Those who haven't died off will have moved to the cities to join the slave hordes.

Uplifting people takes generations? Yes, it does, if you pay people one-tenth what they might get if they had any political rights. Those, you see, were bartered away so that the economic miracle of China could take place.

I hear the students at the university in Beijing have no knowledge of what happened 17 years ago. How could they when Microsoft, Cisco, Yahoo, and Google have helped the Chinese government control all "uncomfortable" information?

These threads wouldn't get closed if people would use grown-ups' language instead of unacceptable trash-talk, and also stay on topic.

Art