brilliant assemblage Diana, very powerful, thanks!

The major problem with your article is that the anti-Jewish/Amerind/Black signs were directed against those who were/are already LEGAL US citizens; they are entitled to be here. Illegal aliens are NOT. There's a major difference you are determined to ignore or use false images/arguments against.

nancy, many of the signs don't mention one's status...what would be their excuse?

while any country takes issue with illegal residents, it needn't be so hateful and generalized ("mexico out of usa") when it is the same country (U.S.) in question that allowed, accomodated, and/or stood idly by while the "illegals" from other countries took up residence...

("oh, those border jumping mexicans...we won't put up with that, will we?")...

and yet, here we are, some 12 million (estimated) illegals later, moaning and groaning about them!
what's up with a country that says "bring 'em this way! american dream! apple pie! dig in!" and then says (again, 12 million people later) "get the hell out of here!"

great party...i love what you've done with yellowstone...

many once-illegal residents have since acquired citizenship, become gainfully employed, and learned english -- not because they were thrown back to their country, but because they weren't thrown out of this one...

there was no USofA when my ancestors landed on the east coast in 1653, and this is true of many families that landed for the next 123 years until 1776 -- when a kinda-sorta plan was put in place to make newcomers "official"...should we all be sent back because our forefathers didn't register?
they were absorbed into the formation of the country because it was easier (and made more economic sense) to do that than to send everyone back -- which would of course resulted in no country at all...

the second to last picture in the article shows a man holding a sign that says, "to hell with the wretched refuse"...
is that it? we just change our forefather's intentions without actually changing the law and the rest of the world is supposed to abide?
should we tell lady liberty to scratch the inscription from the record?

if we shut our borders to mexican illegals, we must shut the borders to all illegals -- mexican, polish, irish, french, nigerian, peruvian, you name it...not all illegals came from mexico and yet mexico and mexicans are the focus...one's home country doesn't make one more illegal than another and yet that is precisely what is at issue...

without proof that the jews addressed (in english) were citizens, your argument that they were already citizens falls flat...many jews (and poles and french and dutch and etc), especially during wwII, did in fact NOT become or even attempt to become citizens for a long time after coming to the states...they were illegal by every definition -- which is precisely what prompted the outrage, well, against jews anyway...there were localized assaults on other groups, but by god the jews had to go...they were, familiarly enough, "stealing" jobs " and we wanted them "raus", er "out" -- just like hitler and his band of merry men...the only difference between hitler and the anti-immigration laws is that the anti-immigration laws don't actually call for barbed wire and gas ovens...hold your horses before you say "the jews were citizens of germany" because, again, no, many of them were not...

for a long time, blacks born on U.S. soil were defined, by law, as "less than a man"...there was even a percentage on the books dictating just how much of a man a black man was...
as "less than a man", they were also less than a citizen -- and it was this very "law" (god, oh god, it's the LAW) that was used to justify lynchings, beatings, and hangings of black people...you know, they were killed -- not like hitler did it, but dead nonetheless, and why? because "we want them OUT" and if they won't leave, we'll show them the way...

using the law to classify a person as "less than a man" or "illegal" is isolationist thinking...it is fundamentally no different than any attempt to mold a society into a "master race"...being any part of the process that allows and promotes such lawmaking is isolationist behavior -- and fundamentally no different than what hitler did...

if one insists the borders be physically closed, one must bear in mind the human reaction on the other side of that border (yes, there are other people outside the united states -- with brains and arms and bad hair days and cravings for chocolate)...
without "them," we will enjoy no more imports (americans rely on imports a hell of a lot more than they would ever hope to beleive), no more exports (who's gonna want our goods?), and damn sure no more passports (who is going to want US?)...

those who really think the U.S. was founded on the principles of isolationist thinking are free to go found their own country where this in fact could be true for them...it isn't true in the U.S., and no amount of signs saying "out" will ever change that...

Briliant assemblage, Diana. The thing that bothers me is that these days the people who chant "Juden raus!" are Israelis.

thank you ruvy...
the thing that bothers me most is that anyone is saying "raus" to anyone, ever; and yet it's been going on for ages with no notable success and still someone is saying it to someone else to this day -- in all parts of the world...

it's disgraceful...

some days it just doesn't pay to be a human being...

Diane: "...while any country takes issue with illegal residents,..."

Takes issue? It's not a question of debating points, or of civil rights, it's a question of illegal criminal activity. And there's not any question of justice, only of the appropriate response, which may be anything the US electorate chooses since they are the ones offended.

If one seeks injustice and racial discrimination at the root of this problem, look at the blatant racism exercised by several generations of Mexican government against US citizens who have sought to own property in Mexico and sought to start profitable businesses in Mexico that would have brought employment and opportunity to Mexican citizens.

The fault here lies not in the capitol Washington but in the capitol Mexico City DF.

"It's not a question of debating points, or of civil rights, it's a question of illegal criminal activity. And there's not any question of justice, only of the appropriate response, which may be anything the US electorate chooses since they are the ones offended."

are we to believe that every one of the 12 million (estimated) illegals in the U.S. is a criminal?
where are the stats to back that up?

"If one seeks injustice and racial discrimination at the root of this problem, look at the blatant racism exercised by several generations of Mexican government against US citizens who have sought to own property in Mexico and sought to start profitable businesses in Mexico that would have brought employment and opportunity to Mexican citizens."

could this have anything to do with why so many come to the U.S.? they don't treat their own any better -- that's why they're leaving to the land that says "send these, the homeless"...

"The fault here lies not in the capitol Washington but in the capitol Mexico City DF."

the fault lies with both...fortunately, the U.S. is a place where things can and do change, where life and making a living has a chance...

"are we to believe that every one of the 12 million (estimated) illegals in the U.S. is a criminal?"

Yes, hence the term illegal.

Diane,

Notice that it says "SEND these." I've always wondered who that was addressed to. The Mexican government? The coyotes?

"Send these your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. The wretched refuse of your teeming shore."

I take it you would be interested in sending a letter of invitation to the mayor of Calcutta, as well as a few hundred other such cities "teeming with wretched refuse", advising them to load up their ships with this miserable cargo and provide them with directions to the "golden lamp" where their huddled billions will be welcomed with open arms to that boundless human landfill kown as America.

I mean, we wouldn't want to constrict our charitable impulses only to those lucky enough to be in close geographic proximity, would we?

rosa parks was arrested for doing something "illegal" too...
bad laws need to be changed into good laws...
good laws need to be enforced and applied so that good people are protected and bad people are put away -- regardless of where they came from and what they look like...
labeling 12 mllion (estimated) people as "criminal" for nothing more than geographic location is ludicrous...

labeling 12 mllion (estimated) people as "criminal" for nothing more than geographic location is ludicrous...

Since illegals are by definition untrackable and thus uncountable, there are probably more like 30 million. Tell me, do you really think there is no upper limit to the number of human beings that our several hundred thousand square miles of habitable territory can sustain at non Third World living standards?

You must know that at the current accelerating level of illegal immigration, which amnesties only serve to further accelerate, combined with the subseqent natural increase from an immigrant population that breeds prolifically, America's population will pass up India and China combined sometime in the next Century. "Breathing free" is going to become increasingly difficult under these packed sardine kind of densities.

"I mean, we wouldn't want to constrict our charitable impulses only to those lucky enough to be in close geographic proximity, would we?"

to my knowledge the U.S. has never sent invitations to the party -- only word that there is one...
throughout the history of the U.S., anyone lucky enough to make it here knew they had a better chance of making it than in the country they fled -- that is until one group far outnumbered any of the other newcomers...
historically, whatever group happens to have the highest number at any given time will be the one singled out and held up to public scrutiny...mexicans are hardly the first to be headlined and they won't be the last because of another historical consistency: anti-immigration enthusiasts...curiously, every single one of them came from a family that came from somewhere else with only one exception -- and i've not seen a whole lot of native american faces in or speaking up at any of the recent (or not so recent) demonstrations...without proof that one's ancestors had any right to be on U.S. soil, what's to stop the anti-immigration enthusiasts from retroactively applying their own malarkey -- and finding themselves stamped "fragile cargo" in the process?

that the demonstrations revolve around one group (mexicans) and one language (spanish) does nothing but debase the anti-immigrant argument...
mexicans TOP the list...where's the anti-immigrant demonstration for the REST of the list?

unless you (any "you", not just Richard) were told or heard an accent, you wouldn't know a Müeller from a Muller and wouldn't think twice about either's right to be here...but because you know a Müeller from a Chavez -- holy cow, is there a problem...
the fact that this entire issue revolves around one sector of the population (regardless of status) instead of every single person whose status is questionable makes this a racist issue...
where's all the hoopla about the illegal gabonians? french? irish? turks? omans? ugandans? nepalese?

saying "it's all about illegals no matter what" and then in the next sentence (or on the next sign) declaring opposition to speaking spanish (cos it's sooo hard to keep up with those quad-lingual dutch and the poorest of senegal's tri-lingual) is to show one's true colors...
if it's really about ALL immigrants and not just mexican immigrants then, again, where's the hoopla?
there isn't any because this isn't about illegals -- this is about mexican illegals, and that's racist no matter how much you dress it up, get it drunk, and slap it around...

"Since illegals are by definition untrackable and thus uncountable, there are probably more like 30 million. Tell me, do you really think there is no upper limit to the number of human beings that our several hundred thousand square miles of habitable territory can sustain at non Third World living standards?"

third world? do you even know what you're talking about? have you ever been in a third world country? except for the availibility of healthcare (a growing issue for everyone in america, not just illegals), there is no better place to live no matter how poor you are...

hell, try even being turkish poor with a work visa in germany (where welfare rules the day) -- it's not fun, and it's damn sure not american-like...

you could take all 6+ billion of us earthlings and put us all on any ONE continent with ample room to spare...that's not everyone standing shoulder to shoulder, that's everyone having their own space...the myopic idea that everyone could fit into texas (which is mathematically true) doesn't take human need into account...
standards of living are largely determined by a person's tolerance -- thus so many escaping intolerable lives for a better life in america...even the worst life in america is still better than the life of someone living in a third world country...

but you know, that doesn't seem to matter to anti-immigrant enthusiasts...all that seems to matter is that those here illegally are here illegally, without regard for the ridiculousness of the law...

"You must know that at the current accelerating level of illegal immigration, which amnesties only serve to further accelerate, combined with the subseqent natural increase from an immigrant population that breeds prolifically, America's population will pass up India and China combined sometime in the next Century. "Breathing free" is going to become increasingly difficult under these packed sardine kind of densities."

how much air does one person need or even want? try moving to montana, wyoming, or western kansas if you require that much space between you and the next person over...it's at least as easy as leaving the country...
the populations of other countries is immaterial because those countries are the very ones people are looking to get out of...
there are few jobs, little money, little food, no healthcare (we're gaining on them there though aren't we?), no lawful protection from the (non-democratic) governement (but again, we're gaining), etc...and STILL, one's worst day in america is better than a great day in conakry..
if density is really an issue, try talking to all those legals and people who were born here -- the not quite 300 million of them -- the ones who legally chose to live where they do under the conditions they do...they're your problem, not the 12 (or even 30) million...

So, you choose not to address a single one of my substantive concerns. At no time in our history has immigration ever approached anywhere near the invasion level numbers that we've seen in the last couple of decades. You simply don't want to face the legitimate issues this raises about about our ability to absorb such a massive hit given, among other finite resource considerations, the fact that our water supply capacity is very nearly maxed out. Instead you just want to smear as a xenophobic racist anyone who, for these reasons, doesn't want to allow every single person in this world who wants to walk in, illegally OR LEGALLY, to be allowed to do so.

"So, you choose not to address a single one of my substantive concerns. At no time in our history has immigration ever approached anywhere near the invasion level numbers that we've seen in the last couple of decades. You simply don't want to face the legitimate issues this raises about about our ability to absorb such a massive hit given, among other finite resource considerations, the fact that our water supply capacity is very nearly maxed out. Instead you just want to smear as a xenophobic racist anyone who, for these reasons, doesn't want to allow every single person in this world who wants to walk in, illegally OR LEGALLY, to be allowed to do so."


let's see...what did richard bring up that he thinks i didn't address:

* sarcastic implication that i should send invitations to those living outside the states, the sarcasm used as a way to open the discussion, but that's neither here nor there...(it does, however, break spades)...so yea, invitations, addressed that, check

* upper limits of population and subsequent living standards...yep, check again

* comparison of america's population with that of other countries...check

* density...check

* breathing...and check

i give up richard...what the hell are you talking about?

if you want someone to address your points, just look up in the thread...if by "address" you mean "agree," look elsewhere...

per the issue you've brought up in the "you didn't say anything about this" post, finite resources is a global issue, not an american issue...where do you think all the people are going to go when resources in their own country run out? they're going to go the countries that still have resources -- and they'll do it legally or illegally...
you can say all day long that closing the borders would solve that problem but it didn't solve it for any of the past or present countries that erected a big old wall...people are still crossing and other people are still having to deal with that...
just how did 12 (or 30) million people get here without anyone noticing at say, oh i don't know, the 1 million mark?
what's the issue now that wasn't an issue some 11 (or 29) million people ago?
you can say resources but there are more resources now than before -- human resources...those humans are getting fed, clothed, educated, and employed...they're producing all manner of goods, paying sales tax, and putting money into their local economy -- just like every legal citizen of the united states...
so what's the difference, really? a piece of friggin' paper...wow...
do you have one? did your ancestors come here legally? did they even reside here legally?
mine didn't...would you throw me back? fine, but i'm taking all the money, product, and service me and mine provided with me...at least give to those you'd throw back that which they accomplished for the benefit of the economy...oh, you can't throw that back with them -- piddles...convenient for you, but piddles for them...
what an interesting turn of events...

now who was it again that was last denied legal rights because of a piece of paper via the law?
that's right -- it was united states citizens...gay united states citizens...

well, i suppose if we can deny our very own a piece of paper, we can sure as hell deny non-citizens...

man, i'm so glad we had this discussion richard...i see your point completely...
it's bad enough we have rebels in our midst, the least we can do is keep out any more of them...
whew...that was a close one...

Richard, first our country is around 3.7 million square miles, and I sincerely doubt that only 300,000 are what you call "habitable."

Also, looking at a map, you can clearly see that Europe and Asia are far higher on the population density scale than the U.S.--in fact, the U.S. is in the lowest category. We're not exactly running out of room or anything. And we're SURROUNDED BY WATER, that which can no longer protect us from the terrorists, remember?

The issue isn't sustenance, it's security.

Diana#5. You get paid to be a human being. Holy crop picker girl, sign me up.

Diane,

Forgive my impatience. I composed #14 having only read your unresponsive #12. Only after posting did I notice that you had already posted #13 in which you did attempt a (very revealing) response:

you could take all 6+ billion of us earthlings and put us all on any ONE continent with ample room to spare

Yes, that right there pretty much gave me YOUR answer to all of my concerns. So let's see, 300 million vs. 6 billion. That's a factor of 20. The country has a little over 3 million square miles. Now take out mountainous territory, lakes, swamps, and deserts for which nature could not supply enough water to make densely habitable, and that portion of the California central valley and the Great Plains consisting of farm land. That leaves maybe a couple of hundred thousand square miles to build one continuous ocean to ocean city. At roughly 30 million square feet per mile, that's works out to less than 1,000 square feet per person. Except that half of that space would be required for roads, unless each person is restricted for the duration of his lifetime to only what he can reach by walking.

Then of course there's the issue of water, which we're already running dangerously low on, and the little matter of how to produce enough food, how to get enough buliding materials, etc., etc.

Anyway, you've painted YOUR picture of what you don't mind seeing this country turned into. And people can choose between that and what I would like to see, which is based on my view that we are ALREADY way overpopulated, and that the ideal number of people for this country is somewhere around 200 million. Your help in highlighting this contrast has been greatly appreciated.

Richard#18. Be fair Richard and try not to confuse Diane with the facts. Would say more but the AM comes early and I have many crops to pick.
Cisco help me. Pancho.

Diana. That was a fine post with powerful visuals and a point. Not one everyone seems to have gotten but we can always hope. I am too tired to continue the immigration debate tonight. Perhaps we can solve it tomorrow morning.

Powerful piece, though, engendering responses of passion.

Ciao, adios, dos vadanye, shalom, sayonara, au revoir. Luckily we are all part of a multi-cultural society which has taken so many things and words and fresh blood from so many places.

I want to make a clarifying comment on your reference to the "Islamics Out" sign above. I drive past one of those every day on my way to work in Stuttgart and it actually says "Islamists Out."

I looked up the definition for Islamists and found that it refers to those who see Islam as not just a relgion but a political ideology -- the root and branch and basis for all politics and all law. I think the point of the German Republicans' sign is that the Islamists refuse to integrate with German society and rule of law because they believe the Shari'a is the only basis for law.

"I want to make a clarifying comment on your reference to the 'Islamics Out' sign above. I drive past one of those every day on my way to work in Stuttgart and it actually says 'Islamists Out'.

I looked up the definition for Islamists and found that it refers to those who see Islam as not just a relgion but a political ideology -- the root and branch and basis for all politics and all law. I think the point of the German Republicans' sign is that the Islamists refuse to integrate with German society and rule of law because they believe the Shari'a is the only basis for law."

that's what i get for having listened to translations that began with "well, um" -- both german and american born...

in this, i stand corrected...certainly, there is no place for this particular ideology in german society...

i wonder how many other guests of germany don't know what the sign actually means...

Probably the majority of us. But I'm guessing that most Germans don't know the difference between an Islamist and a Muslim any more than I did until I looked it up. So I don't think it's a very useful sign -- even for its intended audience.

Interesting, as are the responses.

Im going to have to send you some of the signs from here (Canada) where the "get outs" and general dislike is aimed at Americans.

I do have to side with Richard on one point though. Illegals should not be spared the process that the rest of us have to go through for immigration. When we struggle to feed, educate, and house the legal folks in the US, it is a singlular slap in the face to waive the rules for any immigrant. It's not impossible to get legal status in the US. It's frustrating, expensive, and lengthy. But for something you truly want, there SHOULD be work involved.

Im not saying the biggoted remarks are worthy. ANd I have seen them--I grew up in "tomato valley" where Mexicans were brought in by the busload to pick the crops then summarily disappeared for the winter. Locals looked down thier coal mining and steel working noses at these folks--while at the same time willing to take welfare instead of go pick the tomatoes themselves.

There are always at least two sides to every story. In this case we're not happy with either side.

daina - they're all coming...and since you don't seem to have a problem with the need for space...I heard they're all moving to your house!

So, make sure you get all those multi-lingual signs ready for your house, because we don't expect these illegals to have to assimilate into your society. And don't lock your doors...open border and all.

para espanol, oprima el dos! It'll probably change pretty soon...it'll be...for english, press two!