Brief interlude: Miss Oklahoma stands up for states' rights (state sovereignty). The politically correct judge got owned! He wasn't expecting her response, I bet.
(Now did she really approve that for Infowars???)Starting with what the law actually does:
"Called one of the 'toughest legislations in the nation', the law means that all immigrants in Arizona must now carry their alien registration documents and it means that police can question anyone they think may be in the United States illegally. It will also address people that knowingly hire illegal immigrants or who transport them."
That description has been criticised by some supporters of the law, who contend that the police can only inquire about the status of a potential illegal alien (love the American terminology, btw, do they arrive in saucers?) if they have 'reasonable suspicion'. Now, reasonable suspicion is vague and the same flowery rationalisation behind the un-PATRIOT Act.
On the other hand, illegal immigration is a huge problem for America with an estimated 11 million illegal aliens bringing a crime wave with them across the border from an unstable Mexico. Many are declaring themselves to be invaders, and part of groups like La Raza (the Race) designed to 'liberate' states of America and 'return' them to Me-hee-co. Bullshit based on faulty history and even faultier racial prejudice. Can you imagine if whites formed a group called 'The Race'? Yet these illegals (backed by the intelligence agencies no doubt) have the gall to not only advocate racial supremacism, but at the same time call whites racist!
So I should support the law 100%, right? It is popular after all...Well, not completely. Although I do sympathise with the reasons for passing it.
Some problems with the law are pointed out here
I personally don't give a damn whether it may constitute racial profiling. In case you can't tell I'm growing a little tired of the race card being played every two minutes. Everything is racist unless it's either indifferent or anti-white, then it's politically correct. The illegals in America are almost all from Mexico, duh! So it is inevitable when rooting out illegals that in America's case you're not going to be as likely to investigate someone who looks Chinese than you are someone who looks Mexican. Sorry.
Still, I found this mock ad funny:
Which brings me to my next point: this law only gives the state the power to do something that in America's case, the federal government should have done years ago. But I am not holding my breath. I will only be convinced if and when we actually see truck after truck deporting illegal immigrants back across the border. Until then I refuse to believe they will actually do it (too many employers rely on the cheap labour I bet), but we shall see.
And if it does actually work out, perhaps...naw, now I am dreaming, Britain would never ever take seriously their citizenship requirements. Besides, we have open borders mandated from Brussels, just another reason to quit the EU ASAP (wishful thinking, again).
Also, one final point: do we need borders in the first place? In the future at some time I would suggest not, but for now as long as two thirds of the world is an empoverished hellhole made so in part by our financial and corporate interests, I believe local solutions like Arizona's are not merely justifiable, but necessary. Crime and instability along border regions is nothing new to history; England had major problems for centuries along the Welsh and Scottish borders. Wonder what they did with invading 'immigrants'? Probably just killed them on the spot. How's that for 'racial profiling'.
One solution NOT up for MSM disussion is to legalise ALL drugs immediately. This would crush all the drug lords, in particular the drug gangs destabilising Mexico as we speak (a major cause of Mexican migration north). In fact, the benefits of re-legalisation of all 'illegal drugs' would be tremendous in many other ways, too, but the improvements in Mexico's condition as a result would probably halt Mexican immigration into the US right then and there.
So I'm keeping an eye on this because if it is a success, and I want it to be but I have my doubts that significant deportations will actually occur, then it must not be an isolated case - popular demand will see to that.
Update: seeing how calls were made to 'boycott Arizona', Arizonans respond with their own threats of counter-boycott:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/19/arizona-official-threatens-cut-los-angeles-power-payback-boycott/
Posts
.jpg)
1 comment:
How can you possibly find it just to return illegal immigrants to their respective countries (in this case Mexico, which like Alex Jones you appear to exaggeratingly dismiss as some hellhole, which if you had actually visited the country would realise is far from the truth) when as you openly state these countries are 'empoverished hellhole[s] made so in part by our financial and corporate interests'? Yes OUR financial and corporate interests. It is OUR elites, and in the case of Mexico, in conjunction with OUR consumption of drugs, and our inability to make OUR politicians respond to the need for legalisation, which has produced a state of affairs that makes life financially challenging for its citizens. It is WE that are ultimately to blame for illegal immigration and surely then WE that should deal with its consequences, including, if necessary, allowing the continued existence of these immigrants. But more importantly, ensuring that WE change our political system to one in which this dangerous elite no longer occupies positions of power and is able to wreak such problems in the first place.
Post a Comment