BY JORGE RAMOS AND BLANCA PATRICIA GALINDO/EL UNIVERSAL
December 08, 2003
Puebla, Mexico -- The National Governors Conference (Conago) on Sunday
called on California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to reverse his decision to
repeal a law that would allow illegal migrants the right to obtain a
driver's license.
Conago, which groups 20 governors from opposition parties, met privately
with Jerónimo Gutiérrez, deputy secretary of Foreign Relations. Gutiérrez
said the governors had asked to set up a meeting with organizations of
Mexican migrants in California and also with Schwarzenegger to discuss the
rights of undocumented migrants.
Last, week the Republican Gov. Schwarzenegger signed a bill that repealed a
law that allowed undocumented migrants to obtain driver's licenses. The bill
had been passed by former Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, shortly before he was
recalled from office. Democrats agreed to support Schwarzenegger's bill on
the promise a compromise that better addressed security concerns would be
passed.
Zacatecas Gov. Ricardo Monreal said the administration of President Vicente
Fox had not fought hard enough to protect the rights of undocumented
Mexicans living in the United States. Monreal, from the Party of the
Democratic Revolution (PRD) said Schwarzenegger's repeal of the law was a
bad sign for undocumented migrants.
"This is not only a delicate subject, but it could bode a greater xenophobia
and persecution against Mexicans and Latinos," Monreal said. "Now, under a
right-wing government [undocumented migrants] could lose civil victories."
Monreal said he supported a protest movement in California and he called for
"a day without Mexicans." Latino migrant organizations are working to bring
about an economic strike on Dec. 12.
During their meeting with Gutiérrez, governors also asked for federal
prosecutors to end the impunity of migrant smugglers working in Mexican
states with high rates of migration. While it is illegal to traffic
foreigners through Mexico to the United States, it is not illegal for
Mexicans to traffic fellow Mexicans.-------------------------
Illegal immigration is a crime..........
Illegal Aliens' 'Rights'
1. You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer any questions.
2. Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law.
3. As we discuss this matter, you have a right to stop answering my
questions at any time you desire.
4. You have a right to a lawyer before speaking to me, to remain silent
until you can talk to him/her, and to have him/her present when you are
being questioned.
5. If you want a lawyer but cannot afford one, one will be provided to you
without cost.
6. Do you understand each of these rights I have explained to you?
7. Now that I have advised you of your rights, are you willing to answer my
questions without an attorney present?
_________
The only good Mexican is either "en México," or "en carcerated."
-----------------------
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
California Proposition 187 - You Loved It - Most Voted For It
It's Baaaaack!!! http://www.tinyurl.com/xl5d
No Public Services for the Invading Hordes
See: http://www.save187.com
////////////////////////
observer
12-08-2003, 03:00 PM
Why don't they start "Everyday without Mexicans" campaign.
"--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote in message
news:acc9tvs3bqdgau7cvicogm8b528cts04u6@4ax.com... The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to amaze:
http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=2236&tabla=m iami Governors stand up for migrants' rights BY JORGE RAMOS AND BLANCA PATRICIA GALINDO/EL UNIVERSAL December 08, 2003 Puebla, Mexico -- The National Governors Conference (Conago) on Sunday called on California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to reverse his decision to repeal a law that would allow illegal migrants the right to obtain a driver's license. Conago, which groups 20 governors from opposition parties, met privately with Jerónimo Gutiérrez, deputy secretary of Foreign Relations. Gutiérrez said the governors had asked to set up a meeting with organizations of Mexican migrants in California and also with Schwarzenegger to discuss the rights of undocumented migrants. Last, week the Republican Gov. Schwarzenegger signed a bill that repealed
a law that allowed undocumented migrants to obtain driver's licenses. The
bill had been passed by former Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, shortly before he
was recalled from office. Democrats agreed to support Schwarzenegger's bill on the promise a compromise that better addressed security concerns would be passed. Zacatecas Gov. Ricardo Monreal said the administration of President
Vicente Fox had not fought hard enough to protect the rights of undocumented Mexicans living in the United States. Monreal, from the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) said Schwarzenegger's repeal of the law was a bad sign for undocumented migrants. "This is not only a delicate subject, but it could bode a greater
xenophobia and persecution against Mexicans and Latinos," Monreal said. "Now, under a right-wing government [undocumented migrants] could lose civil victories." Monreal said he supported a protest movement in California and he called
for "a day without Mexicans." Latino migrant organizations are working to
bring about an economic strike on Dec. 12. During their meeting with Gutiérrez, governors also asked for federal prosecutors to end the impunity of migrant smugglers working in Mexican states with high rates of migration. While it is illegal to traffic foreigners through Mexico to the United States, it is not illegal for Mexicans to traffic fellow Mexicans.------------------------- Illegal immigration is a crime.......... Illegal Aliens' 'Rights' 1. You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer any questions. 2. Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law. 3. As we discuss this matter, you have a right to stop answering my questions at any time you desire. 4. You have a right to a lawyer before speaking to me, to remain silent until you can talk to him/her, and to have him/her present when you are being questioned. 5. If you want a lawyer but cannot afford one, one will be provided to you without cost. 6. Do you understand each of these rights I have explained to you? 7. Now that I have advised you of your rights, are you willing to answer
my questions without an attorney present? _________ The only good Mexican is either "en México," or "en carcerated." ----------------------- \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ California Proposition 187 - You Loved It - Most Voted For It It's Baaaaack!!! http://www.tinyurl.com/xl5d No Public Services for the Invading Hordes See: http://www.save187.com ////////////////////////
--=Cochise~||~Guardian=--
12-08-2003, 04:49 PM
On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 23:00:32 GMT, "observer" <observer@hotmail.com> opined:
Why don't they start "Everyday without Mexicans" campaign.
The American people will start an "Everyday without Mexicans" campaign soon enough if that asshole in the
White House doesn't secure the borders and start culling the herd pretty soon.
"--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote in messagenews:acc9tvs3bqdgau7cvicogm8b528cts04u6@4ax .com... The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to amaze:http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=2236&tabla=m iami Governors stand up for migrants' rights BY JORGE RAMOS AND BLANCA PATRICIA GALINDO/EL UNIVERSAL December 08, 2003 Puebla, Mexico -- The National Governors Conference (Conago) on Sunday called on California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to reverse his decision to repeal a law that would allow illegal migrants the right to obtain a driver's license. Conago, which groups 20 governors from opposition parties, met privately with Jerónimo Gutiérrez, deputy secretary of Foreign Relations. Gutiérrez said the governors had asked to set up a meeting with organizations of Mexican migrants in California and also with Schwarzenegger to discuss the rights of undocumented migrants. Last, week the Republican Gov. Schwarzenegger signed a bill that repealeda law that allowed undocumented migrants to obtain driver's licenses. Thebill had been passed by former Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, shortly before hewas recalled from office. Democrats agreed to support Schwarzenegger's bill on the promise a compromise that better addressed security concerns would be passed. Zacatecas Gov. Ricardo Monreal said the administration of PresidentVicente Fox had not fought hard enough to protect the rights of undocumented Mexicans living in the United States. Monreal, from the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) said Schwarzenegger's repeal of the law was a bad sign for undocumented migrants. "This is not only a delicate subject, but it could bode a greaterxenophobia and persecution against Mexicans and Latinos," Monreal said. "Now, under a right-wing government [undocumented migrants] could lose civil victories." Monreal said he supported a protest movement in California and he calledfor "a day without Mexicans." Latino migrant organizations are working tobring about an economic strike on Dec. 12. During their meeting with Gutiérrez, governors also asked for federal prosecutors to end the impunity of migrant smugglers working in Mexican states with high rates of migration. While it is illegal to traffic foreigners through Mexico to the United States, it is not illegal for Mexicans to traffic fellow Mexicans.------------------------- Illegal immigration is a crime.......... Illegal Aliens' 'Rights' 1. You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer any questions. 2. Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law. 3. As we discuss this matter, you have a right to stop answering my questions at any time you desire. 4. You have a right to a lawyer before speaking to me, to remain silent until you can talk to him/her, and to have him/her present when you are being questioned. 5. If you want a lawyer but cannot afford one, one will be provided to you without cost. 6. Do you understand each of these rights I have explained to you? 7. Now that I have advised you of your rights, are you willing to answermy questions without an attorney present? _________ The only good Mexican is either "en México," or "en carcerated." ----------------------- \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ California Proposition 187 - You Loved It - Most Voted For It It's Baaaaack!!! http://www.tinyurl.com/xl5d No Public Services for the Invading Hordes See: http://www.save187.com ////////////////////////
-----------------------
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
George W. Bush is so pro-Mexican that if you hit him with a stick, prizes would fall out of him.
Draft Rep. Tom Tancredo for President - 2004 -- Give Mexico the runs
////////////////////////
Bob
12-08-2003, 05:02 PM
"--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote... The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to amaze: http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=2236&tabla=m iami Governors stand up for migrants' rights
<snip>
The Mexican constitution prohibits foreigners from interfering in
Mexico's political affairs. But apparently Mexico feels that it
has a right to interfere in America's political affairs. Just
another example of Mexican hypocrisy.
I've ranted and raved on this subject before. Mexico expects to
export half its population illegally to the U.S. and have the
U.S. provide them with employment, health care, drivers licenses,
and more; but Mexico is absolutely fanatical about illegal aliens
from the U.S. and other countries in its precious country. Just
today I read about how immigrants from Guatemala and other Central
American countries are routinely robbed and tortured by Mexican
officials, many of them simply "disappearing" completely. But
then Mexico goes and gets all snotty when its citizens are even
slightly harassed by American officials.
I have a question: if I were to sneak into Mexico illegally, would
I be elegible for a Mexican drivers license?
Guest
12-08-2003, 05:15 PM
Poop Dogg wrote: "--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote...The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to amaze:http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=2236&tabla=miamiGovernors stand up for migrants' rights <snip> The Mexican constitution prohibits foreigners from interfering in Mexico's political affairs. But apparently Mexico feels that it has a right to interfere in America's political affairs. Just another example of Mexican hypocrisy. I've ranted and raved on this subject before. Mexico expects to export half its population illegally to the U.S. and have the U.S. provide them with employment, health care, drivers licenses, and more; but Mexico is absolutely fanatical about illegal aliens from the U.S. and other countries in its precious country. Just today I read about how immigrants from Guatemala and other Central American countries are routinely robbed and tortured by Mexican officials, many of them simply "disappearing" completely. But then Mexico goes and gets all snotty when its citizens are even slightly harassed by American officials. I have a question: if I were to sneak into Mexico illegally, would I be elegible for a Mexican drivers license?
Good point. Answer the question zerge.
--
news:alt.politics.immigration
--=Cochise~||~Guardian=--
12-08-2003, 05:55 PM
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 19:02:20 -0600, "Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> opined:
"--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote... The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to amaze: http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=2236&tabla=m iami Governors stand up for migrants' rights<snip>The Mexican constitution prohibits foreigners from interfering inMexico's political affairs. But apparently Mexico feels that ithas a right to interfere in America's political affairs. Justanother example of Mexican hypocrisy.I've ranted and raved on this subject before. Mexico expects toexport half its population illegally to the U.S. and have theU.S. provide them with employment, health care, drivers licenses,and more; but Mexico is absolutely fanatical about illegal aliensfrom the U.S. and other countries in its precious country. Justtoday I read about how immigrants from Guatemala and other CentralAmerican countries are routinely robbed and tortured by Mexicanofficials, many of them simply "disappearing" completely. Butthen Mexico goes and gets all snotty when its citizens are evenslightly harassed by American officials.I have a question: if I were to sneak into Mexico illegally, wouldI be elegible for a Mexican drivers license?
No, but they'll eagerly profile you and constantly ask for your tourist permit. They'll also shake you down
whenever possible. The only thing I know of that is lower than whale **** is a Mexican politician or cop, if
not all Mexicans in general.
-----------------------
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
California Proposition 187 - You Loved It - Most Voted For It
It's Baaaaack!!! http://www.tinyurl.com/xl5d
No Public Services for the Invading Hordes
See: http://www.save187.com
////////////////////////
supernav
12-08-2003, 07:13 PM
Illegals don't have rights. They have to right to LEAVE AND GO BACK
from where they came from.
So why doesn't the Mexican gov't tell us what kind of rights
illegals have in THEIR country? Do they have rights to welfare,
driver's licenses, medicare, unemployment, schooling, sponsorship,
etc. etc. Huh??
Pot..Kettle..Black.
When the mexican gov't starts policing their own borders and arresting
people trying to cross into the US -- perhaps the US will listen to
them "a bit".
-= nav =-
--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com
zerge
12-09-2003, 10:51 AM
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<Ts-dnfkXQbumgkiiRVn-vw@bravo.net>... "--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote... The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to amaze: http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=2236&tabla=m iami Governors stand up for migrants' rights <snip> The Mexican constitution prohibits foreigners from interfering in Mexico's political affairs. But apparently Mexico feels that it has a right to interfere in America's political affairs. Just another example of Mexican hypocrisy. I've ranted and raved on this subject before. Mexico expects to export half its population illegally to the U.S. and have the U.S. provide them with employment, health care, drivers licenses, and more; but Mexico is absolutely fanatical about illegal aliens from the U.S. and other countries in its precious country. Just today I read about how immigrants from Guatemala and other Central American countries are routinely robbed and tortured by Mexican officials, many of them simply "disappearing" completely. But then Mexico goes and gets all snotty when its citizens are even slightly harassed by American officials. I have a question: if I were to sneak into Mexico illegally, would I be elegible for a Mexican drivers license?
There is a distinction between "interfere" and "petition". What the
governors are doing is a "petition".
Disclaimer: This post is intended solely as correction in the use of
the word "interfere" vs "petition". Please continue with your
anti-immigration rant.
zerge
12-09-2003, 10:55 AM
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<Ts-dnfkXQbumgkiiRVn-vw@bravo.net>... "--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote... The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to amaze: http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=2236&tabla=m iami Governors stand up for migrants' rights <snip> The Mexican constitution prohibits foreigners from interfering in Mexico's political affairs. But apparently Mexico feels that it has a right to interfere in America's political affairs. Just another example of Mexican hypocrisy. I've ranted and raved on this subject before. Mexico expects to export half its population illegally to the U.S. and have the U.S. provide them with employment, health care, drivers licenses, and more; but Mexico is absolutely fanatical about illegal aliens from the U.S. and other countries in its precious country. Just today I read about how immigrants from Guatemala and other Central American countries are routinely robbed and tortured by Mexican officials, many of them simply "disappearing" completely. But then Mexico goes and gets all snotty when its citizens are even slightly harassed by American officials. I have a question: if I were to sneak into Mexico illegally, would I be elegible for a Mexican drivers license?
Oh, I forgot to mention. "Interfere" is like, when you send CIA agents
to overthrow democratically elected governments, a la Chile, 1973.
The US is the master at interfering in other countries my friend :)
--=Cochise~||~Guardian=--
12-09-2003, 11:09 AM
On 9 Dec 2003 10:51:21 -0800, zerge@hotmail.com (zerge) opined:
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<Ts-dnfkXQbumgkiiRVn-vw@bravo.net>... "--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote... The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to amaze: http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=2236&tabla=m iami Governors stand up for migrants' rights <snip> The Mexican constitution prohibits foreigners from interfering in Mexico's political affairs. But apparently Mexico feels that it has a right to interfere in America's political affairs. Just another example of Mexican hypocrisy. I've ranted and raved on this subject before. Mexico expects to export half its population illegally to the U.S. and have the U.S. provide them with employment, health care, drivers licenses, and more; but Mexico is absolutely fanatical about illegal aliens from the U.S. and other countries in its precious country. Just today I read about how immigrants from Guatemala and other Central American countries are routinely robbed and tortured by Mexican officials, many of them simply "disappearing" completely. But then Mexico goes and gets all snotty when its citizens are even slightly harassed by American officials. I have a question: if I were to sneak into Mexico illegally, would I be elegible for a Mexican drivers license?There is a distinction between "interfere" and "petition". What thegovernors are doing is a "petition".Disclaimer: This post is intended solely as correction in the use ofthe word "interfere" vs "petition". Please continue with youranti-immigration rant.
If those obnoxious chile chokers spent just a small fraction of the time they spend interfering in the U.S. on
fixing their own chicken-****-encrusted barnyard maybe their peasants wouldn't be fleeing in droves.
Those obnoxious bastards can expect a less than warm welcome in California, I can assure you. With the repeal
of SB60 a done deal, and with a new Proposition 187 in the works, the writing is on the wall for those
sponging pricks. They know it, too.
The party is over, parasites. Now leave.
-----------------------
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
California Proposition 187 - You Loved It - Most Voted For It
It's Baaaaack!!! http://www.tinyurl.com/xl5d
No Public Services for the Invading Hordes
See: http://www.save187.com
////////////////////////
Bob
12-09-2003, 12:58 PM
"zerge" <zerge@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f0a1621c.0312091055.2546ada7@posting.google.c om... "Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:<Ts-dnfkXQbumgkiiRVn-vw@bravo.net>... "--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote... The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to
amaze:
..... I have a question: if I were to sneak into Mexico illegally, would I be elegible for a Mexican drivers license? Oh, I forgot to mention. "Interfere" is like, when you send CIA agents to overthrow democratically elected governments, a la Chile, 1973. The US is the master at interfering in other countries my friend :)
Most countries have done bad things. Does that mean that now all laws can be
ignored and criminals can do what they want because the new victims once did
something wrong?
Your response is symptomatic of the immaturity of political discourse from
Mexico and many Mexicans - apparently resulting from the poor level of
education in that country and, possibly, the failure of that country to
eliminate lead from gasoline and pottery for a very long time.
Bob
12-09-2003, 03:45 PM
"zerge" <zerge@hotmail.com> wrote... There is a distinction between "interfere" and "petition". What the governors are doing is a "petition". Disclaimer: This post is intended solely as correction in the use of the word "interfere" vs "petition". Please continue with your anti-immigration rant.
So if I were to visit Chiapas and "petition" for the rights of the
local Indios, the Mexican government would not stop me?
And if you've followed my posting history here for awhile, you would
see that I am not "anti-immigration" as you label me. I have been
quite tolerant of Mexican immigration for a long time. But lately
I have been getting quite pissed off with Mexico's attitude. It is
not enough that the U.S. has been letting in huge numbers of
Mexicans in for the last 20 years. Now Mexico seems to EXPECT that
it can export half its population to the U.S. to ease pressure on its
creaking economic system that it refuses to reform. The attitude of
the PRI and now Fox's PAN is that they can simply export Mexico's
serious economic problems rather than fix them.
I have seen Fox do absolutely nothing in the three years he's been in
office. His entire platform seemed to consist of reaching some sort
of immigration agreement with the U.S. in which the illegal aliens
already in the U.S. would be given amnesty and even more Mexicans
would be allowed to immigrate legally. Not a single mention of how
he would reform Mexico's economy so that it could grow and employ
the Mexicans who are now fleeing to the U.S. Mexico is still the same,
with the same handful of huge inefficient protected monopolies and megabillionaires, while the
vast majority of Mexicans sell gum on the
streets to survive.
Bob
12-09-2003, 03:59 PM
"Anonymous" <NoSpam@NoSpam.com> wrote in message... Your response is symptomatic of the immaturity of political discourse from Mexico and many Mexicans - apparently resulting from the poor level of education in that country and, possibly, the failure of that country to eliminate lead from gasoline and pottery for a very long time.
Hee hee! Good one! To this day I still won't eat or drink from any
Mexican ceramics, reserving them solely for display. Mexico's
environmental controls are as antiquated as its political and
economic systems. On my trip to the interior in 2000 I encountered
to environmental disasters - one was my bus passing through the
huge Pemex refineries on the way to Tula; apparently there are
absolutely no air emission controls in Mexico, I almost suffocated
from the thick oily air. The other was in Tula itself as I walked
to the bus stop; I crossed a bridge over a river of RAW SEWAGE! It
stunk so incredibly bad! I wouldn't doubt that the river was also
used for washing, bathing, and drinking. Oh, and leaded gasoline is
still available at most Pemex gas stations...
Tiny Human Ferret
12-09-2003, 08:57 PM
zerge wrote: "Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<Ts-dnfkXQbumgkiiRVn-vw@bravo.net>..."--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote...The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to amaze:http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=2236&tabla=miamiGovernors stand up for migrants' rights<snip>The Mexican constitution prohibits foreigners from interfering inMexico's political affairs. But apparently Mexico feels that ithas a right to interfere in America's political affairs. Justanother example of Mexican hypocrisy.I've ranted and raved on this subject before. Mexico expects toexport half its population illegally to the U.S. and have theU.S. provide them with employment, health care, drivers licenses,and more; but Mexico is absolutely fanatical about illegal aliensfrom the U.S. and other countries in its precious country. Justtoday I read about how immigrants from Guatemala and other CentralAmerican countries are routinely robbed and tortured by Mexicanofficials, many of them simply "disappearing" completely. Butthen Mexico goes and gets all snotty when its citizens are evenslightly harassed by American officials.I have a question: if I were to sneak into Mexico illegally, wouldI be elegible for a Mexican drivers license? Oh, I forgot to mention. "Interfere" is like, when you send CIA agents to overthrow democratically elected governments, a la Chile, 1973. The US is the master at interfering in other countries my friend :)
We're all pretty familiar with this.
And maybe that's why when we see someone "running an op"[1], we call it
"running an op".
They're running an op, that's all.
Ref:
1. "running an operation" generally refers to promoting a program,
generally clandestine, to achieve political goals; also criminal
vernacular, to perpetrate a scam.
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbons, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
zerge
12-10-2003, 09:24 AM
"Anonymous" <NoSpam@NoSpam.com> wrote in message news:<zHqBb.68371$l46.44235@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com>... "zerge" <zerge@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:f0a1621c.0312091055.2546ada7@posting.google.c om... "Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<Ts-dnfkXQbumgkiiRVn-vw@bravo.net>... "--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote... > The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to amaze: .... I have a question: if I were to sneak into Mexico illegally, would I be elegible for a Mexican drivers license? Oh, I forgot to mention. "Interfere" is like, when you send CIA agents to overthrow democratically elected governments, a la Chile, 1973. The US is the master at interfering in other countries my friend :) Most countries have done bad things. Does that mean that now all laws can be ignored and criminals can do what they want because the new victims once did something wrong?
No, laws should not be ignored. Have I said they should? Yes, most
countries have done, and keep doing, bad things. Have I denied that?
I was just giving a clear example of what "interfere" means.
You seem to have a reading comprehension problem, my friend. But it is
not your fault; you are just a victim of the American public education
system :P
zerge
12-10-2003, 09:29 AM
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<zuadnRpjQ8-D_0uiRVn-iw@bravo.net>... "zerge" <zerge@hotmail.com> wrote... There is a distinction between "interfere" and "petition". What the governors are doing is a "petition". Disclaimer: This post is intended solely as correction in the use of the word "interfere" vs "petition". Please continue with your anti-immigration rant. So if I were to visit Chiapas and "petition" for the rights of the local Indios, the Mexican government would not stop me?
You can come into Mexico as an international observer to Chiapas, for
example. You may not actively participate in political gatherings,
since the constitution reserves that right to citizens only. You may
deliver petitions to the government without any problem.
And if you've followed my posting history here for awhile, you would see that I am not "anti-immigration" as you label me. I have been quite tolerant of Mexican immigration for a long time. But lately I have been getting quite pissed off with Mexico's attitude. It is not enough that the U.S. has been letting in huge numbers of Mexicans in for the last 20 years. Now Mexico seems to EXPECT that it can export half its population to the U.S. to ease pressure on its creaking economic system that it refuses to reform. The attitude of the PRI and now Fox's PAN is that they can simply export Mexico's serious economic problems rather than fix them.
We do not refuse to reform. We are reforming like crazy right now. But
don't expect to see results soon; this stuff takes time.
I have seen Fox do absolutely nothing in the three years he's been in office. His entire platform seemed to consist of reaching some sort of immigration agreement with the U.S. in which the illegal aliens already in the U.S. would be given amnesty and even more Mexicans would be allowed to immigrate legally. Not a single mention of how he would reform Mexico's economy so that it could grow and employ the Mexicans who are now fleeing to the U.S. Mexico is still the same, with the same handful of huge inefficient protected monopolies and megabillionaires, while the vast majority of Mexicans sell gum on the streets to survive.
Mexico has been a true democracy for only 3 years. The previous ruling
party did run the country like its own personal fiefdom. We are
working hard to fix things. Fox HAS done stuff, but there is still
much to do. We are also just recovering from a worldwide recession
which adversely affected us microeconomically. But check our
macroeconomic indicators, and you will see the stability of the
country.
Bob
12-10-2003, 04:14 PM
"zerge" <zerge@hotmail.com> wrote... You can come into Mexico as an international observer to Chiapas, for example. You may not actively participate in political gatherings, since the constitution reserves that right to citizens only. You may deliver petitions to the government without any problem.
I've heard that while Mexico does allow international observers, in
practice they are constantly monitored and followed by the Mexican
KGB (whatever Mexico's intelligence agency is called). My college
history teacher from a year or two ago said he was in Mexico City
for a conference and for some reason they were nearby a political
rally and the Mexican KGB kept following them around, tracking
every single move. Back in the glory days of the Zapatista movement
I heard that Americans and other foreigners were forcibly removed
from the Chiapas area by the Mexican government; so much for
allowing observation.
We do not refuse to reform. We are reforming like crazy right now. But don't expect to see results soon; this stuff takes time.
I've seen no reform. The last Mexico had any significant reform was
under Carlos Salinas, and his "reform" consisted of giving away
public companies to his buddies in exchange for bribes. From what
I've seen and read, every Mexican president for at least the last
20 years has come into office promising reform and ended up not only
reforming nothing, but actually making things worse. López Portillo,
De la Madrid, Salinas, Zedillo, and now Fox. The only thing different
about Fox is that he hasn't looted the country (yet). Telmex is
still refusing to let other companies connect to its networks. Pemex
is still there gouging Mexicans with $2/gallon gasoline prices to
provide hefty profits for the PRI to skim off into Swiss bank accounts.
Mexico has been a true democracy for only 3 years. The previous ruling party did run the country like its own personal fiefdom. We are working hard to fix things. Fox HAS done stuff, but there is still much to do. We are also just recovering from a worldwide recession which adversely affected us microeconomically. But check our macroeconomic indicators, and you will see the stability of the country.
I'll agree with you there (about Mexico being a democracy for only 3
years). Oddly, some members of this group have defended past Mexican
elections with the most absurd logic (for example, they conceded that
massive fraud occurred in some elections but it didn't matter because
the PRI had so much support it would have won without the fraud anyway
[which leads one to ask why it felt it necessary to commit the fraud
in the first place]).
As to the macroeconomic indicators you refer me to, I've already stated
my OPINION that Mexican statistics are lies. No, I can't prove this,
it is just something that I feel instinctively must be true. I was
doing research recently using official Mexican government economic
publications (published jointly by INEGI and Banamex) from the 1980s.
I have no idea which numbers were true and which were false, but the
publication went out of its way to point out how much the bean
production had increased while omitting the unemployment and inflation
rates completely. Later I found references to the 1980s unemployment
rate and was amazed to learn that it ranged from 4% to 7% during the
worst Mexican depression ever! I lived in El Paso at the time and
regularly witnessed Mexicans killed by traffic trying to cross the
highway into the U.S., something that does not seem to support such
a low unemployment rate, so I assume the official rate is simply a
lie. Here is a nice quote from my favorite book, "1984":
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"But actually, he thought as he re-adjusted the Ministry of Plenty's
figures, it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution
of one piece of nonsense for another. Most of the material that
you were dealing with had no connection with anything in the real
world, not even the kind of connection that is contained in a
direct lie. Statistics were just as much a fantasy in their
original version as in their rectified version. A great deal of
the time you were expected to make them up out of your head. For
example, the Ministry of Plenty's forecast had estimated the output
of boots for the quarter at 145 million pairs. The actual output
was given as 62 million. Winston, however, in rewriting the
forecast, marked the figure down to 57 million, so as to allow for
the usual claim that the quota had been overfilled. In any case,
62 million was no nearer the truth than 57 million, or than 145
million. Very likely no boots had been produced at all. Likelier
still, nobody knew how many had been produced, much less cared. All
one knew was that every quarter astronomical numbers of boots were
produced on paper, while perhaps half the population of Oceania
went barefoot. And so it was with every class of recorded fact,
great or small. Everything faded away into a shadow-world in
which, finally, even the date of the year had become uncertain."
-- George Orwell, "1984," Penguin Books, 1949, p. 37
"Lo más curioso era - pensó Winston mientras arreglaba las cifras
del Ministerio de la Abundancia - que ni siquiera se trataba de una
falsificación. Era, sencillamente, la sustitución de un tipo de
tonterías por otro. La mayor parte del material que allí manejaban
no tenía relación alguna con el mundo real, ni siquiera en esa
conexión que implica una mentira directa. Las estadísticas eran tan
fantásticas en su versión original como en la rectificada. En la
mayor parte de los casos, tenía que sacárselas el funcionario de su
cabeza. Por ejemplo, las predicciones del Ministerio de la
Abundancia calculaban la producción de botas para el trimestre
venidero en ciento cuarenta y cinco millones de pares. Pues bien,
la cantidad efectiva fue de sesenta y dos millones de pares. Es
decir, la cantidad declarada oficialmente. Sin embargo, Winston, al
modificar ahora la 'predicción', rebajó la cantidad a cincuenta y
siete millones, para que resultara posible la habitual declaración
de que se había superado la producción. En todo caso, sesenta y dos
millones no se acercaban a la verdad más que los cincuenta y siete
millones o los ciento cuarenta y cinco. Lo más probable es que no
se hubieran producido botas en absoluto. Nadie sabía en definitiva
cuánto se había producido ni le importaba. Lo único de que se
estaba seguro era de que cada trimestre se producían sobre el papel
cantidades astronómicas de botas mientras que media población de
Oceanía iba descalza. Y lo mismo ocurría con los demás datos,
importantes o minúsculos, que se registraban. Todo se disolvía en
un mundo de sombras en el cual incluso la fecha del año era
insegura."
-- George Orwell, "1984"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
supernav
12-10-2003, 06:24 PM
This is too funny. The mexican gov't criticizing the US for it's
policies...
when their own damn gov't is soo corrupt it's not even funny. Half the
gov't politicians are on the drug lord's payrolls. Even their local
cops just arrest every tourist or foreigner (like me) just to extort a
"fine" and pocket the cash. They are so corrupt it isn't even funny. I
don't know of a single american who doesn't have a screwed-up Mexican
police story to tell which always involves them wanting money.
Fix your own damn system first before criticizing ours.
-= nav =-
--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com
zerge
12-11-2003, 03:22 PM
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<CtednY0gK6h_K0qiRVn-sA@bravo.net>... "zerge" <zerge@hotmail.com> wrote... You can come into Mexico as an international observer to Chiapas, for example. You may not actively participate in political gatherings, since the constitution reserves that right to citizens only. You may deliver petitions to the government without any problem. I've heard that while Mexico does allow international observers, in practice they are constantly monitored and followed by the Mexican KGB (whatever Mexico's intelligence agency is called). My college history teacher from a year or two ago said he was in Mexico City for a conference and for some reason they were nearby a political rally and the Mexican KGB kept following them around, tracking every single move. Back in the glory days of the Zapatista movement I heard that Americans and other foreigners were forcibly removed from the Chiapas area by the Mexican government; so much for allowing observation.
Our "KGB" is called CISEN, Centro de Investigacion y Seguridad
Nacional. They have the right to monitor any activity that may
jeopardize national security. Many foreigners where indeed forcibly
removed from Chiapas, because they where ACTIVELY engaging in
political activity, which is prohibited by our constitution. They
where not mere observers.
We do not refuse to reform. We are reforming like crazy right now. But don't expect to see results soon; this stuff takes time. I've seen no reform. The last Mexico had any significant reform was under Carlos Salinas, and his "reform" consisted of giving away public companies to his buddies in exchange for bribes. From what I've seen and read, every Mexican president for at least the last 20 years has come into office promising reform and ended up not only reforming nothing, but actually making things worse. López Portillo, De la Madrid, Salinas, Zedillo, and now Fox. The only thing different about Fox is that he hasn't looted the country (yet). Telmex is still refusing to let other companies connect to its networks. Pemex is still there gouging Mexicans with $2/gallon gasoline prices to provide hefty profits for the PRI to skim off into Swiss bank accounts.
And I've never seen the Great Wall of China, but it's there. The fact
is you know very, very little about my country. For example, right
this precise moment, a very significative tax reform is being voted in
congress. In the old Mexico (before 2000) the president would have
presented the reform to congress, who would not debate it, not change
a single dot or a single comma, and would rubberstamp it. Now, since
we do have true democracy and a REAL congress, there is a heated
debate about the tax reform. It's all over the news. There are many
other examples like that.
Yes, in the past, "presidents" looted the country. I would not call
them presidents; they where dictators. That was the old Mexico. I'm
talking about the new Mexico.
And just to clarify, Salinas did NOT give away the companies; he sold
them VERY expensive. Few people know this. But I agree, it was NOT a
clean process.
The point is, how much can you see a country change in 3 years?? Not
much. It is just the beginning of the process.
Mexico has been a true democracy for only 3 years. The previous ruling party did run the country like its own personal fiefdom. We are working hard to fix things. Fox HAS done stuff, but there is still much to do. We are also just recovering from a worldwide recession which adversely affected us microeconomically. But check our macroeconomic indicators, and you will see the stability of the country. I'll agree with you there (about Mexico being a democracy for only 3 years). Oddly, some members of this group have defended past Mexican elections with the most absurd logic (for example, they conceded that massive fraud occurred in some elections but it didn't matter because the PRI had so much support it would have won without the fraud anyway [which leads one to ask why it felt it necessary to commit the fraud in the first place]). As to the macroeconomic indicators you refer me to, I've already stated my OPINION that Mexican statistics are lies. No, I can't prove this, it is just something that I feel instinctively must be true. I was doing research recently using official Mexican government economic publications (published jointly by INEGI and Banamex) from the 1980s. I have no idea which numbers were true and which were false, but the publication went out of its way to point out how much the bean production had increased while omitting the unemployment and inflation rates completely. Later I found references to the 1980s unemployment rate and was amazed to learn that it ranged from 4% to 7% during the worst Mexican depression ever! I lived in El Paso at the time and regularly witnessed Mexicans killed by traffic trying to cross the highway into the U.S., something that does not seem to support such a low unemployment rate, so I assume the official rate is simply a lie. Here is a nice quote from my favorite book, "1984":
Yes, some statistics MAY be fudged. There is no way of knowing. But
I'm talking about indicators such as interest rates, exchange rates,
country risk rating, inflation, etc. Those most certainly cannot be
altered, since they are out in the open for everyone to see.
As to the unemployment rate, please see the following page for an
explanation on the relationship between unemployment and GDP per
capita. You will find it quite interesting I think:
zerge wrote: "Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<CtednY0gK6h_K0qiRVn-sA@bravo.net>..."zerge" <zerge@hotmail.com> wrote...You can come into Mexico as an international observer to Chiapas, forexample. You may not actively participate in political gatherings,since the constitution reserves that right to citizens only. You maydeliver petitions to the government without any problem.I've heard that while Mexico does allow international observers, inpractice they are constantly monitored and followed by the MexicanKGB (whatever Mexico's intelligence agency is called). My collegehistory teacher from a year or two ago said he was in Mexico Cityfor a conference and for some reason they were nearby a politicalrally and the Mexican KGB kept following them around, trackingevery single move. Back in the glory days of the Zapatista movementI heard that Americans and other foreigners were forcibly removedfrom the Chiapas area by the Mexican government; so much forallowing observation. Our "KGB" is called CISEN, Centro de Investigacion y Seguridad Nacional. They have the right to monitor any activity that may jeopardize national security. Many foreigners where indeed forcibly removed from Chiapas, because they where ACTIVELY engaging in political activity, which is prohibited by our constitution. They where not mere observers.
Ah, perhaps we should have something similar in our own Constitution?
Because those Consular employees and the consuls themselves, seem to be
engaging in a great deal of political activity in the USA.
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbons, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
Rogelio Perea
12-11-2003, 10:36 PM
"Tiny Human Ferret" wrote:
zerge wrote: Our "KGB" is called CISEN, Centro de Investigacion y Seguridad Nacional. They have the right to monitor any activity that may jeopardize national security. Many foreigners where indeed forcibly removed from Chiapas, because they where ACTIVELY engaging in political activity, which is prohibited by our constitution. They where not mere observers. Ah, perhaps we should have something similar in our own Constitution? Because those Consular employees and the consuls themselves, seem to be engaging in a great deal of political activity in the USA.
Consular delegations all over the world manage themselves in a whole
different way AND respond to very particular internationally established
protocols, putting them at the same level as that of "political observers"
is comparing oranges to apples. If the consular activities where to be taken
with the same light as those of an international political observer, then
yes, many consuls and their delegates would be prime targets for political
prosecution and country expulsion - something that usually happens when
countries break ties with one another, or when traumatizing events (wars for
example) take place.
At least as for the Mexican consulates in Arizona goes, I have found many of
their declarations and statements to be very uncompromising & tame when they
should take a solid stance, like when pressured by hard hitting events, sort
of a "don't upset the apple cart" position... politics at it's bets & worst.
-=[ Rogelio ]=-
Tiny Human Ferret
12-12-2003, 07:25 AM
Rogelio Perea wrote: "Tiny Human Ferret" wrote:zerge wrote:Our "KGB" is called CISEN, Centro de Investigacion y SeguridadNacional. They have the right to monitor any activity that mayjeopardize national security. Many foreigners where indeed forciblyremoved from Chiapas, because they where ACTIVELY engaging inpolitical activity, which is prohibited by our constitution. Theywhere not mere observers.Ah, perhaps we should have something similar in our own Constitution?Because those Consular employees and the consuls themselves, seem to beengaging in a great deal of political activity in the USA. Consular delegations all over the world manage themselves in a whole different way AND respond to very particular internationally established protocols, putting them at the same level as that of "political observers" is comparing oranges to apples. If the consular activities where to be taken with the same light as those of an international political observer, then yes, many consuls and their delegates would be prime targets for political prosecution and country expulsion - something that usually happens when countries break ties with one another, or when traumatizing events (wars for example) take place. At least as for the Mexican consulates in Arizona goes, I have found many of their declarations and statements to be very uncompromising & tame when they should take a solid stance, like when pressured by hard hitting events, sort of a "don't upset the apple cart" position... politics at it's bets & worst.
I wouldn't categorize as "uncompromising and tame" the acts of driving
around the countryside passing out thousands of Consular IDs to illegal
aliens, and orchestrating gatherings at such places where the consular
employees will be expected to attend for such purposes.
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbons, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
zerge
12-12-2003, 10:53 AM
Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote in message news:<3FD92292.1080909@earthops.net>... zerge wrote: "Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<CtednY0gK6h_K0qiRVn-sA@bravo.net>..."zerge" <zerge@hotmail.com> wrote...>You can come into Mexico as an international observer to Chiapas, for>example. You may not actively participate in political gatherings,>since the constitution reserves that right to citizens only. You may>deliver petitions to the government without any problem.I've heard that while Mexico does allow international observers, inpractice they are constantly monitored and followed by the MexicanKGB (whatever Mexico's intelligence agency is called). My collegehistory teacher from a year or two ago said he was in Mexico Cityfor a conference and for some reason they were nearby a politicalrally and the Mexican KGB kept following them around, trackingevery single move. Back in the glory days of the Zapatista movementI heard that Americans and other foreigners were forcibly removedfrom the Chiapas area by the Mexican government; so much forallowing observation. Our "KGB" is called CISEN, Centro de Investigacion y Seguridad Nacional. They have the right to monitor any activity that may jeopardize national security. Many foreigners where indeed forcibly removed from Chiapas, because they where ACTIVELY engaging in political activity, which is prohibited by our constitution. They where not mere observers. Ah, perhaps we should have something similar in our own Constitution? Because those Consular employees and the consuls themselves, seem to be engaging in a great deal of political activity in the USA.
Are you sure your Constitution does not have a similar article? It
would be interesting to know.
Arnold Wolfcaste
12-12-2003, 01:49 PM
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<Ts-dnfkXQbumgkiiRVn-vw@bravo.net>... "--=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--" <jay*--REMOVE--*@adnmail.com> wrote... The arrogance of most Mexican government cretins never ceases to amaze: http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=2236&tabla=m iami Governors stand up for migrants' rights <snip> The Mexican constitution prohibits foreigners from interfering in Mexico's political affairs. But apparently Mexico feels that it has a right to interfere in America's political affairs. Just another example of Mexican hypocrisy. I've ranted and raved on this subject before. Mexico expects to export half its population illegally to the U.S. and have the U.S. provide them with employment, health care, drivers licenses, and more; but Mexico is absolutely fanatical about illegal aliens from the U.S. and other countries in its precious country. Just today I read about how immigrants from Guatemala and other Central American countries are routinely robbed and tortured by Mexican officials, many of them simply "disappearing" completely. But then Mexico goes and gets all snotty when its citizens are even slightly harassed by American officials. I have a question: if I were to sneak into Mexico illegally, would I be elegible for a Mexican drivers license?
Grandma and grandpa in America are gonna get screwed out of their
social security to help Pedro but a new home and a Chevy. Blame vote
pandering Democrats and Republicans.
No 33 Secretary
12-12-2003, 02:36 PM
arnold_wolfcastle_gupta@yahoo.co.in (Arnold Wolfcaste) wrote in
news:76bdb568.0312121349.4ebf0db9@posting.google.c om:
Grandma and grandpa in America are gonna get screwed out of their social security to help Pedro but a new home and a Chevy. Blame vote pandering Democrats and Republicans.
You really don't have a clue how the Social Security ponzi scam works, do
you? The only hope of granda and grandpa getting a dime is to let
immigrants of any stripe work and pay in to the pyramid.
--
Terry Austin
taustin@hyperbooks.com
www.hyperbooks.com
Roleplaying Stuff
Tiny Human Ferret
12-12-2003, 04:15 PM
zerge wrote: Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote in message news:<3FD92292.1080909@earthops.net>...zerge wrote:"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<CtednY0gK6h_K0qiRVn-sA@bravo.net>...>"zerge" <zerge@hotmail.com> wrote...>>>>You can come into Mexico as an international observer to Chiapas, for>>example. You may not actively participate in political gatherings,>>since the constitution reserves that right to citizens only. You may>>deliver petitions to the government without any problem.>>I've heard that while Mexico does allow international observers, in>practice they are constantly monitored and followed by the Mexican>KGB (whatever Mexico's intelligence agency is called). My college>history teacher from a year or two ago said he was in Mexico City>for a conference and for some reason they were nearby a political>rally and the Mexican KGB kept following them around, tracking>every single move. Back in the glory days of the Zapatista movement>I heard that Americans and other foreigners were forcibly removed>from the Chiapas area by the Mexican government; so much for>allowing observation.>Our "KGB" is called CISEN, Centro de Investigacion y SeguridadNacional. They have the right to monitor any activity that mayjeopardize national security. Many foreigners where indeed forciblyremoved from Chiapas, because they where ACTIVELY engaging inpolitical activity, which is prohibited by our constitution. Theywhere not mere observers.Ah, perhaps we should have something similar in our own Constitution?Because those Consular employees and the consuls themselves, seem to beengaging in a great deal of political activity in the USA. Are you sure your Constitution does not have a similar article? It would be interesting to know.
I'm positive.
It's not a very long Constitution, when compared to many. YOu could
always read it. Try starting at http://www.archives.gov/
There _are_ laws which require agents of foreign powers to register as
such, but apparently only law firms ever pay any attention to that
requirement.
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbons, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
drvr1
12-12-2003, 05:23 PM
Well I mostly agree with you ozi, but we are not the only
ones who have bad leaders. How about your cow boy?
Originally posted by Sunlover
Originally posted by --=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--
On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 23:00:32 GMT, "observer" <observer@hotmail.com> opined:
Why don't they start "Everyday without Mexicans" campaign.
"The American people will start an "Everyday without Mexicans" campaign soon enough if that asshole in the
White House doesn't secure the borders and start culling the herd pretty soon (Q)
I can't believe the blatant racism on this forum. Who are you people anyway ? People actually interested in Immigration the US or people who want to spew as much hatred as possible on anyone trying (heaven forbid) to immigrate there ?
I guess it's to
--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com
drvr1
12-12-2003, 05:23 PM
Well I mostly agree with you ozi, but we are not the only
ones who have bad leaders. How about your cow boy?
Originally posted by Sunlover
Originally posted by --=Cochise~|||~Guardian=--
On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 23:00:32 GMT, "observer" <observer@hotmail.com> opined:
Why don't they start "Everyday without Mexicans" campaign.
"The American people will start an "Everyday without Mexicans" campaign soon enough if that asshole in the
White House doesn't secure the borders and start culling the herd pretty soon (Q)
I can't believe the blatant racism on this forum. Who are you people anyway ? People actually interested in Immigration the US or people who want to spew as much hatred as possible on anyone trying (heaven forbid) to immigrate there ?
I guess it's to be expected from people who vote a semi-illiterate Nazi sympathiser in as their State Governor and a retarded
in-bred moron as their President.
--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com
zerge
12-13-2003, 11:41 PM
Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote in message news:<3FDA5A29.1050409@earthops.net>... zerge wrote: Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote in message news:<3FD92292.1080909@earthops.net>...zerge wrote:>"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<CtednY0gK6h_K0qiRVn-sA@bravo.net>...>>>>"zerge" <zerge@hotmail.com> wrote...>>>>>>>You can come into Mexico as an international observer to Chiapas, for>>>example. You may not actively participate in political gatherings,>>>since the constitution reserves that right to citizens only. You may>>>deliver petitions to the government without any problem.>>>>I've heard that while Mexico does allow international observers, in>>practice they are constantly monitored and followed by the Mexican>>KGB (whatever Mexico's intelligence agency is called). My college>>history teacher from a year or two ago said he was in Mexico City>>for a conference and for some reason they were nearby a political>>rally and the Mexican KGB kept following them around, tracking>>every single move. Back in the glory days of the Zapatista movement>>I heard that Americans and other foreigners were forcibly removed>>from the Chiapas area by the Mexican government; so much for>>allowing observation.>>>>>Our "KGB" is called CISEN, Centro de Investigacion y Seguridad>Nacional. They have the right to monitor any activity that may>jeopardize national security. Many foreigners where indeed forcibly>removed from Chiapas, because they where ACTIVELY engaging in>political activity, which is prohibited by our constitution. They>where not mere observers.Ah, perhaps we should have something similar in our own Constitution?Because those Consular employees and the consuls themselves, seem to beengaging in a great deal of political activity in the USA. Are you sure your Constitution does not have a similar article? It would be interesting to know. I'm positive. It's not a very long Constitution, when compared to many. YOu could always read it. Try starting at http://www.archives.gov/ There _are_ laws which require agents of foreign powers to register as such, but apparently only law firms ever pay any attention to that requirement.
you mean like "Hi, um, I'm an agent from the Mossad, which form do I
use to register as an agent of a foreing power?" Surely you don't mean
THAT, do you? :)
Tiny Human Ferret
12-14-2003, 03:18 AM
zerge wrote: Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote in message news:<3FDA5A29.1050409@earthops.net>...zerge wrote:Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote in message news:<3FD92292.1080909@earthops.net>...>zerge wrote:>>"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<CtednY0gK6h_K0qiRVn-sA@bravo.net>...>>>"zerge" <zerge@hotmail.com> wrote...
<snip snip>
>>Our "KGB" is called CISEN, Centro de Investigacion y Seguridad>>Nacional. They have the right to monitor any activity that may>>jeopardize national security. Many foreigners where indeed forcibly>>removed from Chiapas, because they where ACTIVELY engaging in>>political activity, which is prohibited by our constitution. They>>where not mere observers.>>Ah, perhaps we should have something similar in our own Constitution?>>Because those Consular employees and the consuls themselves, seem to be>engaging in a great deal of political activity in the USA.Are you sure your Constitution does not have a similar article? Itwould be interesting to know.I'm positive.It's not a very long Constitution, when compared to many. YOu couldalways read it. Try starting at http://www.archives.gov/There _are_ laws which require agents of foreign powers to register assuch, but apparently only law firms ever pay any attention to thatrequirement. you mean like "Hi, um, I'm an agent from the Mossad, which form do I use to register as an agent of a foreing power?" Surely you don't mean THAT, do you? :)
Well, even they are meant to do that, but somehow I suspect they do not.
It's more of a legal issue, for instance if someone is trying to buy a
piece of land, if the real person in control of that land will be a
foreign organization or government, whoever is acting as the agent is
supposed to be registered as an agent of a foreign power.
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbons, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
Enrique
12-14-2003, 10:16 AM
Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote in message news:<3FDC4722.90006@earthops.net>...
There _are_ laws which require agents of foreign powers to register assuch, but apparently only law firms ever pay any attention to thatrequirement. you mean like "Hi, um, I'm an agent from the Mossad, which form do I use to register as an agent of a foreing power?" Surely you don't mean THAT, do you? :) Well, even they are meant to do that, but somehow I suspect they do not. It's more of a legal issue, for instance if someone is trying to buy a piece of land, if the real person in control of that land will be a foreign organization or government, whoever is acting as the agent is supposed to be registered as an agent of a foreign power.
Illegal are protesting against a TRUE naturalized citizen who worked his way
up from nothing and did NOT sneak into the U.S. to bleed it dry.
As it is, California loses over three BILLION dollars through Social
Services to the 500,000 + illegal aliens PER YEAR !
As they say, "Hey Beaners...You don't like it? GO BACK TO MEXICO where the
authorities would simply point & laugh at your protests!
They are also attacking Arnold Schwarzenegger because of his connection
to the group U.S. English. They claim that U.S. English is a "racist"
organization because it wants to establish English as the primary
language of the United States. Note that Schwarzenegger came from a
non-English speaking country, Austria. How successful would he have
been had he refused to learn English and insisted on speaking German
and having the schools teach his kids in German as well?
Just a bit of devil's advocacy...I do believe in freedom of speech
which includes the right of people to speak whatever language they
wish. But if special accomodation is made for Spanish, why not
other languages? Imagine government documents having to be printed
in Chinese, Hebrew, Swahili, Arabic, Farsi, French, German, Korean,
Urdu, etc. America would quickly fall apart if this happened. I'm
sorry, but immigrants absolutely must learn English. I am offended
that there are actually naturalization ceremononies conducted in
Spanish. Would Mexico naturalize me as a Mexican citizen in English?
Enrique
12-14-2003, 05:11 PM
zerge@hotmail.com (zerge) wrote in message news:<f0a1621c.0312100924.216389b1@posting.google.com>...
No, laws should not be ignored. Have I said they should? Yes, most countries have done, and keep doing, bad things. Have I denied that? I was just giving a clear example of what "interfere" means. You seem to have a reading comprehension problem, my friend. But it is not your fault; you are just a victim of the American public education system :P
In the case of issuing drivers licencenses to illegal immigrants, the law
mandaated laws would be ignored. Federal law says a driver's license
must be accepted identification for voter registration. Federal law requires
citizenship to vote. The law granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants
also mandated that the licenses wouldn't contain any information regarding
citizenship.
I am sure that allowing illegal immigrants to vote in Mexico would be
considered political iterfearence.
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> on 14 Dec 2003 suggested:
I am offended that there are actually naturalization ceremononies conducted in Spanish.
Do you have any proof of this? Or are you simply lying again to
try to make a point? The Federal requirements require citizens to know
English except under three circumstances. You can read THEIR text:
"Applicants for naturalization must be able to read, write, speak, and
understand words in ordinary usage in the English language. Applicants
exempt from this requirement are those who on the date of filing:
have been residing in the United States subsequent to a lawful admission
for permanent residence for periods totaling 15 years or more and are
over 55 years of age;
have been residing in the United States subsequent to a lawful admission
for permanent residence for periods totaling 20 years or more and are
over 50 years of age; or
have a medically determinable physical or mental impairment, where the
impairment affects the applicant’s ability to learn English. "
Would Mexico naturalize me as a Mexican citizen in English?
I'm sure they would not. In fact, I'm pretty sure Mexico would
not naturalize you at all.
"Point & laugh at your protests" the man sez. :) How amusing, another
person who totally INGORES the political reality in Mexico.
Mexico is like, the world capital of popular protests, my man! People
protest about everything, all the time! The gather in huge numbers,
and block streets, paralizing Mexico City at least once a month! I get
stuck in traffic all the time because of it. In any other part of the
world these protesters would get dispersed with gas and water cannons!
But not in Mexico, no sir. People have the right to protest here.
After the unfortunate student massacres back in 1968, the country
swung ALL the way to the opposite side, and allow any schmuck to
organize a protest and paralize traffic.
How effective are they? Do the government listen? Sometimes it does,
sometimes it does not. But let me give you an example. A couple of
years ago, the government was going to build a brand new, huge, top of
the line airport in Mexico City. But a bunch of farmers started to
protest because the government was going to take the land (paying for
it of course). They protested because it was not enough money, because
they didnt want planes flying over their houses, because of this,
because of that etc. Well, they won. The government simply gave up,
and now we don't have a new airport.
"Point and laugh". Sure.
Douglas S. Ladden
12-14-2003, 11:28 PM
zerge@hotmail.com (zerge) on 14 Dec 2003 suggested:
A couple of years ago, the government was going to build a brand new, huge, top of the line airport in Mexico City. But a bunch of farmers started to protest because the government was going to take the land (paying for it of course). They protested because it was not enough money,
I was there during these protests, and as I recall, the government
was going to pay 7 pesos per square meter. That really isn't paying for
the land, in my opinion. You can't even get CHEAP floor covering for that
amount of money. In fact, I don't know of many things that you can get
that cheap.
because they didnt want planes flying over their houses, because of this, because of that etc. Well, they won. The government simply gave up, and now we don't have a new airport.
Yes, and this was a sad result. I think a new airport would have
been good, whether it was in Texcoco or Tizayuca. However, I think that
the passenger traffic problem could be solved be expanding the airports at
Toluca and Cuernavaca. But that of course, is just my opinion.
That would be very un-German. Wherever Germans go, they always try to
speak the local language. To do otherwise would be very rude, and
extremely self-limiting. If they want their kids to learn how to speak
German with more competence than they would learn at home, they send
them to private school or to after-school lessons, at personal expense.
They don't demand that other people pay for education that benefits only
them.
The "spanish" are almost the only people who come to the US and don't
want to learn English. Everyone else learns English as best they can. I
have heard, for example, native speakers of Arabic or Farsi who complain
bitterly that they were expected to learn English and did learn it, and
now these "spanish" come and refuse to study English, and in order to
communicate, now these Arabic- or Farsi-speakers must learn to speak
Spanish. Arabs being Arabs, generally they're too polite to suggest that
maybe Americans should learn to speak Arabic (all 20+ dialects) and
Farsi and Urdu and Hindi and all other languages in the world, so we can
be accomodating of anyone in any language. But they're not so polite as
to never say "English is the accepted language of the USA and if I could
learn to speak it, anyone else should expect to speak it, it's the
common language here".
Just a bit of devil's advocacy...I do believe in freedom of speech which includes the right of people to speak whatever language they wish. But if special accomodation is made for Spanish, why not other languages? Imagine government documents having to be printed in Chinese, Hebrew, Swahili, Arabic, Farsi, French, German, Korean, Urdu, etc. America would quickly fall apart if this happened.
It's the law in Montgomery County MD.
I'm sorry, but immigrants absolutely must learn English. I am offended that there are actually naturalization ceremononies conducted in Spanish. Would Mexico naturalize me as a Mexican citizen in English?
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbons, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
Pomponio Magnus, Gobernador Constitucional del Est
12-15-2003, 07:52 AM
"Douglas S. Ladden" <dslHatesSpam@thesaei.org> wrote in message news:<Xns9451EED79A153divine1Ladden2defaul@216.148.227.7 7>... zerge@hotmail.com (zerge) on 14 Dec 2003 suggested: A couple of years ago, the government was going to build a brand new, huge, top of the line airport in Mexico City. But a bunch of farmers started to protest because the government was going to take the land (paying for it of course). They protested because it was not enough money, I was there during these protests, and as I recall, the government was going to pay 7 pesos per square meter. That really isn't paying for the land, in my opinion. You can't even get CHEAP floor covering for that amount of money. In fact, I don't know of many things that you can get that cheap. because they didnt want planes flying over their houses, because of this, because of that etc. Well, they won. The government simply gave up, and now we don't have a new airport. Yes, and this was a sad result. I think a new airport would have been good, whether it was in Texcoco or Tizayuca. However, I think that the passenger traffic problem could be solved be expanding the airports at Toluca and Cuernavaca. But that of course, is just my opinion. --Douglas
If the stupid Fox cabinet had not been so disdainful of the Atenco
farmers (nacos, nacos!) they would have offered them a fair price for
their land and the airport might have been built. The cabinet went
there with a "you are dark ergo stupid so let me pay you with crystal
beads" attitude. These farmers DO live in a market economy, no way
they could be taken for a ride. The blame is Fox's and his cabinet's
entirely.
hc23hc
12-15-2003, 11:38 AM
Tiny Human Ferret wrote: The "spanish" are almost the only people who come to the US and don't want to learn English. Everyone else learns English as best they can.
Who are they supposed to learn English from - Americans ?
Then you wonder.
..
..
..
zerge
12-15-2003, 01:21 PM
"Douglas S. Ladden" <dslHatesSpam@thesaei.org> wrote in message news:<Xns9451EED79A153divine1Ladden2defaul@216.148.227.7 7>... zerge@hotmail.com (zerge) on 14 Dec 2003 suggested: A couple of years ago, the government was going to build a brand new, huge, top of the line airport in Mexico City. But a bunch of farmers started to protest because the government was going to take the land (paying for it of course). They protested because it was not enough money, I was there during these protests, and as I recall, the government was going to pay 7 pesos per square meter. That really isn't paying for the land, in my opinion. You can't even get CHEAP floor covering for that amount of money. In fact, I don't know of many things that you can get that cheap. because they didnt want planes flying over their houses, because of this, because of that etc. Well, they won. The government simply gave up, and now we don't have a new airport. Yes, and this was a sad result. I think a new airport would have been good, whether it was in Texcoco or Tizayuca. However, I think that the passenger traffic problem could be solved be expanding the airports at Toluca and Cuernavaca. But that of course, is just my opinion. --Douglas
Yes, they where offering way too little money. Fox went in without a
clear negotiation strategy. He walks into PRD and PRI ambushes all the
time. Sadly, even though he is well meaning, he is not an effective
political operator.
zerge
12-15-2003, 01:22 PM
pomponiox@hotmail.com (Pomponio Magnus, Gobernador Constitucional del Estado Libre y Soberano de Tejas de Santa Anna) wrote in message news:<84dc9988.0312150752.1682c3e7@posting.google.com>... "Douglas S. Ladden" <dslHatesSpam@thesaei.org> wrote in message news:<Xns9451EED79A153divine1Ladden2defaul@216.148.227.7 7>... zerge@hotmail.com (zerge) on 14 Dec 2003 suggested: A couple of years ago, the government was going to build a brand new, huge, top of the line airport in Mexico City. But a bunch of farmers started to protest because the government was going to take the land (paying for it of course). They protested because it was not enough money, I was there during these protests, and as I recall, the government was going to pay 7 pesos per square meter. That really isn't paying for the land, in my opinion. You can't even get CHEAP floor covering for that amount of money. In fact, I don't know of many things that you can get that cheap. because they didnt want planes flying over their houses, because of this, because of that etc. Well, they won. The government simply gave up, and now we don't have a new airport. Yes, and this was a sad result. I think a new airport would have been good, whether it was in Texcoco or Tizayuca. However, I think that the passenger traffic problem could be solved be expanding the airports at Toluca and Cuernavaca. But that of course, is just my opinion. --Douglas If the stupid Fox cabinet had not been so disdainful of the Atenco farmers (nacos, nacos!) they would have offered them a fair price for their land and the airport might have been built. The cabinet went there with a "you are dark ergo stupid so let me pay you with crystal beads" attitude. These farmers DO live in a market economy, no way they could be taken for a ride. The blame is Fox's and his cabinet's entirely.
Fully agree. Fox and his cabinet are certainly not chess players. They
cannot see beyond a political move or two.
mexicanonegro@hotmail.com (Enrique) wrote in message news:<391b147c.0312141711.446abcd6@posting.google.com>... zerge@hotmail.com (zerge) wrote in message news:<f0a1621c.0312100924.216389b1@posting.google.com>... No, laws should not be ignored. Have I said they should? Yes, most countries have done, and keep doing, bad things. Have I denied that? I was just giving a clear example of what "interfere" means. You seem to have a reading comprehension problem, my friend. But it is not your fault; you are just a victim of the American public education system :P In the case of issuing drivers licencenses to illegal immigrants, the law mandaated laws would be ignored. Federal law says a driver's license must be accepted identification for voter registration. Federal law requires citizenship to vote. The law granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants also mandated that the licenses wouldn't contain any information regarding citizenship. I am sure that allowing illegal immigrants to vote in Mexico would be considered political iterfearence.
Indeed. I agree. That is why it shouldn't be done.
Tiny Human Ferret
12-16-2003, 06:29 AM
hc23hc wrote: Tiny Human Ferret wrote:The "spanish" are almost the only people who come to the US and don'twant to learn English. Everyone else learns English as best they can. Who are they supposed to learn English from - Americans ?
Believe it or not, there are a hell of a lot of foreigners who learn to
speak English in the American style colloquialisms and everything.
You seem to have done a fairly good job of learning to string words
together, though like a well-educated Alzheimer's patient of a certain
age, you have perfect diction and grammar and make no sense at all.
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbons, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
That's my main point, more or less. This is why we in the States have to
greatly reduce the numbers of both legal and illegal immigrants coming
to the country, in order to foster assimilation of language and culture.
So long as there is a constant inflow of numbers large enough to
perpetuate spanish-language culture, we will be having a
spanish-language culture perpetrated upon us, which is inherently divisive.
I don't think anyone minds people speaking Spanish, they teach it in
schools, you know. But having a culture within that speaks nothing but
Spanish, existing in such numbers that they can speak _only_ Spanish,
that's nearly intolerable. It would be one thing if it was small
isolated communities, but entire States have been nearly overwhelmed.
Languages carry culture, and to some degree, also carry attitudes and
ways of thinking. For instance, I have no doubt that when you are
thinking in terms of complex issues, you do your thinking in English
because some concepts are probably not well articulated in Espa~ol.
There are probably some concepts that are well-articulated (or perhaps
not articulated so much as embedded) in Espa~ol which aren't easily
translated to English.
For instance, the concept of "familia", which generally is
mis-translated into English as "family", when really a better
translation is "neighborhood" in many cases, or even "homeboys". But
does Spanish even have the concept of "neighborhood", outside of the
concept of "familia"? In England, "propinquity does not necessarily
equate to familiarity"; but the neighbors have certain obligations to
each other, even if they are relative strangers and to the degree they
know each other, dislike each other. I'm not sure that Spanish-language
culture carries such a concept. But that concept is a fundamental
embeded in most of American culture and in fact in some States, for
someone to say to a court -- when asked why they didn't try to help an
injured person who was a stranger to them -- "but they aren't part of
my 'familia' and I got no obligations to them" will get the response of
a legal charge of "depraved indifference". (See also the case of Kitty
Genovese.)
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbons, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
David Eduardo
12-16-2003, 08:10 AM
"Tiny Human Ferret" <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote in message
news:3FDF1D66.3000407@earthops.net... For instance, the concept of "familia", which generally is mis-translated into English as "family", when really a better translation is "neighborhood" in many cases, or even "homeboys".
'
"Familia" only means direct relatives. In fact, Spanish has a greater
hierarchy of terms for "friends" than English; the two, friends and family,
are highly distinguished.
<But does Spanish even have the concept of "neighborhood", outside of the concept of "familia"?
"Barrio" ("Colonia" in Mexico) means "neighborhood." The "barrio" concept is
so ingrained that the individual barrios have names that even appear in
maps. Where in American culture do small areas of a larger jurisidiction
nearly alwyas have names?
In England, "propinquity does not necessarily equate to familiarity"; but the neighbors have certain obligations to each other, even if they are relative strangers and to the degree they know each other, dislike each other. I'm not sure that Spanish-language culture carries such a concept.
In Latin America, neighbors know each other. Generally, this is in part
becausse the society is far less mobile, and many families have been in the
same barrio for decades or even generations and everybody knows each other.
Tiny Human Ferret
12-16-2003, 09:40 AM
David Eduardo wrote: "Tiny Human Ferret" <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote in message news:3FDF1D66.3000407@earthops.net...For instance, the concept of "familia", which generally ismis-translated into English as "family", when really a bettertranslation is "neighborhood" in many cases, or even "homeboys". ' "Familia" only means direct relatives. In fact, Spanish has a greater hierarchy of terms for "friends" than English; the two, friends and family, are highly distinguished. <Butdoes Spanish even have the concept of "neighborhood", outside of theconcept of "familia"? "Barrio" ("Colonia" in Mexico) means "neighborhood." The "barrio" concept is so ingrained that the individual barrios have names that even appear in maps. Where in American culture do small areas of a larger jurisidiction nearly alwyas have names?
All of suburbia, anywhere. "Subdivisions" is the term. You know, A
person could say they live in Washington DC, and someone could ask them
where, and they might say "Columbia Heights, that's in NorthWest." Or
they might say "I live in Montgomery Village" and someone would say,
"where exactly?" and they might say "Mill Creek Towne". Someone might
say "I live in Rockville" and one person might say "Twinbrook" and
another might say "Montrose" and the dividing line would be very clear
to both residents, the intersection of Randolph Road and Rockville Pike.
In England, "propinquity does not necessarilyequate to familiarity"; but the neighbors have certain obligations toeach other, even if they are relative strangers and to the degree theyknow each other, dislike each other. I'm not sure that Spanish-languageculture carries such a concept. In Latin America, neighbors know each other. Generally, this is in part becausse the society is far less mobile, and many families have been in the same barrio for decades or even generations and everybody knows each other.
But, you would agree that any sense of obligation is either personal, or
familiar (in the sense of 'familia', almost the sole surviving close
cognate is an adjective, not a collective noun[1])? The sense of
obligation isn't due to being residents in a community, but more due to
personal relationship?
My point is perhaps best demonstrated by example. In Northern Virginia,
where Mr Bash lives, near to him there is a subdivision. Over about a
decade, the entire population of a Salvadoran village named "Chirilagua"
migrated, mostly quasi-legally, to that subdivision. The culture was
transplanted wholesale, and so closely insular was this culture that
US-born children arrived at public schools unable to speak any English.
They didn't even have the so-called "playground english" possessed by
even the increasingly-common "alingual" children.
The Chirilaguans so firmly embraced _only_ their "familia" and so
tightly excluded their neighbors who were not part of their "familia"
that not even children had an opportunity to learn English from the
local neighborhood children.
Part of the backlash you see against the "spanish" is from this contrast
between the "anglo" sense of "neighborhood" as contrasted against the
"latino" sense of "familia". Whether or not they like the people,
"anglos" are bound by a cultural perception of duty to involve newcomers
in their lives, and to involve themselves in the lives of newcomers,
until there is an invocation of the right to privacy; in any case, all
will become known to each other, whether or not the resulting impression
is favorable. The perception many "anglos" get of the "spanish" is that
their actions convey a disdain and rejection, if not outright enmity, of
anyone who is not "familia". Of course, this perception by the "anglos"
(including the Irish and to some degree the rest of the non-latin
"euroamericans") is probably as true of the rest of the latin-origin
immigrants including French and Italian.
It may well be that a cultural adaptation occurred in New York City, an
accomodation between the "non-'familia'" subcultures and the
"'familia-oriented'" subcultures, that it was possibly for Kitty
Genovese to die screaming for help all night long, and nobody would even
call the police "because I didn't want to get involved"; perhaps the
latins couldn't bother themselves because she wasn't of their own
particular 'familia' and the non-latins had long since learned that to
intrude into the 'familia' of the latins generally brought only bad
results. Either way, the resulting codification of responsibility was
the "depraved indifference" statute in New York State, and probably
elsewhere.
Ref:
1. The present usage of "familiar" generally has the meaning of
"something frequently encountered, not unusual, commonplace", but the
older meaning was "of or pertaining to the family, as in 'familiar home'
or [archaic] 'familiar spirit', as, 'the witch kept her familiar spirit
in the form of a black cat'".
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbons, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
hc23hc
12-16-2003, 12:04 PM
Tiny Human Ferret wrote: hc23hc wrote: Tiny Human Ferret wrote:The "spanish" are almost the only people who come to the US and don'twant to learn English. Everyone else learns English as best they can. Who are they supposed to learn English from - Americans ? Believe it or not, there are a hell of a lot of foreigners who learn to speak English in the American style colloquialisms and everything.
"everything" ... minus whatever
You seem to have done a fairly good job of learning to string words together, though like a well-educated Alzheimer's patient of a certain age, you have perfect diction and grammar and make no sense at all.
Given its source, I'll take that as a compliment.
..
..
..
drvr1
12-16-2003, 04:56 PM
"Part of the backlash you see against the "spanish" is from this
contrast
between the "anglo" sense of "neighborhood" as contrasted against the
"latino" sense of "familia". "
Backlash? How about at least three people in this forum
alone who are ready to kill the "spanish" simply for being
"illegal". When a people
feel alone and islolated they close ranks.
Humans simply have an instinct to be nasty to those
who are not just like them and if you see the world
from their point of view, you understand.
Originally posted by Tiny Human Ferret
David Eduardo wrote:
"Tiny Human Ferret" <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote in message
news:3FDF1D66.3000407@earthops.net"]news:3FDF1D66.3000407- @earthops.net[/url]...
For instance, the concept of "familia", which generally is
mis-translated into English as "family", when really a better
translation is "neighborhood" in many cases, or even "homeboys".
'
"Familia" only means direct relatives. In fact, Spanish has a greater
hierarchy of terms for "friends" than English; the two, friends and family,
are highly distinguished.
<But
does Spanish even have the concept of "neighborhood", outside of the
concept of "familia"?
"Barrio" ("Colonia" in Mexico) means "neighborhood." The "barrio" concept is
so ingrained that the individual barrios have names that even appear in
maps. Where in American culture do small areas of a larger jurisidiction
nearly alwyas have names?
All of suburbia, anywhere. "Subdivisions" is the term. You know, A
person could say they live in Washington DC, and someone could ask them
where, and they might say "Columbia Heights, that's in NorthWest." Or
they might say "I live in Montgomery Village" and someone would say,
"where exactly?" and they might say "Mill Creek Towne". Someone might
say "I live in Rockville" and one person might say "Twinbrook" and
another might say "Montrose" and the dividing line would be very clear
to both residents, the intersection of Randolph Road and Rockville Pike.
In England, "propinquity does not necessarily
equate to familiarity"; but the neighbors have certain obligations to
each other, even if they are relative strangers and to the degree they
know each other, dislike each other. I'm not sure that Spanish- language
culture carries such a concept.
In Latin America, neighbors know each other. Generally, this is in part
becausse the society is far less mobile, and many families have been in the
same barrio for decades or even generations and everybody knows each other.
But, you would agree that any sense of obligation is either personal, or
familiar (in the sense of 'familia', almost the sole surviving close
cognate is an adjective, not a collective noun[1])? The sense of
obligation isn't due to being residents in a community, but more due to
personal relationship?
My point is perhaps best demonstrated by example. In Northern Virginia,
where Mr Bash lives, near to him there is a subdivision. Over about a
decade, the entire population of a Salvadoran village named "Chirilagua"
migrated, mostly quasi-legally, to that subdivision. The culture was
transplanted wholesale, and so closely insular was this culture that
US-born children arrived at public schools unable to speak any English.
They didn't even have the so-called "playground english" possessed by
even the increasingly-common "alingual" children.
The Chirilaguans so firmly embraced _only_ their "familia" and so
tightly excluded their neighbors who were not part of their "familia"
that not even children had an opportunity to learn English from the
local neighborhood children.
Part of the backlash you see against the "spanish" is from this contrast
between the "anglo" sense of "neighborhood" as contrasted against the
"latino" sense of "familia". Whether or not they like the people,
"anglos" are bound by a cultural perception of duty to involve newcomers
in their lives, and to involve themselves in the lives of newcomers,
until there is an invocation of the right to privacy; in any case, all
will become known to each other, whether or not the resulting impression
is favorable. The perception many "anglos" get of the "spanish" is that
their actions convey a disdain and rejection, if not outright enmity, of
anyone who is not "familia". Of course, this perception by the "anglos"
(including the Irish and to some degree the rest of the non-latin
"euroamericans") is probably as true of the rest of the latin-origin
immigrants including French and Italian.
It may well be that a cultural adaptation occurred in New York City, an
accomodation between the "non-'familia'" subcultures and the
"'familia-oriented'" subcultures, that it was possibly for Kitty
Genovese to die screaming for help all night long, and nobody would even
call the police "because I didn't want to get involved"; perhaps the
latins couldn't bother themselves because she wasn't of their own
particular 'familia' and the non-latins had long since learned that to
intrude into the 'familia' of the latins generally brought only bad
results. Either way, the resulting codification of responsibility was
the "depraved indifference" statute in New York State, and probably
elsewhere.
Ref:
1. The present usage of "familiar" generally has the meaning of
"something frequently encountered, not unusual, commonplace", but the
older meaning was "of or pertaining to the family, as in 'familiar home'
or [archaic] 'familiar spirit', as, 'the witch kept her familiar spirit
in the form of a black cat'".
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbons, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Johann Schmidt
12-18-2003, 03:32 PM
Does that imply legal immigrants can just show their DL and thus vote,
without being citizens?
JS
--=Cochise~|||®|||~Guardian=--
12-18-2003, 04:10 PM
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:32:34 +0100, "Johann Schmidt" <js@lhotmail.com> opined:
Does that imply legal immigrants can just show their DL and thus vote,without being citizens?JS
Yes. Remember 'motor voter'?
Marcus Cato
12-18-2003, 04:47 PM
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:32:34 +0100, "Johann Schmidt" <js@lhotmail.com>
wrote:
Does that imply legal immigrants can just show their DL and thus vote,without being citizens?
That's all I ever show to vote, and registration is just a card in the
mail.
JS
Graphic Queen
12-18-2003, 05:01 PM
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:47:13 GMT, Marcus Cato <cato@zoidberg.net>
wrote:
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:32:34 +0100, "Johann Schmidt" <js@lhotmail.com>wrote:Does that imply legal immigrants can just show their DL and thus vote,without being citizens?That's all I ever show to vote, and registration is just a card in themail.
And here noone is allowed to ask for any identification. They make
sure of that also so that many illegals can and do vote here.
I wonder how often non-citizens register and vote in the U.S. Any
legal resident can get a drivers license (and now illegal aliens
as well), and that is usually the only documentation necessary to
vote. Some states require a Social Security Number, but legal
residents also have those. I have never heard of any jurisdiction
requiring proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote. Of course,
registering to vote without being a U.S. citizen is a crime, but
how many people do it anyway?
supernav
12-18-2003, 11:14 PM
It's based on an honor system. With a HUGE disclaimer that if you're
ntoa USC and you vote and you're caught -- it'sa federal offense.
Now whether anyone in hisotry has ever been convicted of it -- i
don't know.
I don't know how they can convict -- i mean, keeping election results
with people's names goes against federal privacy election laws, and i
know those scanners only scan in the votes and not the name attached to
it. So i guess it's really "please don't vote if you're not a citizen"
type system.
-= nav =-
--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Carlos J Romero
12-23-2003, 11:43 PM
Illegal or not, as a gringo, you will be treated very well, actually!
So, what is your point?
Burp
12-24-2003, 12:18 AM
"Carlos J Romero" <romerocj@gte.net> wrote in message
news:psbGb.2011$UB3.35@nwrddc03.gnilink.net... Illegal or not, as a gringo, you will be treated very well, actually! So, what is your point?
Fool. The regulars here are well-aware of the gringos who have been kicked
off land purchased, tourists raped, murdered..... Go spew your self-delusion
or propaganda or whatever it is where the uneducated dwell.
Death to Mexico!!!!!!!!
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Graphic Queen
12-24-2003, 06:48 AM
On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 07:43:17 GMT, "Carlos J Romero" <romerocj@gte.net>
wrote:
Illegal or not, as a gringo, you will be treated very well, actually!So, what is your point?
LIAR!!!
Bistoury
12-26-2003, 12:09 PM
Ah but Queeny have already proven yourself to be a liar.
Graphic Queen wrote:
On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 07:43:17 GMT, "Carlos J Romero" <romerocj@gte.net> wrote:Illegal or not, as a gringo, you will be treated very well, actually!So, what is your point? LIAR!!!
Complete Labor
Law Poster for $24.95 from www.LaborLawCenter.com,
includes State, Federal, & OSHA posting requirements
