WFAA TV in the Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas market has been touting a story that they obviously think is some sort of tragedy. So bad, in fact, that the first words of their story are, "'Inhumanity' and 'atrocity' are just two words being used to describe news..."
One would think that the world was ending, wouldn't one?
The TV station is wracked up in high dudgeon over a family of Palestinians who are in the country illegally and were scooped up by Immigration officials and remanded to a rather posh housing center to await the outcome of the machinations of government officials trying to determine their fate.
Federal agents swept down on the Richardson apartment of Salaheddin Ibrahim, arresting him and five members of his family for immigration violations.
Salaheddin was taken to a federal immigration prison in Haskell, Texas.
His wife Hanan and four of their children: Hamza (15), Rodina (14), Maryam (8) and Fatin(5), were all bused hundreds of miles away to the T. Don Hutto Residential Center in Taylor, Texas.
Unfortunately, because of the 14th amendment "born here, stay here" concept the family was split up with a three-year-old "baby of the family" left with legal relatives in Dallas. The child’s dilemma is certainly a regrettable aspect of this story, to be sure.
The WFAA report conveniently forgets to mention that the Ibrahim family had come here on Jordanian visas that had expired and that they were here illegally but it does briefly mention that US immigration officials were stymied in their deportation because their home country refused to take them back.
In fact, the entire WFAA report is filled with emotional pleas to allow this family to thumb their collective noses at our immigration laws. It is also filled with absurd rhetoric utilized to make the reader feel that this family is somehow being tortured.
An activist is quoted as saying, “It's so un-democratic, it's so un-Christian, that we would treat children as prisoners in America." That appeal, of course, that emotional appeal, is one that belies the truth. The family is here illegally and is being held until their situation is cleared up. Children are not being "treated as prisoners".
But, even if they were, it is the parent's fault for flouting our laws and NOT the official's fault for following duly constituted law.
This is certainly a messy situation, grated. But the simple matter of fact here is that these people have no real fear of being tortured or killed if returned to their country and they ARE here illegally, breaking our laws.
But, we are seeing a large network of anti-immigration law activists gearing up to raise money to thwart our laws and force the government to free this illegal family from the system. Those of us interested in upholding the laws should not just stand aside and allow these people to tear down our laws.
Again, the fact is that this family is here illegally. They broke our laws and now imagine themselves higher than those laws. The three-year-old's supposed citizenship notwithstanding this family should be deported. Period.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Can you be a little more rac
February 2, 2007 - 01:32 ET by Dan The Man 2Tumbler, can you be a little more racist that you are now? I have a solution for you, open your house up and post your personal info everywhere, leave the keys in your car and invite all to do what they will. I mean if you believe half of the pap you say you do and are a true Christian, a man who emulates Jesus, then you will see the sanity in what I am posting.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
Illegal Immigaration Racism
February 2, 2007 - 10:47 ET by pbanks7Open your house up and post your personal info everywhere, leave the keys in your car and invite all to do what they will.
Yes. This is essentiall the current immigration policy of the US. You just made Tumbler's point.
I did not see any reference to race in Tumbler's assessment of the situation. His focus was on illegal immigration. It's illegal. Illllleeeeeeeegggaaaaaallllllll.
According to Mike S. Adams:
"Racism – is a pathological tendency to interject race into situations where it is not relevant, merely for personal gain.
And, of course, a racist can be defined as follows:
Racist – one who interjects race into situations where it is not relevant, merely for personal gain."
You have interjected race into an argument for personal gain. In this instance, an ad hominem attack on Tumbler for his belief in enforcement of immigration laws of the United States, and his opposition to socialism. Therefore, Mr. Dan the Man2, you are the racist in this situation.
Of course, you could lead by example in your belief that Tumbler should invite illegal immigrants into his home. After all, that is what you are advocating. How many illegal immigrants would you like? There are plenty to go around. Oh wait. Socialists only believe in doing charity with other people's money and possessions. Sorry.
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
tumbler's point pbank7
February 2, 2007 - 11:03 ET by tumbler_2007Tumbler's point has nothing to do with allowing illegal immigration, or giving illegals a free pass. It's disingenuous to think you made my point by leaving your doors unlocked so an illegal can gain entry. I support the efficient and correct enforcement of our nation's border policies. Deport the ones captured. I maintain it can be done without exposing men and women to vile hate speech.
When an immigrant applies and over all obstacles receives a legal immigration permit, do we spit venom at him entering the U.S.--? NO.
Why spit at the illegal ones? They're just as human; they don't deserve our hatred. Here in this blogsite I've met men who advocate murdering them and declaring war on their country. Isn't something like that Illllleeeeeeeegggaaaaaallllllll . . . ? ? ? Isn't a murder bad policy?
very clever
February 2, 2007 - 11:15 ET by misterbillvery clever having an alternate login and attacking Dan the man. He , and most of us know pbanks is an alias for an apologist.
alternate login say what?
February 2, 2007 - 16:02 ET by tumbler_2007A non sequitur from misterbilious is nothing new. But what thsht is he talking about?
Who attacked who? I answered the guy's question, corrrnuto!
demonstrates that when one do
February 1, 2007 - 22:57 ET by Edhenrydemonstrates that when one does not properly execute on his individual responsibility, with clear & published laws known to that individual, that the individual making those choices ruins his own family.
Hey, great homeland security
February 1, 2007 - 23:18 ET by Mr. KafirHey, great homeland security we got, eh??? Palestinians get into the country on EXPIRED visas??? How the hell did that happen??? Sheesh.
They came here and were iss
February 2, 2007 - 00:11 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveThey came here and were issued visas...they have been here so long their legal visas had expired, that is when it became illegal for them to be here.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
Mean Gene,Too bad, so sad...
February 2, 2007 - 00:21 ET by BlondeMean Gene,
Too bad, so sad...here illegally....get caught....get the hell out.
This family has a choice, take their whole family and get out, or leave their anchor baby with the relatives.
Which is why, I believe, we need to change the bestowal of automatic citizenship upon anyone who is born in the United States. IMO, only the child of a citizen should be granted automatic citizenship. A child born to those visiting the States legally (and seeking citizenship via legal means) should be granted provisional citizenship. Until his/her parents are granted (or not) citizenship.
We must address the issue of "anchor babies".
I am not in the least saddened by this family's "story".
Blonde unfortunately the lang
February 2, 2007 - 00:28 ET by Dan The Man 2Blonde unfortunately the language of the Constitution is vaugue enough to say that all born on US soil have the opportunity to become citizens. I believ it to be a statement that all born in this country to those who are citizens shall be citizens. Unfortunately this is one of those short paragraphs that when worded and accepted all who were present knew what teh intent was but did not forsee the reprecussions of idiots reading the Constitution today. I feel this issue will never be solved because there is too much opposition to clearing up the clause. Also it is the political third rail of this day.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
Dan,I'm not so sure about thi
February 2, 2007 - 00:41 ET by BlondeDan,
I'm not so sure about this being a "third rail" issue.
It needs to be addressed with a look as to the original intent, and as to the ramifications of what it means in the current century. The Constitution is a living document, not a suicide pact.
And if we continue to allow illegal immigration (with this nifty little sympathy clause), we shall surely be committing suicide, albeit slowly and painfully.
"third rail"
February 2, 2007 - 00:44 ET by misterbill"third rail" I think Tancredo will not be bothered by it. I also suspect that Newt Gingrich would address it in subtle terms, but in the end would stop it.
Blonde I hope you mean by liv
February 2, 2007 - 00:58 ET by Dan The Man 2Blonde I hope you mean by living document that it means the document can be clarified, such as the issue mentioned about a child born in the US being a citizen, and ammended using the procedures outlined in the document itself. I cringe when I hear the words "Living Document" because then we get interpretations such as the one about seizing property via emminet domain cases we have today. These clearly violate the spirit and some of the wording of the document.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
Dan,Presicely. Living docum
February 2, 2007 - 01:03 ET by BlondeDan,
Presicely. Living document meaning able to be legislatively amended.
Unlike the hated "eminent domain" which has been horribly warped by the activist judiciary.
Which is another issue entirely....and another one which I feel needs to be addressed poste haste....the activist judiciary.
big talk, not much clout
February 2, 2007 - 01:06 ET by tumbler_2007We have a noise from beneath the floorboards. --Uh; whuzzat? Speak up.
Oh! Blonde, and her right to free speech, no matter how banal-- Yeah!
"And if we continue to allow illegal immigration (with this nifty little sympathy clause), we shall surely be committing suicide, albeit slowly and painfully."
I suggest she means white supreme Americans are sure to commit suicide allowing this sympathy clause. Correct me if um wrong, Blondina. Suppose rich and intelligent Americans were to cease disposing of unwanted fetus "tissue". You might expect the white American population to kinda dangle on another hundred years, maybe? Instead of dying off "slowly and painfully" over at Planned Parenthood? )
Otherwise, despicable little brown anchor children of surreptitiously illegal birth may yet sustain America quite sufficiently. No extinct Americans, no cause for alarm? Isn't it too soon to erase the sympathy clause, for the sake of America's coming generations? God moves in mysterious ways, we hear. Anyhow; are you somebody qualified to change laws? Are you bringing a new bill up before the Congress to alter the existing "suicide pact"--? ? ? I think you'd better count your votes. We're not the majority in Congress anymore. Because of that dratted fence of yours !
Keep it up, tumble.I suggest
February 2, 2007 - 01:17 ET by BlondeKeep it up, tumble.
I suggest you keep your stupid opionions about what I say to yourself. I am perfectly capable of stating my own opinions without you trying to focus it through your "lens" a la John Kerry. Did YOU serve in Vietnam?
Try again.
One more time....I have repeatedly asked you to quit stalking me. I am correcting you because you are wrong. And reading impaired (fetal tissue?).
Where, exactly, is my reference to "little brown anchor children"?
Tumbler, give it up. You are out of your depth here.
It needs to be addressed with
February 2, 2007 - 11:09 ET by Darth DutchIt needs to be addressed with a look as to the original intent
Careful now, Blonde - all this talk of "original intent" seems pretty racist and mean spirited to me. I mean, don't you know the Founding Fathers (oh, wait, I mean "Founders"; wouldn't want to be sexist) didn't know what they were talking about and we need to be able to interpret the Constitution in whatever way we see fit? :)
Dutch
My solution is to deport th
February 2, 2007 - 00:40 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveMy solution is to deport them all, and when the baby comes of age (18) he is welcome back in the country. He can then sponsor his family if he wants to. Or they can leave and use the system, the fact that the baby is already a natural born citizen could maybe move them up a notch or two in priority.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
Mean Gene,Under the law of th
February 2, 2007 - 00:46 ET by BlondeMean Gene,
Under the law of the land as it stands today, the three year old is a citizen. So the kid can stay. As you say...the family must go....and if the child cares to sponsor them when the child reaches the legal age of majority...so be it.
However, I believe we MUST address the issue of "anchor babies" as we attempt to solve this ugly illegal alien delemma.
The illegal aliens must go, now.
Blonde, I know the baby can
February 2, 2007 - 00:59 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveBlonde,
I know the baby can stay, but since I don't think the government should be in the business of breaking up families, I think the "anchor babies" should be deported along with their family until the child reaches majority age. If the family choses to leave the baby with legal relatives, so be it. As far as I'm concerned, the parents made some poor decisions and now the entire family has to suffer the consequences. It's not fair to the children (especially the one that is a citizen) but, their parents should have followed the law in the first place.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
We all bear ramifications fro
February 2, 2007 - 01:03 ET by NeoConfirmedWe all bear ramifications from decisions our parents have made.
Thanks for that neo-confirmed
February 2, 2007 - 06:24 ET by SportPoliticsThanks for that neo-confirmed, my Gerber's was bubbling up all over my bib.
Agreed.I'm hoping for a presi
February 2, 2007 - 01:06 ET by BlondeAgreed.
I'm hoping for a presidential candidate who will address not only this issue, but the overeall issue of illegal aliens and how to get them out of the country, in a hurry.
Is that a Blonde joke? Sorr
February 2, 2007 - 01:27 ET by Dan The Man 2Is that a Blonde joke? Sorry couldnt resist, but seriously dont hold your breath for any canditate to speak up until there is a dire problem. It just hasnt reached its boiling point yet.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
Dan,Oh I wish that it were (a
February 2, 2007 - 01:34 ET by BlondeDan,
Oh I wish that it were (a blonde joke).
I'm afraid you are correct...but my priorities are, let's see....national security, immigration, equitable tax policies, appointing strict constitionalist supremes, energy sufficiency via drilling and nuclear power, privitization of the postal service, eliminating the DOE, FCC, NPR and PBS subsidies, and other worthless federal agencies.
To name a few.
Blonde - regarding the inexpi
February 2, 2007 - 02:03 ET by PeskyDaneBlonde - regarding the inexpilicable policy of "anchor babies" I'll go even further. I have always been an advocate of Robert Heinlein 's assertion that in order for citizenship to be appreciated it must somehow be earned. Our problem (one of many to be sure) is that too many people with no stake in The United States have a voice in what goes on, and a very loud voice at that. Citizenship should never be automatic.
Oh Pesky,I should have known.
February 2, 2007 - 02:08 ET by BlondePD,
I should have known....Lazarus Long.
I agree....one thousand percent.
Even more to PD's point.... &
February 2, 2007 - 04:50 ET by Indiana JoeEven more to PD's point, I think, is "Starship Troopers" and Johnny Rico.
Blonde, I both agree and disa
February 3, 2007 - 22:49 ET by MikeBBlonde, I both agree and disagree with you and Mean Gene. Children born overseas of American parents have dual citizenship. When the child reaches 18 years of age, the child must decide for him/herself which citizenship he/she wishes to retain. It could be the same way here. Go ahead and deport the parents and the child with them. That way the government will not be involved in splitting up a family. When he/she reaches 18 years old, he/she can decide he/she wants to keep his/her American citizenship, and be allowed back into the country. The parents must still go through the proper procedures to gain entrance to the country.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Mike,Children born overseas o
February 3, 2007 - 22:53 ET by BlondeMike,
Children born overseas of American (citizen) parents are an entirely different story. In some cases, they are granted dual citizenship, in others, not.
But the issue of these illegals and their anchor babies is entirely a different matter. While I hate to see a family separated, illegals are just that...illegal. And why should a benefit accrue to them for having a child while here illegally?
I believe this issue needs to be addressed in the overall consideration of the illegal issue....if our politicians have the stones to consider the issue at all. Personally, I think they're all to afraid to take a stance. It's pathetic, really.
Perhaps they should immigrate
February 2, 2007 - 00:22 ET by Dan The Man 2Perhaps they should immigrate to Mexico, become Mexican citizens then come here illegally. That way in a couple of years they could become citizens. I mean they would have much more support also, why they could go to some of the no ask no tell communities and live there unmolested.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
WFAA is one of the local stat
February 2, 2007 - 07:48 ET by Subsailor599WFAA is one of the local stations on my tv.... this is one of the reasons I stopped watching the local channels years ago.
Maybe someone who advocates
February 2, 2007 - 10:02 ET by happyuscitizenMaybe someone who advocates illegal immigration will sponsor this family under the auspices of being neighborly and a good Christian, Buddhist, Pagan, Wicken, or even Atheist? Any takers didn't think so?
Quick question...Do you think Atheists believe in illegal immigration?
"I'm just a big fat hairy American Winning Machine!" - Ricky Bobby
Why do you think atheists w
February 2, 2007 - 10:22 ET by sarcasmoWhy do you think atheists would have any particular belief regarding immigration? I strongly suspect they don't. Belief in a God or even in multiple Gods has nothing to do with nations trying to close their national borders or individuals circumenting those nations' measures, AFAIK.
JMR
happyuscitizen, please tell us
February 2, 2007 - 10:41 ET by tumbler_2007Hi, happy;
Saw your post above. Could you tell us WHO is advocating illegal immigration?
However, tragic this may se
February 2, 2007 - 10:03 ET by happyuscitizenHowever, tragic this may seem to some, I feel sorry for the children, however, it was their parents' responsibility to properly file for residency visas and this whole "atrocity" would have been avoided.
The toddler whom is a citizen is staying with family members in the area that have obviously followed the legal processes to be here, so why is there no questions of these relatives as to why they did not sponsor them to be here in the country? Hmmm, interesting isn't it?
Instead charges of an atrocity are levied and subtle insinuations about the government being racists persecuting "Palestinians" from Jordan? Wouldn't that make them Jordanian or is WFAA trying to blame Israel for this as well?
I am just glad to see the Federal Government is enforcing the law, much to the dismay of a few.
"I'm just a big fat hairy American Winning Machine!" - Ricky Bobby
I live in the Dallas/Fort Wor
February 2, 2007 - 10:32 ET by TEI live in the Dallas/Fort Worth area and have seen plenty of WFAA. Of course, it's a joke. In particular, anchor Gloria Campos is a virulent, militant leftist feminist. She's a huge Planned Parenthood activist, on and off her "news" program.
Am I dreaming or did half of
February 2, 2007 - 10:56 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveAm I dreaming or did half of the posts Tumbler wrote disappear? I was going to respond to one last night, but it is now gone. My settings are on 'Show All Comments'. Did system admin install a sophisticated troll filter?
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
You observe well, Mean Gene
February 2, 2007 - 11:08 ET by tumbler_2007Yeah, Gene; --So much for our First Ammendment rights. But enough about Moi. What's on your mind?
Never mind. I think I'm done
February 2, 2007 - 11:44 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveNever mind. I think I'm done with you.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
The 1st Amendment?
February 2, 2007 - 12:31 ET by Unsane"So much for our First Amendment rights."
Since when did the MRC or NB become an arm of government?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
NB an arm of the government?
February 2, 2007 - 15:58 ET by tumbler_2007Do you know what the hell you're talkin about?
"when did MRC or NB became an arm of government? bla blah."
He does, obviously YOU don't.
February 2, 2007 - 20:25 ET by Warner Todd HustonHe does, obviously YOU don't.
I am about fed up with the
February 2, 2007 - 16:24 ET by bassndudeI am about fed up with the MSM and the "poor illegal alien" thing. If the people cant respect the law of our land, kick them out. I have no use for them at that point. Illegal is illegal. Just like selling drugs, stealing cars or what have you. Sorry about the kid, but the rest have got to go!
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!