Immigrant "sweep" nets over 2000 illegals
 

Officials arrest 2,000 in criminal immigrant sweep

HOUSTON (Reuters) - U.S. customs officials arrested more than 2,000 illegal immigrants, gang members and other fugitives in a nationwide sweep, the head of the U.S. Immigration and Customer Enforcement agency said on Wednesday.

The sweep, code named "Operation Return to Sender," has yielded arrests in 34 states since May 26 and comes as the U.S. Congress is debating several immigration measures, including proposals that would tighten border security and create a temporary worker program.

About half of the 2,179 people arrested in the operation had criminal records, and 367 were members or associates of violent street gangs, including the Mara Slavatrucha, or MS-13, Julie Myers, the assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security for ICE told a press conference.

"America's welcome does not extend to immigrants who come here to commit crimes," Myers said.

Others arrested included 146 who had convictions for sexual offenses involving minors, and 640 were fugitive aliens who had been issued final orders of removal by an immigration judge and had not complied.

About 829 of those arrested on immigration violations have been deported to their home countries.

lol ... seriously?

Not commenting on the rest of the article, but just how this was written,
immigrants must be so happy to see themselves thrown in that lot, don't you think? Creates the idea all illegal immigrants are criminals.

Not to stir sh*t by any means, but how can you say that "illegal" immigrants are not "criminals" in the strictest (or loosest even) sense of the word? I mean, doesn't the fact that they're here "illegally" already mean they are "criminals"? I think I see what you mean as far as committing other crimes, but they're already criminals by being here illegally anyway, so...

Again, I'm really not trying to be an ass or anything by any means, but their existence here makes them criminals anyway.:shrug: Am I being unreasonable?

Brad

I almost spit my diet sunkist out at that one..

Why in the world do you drink diet, oh waif-ish one?:confused:

i like the taste of diet drinks better? :sorry:

I see your point, but yeah, I think of other activities when someone uses the word 'criminal' to describe a person.
I just find it sad how people can be categorized as illegal or criminal based on something artificial like borders, paperwork, burocracy.. I guess I'm an idealist.

Borders were decided upon long ago and they arent nebulous shifting things like clouds :shrug:

as for criminality, the article makes it very clear just how prevelant criminality is--just within the 2000 (!) that was rounded up:
I wonder if the rest are being brought up on charges here? And Brad, I agree with you, the key word here is ILLEGAL immigrants.

With all due respect Mari, I think this is one area where being an idealist is frankly naive.

Then you didn't read my first post. I know what's referred to in this article, but it reads like a generalisation to me.
As for borders, they're an artificial concept. There is no actual naturally formed line on the ground where there is a border, only an idea created by some humans (the ones in power) at some point in history. Sometimes rather randomly, as well.

I disagree with that last word. Could say something similar about you if I wanted to. :shrug:
And I still refuse to associate 'illegal immigrants' with 'criminal'. They're often just the unlucky sods born on the wrong side of that border-thing.

But this thing IS setting off a horrible trend of racial hate crime :distress:


From the Associated Press:

ROCKY POINT, N.Y. (AP) _ Two Mexican immigrants fishing off a
Long Island jetty were set upon by a group of four white youths who
beat them and stole their money while using racial and ethnic
slurs, police said.
The young men have been charged with robbery and assault as hate
crimes in connection with the Monday night attack, and were
arraigned Wednesday in a Suffolk County court.
Authorities identified the defendants as William Foley, 16;
Nicholas Provenzano, 19; Daniel Sturgis, 19, and Jesse Lee Ward,
18, all of Rocky Point.
Police said the two Mexican men, who were not identified, were
not seriously injured.
Attorney James D'Angelo, who represented Ward and Foley in
court, said all four youths had entered not guilty pleas.
``They are denying involvement in this,'' said D'Angelo.
Long Island has been the site of other anti-immigrant incidents.
In 2000, two Mexican men were beaten by two locals in Farmingville
who promised them work. On July 4, 2003, a Mexican family barely
escaped with their lives after teens set their Farmingville house
ablaze by shooting fireworks through a window.

(Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
APNT-06-15-06 0919EDT<

um, does the Rio Grande count as a natural border? As for being artificial, as long as the two entities on either side agree what the border IS, does it really matter that it is a man made concept? We all abide by man made concepts :shrug: If you have a fence on your property, you wouldnt want your neighbor making him/herself at home in your yard without your permission would you? Im not talking about a simple thing like getting an errant pet or paper, Im talking about setting up a patio set and BBQ in your yard and inviting all his/her friends for a party in your yard!! you can see how these "artificial" borders are actually important I hope :shrug:

And I dont see how you can disagree with the concept of ILLEGAL= CRIMINAL. ILLEGAL = CRIMINAL in any other societal aspect, why not this one?? :shrug: your refusal to acknowledge that fact is puzzling......

Right, and then those unlucky sods who are working construction across the alley from my house decide to come over and break into my house stealing most of the valuable things I and my family own and then get away with the whole thing 'cause guess what? They're illegal; they're not on the books. And yes, this did happen to me when I was 10 years old and I was in the house when it happened! :eek: Luckily they were only interested in property and not violence.

And yes, I know this is only one incident and shouldn't be attributed to a general population of people, but it's also an example of how illegal immigration can cause more problems than people might initially think. And while these people have a sorry lot in life being from a poor, 3rd world country, that doesn't automatically give them the right to come over to this country by any means necessary does it? I do feel for them, but fair is fair--what about all those other immigrants who went through all kinds of flaming hoops to get here legally?

So let me see if I get this right... You say ILLEGAL = CRIMINAL. OK, so were all your ancestors criminals???? The Europeans that came over here way back when weren't all legal immigrants.
And how about the people that come here trying to make a better life for themselves but their lawyer is a piece of crap and f**** up the case?! They've committed all their life savings into coming here, paid the lawyer and all the other fees and have nothing left. They can't go home because they don't have any money and they have no home to go to. What are they supposed to do?

Im not sure what you are referring to?? are you talking about when this country was colonized or the influx of immigrants that came thru Ellis Island and various other ports? Either way, my ancestors came over LEGALLY, either as part of the original colonists (on my mom's side) or thru Ellis Island (on my Dad's side). I have my own personal feelings about the crimes that were committed against the Native Americans when Europeans came here, but that is a different topic. If you are by chance referring to the colonists who came over here to work off their criminal sentences from Europe, that was a form of indentured servitude and once they served their sentence, they were free/clear. In any event, that is not equivalent to immigrants coming here without proper documentation or permission and/or staying here past the expiration point (if any) which is in fact what the article is about and to which I most vigorously object.

As for your other "point," Im not sure why you equate the issue of immigrants being poorly represented in court with illegals coming and staying here. Thats like comparing apples and oranges. :shrug:

Ok -think we found anther song for the worst songs list!! :p

haha! i know, so many elvis songs are soooo bad.

I wonder if Elvis' version of Return TO Sender was being played in the Patty Wagons as they rounded them up?:laugh:

is it bad that i actually LIKE that song.. :o

not at all! there are many horrendous songs that i love. :wavey:

Yes, but the question is did they just happen to round up 2000 illegal immigrants and it turned out that a high percentage had criminal records. Or had they identified and were pursuing illegal immigrants with criminal records and/or in gangs and in the process arrested other illegal immigrants.

My sense is it is the latter, which is why the percentage is so high, making it seem like if you round up any group of 2000 illegal immigrants, you are going to find a sky high percentage of sex offenders, gang members, etc.

Yeah - I would tend to agree with that. I think this sweep was more of a propaganda tool aimed at showing Americans that illegal immigrants are also criminals...the articles are totally framed that way and I think it's sad. :distress:

I agree, but also on the other side, poor and less educated populations do tend to be more crime ridden, and illegal immigrant populations tend to be more poor and less well educated.

I didnt get that impression at all. I think if the goal was to go after illegals with criminal records, you'd see higher numbers. :shrug: this article had only about half of the deportees identified as criminals, which I think is probably consistent with a random sting operation...

remember, we are talking about law breakers in the first place so the fact that some of them also had criminal pasts doesnt surprise me.

2000 down, 10,998,000 to go.

I hate to say it - but I agree. And - if they came here without a visa - they are illegal no matter what the fukc group they are put with - that pisses people off, but it is the truth :shrug:

This issue is hard for me, it's really straining my super liberal membership. But i have found a way to reconcile.
There should be rules, but they absolutely should not be made by the people who are making them now.
Bad law is trying to be enacted. Good societies don't function on bad law.
Apparently we are operating on a "let 'em in, then arrest them!" plan.
I swear, there is a way to handle immigration that doesn't drive people to these extremes. My whole problem is that this is not an all or nothing argument, the way it has been here.
I don't love immigration. But I couldn't bring myself to enforce all the rules currently in place.
The whole system is f*cked up, which is neither the fault of the immigrants or the Americans.
Let me reiterate, I am only "against" immigration because of the siphoning of natural resources that America still has. But that goes for anyone who has too many kids. America is one of few countries who have environmental laws (weak though they are) and I absolutely do not want those to be eschewed because of demand. Especially since America's demand is the most of the whole world. We consume immense amounts of resources, and so when immigrants come they consume the same resources. Which are probably 5 fold at least what they would have consumed in their own country. We're like the capitalist needless consumer hellpit that will eventually render the whole earth unpopulable.

I don't approve of the damand that ignorant human populations make on world resources. And that doesn't necessarily mean immigrants.
Hello, people, it's called birth control, and if your faith says that is wrong, either way you should only have as many kids as you and your environment can support. Hey, you don't have food for your family. You think that's a hint?! The hint is, maybe keep it under two or three, and you could provide for your family.
Again, not just an opinion for immigrants, although from Mexico they tend to be more Catholic/anti birth control. But as far as I'm concerned, they could be anyone - if they're populating that fast, I'm still against it. Heck, mormons piss me off for the same reason! :laugh:
It's called science, it's called human advancement, people - embrace it, it will make all our lives better, not to mention the health of the planet.

It's not a right to keep a child, it's work, and availability of resources.
Every other species on the planet is forced to live by this rule.
And since we have the means of birth control, with our big ol' brains, we should use it.
God, at this point animals are smarter than us. We have the tech, but remain in the dark, though the evidence is available. It's pretty sickening.

There have been some nice positive stories in SF Chronicle lately about the undocumented, providing some needed balance.

I never wrapped up the converation on the other thread. After my research, I admit that the cost of providing services to undocumented is higher than I thought. However, it (appears to be around $10 billion) is a rather small amount compared to our overall budget. I'm much more concerned about what we are spending on an immoral war.

I support amnesty for the current undocumented population. They are already here and I think it is next to impossible to think they can all be rounded up and sent home. Plus they have roots here and many with children who are in school and I support integrating them into our society. If they have a criminal record, then send them home.

At the same time, I support reform that strengthens efforts to slow future illegal immigration. Not dumb ideas like building a fence, but targeting businesses that hire/exploit immigrants, tougher enforcement of providing residency/citizenship when applying for things like public services, etc.

What disturbs me the most is that this has become such a defining issue for the 2006 election, proven by the outcome of the race to succeed Duke Cunningham. I believe the energy around illegal immigration this year started as a GOP ploy to take attention off the issues that should be key in this election. That doesn't mean I think people who oppose illegal immigration are part of that ploy, but there is definitely a reason it has reached such a crescendo this year.

It is just way low on my list of problems in this country and it will be a shame if the outcome of elections hinges on it, in my opinion. And that's pretty much all I have left to say on the issue. This is one where people have entrenched positions and there isn't much room for swaying.

Well, it was indeed how I saw it. They were targeting known criminals. Just type "immigration sting" into Google news and read the articles. In San Diego, they rounded people suspected of being illegal immigrants as part of the sweep, but they weren't the main target.

So, obviously it worked to create the impression that if you take a group of 2000 illegal immigrants, that you're going to get a huge percentage of people who have created serious crimes like child molestation.

Here's a sample of what I found on Google.

http://www.southeasttexaslive.com/si...d=512588&rfi=6

The sting targeted individuals who had criminal records, including 146 with convictions for sexual offenses involving minors and 367 members of violent street gangs, including Mara Salvatrucha, also known as MS-13. About 640 of those arrested had been deported before and had returned to the country, according to a statement released by the agency.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the operation is part of a new get-tough strategy that is cracking down on the criminals who "perpetuate illegal immigration."

"The fugitives captured in this operation threatened public safety in hundreds of neighborhoods and communities around the country," he said. "This department has no tolerance for their criminal behavior and we are using every authority at our disposal to bring focus to fugitive operations and rid communities of this criminality."

With all due respect, shouldn't these criminals (over and above the illegal/criminal status) be the very ones to go after first?

In the end, there is a system for coming into this country to work and trying to be a citizen. It is relatively easy and clearly if you know enough to evade the authorities by being an illegal, you know enough about how to be legal. So, I say all should have to follow that system.

I mean it scares me that our borders are not secure and that some terrorist who could not get into America through American Customs can just walk across the Rio Grande.

Although that hasn't happened and the worst terrorists thus far have come through Canada!!

And it's not an easy process to come to America if you are from a poor farm in Mexico and your family is starving. It's only easy to come here if you have a lot of money.

Edit: It not being easy to come here is not my way of making an excuse - they're still illegal - I'm just sayin.

It is?

When my partner came to live here with me, there wasn't a single way he could do so except possibly to pay a ton of money and go to school. And he was French, I can't imagine it's that easy for people from Mexico to come here if they want to.

Maybe the immigration laws have changed, though.

To become a citizen, these are the general Requirements:

All naturalization applicants must demonstrate good moral character.

The other naturalization requirements may be modified or waived for certain applicants, such as spouses of U.S. Citizens.

A period of continuous residence and physical presence in the United States
An ability to read, write and speak English
Good moral character
Knowledge of the principles of the U.S. Constitution
Favorable disposition toward the United States

Certainly, it is a process. I am just noting that the lengths people go to be illegal aliens - fake ID's, nomadic lifestyle, etc., is indicative that that effort could be put into obtaining a Visa or getting your citizenship.

Here one of many sites that goes into the process.

http://www.foreignborn.com/visas_imm...s.htm#eligible

I hear ya - but just because they have not (though much of the drug trade does and that is a form of terrorism) - does not mean they won't. So, I say an ounce of prevention . . . .

And, mind you, if, like the gun laws, the idiots in charge over the last several decades would enforce the current laws, this would not be that large of an issue.

I think you are already skewing your results if you use a search term like immigration STING. I will do my own search with a different (more generic) search criteria, and lets see what I get.....

edit: I used as my search term "operation Return to Sender" and apparently the focus was on getting illegals who had criminal records. here is an excerpt from an AP article:

Ya know, I just cant feel sorry for these people. they need to be GONE. they are killers/rapists/molesters/drug dealers/gang members. to wit:
as far as I am concerned, this operation was a job well done, and lets hope they do many more of these sweeps.

Strand, that is the process for a legal immigrant to become a U.S. citizen.

The process to be allowed into the country as a legal immigrant is extremely complex and limited. In fact, they have had a "lottery" every year for a number of years with something like 40,000 slots and millions apply.

I am well familiar with it, I spent quite a sum of money hiring lawyers to help my first partner get legal status here and it never happened after seven years. And he was (1) French, (2) spoke perfect English, (3) employable.

I agree 100% that legal immigration is the way to go, but I think laws need to change dramatically to make sure that people who want to come here and seek a better life for their families have a good shot at it. I'm liberal on immigration and would support raising the "quotas" that currently exist while cracking down more on future illegal immigration.

I don't feel sorry for the killers/rapists/drug dealers/gang members either. Those with criminal records need to go.

I know you feel that way, and that's fine. I was just trying to correct the record. And, Irishgrl, when I did the search I found over 100 articles with the same info as the article I posted. Including articles in NY and LA Times. If I thought I had found info based on a skewed query, I wouldn't have posted.:)

I became friends with some Latino people while living in Seattle and in Alaska (in fact the canneries up there have become dependent on labor brought in, mainly Mexican). I also became friends with some former New Jerseyites who informed me about U.S. citizens tax dollars going to build hiring centers for illegal under the counter labor to get it off the streets. This is such a complex sitaution really, but I feel the main problem is that business is able to hire non-citizens so easily with no responsibilites or penalties and in fact many benefits (like not having to provide benefits). They argue how Americans don't want to do many of these jobs, well, sure... now that they pay so badly with no benefits! You cannot expect of citizens to compete with non-citizens, that is just wrong, and companies have so often been held as being above a nationality except when it comes to paying for political seats and votes. Reagan began decimating many anti-trust and other business laws that had made the U.S. what it was. Reagan Jr. (and I respected Bush Sr. but his son is another manipulable puppet like The Gipper), well he is just finishing off I guess what reagan started. Union busting, citizenship undermining, allowing market access with almost no conditions of benefits to citizens... it's just a mess, and particularily galling I would think when your own tax money is being used against you whether to help subsidise a sports arena with a corporate name on it or a hiring center for illegal labor.

The people are caught in the crossfire. The U.S. owes the Tejanos and the Mexican people as far as I'm concerned something, but they are being as abused as the tax paying U.S. citizen is. But it's a case of divide and conquer; turning ordinary working people against each other and nobody seems to hold elected representatives, orf business law, accountable... except to punish and harrass the poor migrants. The Mexican government has things to answer for in this, and their own immigration laws are very restrictive and full of stiff penalties. Building a long wall when Pat Buchanen first made it a presidential campaign platform a dozen or so years ago sounded ludicrous then, i wish it would sound as ludicrous to people now, but instead Bush Jr. is sending more muscle as if that will solve things and not just escalate a situation to a new level.

This is an AWESOME post.