S Folinsky

It would be very much appreciated if you could reconcile your statement and your citation to the WikiPedia article. I happen to find the article to be cogent and a reasonable statement of the law.

robin1234

Are you referring to programs that had been put in place by the Bush administration? Presumably much of the money was disbursed during the succeeding administration...?

Giantaxe

Snopes take on some of these "statistics":

http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/taxes.asp

Oregon4now

NO ...
I do not care who the hell he is, he certainly does not deserve my respect and last time I checked I was still able to use freedom of speech... Though for how much longer I am not sure..

Agree it is terrible about the health benefits for the WTC workers.

robin1234

You really are making no sense. If you think Gestapo tactics involved "calling for investigations" then you are very naive or ignorant of 20th century history. Just in case you don't understand me; the Gestapo didn't have to "call for investigations." If they wanted to investigate, they did so. If they wanted to arrest someone or interrogate them, they did so. They were subject to political pressure, but not legal constraints (except when it suited the State or the powerful.)

sir_eccles

Fair enough, I just want to point out that if you want to be taken seriously in this discussion rather than a raving loon who parrots Glen Beck, a certain level of decorum would be appreciated.

Oregon4now

I read the article and it pretty much backs up what I posted, I guess the numbers could be off by a few % either higher or lower.

S Folinsky

Again you are confusing -- you are in total contempt of the Constitution, but want to live in a country "guided by law and order." Were two words "law and" a typo on your part.

Also, on the "anchor baby" thing, where do you get the idea that "under our laws, entitled to invite the rest of their family to join them." What "law" are you talking about? I believe that the Constitution, Acts of Congress and the court cases interpreting them pretty much constitute "law."

I will also admit to treating all tables as suspect [from anybody] unless they are explained. To my mind, facts are often necessary to reach conclusions. A common fallacy is disguising conclusions as fact. [If you are going to do that, then say so -- e.g. "axioms" in Euclidean geometry].

Oregon4now

Agreed... BTW I am not a Fan of Glenn Beck nor a tea party player, I am capable of making up my own mind all by myself.
This is BE if you had not noticed, show me where the decorum is when discussing politics or anything that goes against the popular perception of the forum regulars... Oh wait, I guess that just applies to me.

AmerLisa

Without going any further in your post, that said it all to me.....

My ex-husband's father (and obviously paternal relatives) are all hispanic. My older daughter looks slightly hispanic.....brown eyes, good tan. Wonder if that would be enough to have someone ask her?

Anyway, my ex-FIL died at the beginning of this year, lovely man (shame his son was such a butt, but you find them everywhere....) I would have been very sad and extremely angry had a police officer stopped him to ask where he was born. What a crock of shit....

S Folinsky

You are 100% correct that the Constitution protects freedom of speech for those in contempt of the Constitution. You seem confident that freedom of speech might be destroyed -- but there a lot of people sworn to uphold the Constitution.

I happen to think that it is great that the Constitution is enshrined for what the United States stands for.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

meauxna

BritishExpats.com Site Rules:

1. BritishExpats.com is an interactive site, and everyone who participates is "in it together", please treat others the way you wish to be treated. Personal attacks will not be tolerated. Challenge others' points of view and opinions, but do so respectfully and thoughtfully ... without insult or personal attack.


This post falls at random.

edit to add: some of you may want to consider going back and editing your posts to remove the personal attacks.

Oregon4now

Do not take what I wrote out of context .
I did not say that I agreed with it, I stated the obvious response to a question that sunflwrgrl13 asked me... BTW, I AM CHILEAN = HISPANIC.

Bluegrass Lass

So do you honestly think that judging someone by their looks is acceptable? That we should all just sit back and accept outright profiling of people based on skin color or accent? If you accept it because 'ah well, that's just the way it is' then you should be ashamed of yourself. We are no better than racist pigs if we allow discrimination against any person/group of persons..that is not what this country it founded upon.

If this bus/train checking is to become common practice, then everyone needs to be held to same line of questioning and be expected to produce documentation, not just those that fit a convenient profile. Anything less is a slap in the face of our freedoms.

AmerLisa

So you, above all, should have more empathy for the US citizens that would be affected by this.