The Cellar - What would Martin Niemoller think about Arizona?

Page 21 of 37

« First

Last »

Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Current Events (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - What would Martin Niemoller think about Arizona? (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=22610)

classicman

06-03-2010 09:38 AM

Was the bullshit part the part where I agreed with you?
Oh wait - that was simply your way of admitting that you, in fact, took my post out of context intentionally and therefore its ok because other people do/did it.

classicman

06-03-2010 03:47 PM

From redux's link:

Quote:

"Violence is on the Mexican side, like it's breathing on us," said Estrada, whose county has 50 miles of border with Mexico. "But the [Santa Cruz] county is very safe as a whole. If there's any violence here, it's in the rural areas and canyons… There are probably a lot of things going on we're not aware of."

President Obama, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer to Face Off Over Immigration at White House

Quote:

The administration and Congress have been at loggerheads over comprehensive immigration reform legislation that would enhance security along U.S. borders and address the situation of an estimated 10.8 million undocumented immigrants currently in the United States. Arizona is home to an estimated 460,000 of those immigrants.

Meanwhile, the administration is weighing a legal challenge to Arizona's law on grounds it may impede federal authority to set and enforce national immigration policy and could lead to abuses based on race.

Although the law specifically states that law enforcement officers may not consider race, color or national origin as a basis for inquiring about an individual's immigration status, Latinos and civil rights groups worry the potential for racial profiling is still there.

Link
As an aside... What law doesn't have the potential to be discriminatory? You have humans enforcing them.

Quote:

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer says she and President Barack Obama have agreed to try to work together on a solution to the nation's immigration and border security woes.

Brewer also says Obama assured her that most of the 1,200 National Guard troops he is sending to the southern border will be coming to her state. Brewer recently signed a tough new immigration enforcement law that requires police to check people's immigration status.

Obama has denounced the law as discriminatory.

Brewer spoke Thursday after a half-hour meeting with Obama in the Oval Office.

Read more:

That was less than informative.

classicman

06-04-2010 09:46 AM

Quote:

(a) Every law enforcement agency shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws.
(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following:
(1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status.

Redux

06-05-2010 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 660286)

As an aside... What law doesn't have the potential to be discriminatory? You have humans enforcing them.

Please point to any other law where citizens (not illegals) of one race or ethnicity are far more likely to be subject to being "questioned" about their immigration status than other races, when not in custody for questioning about any other crime.

Again, I am not talking about illegals, but citizens and legal residents who happen to be Hispanic and who will be faced with the potential prospect of be subjected to more scrutiny to determine if they broke the state law of being in the country illegally based solely on undefined "suspicious" behavior.

BTW...I did get a good laugh out of your signature: Support America-Support Arizona

Supporting America means supporting the Arizona law?

Does that mean those who have concerns about the AZ law are UnAmerican or somehow not supporting America?

Damn... and I thought supporting America means supporting the right to dissent.

classicman

06-05-2010 12:24 PM

You are such a hypocrite - You choose to support a boycott and I choose to support the state.

Any law - traffic laws - anything where the police have to use their discretion could be construed as being discriminatory.

Redux

06-05-2010 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 660769)

You are such a hypocrite - You choose to support a boycott and I choose to support the state.

Please explain what is hypocritical about my comment. I dont have problem with you supporting the state. I disagree with you, but I never brought support of America into the equation, which iMO, is nonsense.

But correct me if I am wrong...you are the one who suggests or infers that supporting America has some relation to supporting your position.

If I misinterpreted, please explain what supporting America has to do with support a state law as opposed to expressing concern about a state law.

Support the state or boycott the state..that is everyone's right and it has absolutely nothing to with supporting America.

Quote:

Any law - traffic laws - anything where the police have to use their discretion could be construed as being discriminatory.

Traffic laws are far more likely to be applied equally to all races (despite "driving while black or brown) than a state law that makes illegal immigration a state crime and thus, by its very nature and objectives, far more likely to be applied more to one race than others

This law has the real potential and likelihood NOT to be applied equally to all citizens and legal residents.

There is no comparison to traffic laws or any other laws.

jinx	06-05-2010 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redux (Post 660754)

This is about geography, not discrimination.
What if NY passed the same law, written exactly the same way?

Redux

06-05-2010 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jinx (Post 660785)

This is about geography, not discrimination.
What if NY passed the same law, written exactly the same way?

IMO, and the opinion of many legal experts, this law has a greater potential adverse impact on Hispanic citizens and legal residents than other races. That makes it discriminatory. Others disagree, I get that.

Again, that is why the courts should decide.

Particularly, when the law only requires "reasonable suspicion" and does not prohibit considering race as a factor. It only says race cannot be the sole factor for determining reasonable suspicion. When race is A factor (not the sole factor), it borders or crosses the line of being discriminatory.

If you are a Hispanic citizen or legal resident of AZ, you are more likely to face "reasonable suspicion" of being an illegal immigrant and in violation of the state law than Anglos, Blacks, Asians.....I honestly dont see how objective observers can suggest otherwise.

IMO, there would be much less concern with the law being potentially discriminatory if it relied on "probable cause" (a greater burden of proof) rather than "reasonable suspicion".

added:
In case I wasnt clear enough about your NY comparison......any law in any state that uses a standard of "reasonable suspicion" and allows race to be a determining factor in that suspicion (just not the sole factor) raises serious legal questions of being discriminatory.

Shawnee123

06-06-2010 10:00 AM

I can imagine the outrage if NY passed a similar law targeting muslims (or anyone who just looks the part.)

classicman

06-06-2010 08:47 PM

Unarmed Predator drones flying along border
No not the Pakistani borders...

Quote:

EL PASO -- Unarmed Predator drones are now flying along part of the Texas-Mexico border, an official confirmed Saturday.

A member of Democratic Rep. Silvestre Reyes' office said the flights began earlier last week.

The Federal Aviation Administration had authorized the flights to begin on June 1.

Predators, known for deadly strikes against insurgents in the mountains of Pakistan, can provide detailed images of ground targets from high altitude. Texas lawmakers have said they are convinced the drones will help secure the increasingly violent Southwest border.

The new permit authorizes drones to fly between Fort Huachuca, Ariz., and Big Bend National Park. Lawmakers have asked the FAA to approve flights out of Corpus Christi that would cover the rest of the Texas border and the Gulf of Mexico coastline.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, two weeks ago introduced a bill that would pay for at least six new drone systems and hire pilots to bolster coverage of the entire 2,000-mile Southwest border.

"We must employ state-of-the-art border monitoring and security techniques," Hutchison said in a statement.

Hutchison said that Customs and Border Protection officials told her only 700 miles of the border is under "effective control." The rest of the border becomes an open door for drug cartels, arms dealers, human traffickers and terrorists, she said.

Texas lawmakers have also asked that the FAA to create a faster way of processing applications for new flights.

Link

Spexxvet

06-07-2010 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123 (Post 660919)

I can imagine the outrage if NY passed a similar law targeting muslims (or anyone who just looks the part.)

Or Christians. :eek:

Shawnee123

06-07-2010 08:34 AM

Seriously. We're so goddammed petrified of terrorists, but we're worried about those folks who are sneaking over here to clean our hotel rooms.

Target any nationality in New York City, call it part of the war on terror, and there will be serious anger and consequences I don't want to ponder.

You know why? Terrorism and power and money are all related, mostly because we want to lie naked in oil all goddam day. (coughBushcough) The Mexican people have little to no say in anything, because they don't have all the money.

Redux

06-07-2010 09:36 AM

Words of Wisdom