Mexican border, next Canada

and heres a subject you should look at closser to home eh?
AA country
for the taking

Canada could stop
the migrant onslaught
but chooses not to

by KELLY JANE TORRANCE
with KEVIN STEEL PAUL RUDAN/CAMPBELL RIVER MIRROR
Refugees
Chinese migrants off Vancouver Island: If you coddle them, they will come.

Jean Chretien has made it official. Interviewed last week at the APEC summit in New Zealand, the prime minister declared that a reform of immigration law to deal with the Chinese migrant crisis was out of the question. He declared that Canada's "first come, first served" refugee policy was "the law." What he did not say, however, is that Parliament may change the law or that other countries whose refugee law is similar to Canada's have somehow managed to meet migrant fleets without running up the white flag.

The Reform Party accused Mr. Chretien of "abandoning" his immigration minister, but perhaps he was trying to end her humiliation. Ms. Caplan told reporters August 31 worsening weather would halt the migrant fleet, at least for the year. Even as she spoke, however, the Coast Guard was meeting the third refugee boat to arrive since June 20.

A week later, in a September 9 speech to the Canada


http://www.axionet.com/bcreport/web/990927f.html


plus read this law on the cuban prob you need to read b4 you embaras yourself some more

This new accord alleviated the problem somewhat but it did not go far enough, as it still entices Cubans to leave the island illegally. For although any Cuban now caught by the US coastguard is returned to Cuba, it still grants Cubans permanent residency if they touch US soil. So although the numbers have gone down drastically, Cubans still take the gamble, risk their lives because they know if they touch US soil they will have all the benefits afforded to them.

Lastly, for all those who doubt that US immigration laws as they pertain to Cuba is just another dirty trick on the part of Washington, ponder on the following: if the US has an immigration law and a mechanism that allow Cubans to leave the island legally why then does the US have another policy enticing people to leave illegally? You either allow legal immigration or you don't. You cannot have it both ways. But remember the plight of the boat people is the cheapest and the most effective propaganda tool that the extreme right wing in Washington and the reactionary Miami Cuban mob has.


http://cubasocialista.com/adjust1.htm

long read but we have laws to follow maybe you dont beleave in the law we i do

the Mariel Boatlift.
BBC headline:
Mariel refugees' long voyage to success
The Mariel boatlift brought chaos to Miami, but 25 years on, the Cuban immigrants' legacy is largely positive.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4443985.stm

Much food for thought, especially on perceptions of strangers.
Regards, Doug in New Mexico

you get to pick and choose which laws to obey? I do believe that earns you a Go To Jail card!

In East Berlin it was illegal to try to get over the border to West Berlin.I think those who turned their back to the law did the right thing.But I guess you believe that they should have obeyed nicely and just shut up about the problems,as the law said.

the US. No one is trying to make citizens into prisoners here unless they break the law.

Is Mexico a communist regime? Do the illegals need asylum from Mexico repression? LOL! Was this all you could come up with???

or you'd get shot. But West Germany had no law saying you couldn't escape TO the West. The two situations are not similar at all.

but unlawfull entery dosnt give you anything.

i guess you dont beleave in the law

but for some reason I though you were illegaly immigrated to the US.

As you have no way of knowing who here is or is not a Native American, or a descendant thereof, you may very well be wrong.

Your use of "you" in lieu of "we" was interesting.

Regardless, there are large populations of your interpretation of "illegal immigrants" , and descendants thereof, in countries both North and South of the US - Spanish, French, etc.

Angeline


click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

mean the people who, historically, were called Indians. If I'm not native to America, then neither were they. The last I heard, it is believed that they arrived via Siberia. So their forebears may have arrived sooner than mine, but they are no more American than I am.

my grandparents came her from russia/hungary/germany
they learned to speak english because they were proud to be legal citizens.
not see there language on forms.

entering legally? Or does it escape you that we DO have immigration laws?

... it suffered from those who abused it.

Angeline


click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

With the rest of man's promises.

I recently learned a sidelight on the Thos. Jefferson-Sally Hemings situation.
Jefferson catches flak for being a "freedom fighter" who owned slaves. But Fawn Brodie, his famous biographer, wrote in American Heritage magazine some years ago that he fully intended to free all of Monticello's slaves on or just before his death. (Some, especially Sally's children and grandchildren, had found it easy to escape by a simple route which the intelligent Jefferson never managed to plug(!))
So why didn't the Great Man do the liberty thing? Simple: He ran out of money. Monticello had been declining, and the place would have been almost valueless (in that place and time) without its 'complement' of slaves.
Regards, Doug in New Mexico

Though I would not make it a requirement that they eventually seek citizenship. That should be a personal choice.

I think what's needed, and what we are edging toward, is more of a "guest worker" status like some European countries have. Illegal immigration would be more strictly curtailed but people who qualify and join the program could come here to work, pay taxes, etc. and have benefits as well. This should relieve the pressure somewhat and benefit both US and Mexico.

I realize that it's not a perfect idea. There would be all kinds of opportunity for fraud and abuse, but I do think it would be better than what we have now.

Should they be abale to stay as long as they want to?You don't throw out guests very often in your own home,do you?Especially not if you have invited them yourself.

I am sure there would have to be rules as to how long and under what circumstances people would stay.

And, yeah, if houseguests overstayed I would ask them politely to leave. Not that anyone I know would be so rude. Usually we want them to stay longer.

cockroaches you let 1 in next thing you no 100 more.

Aren't you slightly over the border here?I saw the movie Hotel Rwanda the other day and the Hutus called the Tutsies cockroaches too.That was considered rude.It's rude even if it comes out of your keyboard Mark.

and have a good day watch out for the raid you mite be next

I have bitten my tounge - so to speak - about some of the things you write, I often thought about whether your comments derive from ignorance, spiteful anger or some vile attempt at humor. I will draw the line here as I cannot let this pass. You are crossing the line as posted earlier and you need to check your attitude at the door when you arrive. One finds it impossible to have a dialect with you if you disagree with the other. Many people here can and do disagree with each other without decending to name calling and other hurtful speech. Call me what you will Mark, I take offence to you sometimes and thought you should know this.

My prayers to you,

Don Erickson
California Republican and very proud of it!

but i stand by what i said you don't like it to bad.

there like cockroaches we need to tighten our boarders.
if they have nothing to hide let them enter legally, or not at all.

my grandparents came here landed at the statue of liberty entered the USA all legal.
what gives these people the right to break the law?

so we need build wall keep them out send the ones here now that are breaking the law back.