Warning: file_get_contents(/home/www/settings/mirror_forum_db_enable_sql): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /var/www/html/content/Forum/functions.php on line 8
You always conveniently forget what this "sanctuary" is... it's your local law enforcement opting to not provide services free of charge to the US Government to enforce federal laws. For example, marijuana use is a federal offense. Should local law enforcement be required to haul your ass into federal custody for them? Or should the feds come get you themselves?
Regarding your statement about merit, you are already on the record here long ago rejecting using merit as a criteria for immigration policy. When did you change your mind ?
You always conveniently forget what this "sanctuary" is... it's your local law enforcement opting to not provide services free of charge to the US Government to enforce federal laws. For example, marijuana use is a federal offense. Should local law enforcement be required to haul your ass into federal custody for them? Or should the feds come get you themselves?
Sanctuary cities are an illegal response to a broken immigration system. Most of us want a rational immigration policy that creates an environment where workers are rewarded (merit) not taken advantage of.
Fixed your omission.
Regarding your statement about merit, you are already on the record here long ago rejecting using merit as a criteria for immigration policy. When did you change your mind ?
So as not to get lost in the sauce I separated my last post into two since the points were unrelated other than to whom I was replying to.
.
This is patently false. It is a safe guess that at least half of the regulars here are for open borders and or Sanctuary Cities / States.
How can anyone with these beliefs support any kind of deportation ? These things are diametrically opposed to each other.
How does deportation work with open borders ? What is the point ?
Sanctuary Cities were established to protect illegals from deportation. They are a vehicle to shield illegals from formal law enforcement and its consequences with the primary consequence being deportation.
So go ahead and square that circle.
Sanctuary cities are a response to a broken immigration system. Most of us want a rational immigration policy that creates an environment where workers are rewarded (merit) not taken advantage of.
You're reply is so predictable and barely even sophomoric ...
Go ahead and tell me exactly what they got wrong.
I'll wait.
Just refer to any of my previous posts (or the many other critiques of your 'reasoning'). It has all been said, you haven't learned anything yet. We will wait if you want to try again.
So as not to get lost in the sauce I separated my last post into two since the points were unrelated other than to whom I was replying to.
. rgio wrote:
EVERYONE here agrees with the deportation of "the worst of the worst",
This is patently false. It is a safe guess that at least half of the regulars here are for open borders and or Sanctuary Cities / States.
How can anyone with these beliefs support any kind of deportation ? These things are diametrically opposed to each other.
How does deportation work with open borders ? What is the point ?
Sanctuary Cities were established to protect illegals from deportation. They are a vehicle to shield illegals from formal law enforcement and its consequences with the primary consequence being deportation.
kurtster wrote: More dreck the editor barfs up on.
that's not a legal review, it's an opinion piece from heritage foundation. I'm happy for you that after decades of trying, you found someone to reason out your racism for you, but it's still racism.
You're reply is so predictable and barely even sophomoric ...
kurtster wrote: More dreck the editor barfs up on.
that's not a legal review, it's an opinion piece from heritage foundation. I'm happy for you that after decades of trying, you found someone to reason out your racism for you, but it's still racism.
It is hard for me to understand why people oppose all deportations, regardless of who or why someone is being deported.
They can assemble and peacefully protest as guaranteed by our Constitution.
This is where your inconsistency is mind boggling.
Those 2 quote come from your last 2 or three posts.
You site the Constitution as some sort of north star for peaceful protests, and yet defend those who violate its individual rights to due process in deportation. ...
So pick a side. Do you support the Constitution or the current administration. It's a binary choice.
Here let's take a look at this one now. I did mention that I had some tabs on this matter open for a few months but figured it wasn't worth bringing it up because no one wants to know the truth. And besides no one is going to consider that these sources are credible. But here we are ...
Immigration Proceedings: Criminal vs. Civil Actions
Regardless of their legal status, aliens are entitled to the same constitutional due process rights provided to criminal defendants who are citizens when they are being criminally prosecuted for assault, rape, burglary, kidnapping, murder, or other crimes. “Deport” and “remove” are synonymous in federal immigration law.
However, immigration proceedings to bar an alien’s entry or to remove or deport an alien present inside the United States are not criminal proceedings. As the Supreme Court of the United States first outlined in 1893 in Fong Yue Ting v. U.S., a decision in which it rejected habeas corpus petitions filed by Chinese citizens who claimed that they were being unlawfully detained by U.S. marshals “without due process of law”:
"The [immigration] proceeding…is in no proper sense a trial and sentence for a crime or offense. It is simply the ascertainment, by appropriate and lawful means, of the fact whether the conditions exist upon which Congress has enacted that an alien of this class may remain within the country. The order of deportation is not a punishment for crime.… It is but a method of enforcing the return to his own country of an alien who has not complied with the conditions upon the performance of which the Government of the nation, acting within its constitutional authority, and through the proper departments, has determined that his continuing to reside here shall depend."
The Court added that an alien being removed by the government is not being “deprived of life, liberty, or property” and that “the provisions of the Constitution securing the right to trial by jury and prohibiting unreasonable searches and seizures and cruel and unusual punishments [therefore] have no application.” That is also why federal immigration officers do not need a warrant issued by a judge before arresting and detaining aliens and why aliens are not entitled to be advised of their Miranda rights or to the assistance of a government-appointed lawyer during their deportation proceedings. . I have been very aware of the concept of illegal immigration and all that it entails (including but not limited to the subjects of "anchor babies" and so called Birthright Citizenship) since moving from NorCal to SoCal in1965, living some 70 miles north of the border. The second thing I became aware of was the Border Patrol truck parked on the northbound side of old US 101 aka Slaughter Alley at the Basoline Road exit to the northern most part of Camp Pendleton right on the San Diego / Orange County line. We would always see it while traveling south on surfing expeditions. Being curious and also engaging in the use of cannabis we needed to know what and why they were always there and if it was something for us to be concerned about.
The article I have cited is a concise summary of the law as I have come to know it over the past 60 years and the basis for all of my statements on the subject of illegal immigration. Statements of which have gotten me tarred and feathered over the years as uninformed and racist to name a few by people who were uninformed of the actual nature of laws I have been mentioning here for years. I suggest that the whole article be read by those who really care about the subject and want to be accurate in discussions about illegal immigration enforcement.
The article is what I will be referencing and citing for my points going forward. So if anyone wants to engage and discuss this summary's accuracy by all means I am up for it. I am sure that things mentioned in this summary are breaking news to most here and are directly opposed to the established misinformed beliefs held by most here as evidenced by the postings.
They've just bought a 640,000-square-foot warehouse here in San Antonio...The city council is fighting against it but that's going to be a tough ro to hoe.
They've bumped into several hurdles, and the companies that are selling to them are taking a LOT of heat for it.
Location: 544 miles west of Paradis 1821 miles east of Paradise Gender:
Posted:
Feb 13, 2026 - 9:20am
Red_Dragon wrote:
They've just bought a 640,000-square-foot warehouse here in San Antonio...The city council is fighting against it but that's going to be a tough row to hoe.
I support ICE in removing and deporting illegal aliens. The encounters that ICE have with my fellow citizens are a direct result of these citizens obstructing / interfering with ICE's lawful actions. These citizens bring harm unto themselves by deliberately seeking it out. They can assemble and peacefully protest as guaranteed by our Constitution. But when they step off the curb and into the street and engage / attack law enforcement they are no longer peacefully assembling and lose their Constitutional protection. They become criminals. They become criminals protecting criminals that are not from here and have no right to be here.
Regarding fascism, we seem to have different definitions for that word / term. As you are a German, I am most curious how you define Fascism.
You can support deportations? Even the people who have been here 10, 20+ years, working, raising families, paying their fair share of taxes...under the mismanagement of immigration under both parties?
OK, fine, lets take that as a yes.
But you cannot support the brutal, violent means with which trump, noem, Ice...have been going about this. I'll add, using inexperienced and untrained law enforcement....going all the way up to the top.
People are in the streets protesting this, and should not be smacked over the head, pepper sprayed and shot because of it.
It seems pretty simple...and if you're my neighbor or friend who supports this, I want nothing to do with you as a citizen of this country or as a human being.
I'll wish you to be well, happy and at peace, and then turn my back, wipe the dust off my feet and walk away.
I support ICE in removing and deporting illegal aliens. The encounters that ICE have with my fellow citizens are a direct result of these citizens obstructing / interfering with ICE's lawful actions. These citizens bring harm unto themselves by deliberately seeking it out. They can assemble and peacefully protest as guaranteed by our Constitution. But when they step off the curb and into the street and engage / attack law enforcement they are no longer peacefully assembling and lose their Constitutional protection. They become criminals. They become criminals protecting criminals that are not from here and have no right to be here.
Regarding fascism, we seem to have different definitions for that word / term. As you are a German, I am most curious how you define Fascism.
So civil disobedience = criminality and all immigrants are criminals?
Thatâs a mighty wide brush you are painting with there Picasso.
How many criminals do you suppose are in your family tree?
Regarding fascism, we seem to have different definitions for that word / term. As you are a German, I am most curious how you define Fascism.
You may have a different definition, but it is likely wrong. The rest of us use this one.
Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, and subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race. Emerging in early 20th-century Europe, it promotes intense nationalism, severe social/economic regimentation, and often aligns with powerful business interests. Key elements of fascism include:
Dictatorial Power: A strong leader or party controls all aspects of life, eliminating democratic processes.
Extreme Nationalism: Belief that one's nation or race is superior, often accompanied by xenophobia, racism, and the myth of a "golden age" to be restored.
Suppression of Dissent: Violent opposition to liberal democracy, communism, and socialism, often using secret police and terror.
Militarism: Veneration of the military, expansionism, and the belief that strength is achieved through conflict.
Economic Control: While private property may remain, the economy is strictly regimented by the state to serve national goals, often involving corporate-state collusion.
Fascism is generally distinguished by its revolutionary, yet traditionalist, approach to restructuring society under a single, supreme authority.
