Thread: AZ- Plan would put water stations near trails used by immigr

I am glad I finally have a straightforward answer: You believe migrants should be allowed to die if they get in distress crossing the border, because they might be among the 10% who will commit another crime.

In my question. "Should we be compelled to allow these people to die?", the antecedent of "we" is "Water Station". You may be comfortable allowing people to die -- whether they are among the 10% who will commit other crimes or not -- but you want to compel me to do so. I have not asked for your material or financial support of my mission. Some AZ groups have received small government grants for their work. Feel free to protest to the agencies that approve the grants.

As I have said before, I am in favor of anything that might save lives in the desert. That includes, but is not limited to, increased patrols and manpower.

Now I am not sure why it is so vitally important for you to correct the terminology people use when they refer to the people who cross the border. "Migrant" has been used for a good many years to refer to people who cross with or without the sanction of the receiving country. The term "illegal aliens" has become so pejorative as to be a de facto ethnic slur. "Illegal invader" is more so. I use the term "undocumented immigrant" because it is neutral and factual. I don't bother correcting people who choose other terminology.

We fundamentally disagree about whether one American life is worth more than ten Mexican lives. You think so; I do not. That's why we have a First Amendment.

The statistics you quote are very suspect. Just the fact that they have been repeated a thousand times does not make them any more accurate. Some of the numbers are based on looking at people with Hispanic names and assuming all are undocumented. Other lists do not distinguish between legal and illegal "resident aliens". Finally, the Manhattan Institute is a political advocacy group and not a credible source.

I have, in fact, read 1070, rather than a summary of it. I recommend you read section 1051-B which states that as part of "any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency ... where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made to determine the immigration status of the person." This "person" is not limited to suspects; it includes complainants and witnesses. We would have thought that "police officers have better things to do than stop people who are simply walking down the street," but then we were subjected to the hate-filled rhetoric of Maricopa County's sheriff.

Section 13-1509 makes status violations independently enforceable. Yes, deputies will stop people walking down the street. Dark-skinned citizens will be pulled over and asked for identification.

"Above all however, is the fact that if your [sic] doing nothing wrong, then you have nothing to fear." You do not believe immigration raids will take place? They are taking place now, without the blessing of 1070.

The Constitutional challenges come from the independent enforceability of the law and the usurpation of federal authority. They will get this piece of crap law thrown out.

Other than your bit of silliness at the end of your last post, I have enjoyed our mostly respectful exchange. I wish you well as we end our discussion.

I am glad I finally have a straightforward answer: You believe migrants should be allowed to die if they get in distress crossing the border, because they might be among the 10% who will commit another crime.

Why do you choose to complete disregard this part of my answer:

I guess you missed ( or have chosen to disregard it) the part when I said that crossing the desert is inherently dangerous and those who engage in this reckless and irresponsible ( as well as illegal) act, must face the consequences of their actions -whatever they may ultimately turn out to be.

I cannot even respond to the rest of your rhetoric because it's obvious you view everything through race colored glasses, such as:

But then we were subjected to the hate-filled rhetoric of Maricopa County's sheriff.

What the heck are you talking about? Seriously. Please give me an example of this so called hate-filled rhetoric! The fact that you would consider anything this Sheriff has said as hate-filled rhetoric, demonstrates how skewed your sense of perspective is.

You do not believe immigration raids will take place? They are taking place now, without the blessing of 1070.

I didn't realize that immigration raids were illegal! I can only hope that even more immigration raids will be conducted! Again, I believe that illegal invaders have no rights in this country. They only have the right to be deported.

Most reasonable people can see the majority of your throughts and arguments are premised on racism and how everything to do with enforcement of our immigration laws is an issue against brown people.

It's also obvious that you don't care much for our borders or immigration laws. Is there any immigration law you agree with?

Good luck with your efforts and stay safe....

I guess you missed ( or have chosen to disregard it) the part when I said that crossing the desert is inherently dangerous and those who engage in this reckless and irresponsible ( as well as illegal) act, must face the consequences of their actions -whatever they may ultimately turn out to be

.

I did not think it warranted response, as it is essentially a summary of the questions we were batting around. (1) We agree that the desert is hot and dry. (2) We disagree as to whether one should leave water for passersby who may otherwise suffer the ill effects of the heat and dryness.

I have a story which is, I think, illustrative of the work we do. It is a wonderful analogy and has the added benefit of being true.

In 1975, in an old ghost town at or near Tumco in Imperial County, three young men were exploring the ruins of buildings and the old mine tailings. As they were strolling about collecting glass and metal relics of the past, they came to a cable stretched across a restricted area, on which hung a sign that said something like, “Danger. Do not go beyond this point.â€

Originally Posted by WaterStationPrez

Interesting "THEORY", have you filed in every state in which you collect donations to your 5013c ORG? If not you may be in violation of Tax Fraud! You need to check with every state inwhich you actually plan on getting donations or have gotten donations from!

This is really silly. What are you suggesting has to be "filed in every state"? We file an IRS 990 and state FTB and DOS forms. That covers us regardless of the source of our donations.

[quote:1ugn8u79]BTW, look over your shoulder, someone may be also telling the IRS about your political involvement! Which is a REALLY BIG NO NO for a 5013c! Ouch!

To what political involvement are you referring? We have never supported or opposed a candidate and we spend no time lobbying. And your writing the accusation IN ALL CAPS doesn't change reality.

Again, after a decade of operating a humanitarian non-profit, we've got a pretty good handle on requirements and limitations.[/quote:1ugn8u79]

Really! then you need to check out each states requiremnt for donations, just filing a 990,FTB and DOS just doesn't cut it.

http://www.multistatefiling.org/ incase you need more information.

Really! then you need to check out each states [sic] requiremnt [sic] for donations, just filing a 990,FTB and DOS just doesn't cut it.

How touching of you to look out for our well being like this, even if you don't seem to have a clue what "FTB" and "DOS" mean. Rest assured that I have been told that we are fine with the Charleston Principles.

Seriously. Please give me an example of this so called hate-filled rhetoric! The fact that you would consider anything this Sheriff has said as hate-filled rhetoric, demonstrates how skewed your sense of perspective is.

This certainly seems to qualify:

"All these people that come over, they could come with disease. There's no control, no health checks or anything. They check fruits and vegetables. How come they don't check people? No one talks about that! They're all dirty."

(Sheriff Joe Arpaio)

Originally Posted by WaterStationPrez

Seriously. Please give me an example of this so called hate-filled rhetoric! The fact that you would consider anything this Sheriff has said as hate-filled rhetoric, demonstrates how skewed your sense of perspective is.

This certainly seems to qualify:

"All these people that come over, they could come with disease. There's no control, no health checks or anything. They check fruits and vegetables. How come they don't check people? No one talks about that! They're all dirty."

(Sheriff Joe Arpaio)

That quote was taken out of context. Joe was talking about the desert and all of the people walking through it and the mess they left.

"All these people that come over, they could come with disease. There's no control, no health checks or anything. They check fruits and vegetables. How come they don't check people? No one talks about that! They're all dirty. I sent out 200 inmates into the desert, they picked up 18 tons of garbage that they bring in -- the baby diapers and all that. Where's everybody who wants to preserve the desert?"

Don't bother Arizona. You would only be condemned and ridiculed by other states and cities that prefer attacking your helpful safety measures.

Don't bother trying to change Waterstation Prez Ben's mind because he knows thousands upon thousands of Americans have been murdered,raped (including babies),maimed,robbed but he does not care.

www.ojjpac.org/memorial.asp

www.VOIAC.org/victims.php

His focus is on making sure IA's make it safely to our towns so they can perpetrate crimes against USA Citizens..

BTW Ben your 10% criminal IA theory is pure BS.

After all the safety of IA's who know the danger of trying to sneak across our borders 5,500 deaths over many years are more important to traitor Ben then the THOUSANDS of innocent USA citizen deaths EVERY YEAR at the hands of Bens IA's.

Don't bother trying to change Waterstation Prez Ben's mind because he knows thousands upon thousands of Americans have been murdered,raped (including babies),maimed, robbed but he does not care.

And here we were doing so well, having a respectful debate without name calling and silly accusations. You should learn to have a civil discussion; it is much more satisfying.

His focus is on making sure IA's make it safely to our towns so they can perpetrate crimes against USA Citizens..

Our focus is on attempting to reduce the number of people who die in the desert.

BTW Ben your 10% criminal IA theory is pure BS.

BTW, our 10% figure comes from the Border Patrol from a DHS document from 2007. I don’t believe DHS has published any more recent figures; if so, I haven't seen them.

After all the safety of IA's who know the danger of trying to sneak across our borders 5,500 deaths over many years are more important to traitor Ben then [sic] the THOUSANDS of innocent USA citizen deaths EVERY YEAR at the hands of Bens IA's

(Happily, I have taught for long enough to be able to parse meaning even from sentences like this one.)

Be careful about false attribution, unsupported claims and name-calling. They are fallacies that make you look like an idiot.

I don’t know whether you are an idiot or not; however, impugning a person's character and patriotism based on a political disagreement certainly gives others cause to wonder. In short, you make statements about which you could not possibly have any knowledge. This is not a case of res ipsa loquitor, so you shouldn't pretend it is.

Intelligent, civilized people realize that other intelligent, civilized people may hold political, social, and religious views different than their own, with no more reflection on their integrity than if the differences were in music, tie color, or preferring the mountains to the seashore. Until you learn it, perhaps you sould pretend.