Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bong30
No I'm not... I used it to find sources... there is a difference... just caues the links are from Prison Planet doesn't mean the information is from Alex Jones... and if that's your only defense... i'll take it...
what about that million $$ Bong... you never bring that up... why not??
once again, what don't you understand about pointless posts?? that's a fucking joke compared to how I disproved you... better luck next time...
when i see you use alex jones i just laugh its called agenda... he has one so do you.
lets just use the wikipidia.... no more alex and i wont think you are a joke.
what $$ gumby.... whats your net worth... the .55 cents in your pocket and the car your parents bought you.
please..... if you even know your credit score, ill fall over
you disproved me in your eyes, i still think what i do....
April 28, 2006, 12:05PM
IMMIGRATION DEBATE
La raza not united on border
One Hispanic Minuteman says it's matter of law, not a race issue
By CYNTHIA LEONOR GARZA
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle
Al Garza says he's proud of his Latino heritage, his race. La raza, he calls it, shifting easily from English to Spanish.
But he said he's not about to join the protesters who have taken to the streets of Houston and other cities in recent weeks in demand of amnesty for illegal immigrants.
"Personally, I'm very disappointed in our own raza at what they're doing," said Garza, a Texas native who wants to end the flow of illegal immigration across the U.S.-Mexico border.
"Just because I'm Hispanic doesn't mean I'm going to allow complete strangers trampling over property, vandalizing people's homes and ranches," he said.
Garza, former Texas president of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps and now the group's second-in-command, is one of the nation's most prominent Hispanic anti-immigration activists.
Ten percent of the Minutemen's 8,000 members are Hispanic, he said.
"This has nothing to do with race," said Garza, who was born in Raymondville in South Texas. "Anyone that has any racial agenda is not wanted in our group."
What matters, Garza says, is enforcing the law and getting control of the border. His view of illegal immigrants, some experts say, underscores long-held differences between American-born Latinos and foreign-born newcomers.
"There is a major divide between the immigrant community and the native community," said Guadalupe San Miguel Jr., a history professor at the University of Houston. "From the very beginning you see these differences, but over the years our differences have been maintained."
Indeed, some polls show that American-born Hispanics are more critical of immigrants than newcomers.
While the foreign-born are nearly unanimous in their belief that immigrants strengthen the U.S. with their talents and work ethic, native-born Hispanics are more divided.
Sixty-five percent say immigrants are a plus, but 28 percent say they are a burden, according to a 2005 study by the Pew Hispanic Center, a research group in Washington, D.C.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...e/3825969.html
^^ yawn... who gives a shit
illegal immigration is the issue used to
draw focus away from the incompetencies of this administration
and it is effective: look how many threads pop up about this "problem"
that we don't actually face and then the issues on iraq and GW are washed upon the shore until it's too late
you could make a career of being wrongQuote:
Originally Posted by xblackdogx
Zogby Poll of California Voters on Immigration:
â?¢ 62% say immigration makes education reform more difficult;
â?¢ 67% oppose driver's licenses for illegal immigrants;
â?¢ 72% oppose giving reduced tuition for illegal immigrants;
â?¢ 83% of immigrant citizens say jobs to foreigners only if no Americans available;
â?¢ 65% of black Americans favor a moratorium on legal immigration.
A majority of registered voters throughout the state of California believes continued immigration makes the possibility of reform of the stateÃ*s education system much more difficult, a new poll by Zogby International reveals.
The poll, conducted between February 26 and March 2, 2001 of 802 registered California voters, was commissioned by the Oakland, Calif.-based Diversity Alliance For a Sustainable America. The poll has a margin of sampling error of +/- 3.6%.
State education reform?
A majority (62%) believes that continued immigration makes state education reform more difficult, compared to 32% who say it would have no impact on reform. Another 7% are unsure.
Most ethnic groups believe continued immigration makes state education reform more difficult, including whites (65% more difficult, 31% no impact), Hispanics (66%-27%) and African Americans (67%-28%). Asian Americans, however, disagree with the majority with 54% believing there would be no impact on education reform, compared to 41% who say immigration makes reform more difficult.
Driver's licenses for illegal immigrants?
Another clear majority oppose a proposed state law granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Results show 67% oppose such a law, 29% support the law, with 4% not sure. Respondents were told that state legislators have proposed a law allowing illegal immigrants to apply for driver's licenses and that licenses can be used as one form of identification to apply for welfare benefits.
Whites and Asian Americans had the highest levels of opposition to licenses for illegals, at 70% and 64%, respectively, with African Americans (63%) and Hispanics (54%) also disapproving.
Reduced Tuition for Illegal Immigrants?
Overall, nearly three-quarters of respondents oppose a law giving illegal immigrants reduced tuition to state colleges and universities.
Whites (78%) and Asian Americans (65%) oppose such a law, as do Hispanics (55%) and African Americans (51%).
American vs. Foreign workers?
A clear majority agrees that employers should be required to certify that there are no American workers available for a job before an employer imports workers from overseas. Results show 68% agree, 27% disagree and 5% are unsure. Immigrants who have acquired U.S. citizenship are more in agreement (83% agree, 12% disagree) than those born a U.S. citizen (68% agree, 27% disagree).
Moratorium on legal immigration?
Results show that 43% of those surveyed believe a three-year moratorium, or authorized suspension of legal immigration, would be beneficial to the state, compared to 40% who say such a suspension will be harmful to the state. Another 16% are not sure.
African Americans (65% beneficial, 24% harmful) support such a moratorium in much higher percentages than whites (44% beneficial, 38% harmful) and Hispanics (34% beneficial, 56% harmful).
Slight differences in opinion are seen between U.S.-born citizens (44% beneficial, 40% harmful) and immigrants who have since acquired U.S. citizenship (40% beneficial, 46% harmful). At the same time, men and women are split with men generally opposing such an action (39% beneficial, 46% harmful) and women supporting such an action (47% beneficial, 35% harmful).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Polling Details
10. The California Department of Education recently reported that one in four schoolchildren in the state's schools cannot speak English well enough to understand what goes on in the classroom. Knowing this, will continued immigration make it more difficult for education reform to succeed or will it have no effect?
Table 4. Effect on Education Reform
Overall % Bay % LA/SD % Other %
More difficult 62 51 58 69
No effect 32 40 35 25
Not sure 7 9 7 6
Twice as many California voters (62%) say education reform will be more difficult than those who say it will have no effect (32%).
More respondents from other areas of California (69%), than respondents from the Bay area (51%), Los Angeles or San Diego (58%), say they think continued immigration will make education reform more difficult.
More respondents older than 50 (68% average), than respondents 18 to 49 (54% average), believe it will be more difficult for education reform to succeed with continued immigration.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. State legislators have proposed a law allowing illegal immigrants to apply for driver's licenses. Knowing that in California, driver's licenses can be used as one form of identification to apply for welfare benefits, do you support or oppose a law granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants?
Oppose 67%
Support 29
Not sure 4
Two-thirds of respondents oppose a law allowing illegal immigrants to apply for a driver's license. More immigrants (71%) than U.S. citizens (67%) oppose such a law.
More Republicans (79%), than Democrats (62%) or Independents (55%) also oppose such a law. Three-quarters of homemakers, compared to 60% of women who work for wages, oppose a law granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.
A majority of respondents age 18 to 29 (55%), compared to an average 30% of respondents 30 and older, supports a law granting drivers licenses to illegal immigrants.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. The state legislature proposed a law giving illegal immigrants reduced tuition to state colleges and universities. Do you support of oppose such a law?
Oppose 72%
Support 25
Not sure 3
Older voters are more likely than younger voters to oppose the law. For example, an average of 76% of respondenets 30 and older, compared to 49% of respondents 18-29, say they would oppose a law fiving illegal immigrant reduced tuition.
More Republicans (84%), than Democrats (65%) or Independents (64%), oppose a law giving illegal immigrants reduced tuition to state colleges and universities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Do you agree or disagree that employers should be required to certify that there are no American workers available for a job before an employer imports workers from overseas?
Agree 68%
Disagree 27
Not sure 5
By more than a two-to-one margin, a large majority (68%) agrees that employers should be required to certify that there are no American workers available for a job before an employer imports workers from overseas.
There is little difference of opinion among sub groups.
Republicans, Democrats and Independents (69% average) all agree that employers should certify there are no American workers available before they import workers.
Surprisingly, more immigrants (83%), than U.S. citizens (68%), agree that employers should certify there are no American workers available before they import workers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Do you think a three-year moratorium on legal immigration would be beneficial or harmful to Californians?
Beneficial 43%
Harmful 40
Not sure 16
Overall, there was a narrow split among respondents. Forty-three percent believe a three-year moratorium would be beneficial, and 40% believes it would be harmful to Californians.
Republicans (47%), more than Democrats (42%) or Independents (39%), say they think a three-year moratorium on legal immigration would be beneficial to Californians.
Nearly half of immigrants (46%), compared to 40% of U.S. citizens, say a three-year moratorium would be harmful to California. In addition, more men than women (46% to 35%) say the moratorium would be harmful.
De Martini did NOT, I repeat, DID NOT, build the WTC. He did not work there until 1993 - he was a an architect hired as construction manager after the first terroirst attack. He helped rebuild parts of it that were damaged or destroyed by the bombing attack. Unfortunately, he was killed on 9/11.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gumby
I believe that DiMartini said that the towers would survive jet crashes - but he was wrong. This is not the first time that you have claimed that De Martini was involved in the construction of the WTC, "believe the guy who built it" - so please read the link below.
All I'm claiming is that I talked to a seasoned professional architect in NYC on 9/11, who predicted exactly what would happen. I believe that other people have a different opinion, but I'll go with mine - and I don't think that any investigation will prove the contrary.
McGrawHillConstruction-DeMartini
"De Martini had first worked at the twin towers when engineer Leslie E. Robertson Associates hired him to assess damage after the terrorist bomb blast of 1993. He did such a good job that the port authority hired the 49-year-old New Jersey native to do the job as a staff member. He was based in an office on the 88th floor of the north tower. He recently gave a tour of the towers to students from his old high school. "He loved the structure's massiveness and always pointed out that there was a big subgrade complex that was a city of its own," says his wife, Nicole, who is also an architect."
o.k. so one guy is partialy not reliable... what about the others??
the 9/11 eyewitness was there too... he taped the whole thing... I believe him, much like you put most of your belief in the guy that was there... I was skeptical cause I saw Alex Jones first and couldn't believe something like that could happen... I even made fun of it... But then I saw this one... http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...61603&q=9%2F11
How do you explain it? I mean it's a video from that day... those moments... not someone telling you what happened... what can and cannot happen with a building... it is a look in the past second for second of what happened... how do you disprove or think something else could be? It would take so many random events and unknown facts to even come close to desrcibing it... the 9/11 commision report didn't even do what they did
What is wrong with this video? No prison planet... no slant... no Alex Jones... no commie crap... nothing you can attack me with you douche bag (BONG)... one guy who was there the whole day... tell me why he is wrong... please...
BONG I AM TALKING ABOUT THIS MILLION DOLLARS - http://www.reopen911.org/Contest.htm - it wasn't a personal attack... it's an attack that you cannot defend which you made personal... if you can prove what you are saying they will give you a million dollars...
I can assure you however that I am more weathy than you will ever be because I don't define wealth by the amount of money I have or the car I drive.... I define it by the knowledge I have and the love I can give... two things I know I will always have more of than you...
by the way I am 22, have owned my own business for 5 years... own a 4 bedroom 2 bath house... bought a dodge durango with my own money... I am worth over $400,000 in money terms... so go fuck yourself
I watched the first 12 minutes of this video - and will take in more as I am able, until I've seen the whole thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gumby
I did not see anything in the first 12 minutes that was unusual, or different from what I've seen myself in NYC, on TV, and on the Internet - but I will get to watch the whole film in segments over the next day or so.
it took me two 'sessions' to watch it was well... partly lentgh and partly content... it does get to you. They use the voice recordings a lot for audio timing, and it gets sad. I am not sure if the buildings fall in the first 12 min but you will hear a scream "oh god" that I can't get out of my head... when I see them fall I hear that guy in the background everytime now... It's a very sad movie, but I think it's the best I've seen and very unbiased. I hope you enjoy it even if it doesn't change your mind about who was behind it... I don't think that is what the movie is about ... I think it just more about what happened that day and the differences between 'common knowledge' of the event and 'actual footage' of the event.
ps. have you ever noticed that they will not show build 7 collapse on television... a lot of people, including myself never saw it before the internet.
p.p.s.. History International did a great piece on Nietzsche yesterday... one hell of a thinker...