1 posted on
07/30/2002 4:05:02 PM PDT by
sarcasm
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
To: sarcasm
There's one solution to these deaths in the desert: they can stay in Mexico.
2 posted on
07/30/2002 4:07:50 PM PDT by
My2Cents
To: sarcasm
...stay in Mexico, and imigrate legally.
3 posted on
07/30/2002 4:08:41 PM PDT by
My2Cents
To: sarcasm
Wasn't the Berlin Wall built to keep people in?
To: sarcasm
Not even citizens and yet they're playing the race card as well as anyone. Go figure.
To: sarcasm
Excuse me. Are you sure you got that right? Are you sure it wasn't PMS?
To: sarcasm
Hell no, electrify it...
7 posted on
07/30/2002 4:12:16 PM PDT by
Vidalia
To: sarcasm
Tear down the wall and build a bigger one!
8 posted on
07/30/2002 4:12:34 PM PDT by
NorseWood
To: sarcasm
Yeah, I should send this guy my book. Berkley and the Rise of Ignorance
To: sarcasm
PNS contributor Joseph Nevins (josephnevins@hotmail.com) is a post-doctoral researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, and author of "Operation Gatekeeper: The Rise of the 'Illegal Alien' and the Making of the U.S.-Mexico Boundary" (Routledge). It's tough to get a job in Berkley, I hear...especially with a degree from there. So, we have another PhD sucking on the 'grant titty', out of our taxes, writing this crap.
11 posted on
07/30/2002 4:13:43 PM PDT by
beowolf
To: sarcasm
If we are being invaded and we are being invaded, the military should be deployed on the border. Period.
There should be no hesitation, no question.
There are legal ways to get in this country.
15 posted on
07/30/2002 4:16:11 PM PDT by
dtel
To: sarcasm
I wonder if this
dumb#@$ loses sleep at night wondering how many burglars are killed breaking into law abiding people's homes.
20 posted on
07/30/2002 4:20:13 PM PDT by
Godel
To: sarcasm
"Only by recognizing the inevitability of immigration and welcoming -- rather trying to repel --immigrants can we stop the deaths."
The only to stop it is to welcome the illegals!
OK, and when they come for your house you'll say welcome to them because there is no way to stop them. Mi casa, su casa!
And finally when they start sleeping with your wife, then....
To: sarcasm
A report last August from the General Accounting Office found "no clear indication" that unauthorized crossings along the Southwest boundary have declined since1994. An in-depth study released recently by the Public Policy Institute of California confirms this, while attributing the rise in migrant deaths to enhanced boundaryenforcement.Growing socioeconomic ties and widening inequality between the United States and Mexico (and increasingly beyond) -- combined with the will of migrants to escape
poverty and to pursue their basic human right to work, maintain their families and have an adequate standard of living -- make unauthorized migration inevitable.
Does this comment frost you or what? NAFTA was supposed to lessen illegal immigration. First we send the jobs south, then they take the jobs and stay home. Remember that fantasy that was cramed down our throats as 80 to 90% of the American public demanded Congress stop NAFTA, only to be ignored?
Now we're told that widening desparity has made illegal immigration all but assured. This is infuriating!
I guess going from a $5 billion dollar trade surplus to a $30 billion dollar trade deficit just wasn't enough to do the trick. Whatya say we return the jobs to the US and tank NAFTA for the open borders sham that it is.
To: sarcasm
Widen the Rio Grande and extend it to the Pacific Ocean. The people need work. Maybe someone else can find a way to divert the water further inland to help with drought stricken areas. This project could of course be funded by the local governments. If you don't like it you can give it back to the Apache Indians.
To: sarcasm
When Washington, D.C., began its "territorial denial" strategy in the mid-1990s, officials predicted that it would discourage many migrants from crossing by pushing them away from border cities and towns into harsh mountain and desert areas where they would rationally decide to forgo the risks and return home. These predictions soon proved false, as the number of fatalities -- largely from exposure to the elements and drowning -- rose dramatically. Oh, so WASHINGTON, D.C., did this in the mid 1990's. Gosh, why didn't the PRESIDENT at the time do something to stop the District from performing this awful deed? Of course, later on in the article , a U.S. President does get blamed for future deaths...
The Bush administration's proposed increase of $1.2 billion for immigration enforcement will do nothing to change this. To pretendand behave otherwise is to effectively sentence hundreds of migrants to death each year.
Had not the title itself spoke volumes, I think the article should have had a "Barf" warning...
32 posted on
07/30/2002 4:30:20 PM PDT by
LRS
To: sarcasm
What happened to the puke, gag, barf alert on this one? Anyway, secure the damn borders and someone please tell this leftist idiot to shut up and quit licking the boots of Vincente Fox.
34 posted on
07/30/2002 4:31:44 PM PDT by
healey22
To: sarcasm
"U.S. officials are not deliberately killing migrants.."
The idiot who wrote this piece just destroyed his won thesis.
36 posted on
07/30/2002 4:33:38 PM PDT by
lawdog
To: sarcasm
One big difference is that the Berlin Wall was to keep the people in not out. Every sovereign nation, including Mexico, has the right to keep people out, none have the right to keep their own people, except convicted criminals, in.
41 posted on
07/30/2002 4:41:48 PM PDT by
El Gato
To: sarcasm
Moreover, Washington has aggressively pushed the liberalization of foreign economies such as Mexico's, a process that has predictably intensified migratory pressures among those displaced in the name of economic efficiency. Huh? Liberalizing foreign economies should bring them more jobs, not less. The fact that Mexico, and much of the of Latin America, does not a free economy is what causes the conditions that make their people want to come here. That and rampant corruption, which tends to go along with a non market economy, or one controlled by a very few. Conditions which are becoming all to familiar in our own country, come to think of it.
44 posted on
07/30/2002 4:44:58 PM PDT by
El Gato
To: sarcasm
"Denying any responsibility for the deaths, U.S. officials' typical response..." I think I just had an aneurysm.
No doubt about it. We are surrounded by complete and totally idiots.
So, if measures to keep illegals out on the macro level are bad and are what's responsible for these deaths, does the same apply at the micro level? If I lock all my doors, and a burgler tries to get in through a second story window, but instead falls and breaks his neck, am I responsible for the death because I locked my doors making it difficult for him to enter my home illegally...
49 posted on
07/30/2002 4:56:55 PM PDT by
Slainte
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson