The Mexican Invasion and Occupation

LilOlLady

Gold Member
Apr 20, 2009
10,014
1,310
190
Reno, NV
The Mexican Invasion and Occupation:
Who Pays? ANOTHER FORM OF CORP WELFARE?

OBAMA AND HIS SELLOUT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FOR WALL ST. AND THE ILLEGALS' ILLEGAL VOTES. In California alone WELFARE to illegals cost $20 billion! Keeping criminal illegals in state prisons cost ONE BILLION! Los Angeles County pays out $600 million per year in welfare to illegals even as 47% of those with a job are illegals with stolen social securty numbers. TODAY OBAMA WILL PROMISE LA RAZA BIT BY BIT AMNESTY or CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT!


The Mexican Invasion and Occupation: Who Pays? ANOTHER FORM OF CORP WELFARE?: MEXICO'S BIGGEST EXPORTS: DRUGS, VIOLENCE, LA RAZA SUPREMACY, PREGNANT WOMEN
 
Obama courtin' the La Raza vote...
:eusa_eh:
Immigration on Tap, As Obama Addresses Hispanic Group Monday
Monday, July 25, 2011 WASHINGTON (AP) - Immigration issues are expected to be the top of the agenda when President Barack Obama addresses a major Hispanic civil rights organization on Monday.
The National Council of La Raza is holding its annual conference in Washington. The group's leader, Janet Murgia, says Hispanics want to hear from Obama on a range of issues on which he has yet to take action.

Obama promised in his 2008 campaign to tackle immigration reform, and some in the Latino community have criticized him for failing to do so. He's also drawn criticism for a record number of deportations last year.

In the afternoon, the president welcomes the World Series champion San Francisco Giants to the White House. In addition to congratulating them, Obama plans to recognize the team for its community efforts.

Immigration on Tap, As Obama Addresses Hispanic Group Monday | CNSnews.com
 
The Bush-Chaney gang helped the Mexicans invade the USA, and Obama is just continuing the practice in the hopes that mexicans will eventually vote their way. Both Bush-Chaney and Obama undoubtedly took substantial donations from California and other fruit and vegetable growers and now they have to pay back their "loan donations" by selling out the USA. The politicians expect there will be enough middle class soldiers to save this country once the casualties start to mount to any significant degree.
Neither presidents Bush, Chaney nor Obama have taken the duties of office seriously and may eventually face trial for their behavior because the US Supreme Court ruled "A state of actual war may exist without any formal declaration of it by either party; and this is true of both a civil and a foreign war in which the President is bound to meet it in the shape it presented itself." The Prize Cases, 67 US 635 (1863).
 
The Bush-Chaney gang helped the Mexicans invade the USA, and Obama is just continuing the practice in the hopes that mexicans will eventually vote their way. Both Bush-Chaney and Obama undoubtedly took substantial donations from California and other fruit and vegetable growers and now they have to pay back their "loan donations" by selling out the USA.

:lol: RINO Bush's support for the invasion wasn't motivated by donations from a few orange growers, but belief among the RINOs that they could win over the mexican americans, who have such conservative cultural aspects as roman catholic beliefs and conservative family values. They were wrong - the mexican americans remain firmly 2/3 in the democrat column. With the leftwing hoped for eventual citizenship of tens of millions of illiterate rural mexican peasnats, that figure would undoubtedly go to something like 90%.
 
Granny's use of the noun "invasion" referring to illegal Mexicans is correct but dishonest because an invasion usually have a military conotation.

The word invasion implies that the people invaded and their legitimate government strongly, ferociously resisted the invading hordes.

When the natives do not do everything humanly possible to fight off the invasion, when the natives basically ignore it, like american citizens do, it cannot be called an invasion in the sense the noun is usually employed.

in·va·sion (n-vzhn)
n.
1. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer.
 
Democrats are an illegal's best friend. No one will fight for and champion the cause of illegals more than a Democrat.

A vote for a democrat is a vote for open borders and amnesty.
 
Democrats in power are socialists. They believe in spreading the wealth when it means taking it from someone else and not from THEMSELVES! They love to have their paws in someone else's pockets - usually the middle class via higher taxes to meet the expense of the give-away programs they love so much and of course to give to the poor which we import thousands on a dialy basis from third world countries in hopes that they will also eventually vote their way. Idiots.
 
José;4000877 said:
Granny's use of the noun "invasion" referring to illegal Mexicans is correct but dishonest because an invasion usually have a military conotation.

The word invasion implies that the people invaded and their legitimate government strongly, ferociously resisted the invading hordes.

When the natives do not do everything humanly possible to fight off the invasion, when the natives basically ignore it, like american citizens do, it cannot be called an invasion in the sense the noun is usually employed.

in·va·sion (n-vzhn)
n.
1. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer.

Here's the part Mr. Illegal left off:

in·va·sion   /ɪnˈveɪʒən/ Show Spelled[in-vey-zhuhn] Show IPA
noun

2. the entrance or advent of anything troublesome or harmful, as disease.
3. entrance as if to take possession or overrun: the annual invasion of the resort by tourists.
4. infringement by intrusion.

If you're going to stay here without a green card, senor, learn to speak the damn language.
 
José;4000877 said:
Granny's use of the noun "invasion" referring to illegal Mexicans is correct but dishonest because an invasion usually have a military conotation.

The word invasion implies that the people invaded and their legitimate government strongly, ferociously resisted the invading hordes.

When the natives do not do everything humanly possible to fight off the invasion, when the natives basically ignore it, like american citizens do, it cannot be called an invasion in the sense the noun is usually employed.

in·va·sion (n-vzhn)
n.
1. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer.

Here's the part Mr. Illegal left off:

in·va·sion   /ɪnˈveɪʒən/ Show Spelled[in-vey-zhuhn] Show IPA
noun

2. the entrance or advent of anything troublesome or harmful, as disease.
3. entrance as if to take possession or overrun: the annual invasion of the resort by tourists.
4. infringement by intrusion.

If you're going to stay here without a green card, senor, learn to speak the damn language.

Just a matter of "semantics" as we Americans would put it.:eusa_whistle:
Do Mexico have "semantics?"
 
If I enter your home without your permission and you don't say a peep, don't tell me to leave, don't threaten to beat me up, don't call the police, don't sue me, don't do anything and allow me to live there for 10, 20, 30 years...

Am I really "invading" your home, Pat??

Yes, I am but the use of the word "invasion" is a bit too strong due to your reaction (or lack thereof) described above.

Similarly the US has both the material means and the legal right to expel its entire illegal population but the country lacks the political will to do it.

Notice that I said the use of the word invasion is technically correct... I just urged the OP to stop being such a drama queen by choosing words with aggressive, violent conotations like "invasion" and "occupation".

Anyway, semantics debates are a waste of bandwidth.
 
Originally posted by LilOlLady
Just a matter of "semantics" as we Americans would put it.:eusa_whistle:
Do Mexico have "semantics?"

You beat me to it, Granny. :lol: :lol:
 
Granny chose an OP with the words "invasion" and "occupation" because they have a far greater dramatic impact in the sense that they convey the idea of war, the idea of violence, of natives fighting, dying in great numbers and eventually losing the battle to the invading hordes.

The two words play into her strategy of mobilising you, member of the USMB, against illegal immigration.

Can't really blame her for doing her "job" efficiently.
 
All is fair in love and war. If an invading army uses sticks or stones to kill US Border Patrol officers, or renders them ineffective by bribing corrupt politicians rather than using more costly soldiers in conventional military uniforms and weapons of a poorer quality than we have, why should they do otherwise. Please, don't say the ancient Achaeans had no right to win the Trojan War because they used trickery and cunning!
At a distance of a few hundred feet, could you tell the difference between an illegal Mexican crossing the border and an al Quaida terrorist?
 
Last edited:
José;4002055 said:
Granny chose an OP with the words "invasion" and "occupation" because they have a far greater dramatic impact in the sense that they convey the idea of war, the idea of violence, of natives fighting, dying in great numbers and eventually losing the battle to the invading hordes.

It's actually the leftwing which unloads tons of BS regarding the illegal alien invasion. They want to call people who sneak across the border at night, violating federal law, "undocumented workers" - as if they were just someone who forgot to get their visa stamped. :lol: The "workers" is a big laugh - lots of them just want to bankrupt ERs, or have anchor babies and then tap in to countless welfare state benefits, paid for by the taxes of americans. Any california policeman would laugh in your face at your benign portrayal - the illegals provide most of the vicious gangs and drug trade, and constitute 25% of the huge california prison population. Doesn't quite fit in with the image of nice peasants picking grapes. :lmao:

They need to go back where they belong - and so do YOU.
 
While I don't dispute the facts and figures supplied in previous posts I do observe that the dramatic increase in the Hispanic population of east Texas and NW Louisiana have had an overall positive impact.

The housing industry has greatly benefited by Hispanic labor, I'm seeing a work culture not a welfare one.

I ride patrol in my parish with the Sheriff's posse and my job is to observe. That's what I see, a lot of Hispanics working, buying and selling, raising families and generally law abiding.

I have no idea who is illegal or legal immigrants or American citizens. That's the feds purview.
 
Reagan granted amnesty to illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously.

Odd that so many of you folks forget this fact, isn't it?

 
Reagan granted amnesty to illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously.

Odd that so many of you folks forget this fact, isn't it?


Nobody forgot it. What you leftwingers forgot is that there was a "gentleman's agreement" at the time that that was a ONE-TIME event based on humanitarian considerations, that henceforth the border and legal immigration were to be enforced. Ofcourse, leftwingers forgot that promise as quickly as they forgot their 2 for 1 promised spending cuts if Reagan raised taxes in 1982, which incidentally is ANOTHER thing leftwingers have "amnesia" about when spoutiung their standard "reagan raised taxes" half-truth.
 
I read an article from foxnews latino titled "Spanish and Indigenous Language Battle Divides California Town" that i found quite ironic. It seems that the latino citizens in Greenfield Ca are tired of the mass influx of illegals and the crime that comes with them. The Latino Americans are complaining about the Oaxacans, a group of migrants that came to the area to work. The article states ,

"Established residents say a massive influx of migrants from the Mexican state of Oaxaca has changed their city for the worse.They speak their own languages, not Spanish, they keep their own customs, such as arranged marriages, and, despite a longstanding tradition of sanctuary and tolerance in Greenfield, they remain separate. In a town feeling heavily pressured by the economic crisis and gang activity, the influx of Oaxacans and their lack of understanding of U.S. customs has led to an ethnic clash. t's a new round in a conflict as old as the United States, in which successive waves of immigrants have often feuded with each other. But what's happening in Greenfield is distinct, partly because the split here pits immigrants rooted in the same country, but also because of the hard look it's forcing the town to take at itself."

The article uses the words "established residents" instead of "citizens of Greenfield", I dare to wonder how many of these "established residents" are citizens since the article referred to both groups as immigrants without noting any status. So a group of immigrants that came here, more than likely illegally, that speaks their own language and customs is upset because there is a new group doing the same thing and threatening their customs. This article screams hypocrisy, I guess the next thing we are going to hear out of these "established residents" is that english is threatening their customs?

Here's an easy solution to the problem that would guarentee that our courts and tax dollars would not get bogged down by their tribal Mexican feud. Round them all up and any that are not citizens or here under a current, valid visa send back to Mexico to sort out their differences. I can't link the story because I don't have enough posts yet but you can find it at foxnews latino.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top