300 suspected illegal immigrants caught in SC raid

  • Thread starter Thread starter geezerbob
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Texas_Roofer said:
And if the assailant was not illegal things would be okay for you?
Click to expand...
no. the government has the authority to set immigration policy, not the illegals.

why aren’t you clamoring for an open border policy to congress instead of undermining U.S. laws by encourage illegal entry?

better yet, what parts of the Immigration and Nationality Act do you want amended?

let’s have a productive discussion on this.
 
Texas_Roofer said:
And if the assailant was not illegal things would be okay for you?
Click to expand...
I am not sure what the logic here is. If the illegal had been tucked away in his/her own country, then he/she would not have been here to conduct such assault.

Though it has nothing at all to do with the topic of the thread.
 
Wirraway said:
no. the government has the authority to set immigration policy, not the illegals.

why aren’t you clamoring for an open border policy to congress instead of undermining U.S. laws by encourage illegal entry?

better yet, what parts of the Immigration and Nationality Act do you want amended?

let’s have a productive discussion on this.
Click to expand...
Which really means you need to avoid the question?
jrabs said:
I am not sure what the logic here is. If the illegal had been tucked away in his/her own country, then he/she would not have been here to conduct such assault.

Though it has nothing at all to do with the topic of the thread.
Click to expand...
What part of “assault” are you okay with?
 
Texas_Roofer said:
Which really means you need to avoid the question?

…
Click to expand...
what I explicity said was that no illegal should be here to assault anyone. what part of that do you have trouble understanding.

so, what part of the INA do you want to reform?

I asked that question because I assumed to near certainty that you could never actually respond substantively.

on the question of immigration reform, the illegal advocates always default to a demand that the US open its borders to all illegals, for all reason, without any examination, and that they get permanent residency in the least amount of time.

so asking an illegal advocate how to reform existing law is usually a trick question.
 
Texas_Roofer said:
Which really means you need to avoid the question?

What part of “assault” are you okay with?
Click to expand...
Yeah - and that’s just what I said - that assault was OK. :confused:
Wow - talk about being the King of adding random words to someone’s post. 👍

What part of "if the illegal had not been here, then he/she could not have committed any crime " did you not understand?
 
jrabs said:
I am not sure what the logic here is. If the illegal had been tucked away in his/her own country, then he/she would not have been here to conduct such assault.

Though it has nothing at all to do with the topic of the thread.
Click to expand...
Again if the assault occurs from a “legal” you are okay with it?
 
Texas_Roofer said:
Let me help you out by showing you what you wrote
Click to expand...
perhaps we can talk about my Mother at another time, although I doubt it.

stop evading the question.

how do you want to amend the INA?

poast again when you’ve figured out what the *INA *is.
 
I do not understand why this article is an issue. What else would immigration officers do other than enforce immigration laws? It is what they are paid for. It is not like they can take up banking tomorrow and help America’s ill. It is right that they do their job to the best of their ability.

If one has issues with immigration laws, as I do, that is something we can only take up when we vote. If we are to remain a nation of law as opposed to an anarchy, we must not be critical of those who enforce the laws we have established. Their is nothing in the action of these officials that violate Catholic teaching or the rule of law.
 
Wirraway said:
perhaps we can talk about my Mother at another time, although I doubt it.

stop evading the question.

how do you want to amend the INA?

poast again when you’ve figured out what the *INA *is.
Click to expand...
You would not have to run from and hide from post numbers 18 & 19 if the truth were not so painful.
 
Texas_Roofer said:
You would not have to run from and hide from post numbers 18 & 19 if the truth were not so painful.
Click to expand...
my Mother has nothing to do with this, so I’d appreciate you leaving her out of the discussion.

how do you want to amend the INA?
 
Can we please stop talking about everyone’s mother. I expect a little more respect from fellow Catholics and fellow Texans.
 
I’d like to know how the illegals advocates want to change the INA, so we can have a discussion that addresses substance. apart from the fact at illegals want to be here indefinitely, that’s all anyone here has said about ultimate aims, even indirectly.
 
roofer: first of all, don’t play the misquote game again and embiggen, highlight or otherwise emphasize what I didn’t. you really, really don’t want to go there.

second, my response is that if you or whoever wants to play the Mom Card, I can do it a lot better than you, so you really don’t want to go there either, although you shouldn’t because its not effective argumentation.

third, do you ever intend to discuss immigration reform or are you going to obsess over my Mom? so, again, because you apparently haven’t noticed:

what proposals do you have for amending the Immigration and Nationality Act**?
 
Wirraway said:
roofer: first of all, don’t play the misquote game again and embiggen, highlight or otherwise emphasize what I didn’t. you really, really don’t want to go there.

second, my response is that if you or whoever wants to play the Mom Card, I can do it a lot better than you, so you really don’t want to go there either, although you shouldn’t because its not effective argumentation.

third, do you ever intend to discuss immigration reform or are you going to obsess over my Mom? so, again, because you apparently haven’t noticed:

what proposals do you have for amending the Immigration and Nationality Act**?
Click to expand...
you brought up the issue (assault), now wish to hide from the same issue

Should I try a Jack Nickolson? ( A Few Good Men)
You want assault
You need assault
You use assault
Either way I do not give a ---- what you think you are entitled to. I suggest you either……

Is that not the real issue you need assault to hide the facts which are these were working people
 
The charity level in this thread is going downhill really fast. For those engaged in shouting matches, I suggest you take a break for a day or two and come back with a better attitude.
 
I’d like a discussion on amendments to the current immigration law. or even a suggestion about possibilities.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top