PDA

View Full Version : Mexican Gangs Maintain Permanent Lookout Bases in Arizona




Cowlesy
06-22-2010, 09:17 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/22/mexican-gangs-permanent-lookouts-parkland/

I swear if people wanted to go play "Army" in real life, just head to the Az border.

Craziness!

Elwar
06-22-2010, 09:23 AM
I wonder if Pfizer and Merk have such a setup to get their drugs to consumers.

Oh ya, that's right...their highly addictive, harmful drugs are legal and don't require armed thugs to set up lookout bases on the border.

catdd
06-22-2010, 09:34 AM
The Department of Homeland Security personnel should be placed under investigation for aiding and abetting ; convicted of treason, and hanged.

Krugerrand
06-22-2010, 09:38 AM
I wonder if Pfizer and Merk have such a setup to get their drugs to consumers.

Oh ya, that's right...their highly addictive, harmful drugs are legal and don't require armed thugs to set up lookout bases on the border.

Don't pay your taxes to fund the vaccines the government forces people to inject into children and fund the FDA that sanctions their products and you'll meet their armed thugs soon enough.

John Taylor
06-22-2010, 09:40 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/22/mexican-gangs-permanent-lookouts-parkland/

I swear if people wanted to go play "Army" in real life, just head to the Az border.

Craziness!

I know a pile of Minutemen, great guys, many involved in the JBS and with Ron Paul's campaign in '07-'08, and they would like nothing more than to go down to the border and seal it themselves. They could, but they would face the same civil liability the ranchers whose property is destroyed by these lawless migrating hordes face routinely here... sucessfully sued by illegals tresspassing on their property. Either the civil liability laws for privately using up to lethal force against other private individuals needs to be altered, or we need to utilize something else in order to actually secure the border... like enforcing the law as it has read on the federal books for 40 years... It's interesting how everyone got in a tizzy for AZ's adoption of a pre-existing federal law... merely because they know we in AZ will enforce it.

FrankRep
06-22-2010, 09:41 AM
http://www.jbs.org/templates/political/images/jbsheader.jpg (http://www.jbs.org/)


Stealing the American Dream: How Illegal Immigration Affects You


AZ Central: John Birch president to target illegal immigrants in Mesa speech
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2010/06/22/20100622john-birch-society-illegal-immigration.html

Time: 6:30 p.m

Place: Burke Basic School - 131 E. Southern Ave, Mesa, Arizona
Date: June 22, 2010
Tickets: $7.00


The Birch Society, the East Valley Tea Party Patriots and others will join tonight in Mesa to hear the John Birch Society's president, 75-year-old John McManus, expound on the perceived threat.

His topic: "Stealing the American Dream: How Illegal Immigration Affects You." The event is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. at Burke Basic School (http://local.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Burke+Basic+School,+mesa+az&sll=33.393312,-111.828988&sspn=0.012344,0.026565&g=131+E+Southern+Ave,+Mesa,+Maricopa,+Arizona+8521 0&ie=UTF8&hq=Burke+Basic+School,&hnear=Mesa,+Maricopa,+Arizona&ll=33.393792,-111.828976&spn=0.023791,0.053129&z=15&iwloc=A), 131 E. Southern Ave., Mesa; tickets are $7 at the door.


Jack McManus on the Illegal Immigration Invasion.


Jack McManus of the John Birch Society explains our current open borders policy and how continued unrestricted immigration threatens our nations future and independence.

Jack McManus on the Immigration Invasion (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8777665565344843988)

John Taylor
06-22-2010, 09:42 AM
The Department of Homeland Security personnel should be placed under investigation for aiding and abetting ; convicted of treason, and hanged.

Because they're turning a blind eye to the movement of the cartels into AZ? Because the feds don't mind that Phoenix is turning into a Mexican city almost as bad as LA? Because they don't mind that Phoenix has the highest rate of kidnappings in the United States? Yeah, you're onto something.

John Taylor
06-22-2010, 09:43 AM
http://www.jbs.org/templates/political/images/jbsheader.jpg


Stealing the American Dream: How Illegal Immigration Affects You


AZ Central: John Birch president to target illegal immigrants in Mesa speech
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2010/06/22/20100622john-birch-society-illegal-immigration.html

Time: 6:30 p.m

Place: Burke Basic School - 131 E. Southern Ave, Mesa, AZ
Date: June 22, 2010
Tickets: $7.00


The Birch Society, the East Valley Tea Party Patriots and others will join tonight in Mesa to hear the society's president, 75-year-old John McManus, expound on the perceived threat.

His topic: "Stealing the American Dream: How Illegal Immigration Affects You." The event is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. at Burke Basic School (http://local.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Burke+Basic+School,+mesa+az&sll=33.393312,-111.828988&sspn=0.012344,0.026565&g=131+E+Southern+Ave,+Mesa,+Maricopa,+Arizona+8521 0&ie=UTF8&hq=Burke+Basic+School,&hnear=Mesa,+Maricopa,+Arizona&ll=33.393792,-111.828976&spn=0.023791,0.053129&z=15&iwloc=A), 131 E. Southern Ave., Mesa; tickets are $7 at the door.


Jack McManus on the Illegal Immigration Invasion.


Jack McManus of the John Birch Society explains our current open borders policy and how continued unrestricted immigration threatens our nations future and independence.

Jack McManus on the Immigration Invasion (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8777665565344843988)

Oh, awesome, I didn't realize this was tonight! I'll have to get out of the office early to run over to Mesa!

talkingpointes
06-22-2010, 11:26 AM
Because they're turning a blind eye to the movement of the cartels into AZ? Because the feds don't mind that Phoenix is turning into a Mexican city almost as bad as LA? Because they don't mind that Phoenix has the highest rate of kidnappings in the United States? Yeah, you're onto something.

Turning into a "Mexican" city ? Just a little bit about yourself shinning through. I love the mexican culture in this city and I feel you might be a bit xenophobic and unable to handle a culture different from your own. America's cultural hegemony will soon turn them over to "Americans", be sure of it. I'm sure your ancestors didn't speak english and watch "Laurel and Hardy" but that's what this country does to you. I even work at Arriba Mexican Grill and love Mexican culture. Hell next thing you know their culture will be integrated into American society and then well have things like Taco Bell and other products from the south. Then you'll really zeek.

John Taylor
06-22-2010, 11:34 AM
Turning into a "Mexican" city ? Just a little bit about yourself shinning through. I love the mexican culture in this city and I feel you might be a bit xenophobic and unable to handle a culture different from your own. America's cultural hegemony will soon turn them over to "Americans", be sure of it. I'm sure your ancestors didn't speak english and watch "Laurel and Hardy" but that's what this country does to you. I even work at Arriba Mexican Grill and love Mexican culture. Hell next thing you know their culture will be integrated into American society and then well have things like Taco Bell and other products from the south. Then you'll really zeek.

Yeah, drive up a couple blocks from here on Osborn and you'll see it for yourself. Stating that Phoenix is turning into a Mexican city is not zenophobic. You yourself subconsciously believe Mexican cities are inferior to U.S. cities, or at least acknowledge that this is the popular perception.

I also happen to love the Mexican culture in this city, and as a first generation American, I love to see and experience a litany of cultures here in the valley of the sun. The cultural assimilation you assert will swallow the Mexican culture is not occuring. The sheer number of Mexicans within the state, and within the country, if unchecked, guarantee that assimilation will not occur rapidly, and that when it does, the "group" will simply become one more "victimized" minority group seeking the patronage of the more redistributionist of the two political parties. Thanks but no thanks. The welfare/warfare state must be crushed before the borders are opened. This old Ron Paul backer is behind SB1070.

FrankRep
06-22-2010, 11:37 AM
Just to be clear:

It's not Racist or Xenophobic to support Legal Immigration Laws.

RM918
06-22-2010, 12:21 PM
Just to be clear:

It's not Racist or Xenophobic to support Legal Immigration Laws.

They'll try it anyway. You'd think after being personally assailed by that bogus tactic time and time again they'd be a little reluctant to use it themselves on others, but go figure.

MelissaWV
06-22-2010, 12:27 PM
Just to be clear:

It's not Racist or Xenophobic to support Legal Immigration Laws.

Of course not, however sometimes if you know a certain poster's history the shoe does fit. Some things are difficult to ignore.

To complicate matters, there are those who blanketly support anything that purports to "curb illegal immigration" whether it has any rational chance to or not. That's where things get dangerous, because it is a blatant case of sacrificing liberty for security. Citizenship laws should target the areas people have genuine gripes about. It doesn't seem like the problem is the actual presence of illegals, but those illegals using Government services (schooling, welfare, etc.) or occupying jobs which "should have gone" to Americans. The former can be addressed by checking birth certificates or immigration documents before allowing entry into the public school system, approving a welfare application, and so on. The latter can be encouraged in the same way that companies who say "Good Housekeeping seal of approval" or "#1 Consumer Reports best buy" or "Better Business Bureau member" might expect to see a positive reaction. Your company can be "E-Verify Secure: All-American Workforce."

There are all kinds of solutions on both sides of the fence, here, but let's not get twisted. There are those whose "concerns" fall more along the lines of a culture war and whose problems with the immigrants themselves which will not be erased by being legal citizens.

dannno
06-22-2010, 12:33 PM
Of course not, however sometimes if you know a certain poster's history the shoe does fit. Some things are difficult to ignore.

To complicate matters, there are those who blanketly support anything that purports to "curb illegal immigration" whether it has any rational chance to or not. That's where things get dangerous, because it is a blatant case of sacrificing liberty for security. Citizenship laws should target the areas people have genuine gripes about. It doesn't seem like the problem is the actual presence of illegals, but those illegals using Government services (schooling, welfare, etc.) or occupying jobs which "should have gone" to Americans. The former can be addressed by checking birth certificates or immigration documents before allowing entry into the public school system, approving a welfare application, and so on. The latter can be encouraged in the same way that companies who say "Good Housekeeping seal of approval" or "#1 Consumer Reports best buy" or "Better Business Bureau member" might expect to see a positive reaction. Your company can be "E-Verify Secure: All-American Workforce."

There are all kinds of solutions on both sides of the fence, here, but let's not get twisted. There are those whose "concerns" fall more along the lines of a culture war and whose problems with the immigrants themselves which will not be erased by being legal citizens.


The best way to cure the "Dey took r jobs!!!" syndrome is to lower income taxes to nothing or close to nothing....

If an immigrant is willing to work for $10/hour tax free, and a citizen is willing to work for $13/hour tax free, the employer might prefer hiring the citizen. However, since they are required to pay the citizen $20/hour just so they can receive their $13/hour after taxes, suddenly you have to pay the citizen twice as much.. at that point it is better to hire the illegal immigrant under the table.

WaltM
06-23-2010, 11:28 AM
they got company now!

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/bastard/2010/06/jt_readys_neo-nazi_patrol_in_v.php

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/bastard/jeffhall.jpg

WaltM
06-23-2010, 11:29 AM
The best way to cure the "Dey took r jobs!!!" syndrome is to lower income taxes to nothing or close to nothing....



how about lowering wage limits, thereby making it legal to exploit and abuse American workers (and taking away the incentive to hire an immigrant)

Cowlesy
06-23-2010, 11:33 AM
they got company now!

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/bastard/2010/06/jt_readys_neo-nazi_patrol_in_v.php

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/bastard/jeffhall.jpg

There is no way FedGov is letting a bunch of those yahoos run around with AR-15's "on patrol," unless a majority of the yahoos are composed of undercover FedGov guys lol

WaltM
06-23-2010, 11:36 AM
There is no way FedGov is letting a bunch of those yahoos run around with AR-15's "on patrol," unless a majority of the yahoos are composed of undercover FedGov guys lol

I was thinking the same thing, no way Minutemen who only tattle tell can have so much trouble, but armed men with guns, openly calling themselves neo-Nazis, can get away with this.

BUT do the Mexicans know whether they're gov or not?

constituent
06-23-2010, 11:43 AM
how about lowering wage limits, thereby making it legal to exploit and abuse American workers (and taking away the incentive to hire an immigrant)

Is that what would happen? Is your position really that lowering the minimum wage would legalize the exploitation and abuse of American workers?

Do you believe this to be true?

constituent
06-23-2010, 11:47 AM
There is no way FedGov is letting a bunch of those yahoos run around with AR-15's "on patrol," unless a majority of the yahoos are composed of undercover FedGov guys lol

No, I see them in Texas (the valley) with startling frequency. They're mostly on horseback though, and confine their "patrols" to the boundaries of property they've obtained permission to be tromping around on.

The only differences I see here are the urban assault gear and willingness to publicly discuss their neo-nazi connections. ;)

Cowlesy
06-23-2010, 11:52 AM
No, I see them in Texas (the valley) with startling frequency. They're mostly on horseback though, and confine their "patrols" to the boundaries of property they've obtained permission to be tromping around on.

The only differences I see here are the urban assault gear and willingness to publicly discuss their neo-nazi connections. ;)

It's about time! I was wondering when you'd get into this thread with some trademark Constitusnark.

I can't picture that guy on horseback. Please tell me they were cowboy hats and carry lassos, too.

constituent
06-23-2010, 11:53 AM
It's about time! I was wondering when you'd get into this thread with some trademark Constitusnark.

I'll take that as a compliment.



I can't picture that guy on horseback. Please tell me they were cowboy hats and carry lassos, too.

Well, they weren't cowboy hats, but they do wear cowboy hats (mostly). No lassos afaik. I'm usually buzzing by on the highway.

Cowlesy
06-23-2010, 11:57 AM
I'll take that as a compliment.

Well yeah, it was a compliment in that I lol'd, though I do find the equating of people protecting property equivalent to closeted neo-nazis a bit crass, but suit yourself on that one. Unless you weren't speculating and actually know for a fact that they hold secret ties to those organizations.




Well, they weren't cowboy hats, but they do wear cowboy hats (mostly). No lassos afaik. I'm usually buzzing by on the highway.

Well, I'd settle for a PA system blasting the theme to Bonanza.

constituent
06-23-2010, 12:00 PM
Well yeah, it was a compliment in that I lol'd, though I do find the equating of people protecting property equivalent to closeted neo-nazis a bit crass, but suit yourself on that one. Unless you weren't speculating and actually know for a fact that they hold secret ties to those organizations.

Wouldn't have said it otherwise. I grew up here. I know and witness both ends of this debate personally, and always have. :)

I have very little doubt that you couldn't tell us a thing or two about the folks you see here, there and everywhere everyday too. ;)

All that said, I don't debate their tactics just as long as they confine it to private property. It doesn't even matter if they know or are neo-nazis except in a "consider the source" kinda way.

Cowlesy
06-23-2010, 12:02 PM
Wouldn't have said it otherwise. I grew up here. I know and witness both ends of this debate personally, and always have. :)

I have very little doubt that you couldn't tell us a thing or two about the folks you see here, there and everywhere everyday too. ;)

Don't we all love to pontificate on issues and things where most cannot see the forest through the trees ;) :D

constituent
06-23-2010, 12:04 PM
Don't we all love to pontificate on issues and things where most cannot see the forest through the trees ;) :D

just a little perspective, that's all. :)

Cowlesy
06-23-2010, 12:12 PM
just a little perspective, that's all. :)

If we get rid of the welfare state and abolish the minimum wage, I will be 100% on-board with wide-open-borders utopia. Unfortunately that'll push the war to close the border back on the left's shoulders. In fact it's already part their if the NSM is involved. :p

constituent
06-23-2010, 12:24 PM
If we get rid of the welfare state and abolish the minimum wage, I will be 100% on-board with wide-open-borders utopia.

Freedom for you after freedom for me? Is that really the score?

Let's break it down to brass tacks.



Unfortunately that'll push the war to close the border back on the left's shoulders. In fact it's already part their if the NSM is involved. :p

I don't really think there's a war to close the border. It is my opinion that there exists a vocal minority whose emotions and fears have been played upon in order to convince them that it is necessary to limit the freedom of others to ensure security for themselves.

The government will not do anything near closing the border as it is incapable of even pretending to do so. It would absolutely bankrupt the country overnight.

What will happen though is the current unconstitutional federal immigration and customs bureaucracy will continue to grow, and make life increasingly difficult for law abiding citizens who seek to participate in legitimate trade and social exchange with their neighbors outside the borders of the U.S.

When people agitate for more government control they are advocating against the cause of liberty. They are arguing for the curtailing of their neighbors' liberty, their own liberty for that matter, for the sake of a little perceived security that the government can't really provide in the first place.

Longer lines at the border. That's all you're gonna get.

Anyway, just some food for thought. :)

Cowlesy
06-23-2010, 12:36 PM
Freedom for you after freedom for me? Is that really the score?

Anyway, just some food for thought. :)

That's backward, no? As long as there is a threat of force against me by the government if I refuse to stop funding the welfare state from the earnings of my labor, I'm not free. So all those who come across the border to benefit from the social programs provided by the labor of taxpayers further reduce my freedom as more social cost is heaped upon the taxpayer.

I'm afraid the open-borders guys might be disappointed if we did eliminate the welfare state and minimum wage given the starvation-level wages in the latter half of the 19th century and the strife it caused between the immigrant and native laborers. That's kind of the reason I don't think there is any absolutist right answer to the border question. There is always a cost inherent in the system, and right now it's being broadly set upon the taxpayer (and in the 19th century it was on the laborers via the liberal immigration policy causing wages to fall). At some point, the system will break, and it will be interesting to see what that failure entails. :o

constituent
06-23-2010, 01:55 PM
That's backward, no? As long as there is a threat of force against me by the government if I refuse to stop funding the welfare state from the earnings of my labor, I'm not free. So all those who come across the border to benefit from the social programs provided by the labor of taxpayers further reduce my freedom as more social cost is heaped upon the taxpayer.

I'm still not sure what that has to do with all those people who don't come across the border to "benefit from the social programs provided by the labor of taxpayers."

I can't decide if this is guilt by association or guilty until proven innocent. :D



I'm afraid the open-borders guys might be disappointed if we did eliminate the welfare state and minimum wage given the starvation-level wages in the latter half of the 19th century

Which statement best describes your position as suggested above?

a) a lack of a minimum wage/welfare state was the only cause of starvation level wages in the latter half of the 19th century
b) a lack of a minimum wage/welfare state was the primary cause of starvation level wages in the latter of the 19th century
c) a lack of a minimum wage/welfare state was potentially one cause of starvation level wages in the latter of the 19th century

I just ask because this is now the second time I've heard the exploitation bit today. As if the minimum wage actually prevents, or that its absence will ensure, the exploitation of American workers... it just sorta puzzles me that you might entertain this notion as well. :confused:



and the strife it caused between the immigrant and native laborers.

Yea, kinda reminds me of the whole emergence of the unions back in this nation's industrial heyday, and their fights for recognition...



That's kind of the reason I don't think there is any absolutist right answer to the border question.

Agreed, which is why in the meanwhile we should insist that any legislation dealing with the immigration question(s) include provisions that exempt United States citizens for the requirements imposed upon their travel in accordance with the remaining segments of the Tariff Act of 1930 and/or a repeal of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (at the very least).

Glad to know that you agree! ;) :D



There is always a cost inherent in the system, and right now it's being broadly set upon the taxpayer

Agreed. Laws only hamper the law abiding.

WaltM
06-23-2010, 02:53 PM
Is that what would happen? Is your position really that lowering the minimum wage would legalize the exploitation and abuse of American workers?

Do you believe this to be true?

yes, I believe that would happen.

Can you give me a reason that something else would protect American workers from being exploited? (Like unions? Tell that to auto workers in Michigan)