Homeland Security??????? For shame!!

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Azizi
Date: 27 Aug 07 - 01:36 AM

I suppose that you may have figured out that I neglected to type one important word in the first sentence of my last post. But just in case you didn't here it is:

"Imo, to focus on pdq or Ron Davies or Sorcha or Big Mick or Little Hawk or whether any other poster is mean spirited or righteous or not is to lose sight of the main concern of this thread."

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Azizi
Date: 27 Aug 07 - 01:32 AM

Imo, to focus on pdq or Ron Davies or Sorcha or Big Mick or Little Hawk or whether any other poster is mean spirited or righteous or not is to sight of the main concern of this thread. It seems to me that that is not the point of this thread!

It seems to me that our focus should be on the meanspirited and meanly done actions of those who targeted those persons who they thought were illegally in the United States. It also seems to me that our focus should also be on what we UnitedStaters should be doing about that kind of mean behavior, a behavior which should not only not be the norm, but should not ever happen in the United States or elsewhere, and definitely not happen at the command of those representing in any way, the United States.

Amos' post of 24 Aug 07 - 07:05 PM focuses on that mean behavior. When Mick spoke of the possiblilty of the union suing on behalf of some of these persons that addresses the "what should we do about this" point.

Another action statement is throwing the bums out in 2008 and as much as possible thereafter, cleaning house and being vigilent thereafter to be sure that our house stays clean.

Anybody else have any more action statements?

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: pdq
Date: 26 Aug 07 - 11:20 PM

Sorcha:

Your comment was both mean-spirited and completely irrelevant.

I hope you feel better now. Hate to think you would take your frustrations out on your dogs, your husband or your children.

Yes, a stranger make a much better punching bag. Give it your best shot. Glad I could help.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Aug 07 - 10:46 PM

Ron, I have to say that your debating style remains as snide and condescending as ever. Your treatment of your rhetorical foes on this forum embarrasses me even on the fairly frequent occasions when I agree with you about something. And I so often disagree with pdq... ;-)

I hope you are not that nasty in person, Ron.

As regards the debate, I tried to read this frikkin' thread and sort out all the arguments pro and con, but I started getting a headache after awhile, and decided it just ain't worth it.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Sorcha
Date: 26 Aug 07 - 09:58 PM

Send him out here to chop beets for a month or so in 104F weather. He might decide he actually likes migrants/immigrants.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Aug 07 - 03:08 PM

I'm still waiting as well.............

No answers to the questions posed, no facts to back up the points. And when Ron, politely as best as I can tell, simply asks for those, he accused of being a flamethrower. I don't see any evidence of that either.

Ebbie also asked for a cite as I recall....

Mick

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Aug 07 - 12:37 PM

pdq--

So sorry you miss "Martin Gibson". Obviously a soulmate of yours--you have traits almost as endearing as his--perhaps you can succeed him in our affections. But meanwhile, I sincerely hope you find him soon. At least you can commiserate about the unfairness of Mudcat--in whatever bathroom you find him.

Fascinating that you still have found precisely zero facts to back up your allegations about immigration. Perhaps when you do, the thread can actually progress.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Sorcha
Date: 26 Aug 07 - 12:28 PM

Still waiting for facts. And I, for one, don't WANT to do the jobs that most illegal immigrants do. Pick fruit, thin sugar beets, put the kids to work as soon as they are able to climb a ladder or hold a hoe.

Live in a shack with no running water, no toilet facilities...we ARE taking advantage of these people. If we ban them all, will our PhDs climb ladders and hoe beets in 100 F plus weather? A drink of water and a porta potty at the end of each row.

Then pack up the truck and move someplace else to pick something else. No permanent home, no real friends, no real school...tell me a choice they have.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: pdq
Date: 26 Aug 07 - 12:24 PM

To anyone who is stil interested in this thread, please note who throws gasoline on fires, who flames, trolls and who can't "let it go" like most grownups can. It must make him feel better to be Mudcat's most consistant jerk. He was also the most vocal attacker of Martin Gibson who must have made him feel small and inadequate. Unfortunately, he feels that way because it is simply true.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Aug 07 - 12:06 PM

pdq--

"...start brain before throwing mouth in gear"-- you must have been looking in the mirror--good observation, by the way. Perhaps you'd like to try it someday.

For instance---still no facts? That's disappointing, since without facts--with exact source and date, of course-- we may be forced to the conclusion that your only contribution to the debate on immigration is alarmist tripe--(e.g. "32 million Mexicans who snuck (sic) into the US".)   

And we wouldn't want to have that impression, I'm sure you agree--particularly from a person of such towering intellectual achievement as your good self.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Amos
Date: 25 Aug 07 - 11:42 AM

PDQ--

I suggest you may want to examine whether there is some flavor in your editorial style that leads people to wrong conclusions about your thoughts. Did you notice that Jane already came to your defense?

I apologize for overlooking what you had said.

I think as far as the immigration issue is concerned that we need to examine exactly what real harm is being done, measured in real terms, rather than succumb to fiery jingoistic rhetoric. For example those who are fiercely opposed to the well-being of existing undocumented immigrants are quite certain, they say, that they are costing the country millions. But they do not mention that the majority of these people are paying taxes in the hopes it will help them become citizens. That is my understanding, anyway. I don't really have a hard head count either, and without some sort of metrics, we are are basically debating in a black hole.

A

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: pdq
Date: 25 Aug 07 - 09:29 AM

To anyone who is reading this thread, please go back to my first post and see what I really said. It is: 23 Aug 07 - 04:06

In it is: "The raid reminds me of Janet Reno's jack-booted attack on the house where Illian Gonzales was staying."

In my 24 Aug 07 - 12:16 post I said: "I don't rationalise the actions of the actions of these jack-booted thugs anymore than you do."

Still, there are probably 20 post saying that I liked the way the raid was handled.

The people attacking me either cannot read or have low comprehension skills.

Several people on Mudcat go into attack mode whenever the preceive a threat to their territory. After 4 1/2 years here, I know who most of them are and can anticipate, within limits, what they will say. Some here should learn to "start brain before throwing mouth in gear".

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: pdq
Date: 25 Aug 07 - 08:58 AM

In his 12:48 post, Big Mick said "you lack the intellectual gravitas to take an issue on head up."

Hence the explanation of my eductional background.

As far as this thread and my contributions to it, I simply asked people to be honest and tell others whether they are in favor of the illegal immigration from Mexico or not

If they consider it to be a problem, what are prepared to do about it.

Trying to blame me for problems the Irish had 150 years ago, suggesting that I favor the tactics used in the Swift Co. raids is absurd. You are inventing that crap, probably because you can't answer the question.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Janie
Date: 25 Aug 07 - 01:30 AM

Amos,

In an earlier post, addressed to Mick, pdq does say I don't rationalise the actions of the actions of these jack-booted thugs anymore than you do.

I don't think he is advocating or condoning brutal treatment.

As I read back through the thread, he actually seems just to be trolling. Pretty good at it, too. Oh well. Live and learn. I'll know better than to bite in the future.

It's sad, though. Such a waste of a degree in hard science and 9 hours towards a masters.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Janie
Date: 25 Aug 07 - 01:03 AM

Every time I fail to parrot the DNC talking points I expect to be compared to Hitler, called a rascist or be accused of being an intellectual lightweight. I could care less about such childish name-calling. from pdq.

If you often find yourself compared to Hitler, et. al.,, you always have the option of examining why you choose to communicate in ways that are deliberately designed to provoke such reactions.

My entire point on this thread has been to make people think about the Mexican illegal immigration and see if they really want it to stop. If so, what is the best way to proceed.

Which leads us to wonder, if that is indeed your intent, why you don't clearly, and with intellectual integrity, state that to begin with.

I have a degree in the hard sciences and 9 units toward a masters degree. I want to hear people discuss facts, not make then up

What is your point in sharing that little tidbit of information? If you have some particular expertise or academic knowledge about immigration that would contribute to any or all of us arriving at a more informed opinion about immigration policy, or the use or misuse of officially sanctioned power and authority, please share it. I, for one, greatly value hearing from people who have particular expertise about a topic under discussion.



Janie

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Amos
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 11:51 PM

PDQ:

Given even that some of the people targeted by this raid came into the United States without correct process and approval from those already here, why does that justify violence and brutal treatment? Where's the explanation or defense for the kind of behaviour that should be reserved for hardened criminals if that? Do you justify this kind of procedure in a "raid""?

A

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Big Mick
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 10:59 PM

First off, the apology stands and was offered sincerely. Whether you are gracious enough to accept it is on you.

As to your charge of baiting, I know you will find this hard to understand and accept, but I honestly don't have time to remember every detail of every person. The use of "s/he" is not a bait. It is a polite way of not assuming, when one is not sure, that a poster is male or female. I honestly couldn't remember if you were a male or female. Obviously that offends your delicate sensibilities. See a pro about that.

As to your sterling education, congratulations. I am sure your Mother is very proud. What the hell does that have to do with the discussion? BTW, in my life I have seen a great many folks that had great educations, alway liked to trumpet them, usually as a cover for the fact that they didn't know what the hell to do with said education. I don't know if that fits you but FYI, as it has as much relevance to the discussion as your point.

And what arrogance lead you to believe that the folks in this thread weren't thinking about illegal immigration? It is a central facet to the discussion.

Finally, you still haven't answered the questions posed. Let me try again. Dropping for the moment all the discussion of race, ethnicity, or the 4th Amendment...... what justification was there, when all they were doing was checking documentation, for coming in like they were raiding a terrorist training camp? And even if they caught some astounding number of undocumented folks, how does this make our "homeland" more secure from terrorists? Can you produce any links to terrorism from the illegal immigration problem? C'mon MISTER pdq. Wrap all that education you are parading out around that one, please. And I would think that a person claiming a background in hard science would be loaded with data and not very likely to make gratuitous assertions.

Mick

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 10:58 PM

Whatever you say, pdq. After all, you've always been right about everything so far. I note with interest your patented subtlety and willingness to always give direct answers to questions.

But we're still standing by to be entertained by your picture of the US in chaos as a result of immigration. Please don't disappoint your fans.

Not that anybody would want to characterize your posts so far on the topic as incendiary drivel. Which somebody might be tempted to do if you can't provide any facts.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: pdq
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 10:47 PM

Dear "Ronbo" Davies:

Nothing in your post has anything to do with me. Nothing to do with anything I have said and nothing to do with anything I believe.

You are very dishonest in your style of arguing and everyone but you knows that to be a fact.

When you want to be civil and rational, let people know. Until then, go blow goats.

Your wife Jan married down, bigtime.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 10:34 PM

pdq--

So, if we do not "speak with one voice"--(why do I have the suspicion that voice is to be yours?)--"you will lose this country"--"see this country dissolve into a 3rd world slum".

Rather apocalyptic, I'd say. The country will "dissolve into a 3rd world slum" due to illegal immigration. Nothing like a bit of hyperbole to liven up a post. Congratulations.

It sounds for all the world like "Before September 11, many in the world believed Saddam Hussein could be contained".

Same degree of truth and relevance to listeners' problems. Same goal--to panic the listeners and give them a scapegoat.

Now I realize that as a stalwart Bush supporter you respond primarily to hate and fear--(and probably imagine others do too)-- especially fear of "the other"--that is, anybody different from you.

But actually some people respond to other arguments, logic for instance. At some point you might want to try it.

And on this topic (immigration), not even Mr. Bush is with you. Fortunately, you have another mighty leader to look to for inspiration: Mr. Tancredo, who is busily splitting the Republican party and leading it on this issue---down the drain. As a registered Republican, I can't say this is exactly a happy prospect, but since Republicans at the national level since Ike or maybe Dole--a good man, but surrounded by Neanderthals-- have not stood for anything a sentient being would support, I suppose it's all to the good.

But perhaps you'd like to give us more details of just how immigration will make us a 3rd world country. ( Funny how very similar things were said of the Irish in New York City--which did at one point have some of the worst slums in the world. That well-known bigot, Walt Whitman, argued in 1842 that city Democrats should not submit to a "coarse unshaven, filthy Irish rabble". And I'm sure the rest of the 1840's did not make him happy.)

So exactly how is this dire fate to befall the US? I'm sure you can be entertaining, if not informative.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Sorcha
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 10:16 PM

"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."

Well? Free? Who? Where? Let's just knock down Lady Liberty as she means nothing anymore for anyone.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: pdq
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 10:04 PM

Big Mick:

I am a he and have made that clear many times so you can knock off the gender baiting, big guy.

I was not here to answer your response because I was grading a lot where I hope to build a spec house next year. My tractor is a full-sized Case, big enough to pick Bobert's Kubota up and dump it in the river (I would not do that, of course, because I am a conservationist and don't like pollution).

Every time I fail to parrot the DNC talking points I expect to be compared to Hitler, called a rascist or be accused of being an intellectual lightweight. I could care less about such childish name-calling.

I have a degree in the hard sciences and 9 units toward a masters degree. I want to hear people discuss facts, not make then up.

My entire point on this thread has been to make people think about the Mexican illegal immigration and see if they really want it to stop. If so, what is the best way to proceed.

Some people like Joe Offer want a completely open border with Mexico and don't mind if we take care of all their problems at US government expense. He is entitled to his opinion and is honest enough to share it. It is people with hidden agendas who need a swift kick in the butt.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Big Mick
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 09:21 PM

Exactly, Amos, and that is a distinction that many of our mentally lazy brethren and sistren fail to consider. One of the downsides of American life is that we want everything fast and easy. And so many of the right wingers, champions of simplistic "right or wrong" thinking, want to talk about the Founding Fathers and what they envisioned. But when the words that the founding Fathers get in they way of their oversimplified sense of right and wrong, they quickly obfuscate and slip off into phony predicates with a red herring appetizer.

"We hold these truths to be self evident......"

Mick

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Big Mick
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 09:14 PM

In my last post I said:

Stop the raids which attempt to cast too broad a net, and in the process end up victimizing honest, hard working citizens. Your racism is showing, there.

I then left and went out to work on laying subfloor in my barn. Hard work is a good time for reflection, and I found myself pondering my response to pdq. And it became clear to me that while pdq and I are going to disagree mightily on this subject, there is absolutely nothing s/he has said that would justify my suggesting that s/he is a racist. I am embarassed that I let my passion get away from me, and I hope that my sincere apology for that statement is accepted. It is offered without reservation and sincerely.

Mea culpa, mea culpa. Now, ..... back to the discussion.

Mick

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Amos
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 07:05 PM

The core issue is not whether these people are here properly or are here improperly. The core question is whether or not they are people, in the sense of common civility and the spirit of inclusion defined by the self-evident beliefs enumerated in the Declaration of independence.

If they are, in fact, human beings in that sense, they have been treated unconscionably by other people who, had they been acting privately, would have been actionable as criminal thugs. That they should instead be representative of the United States government is an insult, in my opinion, to me and to each of us who honors human inclusion, recognition and mutual respect as a basic principle of civilization.

To deny the fundamental humanity of individuals because one is in some legalistic adversarial posture in relation to them is essentially a psychotic answer to a problem -- the kind of psychosis that typifies Rovian political manuvers and Bushian faux-leadership in the service of selected interests.

A

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Janie
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 06:43 PM

Thanks Mick and Barry. That was the point I was trying to make in my late night post early on in the thread with a scrambled insomniac brain. These tactics endanger the rights and freedoms of all of us.

Janie

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 01:57 PM

This action makes it look as if the government is doing something about illegal immagration, pure & simple, IT IS NOT, it puts the focus on the Latino community & espically the Mexican/American as an ethnic group but tosses in any Latino in the process (this is how the republicans win the Latinio vote???) & use them as the scapegoat because it wants to blame illegal immigration for it's poor economics, it's poor health care system, it's poor educational system & espically it's poor economic growth & it wants to control them as a labor pool. Blame the Mexicans, Hitler (& our bastards are no better than the SS's) did this with the Jews. We are not doing anything about illegal immagration except blame them for our own faults nor do we intend to do anything aside from building fences for show & raiding some companies like vikings. Homeland Security, bullshit! We want & need these immagrants they support our economy & we can't do without them but they are also a problem in the eyes of the public only because of the spin that's put on the situation, THEY PRESENT NO HARM to our economy, they actually help it, to their own costs. We could do more & do better but that would not suit our wants, disires & profit margins nor would it do us good to give them any say or voting rights that would give them a say in how their lives are led. If you take the politics & big business issues out of the immagration equation the issue would become a whole lot simpler & clearer. If we need workers & they are willing to work, wait & prove themselves & contruibte then let them become citizens, easy, but not when you start thinking about where they're votes might fall & how they won't be as easily taken advantage of anymore, then it starts getting difficult.

As far as I'm concerned these are human & civil rights violations, not only of our own laws but also of international law, as well as laws pertaining to torture. Who the fuck does this government think they are to violate our Constitution, our Amendments & our Bill of Rights like this. This is a crime against all of us, it affects all of us, those are OUR RIGHTS that they are in violation of NO MATTER WHAT EXCUSE THEY USE, or who they are focusing on, they belong to US. DON'T TREAD ON ME!

Barry

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Big Mick
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 12:48 PM

Now, suppose you take the statement in whole, here it is:

Suppose I agree that illegal immigration is a problem that needs addressing (I do, by the way).

Who is being dishonest now? And you aren't good enough to read my mind, never mind my words. I agreed that there is a problem.

As to answers, it is simple. Follow the Constitution and laws of this country. Stop the raids which attempt to cast too broad a net, and in the process end up victimizing honest, hard working citizens. Your racism is showing, there. I notice you chose not to address the fact that over 90% of those detained were citizens or legal resident aliens, many veterans or long term employees. You choose to ignore the real problem, which is an erosion of civil liberties. You choose to allow these buffoons, in the name of Homeland Security, to victimize your fellow citizens, when there is not one shred of evidence that any of this has to do with that issue. It is a ploy that was hatched to take the focus away from legitimate Homeland Security items like harbor security, where the Department is wholly ineffective. This is probably due to lack of funding because our budget is being wasted on another boondoggle. So instead we choose to violate the constitutional rights of another whole segment of our society, but ...... hey ..... it's OK because they are just Mexican Americans...... and they are taking all of our jobs.... right?

Your use of the term "union boys" shows that you have been stung and don't like it. You attempt to demean because you lack the intellectual gravitas to take an issue on head up.

And why shouldn't business be held accountable. You are so quick to hold the poor folks "longing to be free" acountable, when it is the businesses, especially seasonal ones, that openly advocate HAM (acronym they use which stand for Hire A Mexican)and take advantage of these folks. But to go after them takes work that ICE doesn't want to do. So what do they do? Go to the concentrated areas of Latinos at Swift, and detain 1300 folks and end up with 4%. Put on a good show, dress up like an extra in a Rambo movie, brandish weapons, impress the unthinking populace. Never mind that you terrorized whole groups of folks that simply went to work. What if it were you, hot shot? How would you feel that it happened for no other reason than your ethnicity or what you looked like?

Mick

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 12:44 PM

I agree, Metchosin. The recent actions of the Quebec police (infiltrating a peaceful demonstration to provoke a riot) was sleazy if not dishonest. They must be called to task for endangering those who were there to peacefully (and legally) protest. I am disgusted by the tactic and I hope some heads will roll.

Yes, Mick, the tactics employed in the raid in the U.S. are appalling.

This is North America. We have rights and those rights include not being subjected to undue harassment. Neither of the incidents were warranted. In fact, innocent people were being harassed by an overzealous police force at the request of our governments.

If we don't demand an end to this and protect our freedom, we will find ourselves with nothing to protect.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: pdq
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 12:16 PM

Big Mick:

I don't rationalise the actions of the actions of these jack-booted thugs anymore than you do. Don't put words ot people's mouths.This is part of your usual dishonest style of arguing.

You say "Suppose I agree that illegal immigration is a problem that needs addressing "

There is absolutely no conviction in that statement. You also do not propose any answers.

Another point. It is often union boys who want these raids because the illegals keep the labor costs down by expanding the pool of available workers. Any proof these raids were not at the request of union organizers?

Also, Democrats are the ones who always call for employer sanctions. Part of this is a appeal to those who tend to hate business in general.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Big Mick
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 11:42 AM

Nice to see your comment, Metch.

As to legal action, dianavan, we are considering doing just such a thing on behalf of our members who were detained without cause. The whole idea that it is OK, with a very vaguely worded warrant, to check every person who looks hispanic at gunpoint and while in cuffs, never mind that no one had done anything to suggest that either measure was necessary, runs counter to everything this country SUPPOSEDLY stands for. Those of African descent were outraged at the issue of racial profiling a few years back. Where is the outrage now?

pdq, unfortunately, represents a view that we see to often. They let their biases about an issue allow them to rationalize actions that run counter to what this land stands for. In the mid 1800's the Nativists/No Nothings had the same attitude toward the Irish and German Catholic. And Bill the Butcher is alive and well in the USA today.

Your questions, pdq, are loaded. You are trying to establish a predicate for your arguments which insure your success in the debate. Apparently you have so little respect for the intelligence of your fellow 'Catters that you believe they won't see through this rather amateurish tactic.

I reduce the argument to different questions. 1) Suppose I agree that illegal immigration is a problem that needs addressing (I do, by the way). What is it about this that justifies rounding up 1300 people, detaining them for hours, and in some cases, days at gunpoint, and terrorizing them? 2)Forget the immigration issue. Suppose your daughter or wife were refused bathroom privileges, and then made to go with a door open and an agent watching. 3) What is it among folks like you that causes you to justify the actions of Homeland Security that clearly fly in the face of what we stand for, of the 4th Amendment of our own Constitution? Would you like Freedom of Speech to be the next to go? How about limiting songwriters to songs that only support the efforts of the government so we don't incite citizens? It is, after all, in support of our security?

Mick

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Metchosin
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 05:18 AM

Dianavan, while I sympathize with US citizens who are upset about jackboot police behavior within their own borders and agree that this is probably heavy handed political grandstanding, I think before we do any cross border criticizing, we should demand some clean up of the "jackbooting" that is happening on this side of the border first.

"The Quebec provincial police acknowledged in a statement Thursday that their agents had infiltrated protesters demonstrating during the recent North American leaders summit in Montebello, Que. but denied that they acted as "agent provocateurs" to instigate violence." CN

More about the incident is available HERE and includes the Youtube video of the incident, where a Union organizor demanded that the "three black bandana clad police provocateurs" put their rocks down. The three were finally "arrested" (yeah, right) to the applause of the peaceful demonstrators.

It is beyond me how the Quebec police can claim that their "police agents" were not trying to instigate something and not behaving in a provocative manner. Perhaps they think that wearing a black bandana over their face and carrying a large rock during a demonstration is just an example of poor fashion sense on the part of the officers who were just trying to "fit in". LOL I'd at least agree there, these turkeys stuck out like sore thumbs.

While the incident was not as frightening as the American one, as a Canadian, I found this recent event disturbing and insidious, although not surprising.

My apologies Mick, for getting a bit sidetracked regarding our own goons.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 04:42 AM

Which is why we will never set foot in the USA again, which is a great pity, but Argentina has so much more to offer.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: GUEST,CrazyEddie
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 04:23 AM

"Bullying & harrasment is a small price to pay, for being allowed to remain in the land of the free"   Montgomery Burns (The Simpsons)

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: pdq
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 04:20 AM

"My world, and my views are much more nuanced and complex." {meaning "than yours"}   ~   Janie

Santimonious blather. Bordering on NPD, a form of mental disorder. Get help.

" Illegal Mexicans are a big problem. Yes, the employer must be heavily fined for employing illegals. That will probably involve raids."   ~   dianavan

Congratulations, that shows some courage as well as intellectual integrity.

Most of the other responses dodge the issue. Most start the usual name-calling and blame-laying.

Reality check time for the US. Do we have a problem or do we not have a problem? If we do, how do we fix it? Put your energy there instead of putting it into spitting on your fellow Americans who don't want to see this country dissolve into a Third World slum with all the hopelessness, ignorance and violence that entails.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 03:23 AM

D.
The artical stated almost 1300 people were netted & held under these conditions & less than 4% were illegal.

Barry

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 24 Aug 07 - 12:51 AM

I don't think you can compare Canadians and Mexicans and then accuse the U.S. of racism. Illegal Canadians are not a problem. Illegal Mexicans are a big problem. Yes, the employer must be heavily fined for employing illegals. That will probably involve raids.

It is the way the raid was conducted that was wrong. Nobody, regardless of colour, should be treated that way. If Canadians were sneaking into the U.S. to work, they would probably be treated the same way. That means anyone working for low wages (black or white) is in danger of being caught in a dragnet. I see this more as classism than racism.

Its just more heavy-handed, political grandstanding to show the U.S. public that Bush is in charge. Its his style that trickles down to the goons on the ground. Some of those goons are probably racists but to call the effort to stem the tide of illegals, racist, is whistling in the wind. You either raid the place of employment or you build a wall and hire thugs to guard it. What other solution is there unless you are advocating open borders?

I hope the people who were illegally detained, have attorneys who will fight for their rights. I would also like to know what kind of fine the employer is facing for hiring those who were illegal. I'm sure that with a little investigation, most of the inconvenience to those who were legally employed could have been avoided.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 11:53 PM

pdq, it seems to me that you wouldn't be asking those questions if you didn't have answers that disturb you a good deal. In other words, I'm pretty sure I know what your own answer is and that you recognize it is not a pretty one.

My answer, going a bit around the park: Human beings, when it comes down to it, are very realistic. As a representative of the species, I think that when we are faced with need we are not going to give more than a cursory thought to the legalities bent in meeting that need.

If I am hungry or freezing or drowning I am not going to spend long moments wondering if taking a loaf of bread or someone's extra coat or the life ring hanging on a hook is stealing and therefore making me a criminal.

There is a long time-honored expectation in Alaska that when a person in need comes to a cabin in the wilderness or along the shore that the person helps him or herself to whatever meets that need. There is also an expectation that one will do the same for the next person in line.

All this to say that when a better life for me and my family is right across the border and all I have to do to reach it is to put myself into danger and subject myself to an arduous trek as well as dodge officials and vigilantes who are trying to catch me I'm goin'.

As I said before, borders are manmade.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 11:27 PM

IMO this is the same a terrorists walking into a Mosque, rounding up those that were praying & binding them, & terrorizing them for hours & putting them in a state of fear that they could never imagined.
This is a form of torture!

Barry

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 11:18 PM

Reguardless of what questions are asked or answered, there is absolutly no cause that can warrant this type of SS Action. You can agree or disagree on present US policy, it's a nice piece of work to divide up a nation on but you cannot agree with this type of action weither it be legal or not. You can cast aside these actions by saying what you want about the Mexican or Canadian borders but you cannot hear of this type of treatment & then cast it aside without shading yourselves & knowingly you're bording the 'dark side'. Next will the department of Homeland Scandles be interning all Latino & Mexican-Americans, Porto Ricans, Cubans & other light/shaded skinned peoples, might as well get started of the darker skinned people too, from there we can intern those of yellow & red skin until we have a pure white skined, blue eye, blonde population, "It can't happen here". This has been tried before & we're heading down the same road again.
This is a vicious & delibrate act against an innocent part of our population, our citizenery & it is to install fear & to ride rough shod against a class & an ethnic group & care for whose a citizen, an illegal, a documented worker is of no concern, there is not even the concern if any are even human. It is the same treatment that the Japanesse Americans recieved during WWII, the same as the Native Americans recieved when the white man 1st drove them into the dust, the same as the black slave who was treated worst than a beast of burden. This is not even the way one would treat a mule working in the field, after a days work even they would be fed & given water, a rub down & a brush, a little walk in the sun light. These people were treated worst & they that caused these violations should have their shame put to their faces, from them that acted to those that commanded these actions to take place. We now have unjustly OK'd torture not only on our enemies but now on our own citizens & our own workers. Is this how we want to see our government degrade its self, to have it ride on the backbone of it's champions with a whip in it's hand?
Amos, I to feel disgust & fear when I arrive at an airport but my disgust runs far deeper & my anger is much hotter when I see people who only want to earn a living treated like over ripe & rotted fruit good for nothing but the compost pile.

Barry

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Janie
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 11:03 PM

Again, Amos, AMEN.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Janie
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 11:02 PM

Glad your world is so simple, pdq. My world, and my views are much more nuanced and complex. Sometimes I envy people like you, for whom everything is so simple, so back-or-white, so either-or.   

May I also suggest, and I am serious, that you contemplate the difference between thinking and feeling. Feelings matter, they belong on the bus, but they don't belong in the driver's seat on the road to forming our views and opinions. Feelings are important but very non-specific signals about ourselves. If a person is having disturbed or upset feelings, it is a signal that something, somewhere, is awry. But the feeling gives no indication whatsoever about where something is awry. Something may be awry internally, externally, or both. It will take thinking, unclouded by the emotion, to sort that out. But first, one has to learn to tell the difference between their cognitions and their 'feelings.'

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Amos
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 10:28 PM

1. Neither in favor nor opposed. It is a bogus issue, a granfaloon invented by politicians, and highly undemocratic in origin. Naming the CORRECT problem would be a good start.

2. In light of 1, no answer required.


A

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Janie
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 10:19 PM

Amen to that, Amos. Although this nation has always limited to whom that compassion should be extended, often based on racial or ethnic characteristics. That is, to a certain extent human nature, and it is not surprising that governments reflect human nature.

No matter what one thinks about illegal immigration, it is in one's enlighted self-interest to be appalled by, and to oppose unprovoked brutality practiced by those in authority.

Janie

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: pdq
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 10:18 PM

My two questions are not 'trick' or 'twisted'. I am asking people to search their hearts and find what they actually believe.

Here they are again:

                Are you in favor of the huge migration of illegal aliens into the US?

                If you do not want this migration to continue, what do you feel should be done to stop it?

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Janie
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 10:08 PM

Pardon me. Not leading questions. Trick questions. Manipulative questions.

PDQ's questions remind me of the rdiculously biased 'surveys' I get a few times a year from the Democratic Party (to which I belong).

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Janie
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 10:01 PM

pdq,

Your questions are twisted, and you know it. Leading questions always are.

Janie

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Amos
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 09:58 PM

Brutalization is not the answer.

Better processes at the borders is.

Above all, a reversion to a nation founded on human compassion would be a good starting place.


A

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 09:57 PM

pdq--

It's you who have questions to answer. Specifically: what exactly did you mean by "we will surely lose this country"?

And exactly why are your ideas not squarely in the long--and not exactly honorable-- US tradition of nativism--from the Know-Nothings to the KKK--and beyond.

If you want to fight the statistics battle, fine--and I guarantee you will lose. And if you do so, please be good enough to give exact source and date for any figures you cite.

Thank you so much.

Subject: RE: Homeland Security??????? For shame!!
From: Nickhere
Date: 23 Aug 07 - 09:54 PM

The indians must be kicking themselves that they didn't think of having an Immigration and Naturalistion Service when the colonists stepped ashore back in the 1600s....