Why is it that the pro-immigration advocates refuse to debate or address the real world issues, but instead label everyone that wants our nations laws enforce a 'racist' and 'bigot'? Because they want to disarm their opponents, instigate racial hatred and division, and prevent any enforcement of our nations laws for a select and priviledge ethnic group.

As a race and culture, I think Latinos are wonderful people with a rich cultural heritage. My step mother is a Mexican citizen. But this debate isn't about race and it isn't about human rights. Despite the slander of the far left, It is NOT a basic human right for everyone on the planet to migrate and reside in the United States. It is a PRIVILEGE for legal citizens and legal immigrants to live here. A PRIVILEGE granted by the US government.

But the far left will argue that LATINOS have a god-given human right to live here in their sacred AZTLAN anad that all non-Latinos should be expelled as foriegn invaders. OK, so who's the racist and bigot? Just as a hypothetical thought experiment: How would the Latino community feel if they were suddenly displaced in housing and jobs by 3,000,000 Pakistanis migrating freely into Southern CA, taking their jobs for $30/month? They would suddenly scream about the injustice and the crimes of allowing all those Pakistanis to migrate unmitigated into "their country". I think the pro-immigration crowd would suddenly shed their liberal agenda and they would suddenly lobby fiercly for the rigorous enforcement of our immigration laws ... against this one ethnic group of Pakistanis. Why? Because 3,000,000 Pakistanis would threaten them ... so they'd suddenly become stalwart supporters of our government to stop the flood of illegal Pakisitanis. My point is that the "La Raza" crowd is for the rigorous enforcement of any law that benefits their ethnic group, and staunchly defends their 'right' to wontonly ignore any laws they feel negatively impacts their ethnic group. They view their ethnic group as 'privileged' because the continuously play the 'victim' card, i.e., they were victimized by Cortez, they were victimized by the Spanish/American war of 1834, they were victimized by the settling of the American West, and they are victimized today by laws they choose to ignore.

You say it isn't a fair comparison to compare Latino immmigration with Pakistanis? Why not? The only difference is in the physical difficulty in immigrating from Central America versus Pakistan. Both cultures have chronic poverty and government corruption in their native countries. Both cultures have economic castes and long running internal civil rife. Why should Latinos and Pakistanis be treated any different? Oh, MECHA says that Latinos are a 'special' race that have a god-given right to the American SouthWest, and that all other ethnic groups should be expelled, violently if necessary. But the MECHistas aren't racist, right?

Again, what hypocrites for a group that calls itself "La Raza" to label others as 'racists' that simply want immigration into our country to be legal and controlled by our government's laws. The only reason they do so is because they themselves are racists and bigots.

Let's all put the race card down and ask how do you solve REAL problems presented by unchecked, unlimited immigration by ANY foreign national of ANY ethnicity? Our classrooms are overcrowded and our school systems struggle to provide anything but the basic educational resources to our children. Our healthcare systems are shutting down under the massive burden of caring for the uninsured. We are saddling our children and grandchildren with TRILLIONS of dollars of budget deficits. Our prisons are overflowing with illegal alien criminals. Our law enforcement agencies are ignoring non-violent crimes because they are overwhelmed with gangs, drugs, and street violence. There are vast areas of our nations metropolitan areas that are the domain of violent gangs and are basically unsafe for anyone other than local residents and the police. The vast majority of illegal aliens facing deportation proceedings disappear and never show for their court hearings. The costs of providing social services to illegal aliens and the lost tax revenue due to the cash-only under-the-counter employment market favored by illegal aliens COSTS our government $65 BILLION PER YEAR and growing!

These are REAL problems that have NOTHING to do with race. These issues aren't being voiced by racists and bigots ... they are being raised by concerned US Citizens who's wallets are funding the bill for the unmitigated and wonton abrogation of our nation's immimgration laws. They aren't asking for a stop to all immmigration ... our nation was founded on immigration ... they are asking for our government to stop ILLEGAL immigration of ANY foriegn national, regardless of race or ethnicity.

I've pretty much given up debating the activists here at LA Indymedia. It's like cheating at a game of chess - you have checkmated your opponent and then he/she unilaterally decides that the checkmated king can move 2 spaces per turn instead of 1.

A perfect example, I provided links to some sound and comprehensive studies that show illegals take more in taxpayer-provided benefits than they could ever possibly pay in taxes. Their response? All these guys do here is label (so much for being true “progressives”). The study was from a "think tank" (yes, so what’s your point), they’re associated with "Fox News" (Fox will report on their studies, but that does not mean Fox owns the think tank), you’re a “Republican” (no, actually I’m an independent and despise our current president for being so pro-corporate and open-borders), and so on and so on.

Another example: I provided “anchor baby” poncho 3 occupations hit hard by illegal immigration, throwing Americans and legal U.S. residents out of work, and he'll make up something like that they're union occupations. Most landscapers or construction workers I know are not in a union. The stats on union membership in the U.S. are around 20-25% of all jobs. You will give them fact after fact, and they will simply ignore them and continue to label you. And, of course, their favorite cut is calling you a “racist” just because you support legal immigration but oppose illegal immigration, and believe our borders need to be secured.

Yet one more example: I ‘outed’ one of the prime instigators here at Indymedia, proving this guy was a militant atheist and an extremist whom harasses people whom believe in religion, and further that this guy lives in an ultra-white gated community (yet is coming to Baldwin Park to celebrate diversity). His response? You got it, I must be a “racist.” Ironically, many of these student counter-protestors that claim to be against racism show up with signs and flags celebrating MEChE, a racist group whose motto is “Por La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada.” (Translation: For the [Chicano] Race, everything. For those outside the Race, nothing).



You are really wasting your time here. These radicals do not care about facts and will not honestly debate you on anything. They will label you “racist” just because you do not share their dreams of world socialism, and ignore all the anti-white racists in their our group. And they’ll spew forth, over and over, all the buzzwords and catch phrases that get the socialists all hot and bothered: “Fox News,” “racist”, “Nazis,” “Republican,” “No person is illegal” (true, not a person, but their immigration status in the U.S. is), “We didn’t cross the border; the border crossed us” (I don’t think anyone present at Indymedia was alive in the 1840’s when Mexico’s questionable claim to what is presently the Southwest U.S. ended), “Our community is not a cesspool” (no, but if you won’t walk the streets at night for fear of your safety, there certainly is something significantly wrong with that particular town), etc. You’ll give them reasoned arguments, and will got nothing back but hypocrisy, slogans, labels and catch phrases.

Their world in one of emotions, not logic. The dream of one world, one people all living in harmony sounds good and gives you a warm and fuzzy feeling inside, right? Why let logic intrude on your warm and fuzzy dream? That "one world" may be the cause of many Americans becoming unemployed, the destruction of the middle class, cause problems like hospitals closing en masse as they're unable to cover all the services for illegals, our environment getting trashed as our population explodes (less open space, more automobile traffic and pollution, more demand for limited resources like water, electricity), etc.

You get the point. These indymedia folks will not honstly debate the issues because they don't have a leg to stand on. Their house is build on deception and lies.

P.S. - What how they respond to this post, and your own. They'll label and slander, and put up a lot of claimed "facts" without any supporting evidence. Distortions and lies.

...seems to me that all your posts proves is that you are a hypocrite...equally guilty of the same crime you condemn your opponents of...

..oh, just to let you know...both sides can be guilty of hypocrisy...but only YOU can take responsibility for your own.

Studies by think tanks, liberal conservative whatever, are inherently suspect because their stated purpose is to find information that supports their goal. The think tanks you cited are anti-immigrant by their own policy...do you thing for one second that they will publish finding that counter that policy? That simple fact makes them both unsound and non-comprehensive, regardless of what you would like to believe or claim.

You talk of slander and dismissal, but toss around "socialist" and "militant (!?!) atheist"...two terms that have no meaning the way you use them beyond being a provocative slogan and catch phrase. You continue to use the term "Poncho" when the individual had already told you that he found it racially offensive, and seem to take delight in tossing this term around. Why?

You also claim that the residence issue you raised was dismissed as 'racist'...this is not true, it was dismissed as irrelevant. Seems like you are doing a little distortion of your own maybe? You want to condemn someone for living in an "ultra-white" community, and seem to take pride in living in East LA, but also relish the fact that the same area is referred to as a "cess-pool".

You try to mitigate the phony war of aggression that annexed parts of Mexico to the US by falsely referring to it as when the "claim to what is presently the Southwest U.S. ended".

There. No slander...plenty of facts from your own words...the only distortions and lies being your own.

Now, by all means, stop wasting your time.

<>

The exact same criticism can be made about almost any institution in the country. The mass media is inherently suspect as they seek information that sells newspapers and generates revenue. Policy advocacy groups (like Meche, La Raza, MALDEF) are inherently suspecdt as they seek information to support their policy positions and increase funding by members and foundation. And so on. KPC - you actually have to look at the study (yes, open up that link), read the data and then challenge the DATA, not the authors. Otherwise you could go on and on stating that its "from a think tank" or "inherently suspect" all day long. LOOK AT THE DATA ITSELF, THEN FORM YOUR COUNTER-ARGUMENTS. That is, if you are able to do so, which so far you have not.

<>

The link I sent you showed that there are non-denominational religious freedom groups out there that consider your dear friend Freddy a religious bigot, and have a good number of facts to support their contention. What is your response, or Freddys? Ignore, ignore, ignore. Why let truth get in the way of that warm and fuzzy "one world" feeling?

<>

Because Poncho come across as a giant pansy. And how can people that throw around the term "racist" everywhere just to suit their purposes, regardless of the truth of the matter, then turn around and claim that something is "racially offensive" to them? Answer: The hypocrites cannot morally or logically do so. Hence I do not care if Poncho's feeling are hurt. He can apologize for having falsely called me a "racist" (and the rest of you as well), and then I will apologize in kind.

<>

My, yes MY, communtiy is a bit of a cesspool. So much for all those signs at Alhambra and Baldwin Park stating "our communities are not cesspools." I'm not condemning someone else's neighborhood, I'm condemning MY OWN. And again (but please feel free to ignore like you always do) the matter of living in an ultra-white neighborhood but marching for "diversity" IS RELEVANT - it exposes further hypocricy by a career-long aggitator whom lives for socialist causes, but would not dare live in a neighborhood where Latinos live. Anyone but you easily understand the hugh hypocracy this represents.

<>

This statement is more damning to you and your side than mine, so I won't respond, other to suggest that, if you do not want to alienate most of America (whom you want to rally around your cause), you should not publicly state your belief that this land was stolen from Mexico. You'll just piss off most of the folk, the ones that vote, the ones that give campaign $ to the political reps. You might believe the America bad rhetoric, but for YOUR cause, it behooves you not to state it publicly.

Regarding think tanks: I already stated that they are suspect regardless of their political stripe. That was the point, not whether any particular DATA is correct, but whether associated conclusions are. I suggest if you want to be taken more seriously you look for a more objective analysis of the data....that is IF you are really interested in being taken more seriously.

Regarding religious tolerance: I do not know "Freddy", and have no idea why you assert he is a "dear friend". Also, I am not concerned with your personal vendetta against him. I myself am an atheist, but I am tolerant of all religious beliefs, and do not agree with those who are intolerant, whether it be you or him.

Regarding the term "Poncho": No one asked you to apologize, just not to be purposely racially offensive. Your petulent demand for an apology when you are obviously purposely being racially offensive is quite childishly insincere and hypocritical. In other words; you should grow up.

Regarding the community in which you live: First, it is not YOUR community, you just happen to live there. Obviously, if a person lives in an affluent community, he or she can afford to move to the inner city. You claim that Fred "would not dare live in a community where Latinos live". First of all, there ARE Latinos in San Clemente, second...you cannot possible know what he would 'dare' to do and why. Regardless of his choice of residence, it has no bearing on whether his opinions are valid. It is an irrelevancy that you use to try to dismiss him out of hand, and a pretty lame one at that. Now...I have asked YOU a question that you ignored...would you move OUT of the "cesspool" you live in if you could afford to, or do you stay there in order to give your opinions imaginary weight and validity?

...let's just dismiss your use of "socialist" and "career long aggitator" as more lame "buzzwords", "slogans" and "catchphrases", these dug up from an 1956 time capsule, and hardly worth discussion.

Regarding the annexation of the Southwest: I did not say that the land "stolen' from Mexico...so please avoid the distortions you claim to have such distaste for. What I stated was that the land was annexed after a phoney war of aggression. This is an historical fact that can be ignored, as you have chosen to do, but cannot be denied. Whether it "behooves" me to speak of historical fact to those who cannot tolerate it does not concern me...it hasn't hurt Mark Twain and other brave Americans over the years, if they can weather the storm I am sure that I can.

Okay, drop the Race Card.

Leave the Danzas Indigenas monument alone.

It has nothing to do with immigration - legal or not.

It has statements regarding the American experience of Chicanos.

The Chicano culture is a product of American Society, just like the Cowboy culture - which BTW is of Mexican influence.

Regarding think tanks: I posted one CIS study showing that illegals use far more in taxpaper supported benefits than they pay in taxes. Please actually read the study (at http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalrelease.html) rather than merely state your opinions on think tanks in general. It has data and conclusions, both of which you have completely failed to address. You now have an opportunity to look at the data and come up with alternative conclusions that support your "one world" views. I suspect you'll ramble on more about think tanks, and not actually address the study in particular. Why? It's hard to come up with alternative conclusions. Illegals DO use more in resourcses than they pay in taxes - i.e. they are a burden to taxpayers, not a benefit.

If you're an athiest, then I'll say a prayer for you. You may not "know" Freddy, but he posts all over L.A. Indymedia and appears to be instrumental in organizing the anti-SOS rally in Baldwin Park 2, so I suspect you actually DO know him to a certain degree. He is an anti-religion bigot and central in your side's protests efforts. Then there's also the toothless Arab man from Baldwin Park 1 stating "viva al-Zarkawi, the gringo killer." Point is, I guess your side had both extremes of bigots - those that hate religion, and those that believe in religiously-inspired killing of white people.

OK, I'll refrain from further use of the term "Poncho." Now can those on your side refrain from the continuous, unjustified charges of "racism"? I doubt it - it's how you recruit unknowledgable students for your rallies.

The community I live in IS MY COMMUNITY. Just because I am not Latino does not mean I am not part of the community in which I live. To suggest otherwise would be blatantly RACIST, would it not?

There are NOT many Latinos in San Clemente. I have visited friends there many times and it is a very white town. By the way, if you don't know Fred, as you claim, why are you spending so much time defending him? I wonder.

<>

OK, point conceded. The logic behind your statement is EXACTLY my point with respect to think tanks. You may disagree with their goals, but every study or reports has a truth value (true, false or somewhere inbetween) regardless of the source of the information. So, I'm awaiting your analysis on the CIS report I've mentioned above.

I would move out of the cesspool, and plan to in the future. But I'm not the hypocrite - I'm not claiming to cherish diversity. Your side is, but some of the activists live in all-white gated communities. I don't celebrate diversity, I celebrate humanity (the commonalities we all share, not the differences).

Fact is, many here at indymedia are "socialists." In fact, signs bearing the name "International Socialist Organization" often show up at your counter-protests and anti-war rallies. Now, I'm safe in assumming the ISO is socialist, right?

The links I sent you about the militant athiest "career long aggitator" detail a pattern of behaviour that justifies the labels. So again, just like with the CIS study, please actually review the data AND conclusions for yourself, then comment.

Regarding the annexation of the Southwest: Sorry, but I have another report for you. Don't let facts get in the way of the one world dream:

http://www.barnesreview.org/The__Reconquista_-Mexico_s_Dre/the__reconquista_-mexico_s_dre.html#

This extensive report chronicles the history of the American Southwest in great detail. Some highlights: Mexico’s claim to the region originally stemmed from a disputed15th-century treaty whereby the Pope divided the New World between Spain and Portugal, giving Spain controversial legitimacy to rule what is now Mexico. In 1821, a number of Mexicans revolted against Spain, set up an independent government and assumed theoretical rulership of the region. Nevertheless, the region was virtually ignored by the Mexican government. Subsequently, the United States obtained the Southwest in various ways – the Mexican American War (ended by the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, signed by Mexico, under which it received millions of dollars from the U.S.), the Gadsden Purchase (a purchase of land whereby Mexico accepted more money for ceding the territory), and the 1845 annexation of Texas (which since 1836 had been an independent republic) by mutual consent of Texas and the U.S. By this time, American settlers outnumbered Mexicans by at least five to one in all eight states Mexico ceded to the United States in 1848 (California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Wyoming, and Texas).

You want to talk about childish? When I discovered and confronted Freddy for living in an ultra-white gated neighborhood, someone on your side (either you, 1People or Pachuco [see, I finally got the name right]) responded by writing in effect (paraphrased): "Why are you so obsessed with him? Am I missing something? Maybe your into something, but I don't swing that way." Then, as an afterthought, this posted states "but if you were, there'd be nothing wrong with that." (again, paraphrased, not exact wording)

Hilarious! This indymedia guy was trying to cut me down by implying that I’m gay, then as an afterthought remembers that the socialists are supposed to be tolerant, diverse and accepting of gay people, and has to add the disclaimer. More hypocrisy. If he does not consider being gay to be a put-down, he wouldn’t have written it in the first place. But then he remembers that is was his side – which is your side – the socialist side – that claimes to be all for gay rights and to have this flowery “it’s a small world after all” philosophy of love and tolerance.

At lease my side – the SOS/Minutemen side – is far more honest than that. We’re not doing this silly flowery dance to appeal to everyone. Your side is full of deceitful activists.

...I have more concerns about drains on our economy that your...or CIS's...specious claims regarding illegal immigrants. You can continue to use that as grist for your mill, but the thinking portion of the country can use their own minds.

I have no idea what you are talking about "one world", and I don't give a rats ass whether you believe I know Fred or not. You seem to be very good at putting words in other peoples mouth, and puttin' your foot in your own. So your feigned distaste for distortion is hypocritical bullshit. You seem to have a Fred fetish if you ask me...and I haven't the slightest friggen' idea of what you mean when you say "your side". Your lame generalizations, catchphrases, buzzwords and slogans are an indication of a profound lack of imagination and intellectual laziness.

...and spare us the childish "I'll stop acting like a racist asshole is you stop calling me one"...grow up already.

Where you live is not your community, not because you are not Latino, but because you don't give a shit about it or it's people. It just happens to be where you are stuck until you can recycle enough bottles and cans to get the hell out.

You claimed that Fred wouldn't DARE live with Latinos...yet concede there are Latinos where Fred lives...I think that makes you...ummm...wrong.

...oh...that's right...there aren't MANY Latinos.

You blather on post after post about where someone lives invalidating their opinion. Then you cede the point, and in the very next paragraph bring it up again. I hate to point this out to you...but I think you got too many voices in your head, and they all sound like an idiot.

Now, go ahead and say a prayer for me...I will draw a pentagram and ask a non-existent Satan to steal your soul tonight...it will be just as pointless as your actions.

Geez, got your panties in a bunch, huh?

Give it a rest...this ain't a football game of "my side vs. your side" we are ALL on the same side...although the way you carry on I can see why people may want to keep their distance...not from your "side"...just from you.

And I was the one who made the joke regarding your Fredishism...you gotta admit, it was getting a little weird there, and I just wanted to be sure that these were valid threads and not a public lovers spat...

...not that there is anything wrong with that.

Look, Mr. Schizo...I gotta go get some grub...but I will be sure to check out your cripple ass replies and spank you at a later date...

...not that there is anything WRONG with that...

Chew on my baby batter, asswipe.

The last post (KP Obscene) was not mine, but from an inposter. I don't use high school language in my posts.

<<...I have more concerns about drains on our economy that your...or CIS's...specious claims regarding illegal immigrants. >>

You can come up with any excuses you want, but to date no one here at indymedia can refute the findings of the CIS study I cited. So you ignore it, or come up with bogus reasons why you won't address it. By the way, last time I checked, $10 billion/year out of a California state budget of $100 billion a year IS a serious drain on the economy. You stated that was your concern, right?

<>

The is no litmus test to belong to a community. I don't need to think one way or another. You take issue with being called a socialist, but what you wrote above sounds like socialism. It all about race or class struggle, right?

<>

I've consisitently stated that he lives in an ultra-white neighborhood. I never said there were no latinos there, but just few, and that he was a giant hypocrite if he claims to march for diversity.

<>

Really, then when will you be signing up for the next Minuteman project?

<< I just wanted to be sure that these were valid threads and not a public lovers spat... ...not that there is anything wrong with that.>>

Funny, but again, the gay insinuation was put out there as a cut-down, then you (it was you, right?) have to state "but there's nothing wrong with that" How hypocritical ! Whomever wrote that remark was quick to mention that they "did not swing that way." If ther's nothing wrong with being gay, then why be so quick to state that you're not one. It wouldn't even come to mind, unless you in fact don't think highly of gays.

Your side has to pretend that we're all part of one giant happy family. My side can honestly state that we may tolerate people living alternative lifestyles, but don't need to approve of their lifestyles. I tolerate, but don't approve. We're not afraid to be completely 100% honest. Your side need to pretend to support all alternative lifestyles.

Seems to me that the true voice is busy whispering lies:

This is what you said about Fred:
"it exposes further hypocricy by a career-long aggitator whom lives for socialist causes, but would not dare live in a neighborhood where Latinos live."

San Clemente has Latinos...you qualifiers of "many" or "few" were only trotted out when you were shown to be wrong....which you still are, by the way. And I see you are back to pressing a bullshit point that you supposedly ceded yesterday...that is known as "hypocrisy"...look it up or ask one of your many voices to define it for you.

And your claim that 10% of the CA budget is being drained by illegal immigration is fuckin' LAUGHABLE....you might as well pull any number out of your ass....instead of out of the asses of CIS. Wrong again.

Now, as for your gay obsession, I already told you, my gate don't swing that way...just to save you some time and energy...

...not that there is anything WRONG with that...


...ever seen the show "Seinfeld"?

...idiot.

Argument 1. the undocumented don't pay enough in taxes to cover what they take in services.

Response1: of course they don't pay so much in taxes. They are underpaid and lack staus. To be fairer, compare their total contribution to the GDP to their consumption of services.

Argument 2: the leftist socialists cry "racism" and then turn around a . They are hypocrites.

Response 2: the counter-protests are diverse, composed of many individuals. You are expecting a single, coherent message, but you aren't getting it. It's been said it's a "united front", meaning that these groups don't agree 100%, except that they agree to protest against SOS.

Arguement 3: Fred Rice lives in some white gated community, and I live in the Alhambra cesspools.

Response 3: you're ignoring everyone else, including your neighbors who oppose you. There are hypocrites of varying degree everywhere: Hal Netkin married an undocumented person, and people like him ultimately cause more immigration, no. He also hit a couple people with his car, and then got off without even a hearing. Talk about "white privilege".

Guys like Hal can play the race card too. He's got the ace of hearts (health), the ace of diamonds (wealth), and the ace of clubs (government and police support).

Sometimes, the only edge that the oppressed have is the guilt of their oppressors. It's the moral high ground that the slave gains when the master beats him. That's their only race card.

The ace of spades (death) is all they got.

LOL. Fred Rice isn't instrumental to organizing around the SOS.

ISO are socialists, but not everyone who goes to these demonstrations is socialist. I'm not a socialist, and have never been a member of a socialist organization.

http://www.myoc.com/community/sanclemente/demographics/

It's 16% "Hispanic".

That's somewhat low, but, it's not that low.

Alhambra is 36% "Hispanic".

http://alhambra.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm

San Clemente IS an ultra-white neighborhood, so the fact that there might be a few Latinos living there does not diminish my basic criticism of one of your activists is fighting for diversity while living far from that diversity.

Look at the CIS study, KPC. You cannot argue with it. You come up with one b.s. excuse after another not to address the study. Laughable? Well, quit being so sophomoric about it and explain exactly why. Johnk has a better handle on the economics argument. Illegals cannot contribute much to the tax base as they are exploited. If they collectively stood up one day and demanded the same wages Americans do, these greedy business owners would not hire them. Believe me, our battle is just as much against the business owners as the illegals. Just go to the minuteman project website to find out about Operation Spotlight – 100% an enforcement effort against business owners. So much for all the whining about us picking on illegals only.

I’m not obsessed about the gay thing other than to point out another hypocrisy on your part – your side needs to be gay friendly, but then you’re so quick to state that your not one, then you’re so quick to state “not that there is anything WRONG with that.” BTW – I don’t form my political discussions around television sitcoms like “Seinfeld” The fact that YOU DO make you more of an idiot.

mumble: "I don’t form my political discussions around television sitcoms like “Seinfeld” "

...which one then, "Will and Grace"?

...not that there is anything WRONG with that (wink wink, nudge nudge)...

Why do you keep harping on a point that you ceded yesterday was irrelevant...am I speaking to one of those different voices now?

Like the poster sez - who you calling "illegal alien" pilgrim?!

If you want to put down the race card and deal with the real history, then let's examine the impact of illegal European immigration, invasion, and genocide , right along with the utter destruction of the environment.

After all, it is the white man who turned this pristtine hemisphere into a "cesspool."

You really want to put down the "race card"?

Hell, no you don't - you're _playing_ the "race card" just like Papa Bush did with Willie Horton, just like the Klan and Nazis have always done.

Your very presence on about 2/3 of what is for now the US is illegal Under Your Own Laws, and under international law and under treaty law.

But like a fool you want to raise the banner of legality - well, you lose there too.

You have very little claim - even if we allow a great many fraudulent treaties into the record as if they were real, and not forged or coerced.

Even if we leave aside the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo - which is null and void due to its many violations on the part of the US - Even if we leave aside the blatant land theft and issues pertaining to the sovereignty of the Apache, Hopi, Dine / Navajo and other southwestren nations attendant to it, you still don't have a leg to stand on in terms of your claims to "legality."

Not only are you illegal aliens - you are illegal occupiers in violation of the norms of international law, and have no more right here than Hitler had in the slavic countries he invaded under his "elbow room" policy.

You are a fool.

You think we don't _know_ the laws and treaties under which you stole a continent.?

!Que Pendejo! - and anyone who agrees with you, likewise.

Chicomozteca

Now *there's* a can of worms.

How many treaties have been honored? How many were arbitrated in courts neutral to both the US and the tribes?

Billy Bragg had a good line about justice:

"The Judge said 'this isn't a court of justice, son, this is a court of law."

Blow me, wetback.

Fresca's begging for Arnold and Chicomozteca. Somebody help this woman out.

And your mighty Aztec didn't do anything but have tea parties ? Wake up. Are the Spaniards white...Race card? Are you the only one allowed to call a bigot a bigot and rewrite history..

It's the beginning of the end for Mexican appeasement.