How will you react?

Here is one more news report of how they do business south of the Rio Grande.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/45bf6cf8-8d14-11e3-ad57-00144feab7de.html

For all the weak-knee liberals, for all the heads of corporations who want cheap labor how are you going to react when this happens in Boise Idaho? These people are animals. Why are some in this country willing to open our borders and invite barbarism unto our shores? That should not be the America we will be gifting to our next generations.

No votes yet

but I thought it would be good to warn others that the link you posted is full of spyware and tracking cookies. Plus, it's one of those sites that wants you to subscribe in order to read the article. Please try and find your information on some other site.

The Financial Times (of London) is a perfectly valid source.

The fact that it's behind a paywall/mandatory login however means it gets tossed out because it can't be read without jumping through hoops.

Yes, I’m sure they are a great source. I’d even like to see how what they say compares to what the original poster has written. It’s just that I resent any site that immediately starts tracking me and asking for money.

The article dealt with two dismembered heads left at a bank in Mexico by drug cartels. Not shocking just google beheadings in Mexico there is a long list from the past ten years from the drug wars there. The point of the post was do you really want this in America? Immigration without caution invites good and bad into our culture. The world should have evolved past the point of people chopping off the heads of others to send a message. It has not.
A small amount of filtering scripts and tracking cookies gets you past paywall and other bothersome internet restrictions. Maybe that's just an acquired art.

Yeah because the minute we let the dirty brown people in from Mexico we're also letting the gangs and cartels in and they're going to do the exact thing here because reasons and furthermore comma

This board is filled with racists and right-wing nuts worse than ToledoTalk.

Perhaps then you shouldn't visit this site any longer.

"This board is filled with racists and right-wing nuts worse than ToledoTalk."

There are two particular race baiters on this site. One conservative one liberal. Beyond that please give an example of racist behavior or comments.

MikeyA

So, you’re worried that immigration reform will cause drug cartel hit men to move to the U.S. and raise their families? Try not to get too scared.

A small amount of filtering scripts and tracking cookies gets you past paywall and other bothersome internet restrictions. Maybe that's just an acquired art.

No offense, but as a person who tries to be honest I never attempt to get past the paywalls of subscription sites. Therefore, I would never have need of the scripts you call “an acquired art”. I guess I consider it a character thing.

Am glad you took note of the ethical question and practice of avoiding bloatware, spamware whatever names are put to what evolved on commercial internet today. Many sites (not all by any means) have lost track of their primary function and have developed to be revenue producers for their owners by using your machine and internet traffic as a cash cow. These include old and trusted names in the nation's commerce. We pay for our machines. We pay for the maintenance of our machines. We pay for on-line use of the machines. They belong to us by virtue of purchase. To have web sites include data mining (translate $) into your machine without your knowledge is unethical. That is where the Boy Scout Handbook gets set aside.

Fear has nothing to do with it. Lack of foresight does. It can be argued that the drugs and gang influence are already here. What is not here yet is the extreme animalistic behavior. If separating torsos from people's heads is ok with you then drive south, cross the border and iive among the savages. Please don't conceive that this is not an element to immigration policy. Once it becomes a daily occurrence in Peoria it's going to be too late to say you were warned. Right as rain it will have to be dealt with - change in immigration or not.

They left, primarily, because, as Jews, they were subject to the most hateful treatment, even torture and death. These acts were perpetrated by the Czar's police and military. Some of my cousins were set on fire and burned to death by Czarist forces. When my grandparents came to America, they left that inhuman violence behind. They did NOT bring the violence with them!
Most immigrants today come to America for greater security from violence as well as for economic opportunity. Many take jobs here which natural born Americans do not want to do. Most fill an important void in our economic system. Ask farmers all the way from Texas and Florida up to Ohio and Michigan what they would do without their mostly foreign-born migrant workers.
NO!! We must NOT have open borders! But, we do need a reasonable immigration policy, rather than ludicrous programs like self-deportation. Do you really want America, which has been a beacon of hope to tens of millions for over 200 years to close itself to so many who want to escape the terror within their home countries?

Anti-immigration is nothing new. Back in the 1798, the Federalist Party passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, signed into law by President John Adams, to "protect" America by making it much harder for newcomers to get full citizenship rights for "radicals," especially those from France and Ireland. This, BTW, was a major issue allowing Thomas Jefferson to defeat John Adams when Adams ran for re-election in 1800. From the 1830s to the 1850s, the Nativist Movement gained so much momentum, they organized the Know Nothings, because they wanted to keep their membership as a Nativist a secret. Many of them formed their own political party named the American Party. Their main target were the Irish, both for their Catholicism and because those of British background considered the Irish to be lowlife, violent hooligans. Germans became targets, starting in the 1840s because they, among other things, had their own German-language schools, and refused to speak English. Do any of these examples ring familiar?

The bottom line is, the real Native Americans really blew it. If they had only had a stronger anti-European immigration policy starting in the 16th Century, few of us would be here arguing about today's immigrants!

Native Americans seduced by curiosity and fire water (today narcotics). Re-read the post. There is no mention of closing borders. There is no brown phobia diatribe. There is a high level of concern about human beings who sever the heads of other human beings. The brutality Dale writes of from personal experience is hard to fathom from the comfort of America's relative security. If you were between the ages of 18 to 25 during the height of the Viet Nam conflict insurance actuaries report there was a 40% higher risk of injury or death living between Boston and San Diego than in service in South East Asia. There is unacceptable violence today in America. A line in the sand has to be established rather than coddle the perpetuation of savagery. The head is removed from the body with a machete not a firearm. Ignoring the prognostication exacerbates the outcome. To derive that all drug lords are Mexican or all Mexicans are drug lords is folly and furthermore was never stated nor implied.

"These people are animals. Why are some in this country willing to open our borders and invite barbarism unto our shores?" I'll leave it to those who read here to decide if there is an implication by you regarding the Mexican immigrants who come to America. Almost every Mexican-American I know works hard. The second and third generation Mexican-Americans I know personally speak English well, although most are fluent in Spanish also, and work in skilled trades and professions requiring education beyond high school.

CTR -- You'd better "checktherecord" better than you have! As far as violence in America is concerned, there still is too much violence. However, statistically [I know how much ideologues HATE statistics] crime has dropped, especially violent crime, since a peak in the early 1990s. For example, there were nearly 2,000,000 violent crimes in 1991, 1992, and 1993. The latest numbers show a little over 1,200,000 violent crimes in 2010, 2011, and 2012. Meanwhile the U.S. total population had increased from 252,000,000 in 1991 to 314,000,000 in 2012. And, I presume, the number of immigrants had grown in that time period as well. The bottom line is, while we still have too much violence in our society, right-wing propagandists are using scare tactics like those you, CTR, have posted, to give the false impression that things are getting worse, and will continue to get worse, when the facts are, this just is NOT true!!

"There is unacceptable violence today in America." To have read that statement and perverted it into a statistical argument is the hall mark of the leaning left. If the statement had been Any violence is too much would you have cut and run with the same bombastic stance? In your attempt at insult, name calling, "ideologues," you have persisted with the theme that this has been a condemnation of a race of people. For all your insinuated intuition I in fact might be of Mexican descent. You don't know do you? You also don't know what background I may or may not have regarding any race of immigrant contributing to the country. If you taught with the same non-objective analysis you did many unfortunate students a grave disservice. Your conclusion to the drop in violent crime in the last 10 years, coupled to increased immigration was stated "presumed." The liberal perspective appears to be all things being equal. They most assuredly are not. It also relies on governmental reporting of the crime numbers. Is there anyone left in the country who is gullible enough to swallow whole those as fact? Let's have a meaningful discussion on the unemployment figures. I'd like to hear your rosy presentation right after you cash your pension check derived by teaching those kids to think via your distorted prism.

Do I really have to quote you again?
I'll let readers here decide if your statement is biased, by reading the words you wrote!

All the crime statistics were gathered by the same agency in the same way over a period of years. Whatever you do CTR, don't really "check the record" on anything that will negate your opinion. NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, let those nasty facts stand in the way of your opinions!
BTW -- Are you also one of those ideologues who were touting the dropping crime rate during the Bush #43 Administration with those statistics you now deride?

Dale to draw a conclusion for the blatant purpose of supporting a miserably failed presidency ignores all the ancillary pertinent elements such as an aging population, increased law enforcement numbers due to 9/11 with a great deal more technology such as data management. Those are just a few but my firm conclusion is that since we have had the current administration there just isn't the same amount of anything of value left around for anyone to steal. Maybe a few used hookahs over in Hawaii.

Blah, blah, blah...you have no facts...blah, blah, blah.

CTR -- NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, allow facts to get in the way of your opinions!!

You should change your handle to checkmyopinions. (Do you ever really check any records on anything?)

You are right dale. This presidency has been a success. I mean he won a Nobel Peace Prize for all his accomplishments!

MikeyA

Let's see: despite what right-wingers here and elsewhere predicted, millions of jobs have been created, unemployment is down, the U.S. is finally (mostly) out of the quagmire that is Iraq, the U.S. stock market averages are all WAY UP, millions of Americans, many of them children, have affordable health care for the first time in their lives, the United States EXPORTS more oil than we import, and Osama Bin Laden is dead! That's quite a list of accomplishments, and that's just off the top of my head!
And, because he was re-elected, despite all of the Republican efforts at voter suppression, including hundreds of millions spent on negative advertising to turn off the American electorate, Obama has almost 3 more years to accomplish even more!
WOO-HOO!!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.