Mexico Is Gonna Sue Us.
 

On Fox News today, I have been hearing about how Mexico is going to sue the United States of America, if we put National Guard troops on the border.
The only thing I can say is what a crock!:turd:

Over posse comitatus?

My main TV news down here comes out of Alb., New Mexico. Naturally, NM is one of the states on the front lines of all this. The Alb reporter explained that in order to do a proper job, they would need 6,000 National Guard members to do the task. Currently, New Mexico has 70 guardsmen assigned to do duty with "La Migra." The NM officials expressed the hope that Guard units from "interior states" would be sent down to help out, and the NM officials are complaining that W. has not suggested how his plan can be implemented.

Hmmmm, then we'll just have to start watching Mexico [:bitching:] for activity indicating the development of WMD. I'm sure we could find some. I expect that the new government we establish for them wouldn't be interested in such lawsuits. :eyebrow:

They're getting billions of dollars a year sent to them by the illegals here...you don't expect them to give that up without a fight, do you?

Why? We couldn't find any in Iraq. What makes you think Dubya and his arrogant fucking crowd have learned anything?

For about the 1,000th time, people here in the US (legitimately) need to step back and ask "Quo bono," who benefits?

Try looking through this series of eye opening articles from the Palm Beach Post.

I am not advocating that ANYONE come here illegally, but the people who make the profit off the illegals are the ones who should be stopped. US companies can pay substandard wages, treat illegals as little better than slaves, use children in the fields, provide substandard or even lethal living conditions and no one cares because the people who are treated this way are illegals.

The shame is far more at the doorstep of corporate America and the US Congress than it is at the illegals'. Corporate American benefits from the flood of illegal workers. Corporate America doesn't care that the rest of us have to pick up the tax bill in social services costs or that the illegals themselves are often treated worse than the avergage US born dog.

If Congress were to make an enforce a law that any employer found to be using illegals would be fined $100,000/worker for the first offense and $500,000 per worker for every offense there after, there would be no illegal immigration problem. And you can bet that the people doing the hiring would become very good at recognizing counterfit documents.

The Soviet Union had an excellent method of preventing its people from escaping through its borders. It shot them or sent them to the Gulag. The US could shoot to kill any one crossing the border in New Mexico, Arizona or Cali and ask questions later. Don't tell me that this xenophobic country doesn't have the stomach for that.

A better solution would be to go after the employers as outlined above. Either way, the US does not have an illegal immigrant problem - it has a greed problem and a congress that answers to corporate America, not the people.

Cut them off, completely, not just from cash, from all help, technology, military; all forms of scientific, economic, intellectual, pharmaceutical, agricultural, you name it... no help.
Until they can pay back ALL they owe us and then pay for anything they ask for, after dropping any suit, NOTHING, EVER...no matter what.
Ingrates.
Also, don't just drop people off across the boarder, air-lift their ass all the way down to an island off the coast of the Yucatan Peninsula.

Sure, but make corporate America pay THEM back, first.

I love xenophobic, racist comments such as yours. Did you know that a significant percentage of illegals come from CANADA? (God knows why). Wanna drop them off in the Yucatan, AS WELL?

How is my comment racist?
Canadians come here and work without a visa for less than min. wage?
If we find illegal immigrants, fine, get rid of them, but the Canadian government is not actively trying to undermine our attempt to reclaim our nation.
Racist? I really want you to explain that one? Mexico is a nation not a race. LOL!

Oh, please. Being disingenuous does not suit you. :eyebrow:

Ironic, that post is the disingenuous one.
Every time someone in this illegal immigrant argument gets backed into a corner they yell racism.
I asked you specific questions. If you can't answer them, fine, slinging insults, just makes you look bad.

they are called ILLEGAL immigrants for a reason , they broke the law and should be delt with accordingly . Period.
What the hell is Mex going to sue us about , securing our borders !!!!
FUCK THEM !!!
if life was better down there then folks wouldn't HAVE to sneak accross the border just to make enough money to support their familys .
Hell we should sue THE MEX GUBMENT for back pay for takeing care of their citizens !!!!
Just my little rant , as this WHOLE issue Pisses me off !!!

Exactly, I was being sarcastic by implying that we still have a bungling administration to unleash that will find a way to do to Mexico's government what it did to Iraq's, if push comes to shove with Mexico's interference in our domestic security. :comfort:

Wait, if there is a lawsuit who is going to pay for the translators? Gotta say I agree with Mari. It wouldn't stop them all but until there is a good reason for them to come through legally the problem will persist. Doesn't sound like ANYBODY is happy with Bush's plan either.

Of course not. They took the Alamo; then, they lost the Alamo. I expect history to repeat itself at new level. If Mexicans could fight, they would have something more recent to celebrate than Cinco de Mayo. My sympathy goes out to the US casualties of the battles; but, I'm confident we will win the undeclared war on illegals. It simply isn't going to happen under this administration. It might not even have been an issue with this administration if we could still afford to support the illegals; but, we no longer can. We've blown too many of our resources on botched wars.

"Well, there's your problem right there!"

I've been searching for news on this supposed lawsuit and managed to find this goldmine of information in a Fox News article. (Really, try reading this article and see if it makes any sense to you. Mexican lawsuit! More buzzards than people! Texas speed limit shocks people from the east coast! What the hell was Hill smoking when she wrote this? They call this news?)

Well, I did manage to find this, too.

So therealitycheck.org is where this rumor is coming from? Someone from this slightly slanted website is suggesting that Mexico could file a lawsuit? Can we get some more information than that? Ah, here we go:

Really? Can we get a name of that representative? A quote, maybe? Whatever.

The ACLU, as I understand it, is simply trying to keep the administration in check for violating the posse comitatus act for not getting congressional approval, not file a lawsuit on behalf of Mexico. But, hey, it isn't as if there isn't precedent for the president bypassing congress on anything, lately... :rolleyes:

Okay, fine. Mexico sues us. The judge takes one look at the case and throws it out of court. Everyone goes home. The end.

Depends where it's heard and by whom. I couldn't swear to you that there isn't a judge somewhere who wouldn't listen to arguments that commitatus applies, or that the illegals are entitled to only have to go up against the unassisted Border Patrol or some such nonsense....especially given some of the whiney "they've earned the right to be citizens by sucessufully flouting the law for so long" arguments offered in all apparent seriousness by some in this debate.

The little thing that everyone forgets is that most of our national guard units are being kept busy in a place caled Iraq. Once again, the New Mexico governor said that it would take 6,000 guard members just to patrol the border of Mexico/New Mexico alone. New Mexico currently has 70 guard members who are are working down at the border. The other guardsmen are engaged elsewhere. Right now the entire thing is a moot point.

I agree it's unlikely to have much impact. To my mind the significance of this story is that Mexico actually feels entitled to sue over it.

Why can't we just move toward securing our borders and enforcing the laws that we already have?

*Anything* the US does is racist, or imperialist, or wrong somehow unless we are kowtowing and pandering to everyone else. We have a right to police our borders. People who are legally entitled to go back and forth will do so. People who aren't, won't. Anyone ever tried to get into Mexico illegally? Are they pretty much cool with that?

And playing the race card is just wrong. How is this racist? How is it wrong to enforce immigration laws, especially those which are the least restrictive in the world anyway? How in the world can anyone make a legal case against securing your own borders?

Patrick, it FEELS racist to me when 6% of illegals come from Canada, yet no vigilantes are patroling the Canadian border the way they are the Mexican one. It FEELS racist to me when during the depression era, there was a "repatration" act that rounded up AMERICANS born in the US of Mexican ancestry and illegally sent them "back" to Mexico.

It FEELS racist to me when the legal authorities go after the Mexican illegals but not the upper/middle class executives of US hotel chains and agribusiness who illegally hire these workers knowing full well that they have no green cards.

I have a friend I have mentioned before - he a Mohican Indian who grew up in Canada, has dual US/Canadian citizenship and served in the US military for 7 years. He tells me that every time he goes home, he had no problem with the CANADIAN officials at the border, it is the AMERICAN officals on his return trip that make his crossing miserable. He drives a high end sports car. Last crossing back to the US, the US border officials stopped him and said, "That sure looks like an expensive car. How'd you get it?" "I bought it" my friend replied. "We'll need to do some checking" was the response. My friend waited 5 hours while they desperately tried to prove his was a stolen car. Finally, they had to concede that the car appeared to be legally his and he was allowed back into the US. This FEELS racist to me.

Take a look at the following web site and tell me if the whole thing doesn't FEEL racist to you.

I'm sure glad we don't run the legal system based on "feelings". Just possibly some of the difference between how things "feel" at the two borders has to do with the ways that they are and are not abused or violated. If only 6% of th eillegals are coning through from the north, I can certainly understand why the focus is on the 94% coming though from the south.

Attributing that to "racism" seems disingenuous, y'know? It "feels" that way to me, anyway...

Oh...by the way...the high-end Mohican sports car? Where was it registered? Can we assume your friend had the registration papers for it? Five hours to check the ownership of a US- or Canadian-registered vehicle certainly seems excessive; one has to wonder if there aren't some unusual circumstances involved.

Just a "feeling"...

Could have fooled me. The sudden demand for new laws that comes from the American public seems to be based entirely on a newly fueled passion for a problem that has existed for years but only recently hyped up by distraction-oriented politics.

I don't think this was sparked by racism, mind you, but it is undoubtedly an element today.

Well, that's your feeling. :-)

If you think this is a new issue, consider the possibility that it's only new to you.

Perceptions on many matters is heavily colored by what elements of the culture you interact with, and if you spend a lot of time with people and media where anything negative about hispanics is silenced with the cry of "RACISM!", it might take a while for concern about the issue to filter through the self-censorship.

Also, not every concern that isn't on your personal political agenda qualifies as a "distraction".

Actually, according to a long-haul trucker friend who travels to the 49 contiguous states and Canada, the border between Canada and the US was tightened drastically following the 9/11 attacks. Whereas he was formerly able to quickly and easily pass both ways, the crossing is much tighter now. After 9/11, there was some speculation (now believed to be false) that some of the bombers slipped into the US from Canada because the border is so unguarded.

My trucker friend had to obtain a special ID card which involved a full background check so that he didn't spend hours at the border coming back into the US (the program is called F.A.S.T. - Free And Secure Trade). For a while there, before he got his card, it was ridiculous as he would sometimes cross back and forth several times a day. I listened to long cell phone rants about it :( .

The possibility even exists that passports or special ID cards will be required of everyone as of 2008 in order to visit either country. http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jh...s/domesticNews



Stormie

Or, it could be that I don't watch sensationlist 24-hour news programs or listen to AM radio talk shows enough to be as informed as the guy that had "deport these mexican invaders NOW!" lettered on the back of his pickup truck.

Of course they aren't. This now highly emotional topic would never have been suddenly introduced to the American public as the #1 priority on the congressional agenda to take our attention away from middle eastern security issues or plummeting presidential approval ratings in order to give some republic party members some distance from their failings of their head man. It is important that we pay attention to this now. Not in 1998, not in 2000, and not even in 2001 when border security was a major issue following terrorist attacks. Illegal immigration is a priority in 2006, just because!

So...which is the bigger problem? Taking race completely out of it, which border is the bigger problem? I think it makes at least a little sense to focus on the biggest problem which happens to be our Southern border, which happens to be crossed by Hispanics. We don't need to secure our Southern border *because* they are Hispanics, we need to secure our Southern border because it is laughably porous. If millions of Hispanics can get across it, so can a couple of dozen malcontents with a suitcase full of plutonium. If nothing else, they'll be lost in the shuffle.

As to no enforcement of business, well, that's changing, too. In fact, I was just ordered by my corporate masters to review all my I-9 procedures and files and identify anyone who isn't legally qualified to work in the US. This is patently not racially biased, because there are people of foreign origin who work here who are *going* to have a problem, and people of foreign origin who aren't.

Is this whole mess an economic issue? Yup. Is it a security issue? Damn straight. But a racial issue? Hell, no.

What vigilantes are you referring to? I must have missed something.

Mari is referring to The Minutemen, the newish group of self-appointed border patrollers whose stated purpose is to help stop illegal immigration.

I'm pretty sure they have a web presence where you can read and join up, if memory serves. I'm not a fan of vigilantism, for the record, but then I'm not sure these guys have actually broken a law yet, so the jury is out on what they are doing.

Maybe. But who's dealing in stereotypes now? Would that be "racist" if you werent talking about white people? Surely it's as much a caricature as "the Frito Bandito"

Do you beleive you have fairly described the people who care about this issue and have for quite some time? Was it on your radar before it got Congressional attention and the illegals (and the US citizens who have found steady employment by NGOs serving them, themselves a not-inconsiderable political force) began demonstrating? Or were you (and they) content to let it languish until it looked like something might actually happen to jeopardize the status quo?

You can apply. They're quite selective about who they will allow to join.

Well. you can't get NOTHIN by me, I FEEL there is a mild hint of sarcasm in your question. :p My friend retired from the US army with the rank of Sargent, is a Microsoft certified programmer and always keeps his car plates and registration (in the US) up to date. The US officials claimed the delay was due to "computer" problems. While he waited, he counted the number of white folks with high end automobiles who were waved right on through. He stopped counting at around 200 or so.

Sounds like he should have filed a complaint. Of course, I would have given him a hard time just for being an MCSE/MCSP or whatever. Come to think of it. I do still hold a MSFT certification myself. I'm a Product Specialist in Windows V3.1. :-)

It seems the Minutemen site is seeking volunteers for operations in Vermont and Minnesota...so apparently it's not true that there's nobody on the Canadian border.

Only if they were actually doing something for those five hours.

That's funny -- I don't remember mentioning anything about anyone's race. But, stereotypical thinking is strange that way, isn't it?

No, I don't think I've been fair in describing the people who have cared about this issue for sometime because I'm not aware of anyone other than the local produce companies in my area who have held an interest in it beyond the previous two months. This issue hit my radar the moment people here, and elsewhere, began debating it. Prior to that, I had heard very little concern about illegal immigrants and there was certainly no uproar/protests/anger until it hit the mainstream media. This doesn't mean that I find it to be a non-issue -- I do find it something to be concerned about, but I question the timing and genuine purpose behind it. For an crime that has always been illegal, I find it suspect that there is more interest in the immigrants themselves rather than the corrupt law enforcement agencies that have turned a blind eye to it. Does that not "feel" strange to you?

I'm sure glad we don't run the legal system based on politics.

I don't think there's anything suspect about being interested in criminals when the subject is crime. Which law enforcement agencies do you believe to have "turned a blind eye to it" out of corruption?

Exactly. It would really help with the debate if everyone stopped, took a breath, removed thier emotions from it (including any ideas about race), and just look at this issue for what it is. A crime.

We have laws. There is a reason for them, and until the laws either changed or are abolished, then the laws need to be enforced. Obviously, with an estimated half a million people crossing illegally every year, the job of enforcing our immigration laws is very, very difficult, however, they still need to be enforced to the best of our abilities and to the extent provided by our laws.

Now, you may not like those laws, and that is perfectly fine. Its great that in the US you can take whatever point on an issue and exercise your rights to say whatever you want about it. But if you don't like those laws, it doesn't mean that you can just disregard them, or break them, or help people break them. Because at the end of the day, it is still the law and illegals, wherever they are from and whatever race they are, are still breaking our laws and disrespecting our country. So if you don't like the laws, do something about it. If you don't like it, get em changed, or try to at least. Just do it legally. Take some notes of how civil rights leaders used our legal system to get changes that favored them. Do it peacefully, do it legally, and do it respectfully. But until that time comes, you better damn well expect that our law enforcement, our national guard, our immigration service will continue to enforce our existing laws the best they can!

It’s called the Federal government. Even the State of Oklahoma had to start an Enron prosecution before Feds would prosecute. Or AIG - the NY State Attorney General had to prosecute because Feds would not investigate major campaign fund contributors. As a result of that investigation, we later learned AIG management even pilfered a trust fund setup by AIG’s founder just to enrich themselves.

Where are so many that intentionally 'fixed' CA's (West Coast) energy markets only for self serving profits? Not prosecuted and not even investigated. Where is the government following many $billions siphoned off by keeping power plants off line? Where is the prosecution of those people?

Where is prosecution of 1st Energy who intentionally - by repeated negligence - created a NE electric blackout?

Or who outted a CIA agent? So they throw in a fall guy - deja vue Watergate?

Or torture and international kidnapping approved of that the highest levels of government. Even Gen Miller, who is central to outright torture, is trying to retire early - probably to save any pension - before the criminals of one political party get removed from power.

Do you think Ambramoff is the whole K street corruption? Are you that naive to believe only Ambramoff and his closest friends were doing it all?

Funny. Same people who demand blind and total prosecution of immigration laws don't want those big criminal prosecuted. Show me where MaggieL strongly demands those above criminal actions be prosecuted. Why does she, instead, want to punish little people? Nazi - sorry - Republican/Democratic party member?

Is it criminal when a president goes off on a campaign fund raising trip to CA and to a birthday party in AZ for John McCain as New Orleans is attacked (as predicted) by Katrina?

It’s rather silly to blame immigrants for doing what is necessary when those who are criminally negligent at the highest levels of government and industry are not prosecuted (unless public outrage causes change). Laws currently written make illegal immigration necessary. Ameircan efforts even to undermine the Doha round of GATT also make illegal immigration necessary. Why do so many here ignore reasons why - and instead demand a Nazi like attitude only to blind law enforcement?

Those who have a political agenda and must avoid all underlying reasons, then blindly demand all laws be enforced. Fine. Laws say mandatory 5 years for marijuana possession. Another law we also should be prosecuting as if America was under terrorist attack. Oh. More Americans are in jail (by percentage) than any other nation in the world - mostly for drug possession. Therefore there are no jail space left for illegal immigrants. Just another little fact completely avoided by those who advocate blind Nazi justice. The purpose of American laws that make illegal immigration necessary and that make immigration laws so difficult to enforce are the problem. Therefore we must even blindly enforce immigration laws with jack booted agendas, but ignore one of the biggest cash crops from many states? Why a double standard? Thinking with a head hanging between the legs rather than use the one between shoulders?

A law is not just enforced because one has a 'big dic' and self serving political agenda. A law is enforced because it has a purpose. Even in this discussion are people blinded by propaganda so as to forget why we are more concerned with ‘purpose of the law’. Illegal immigration does not hurt America. And illegal immigration is due to other laws and political leaders who get rich from such laws that violate American principles.

Notice not once does MaggieL, et al discuss massive and anti-free trade laws that subsidize sugar, corn, cotton, etc. She, et al is not honest if she does not include WHY illegal immigration exists.

Most posters here have become so myopic as to not even discuss why America created its own illegal immigration problem. Blame others. Myopia and decisions based only in emotion is easier.

Previously, we even enrich lawyers at the expense of legal immigrants. Thousands of dollars to lawyers just to fill out forms intentionally written to require lawyers. Illegal immigrants are only a symptom. Why do what a scam auto mechanic does – fix symptoms – not fix the problem? A problem is demonstrated right here where MaggieL, et al did not start and finish by defining reasons for illegal immigration.

American leadership even advocates torture and kiddnapping - and denies they are even doing it. Therein lies the same reasons for illegal immigration - and corruption of CA energy markets, and pension fraud in GM, and K Street, ...

Well at least PA voters finally got balls. In a primary, they did something that PA voters never do. Never.voted out two most powerful They voted out incumbants. IOW they finally voted for America rather than a ‘nazi like’ allegiance to party power brokers. Those same party power brokers (and their mouthpiece Rush Limbaugh) even have many here avoiding why illegal immigration exists.

Are you a loyal communist (,et al) party member. Zieg Heil. You demand blind enforcement of laws rather than first learn why laws are broken and defective? This thread is full of posters who refuse to deal with the problem – a classic example of “85% of all problems are …”

Let's see. Anyone working a minimum wage (or less) job will end up in those Norristown welfare and hospital doles. But since most who do those jobs are illegals, then clearly the illegal immigrants are the problem. Kick out the illegals, and those same doles are going to other legal or illegal low wage employees. So why do we cover them? Illegal or legal - they are all the same future of America. Just another little fact ignored when citing who gets public assistance in Norristown - or how political agenda brokers spin the truth. All that money in Norristown for the working poor is what America always did. Why? That poor are some of the greatest future Americans. Notice how spin forgot to mention that important fact - who are some of America's most productive future citizens? Not long time legal Americans - who do the most complaining about immigrants.

Where do so many complaints about illegal immigration come from? From those who are America's least productive - those who are well beyond third generation immigrant. They don't look like us, don't sound like us; therefore must be evil. Deport them. Which head is being used to promote a political agenda? That cannot happen. Emotions are the only reason why this illegal immigration 'debate' exists. Logics, such as president who perverts international trade - making illegal immigration more necessary - just never gets discussed by those who avoid logic - the reasons why.

Ah, those guys. Should have known. Thanks for clearing that up.

We can always count on tw for a clear, succinct, dispassionate summary of...whatever it is he's always on about.

Congratulations...surely that is the most mixed metaphor of the year.

Short memory? :-)

Another thing is that the Rep party has brought up this debate at a most interesting nexus in our history. Someone (Kit?) has already made allusion to this. Lets deflect criticism from the war in Iraq; lets give the Rep's an issue to disassociate their affiliation with a president who is taking a nose dive in the polls. I know! Illegals! But God, forbid, lets not involve any Rep party contributors to war chests. As usual, we'll go after the group of law breakers least able to defend themselves; not the group of law breakers who sponsor all those expensive election year ads on TV and radio.

Hello?:eyebrow:

Your numbers from Norristown tell us anything logical? Those numbers demonstrate how dependant all low wage workers are on social services. Those numbers demonstrate how much government invests in the future of America. Those numbers tell us nothing about illegal immigrants getting a free ride. And yet you tried to make that claim.

Facts - dispationate and without emotion - repeatedly go right back to the source - the problem. Like it or not, 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management. But those who love a scumbag president instead say there is plenty of blame to go around. Are you one of the latter?

You have the option of defending reasons for massive illegal immigration - laws that make such immigration necessary. Instead you post: Is that suppose to be logic - or emotion charged insult? You have posted diatrbes based in emotion. Now is time to be logical.

Cited are repeated examples of how government creates a need for illegal immigrants. Should I infer from your response that you cannot be logical - cannot dispute reasons for illegal immigration? Or that you simply don't want to address the problem - because it imlies Rush Limbaugh lies?

Numerous logical interpretations of your posts exist. Which one should we be using? Clearly you are diverting criticism of a president with long history of undermining America. Should we assume you are defending a scum bag president? Or do you have no defense of those who created this illegal immigration problem? All logical questions begging a "clear, succinct, dispassionate" reply. Why does this illegal immigration exist? Do we blame the symptoms - too many illegal immigrants?

Where do you once define a reason for problems? I did. So I am to be insulted? Or can you post a logical reply. Where is this reason(s) for illegal immigrants? So they can live off the citizens of Norristown?

Maggiel - you have long posted emotionally charged accusations of illegal immigrants. I have provided reasons why the problem exists and now challenge you to do same. Why does this problem exists- which should be easy if opinions were based in logical, dispassionate facts.

Is your idea of "being logical" demonstrated by your last two posts? Because they sure look like "diatribes based in emotion" to me. Or is this just a demonstration of your "Read? I only know how to write" tag line?

In fact, I think Bush's position on this issue sucks rocks. But then, if you'd read what I've already written extensively on the subject (instead of whipping yourself into a blind raging froth about Bush...again), you'd know that.

Small misinterpretation on my part.

I don't think this is based on racism, but I do hear a lot of comments suggesting it.

I'm still waiting for someone to actually suggest expansion of the INS beyond the mere 2,000 agents they have.

I've crossed the Canadian border many, many times. Never a problem going in, always a problem coming back.
I want all the illegal Nigerians out of MA so I guess I'm racist.:rolleyes:

The illegal immigration issue has grated on a lot of people for a very long time. So it's not surprising when it finally comes to the spotlight, so many people are eager to jump in with their long ignored opinion.

I asked a simple question. It is asked again because you (and others) never answered that question. Why does this illegal immigration problem exist? Are they just flocking across the border because we offer free hospital care in Norristown? Or does the problem exist for same reasons that created so much violence and smuggling even during prohibition? Arguing about symptoms - the numbers of illegals - tells us nothing. Why must they come to America? Why do we not, instead, employee (and get rich) so many productive people where they live?

Why must so many risk so much to come to America? A question not just asked of MaggieL. A qustion to everyone who has been posting only about symptoms of a problem called massive illegal immigration. A question asked because so many posts don't even consider that question. So many want to cure symptoms instead of first asking the real question - why must they come here in such great numbers?

Just reposting the same question bluntly - and without insults. MaggieL, you were never insulted. Just challenged to post what you have not posted. Same question posted - three times now - without a logical reply. Why must they come here in such great numbers?

You obviously have not spent any time in FL or Southern CA, ever.
Because people are not willing to take care of their own nation. They are not willing to buckle-down and do what they have to do the fix their own nation like we did during our hard times... they abandon theirs instead.

In summary: because as criminals here they get a vastly better deal than they can legally in their homeland. Medical care is just a part of that.

My guess its *that* is because their homeland is completely in the hands of thugs and crooks, and ours largely is not. Mexico is awash in oil, yet they bring in more money ($20 billion last year in reimttances) pimping their citizens here under the table to do yardwork, clean offices and pick crops at bargain basement rates.

Your question was answered long ago in the other two or three immigration threads. Your willingness to harrangue endlessly trying to hijack every thread to your favorite topic doesn't create an obligation on the part of others to respond. Have a nice day.

Now we're cracking down. (but it was on the US side headed into Mexico? Wha?)

We get more than Canadians coming across the border from the North.

About a month ago, US Customs caught 2 illegal aliens from Guyana as they were smuggled in by a Trinidadian truck driver in his trailer.

But a high dose of Gamma radiation was able to see them through the sides of his trailer. I wonder what their odds of getting cancer will be?

Handy safety tip:

If you try to run over an armed cop with your SUV, he may shoot you.

Handy safety tip #2:

If you hide in cargo, you may be X-rayed.

You obviously don't know me. :p

Anyways, back to the point of the thread... if Mexico thinks they can sue the US for enforcing our immigration laws and protecting our borders, then to that I say "Bring it on"

I mean, the implications in the fact would be huge. The US has the right, and the responsibility to enforce our immigration laws and protect our borders. We haven't done anything wrong in doing so, we're just making it more difficult for immigrants to come here as criminals. Any court should see that we, as a soverign nation, can and must do what must be done, within the limits of the law, to protect ourselves and our borders. With that in mind the lawsuit should be thrown out, but assuming it isn't then the next logical assumption would be that we are only taking a reasonable response to Mexico's lack of responsibility to stem the tide of illegal immigrants. If Mexico enforced their borders and acted to create jobs in their own country, there would be less incentive for immigrants to come here illegally.