Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Full Text, Bush Speech.
Instapundit ^ | May 15, 2006 | GWB

Posted on 05/15/2006 5:14:48 PM PDT by Leisler

FROM THE WHITE HOUSE, here's the full text of Bush's speech. Click "read more" to see it.

Read More »

Embargoed Until Delivery

At 8:01:30 P.M. EDT

Monday, May 15, 2006

THE PRESIDENT DELIVERS AN ADDRESS TO THE NATION

As Prepared for Delivery

Good evening. I have asked for a few minutes of your time to discuss a matter of national importance – the reform of America’s immigration system.

The issue of immigration stirs intense emotions – and in recent weeks, Americans have seen those emotions on display. On the streets of major cities, crowds have rallied in support of those in our country illegally. At our southern border, others have organized to stop illegal immigrants from coming in. Across the country, Americans are trying to reconcile these contrasting images. And in Washington, the debate over immigration reform has reached a time of decision. Tonight, I will make it clear where I stand, and where I want to lead our country on this vital issue.

We must begin by recognizing the problems with our immigration system. For decades, the United States has not been in complete control of its borders. As a result, many who want to work in our economy have been able to sneak across our border – and millions have stayed.

Once here, illegal immigrants live in the shadows of our society. Many use forged documents to get jobs, and that makes it difficult for employers to verify that the workers they hire are legal. Illegal immigration puts pressure on public schools and hospitals ... strains state and local budgets ... and brings crime to our communities. These are real problems, yet we must remember that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are decent people who work hard, support their families, practice their faith, and lead responsible lives. They are a part of American life – but they are beyond the reach and protection of American law.

We are a Nation of laws, and we must enforce our laws. We are also a Nation of immigrants, and we must uphold that tradition, which has strengthened our country in so many ways. These are not contradictory goals – America can be a lawful society and a welcoming society at the same time. We will fix the problems created by illegal immigration, and we will deliver a system that is secure, orderly, and fair. So I support comprehensive immigration reform that will accomplish five clear objectives.

First, the United States must secure its borders. This is a basic responsibility of a sovereign Nation. It is also an urgent requirement of our national security. Our objective is straightforward: The border should be open to trade and lawful immigration – and shut to illegal immigrants, as well as criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists.

I was the governor of a state that has a twelve-hundred mile border with Mexico. So I know how difficult it is to enforce the border, and how important it is. Since I became President, we have increased funding for border security by 66 percent, and expanded the Border Patrol from about 9,000 to 12,000 agents. The men and women of our Border Patrol are doing a fine job in difficult circumstances – and over the past five years, we have apprehended and sent home about six million people entering America illegally.

Despite this progress, we do not yet have full control of the border, and I am determined to change that. Tonight I am calling on Congress to provide funding for dramatic improvements in manpower and technology at the border. By the end of 2008, we will increase the number of Border Patrol officers by an additional 6,000. When these new agents are deployed, we will have more than doubled the size of the Border Patrol during my Presidency.

At the same time, we are launching the most technologically advanced border security initiative in American history. We will construct high-tech fences in urban corridors, and build new patrol roads and barriers in rural areas. We will employ motion sensors … infrared cameras … and unmanned aerial vehicles to prevent illegal crossings. America has the best technology in the world – and we will ensure that the Border Patrol has the technology they need to do their job and secure our border.

Training thousands of new Border Patrol agents and bringing the most advanced technology to the border will take time. Yet the need to secure our border is urgent. So I am announcing several immediate steps to strengthen border enforcement during this period of transition:

One way to help during this transition is to use the National Guard. So in coordination with governors, up to 6,000 Guard members will be deployed to our southern border. The Border Patrol will remain in the lead. The Guard will assist the Border Patrol by operating surveillance systems … analyzing intelligence … installing fences and vehicle barriers … building patrol roads … and providing training. Guard units will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities – that duty will be done by the Border Patrol. This initial commitment of Guard members would last for a period of one year. After that, the number of Guard forces will be reduced as new Border Patrol agents and new technologies come online. It is important for Americans to know that we have enough Guard forces to win the war on terror, respond to natural disasters, and help secure our border.

The United States is not going to militarize the southern border. Mexico is our neighbor, and our friend. We will continue to work cooperatively to improve security on both sides of the border ... to confront common problems like drug trafficking and crime ... and to reduce illegal immigration.

Another way to help during this period of transition is through state and local law enforcement in our border communities. So we will increase federal funding for state and local authorities assisting the Border Patrol on targeted enforcement missions. And we will give state and local authorities the specialized training they need to help federal officers apprehend and detain illegal immigrants. State and local law enforcement officials are an important resource – and they are part of our strategy to secure our border communities.

The steps I have outlined will improve our ability to catch people entering our country illegally. At the same time, we must ensure that every illegal immigrant we catch crossing our southern border is returned home. More than 85 percent of the illegal immigrants we catch crossing the southern border are Mexicans, and most are sent back home within 24 hours. But when we catch illegal immigrants from other countries, it is not as easy to send them home. For many years, the government did not have enough space in our detention facilities to hold them while the legal process unfolded. So most were released back into our society and asked to return for a court date. When the date arrived, the vast majority did not show up. This practice, called “catch and release,” is unacceptable – and we will end it.

We are taking several important steps to meet this goal. We have expanded the number of beds in our detention facilities, and we will continue to add more. We have expedited the legal process to cut the average deportation time. And we are making it clear to foreign governments that they must accept back their citizens who violate our immigration laws. As a result of these actions, we have ended “catch and release” for illegal immigrants from some countries. And I will ask Congress for additional funding and legal authority, so we can end “catch and release” at the southern border once and for all. When people know that they will be caught and sent home if they enter our country illegally, they will be less likely to try to sneak in.

Second, to secure our border, we must create a temporary worker program. The reality is that there are many people on the other side of our border who will do anything to come to America to work and build a better life. They walk across miles of desert in the summer heat, or hide in the back of 18-wheelers to reach our country. This creates enormous pressure on our border that walls and patrols alone will not stop. To secure the border effectively, we must reduce the numbers of people trying to sneak across.

Therefore, I support a temporary worker program that would create a legal path for foreign workers to enter our country in an orderly way, for a limited period of time. This program would match willing foreign workers with willing American employers for jobs Americans are not doing. Every worker who applies for the program would be required to pass criminal background checks. And temporary workers must return to their home country at the conclusion of their stay.

A temporary worker program would meet the needs of our economy, and it would give honest immigrants a way to provide for their families while respecting the law. A temporary worker program would reduce the appeal of human smugglers – and make it less likely that people would risk their lives to cross the border. It would ease the financial burden on state and local governments, by replacing illegal workers with lawful taxpayers. And above all, a temporary worker program would add to our security by making certain we know who is in our country and why they are here.

Third, we need to hold employers to account for the workers they hire. It is against the law to hire someone who is in this country illegally. Yet businesses often cannot verify the legal status of their employees, because of the widespread problem of document fraud. Therefore, comprehensive immigration reform must include a better system for verifying documents and work eligibility. A key part of that system should be a new identification card for every legal foreign worker. This card should use biometric technology, such as digital fingerprints, to make it tamper-proof. A tamper-proof card would help us enforce the law – and leave employers with no excuse for violating it. And by making it harder for illegal immigrants to find work in our country, we would discourage people from crossing the border illegally in the first place.

Fourth, we must face the reality that millions of illegal immigrants are already here. They should not be given an automatic path to citizenship. This is amnesty, and I oppose it. Amnesty would be unfair to those who are here lawfully – and it would invite further waves of illegal immigration.

Some in this country argue that the solution is to deport every illegal immigrant – and that any proposal short of this amounts to amnesty. I disagree. It is neither wise nor realistic to round up millions of people, many with deep roots in the United States, and send them across the border. There is a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant, and a program of mass deportation. That middle ground recognizes that there are differences between an illegal immigrant who crossed the border recently – and someone who has worked here for many years, and has a home, a family, and an otherwise clean record. I believe that illegal immigrants who have roots in our country and want to stay should have to pay a meaningful penalty for breaking the law … to pay their taxes … to learn English … and to work in a job for a number of years. People who meet these conditions should be able to apply for citizenship – but approval would not be automatic, and they will have to wait in line behind those who played by the rules and followed the law. What I have just described is not amnesty – it is a way for those who have broken the law to pay their debt to society, and demonstrate the character that makes a good citizen.

Fifth, we must honor the great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made us one Nation out of many peoples. The success of our country depends upon helping newcomers assimilate into our society, and embrace our common identity as Americans. Americans are bound together by our shared ideals, an appreciation of our history, respect for the flag we fly, and an ability to speak and write the English language. English is also the key to unlocking the opportunity of America. English allows newcomers to go from picking crops to opening a grocery … from cleaning offices to running offices … from a life of low-paying jobs to a diploma, a career, and a home of their own. When immigrants assimilate and advance in our society, they realize their dreams ... they renew our spirit ... and they add to the unity of America.

Tonight, I want to speak directly to Members of the House and the Senate: An immigration reform bill needs to be comprehensive, because all elements of this problem must be addressed together – or none of them will be solved at all. The House has passed an immigration bill. The Senate should act by the end of this month – so we can work out the differences between the two bills, and Congress can pass a comprehensive bill for me to sign into law.

America needs to conduct this debate on immigration in a reasoned and respectful tone. Feelings run deep on this issue – and as we work it out, all of us need to keep some things in mind. We cannot build a unified country by inciting people to anger, or playing on anyone’s fears, or exploiting the issue of immigration for political gain. We must always remember that real lives will be affected by our debates and decisions, and that every human being has dignity and value no matter what their citizenship papers say.

I know many of you listening tonight have a parent or a grandparent who came here from another country with dreams of a better life. You know what freedom meant to them, and you know that America is a more hopeful country because of their hard work and sacrifice. As President, I have had the opportunity to meet people of many backgrounds, and hear what America means to them. On a visit to Bethesda Naval Hospital, Laura and I met a wounded Marine named Guadalupe Denogean. Master Gunnery Sergeant Denogean came to the United States from Mexico when he was a boy. He spent his summers picking crops with his family, and then he volunteered for the United States Marine Corps as soon as he was able. During the liberation of Iraq, Master Gunnery Sergeant Denogean was seriously injured. When asked if he had any requests, he made two – a promotion for the corporal who helped rescue him … and the chance to become an American citizen. And when this brave Marine raised his right hand, and swore an oath to become a citizen of the country he had defended for more than 26 years, I was honored to stand at his side.

We will always be proud to welcome people like Guadalupe Denogean as fellow Americans. Our new immigrants are just what they have always been – people willing to risk everything for the dream of freedom. And America remains what she has always been – the great hope on the horizon … an open door to the future … a blessed and promised land. We honor the heritage of all who come here, no matter where they are from, because we trust in our country’s genius for making us all Americans – one Nation under God. Thank you, and good night.

END


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: aliens; bush; bushtruth; enforcement; guestworker; presidentialaddress; transcript
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360361-379 last
To: ZULU
There is a basic concept in law called "due diligence" -- failure to learn a relevant fact is treated much more harshly if you chose to look the other way than if you failed to discover it after a good-faith effort.

The illegal alien problem, by and large, isn't driven by employers who were honestly fooled after a routine check of SSN, green-card records, and the like came back OK. It is driven by employers who simply don't bother, or who actively prefer to employ illegals (because they can be threatened with deportation if they complain about unsafe conditions, lousy pay, etc).

Exploiting the issue to sneak in the government's pre-existing your-papers-please agenda is unacceptable.

361 posted on 05/16/2006 10:33:45 AM PDT by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies]

To: BlueStateDepression
Good fisking of this delusional pap.

Hey, the '6,000' guardsmen. I think, I am not sure and how can I be, being but a citizen and dependent upon the cryptic weasel words of Bush, but anyways I take it this doesn't mean at any time there will be 6,000 men on duty. I think, again I am not sure, that it means, over a year, there will be 6,000 deployed, thus at anyone time this words out to a extra 270 people. If Bush ment 6,000 every two weeks, then that would tie up 156,000 guardsmen a year. Que Sabe? Wow. I feel good now.
362 posted on 05/16/2006 11:14:22 AM PDT by Leisler (Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Therefore, it is only by interpretation that someone can arrive at such a conclusion that our legal/illegal immigrant distinctions are present in ancient middle eastern cultures.

The point is that the Hebrews were not illegal aliens in a foreign land, but we do have illegal aliens today.

Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." Matt. 22:21

Apparently you do not believe this passage, but allow the 12 to 20 million illegals in the country to stay here, but your faith overlooks the 4 million waiting in line to immigrate here legally. There are going to be delayed for several more years due to your faith.

If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed; Exodus 22:2:

Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent— the LORD detests them both. Proverbs 17:15

From Luke 28-37: "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."
But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"
In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins[e] and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'
"Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?" The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him." Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."
(Note that Jesus excluded the lawbreakers from consideration here.)

363 posted on 05/16/2006 11:17:55 AM PDT by GarySpFc (Jesus on Immigration, John 10:1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies]

Fon news reports that if the National Guard actively detains illegal invaders that they will sue in court.

Don't that just beat all. A foreign nation threatening to sue in our courts over our ability to defend our own nation.

Thanks Liberal LEFTISTS...you are responsible for THIS!


364 posted on 05/16/2006 11:36:18 AM PDT by BlueStateDepression
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: BlueStateDepression

By the THEY I refer to Mexico. The way I wrote that it appears ai meant FOX would do the suing. My appologies for that.


365 posted on 05/16/2006 11:37:15 AM PDT by BlueStateDepression
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: steve-b

O.K.

That makes sense to me.


366 posted on 05/16/2006 11:57:01 AM PDT by ZULU (Non nobis, non nobis, Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 361 | View Replies]

To: No Blue States

I think the Dems would support NO troops on the border and total unqualified approval of illegals.

The difference between Bush's proposal and a Democrat proposal is the Dems would hire the illegals already here with tax dollars to run a bus srvice from Tiahuana and Mexico City to bring more in.


367 posted on 05/16/2006 11:59:40 AM PDT by ZULU (Non nobis, non nobis, Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Bubba182
I expect we will get played on all this until the elections.

I agree. Assuage the angry base with pretty words.

368 posted on 05/16/2006 12:07:36 PM PDT by PhilDragoo (Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: xzins
THE BIBLE AND THE BORDER: ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION FROM A CHRISTIAN PERSPECTIVE

--Robert Klein Engler

HE IS AN ILLINOIS MINUTEMAN!!

(CHICAGO--7 Nov. '05) Most social observers agree that the United States is a very religious country. By all measures of religiosity, the U. S. ranks high. At least 85 percent of the U. S. population claims they believe in God. Church attendance is high in the U. S. and so are donations to religious groups. With such a large number of citizens holding religious beliefs, it is little wonder that these beliefs are beginning to enter the debate over illegal immigration. To some observers it may seem that God and the border patrol are going to meet head-on.

If the U. S. is a very religious country, then it is also a predominantly Christian country. Some 80 percent of Americans identify themselves as Christians. Yale professor S. P. Huntington argues that Anglo-Protestant Christian beliefs are at the core of traditional American values. Anglo-Protestant beliefs, however, have changed and developed through the centuries since the founding of the nation. From the doorway of a storefront church on the south side of Chicago to the stained-glass windows of New York City's St. Patrick's Cathedral, the U. S. offers multiple expressions of the Christian faith.

Many Christians are now caught up in the debate about illegal immigration. Some do not know what to do to stop illegal immigration while at the same time living a faith that asks its believers to practice charity and forgiveness. Other Christians mistakenly believe that groups who are against illegal immigration, groups like the Minuteman Project, are immoral and dangerous. These Christians believe that illegal immigrants should be seen as people who need our assistance and compassion, not our judgment and condemnation.

Does the Bible and Christian theology have anything to add to the illegal immigration debate? Are Christians supposed to act one way or another on this social issue? I think Christianity does have some answers to the moral questions raised by illegal immigration. These answers are to be found both in Christian scripture and theology. In my view it is possible to be both a good Christian and have secure borders. It is also possible to demand illegal immigrants be deported and to practice Christian charity.

In chapter 13 of the apostle Paul's Letter to the Romans, the English translation reads, "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed..." (Romans 13:1-2). Clearly, this is advice to Christians to follow the laws of their nation and to respect the laws of other nations.

When people come to the U. S. illegally, they are committing a crime. They are doing something that is against the governing authorities of the U. S. Illegal immigrants are not good Christians from Paul's perspective. Illegal immigrants may have reasons for breaking U. S. laws, but those reasons do not excuse their illegal actions. We should not let charity and compassion blind us from the criminal act illegal immigrants commit.

Those who work in a law-abiding way against illegal immigration and those who ask that the laws of the U. S. be enforced are being good Christians in doing so. Likewise, those who demand that illegal immigrants be detained and deported respect the governing authorities of their nation. In line with Paul's argument, they are doing what good Christians ought to do.

This is not to say that illegal immigrants should be treated badly. Christians practice charity and respect for the individual, but they do not condone law breaking. Law-abiding citizens of the U. S. have every right to make sure their borders are secure and that illegal immigrants are removed from their country as quickly and humanely as possible.

There are ideas implied in Paul's other writings that also shed light on the contemporary issue of illegal immigration. In his Letter to Philemon, Paul address the issue of what is to be done about a runaway slave. In short, Paul sends back the runaway slave, Onesimus, and encourages his master, Philemon, to accept and forgive him. This may seem an unusual act by Paul to those who know that under Roman law, the master had absolute authority over the life and person of the slave.

Although illegal immigrants are not slaves the way Onesimus was a slave in the apostle Paul's time, we can see illegal immigrants today as persons running away from their moral obligations to improve their own country and not run down ours. If that is the case, then it is certainly a moral and Christian thing to encourage illegal immigrants to return home and make life better in their own country.

Moving from scripture to the domain of Christian theology, we learn that moral actions have both an objective and subjective component. The theologian Thomas Aquinas held that both subjective intention and objective consequence are necessary in making a moral judgment. In one of Thomas's examples, while out hunting it is better to kill your father believing he is a stag, than to kill a stag believing it is your father.

From the point of view of the moral theology of Thomas Aquinas, we may judge illegal immigrants from Mexico from both a subjective and objective point of view. Objectively, illegal immigrants are breaking U. S. immigration laws, but do these criminals have a subjective intention that outweighs the objective criminal act? Is breaking U. S. immigration laws justified because it is the only way poor Mexicans can feed their families, or do illegal immigrants who come to the U. S. have another choice?

Coming to the U. S. illegally is not the only choice poor Mexicans can make to improve their lives. They could also choose to stay in Mexico and work to make Mexico a better country. In fact, as good Christians it is their moral obligation to do this. It is better to improve Mexico than to be a criminal in the U. S. Illegal immigration may be the easy way out, but it is not the moral way. Christians are supposed to do what is good, even if the good is difficult to do.

Although Christianity encourages acts of charity, we cannot be both charitable and law breakers. We cannot rob Peter to pay Paul. The Archbishop of Mexico City should be encouraged to prevent Mexicans from coming illegally to the U. S. He should encourage Mexicans to work for Christian social change in Mexico instead of criticizing U. S. immigration policies. Unless the Mexican state changes, many Mexican citizens will never be able to have a fulfilled life. Nor can they find fulfillment by breaking U. S. immigration laws. To push the poor from your door to your neighbor's door is not an example of Christian charity.

It remains to be seen what other religious questions will be raised about illegal immigration to the U. S. It seems clear for the moment that as the debate over illegal immigration grows, so, too will the theological and scriptural debate over this issue grow. It may very well be that just as liberal Christianity in the U. S. inspired the civil rights movement of the late 20th century, so, conservative Christianity will inspire the secure border movement of the early 21st century.

Robert Klein Engler lives in Chicago. He is an adjunct professor at Roosevelt University. His book, A WINTER OF WORDS, about the turmoil at Daley College, is available from amazon.com.
369 posted on 05/16/2006 12:14:53 PM PDT by GarySpFc (Jesus on Immigration, John 10:1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo

I don't see the base buying it this time. If Bush wants to help the GOP, there needs to be fence a wall construction on a large scale. The ICE raids are a Dog and Pony show that does not fool anyone. If Bush was to be believed on that score they need to be arresting executives at Tyson Foods and "Frog Marching" them to the dock. I don't see Bush doing anything like that. There is time to build a lot of fence.


370 posted on 05/16/2006 12:15:58 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 368 | View Replies]

To: xzins
However, there is more that informs us to be a compassionate people than suggests that we should be a hard, legalistic people.

Jesus was accused of being a hard and legalistic man, when he told the Pharisees to look on a woman and lust is adultery. That said, we are to be compassionate. However, we are to worship God in spirit and truth, and spirit without truth is mere sympathy.
371 posted on 05/16/2006 12:17:18 PM PDT by GarySpFc (Jesus on Immigration, John 10:1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: Washi
By that standard (politically acceptable vs. not politically acceptable) what can, or will ever be done?

IMHO - It is not a political problem. President Clinton had no problems deporting Elian Gonzalez even in the face of intense political pressure not too. Clinton cared more about what Castro thought then what the majority of us Americans thought. Deep down the Oligarchy cares not one bit about politics. They think Globally and act Globally. Local politics is the canard they brainwash the sheeple with. Our current President appears to care more about what Fox thinks, then what the majority of us Americans think.

372 posted on 05/16/2006 3:48:19 PM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
Cute, no?

No.

373 posted on 05/16/2006 5:45:09 PM PDT by skateman (Bush good, demonrats bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

I really don't care who you are or how many posts you have made.

It is cost prohibitive. Wasting a single dime on simply rounding them up and shipping them back is a dime wasted. The incentive to come here in the first place is what needs to be removed, and that doesn't cost a thing, and would infact free up even more resources. No more free health care, tuition breaks, and so on.

Clear?


374 posted on 05/16/2006 8:12:19 PM PDT by Gorobei
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc
12 to 20 million illegals in the country to stay here

I don't think you can find where I said the above. What I have said is that I think the President's faith is informing his policy. I also have said that the bible DOES require compassionate treatment of the alien. It's simply a biblical fact. The Hebrews were once illegal aliens in a foreign land. Certainly you don't think that the sack of all those cities they overthrew in their invasion of Palestine was approved by the laws of those cities????

375 posted on 05/16/2006 9:03:18 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It. Supporting our Troops Means Praying for them to Win!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: xzins
The Hebrews were once illegal aliens in a foreign land. Certainly you don't think that the sack of all those cities they overthrew in their invasion of Palestine was approved by the laws of those cities????

No, the Hebrews were never illegal aliens...period.

No, the overthrow of the cities was not approved by the kings of those cities, but what you are missing is the Lord was the authority who told them to overthrow them. He was the governing legal authority at the time, and the Hebrews attacked at His command. The Lord specifically commanded the Hebrews to drive out the other kings. It is simply not correct to say the Hebrews were illegal aliens.
376 posted on 05/16/2006 9:50:44 PM PDT by GarySpFc (Jesus on Immigration, John 10:1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies]

To: Gorobei
"I really don't care who you are or how many posts you have made."

I'm pointing out that I'm just "slightly" more likely to understand the ettiquette of the forum than you, NOOB.

"It is cost prohibitive. Wasting a single dime on simply rounding them up and shipping them back is a dime wasted. The incentive to come here in the first place is what needs to be removed, and that doesn't cost a thing, and would infact free up even more resources. No more free health care, tuition breaks, and so on."

Wrong. It is NOT cost prohibitive. It is actually cheap at the price. The economic impact of the money sent home every year ($30 billion/year) ALONE is six times the TOTAL budget of INS ($5.3 billion). The net effect of having that $30 billion not spent in the US economy is at least $150 billion dollars (assuming a multiplier effect of 5X). This says nothing about the direct costs.

I agree that it would be nice to reduce the incentives, but that is even less likely to happen than deportation.

377 posted on 05/17/2006 4:09:04 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 374 | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc
the Hebrews were never illegal aliens...period.

IF it were according to the law of that land, then they wouldn't have had to conquer the cities.

As it was, they had to subjugate.

It is the law of our land that you cannot take my property except for a public use. If you come in with a team of lawyers and a court order and take it and hand it over to a Strip Mall, then you have demonstrated your power.

Now....what's the law of the land regarding the taking of property?

378 posted on 05/17/2006 5:13:12 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It. Supporting our Troops Means Praying for them to Win!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

""Wrong. It is NOT cost prohibitive.""

Yes, it is. Might as well throw the billions right down the sewer for all the good it will do.

Remove the incentives, and they will go back themselves. If no one can hire them, no one can give them medical care, etc...there will be no reason to be here. They can go home, and then come in through the front door with the rest of the lawful immigrants.


379 posted on 05/17/2006 3:04:31 PM PDT by Gorobei
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360361-379 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson