|
01 Oct 04 - 06:37 PM (#1286465) Subject: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST,Don't ask Is there a statute of limitations? |
|
01 Oct 04 - 06:44 PM (#1286469) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: CarolC Which country? |
|
01 Oct 04 - 06:47 PM (#1286471) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST USA, England, Australia. |
|
01 Oct 04 - 06:55 PM (#1286480) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow It's probably too late to prosecute the Pilgrim Fathers. |
|
01 Oct 04 - 06:55 PM (#1286481) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Stilly River Sage Depends. In the U.S. there have been various legal measures that allowed certain people in specific categories here before certain dates to stay. Most others, if caught and can't prove they fit in that eligible category, can be deported. But it's a complex subject to research. Good luck. SRS |
|
01 Oct 04 - 06:56 PM (#1286484) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Rapparee But which one are you or the person involved in NOW? That's what rules. |
|
02 Oct 04 - 03:11 AM (#1286685) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Dave Hanson And don't forget England used the US of A as a penal colony as well as Oz. eric |
|
02 Oct 04 - 03:21 AM (#1286688) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: dianavan McGrath's post says it all. d |
|
02 Oct 04 - 10:28 AM (#1286839) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: katlaughing You might find some answers at ilw.com |
|
02 Oct 04 - 02:49 PM (#1286957) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST Thanks. |
|
02 Oct 04 - 03:12 PM (#1286972) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Sorcha Ask for political asylum? |
|
02 Oct 04 - 04:50 PM (#1287000) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST,sorefingers The INS thinks - ahem - there are 1 million people crossing the Mexian border illegaly evey year. Others say the number is about 1.5 million. Last week I heard a report on the radio that said the number is 3 million. I don't think anybody really knows, but after a few years the real numbers do come in when people have to get some kind of legal papers. According to one analysis it is estimated that in 20 years Latinos will be the largest ethnic community in the USA. United Latinized States Of America Hola Todos Que Passo Man! |
|
02 Oct 04 - 08:26 PM (#1287108) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Peace Deseo gracias para sus palabras amables. Usted es un caballero y un erudito. |
|
03 Oct 04 - 05:57 AM (#1287282) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Big Al Whittle Yes you can all come back from the penal colony , your sentence is up. i'll put the kettle on. Welcome home! |
|
03 Oct 04 - 06:24 AM (#1287293) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow "in 20 years Latinos will be the largest ethnic community in the USA." Is that suppposed to be a bad thing? |
|
03 Oct 04 - 06:59 AM (#1287308) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST Of course when they cross the border they are in ..... part of Mexico that was annexed by the United States. |
|
03 Oct 04 - 09:45 AM (#1287359) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D "in 20 years Latinos will be the largest ethnic community in the USA." "Is that suppposed to be a bad thing?" ----------------------------------------------------------------- yep...sadly, it is. Any time you have multiple ethnic communities in the same political/economic community you will have more problems than virtues. It is not a matter of who is better or who was 'here first'...it is a matter of communication and value systems and jobs and leadership. People (most people) want their 'diversity' in small, non-threatening doses...they don't want multi-lingual schools and neighborhoods changing so that the they don't feel comfortable and/or safe. What it really come down to is whether the language and values of various cultures come into conflict, and more & more, they are. I don't know a solution, and I know it is not 'politically correct' to point at this problem, but it is quite evident in some areas. You don't see it a lot in North Dakota, but you sure do in Los Angeles or Washington DC.... There's a lot to say and discuss about this ...maybe on another thread sometime....it's not an easy issue. |
|
03 Oct 04 - 09:51 AM (#1287365) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Amos As opposed to part of the Aztec Empire annexed by Spain? A |
|
03 Oct 04 - 10:33 AM (#1287386) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow How would the USA overall be any less of a multiple ethnic country if the Spanish speakers outnumbered the English speakers, rather than the other way round? Or if your National Anthem looked like this: Oh, decidme, ¿veis a la primera luz de la aurora La que izamos con orgullo al último rayo del crepúsculo, Cuyas anchas bandas y brillantes estrellas, en la fiera lucha Contemplamos ondeando gallardas sobre las murallas? El resplandor rojizo de los cohetes y el fragor de las bombas Probaban que por la noche nuestra bandera aún estaba allí. Oh, decidme, ¿flota todavía la enseña estrellada y listada Sobre la tierra de los libres y la patria de los valientes? En la costa apenas perceptible entre las nieblas del mar Donde la altiva hueste enemiga reposa en temeroso silencio, ¿Qué es lo que la brisa al soplar oculta en parte Y en parte descubre su elevado pedestal? Ahora recibe el destello del primer rayo matutino Reflejado en todo su esplendor, y ahora se destaca en el aire ¡Es la enseña estrellada y listada! Que ondee largos años Sobre la tierra de los libres y la patria de los valientes. ¿Y dónde está aquella banda que engreída juraba Que el torbellino de la guerra y la confusión del combate Nos privaría para siempre de patria y hogar? La sangre ha lavado la mancha de sus pasos desleales. Ningún refugio pudo salvar al mercenario y al esclavo Del terror de la fuga o de la lobreguez del sepulcro. Y la enseña estrellada y listada ondea triunfante Sobre la tierra de los libres y la patria de los valientes. Así sea siempre, cuando los hombres libres se interpongan Entre sus amados hogares y la desolación de la guerra: En la victoria y la paz, este país, socorrido por el cielo, Alabe al Poder que nos creó y conservó como Nación. Hemos de triunfar, pues nuestra causa es tan justa, Y sea nuestra divisa: "¡En Dios está nuestra confianza!" Y la bandera estrellada y listada flotará triunfante Sobre la tierra de los libres y la patria de los valientes. |
|
03 Oct 04 - 04:20 PM (#1287599) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: dianavan Bill D. - You said that with "multiple ethnic communities in the same political/economic community you will have more problems than virtues" I strongly disagree since I live in a multicultural country which builds on its diversity. Are you saying that the U.S. is safer and more virtuous? Canada is a strong nation which recognizes that regardless of ethnic background, basic needs are the same. Educate yourself. We're right next door. Ignorance is a bigger problem than ethnicity! d |
|
04 Oct 04 - 09:35 AM (#1288228) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST,Mingulay Pardon my ignorance in such matters but has anyone asked the remaining members of certain ethnic tribes who, if I remember right, were somewhat displaced, what their take is on the subject. I speak as one whose ancestors were heavily into Celt bashing at one time, which makes me a White Anglo Saxon Pagan. |
|
04 Oct 04 - 11:11 AM (#1288287) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST,Hugh Jampton I hope the day never comes when the US national anthem is as posted above by McGrath. Just imagine having to sit through all of that each time the Americans won a gold medal!! |
|
04 Oct 04 - 11:54 AM (#1288315) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D dianavan...I am not 'un-educated' ..I agree with what you say and point out about 'diversity'...up to a point. Basic needs are indeed the same, and I am well aware that Canada has done quite well integrating certain aspects of diversity....but let me answer Mc Grath's question, and you'll see why I say what I do....(and while you are reading, imagine the French language issue in Quebec spreading to almost every province, and adding in Vietnamese, Chinese, African-American, Native groups..(Inuit?)..etc....in quite large numbers in many metropolitan areas) Kevin...of course we would still be a multi-ethnic country if Latinos..etc...outnumbered English speakers, and we would have a situation where the infrastructure, from major business to the news media to school systems..etc were still largely controlled by Caucasians, mostly of W.A.S.P persuasion...(and fueled by current Republican arrogance and intransigence). We are not talking about people who come here seeking a 'better life' and want to be *Americans* and learn English and integrate into the community, becoming average citizens with different features and skin color ...we are having LARGE groups who want to remain Latino, Oriental, etc. and simply live in America. We add this to the already large communities of African-Americans who retain a VERY different culture and value system, and we have problems NOW. This weekend I was at an Octoberfest fair in Maryland, where various German/Bavarian/Swiss traditions were celebrated ...food, costumes, music..etc...and it was delightful....but on Monday, those people will not be in costume, and their language will be English, with very few showing much trace of ethnic accent. We have also here, various Latino festivals which are also delightful and happy...but on Monday, most of THOSE participants will be back in narrowly defined areas, speaking mostly Spanish, watching mostly 3 Spanish TV channels with 'limited' programming options, going to 'mostly' menial jobs ..etc...etc...etc... and THEY are the lucky ones. At least some signs and closed-circuit TV programs have Spanish captions. Most of the Oriental groups do NOT get this help, nor do the Nigerians, Ethiopians...etc..etc...etc... Well, dianavan.. you see where this is going as a description, but I'm guessing you do not see my point yet. We have two situations here. One is a matter of 'fairness' and 'openness' that the USA is supposed to modeled on, with equal opportuniy for all. The other is a practical matter of how to educate, communicate, integrate, etc. when some of these groups do not like each other, as well as not liking to adapt to the Anglo value system that still clings to power. No one can agree on how to spend tight budgets to operate school systems with large, ethnicly diverse populations who require special classes....and no one can agree how many police, etc, should be trained to deal with crime that is ethnicly based...and simple problems like understanding the cab driver or the counter help at McDonalds is not a minor issue...though it is NOT PC to complain, or even notice. We are, simply, becoming ethnicly diverse faster that we can adjust the system, and although this, as I said, is not yet a big issue in N. Dakota, it IS already in many large cities.....and the question out on the horizon is "Just how much adustment can the system take before it is a totally different system?" I state simply that the practical problems ARE beginning to overshadow the nice theories about the wonderful values of Ethnic Diversity, and as one who has FOUGHT for fairness and equality all my life, I am worried.......... |
|
04 Oct 04 - 12:24 PM (#1288336) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow Caucasians? I always find that quaint expression Americans use a bit bizarre. I can't understand why they don't go the whole hog and use the term Ethiopian to refer to black Americans. After all: "The term Caucasian meaning the so-called white or European race originated with Johann Frederich Blumenbach (1752-1840), a German professor of natural history in Göttingen...Based on skull measurements, he classified five races: American, Caucasian, Ethiopian, Malayan, and Mongolian." All these different people insisting on speaking their own different languages, and most often time that won't be English... Why, you might as well be back in Europe. And that's not so bad, honest. |
|
04 Oct 04 - 01:40 PM (#1288413) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D ok...fine, I almost used another term than Caucasian, anyway...I just assumed it made the point internally in the paragraph. I certainly don't suggest it is the best way to define "whitish" groups any longer. So...as to the point....you tell ME whether there are any language problems in France, Germany, Italy, England...etc... Would it be a problem in England if pressure were building to have TV channels in, say, Chinese and the school system was having to spend many extra £s to have parallel classes in Chinese? I know that the French, especially, are pretty defensive about their language, and that there is a strong movement to promote Welsh as a viable, vibrant language, which MUST have some effect on the social norms of the UK. How are these things playing out? How does London deal with large Pakistani populations? Is it smooth, or are there conflicts? Sure, in Europe, there are all these " different people insisting on speaking their own different languages,", but it was my understanding that they did it mostly in their own countries....am I wrong? I am reading in the Washington Post just this morning this sort of item: "From the shores of North Africa, Western European affluence is only a short boat trip away, and each year thousands of illegal immigrants attempt the trip. Often the result is tragedy, as overloaded vessels overturn in high seas." "The wave of travelers approaching Libya includes refugees fleeing civil war in Sudan, war in Iraq, conflict in the Palestinian territories, anarchy in Somalia and poverty in places as far away as Chad and Nigeria. Libya is a magnet for the migrants partly because of its proximity to Italy but also because, for many years, the government of Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi permitted Africans and Arabs to enter his country without visas, in the name of pan-continental solidarity. Libyan officials estimate that more than a million migrants live within the country's borders. Italy's interior minister, Giuseppe Pisanu, has put the number at 1.5 million. "Some neighborhoods in Tripoli are entirely under the control of immigrants," Foreign Minister Abdel-Rahman Shalqam told reporters in Tripoli recently. In remarks to the Italian newspaper La Stampa, Shalqam indicated that the long barren frontier made it virtually impossible to stem the tide. "If for you Italians illegal immigration is a problem, for us it's much more. It's an invasion," he said. --------------------------------------------------------------------- This world, with much of the 3rd world painfully aware of the advantages to be had by escaping to Europe or America (including Canada), seems to have problems deciding how...and IF...to regulate immigration, legal AND illegal. Add in the current religious element in terrorism, and you can't have an issue with clear-cut, easy answers anymore. Everyone in the world can't move to those parts of the world deemed safer and 'better'...so where is the line to be drawn, and by whom? I am fascinated and intrigued by diversity in art, language, culture, etc...but I'd like to do it without the angst that pervades the situation currently. I, too, have a culture, language and social system that I'd like to practice comfortably, and gradually incorporate bits of other cultures and languages, much as was done when the process was slowed by sailing ships. (Even then we had conflicts when the Irish arrived in New York and slavery brought many thousands of Africans to an Anglo world!) ......I don't HAVE a simple solution, but I refuse to ignore the problem just because any stated solution is disagreeable to someone. The one thing which could gradually ease the situation IF other things were also worked on is population control...but that is another can of worms, hmmm? |
|
04 Oct 04 - 11:09 PM (#1288782) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: dianavan Bill D. - The French language issue is quite a different cup of tea. French was spoken in Canada before English. It has spread to other provinces. Canada is officially a bi-lingual country. Our school system requires that both languages be taught. The Chinese use our schools after 3:00 dismissal to teach their language. Any cultural group intent on keep their language alive is free to do the same thing. As far as the school system goes, 30-50% of my grade 2 students are just learning English. Most are very good students because their parents value education. They bring with them a keen desire to learn. This motivates some of our more complacent English speaking students. In other words, part of the reason our students rate so highly internationally is because of what they learn from each other. I have never heard of "crime that is ethnicly based." In this country a criminal is a criminal, regardless of ethnicity. What are you talking about? As far as your remark, "We add this to the already large communities of African-Americans who retain a VERY different culture and value system, and we have problems NOW." There is a theory that says that the sub-culture that developed was a culture of opposition. In other words, WE ARE NOT THEM. It is no wonder it is a problem. Having lived through the process of integration, I would say that although the U.S. is less than perfect in regards to their treatment of Afro-Americans, much progress has been made. The U.S. has gone from slavery to segregation to integration. The U.S. can change and will change over time. As to your own fears - Nothing is perfect but if you focus on the similarities instead of focussing on the differences, you will find most immigrant people have similar values to your own. The differences are usually interesting. Believe me - I wouldn't trade my multi-ethnic neighborhood for the suburbs ever! The thought of being surrounded by people the same as me sounds way to boring. d |
|
04 Oct 04 - 11:16 PM (#1288786) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST Steven's Kat was guilty and deported. |
|
05 Oct 04 - 12:56 PM (#1289369) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D late in getting back to this: dianavan...I know, of course, how younger kids, like your grade two students, more easily pick up a new language and, hopefully, integrate it into their lives so that they can comfortably converse in either one and be understood easily. (just to double check your post...is French 'offically' taught in all of Canada...including B.C and Alberta..etc?...I understand that signs and such MUST have French shown in Quebec...but elsewhere?) to clarify about crime...I had in mind gang violence that specifically relates to current issues with Black, Latino or Asian gangs, usually directed against other gangs of like heritage but a distinct problem for the community at large. Since police need to deal with any crime, having 3-4 different ethnicities to try to understand when investigating problems can be awkward. It DOES require extra training, recruitment and assignment scheduling. (Just having officers who can speak Spanish well can make a big difference). Are we to require all US schools to teach both Spanish and English, as you say Canada does with French? And if so, how about Arabic and Vietnamese--at least in some areas? I do not question that we can do better, and that understanding and tolerance is important, but no matter WHAT you note as historical causes and "a culture of opposition", we have groups (African-American especially) who are going out of their way to remain different and maintain a language barrier....and then to simplify their poor access to jobs and housing by labeling it 'discrimination'. Is is that, and much more. I once heard a Black woman educator from Chicago defending 'Ebonics', the black dialect with different grammatical rules as a 'language', and arguing that it should be taught in black school. Fine....but THIS woman was at least able to switch into perfectly good standard English in order to make the argument, while the kids she was referring to were not! She had no plan to make the kids able to compete on an equal basis in a job interview...she was merely touting Ebonics as 'good enough' as a language. What I fear is that the situation Canada just is not a close enough correspondance to that in the US...we have a Spanish speaking country with economic problems right to our south, with several more a bit further south, and enormous numbers of illegal immigrants flooding over the border every day. In that situation, it is really hard to focus on the multi-cultural 'values' you note. finally, you remind me that "... you will find most immigrant people have similar values to your own."...well...yes, sort of. They all want basic human homes, work, families, music...etc....but they often have values in various areas which do NOT easily fit in a community. Even basic habits in driving automobiles and standards of 'personal space', and what counts as 'fair' in business dealings can be sources of strife. In smaller doses, these can be worked with, but sometimes it really is an issue. My claim is that this is getting worse in the US, just as we have a president and government who are not inclined to be reasonable in how they approach the problem..... we shall see..... (it good to compare the ideas, anyway!*smile*) |
|
05 Oct 04 - 01:28 PM (#1289386) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow French was spoken in Canada before English. And Spanish was spoken in what are now the United States before English. |
|
05 Oct 04 - 02:22 PM (#1289438) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D 'who got there first' is interesting historically, but hardly relevant when dealing with what is We have to take the situation as we find it. Of course, there were 'Indians' of various sorts already here in both countries. |
|
05 Oct 04 - 03:28 PM (#1289486) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow "We have to take the situation as we find it." And the situation is already, as I understand it, that the USA is a bi-lingual country. Well, more languages than that, obviously, but English and Spanish are by far the largest numbers. Looked at objectively, Spanish is a much more straightforward and consistent language than English is. There'd be a lot of advantages if it were to become the lingua franca of the world rather than English. |
|
05 Oct 04 - 04:05 PM (#1289511) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D well...'parts' of the USA are marginally bi-lingual. Some border areas and certain large cities certainly are, but even the term bi-lingual is a misnomer, as all it means is that two languages are commonly heard on the streets. It does not mean that a majority of the people in those areas speak both languages even semi-fluently. Shopkeepers in San Diego, or Miami, or Del Rio, Texas of both groups can no doubt 'get by', and many school personel are having to learn both, and kids who play with others pick up the others' language pretty well, as well as often having classes in it....but there is no sense that the USA, as a whole, is likely to be required to learn Spanish from early school days. As to the rest of the world? Don't hold your breath..*wry grin*. There are as many disadvantages as advantages to Spanish.....and if you want a universal language, Esperanto is waiting on the sidelines. I can imagine the Russia and the Baltic areas and the Chinese being told to learn Spanish! I rather imagine that in 200 years, if we last that long, the internet/WWW will settle the issue, and that many changes will be made, both in lingua franca and translation. |
|
05 Oct 04 - 04:15 PM (#1289519) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: dunkel_esel why do people write such long messages - I dont have a long enough attention span! mjxx |
|
05 Oct 04 - 04:42 PM (#1289537) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D 'cause short messages don't let you say it all. |
|
05 Oct 04 - 04:58 PM (#1289552) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow Some parts of Canada don't have that many French speakers, but that hasn't been a reason not to recognise it as a language of equal national status. Even aside from the presence of lots of Spanish speakers in the USA, most people in the rest of America speak Spanish. I'd have thought that it would be a language which children would learn at school as a matter of course. |
|
05 Oct 04 - 06:26 PM (#1289607) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D by that reasoning, Brazil should speak Spanish also...*shrug*...it just happened that the USA was settled in patterns that favored English. It could easily have been Spanish...or French, but it was many years before the US expanded into Texas and California and even came into contact with many Spanish speakers. We were dealing with more Irish and German and Swedish for most of the middle 1800s...then a war with Mexico made Spanish a pretty unpopular tongue for awhile.... and...if it had not been for pressure from Quebec, would the rest Canada have even pretended to take French seriously? Countries don't do things like that without overriding reasons, and "that's a nice language they speak next door" is not usually a reason for adopting it formally.. |
|
05 Oct 04 - 06:37 PM (#1289617) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow I rather suspect that most Brazilians wouldn't have all that much difficulty in getting by in Spanish. But are you saying that in fact it isn't a normal part of schooling in the USA to learn Spanish? That'd be about as silly as not teaching English in schools in your neighbours to the South. |
|
05 Oct 04 - 06:54 PM (#1289637) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Greg F. Kevin, the teaching of languages in U.S. primary and secondary Schools is a disgrace. There's no requirement to show proficiency in any language other than English- and standards there are slipping as well. Its hubris- "just speak English slowly and loudly..." and jingoism, and lack of adequate education funding into the bargain. How folks in the U.S. can keep from cringing with shame every time a newscast shows a peasant from some place like Azerbaijan or Chechnya speaking perfect English...... I could tell you the story of a local French teacher who took a group of students to Québec and was really annoyed that the residents wouldn't speak English to her- |
|
05 Oct 04 - 06:56 PM (#1289643) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Rabbi-Sol Here in the New York area you have a choice in High School as to which foreign language you wish to study. Spanish is not a required language. Believe it or not, many students here are opting for Russian over Spanish. There are a ton of Russian immigrants in the major population centers of northern and central USA. SOL ZELLER |
|
05 Oct 04 - 07:12 PM (#1289657) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D Spanish is offered as an elective almost everywhere, and 'many' people take a couple of classes....but my son, for example, is taking Chinese in college. You would be suprised, Kevin, to see how little importance is given to being able to speak Spanish. Mexico is usually considered either a source of migrant workers, or a tourist destination, and in both cases it's "YOU learn English"..... Indeed, we ought to do better at Spanish...but there simply is little incentive to do so with all the rest of the worlds issues crying for people to learn other languages. It is sad, but "Spanish" often means just "illegal immigrants" to many in the US...except, as I said, in border areas and places like Miami where sizeable groups of Cubans have made entire communities. It is, I suppose, difficult to understand how the size of the US affects the situation, when in Europe, another country is usually not far away, and some familiarity with another language is more common. |
|
06 Oct 04 - 10:23 AM (#1290236) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow Those sound like reasons why a Spanish speaking majority in the USA would be a good thing. |
|
06 Oct 04 - 12:01 PM (#1290332) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D 'good'?? in what way? Are you having me on or arguing seriously? I would think it would just cause strife as Spanish speakers began to lobby for "full equality" in all ways....separate editions of newspapers & magazines?...and how would schools be run? Most English speakers would likely object....some VERY strongly, and we hardly need more strife right now. And speakers of 3rd & 4th languages would reall be caught in the crunch! I would think it would make most sense for ANY country to say "this is our National language. Everyone is expected to be fluent in it." I know some countries have 2 or more 'common' languages, but how do they treat those for issues like conducting government? (sessions of Congress/Parliament) How does Canada do it? Headphone and translators like the U.N.? The 'official' language of countries is usually reflected in what is spoken on the news programs of radio & TV...I know Germany, with several dialects, has what is called 'Die Umgangsprache', a standardized version that everyone knows, even if it is not what they speak at home. I am really trying to wrap my head around this idea...but it ain't easy.... |
|
06 Oct 04 - 12:48 PM (#1290363) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow Since it's probably coming, best look on the bright side and look forward to it. Being bilingual, and even more than that, isn't that difficult, plenty of ordinary people all over the world manage it without a problem. |
|
06 Oct 04 - 09:32 PM (#1290812) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: The Fooles Troupe Aussie Immigration Policy |
|
15 Oct 04 - 05:20 PM (#1298160) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST What happens if one is turned in? |
|
15 Oct 04 - 06:29 PM (#1298210) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Padre It seems that many people are choosing to miss the first word in this thread - ILLEGAL immigrants are very clearly breaking the law of whatever country they enter illegally. If a citizen of the United States of America were to try to enter one of the countries of the European Union (or Mexico) illegally, he would be turned back at the border, or would be deported when caught, regardless of how long he had lived there. Why, then, should the USA not be permitted to take similar actions against those who enter her borders without permission? |
|
15 Oct 04 - 08:47 PM (#1298294) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: dianavan Bill D. - you said, "and...if it had not been for pressure from Quebec, would the rest Canada have even pretended to take French seriously? Countries don't do things like that without overriding reasons, and "that's a nice language they speak next door" is not usually a reason for adopting it formally.." True enough their was pressure from Quebec. As mentioned before, French was spoken in Canada before English and yet those who spoke French were being discriminated against because they did not speak English. The compromise - make Canada bilingual. How does it work? All packaging and advertisements must be in both languages. It is a requirement that you learn both languages in school. Federal politicians speak both languages if they want the votes. Provincial politicians speak one or both languages - depending on the population. As far as newspapers, magazines, and media in general, we have both. If there is a demand, there is a supply. Nobody forces me to read or watch or listen to French if I don't want to. I have choice. What are you afraid of? I know a Spanish speaker married to a French speaker. Their children speak three languages. All three languages are spoken at home. My daughter is fluent in both languages because 1/2 her family is French and 1/2 her family speaks English. In Vancouver, I often have a class where 5 or more languages are spoken at home. Whats the problem? The more languages that are known, the better. Spanish should be more than elective in U.S. schools. If children are schooled in their first language, they have a much better chance of success. To recognize only one language is to exclude a large number of people from the economy. Exclusion and marginalization is what leads to socio-economic problems, not inclusion. d |
|
15 Oct 04 - 09:01 PM (#1298305) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Peace Dianavan, I must correct that notion. In Quebec, the language MUST be French. English also is optional. However, if English is on a French sign, the French lettering MUST be bigger or bolder. |
|
16 Oct 04 - 12:15 AM (#1298377) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Metchosin well its only fair, after all, French is always on the back of the cereal box in English Canada. LOL |
|
16 Oct 04 - 01:40 PM (#1298497) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: dianavan |
|
16 Oct 04 - 01:56 PM (#1298516) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: hesperis Toronto is actually beginning to have an ethnic problem. A lot of people immigrate to it but don't speak English or even French... then it's much harder for them to join into the culture. They settle in pockets of same-language people and don't get to know others easily. There are no ads for service jobs in Toronto that don't require knowledge of English AND either Portugese or Mandarin... and there are jobs that require only Portugese or only Mandarin. When the ads say "bilingual" they don't mean English and French anymore. Then the servers at the restaurants don't know english properly, only enough to get by, and they mess up your orders constantly. People who speak only English - even very well - find it REALLY difficult to get a job. This problem could only be solved by slowing the rate of immigration, and offering incentives to people to settle in areas other than the large cities. |
|
16 Oct 04 - 02:03 PM (#1298518) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: dianavan BillD - You said, "we would have a situation where the infrastructure, from major business to the news media to school systems..etc were still largely controlled by Caucasians, mostly of W.A.S.P persuasion." True - Therein lies the argument for early education, hiring practices that include minorities, balanced media coverage, and an absence of racial profiling and stereotyping. Of course these are only ideals but does that mean we shouldn't strive for the ideal? If you choose Spanish as your other official language then you only have to cater to two languages. Canada did it because Quebec is predominately French and its part of Canada. Which states are predominately Spanish speaking? California? Texas? Arizona? New Mexico? Florida? I don't know. I believe that originally they might have been Spanish speaking territories. Then again, if you combine all the Spanish speakers that are legally in the U.S., what is the ratio? If its very high, it would be prudent to educate children in both languages. Its when people have a hard time communicating that misunderstandings occur. I don't know if you can really compare Canada and the U.S. on the language debate but you can certainly use it as an example of how a government can make laws to provide inclusion. English lang. businesses had to go through some growing pains but it seems the adjustments have been made. Just like we had to go through some growing pains to adopt the metric system. Seems to me that for a Nation to grow and prosper, it must flexible and willing to make some changes. d d |
|
16 Oct 04 - 02:07 PM (#1298522) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST Be patient with the waiters 'constantly' getting your orders wrong. Their children will be schooled in your schools and have an easier ride. The first generation of newcomers are often the ones to face the biggest prejudices. It must be hard. |
|
16 Oct 04 - 06:24 PM (#1298672) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow And the food is certainly a lot better in England since the Chinese and the Indians and so forth arrived. |
|
24 Oct 04 - 06:14 PM (#1305980) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow We talk in abstract terms here - but there is real human suffering involved. For an individual example of a case where immigration controls in the USA and in Australia have arbitarily torn a family apart, look at this thread. |
|
25 Oct 04 - 11:25 AM (#1306638) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST,Teribus hesperis 16 Oct 04 - 01:56 PM Taking aside all the bits about waiters and waitresses messing up orders, what you said in your post, referred to above, was said a long time ago, 1964 if memory serves me correctly, by a Tory MP - His name was Enoch Powell. |
|
25 Oct 04 - 07:35 PM (#1307032) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST,Peter from Essex The publicity in the tabloids has got some people thinking that every non-white person in the street is a recent illegal. Even the lad with a strong local accent delivering menus for the local Chinese takeaway. (Does the Daily Mail tell them that Kosovo and Kurdistan are suburbs of Hong Kong?) |
|
25 Oct 04 - 07:50 PM (#1307047) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow Colour and "race" aren't the only reasons people get discriminated against. That link I gave just now to MY DAUGHTER NEEDS HELP leads to a thread about a case where disability is the issue. It's a case where the Australian authorities refused to allow a disabled girl and her mother, American citizens, to live with the girl's father (and the lady's husband), who is Australian, simply because of the disability; and then the American authorities are refusing to allow the father to join daughter and wife back in America, because on a previous visit he had overstayed his visa. Read it and weep. (Then try to do something about it, maybe?) |
|
25 Oct 04 - 10:30 PM (#1307186) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D dianavan.....with the Getaway and the onset of craft season,(busy, busy, busy), I lost track of this thread. I will contemplate what you say and ask and try to give a reasonable answer tomorrow. (I agree with some points you make, but then have to question some of the conclusions you draw as simply not following from the premises.) |
|
26 Oct 04 - 02:46 AM (#1307353) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: dianavan Bill D - I didn't know this was so formal. Maybe if you can define the premise, I will be able to form a conclusion. d |
|
26 Oct 04 - 08:00 PM (#1308139) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D ok..*grin*...less formal. in your post of 15 Oct, 8:47, you note how bilingualim had come about in Canada, and how well it usually works, since everyone MUST learn, (at least superfically, I guess) both languages. Then you ask me "what are you afraid of?" and note ..." I know a Spanish speaker married to a French speaker. Their children speak three languages. All three languages are spoken at home."...etc... I see those points, and I agree that it does work reasonably well in Canada, and I agree that it IS good for a person/family to know several languages if possible, but I do NOT agree that the US could simply 'do like Canada' and require compliance and order everyone to learn Spanish, for example. The US has a much larger pouplation and demographic complexity than Canada, and there would be huge groups that would resist any attempt to institute such rules! We have Southern Rural folks (Rednecks is the common word) who would not have anything to do with an idea like that....and African-American populations in many cities which barely tolerate Latinos...and vice-versa. In a later post you say ".. Therein lies the argument for early education, hiring practices that include minorities, balanced media coverage, and an absence of racial profiling and stereotyping." good luck!...especially with a Republican administration.......also, some ethnic groups do SELF-profiling and stereotyping. They flatly do-not-intend to be like anyone else, and ridicule members of their own group who try to 'blend in'. This is especially pervasive among blacks, but is also common among Latinos and some Asian groups. Again, I agree that education is good, and differences need to be ironed out, but this..... "I don't know if you can really compare Canada and the U.S. on the language debate but you can certainly use it as an example of how a government can make laws to provide inclusion..." is not really a workable solution given the desire by many to avoid true inclusion. It is SO hard to explain how huge the problem is, and that it bears only superfical resemblance to Canada's situation..(though I read that Canada, as well as some spots in Europe, are seeing rapid immigrant growth that threatens to swamp the system). I am trying to find a way to express my opinion briefly and succinctly, but it ain't easy, as you see. Let me just say that while I agree that "multi-culturalism" can be a positive educational thing and contribute to understanding and other good things, this ONLY works if the process is monitored and does not overwhelm the ability of the society to make adjustments, especially in conflicts of value systems--which are directly reflected in language. If we cannot communicate easily, we cannot negotiate and appreciate. You cannot just state that bi-lingualism and multi-culturalism are 'good' and that therefore we ought to durn well make it a law! (Most US high schools require some classes in a 2nd language for graduation, but NOT any specific one, and no one is willing to choose just one to require) "Seems to me that for a Nation to grow and prosper, it must flexible and willing to make some changes."....and for those changes to be viewed as anything other than having someone elses values forced down one's throat, they have to be done much more slowly than you suggest. This goes way beyond "freedom of opportunity" , because a 'Nation' cannot be willing to do anything....only its citizens can, and every one of them has to be convinced individually, no matter how many laws are passed. |
|
26 Oct 04 - 08:23 PM (#1308160) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow I imagine it'll happen at State level, in States where there is a sizeable Spanish speaking minority, or majority. When in time that has happened in many or even most of the States it'd be silly not to give Spanish some kind of official status at a national level. |
|
26 Oct 04 - 09:53 PM (#1308213) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D it is possible that certain states will deal with larger Latino populations long before others will. It is one of the things that makes the United STATES a tricky way to run a country. We are constantly debating what things individual states should have final say over, and what should be regulated by the Federal government. That leads to strange conflicts like the current one about the serial snipers being tried in the DC area. Three different states and the District of Columbia, with differing approaches to punishment, are all wanting to try these guys, and it took months just to decide who got first chance. It also leads to women in one state sneaking over to another for abortions, and smuggling of cigarettes, and driving over the border for better bargains on alcohol. So...Texas may need to deal with Mexican immegrants, legal and illegal, but Louisana, just to the east, may not like ANY compromise, given the large Acadian-French (Cajun) speaking population....and both those states have serious attitudes about 'their' culture. You can barely imagine what the Swedish/German/Norwegian areas in Minnesota or Wisconsin would have to say if they were informed that their kids MUST learn Spanish. I can't tell you what will happen in 20-40-80 years, as much demographic change will depend on politics and the world situation as regards oil and religion..etc..but I think that the only way that 'might' prevent serious conflict (at least in the US) is to encourage keeping one's ethnic heritage alive, while insisting that immigrants and communities adapt to the lingua franca of the country, as defined by National commerce, business and the media. This would (IMHO) allow the best opportunity for advancement and integration that are necessary to compete in a complex society. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 12:26 AM (#1308305) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: dianavan Bill D - You have certainly thought this through. Sound reasoning too, I'd say. I just heard that Bush has an immigration policy on hold until after the election. If elected he is going to flood the U.S. with immigrants who will work for very low wages. Looks like you should investigate this rumour because if what you say is true, all hell will break loose stateside. It would be just like Bush to flood the country with immigrants and fail to provide the support systems required for successful inclusion. Sounds like more conflict ahead if Bush gets in. d |
|
27 Oct 04 - 07:14 AM (#1308495) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow Isn't it strange how language works? "Lingua franca" is the Latin for the French language, but in English it doesn't mean that; and when Americans talk about "Latinos" that apparently doesn't include Italians. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 06:39 PM (#1309046) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D it seems that 'Latino' is the preferred term chose BY the majority of the Spanish speaking citizens lately, rather than Hispanic or a couple of other terms. dianavan...I would not be surprised to see a number of startling Bush policies if he gets to play for 4 more years. He lives in Texas, and had a term as Governor to decide that cheap labor and grateful Latinos would help his cause...along with exporting many American jobs. I do NOT understand his reasoning, but he pushes onward with strange ploicies. |
|
28 Oct 04 - 12:02 AM (#1309254) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Ebbie Something that struck me anew last winter may not be familiar to everyone. You know those WALK figures we are all familiar with at street corners or those yellow PEDESTRIAN CROSSING signs? Well, at the US border and for some miles up into California there are cautioning freeway signs depicting fleeing people, a jarring reminder of desperation. |
|
28 Oct 04 - 07:01 PM (#1310006) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow I'd assumed that Latino was to take account of Portuguese speakers. Wouldn't people from Brazil count as "Latino"? And I'd have rather thought that Italian Americans would object to not being included in the term, since it was Italians developed Latin and exported it to Spain. And Spanish and Italian are still remarkably similar languages. |
|
28 Oct 04 - 11:29 PM (#1310191) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D *grin*...it isn't rational, Kevin....I have in all my life, NEVER heard a Portugese speaker offer an opinion.....and since we get very few Brazilian immigrants, they are not speaking out on the matter. But I suppose 'if' a Brazilian were to settle here, he'd probably be classified as 'latino' for convenience sake. (our convenience, not his) Italian-Americans consider themselves a separate group, mostly....certainly no one around here would mean to include Italians as Latinos....the term is 97.2714% reserved for Spanish speakers from Mexico, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic & Central America |
|
01 Nov 08 - 10:36 AM (#2481608) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger WASHINGTON – Barack Obama's aunt, a Kenyan woman who has been quietly living in public housing in Boston, is in the United States illegally after an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years ago, The Associated Press has learned. According to Federal Election Commission documents filed by the Obama campaign, Onyango has contributed $260 to Obama over a period of time. Under federal election law, only U.S. citizens or green-card holders are legally permitted to give money to campaigns. Onyango, who listed her employer as the Boston Housing Authority, gave in small increments to the Obama campaign. Her latest contribution was $5 on Sept. 19. Boston Mayor Thomas Menino said Saturday that he had no idea how Onyango might have qualified for public housing with a standing deportation order. He said he's not involved in the operations of the agency, even though he appoints the head, because it runs mainly on federal and state dollars. William McGonagle, deputy director of the Boston Housing Authority, said when contacted: "I know nothing about it and I've got no comment." |
|
01 Nov 08 - 11:18 AM (#2481641) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Ebbie You are as reliable as a feeding sparrow, Rig. ^g& |
|
01 Nov 08 - 12:48 PM (#2481701) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D That post, Rig, is barely relevant to the general discussion of 4 years ago. You are frantically seeking ANY pretext to smear Obama and his candidacy with insinuations that HE is somehow responsible for everything you might object to. If there is an immigration violation in this case, OR a matter of a few $$$ donations, it can be handled without using it as a bludgeon against Obama. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 12:53 PM (#2481706) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger A feeding sparrow? |
|
01 Nov 08 - 12:56 PM (#2481710) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: katlaughing It will be one more thing the Desperate McCan't and 'Spalin' will try to use, but it will do them no good. Here is further response: CHICAGO (AP) — Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says he didn't know that one of his relatives was living in the United States illegally and believes the appropriate laws should be followed. The Associated Press found that Obama's aunt had been instructed to leave the country four years ago by an immigration judge who rejected her request for asylum from her native Kenya. The woman, Zeituni Onyango (zay-TUHN on-YANG-oh), is living in public housing in Boston and is the half-sister of Obama's late father. A statement given to the AP by Obama's campaign Saturday says, "Senator Obama has no knowledge of her status but obviously believes that any and all appropriate laws be followed." |
|
01 Nov 08 - 01:04 PM (#2481720) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger Great! After he's elected he can personally escort her out of the country. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 01:15 PM (#2481736) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bill D the entire story |
|
01 Nov 08 - 01:15 PM (#2481738) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Ebbie By "feeding sparrow", Rig, I was recognizing your predictability. Ya know, the fresh, steaming pile? I knew you would be the first on this bit of news. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 02:04 PM (#2481761) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger Just trying to keep the American public from making a terrible, terrible mistake. Plus, you've got to wonder why people keep putting those "steaming piles" out there in the first place, in this case another one of Obama's relatives. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 04:50 PM (#2481847) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow Everyone hopes the American public doesn't make a terrible terible mistake. Fortunately at the moment it looks as if they probably aren't going to. Touch wood. God preserve us all from the vicious small minded people who crop up at times like this. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 04:54 PM (#2481853) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Ebbie "Plus, you've got to wonder why people keep putting those "steaming piles" out there in the first place, in this case another one of Obama's relatives." I agree, Rig. Why do you do it? |
|
01 Nov 08 - 05:10 PM (#2481873) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger Ebbie - I had nothing to do with Obama's relative being in the country illegally. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 06:09 PM (#2481932) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow Prove it. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 06:30 PM (#2481949) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Ebbie That's right. Rig, how did you get to know so much about all these guys? Just who are your associates? |
|
01 Nov 08 - 06:36 PM (#2481954) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Barry Finn Rig, you can't even prove that Obama had anything to do with this, as much as you can prove that you didn't. Barry |
|
01 Nov 08 - 07:26 PM (#2481991) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bee-dubya-ell If Barrack Obama knew what every member of his extended family was up to at all times, he wouldn't be needing to run for President. He'd already be God. If he helped his aunt stay in the country illegally or if his campaign took money from her while knowing she was a foreign national, this would be an issue. But there's no evidence that either occurred, so it's irrelevant. That she happens to be related to him is coincidental. Even the McCain campaign is calling this a family matter and leaving it alone. Take a clue from them. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 08:34 PM (#2482032) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger It looks to me like it's an immigration matter, and not a family matter at all. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 09:03 PM (#2482055) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bee-dubya-ell True, it's an immigration matter. But, as such, it has no more relevance to the campaign than the hundreds of other immigration violations the INS investigates every day. That this particular violator was related to Obama is coincidental and irrelevant. Obama has already said she should be treated the same as any other violator. What more do you want? |
|
01 Nov 08 - 09:07 PM (#2482058) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Ebbie Ah, but you see, Rig is just protecting the nation. Obama's aunt, for all we know, is a cat burglar or is out dealing drugs or using her trusty acetyline cannister on stolen cars. One cannot be too careful with these furriners. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 09:08 PM (#2482059) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger I guess it all comes down to people believing, or not, whether he didn't know. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 09:15 PM (#2482065) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Big Mick What he wants is for Obama to not be elected. He cannot dissuade folks by his brilliant intellectual and economic arguments, so he reverts to the weapon of the uninformed and the ignorant, namely using innuendo, falsehoods, and half truths. I don't blame him as his mentors, Grampy McSwain and Caribou Barbie, are doing the same. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 09:17 PM (#2482068) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: McGrath of Harlow It seems much more likely he didn't know. Why should he have known, after all? I rather suspect that it would have been easy enough to sort out some way of sorting this out, if he had known. |
|
01 Nov 08 - 09:35 PM (#2482081) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Bee-dubya-ell I guess it all comes down to people believing, or not, whether he didn't know. At this moment, I can't tell you what any of my family members other than my wife are up to. Hell, I don't even know exactly where more than a couple of 'em live. Every one of them could be breaking the law in some fashion for all I know and I would be totally ignorant of it. Why should I expect Obama to be any more aware than I am about what members of his extended family are doing? |
|
02 Nov 08 - 06:21 AM (#2482312) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger Once Again Senator Obama Needs to Come Clean with the Latino Community: Contact: Robert Deposada, Latinos for Reform, +1-202-255-1480 WASHINGTON, Nov. 1 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Latinos for Reform (LFR) called on Senator Barack Obama to come clean with the American people, and particularly with the Latino community regarding the issue of his aunt, who has been in the U.S. illegally for four years now. "We have no doubts that Senator Obama is once again hiding the truth from the American people when it comes to the story of his aunt," said LFR Chairman Robert Deposada. "For crying out loud, everyone would agree that when people in other countries have relatives in government, it is a common practice to contact them for assistance when they have a problem. She knew she had a powerful Senator as her nephew, considering that she attended his swearing-in ceremony in the Senate. And this was not a traffic ticket we're talking about. She was ordered to leave the country by an immigration judge. So you can rest assure that she did contact him." "Senator Obama must come clean about his knowledge of her illegal status," Deposada added. "This situation makes us question why he remained so quiet during the immigration debate in the Senate and why he supported all the poison pills to kill the bipartisan legislation introduced last year in the U.S. Senate. He should have put his personal interest aside and help address the issue of comprehensive immigration reform." SOURCE Latinos for Reform |
|
02 Nov 08 - 10:04 AM (#2482426) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Ebbie Latinos for Reform (LFR) called on Senator Barack Obama to come clean with the American people, and particularly with the Latino community ... Why the Latino community, particularly? |
|
02 Nov 08 - 10:14 PM (#2482943) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger I don't know. The Latinos just seemed to want to jump in the middle of it. Probably because they're always taking it in the shorts for being in the country illegally, but if you're related to a sitting senator, you not only get to stay, buy you're rewarded with public housing to boot. |
|
27 Jan 09 - 09:53 PM (#2550677) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger If we're lucky, the Democrats and the Republicans can get together long enough to pass an Economic Recovery Act. Hopefully, there will be jobs in the act for people, much like the jobs that were generated in the legislation that was passed under FDR during the the Great Depression--not to be confussed with the last depression that was caused by whoever was running Ronald Reagan. And if we're lucky, this legislation will include some kind of language that will direct these jobs to legal American citizens, with strict sanctions for managers found in violation. |
|
28 Jan 09 - 03:28 PM (#2551280) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Les in Chorlton Riginslinger "And if we're lucky, this legislation will include some kind of language that will direct these jobs to legal American citizens, with strict sanctions for managers found in violation." the real problem is all those people who arrived after 1492 Best wishes L in C |
|
28 Jan 09 - 04:10 PM (#2551333) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger Les - Why not include the folks who arrived on the Siberian Ice Bridge and crowed out Kennewick Man while you're at it? |
|
29 Jan 09 - 03:50 AM (#2551717) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Les in Chorlton Because almost nobody believes that a large collection of people lived in North America before people came across the SIB. However when they did arrive they exterminated a lot of big creatures, Cheers Les |
|
29 Jan 09 - 08:13 AM (#2551850) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Les in Chorlton No I have probably got that wrong. I understand that people may have traveled from Asia around the coast in some kind of boats / canoes maybe? Cheers Les |
|
29 Jan 09 - 10:31 AM (#2551977) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger Well, I guess if we've concluded that everybody in North America is an immigrant, it only makes sense that we began to start to protect the borders once we concluded that we already had to many people, and were rapidly devouring the resources. |
|
29 Jan 09 - 12:32 PM (#2552060) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Les in Chorlton You live in a country that is rich in natural resources and you have used them rather a lot. That's it really. |
|
29 Jan 09 - 12:39 PM (#2552066) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger Yes well, it's a good time to cut down, I'd say! |
|
29 Jan 09 - 12:46 PM (#2552077) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Les in Chorlton Well Ringslinger, a truer word had seldom been said but I'm not sure I see much of a strategy so far - what do you think? |
|
29 Jan 09 - 01:35 PM (#2552125) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger No, no strategy, but paying for 30 years of Reaganomics will probably keep people from consuming as much over the course of the next few years. |
|
29 Jan 09 - 02:39 PM (#2552181) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Les in Chorlton I guess you right Ringslinger. I shouldn't really have joined in this thread without reading the previous 90+ posts. I complain when other people do it on my threads. So I am going out for a Curry and I wish you well. L in C |
|
29 Jan 09 - 05:15 PM (#2552300) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Don(Wyziwyg)T I must confess I am confused! Were they lying when they put all that in the history books about North America being opened up by:- Germans, Englishmen, Irishmen, Poles, Swedes, Russians, French, Chinese, Spanish, Italians, Sicilians, etc. etc. And you are worried about Mexicans because....? Don T. |
|
29 Jan 09 - 05:42 PM (#2552319) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Riginslinger I'm not sure anyone is worried about Mexicans in particular, it's simply the numbers of people. |
|
30 Jan 09 - 05:19 AM (#2552671) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Arnie Here in the UK we've just had a documentary on the situation of illegal immigrants in Calais. This French coastal town is only 21 miles from Dover and is a gathering place for illegal immigrants from Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea and a few other nationalities. The French interior minister visited the town this week and blamed the situation there on weak UK asylum and immigration controls. There are estimated to be between 2-300 immigrants in Calais at present with more joining them daily. The Brits have a border control at Calais port which involves searching in car boots and lorries to extricate any illegals before boarding the ferries, hence the backlog building up in Calais. Strangely, none of the illegals want to claim asylum in France, which they are perfectly entitled to do, they would rather live rough and eat at the Red Cross soup kitchens than claim asylum and be fingerprinted.This is because once the French take their fingerprints, they will always be returnable to France should they reach the UK and claim asylum. They seem to see the UK as some sort of Eldorado - not sure why though as they would get the same benefits here as are available in any other EU country. |
|
30 Jan 09 - 06:58 AM (#2552742) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: GUEST,Dean (Bristol) Legal immagration is causing enough problems in the UK without illegal. The south of England has saw a rise in crime in recent years. As reported in the Daily Mail and Telegraph, a lot of it is related to Eastern Europeans. |
|
30 Jan 09 - 07:20 AM (#2552764) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Ron Davies So the constant search--on both sides of the Pond--for scapegoats goes on. And several posters have already pointed out how reliable anything in the Daily Mail is. With the world-wide recession, Poles are now leaving the UK--and returning to Poland--which seems to be doing better than some other countries. In the US, it's painfully obvious what Mr. Riginslinger's attitude is toward Mexicans. It's the Brown Peril--to add to his other conspiracy theories. His alleged concern with overpopulation only will convince only people who have not followed his postings--in a myriad of threads--for years. |
|
30 Jan 09 - 01:22 PM (#2553054) Subject: RE: BS: Illegal Immigration From: Les in Chorlton "Legal immagration is causing enough problems in the UK without illegal. The south of England has saw a rise in crime in recent years. As reported in the Daily Mail and Telegraph, a lot of it is related to Eastern Europeans." Well if it's in the Mail & Telegraph it must be true. Imagine how much worse the crime wave would be if all those Brit Crooks had not been taken in by those kind Spaniards. L in C |