Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 7, 2018 9:49:46 GMT -5
Excerpted from an article by the The Gatestone Institute: Hundreds of Africans and Asians armed with knives and iron rods fought running street battles in the northern port city of Calais on February 1, less than two weeks after French President Emmanuel Macron visited the area and pledged to crack down on illegal immigration.
The clashes plunged Calais — emblematic of Europe's failure to control mass migration — into a war zone and reinforced the perception that French authorities have lost control of the country's security situation.
The mass brawls, fought in at least three different parts of Calais, erupted after a 37-year-old Afghan migrant running a human trafficking operation fired gunshots at a group of Africans who did not have money to pay for his services. Five Africans suffered life-threatening injuries.
Within an hour, hundreds of Eritreans, Ethiopians and Sudanese took to the streets of Calais and attacked any Afghans they could find. More than a thousand police officers using batons and tear gas were deployed to restore order. Two dozen migrants were hospitalized.
French Interior Minister Gérard Collomb described the level of violence in Calais as "unprecedented." He attributed the fighting to an escalating turf war between Afghan and Kurdish gangs seeking to gain control over human trafficking between Calais and Britain, which many migrants view as "El Dorado" because of its massive underground economy. Each day around 40 ferries depart Calais for Britain. A mass influx of undocumented, culturally-unassimilated foreigners? What could go wrong? They add to the cultural diversity. They're hard workers, willing to do the jobs ordinary Frenchmen won't do. They have deep religious convictions. They simply want a place to call home, to live and grow with their families. All the more reason we should ship them over here, to North America, en masse. We wouldn't want to be perceived as unwelcoming, non-diverse, or (*shudder*) "xenophobic" by the international community, would we?
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,937
|
Post by bean29 on Feb 7, 2018 10:32:15 GMT -5
I do think we should have an Honest discussion on immigration, but demanding a wall won't get rid of all illegal immigrants. Nearly 1/2 of illegal immigration is due to VISA Overstays.
Why spend Billions on a wall if that is not the end all and be all. If we have to have other methods to get at the VISA Overstay population, won't whatever method we come up with work on the people who crossed the border illegally?
I thought most Hispanic Immigrants were Christians - which is why their religion is not generally considered a threat to US residents?
Who is culturally unassimilated? My husband's family is 90% First Generation immigrants. Few of the Second Generation even speak Spanish. My two youngest brother-in-laws were born in the US - they speak Spanish, but my DH considers their Spanish Skills to be poor. My kids speak Spanish well enough for a convo with relatives, but they say they don't "Speak Spanish". We do all look forward to eating Mexican Food at family gatherings but there is plenty of "White People Food" served too. DH has 7 Brothers, only one Married another Hispanic. Of all the Grandchildren, my one niece is married to a guy that speaks Spanish, but I am pretty sure he is 1/2 Puerto Rican, and his mother must be white, b/c they said she does not speak Spanish, and she babysits for their kids.
I also have a very "White" niece that will Marry a Man from Africa (Naturalized US Citizen) this summer. His English is Nearly Perfect, although I will admit he does have an accent. He also is a Christian.
No lazy Immigrants who refuse to work in our family either, DH is self employed Insurance Agency Owner, and has a BS in Education with at least 1/2 his Master's done. Most of his brothers are in the Trades. Most of the Niece's and Nephews are college Grads.
ETA, it is my opinion that Trump really doesn't want to protect the Dreamers. Every time they come close to a deal, he kills the deal and starts spouting off about the Democrats not wanting a deal. The Republicans have to come up with the solution. The democrats can not solve the problem. DT created the problem and the Republicans have to present a plan that the Democrats find acceptable. To pretend that the Democrats can solve the problem is disingenuous. I really don't think that with all the conflicting Budget priorities the Republicans have to meet, that they would allocate the $$ Trump wants to a wall. I am not even sure Trump wants the wall - he just wants to be able to Blame the Democrats for the fact that we don't have it.
If Trump really wanted to solve the issue of illegal immigration, Why focus on Criminal Gang members at his SOTU? The MS-13 Gang originated in El Salvador (South America). Those people are not Mexicans. They are also not representative of the Dreamers or most of the Legal and Illegal Immigrants of Hispanic descent. He could have highlited hard working Dreamers, instead he chose to hilite Criminal gang members.
Donald Trump does not like people with Dark Skin. He is just savy enough not to say it, and he pretends he wants to help Hispanics and African Americans. I seriously doubt his sincerity. Actions don't match words here.
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,937
|
Post by bean29 on Feb 7, 2018 11:01:38 GMT -5
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 7, 2018 13:32:23 GMT -5
I posted the article more as a talking point in the "Should we invite more Middle Eastern/North African refugees over to North America?" debate, but it is worthwhile to compare which factors are the same and which factors differ in the DACA/Wall/immigration reform debate.
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,937
|
Post by bean29 on Feb 7, 2018 13:54:25 GMT -5
I don’t think “more” is on the table. The status quo is at risk unless the refugee is educated and has $$.
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Feb 7, 2018 13:55:38 GMT -5
I posted the article more as a talking point in the "Should we invite more Middle Eastern/North African refugees over to North America?" debate, but it is worthwhile to compare which factors are the same and which factors differ in the DACA/Wall/immigration reform debate. No, you posted an article that showcases violence perpetrated by illegal immigrant gangs and human trafficking rings in Europe in an attempt to compare them with what its been a hot topic in US as far as what it can be done with those that have illegally entered/ stayed. Nobody is opposed to deporting bad elements but what is to be done with those that simply seek a better life? Note that the whole problem started with a man making use of a firearm. Maybe the bigger issue is acces to firearms?! Full disclosure: I believe I said that before but I feel that I have to remind all that I AM ONE OF THOSE THAT ENTERED US ILLEGALLY! My alternative would’ve been returning home, something that at the time was out of question for various reasons. Never been on government’s dime, never associated myself with any fringe elements, never took someone else’s job but created some for those that were willing to work. You can build two parallel walls on the border and patrol them or electrify them or take any measure you want but if I decide to cross the border for any reason at all and my only option is to do so illegally I can assure you I can do it. That in itself would render all your efforts useles and the expense incurred unnecessary. As a result, a humane approach is necessary and if that involves offering a path to citizenship to those deserving it then I’m all for it.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 7, 2018 17:40:23 GMT -5
I posted the article more as a talking point in the "Should we invite more Middle Eastern/North African refugees over to North America?" debate, but it is worthwhile to compare which factors are the same and which factors differ in the DACA/Wall/immigration reform debate. No, you posted an article that showcases violence perpetrated by illegal immigrant gangs and human trafficking rings in Europe in an attempt to compare them with what its been a hot topic in US as far as what it can be done with those that have illegally entered/ stayed. Nobody is opposed to deporting bad elements but what is to be done with those that simply seek a better life? Note that the whole problem started with a man making use of a firearm. Maybe the bigger issue is acces to firearms?! Full disclosure: I believe I said that before but I feel that I have to remind all that I AM ONE OF THOSE THAT ENTERED US ILLEGALLY! My alternative would’ve been returning home, something that at the time was out of question for various reasons. Never been on government’s dime, never associated myself with any fringe elements, never took someone else’s job but created some for those that were willing to work. You can build two parallel walls on the border and patrol them or electrify them or take any measure you want but if I decide to cross the border for any reason at all and my only option is to do so illegally I can assure you I can do it. That in itself would render all your efforts useles and the expense incurred unnecessary. As a result, a humane approach is necessary and if that involves offering a path to citizenship to those deserving it then I’m all for it. So, in summary: 1) The US can't effectively secure its border, so why bother? 2) The US should reward your lawless behaviour and grant you a path to citizenship, while immigrants who waited for years to immigrate through legal channels can go pound sand. 3) Banning firearms in the US will fix problems with criminality related to illegal immigration. (You may note that firearms are banned in France, and that hasn't stopped Northern France from becoming a war zone.) I'll have to tell my uncle, who worked as an MD in the US for more than a decade, owning two practices, that he shouldn't have given up when his US green card was denied. Obeying the law is for suckers, and the US apparently owed him a better life. He should have taken his whole operation off the books, given up paying taxes, and held out until the cost of punishing his contempt for the law was so high that lawmakers decided to give up rather than pursue justice. But like a fool he returned whence he came. No citizenship for him. So if you want to make this thread about yourself and America's southern border crisis, be my guest.
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Feb 7, 2018 20:12:00 GMT -5
Why do you have to go from one extreme to another, is beyond me!
No, the US should continue with the processing of legal immigration. The US should also consider circumstances related to each case of illegal immigration: look into the cause of it, the worthiness of the individual, his/her potential and so on. Again, I apparently can’t stress this hard enough: those that cause trouble or looking for it constantly should be deported.
No, I have no intention of making this about me but I was just offering an example of the fact that not all illegal immigrants come here to rape, kill and pillage or enslave as you are trying to infer. The US doesn’t owe a “better life” to no one but according to the Constitution all have the right to “life, liberty in the pursuit of happiness” and is not specific to citizens only!
While your uncle was waiting for his second or third application for US Green Card it is most likely that he could have a peaceful or relatively peaceful life. My advice would be not to judge people of doing things that you do not understand.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 8, 2018 8:38:55 GMT -5
The US should also consider circumstances related to each case of illegal immigration: look into the cause of it, the worthiness of the individual, his/her potential and so on. Under what criteria should an illegal migrant be granted citizenship, in your opinion? Can you offer specifics? What I mean to imply--in the case of immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa specifically, although it also applies to immigrants from South America--is that mass, lightly-regulated (or unregulated) migration makes no distinction between good and bad. Not that "good" and "bad" are inherent in all migrants, either. I'm sure many show up with the best of intentions but fall into the routine pitfalls of life: entitlement, inability to find a job, factionalism, disaffection, foreign nationalism, etc. The case for deporting illegal immigrants in the US doesn't rest entirely on the problems they cause or their net burden on the system (since I agree with you that the US could, for example, prioritize kicking out immigrants on social assistance). It rests on the principle of not rewarding lawlessness, and rewarding the patience and uprightness of those willing to immigrate lawfully. It's also an imperative if Hispanics want enduring respect from the other races (or ethnicities, if you prefer). An amnesty agreement will taint race relations for a generation, not unlike how AA has been the bane of black-white relations in the US. The US is a country that embraces liberty through law. Not through rewarding the breaking of it. Perhaps you shouldn't assume others don't understand things simply because you don't like their conclusions.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 8, 2018 10:09:18 GMT -5
All the more reason we should ship them over here, to North America, en masse. We wouldn't want to be perceived as unwelcoming, non-diverse, or (*shudder*) "xenophobic" by the international community, would we?Please note Virgil Showlion that I am going to speak to the situation in the United States, rather than North America. (i.e. Canada or Mexico) The situation in France is far different than it is here. We have a flow of immigrants from all over the world, and our refugee immigrant influx is quite small and controlled. This is different from France both numerically and more so on a percentage basis. The United States has a big ongoing problem with illegal immigration, primarily from our southern border. However these immigrants come here for several different reasons, the primary one being economic in nature. There are a good number of people from some Central American countries who do come here fleeing violence at home, but it is a different situation than is faced in Europe. Furthermore, the French culture is very insular, and immigrants there face a very different experience than they do here. Assimilation, never easy anywhere, is far more difficult there. Comparing what is going on in Europe to the situation here is going to lead to the conclusion that the two examples are very different and have limited instances in which we can draw any similar conclusions at all. I'll say again: the OP mainly concerns the Canadian immigration problem, which is the desire of blind idealists in our government to import refugees en masse from overseas. You had the same problem while Pres. Obama was still in office, or don't you remember? There are limited corollaries to the current situation in the US. Believe it or not, not everything on Earth revolves around the USA and your political issue of the month. Having said this, France is rapidly approaching the point where they're going to be unable to do anything, even politically, to halt the problem. The larger the immigrant population, the more entrenched they become, the more political clout they wield (with or without the ability to vote), and the more painful it is to reverse course. The US is on this same trajectory, albeit lagging by a decade.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,898
|
Post by happyhoix on Feb 8, 2018 12:22:13 GMT -5
All the more reason we should ship them over here, to North America, en masse. We wouldn't want to be perceived as unwelcoming, non-diverse, or (*shudder*) "xenophobic" by the international community, would we?Please note Virgil Showlion that I am going to speak to the situation in the United States, rather than North America. (i.e. Canada or Mexico) The situation in France is far different than it is here. We have a flow of immigrants from all over the world, and our refugee immigrant influx is quite small and controlled. This is different from France both numerically and more so on a percentage basis. The United States has a big ongoing problem with illegal immigration, primarily from our southern border. However these immigrants come here for several different reasons, the primary one being economic in nature. There are a good number of people from some Central American countries who do come here fleeing violence at home, but it is a different situation than is faced in Europe. Furthermore, the French culture is very insular, and immigrants there face a very different experience than they do here. Assimilation, never easy anywhere, is far more difficult there. Comparing what is going on in Europe to the situation here is going to lead to the conclusion that the two examples are very different and have limited instances in which we can draw any similar conclusions at all. I'll say again: the OP mainly concerns the Canadian immigration problem, which is the desire of blind idealists in our government to import refugees en masse from overseas. You had the same problem while Pres. Obama was still in office, or don't you remember? There are limited corollaries to the current situation in the US. Believe it or not, not everything on Earth revolves around the USA and your political issue of the month. Having said this, France is rapidly approaching the point where they're going to be unable to do anything, even politically, to halt the problem. The larger the immigrant population, the more entrenched they become, the more political clout they wield (with or without the ability to vote), and the more painful it is to reverse course. The US is on this same trajectory, albeit lagging by a decade. France doesn't do a good job integrating refugees into their society. They tend to keep them segregated into camps or particular neighborhoods of the cities and not make much effort in getting them employment, etc. I have a friend who is married to a Syrian whose brother and SIL, both doctors, escaped Syria and moved to Germany, where the Germans set them up with housing and fairly menial jobs while they attend German language classes; once they complete the classes they'll be able to go back to being doctors.
I'm not sure that the US is on the same trajectory, at least not now with Trump. My friend has another BIL, a dentist, who was able to escape to the US and live with his brother, but unable to get permission to get a job or apply for refugee status. Eventually he immigrated to Canada, where he had help getting a job, applying for citizenship, and getting his dentistry credentials approved.
So- at least for that family, Canada and not the US was the best immigration option.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 2, 2024 22:24:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2018 13:55:22 GMT -5
Excerpted from an article by the The Gatestone Institute: Hundreds of Africans and Asians armed with knives and iron rods fought running street battles in the northern port city of Calais on February 1, less than two weeks after French President Emmanuel Macron visited the area and pledged to crack down on illegal immigration.
The clashes plunged Calais — emblematic of Europe's failure to control mass migration — into a war zone and reinforced the perception that French authorities have lost control of the country's security situation.
The mass brawls, fought in at least three different parts of Calais, erupted after a 37-year-old Afghan migrant running a human trafficking operation fired gunshots at a group of Africans who did not have money to pay for his services. Five Africans suffered life-threatening injuries.
Within an hour, hundreds of Eritreans, Ethiopians and Sudanese took to the streets of Calais and attacked any Afghans they could find. More than a thousand police officers using batons and tear gas were deployed to restore order. Two dozen migrants were hospitalized.
French Interior Minister Gérard Collomb described the level of violence in Calais as "unprecedented." He attributed the fighting to an escalating turf war between Afghan and Kurdish gangs seeking to gain control over human trafficking between Calais and Britain, which many migrants view as "El Dorado" because of its massive underground economy. Each day around 40 ferries depart Calais for Britain. A mass influx of undocumented, culturally-unassimilated foreigners? What could go wrong? They add to the cultural diversity. They're hard workers, willing to do the jobs ordinary Frenchmen won't do. They have deep religious convictions. They simply want a place to call home, to live and grow with their families. All the more reason we should ship them over here, to North America, en masse. We wouldn't want to be perceived as unwelcoming, non-diverse, or (*shudder*) "xenophobic" by the international community, would we? Merit based immigration has little downside.
|
|