Grijalva invites Ashcroft to see vigilante 'justice'

Arizona Daily Star ^ | 14 Jan 2003 | Unkown

[JackelopeBreeder]

Grijalva invites Ashcroft to see vigilante 'justice'

ARIZONA DAILY STAR; Tuesday, January 14, 2003

U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva stepped up his campaign to crack down on vigilantes Monday by inviting Attorney General John Ashcroft to come to Southern Arizona to see the threat they pose to border security.

The Tucson Democrat told Ashcroft in a letter that the federal government's silence on the issue is "seen as giving official sanction to this racist movement, both by the perpetrators and victims of vigilante 'justice.' "

Ashcroft's voice, Grijalva added, "is needed now to make clear that private armed groups claiming law enforcement powers have no role in patrolling our border with Mexico."

Last week, shortly after he was sworn in, Grijalva called for a federal inquiry into the vigilante groups that have formed in response to the thousands of illegal immigrants who make their way across Arizona's border every year.

[Marine Inspector]

Mexico is obviously not racist in its southern border enforcement since the race seeking to enter Mexico is the same race that resides in Mexico

Funny, the race seeking to enter the US, the most, is the same race that resides in the US.

The vast majority of Americans and Mexicans are of the same race.

It's called Caucasian. Latino or Hispanic is not a race.

[Marine Inspector]

BTW, I understand that you, at least, formerly worked for the government's border control agency and not as one self-appointed. In your former capacity, you were quite subject to the rule of law, and especially so as a government official. That is more than can be said for the border volunteers. They may be subject to criminal or civil law but they are not regulated government agencies and I think you can admit that professionals have a different mindset.

I'm a current Federal Officer. And being regulated by the Government does not make one a professional.

Mindset has nothing to do with Government Regulation, unless you are in a public school.

Mi

[Marine Inspector]

If I served on the jury that tried a pope for illegally entering, my vote is not guilty.

So the Pope is above the law. What other laws can he ignore?

[Marine Inspector]

My question was whether Mexico is also racist (in your twisted mind) for keeping Guatemaleans from crossing their border.

Don't tell he the Mexican Military sometimes shots illegal border crossers form Guatemala, he'll blow a gasket.

[MissAmericanPie]

Same here, illegal immigration isn't appreciated by the Mexican American members of my family either.

[Marine Inspector]

Don't tell he = Don't tell him.

[A Navy Vet]

Thank you for a reasoned and courteous reply. Before I address your specific responses I'd like to make clear what my specific problems are with the mass immigration issue we're debating:

1. Illegal immigration is just that - illegal. I believe in the rule of law.
2. It is patentedly unfair to those who use the legal process.
3. No one has a "right" to join our social (societal) contract. Immigrants are invited...illegal immigrants ignore that.
4. Weekly, I read about a survey, study, panel, commission, poll that shows the negative impact this mass migration is having on American taxpayers.
5. The unsustainable size of the incoming human wave doesn't allow for assimilation which is beneficial to the societal contract....which brings me to another reality of the problem -
6. Lowering our standard of living. I have personally witnessed the California dream turn into a poverty stricken nightmare in sections and whole towns of Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego counties. I have seen entire neighborhoods degrade in value and living satisfaction. I attibute this not to any racial differences but simply due to overcrowding, which is a verifiable fact. The early Irish and Italian ghettos were products of overcrowding, although the wide open spaces and relatively unlimited resources eventually helped the situation. Times have changed.

I contend that the millions of Americans, and yes immigrants, who have worked to produce a lifestyle unlike any the World has ever seen have the right to maintain it. Remember, the people coming into America and signing on to our social contract do so at the pleasure of those currently within that society.

As for your belief that millions of more "right" thinking voters will cause the demise of Roe v. Wade when the decision lies with 7 individuals who have surprised conservatives before is simply naive. You suggest we add more problems and misery to our society and communities to maybe, possibly, hopefully overturn that decision? With respect, that's not rational.

I'll address the other stuff later...it's late.

[MissAmericanPie]

Your arguments fly in the face of the evidence. Take a look at the blue and red election map for the truth that, where there is a concentration of illegals, the area goes to the democrats. Many, most, of these illegals are Marxists. I do not support an invasion designed to negate my vote.

I am tired of hearing Americans called racist because they have inherited not only the Constitution, but the responsibiity to see it continues. No I will not trust these people to see to it that the Constitution continues until they earn my trust and they have not earned my, or any other conservatives trust by the evidence of their voting habits. Sell your snake oil all you want, but it will be spit back at you.

We do have the right to protect our borders, we do have the right to protest an invasion dangerous to the Constitution, we do have the right to protest our votes being negated, and we do have a right to protest our culture being dismantled, an I don't give a flying monkey what color the invaders are. It isn't about color, I doubt it ever has been. And this lame race card isn't buying what it use to anymore, the strip has worn smooth. No one is buying this bottle of snake oil anymore.

[Marine Inspector]

Great post.

[dirtboy]

Did I mention Spencer? Where?

Your post #7 (which was yanked by the mods) implied the border groups were racist, and American Patrol is one of those groups, and Spencer leads that group. Just because your comment was deleted, it doesn't mean I don't remember it, but I've come to expect that level of dishonesty from you.

[dirtboy]

. As with all other potential prosecutions, there is prosecutorial discretion which means that the prosecuting authorities may choose to prosecute or NOT as THEY see fit not as a bunch of silly hobbyists running around in pickups in the desert see fit.

Nice try again, weasel boy. Trying to equate prosecution with detection by private citizens. More dishonesty...

[dirtboy]

Remember, the people coming into America and signing on to our social contract do so at the pleasure of those currently within that society.

And current federal laws regarding immigration status were drafted by duly elected representatives of the people. Border and immigration control is in turn a proper function of the federal government (unlike much of what they meddle in). So when federal, state and local officials decide to ignore federal immigration law, they subvert the will of the people and the Constitution. But BlackElk seems to thing that's just hunky-dory.

[dirtboy]

your federal government and mine and your state government, my state government and most other state governments simply do not choose to do what you want. This is nothing new. Most conservatives are all too used to their governments NOT doing what they want, law or no law.

I hate to tell you this, but this isn't about me wanting a law passed and the federal government refusing to pass such. This is about the federal government enforcing laws that already exist on the books. And state and local officials refusing to acknowledge federal law, even though immigration is clearly a federal function by any interpretation of the Constitution. You, in your usual twisted manner, are trying to equate disregard of immigration law as some kind of noble federalist concept when it is exactly the opposite. But we've come to expect that level of discourse from you on this thread.

[dirtboy]

In your former capacity, you were quite subject to the rule of law, and especially so as a government official. That is more than can be said for the border volunteers.

Either cite specific examples of how they are breaking the law or retract. You are bordering on slander here.

[occam's chainsaw]

Great posts
(although such common sense is probably wasted on the obtuse)

[BlackElk]

Sorry, other than here, I have never heard of Spencer and don't really need to. I know what I see. You are frustrated because my lapels are not available for you to grab.

[BlackElk]

Ummmmm, the point which went in your left ear and out your right ear unobstructed was that the Looneys in the desert do0 not dictate to federal prosecutors what laws will be enforced and against whom. If the looneys idetify the entire Mexican nation as "illegally" crossing the border, that constitutes no command to prosecutors or other government attorneys to prosecute or sue. Nor does the mere existence of a legislative enactment command specific performance by prosecutors. Talk to a lawyer before continuing the fantasy that just because you and your buds are hot and bothered on the subject, the prosecutors must obey your priorities. Laws are broken all the time. Sometimes, the perps are even prosecuted.

[muslims=borg]

Choose one of the following.

1. Illegal immigration is OK.
2. Illegal immigration is NOT OK.

[SwankyC]

...border hysteria....

This conversation is over.

[SwankyC]

</I> Closing Italics