I have looked into the issue. For example...conversations with economists. The bottom line is that economics is not the only concern. How many illegals are unable to come over legally due to disease or criminal status? The Hatians would admit that many of their illegals may have HIV. There are more reasons than poverty that people come over illegally. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I have failed to do my homework.
Your concern about diseased illegals is not economic? The common argument against illegals (which may not be your own) is that they received the benefits of US citizens (schools, hospitals, etc) without paying for it. They pay sales taxes and property taxes (through their rent like everybody else who rents). They don't pay SS tax, federal income tax, or state income (nonissue for Texas, big issue for California). The income taxes are not likely to be issue since their level of income would most likely exempt them from paying. The other side is that they work for less than the minimum wage and thus reduce the costs for the goods they produce (like produce and housing costs). For some of the jobs they do, employers would be hard pressed to find replacement workers, e.g. crop picking. BTW, eliminating much of the poverty driven illegal immigration would be fairly easily accomplished. All the state/federal government has to do is make the fine for employing illegals so prohibitive that employers would choose to not take that chance.
No...it's not. When people with communicable disease come over here unidentified...there may be a human cost to be paid should they transmit said disease. I agree that this would certainly help. But I also think that we need to solve this problem on the border itself as well. Both approaches should be used.
NOBODY enters without inspection (build a wall if you need to). EVERY vehicle is thoroughly inspected before entering the US. Those would be 2 good places to start.
The work that must be done? Do you honestly think that the immigrants who were voluntary trying to meet an immigration deadline, had to have been arrested? Do you think that action in anyway made this country safer from terrorists? Just a word about Ashcroft and the job he must do. His job is to uphold the constitution and the enforce the Federal laws and mandates. His job is to protect the constitution not protect the country and it's inhabitants. That protection would be a by-product, but the oath Ashcroft swore was to uphold the consitution. Now it looks like at the first sign of trouble, the constitution is being thrown out the window. If you want to sacrifice freedom for safety, then Singapore has extreme security, and is very clean with almost no crime. Of course people can be caned for minor offenses, and the law enforcement is somewhat draconian. But hey, they are safe, and have nearly spotless trains. Other countries in efforts to keep their country safe, arrest people who vocalize dissention. Sure they lose their freedom, but it helps keep the country safe from revolution, and ideas that don't gel with what the govt. is pushing. Me, I would rather live in the United States of America, where we are supposed to be free, and have our freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of the U.S. I've alwasy beend told and agreed that the thing that makes this country great is it's freedom. Start changing that, and the country isn't quite as great anymore. Other places will be safer, have more history, be cleaner, better medical care, less homeless, etc. I think Ashcroft should be fired for breaking his oath to uphold the Constitution, rather than nominated for any award.
I forgot to mention I was wrong about it being Madison's quote. It was Ben Franklin's quote. Anyway, rather than give up freedoms for security, how about scrapping Bush's plan to build a 'star wars' missle defense plan, which wouldn't work, angers our allies people we've entered into treaties with, and instead spending that money on counter terrorism surveilance, buying informants etc. I would trust those measures way more than arresting immigrants to comply with a registration deadline, and throwing out the constitution.
I can understand the argument that they were arrested because they were breaking immigration laws. But, it is still a bad enforcement idea. The terrorists, and the folks who literally snuck into the country, and those who are wanted for felonies are not going to come forward to register (except the stupid ones). This sweep arrests the least dangerous, most law-abiding and cooperative of the illegal population. Sure, they may be illegal, but it is bad PR, bad enforcement, and will make catching the others more difficult. I am a big enemy of Ashcroft, but I'm not sure how much of the blame he gets here. I mean, he does get the blame, but the truth is that the INS has been this abusive and insensitive for decades now. I doubt they'd act much differently under anyone else we've had in office for the last 50 years. I think the INS needs a rehaul. Draw the strings tighter if you must, but make it make it more just in the process and give illegal immigrants rights that are due them.
Like I said earlier, this type of action will not make us safer. It will make the Muslim world angrier at the USA and bring about more terrorist acts against us. I truly believe that George W. Bush is welcoming the apocalypse, the prick.
Ashcroft should focus on arresting jaywalkers too. You never know when you might catch a terrorist jaywalking. Hold 'em indefinitely too, on the off chance that they might be connected to terrorism. We'll worry about figuring out if there's a real connection in a couple of years.
Could someone please list all of the laws that we should be allowed to ignore, for whatever reason? Thanks.
Man, I just saw The Constitution hurled through my kitchen window? It landed on an illegal immigrant. Could we exaggerate a little bit more, please? You all act as if Ashcroft is running the department as if he were Saddam Hussein or Der Fuhrer. So did Ben Franklin invent the dirty nuclear weapon? I think it is great to criticize ANY current administration, but to caricature it is just not responsible. Why isn't FDR villified for allowing the Japanese internment camps? He is generally regarded as one of the top 3 Democratic presidents.
Well Roosevelt may be generally regarded as a great president but I always thought of him as a tyrant and I wish he had keeled over earlier than he did. Not only did he ok the internment of the Japanese Americans, he tried to subvert the power of the Supreme Court, which was the only branch that still blocked his initiatives as president.
More blame the US for the terrorism BS. You couldn't possibly be giving bin Laden what he wants more than by uttering that little nugget of ignorance and stupidity. I don't agree AT ALL with the methods listed above...but what you said is ridiculous. It's just as silly as the current state of immigration. Nope...but I like him a little less than I liked Janet Reno...and that coming from me...is pretty strong language.
It's not just this arrest, it's the whole patriot act and other measures which do apply to citizens. That's why Ashcroft is an enemy of our countries constitution. That's not too far from the truth. He certainly isn't paying too much attention to our nations constitution. Nope, but if freedom can't stand up to threats then maybe not worth basing a country on. Like somone else already said, Franklin didn't see the invention of the dirty nuke coming, but he certainly saw people like Ashcroft who would use security as an excuse to sieze freedoms. I'll admit that we aren't at the level where of having storm troopers charging in everywhere, or a totalitarian regime. But it's scary that certain freedoms are starting to erode and many people think it's ok, in order to have security. Maybe not at the time, but certainly afterwards, and as a result our govt. paid $$$ for their mistake. The idea is hopefully that after seeing one such mistake, we don't do anything at all like that again.
<A HREF="http://asia.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml;jsessionid=5J3OA3SM2MVS4CRBAELCFFA?type=worldnews&StoryID=1946049"> U.S. frees most Muslim immigrants detained in California</A> <i> LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - All but 20 of the hundreds of Middle Eastern men detained this week in southern California after voluntarily presenting themselves to register under new anti-terrorism rules have been released, U.S. immigration officials said on Friday. "All the people taken into custody were people whose visitors' visas had expired," a U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service official, who requested anonymity, told Reuters. "Some remained in custody because there are circumstances surrounding them that potentially make them of interest to law enforcement." ........ </i>
Are you guys kidding me? HOW CAN YOU JUSTIFY THIS ACTION TAKEN BY THE US GOVERNMENT? There are so many ways of trying to catch these ILLEGAL immigrants. How about the freakin INS doing a better job on catching the people who are staying past their visa dates. You guys (who are defending these actions) going to tell me that sending almost 1,000 immigrants to jail will stop terrorist from coming into this country. That is ridiculous. How this not causing more outrage, I dont know. This shows how stupid and how narrow minded this regime has been in trying to resolve issues from 9/11. THIS MAKES ME SICK
OK...you've stated your opinion...now tell us how you would do things differently. Keep in mind that they must be workable, real world solutions, rather than some nice, yet ineffective non-plan. I don't agree with the actions that have been taken...but we need alternatives that will work.
The people they arrested where criminals, breaking the law. Unless you think criminals who come forward and confess should just be let go, I don't understand the outrage. I think asking them to come in voluntarily: uses the least amount of resources, is done in nearly every criminal case, and puts everyone involved in the least amount of danger. Sure, it would be great if no one came into or stayed in this country illegally, but once it happens, I don't think ignoring it is the best solution. Not really. They might get one this way (or around twenty, the number still detained), but why not pick up the freebies while you are working on everyone else? I don't think arresting criminals is outrageous. There is certainly no reason to be sick over it. Outside of the bad press they are receiving, there really isn't any negative effect. In case you were not aware, two purposes of the INS are to keep out illegal immigrants and make sure people leave when a temporary visa has expired.
