Davin News Server

Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote:
> In article <1033618142.767038163.174453.recscuba_google-
> huntzinger.com@news.eternal-september.org>, 
> recscuba_google@huntzinger.com says...
>> 
>> Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote:
>>> In article <1601913815.766801634.333602.recscuba_google-
>>> huntzinger.com@news.eternal-september.org>, 
>>> recscuba_google@huntzinger.com says...
>>>> 
>>>> Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote:
>>>>> In article <vtqbjq$6bga$2@dont-email.me>, 
>>>>> chine.bleu@yahoo.com says...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 16/4/25 18:41, pothead wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Did Laken Riley get due process?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> She's dead because an illegal migrant killed her.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And there are many others like her.
>>>>>>>>>>> She's dead because a PERSON killed her.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> and that person was an illegal immigrant.
>>>>>>> Bingo.
>>>>>>> And totally preventable.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> That's the point the libbys ignore.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> So no illegal immigrants then no murders.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Who said that? Oh YOU did.
>>>> 
>>>> Yet it is historically correct.
>>> 
>>> No it isn't. Are all liberals as dumb as you?
>> 
>> It is precisely what you?re trying to imply?and are now trying to play dumb
>> when you?ve been called out for it.  
> 
> I never said that. But there would be a lot less.

Thus, why I said “imply”.

And good luck trying to prove your “a lot less” claim, because on a per
capita basis, it’s known that immigrants commit fewer murders than native
born Americans.


>>>>>> The concept of an 'illegal immigrant' is only from the 1920s.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Cross the right way.
>>>> 
>>>> So the ?right? way would be to have a totally fair & impartial system which
>>>> doesn?t contain racist, misogynistic, or bigoted exclusions ? right? 
>>> 
>>> The right way. What part of that don't you understand?
>> 
>> Dodge attempted.
> 
> No dodge. Enter the right way. Why is following the law so 
> confusing to you libs?

Because you’re still trying to dodge responsibility for the laws on if they
are honest and just.

Case in point:

>> Again:  does the ?right? way would be to have a totally fair & impartial
>> system which does not contain racist, misogynistic, or bigoted exclusions? 
> 
> You submit your case and if you pass you may enter.

And if they’re not white Christian Europeans?

Current law says 25-70 year waitlists for some countries.
How can it be just to be so blatantly discriminatory?


>> Because what we have today is not ?right? by these metrics.  And by you
>> trying to dodge acknowledgment of this, you?re effectively admitting that
>> our current immigration policy is not right.
>> 
> 
> When was the last time you tried to cross the border? Stop 
> being dumb. Come to a legal entry point and it will be 
> determined if you are elegable. Got a crime record. Maybe 
> not.

Last time I crossed the border was earlier this month.  How about you,
Walt?

Because we all know that the ‘eligibility’ bar varies very widely by where
you’re from, with very clear undertones on favored race, religion, etc:  it
is *not* based on not having a criminal record, or other impartial
“eligibility” metrics: it is explicitly intended to keep some out based on
things that they have no choice over (country of birth/origin, demographics
of same, etc).

That’s why you dodge when asked if the “right” way would be to have a
totally fair & impartialsystem which does not contain racist, misogynistic,
or bigoted exclusions: you know that the US system presently does not: it
fails to be fair, just and right.

>>>>>> No murders during the nineteenth century. Nobody was shot in the 
>>>>>> back of their head whilst watching a play.
>>>> 
>>>> Gosh, no snappy retort attempt on this satirical comment, eh?
>>> 
>>> Because it was a stupid statement.
>> 
>> Not stupid at all:  you’re merely mad that your attempt to imply/create
>> causality from nothing has been called out as logically invalid.

Which is why you still are trying to dodge, because you know is an unjust &
unfair system that is not right, which is morally indefensible.  

Do you refuse to criticize our shortcomings because you’re a coward?  Or is
it because you’re cravenly petty & selfish?  

-hh