NationStates Jolt Archive

Let's see what you guys think about this. I personally want less of our time and energy and money being spent on stoping the migrant workers from coming over. I live in Tucson AZ which is really near the border and I experience it first hand. All the migrant workers want to do is to get a good job so they can send the money back to their loved ones in Mexico. If it were up to them, they wouldn't want to come here. But they have to just to sustain a good wage to feed their families. PLus, our economy benefits from them coming over. THey take all the jobs that us rich, fat , white guys dont want. (tomato picking, yard work, house cleaning, etc, etc.) Maybe we should stopp worrying about these innocent people who just want to make a decent wage and started focusing on how 19 hijackers got their visas.

I've got a different way to handle the situation. I don't think the borders can be porous--we need to control who comes in and who leaves and keep track of them while they're here--but the issue of undocumented workers is another issue entirely.

It's another issue because those people who come across for jobs are exploited by companies that pay them shit wages and if they start to speak up, they get deported. Nothing ever happens to the companies who do this--once in a great while they might get a pissant fine, but that's all. The money they save by paying undocumented workers more than makes up for it.

So my way to handle the problem is to start fining the everloving shit out of companies that hire illegals, and throw a CEO or two into jail for it. Next thing you know, getting into the country will be simple because all these companies like Tyson, for example (who was recently busted flying illegals into their private airstrip), will 1) have to start paying a living wage and 2) there still won't be enough Americans to fill the jobs, so they'll relax immigration standards.

I agree with Cremerica. The US used to have open borders (mostly) and it didn't do them any harm. If you're not going to have open borders you may as well send the statue of liberty back to France and replace the plaque with

"America the great preserve
That dirty foreigners don't deserve"

So my way to handle the problem is to start fining the everloving shit out of companies that hire illegals, and throw a CEO or two into jail for it. Next thing you know, getting into the country will be simple because all these companies like Tyson, for example (who was recently busted flying illegals into their private airstrip), will 1) have to start paying a living wage and 2) there still won't be enough Americans to fill the jobs, so they'll relax immigration standards.
Yes, violence is always the answer. Good thinking, Adolf.

Innocent people?...They are committing a crime...they are illegally entering this country..is that lost on some of you people?...as for the part bout the Statue of Liberty...please....there are legal methods on immigrating to this country..there are several US Consulates in the Mexican States bordering our southern Border where a Mexican can get anywhere from a temporary Work Visas to applications for legal immigration...that is how it's done...

And think about it..if Jose can come across this border willy nilly...so can Achmed with a bomb...I consider the problems with our border with Mexico a matter of National Security and I'd clamp down...I'd build my own Wall to keep them out.

And those jobs you say they take..well...since their employers don't have to worry bout paying taxes, unemployment, workmen's comp, etc.because they are paying these illegals under the table...they can also exploit these illegals and pay them squat. They don't wish to assimilate.....time was when you immigrated to a country you learned the lingua franca...English and tried to become an American, Mexican illegals merely want to transplant Mexico to the US. Those jobs...well..how much unemployed American citizens would take those jobs if the employers actually had to pay minimum wages, benefits...etc.

But I'll tell you what..for those that aren't American....we'll send you the 12 million illegals that are currenly reckoned to be in the US....I'm pretty sure you'll want to send them back after they finish making it Little Mexico whereever they land up. After they've bankrupted your healthcare systems, forced you to raise taxes on those who actually work just to pay for all the social bennies they snatch up like chocolate.

Innocent people?...They are committing a crime...they are illegally entering this country..is that lost on some of you people?
Oh no! They aren't doing exactly what your crypto fascist all knowing King Bush demands! They are clearly evil.

If you want people to respect the law you must make the law respectable. There's nothing wrong with breaking an evil law, Oscar Schindler knew that.

But I'll tell you what..for those that aren't American....we'll send you the 12 million illegals that are currenly reckoned to be in the US.....
Where did that come from?

Tell you what, why don't they cross the border, set up home in say new Mexico. Wait until they form the majority of the population, then demand to be part of thier country of origin as they don't agree with the rules of the land they entered. They could then fight to be unified with Mexico and tell the world what a brave a struggle it was and what heros they were.

Good to know that this is a controversial issue across the pond... at least the debate doesn't descend into arrant racism like it usually does in the UK.

Daily Mail (I paraphrase):

"Keep those dirty heathen benefit-scrounging foreigners off our land! Except the white Zimbabweans, of course. They're our sort of people."

Meh, most of the illegal immigrants in Oz are British or American. Indonesia has a bigger problem with illegals than the US does.

How to solve the US situation..? ummmm erm.. dunno.

There is no "problem" with immigration except that it is regulated and controlled (at gunpoint). End the international Apartheid.

Oh no! They aren't doing exactly what your crypto fascist all knowing King Bush demands! They are clearly evil.

If you want people to respect the law you must make the law respectable. There's nothing wrong with breaking an evil law, Oscar Schindler knew that.

Oh please.don't turn this into a Bush-thing...this is an immigration problem that goes well beyond Bush..and has been a problem for far longer then Bush..

As for illegals..tell you what..what country do you live in...I'll send them all to your country and you can deal with them..or if your an American..tell me what State and County you live in so we can send them all there.

How is good immigration policy an evil law?

As for illegals..tell you what..what country do you live in...I'll send them all to your country and you can deal with them..


Again. Where does this come from?

Again. Where does this come from?

I mebbe overstretching myself here..just getting it out there just in case I'm gonna get some Non-American posting to this subject...if it doesn't apply then ignore it....but somehow I have this feeling this post is gonna turn into a hate-Bush-stupid American thing.

There is no "problem" with immigration except that it is regulated and controlled (at gunpoint). End the international Apartheid.

Fuck the border? (http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Fuck-the-Border-lyrics-Propagandhi/03177DCEA3F8B7D248256C640025B8A5)

Oh please.don't turn this into a Bush-thing...this is an immigration problem that goes well beyond Bush..and has been a problem for far longer then Bush..

It doesn't matter who wins "elect-a-king", the question is why should you respect their evil laws?

As for illegals..tell you what..what country do you live in...I'll send them all to your country and you can deal with them..or if your an American..tell me what State and County you live in so we can send them all there.
Uk. Bring it on. "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses. Yearning to breath free". Unfortunately we've got a fascist elect-a-king too.

How is good immigration policy an evil law?
Good immigration policy is no immigration policy. All others are using violence to enforce the international apartheid.

There is no "problem" with immigration except that it is regulated and controlled (at gunpoint). End the international Apartheid.

Excuse me..how does National Security equal out to Apartheid?

Fuck the border? (http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/ads?client=ca-sing365_300x250&random=1091101513820&adsafe=high&format=300x250_pas_abgnc&output=html&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sing365.com%2Fmusic%2Flyric.nsf%2FFuck-the-Border-lyrics-Propagandhi%2F03177DCEA3F8B7D248256C640025B8A5)
That link took me to a Will Young ringtone site. Unless he's gone death metal and released a song called "Fuck the border" I'm guessing you typed it wrong. :)

It doesn't matter who wins "elect-a-king", the question is why should you respect their evil laws?

Uk. Bring it on. "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses. Yearning to breath free". Unfortunately we've got a fascist elect-a-king too.

Good immigration policy is no immigration policy. All others are using violence to enforce the international apartheid.

Well..isn't that just fine and dandy...how much are you willing to fork over to pay for them all eh? How much are you willing to enforce on the hard-working men and women of your country, who are already heavily taxed to pay for the social services net you have?...I mean..let's say..out of a typical British pound, just how much of it goes to taxes?..and you wish to increase that amount?

That link took me to a Will Young ringtone site. Unless he's gone death metal and released a song called "Fuck the border" I'm guessing you typed it wrong. :)

I hate internet ads.

Link corrected, I think. You probably knew what song I was on about anyway.

Excuse me..how does National Security equal out to Apartheid?
National security isn't the issue. If 12 million workers can sneak in so can one terrorist. It's about "keeping the bloody kaffirs out". I'm sure the South African govt used extremism as an excuse to keep the natives subjugated too. How is it not Apartheid? It's the same thing on a bigger scale.

Well..isn't that just fine and dandy...how much are you willing to fork over to pay for them all eh? How much are you willing to enforce on the hard-working men and women of your country, who are already heavily taxed to pay for the social services net you have?
Nothing whatsover. They can get in but they'll have to earn their own keep. That's only fair.

It comes down to the price of coffee - people in LAtin America wouldn't need to enter the US illegally if America was to pay a fair price for the coffee they drink.

National security isn't the issue. If 12 million workers can sneak in so can one terrorist. It's about "keeping the bloody kaffirs out". I'm sure the South African govt used extremism as an excuse to keep the natives subjugated too. How is it not Apartheid? It's the same thing on a bigger scale.

Hell yes it's a National Security issue..and you just elaborated on it..if 12 million illegal Mexicans not workers can get in...so can one terrorist...the border needs to be closed and only a few access points allowed...

And these are not American citizens being segregated from other Americans so your apartheid model is irrevelent.

Nothing whatsover. They can get in but they'll have to earn their own keep. That's only fair.

And what if they don't earn their own keep?..What if you suddenly start seeing signs solely in Spanish...and government documents have English and Spanish...and your telephone numbers indicate "Dial 1 for English, 2 for Spanish"..will you be so obliging then?

Well, leaving aside the whole "bush is the devil" partisin bullshit, the problem lies with the fact that these people are almost forced to come here because they can't get anything from the Mexican government in terms of support in even the most basic ways. Their only recourse is to come over here in some cases, but the problem is that when they get here, immigration laws or not, most are treated almost as indentured servents getting WAY below the minimum wage. They'll get like 20 bucks for a hard days work and enjoy it because that's all they can get. With NO immigration policy I see that problem being even worse! It's simple economics. If you have too many people only able to do certain work, and all the jobs that do that work are all filled, or have a line of people willing to do them, you can pay as little as you want and they'll still do the work because their's nothing else for them to do. They're stuck in the same situation as they were in Mexico, so the real trick isn't to take them in, but to somehow get the Mexican government to take care of it's own people. If this was done, this comversation would be academic.

As an immediate solution, I say lock the borders with mexico down more, there's too much drugs as it is comming from that end and that does need to stop.

Hell yes it's a National Security issue..and you just elaborated on it..if 12 million illegal Mexicans not workers can get in...so can one terrorist...the border needs to be closed and only a few access points allowed...
They don't come to work? Yes, more violence is the answer. They'll always get in. Why restrict the freedom of millions of people for something that won't work anyway. You're not really interested in national security, you just don't want 'spics on your street, as you show here....


And what if they don't earn their own keep?..What if you suddenly start seeing signs solely in Spanish...and government documents have English and Spanish...and your telephone numbers indicate "Dial 1 for English, 2 for Spanish"..will you be so obliging then?
Yes. Don't give them social security. Problem soved.

And these are not American citizens being segregated from other Americans so your apartheid model is irrevelent.
That makes as much sense as saying those in Guantanamo Bay aren't Americans so it's okay to lock them up without trial. It is Apartheid on an international scale.

I've got a different way to handle the situation. I don't think the borders can be porous--we need to control who comes in and who leaves and keep track of them while they're here--but the issue of undocumented workers is another issue entirely.

It's another issue because those people who come across for jobs are exploited by companies that pay them shit wages and if they start to speak up, they get deported. Nothing ever happens to the companies who do this--once in a great while they might get a pissant fine, but that's all. The money they save by paying undocumented workers more than makes up for it.

So my way to handle the problem is to start fining the everloving shit out of companies that hire illegals, and throw a CEO or two into jail for it. Next thing you know, getting into the country will be simple because all these companies like Tyson, for example (who was recently busted flying illegals into their private airstrip), will 1) have to start paying a living wage and 2) there still won't be enough Americans to fill the jobs, so they'll relax immigration standards.

Listen. Can you hear the bells of liberty being chimed by Incertonia?

Controlling borders is one of the reasons why the immigrants work for wages that are below American standards. The companies pay the immigrants lower wages knowing that if the immigrants demand better wages and conditions they can simply alert the proper authorities that their workers are illegal immigrants. Most of the workers know this and accept the jobs anyway on the grounds that they are being paid higher wages than what they would receive for equivalent work in their own country. By removing border controls you would then eliminate the means for employers to blackmail immigrant workers and a chance for the workers to negociate better wages and conditions.

In reality, your plan will result in 1) Companies moving overseas due to the draconian laws and paying lower wages anyway and 2) An increase in unemployment due to the relocation of companies and an introduction of more draconian laws as a solution to the problem.

Well, leaving aside the whole "bush is the devil" partisin bullshit, the problem lies with the fact that these people are almost forced to come here because they can't get anything from the Mexican government in terms of support in even the most basic ways.
The Mexican govt doesn't have anything to give them. How will taking money off people then giving some of it back make them richer?

Their only recourse is to come over here in some cases, but the problem is that when they get here, immigration laws or not, most are treated almost as indentured servents getting WAY below the minimum wage. They'll get like 20 bucks for a hard days work and enjoy it because that's all they can get. With NO immigration policy I see that problem being even worse! It's simple economics. If you have too many people only able to do certain work, and all the jobs that do that work are all filled, or have a line of people willing to do them, you can pay as little as you want and they'll still do the work because their's nothing else for them to do.

A fair wage is whatever someone's willing to pay you.


They're stuck in the same situation as they were in Mexico, so the real trick isn't to take them in, but to somehow get the Mexican government to take care of it's own people. If this was done, this comversation would be academic.
The real trick is to stop using govt guns to get your little white picket fence world and let people get on with improving their lives.


As an immediate solution, I say lock the borders with mexico down more, there's too much drugs as it is comming from that end and that does need to stop.
Oh yes, drugs. There's another good reason to lock people in little rooms for years. Because they like inhaling chemicals. Damn this culture of violence.

They don't come to work? Yes, more violence is the answer. They'll always get in. Why restrict the freedom of millions of people for something that won't work anyway. You're not really interested in national security, you just don't want 'spics on your street, as you show here....


Yes. Don't give them social security. Problem soved.

That makes as much sense as saying those in Guantanamo Bay aren't Americans so it's okay to lock them up without trial. It is Apartheid on an international scale.

lol..you must be unaware...I am a Native American...and by your standards a victim of apartheid..with the current reservation system in place that is..so it has nothing to do with "spics on your street"...I asked you if you would be able to envision 12 million people refusing to assimilate into English Culture.

As for criminals..you can check our Border Patrol Stats..but I have several friends on the BP...out of 10 illegal Mexicans...3 will have active criminal associations or criminal records..the biggest gangs funneling drugs up thru the Southwest originate in Mexico...so no..they are not all here just to work.

And if it kept one suicide bomber from getting across..hell yes..I'd lock it al down...and put US troops on the border to seal it.

I dont know ,about coffee being the issue ,personally its too expensive for me to want to drink it any way. as for illegal immigrants well ,we have laws that
go back to the early 1900's governing that,however as for the statue of liberty we still accept more immigrants than most nations,and it is a reminder of earlier times. all nations have laws ours are often less strict than most,yet once again
its a matter that anything the verges on national interest is wrong . how interesting

lol..you must be unaware...I am a Native American...and by your standards a victim of apartheid..with the current reservation system in place that is..so it has nothing to do with "spics on your street"...I asked you if you would be able to envision 12 million people refusing to assimilate into English Culture.
Most English people don't assimilate to English culture, whatever that is. Scottish here, btw :)

As for criminals..you can check our Border Patrol Stats..but I have several friends on the BP...out of 10 illegal Mexicans...3 will have active criminal associations or criminal records..the biggest gangs funneling drugs up thru the Southwest originate in Mexico...so no..they are not all here just to work.

Of course if you make something illegal it will be associated with criminals! That's obvious. Most drug dealers have criminal records but most tobacconists don't. Funny that.

And if it kept one suicide bomber from getting across..hell yes..I'd lock it al down...and put US troops on the border to seal it.
Banning all cars except emergency vehicals would save lives from road traffic accidents, but you'd probably recognise here that freedom is the more important virtue. How many people will die in foreign countries that could have lived if they'd got to America just to stop 1 suicide bomber, or do foreign lives not count?

Salishe:And what if they don't earn their own keep?..What if you suddenly start seeing signs solely in Spanish...and government documents have English and Spanish...and your telephone numbers indicate "Dial 1 for English, 2 for Spanish"..will you be so obliging then?

This is the most racist statement I have heard in months. How does it feel to be a bigot? It also completely ignores the fact that we have no national language, and are a culture of intermingling cultures. So your culture and language arguments are nothing more than drivel anyway.

As for criminals..you can check our Border Patrol Stats..but I have several friends on the BP...out of 10 illegal Mexicans...3 will have active criminal associations or criminal records..the biggest gangs funneling drugs up thru the Southwest originate in Mexico...so no..they are not all here just to work.

And during prohibition, most criminals had ties to alchohol distribution, duh. Make drugs legal and regulate the hell out of them and the only 'criminals' involved in the process would be the exectutives of major corporations, same as alchohol, tobacco, and other pharmaceuticals. (and I don't have a problem with that)

And if it kept one suicide bomber from getting across..hell yes..I'd lock it al down...and put US troops on the border to seal it.

Wow, I remember a time when we as a nation prided ourselves on the sacrifices we made in the name of freedom. It was always, "The blood of our forefathers, our brothers, and our sons was paid so that we can be free." Now all of the sudden it's, "Screw freedom, I don't feel safe. Throw it out the window if it keeps 1 suicide bomber away from me."

I pity you. Your fear and ignorance will always blind you.

Most English people don't assimilate to English culture, whatever that is. Scottish here, btw :)

Of course if you make something illegal it will be associated with criminals! That's obvious. Most drug dealers have criminal records but most tobacconists don't. Funny that.

Banning all cars except emergency vehicals would save lives from road traffic accidents, but you'd probably recognise here that freedom is the more important virtue. How many people will die in foreign countries that could have lived if they'd got to America just to stop 1 suicide bomber, or do foreign lives not count?

Let's see...protecting American lives is less then letting in illegals who may or may not be criminals or terrorists and who milk our society for benefits they shouldnt be entitled too because they are not citizens....sorry..got go with the protecting American lives thing..but I'll refer all these mexican illegals to Scotland just so your conscience can be assuaged that the right thing is being done.

And what if they don't earn their own keep?..What if you suddenly start seeing signs solely in Spanish...and government documents have English and Spanish...and your telephone numbers indicate "Dial 1 for English, 2 for Spanish"..will you be so obliging then?
Hmm yeah. thats annoying. When I was a kid I was in a hospital in Germany with meningitis. And when my mom came from Holland she couldn't find the room I was in. Cause all the signs where in Turkish.

This is the most racist statement I have heard in months. How does it feel to be a bigot? It also completely ignores the fact that we have no national language, and are a culture of intermingling cultures. So your culture and language arguments are nothing more than drivel anyway.



And during prohibition, most criminals had ties to alchohol distribution, duh. Make drugs legal and regulate the hell out of them and the only 'criminals' involved in the process would be the exectutives of major corporations, same as alchohol, tobacco, and other pharmaceuticals. (and I don't have a problem with that)



Wow, I remember a time when we as a nation prided ourselves on the sacrifices we made in the name of freedom. It was always, "The blood of our forefathers, our brothers, and our sons was paid so that we can be free." Now all of the sudden it's, "Screw freedom, I don't feel safe. Throw it out the window if it keeps 1 suicide bomber away from me."

I pity you. Your fear and ignorance will always blind you.

Please..let's not toss in the racism card..this has everything to do with a simple problem of securing our borders and having an efficient immigration policy...millions of illegal Mexicans make this impossible.

As for the criminal aspects..you're not getting my point Border Patrol officers pick up criminals that were not attached to the drug trade...we are talking bout murderers, pedophiles, rapists, gang members...etc...in other words, we are not just getting in the poor, tired masses, but the worst elements of Mexican criminal society as well..

And I'm not a bigot..the point was in somone else envisioning what has happened in the American Southwest...we took the Southwest with military force during the Mexican-American War...they will take it back simply by coming back and squatting..go figure.

As for your appeal to sacrfices..it's moot...I've said it elsewhere, there are legal ways to work and or emigrate here...moving across the desert or running across the highway from Tijuana to San Diego isnt one of them.

I must admit, you point out an interesting issue. And it all leads down to the question -

"Do the ends justify the means?"

Let's see...protecting American lives is less then letting in illegals who may or may not be criminals or terrorists and who milk our society for benefits they shouldnt be entitled too because they are not citizens....
Open borders don't put American lives at risk from terrorism. Imperialistic foreign policy does. Open borders don't cause the productive to be milked to support the lazy. Social "security" does that. The soln isn't close the borders, the solution is peace and free markets.

I'll refer all these mexican illegals to Scotland just so your conscience can be assuaged that the right thing is being done.
If it were up to me that'd be fine.

As for the criminal aspects..you're not getting my point Border Patrol officers pick up criminals that were not attached to the drug trade...we are talking bout murderers, pedophiles, rapists, gang members...etc...in other words, we are not just getting in the poor, tired masses, but the worst elements of Mexican criminal society as well..

But it is illegal so it is only natural it will feature a disproportionate number of criminals.

And what if they don't earn their own keep?..What if you suddenly start seeing signs solely in Spanish...and government documents have English and Spanish...and your telephone numbers indicate "Dial 1 for English, 2 for Spanish"..will you be so obliging then?

How is that wrong? Does the US have an official language now?

Tell you what, why don't they cross the border, set up home in say new Mexico. Wait until they form the majority of the population, then demand to be part of thier country of origin as they don't agree with the rules of the land they entered. They could then fight to be unified with Mexico and tell the world what a brave a struggle it was and what heros they were.

That happened once. Let me see it I can remember. It was ... started with T something... oh, yes! Texas!

Salishe:Please..let's not toss in the racism card..this has everything to do with a simple problem of securing our borders and having an efficient immigration policy...millions of illegal Mexicans make this impossible.

I didn't toss in the racism card, you did. If you don't want it to be about racism, don't make racist statements.

As for the criminal aspects..you're not getting my point Border Patrol officers pick up criminals that were not attached to the drug trade...we are talking bout murderers, pedophiles, rapists, gang members...etc...in other words, we are not just getting in the poor, tired masses, but the worst elements of Mexican criminal society as well..

And you missed the point entirely as well, make something illegal, and the only ones who do it are by definition, criminals. It's the same as the logic of, "if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns." If you outlaw border crossings, only outlaws will cross borders.

And I'm not a bigot..the point was in somone else envisioning what has happened in the American Southwest...we took the Southwest with military force during the Mexican-American War...they will take it back simply by coming back and squatting..go figure.

Whatever it takes so that you can sleep at night, right?

I can't see how you think busting ones ass to make a living qualifies as 'squatting'. And your arguments about the waste of social services is invalid, since they cannot take advantage of them without citizenship (or at least a valid visa).

As for your appeal to sacrfices..it's moot...I've said it elsewhere, there are legal ways to work and or emigrate here...moving across the desert or running across the highway from Tijuana to San Diego isnt one of them.

It's obvious that you've never tried to immigrate to another country. Especially not as a dirt farmer just trying to keep his kids from starving to death. News flash, it's pretty freaking hard. Too freaking hard, which is why this argument is happening.

Lets put the army on that border and keep those Mexicans out. Then start the construction of a wall that runs the length of the border that is 10 feet high.
And then issue a warning that if they are not legal United States citizens that they have 10 days to leave the United states then in 10 days hunt for all the illegal ones deport them and mark them so if they come back we send them to Cuba.

I didn't toss in the racism card, you did. If you don't want it to be about racism, don't make racist statements. On the contrary, I made statements alluding to the inclusion of a language other then English which has been the de facto official language...That is not racist..I am Cherokee..if I don't see my language included in a automessage..I can assure you I'm not going to say that company is racist for not including my language.



And you missed the point entirely as well, make something illegal, and the only ones who do it are by definition, criminals. It's the same as the logic of, "if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns." If you outlaw border crossings, only outlaws will cross borders.You missed what I said later, we are not just getting the poor, the tired masses yearning to be free, but also the worst of Mexican criminal society



Whatever it takes so that you can sleep at night, right?I sleep just fine thank you but that is not relevent to this discussion

I can't see how you think busting ones ass to make a living qualifies as 'squatting'. And your arguments about the waste of social services is invalid, since they cannot take advantage of them without citizenship (or at least a valid visa).wrong..they utilize education by claiming out of state tuition rates (california example), they use ER facilities because by Federal Law they can not turn them away....that's wasting tax-payers services.



It's obvious that you've never tried to immigrate to another country. Especially not as a dirt farmer just trying to keep his kids from starving to death. News flash, it's pretty freaking hard. Too freaking hard, which is why this argument is happening.

Oh and for the friggin record..I grew up on the Qualla Reservation where the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Nation lives....unemployment was rampant depending on when the tourists would come and buy turqouise jewelry or come to hike or use a camp...I grew up on a dirt-poor farm on that dirt-poor reservation...now..thankfully my family was able to sustain itself til such time as the tribe recently had built a casino/resort up in the Smoky Mtns, now we are almost sufficient to the point we can finally rid ourselves of Bureau of Indian Affairs mismanagement.

Hell yes it's a National Security issue..and you just elaborated on it..if 12 million illegal Mexicans not workers can get in...so can one terrorist...the border needs to be closed and only a few access points allowed...


And how much would that cost? Not only the expense of keeping the border closed, all of it, but also the amount the increse in price of many produce that depend on illegal hands to be picked, manufacturing companies that will have to close because of their higher employment costs, and services that will also have to increase their prices to pay their people.

No government likes to have such a high number of illegal aliens, even if they contribute something to the economy, as they all produce something and spend something, but they can't be taxed and they can't be rallied to political gatherings. But they haven't done anything too effective because the economic cost would be huge, plus it would be quite impractical.

The largest provider of illegal aliens by far is Mexico, and the solution there is clear. Mexicans have to get up off their thumbs, take responsibility for their own country instead of leaving it to corrupt politicians, and put it back in its feet. In that way the poorest sectors won't have to choose between starvation in their land and an perilous journey across the desert to an uncertain life in the US.

What can the US do about it? Not much more than what it's already doing, really. It will have to be up to the Mexicans, stop looking for easy solutions, stop the internal fighting and start making serious long-term plans.

Let's see what you guys think about this. I personally want less of our time and energy and money being spent on stoping the migrant workers from coming over. I live in Tucson AZ which is really near the border and I experience it first hand. All the migrant workers want to do is to get a good job so they can send the money back to their loved ones in Mexico. If it were up to them, they wouldn't want to come here. But they have to just to sustain a good wage to feed their families. PLus, our economy benefits from them coming over. THey take all the jobs that us rich, fat , white guys dont want. (tomato picking, yard work, house cleaning, etc, etc.) Maybe we should stopp worrying about these innocent people who just want to make a decent wage and started focusing on how 19 hijackers got their visas.
That's a good point.
After all, they're just making a better living than if they worked back home. If they have more money, their nation's economy has more money and then more money is spent and more jobs are created... You see a pattern here?

And I'm not a bigot..the point was in somone else envisioning what has happened in the American Southwest...we took the Southwest with military force during the Mexican-American War...they will take it back simply by coming back and squatting..go figure.


Salishe, if you really are a native you would know that you didn't take the Southwest, the Southwest was taken from you.

Plus squatting is as good a way to take something back as a war. You don't see anything wrong with a war of invasion and dispossesion, I don't see anything wrong with squatting.

What we NEED to do is allow the workers in, but document them so they enter legally. Then ensure that they are paid at LEAST the legal minimum wage. IF they reside here they will have to spend a larger percentage of their money here. By sending it all home they are in effect, taking money OUT of the US economy and that is a further drain. Also a percentage of their wages should be used to pay for medical care. Hospitals in the Southwest are really hurting because they are required by law to see patients whether they can pay or not and the illegals they are treating do not pay.

For those workers who would return home after work, no such stipulatons would be required.

Someone earlier posted that the immigration laws are not just. I would encourage that person to run across the Mexican border and see what happens to him. The Mexican police shoot first...then ask questions. Show me ONE country in the world that does not have immigration laws....

Lets put the army on that border and keep those Mexicans out. Then start the construction of a wall that runs the length of the border that is 10 feet high.
And then issue a warning that if they are not legal United States citizens that they have 10 days to leave the United states then in 10 days hunt for all the illegal ones deport them and mark them so if they come back we send them to Cuba.
Flawless. I'd applaud your sense of humour but, having read some of your other posts, I have the suspicion you're being serious...

far too many issues to quote them all here.. but let's see....

$20 US for a day of hard labor... for someone with a work visa, and lives in Mexico (which I have no problem with them working in this country legally) is actually a 'living wage' because the cost of living is actually substantialy lower in Mexico.

Not only does the Mexican government not support it's own population, they actively promote it's citizens to cross the borders. They do this by a variety of methods from transportation to the borders to issuing 'survival packs' for the trip accross the somewhat harsh terrain on the border. Ol' Vincente Fox knows that a rather substatial portion of it's GDP comes from money coming into Mexico from the US.

Yes, there is an official language. Depending on the state, e.g. it's English in California.

Libertovania, Im afraid that, it's your own (Im sorry to say) rather narrow interpretation of the law that finds it evil. Others find it evil the effects of having 12 million illegals in their country is having on our country.

These workers, as has been pointed out by several others are usually paid 'under the table'. Therefore no taxes are being paid, therefore the services they use up (medical, educational, welfare) are being paid for by the ones who are in this country legally.

A large portion of the wages paid to these illegals is being sent to their familys in Mexico. That is money being funneled out of the US economy and represents a drain on it that we can ill afford at this time. It would be far better for that money to be used inside the US to buy goods, foriegn or otherwise. This would help companies here, allowing them to grow, allowing them to hire more people to handle the increased demand, etc.

There is a huge ammount of drugs comming through our currently porous borders. And yes, drugs are a problem. Personally I dont care if someone ruins their own life via drugs, but I do care that drug users usually resort to crimes to finance their drug use, and that chronic drug use puts a huge drain on our health care system.

There is a process to allow legal immigration that solves all of the problems we now face. Why is it so wrong, or evil, for people do use a system to enter this country to 'enjoy' it's benifits?

That's a good point.
After all, they're just making a better living than if they worked back home. If they have more money, their nation's economy has more money and then more money is spent and more jobs are created... You see a pattern here?

Unfortunately this is not the case, as is evidenced by the current economy of Mexico. We are sending millions (possibly billions) down there annually between money the US govt sends and money illegal and legal workers send down there. The problem is that the Mexican govt is horribly corrupt and most of the money does not go into the mexican economy but rather into a certain few's pockets.

If their govt would buckle down and address the issues they have, use the money they are getting from us, there would be no problem of illegal immigrants because their economy would be as robust as ours is (following our cycle, ours goes up, theirs goes up etc.) But they dont, they would rather line their own pockets than take care of their own citizens, they would rather we take care of their citizens.

If immigrants bother you, you should oppose capitalism and the poverty it creates. What's so bad about immigrants?

There is no "problem" with immigration except that it is regulated and controlled (at gunpoint). End the international Apartheid.

You know what Libertovania, screw it... Im going to move my whole family over to your house. Im going to get a job wherever it is you work. Im going to send my money back here to the US. Im going to let you pay for me and my family's food, clothing, healthcare, and anything else I want to buy. Im sure you wouldnt mind, and at the very least, you wouldnt kick me out because "DAMN THIS CULTURE OF VIOLENCE!"

If immigrants bother you, you should oppose capitalism and the poverty it creates. What's so bad about immigrants?

I do NOT oppose immigrants. I am on. I oppose ILLEGAL immigrants. Huge difference.

You know what Libertovania, screw it... Im going to move my whole family over to your house. Im going to get a job wherever it is you work. Im going to send my money back here to the US. Im going to let you pay for me and my family's food, clothing, healthcare, and anything else I want to buy. Im sure you wouldnt mind, and at the very least, you wouldnt kick me out because "DAMN THIS CULTURE OF VIOLENCE!"
There's a world of difference between agression and defence. I'll defend my house becuase it's MINE (well, rented). I doubt you could do my job. I'm against social security, I thought I mentioned.

I do NOT oppose immigrants. I am on. I oppose ILLEGAL immigrants. Huge difference.

You know it's almost weird..but the Apache clans out of New Mexico, and the Comanches in Texas are vigilant in keeping the Mexicans off their lands. I wouldn't want to be caught trying to trespass on Apache lands at nite...that just ain't plain healthy.

Libertovania, Im afraid that, it's your own (Im sorry to say) rather narrow interpretation of the law that finds it evil. Others find it evil the effects of having 12 million illegals in their country is having on our country.

These workers, as has been pointed out by several others are usually paid 'under the table'. Therefore no taxes are being paid, therefore the services they use up (medical, educational, welfare) are being paid for by the ones who are in this country legally.

A large portion of the wages paid to these illegals is being sent to their familys in Mexico. That is money being funneled out of the US economy and represents a drain on it that we can ill afford at this time. It would be far better for that money to be used inside the US to buy goods, foriegn or otherwise. This would help companies here, allowing them to grow, allowing them to hire more people to handle the increased demand, etc.

There is a huge ammount of drugs comming through our currently porous borders. And yes, drugs are a problem. Personally I dont care if someone ruins their own life via drugs, but I do care that drug users usually resort to crimes to finance their drug use, and that chronic drug use puts a huge drain on our health care system.

There is a process to allow legal immigration that solves all of the problems we now face. Why is it so wrong, or evil, for people do use a system to enter this country to 'enjoy' it's benifits?
Sadly true, I'm in the minority by opposing overwhelming agressive violence. Taxation is robbery so if they can get away without paying good on them.

Stealing is a crime. Drug use is a hobby. People wouldn't have to steal if drugs were legal cause they'd be cheap. Do smokers steal to fund their habit? No.

The rest was a classic example of how socialism leads to totalitarianism. We can't let immigrants in because it's a drain on welfare. We can't allow drugs becuase it's a drain on our health service. We can't allow people to get fat or smoke either. A govt gun is the solution to everything.

There's a world of difference between agression and defence. I'll defend my house becuase it's MINE (well, rented). I doubt you could do my job. I'm against social security, I thought I mentioned.

Ok, I concede that there's a difference between aggression and defense. I'll defend my country because it's MINE.

Stealing is a crime. Drug use is a hobby. People wouldn't have to steal if drugs were legal cause they'd be cheap. Do smokers steal to fund their habit? No.

Um, actually, yes they do. There is a problem with cigarette smuggling to avoid the taxes paid on them. And watch store surveilance tapes on most convenience store robberies. They usually include someone grabbing cartons of cigerates after they grab money.

We can't let immigrants in because it's a drain on welfare.

Im all for allowing immigrants in. Just legally.

We can't allow drugs becuase it's a drain on our health service.

That's one issue, it also leads to crime and violence against law abiding citizens.

Tell you what, why don't they cross the border, set up home in say new Mexico. Wait until they form the majority of the population, then demand to be part of thier country of origin as they don't agree with the rules of the land they entered. They could then fight to be unified with Mexico and tell the world what a brave a struggle it was and what heros they were.

Well if we are willing to give Isreal to the Jewish people because they were supposedly there first, why not give all the land that USED to be part of Mexico (the land Santa Anna lost to the U.S during the U.S Mexican war) BACK.

Well if we are willing to give Isreal to the Jewish people because they were supposedly there first, why not give all the land that USED to be part of Mexico (the land Santa Anna lost to the U.S during the U.S Mexican war) BACK.

Because...there are prior claims to it then...it wouldn't go to Mexico..there are several Apache clans, Comanche, Piute, Ute, Hopi, Nez Perce, Navajo, Southern Cheyenne, Arapaho, and a host of others that demand that Mexico drop any claims of land in the Southwest.

By the way...don't forget, except for First Nations people...you're ALL immigrants:).

That's right Sinuhue...now..if I can only manage to get our Tribal Council to ask for rent from the States of North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Kentucky, and Arkansas we'd be some heap rich Injuns....otherwise..get off ya squatters..lol

Ok, I concede that there's a difference between aggression and defense. I'll defend my country because it's MINE.
You own America? Wow, I'm impressed.

Um, actually, yes they do. There is a problem with cigarette smuggling to avoid the taxes paid on them. And watch store surveilance tapes on most convenience store robberies. They usually include someone grabbing cartons of cigerates after they grab money.

Tax is robbery and should be opposed. Shall we ban money since that clearly causes crime too?

Im all for allowing immigrants in. Just legally.


I don't understand why you think you should obey an unjust law.

That's one issue, it also leads to crime and violence against law abiding citizens.
Only because it's illegal. (drugs). Violence is already illegal. You don't need another law.

Because...there are prior claims to it then...it wouldn't go to Mexico..there are several Apache clans, Comanche, Piute, Ute, Hopi, Nez Perce, Navajo, Southern Cheyenne, Arapaho, and a host of others that demand that Mexico drop any claims of land in the Southwest.

I know it...it'd be nice to get off the piddly (usually) resource poor Reservation and spread out again....ok, ALL EUROPEANS OUT!!!!! Muahahahahaha!

Wait...no...let's just put THEM on Reservations:). Hehehehe.

No, seriously, about the U.S border thing.......most of you who are for closing to border to ILLEGAL immigrants say you have no problem with the legals, right? Ok..but how familiar are you with your own immigration laws? It's hard to get into Canada legally too...but U.S laws are even more stringent. Unless you are a highly trained professional, or have extraordinary skill in the arts...or are related to a U.S citizen, you have very little chance of being accepted for immigration. The whole immigration process (here too) is a lot harder than most people think, but a lot of times it's the people who can throw money around and hire expensive lawyers that get in...not the regular worker. Instead of spending so much time (and money) trying to seal up your borders...(is it even possible?), why don't you spend more money on your immigration system to make sure you're weeding out the criminals, and letting in ordinary people that will work like dogs for you (and pay into your Old Age Pension...however you call it there)?

Tax is robbery and should be opposed. Shall we ban money since that clearly causes crime too?


I don't understand why you think you should obey an unjust law.

Only because it's illegal. (drugs). Violence is already illegal. You don't need another law.

But that seems to be the gist of our viewpoints Libertovania....we don't view protecting the sovereignity of our borders as unjust...we dont view protecting American citizens as unjust...we view taxation as a necessary means by which we protect the borders, and it's citizens from those who are not citizens...it's as simple as that.

But that seems to be the gist of our viewpoints Libertovania....we don't view protecting the sovereignity of our borders as unjust...we dont view protecting American citizens as unjust...we view taxation as a necessary means by which we protect the borders, and it's citizens from those who are not citizens...it's as simple as that.
Whose borders? Do you own any borders? You may protect the land you own if you like but if I want to let immigrants on my property that's none of your business.

"It's necessary for security" has been the excuse for every totalitarian measure in recent history, probably the justification they gave for murdering all your people in the 19th century. You'd think people would catch on.

I know it...it'd be nice to get off the piddly (usually) resource poor Reservation and spread out again....ok, ALL EUROPEANS OUT!!!!! Muahahahahaha!

Wait...no...let's just put THEM on Reservations:). Hehehehe.

No, seriously, about the U.S border thing.......most of you who are for closing to border to ILLEGAL immigrants say you have no problem with the legals, right? Ok..but how familiar are you with your own immigration laws? It's hard to get into Canada legally too...but U.S laws are even more stringent. Unless you are a highly trained professional, or have extraordinary skill in the arts...or are related to a U.S citizen, you have very little chance of being accepted for immigration. The whole immigration process (here too) is a lot harder than most people think, but a lot of times it's the people who can throw money around and hire expensive lawyers that get in...not the regular worker. Instead of spending so much time (and money) trying to seal up your borders...(is it even possible?), why don't you spend more money on your immigration system to make sure you're weeding out the criminals, and letting in ordinary people that will work like dogs for you (and pay into your Old Age Pension...however you call it there)?

Shooooo...Sinuhue...don't give away our ultra-top-secret plans on retaking North America and putting the Euros on reservations...bwahbwahbwahbwah...then they can deal with the Bureau of European Affairs..hehe

Whose borders? Do you own any borders? You may protect the land you own if you like but if I want to let immigrants on my property that's none of your business.

"It's necessary for security" has been the excuse for every totalitarian measure in recent history, probably the justification they gave for murdering all your people in the 19th century. You'd think people would catch on.

Oh..they didn't need to use that excuse....they were open bout their plans to get the gold from our lands in Northern Georgia, and our abundant water resources in Tennessee...besides President Andrew Jackson hated the Cherokee, Choctaw, and Chickamaugas..he'd fought us most of his life...but that was over a century ago..we've managed to assimilate very well..And yes you can own a border...til it's changed by policy or the butt of a gun.

And yes you can own a border...til it's changed by policy or the butt of a gun.
But do YOU own a border? Only if you own it do you have the right to tell people whether or not they may cross it. If not, it's none of your business. And don't say the govt owns it, they are thieves, murderers and liars.

But do YOU own a border? Only if you own it do you have the right to tell people whether or not they may cross it. If not, it's none of your business. And don't say the govt owns it, they are thieves, murderers and liars.

Then you don't own your property then do you? Stands to reason then if you say you own it you're a thief, a murderer, and a liar....correct?

*singing* This land is MY land, it isn't YOUR land, I have a SHOTGUN, you haven't GOT one, so get the HELL off, before I blow your HEAD off...this land was made for only meeeeeeeeeee.....

Hey, I'm willing to share...let them come to Canada....we have plenty of room!

Besides....hispanic guys are hot...hehehehehe (married to a Chilean).

Then you don't own your property then do you? Stands to reason then if you say you own it you're a thief, a murderer, and a liar....correct?
Eh? The govt doesn't own the country but I own what's mine. The reason is because I earned it rather than stealing it from the citizens at gunpoint.

Eh? The govt doesn't own the country but I own what's mine. The reason is because I earned it rather than stealing it from the citizens at gunpoint.

If that were true..then you wouldn't have felt the need to assert you were Scottish...if there are no borders...why did the Scots feel the necessity to regain their own Parliament (I'm told it was reinstituted within the last 20 yrs, correct me if I'm wrong)..Why do you not refer to yourself as British? The Founding Fathers didn't steal their colonies...they sat down, put down on paper their beliefs and why they were separating from the British Empire, it was the British who responded not with negotiation but violence, in contrast your people under Robert De Bruce fought at Culloden in order to assert your independence...only to lose it at Bannockburn with the Bonnie Prince. It appears then your people certainly valued borders.

First of all not following immigration law is not a crime. Violation of immigration law is a civil violation not a criminal violation, which is why immigrants subject to deportation have no right to an attorney or many other due process rights. Secondly, immigrants have described as the back bone of our ecomony by nearly all economist, in fact the vast majority of economists believe that illegal immigration benefits our economy because they buy goods, pay sales tax and work for low wages and rarely receive goverment services. Most immigrants fear getting health care b/c of the fear of deportation and after 96 are no longer allowed to recieve any welfare benefits. Nor do immigrants receive any social security in spite of all their labor. Immigrants ought to be able to live in the US without fear of explotation, crossing hundreds of miles in the scourching desert of Arizona, and without living in the shadows because of unfounded fears of foreigners. Lastly, no INS raid, random check at the border, or wall will prevent terrorism. Real counter intelligence is our best weapon against terrorists attacks. And just so you know, I'm American that lives on the border and in a city that depends on immigrants for its economic livelihood.

First of all not following immigration law is not a crime. Violation of immigration law is a civil violation not a criminal violation, which is why immigrants subject to deportation have no right to an attorney or many other due process rights. Secondly, immigrants have described as the back bone of our ecomony by nearly all economist, in fact the vast majority of economists believe that illegal immigration benefits our economy because they buy goods, pay sales tax and work for low wages and rarely receive goverment services. Most immigrants fear getting health care b/c of the fear of deportation and after 96 are no longer allowed to recieve any welfare benefits. Nor do immigrants receive any social security in spite of all their labor. Immigrants ought to be able to live in the US without fear of explotation, crossing hundreds of miles in the scourching desert of Arizona, and without living in the shadows because of unfounded fears of foreigners. Lastly, no INS raid, random check at the border, or wall will prevent terrorism. Real counter intelligence is our best weapon against terrorists attacks. And just so you know, I'm American that lives on the border and in a city that depends on immigrants for its economic livelihood.

Excuse me..but there is nothing that prevents an Mexican from hightailing his ass into any of the various US Consulates in the northern Mexican States or the US Embassy...once there a Marine on duty at Post 1 will direct them to the Visa office where they may legally seek entry into the United States.

And if they entered into the US legally..they wouldn't have to live in fear of an INS raid, or crossing a river or a desert now would they?

Flawless. I'd applaud your sense of humour but, having read some of your other posts, I have the suspicion you're being serious...

Do you have a better idea to keep those mexicans out.

Do you have a better idea to keep those mexicans out.
Nope, but then I see no convincing reason to keep them out at all.

NB: Werteswandel = Ecopoeia

Nope, but then I see no convincing reason to keep them out at all.

NB: Werteswandel = Ecopoeia

I see no reason to keep them out at all..what apparently you don't grasp is that concept in that we want them to come here legally.

If that were true..then you wouldn't have felt the need to assert you were Scottish...if there are no borders...why did the Scots feel the necessity to regain their own Parliament (I'm told it was reinstituted within the last 20 yrs, correct me if I'm wrong)..Why do you not refer to yourself as British? The Founding Fathers didn't steal their colonies...they sat down, put down on paper their beliefs and why they were separating from the British Empire, it was the British who responded not with negotiation but violence, in contrast your people under Robert De Bruce fought at Culloden in order to assert your independence...only to lose it at Bannockburn with the Bonnie Prince. It appears then your people certainly valued borders.
You were talking about English culture as if you were assuming I was English, which I amn't. You got Culloden and Banockburn backwards. The founding fathers didn't own the US, neither did Britain and neither does fedgov(TM). The US is owned in small parcels by private individuals. They individually should decide who gets on the land that they individually own.

The govt simply does not have the moral right to enforce at gunpoint an international apartheid against the will of property owners and would be immigrants. It's none of their business.

You were talking about English culture as if you were assuming I was English, which I amn't. You got Culloden and Banockburn backwards. The founding fathers didn't own the US, neither did Britain and neither does fedgov(TM). The US is owned in small parcels by private individuals. They individually should decide who gets on the land that they individually own.

The govt simply does not have the moral right to enforce at gunpoint an international apartheid against the will of property owners and would be immigrants. It's none of their business.

Thank you for the corrections on Culloden and Bannockburn..but as I stated, your ancestors apparently thought enough of borders to engage in military action to explain this issue to the English.....after all Longchamps was only going to use your wives and women as breeders for future English settlers.

And the Founding Fathers to an extent did own the land..they were representatives of those same private owners, in fact the delegations from Virginia and Pennsylvania included landowners with immense tracts of land. Those same private owners gave the right to own their nation to those men they elected...and if you asked many of those same private owners on the Mexican Border I can guarantee you that they'd like to keep the illegals out.

I see no reason to keep them out at all..what apparently you don't grasp is that concept in that we want them to come here legally.
I was criticising more the suggestion that some kind of enormous wall is required. Doesn't seem a worthwhile trade-off. Personally, I would advocate open borders, but I understand your position. Our friend Enod seems to take a harder line than you.

Thank you for the corrections on Culloden and Bannockburn..but as I stated, your ancestors apparently thought enough of borders to engage in military action to explain this issue to the English.....after all Longchamps was only going to use your wives and women as breeders for future English settlers.

Yes, they thought rule by an oppressive Scottish king was preferable to rule by an ultra-oppressive English king. So what? I doesn't matter to me whether the elect-a-king has his castle in London or Edinburgh. Nationalism is the curse of mankind.

And the Founding Fathers to an extent did own the land..they were representatives of those same private owners, in fact the delegations from Virginia and Pennsylvania included landowners with immense tracts of land.
Fine. Why did they have to claim rights on everyone else's lands and freedoms? Because they, like all politicians, were megalomaniac assholes. One of Washinton's first acts as president was to quell a tax revolt. Can you imagine!

Those same private owners gave the right to own their nation to those men they elected...
Rrrrrubish. May I direct you to the wonderful Lysander Spooner.

http://praxeology.net/LS-NT-2.htm#no.2

and if you asked many of those same private owners on the Mexican Border I can guarantee you that they'd like to keep the illegals out.
So they can, on THEIR property. But as to the spare room in a house of a New York family who want to hire a maid, they have no right to keep immigrants out.

You can niggle all you want. You're still trying to justify something you know is horrible and sick, the enforced segregation of human beings based solely on where they were born.

For all of you people advocating open borders:

Let's see how you like it when some terrorist scum blatantly walks over and conducts an attack against a major U.S city.

Yes, they thought rule by an oppressive Scottish king was preferable to rule by an ultra-oppressive English king. So what? I doesn't matter to me whether the elect-a-king has his castle in London or Edinburgh. Nationalism is the curse of mankind.

Fine. Why did they have to claim rights on everyone else's lands and freedoms? Because they, like all politicians, were megalomaniac assholes. One of Washinton's first acts as president was to quell a tax revolt. Can you imagine!

Rrrrrubish. May I direct you to the wonderful Lysander Spooner.

http://praxeology.net/LS-NT-2.htm#no.2

So they can, on THEIR property. But as to the spare room in a house of a New York family who want to hire a maid, they have no right to keep immigrants out.

You can niggle all you want. You're still trying to justify something you know is horrible and sick, the enforced segregation of human beings based solely on where they were born.

No one is segregating ANYONE...for Gods sake...they can go to any US Consulate, the US Embassy and apply for legal entrance into this country...tell me how simply filling out a visa application is segregating a person?

That is not horrible, nor sick, it is just good policy...and you can sit there comfy in your home in Scotland knowing you don't have 12 million Englishmen crossing over into Scotland....