France/egypt

[ShockAndAwe^i^]

(I shouldn't have put that title for this post)
I found this article while I was searching for a news story I heard on TV today.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,79834,...,00.htmlarticle
This one is just about a poll of who is the US's friend. hehe(note the address)

The news I heard today was that Illegal Mexican immigrants are suing the US($50.000.000) for not providing safety for illegal immigrants.
While they're sneaking accross the border.
If that just don't freak you out...this will.
They want the US to provide watering stations in the desert for the law breaking illegal aliens and are suing to get this and much more done.
This boggles my mind!
The mere fact that a lawsuit can even be brought for this is ridiculous.
Another great example of liberalism run amuck.

Hey if anyone can find something on the net about this please post it.
I couldn't!

[clocker]

How is this an example of "Liberalism"?

I would consider myself more liberal than many ( of late perhaps more Libertarian...), and I do not support this proposition.

I do not support the acceptance of Mexican Consular IDs.

I do not support public health care and educational scholarships for illegal aliens.

Mexico for years has been running programs that make the Mariel boatlift pale in comparison. Mexican border states actively promote illegal immigration by providing maps, supplies, water and Consular IDs with the intent of easing their own pitiful social infrastructure. Rather than deal with their population problems they simply seek to export it to the US then sit back and enjoy the influx of American money that inevitably flows back to relatives/family.
The Mexican Police and Army regularly cross our borders ( a move which, if duplicated by US authorities ,would raise a huge outcry).
The Mexican government, Army and Police are riddled with corruption.

And somehow (surprise, surprise!) this is our fault.

Screw 'em.

[ShockAndAwe^i^]

hehehe
Don't take it personal.
It may not be liberalism but somehow some way if you dig deep enough I think one might find that it is.
It certainly is'nt conservative policies that encourage this type of thing.
The truth is conservatives are wishy washy with the subject.
You know "biggot" "racist" "evil" are a few words that the left loves to throw out as soon as anyone wants to really do something about it.
And sadly it works!

[j2k4]

Originally posted by clocker@26 May 2003 - 22:27
How is this an example of "Liberalism"?

I would consider myself more liberal than many ( of late perhaps more Libertarian...), and I do not support this proposition.

I do not support the acceptance of Mexican Consular IDs.

I do not support public health care and educational scholarships for illegal aliens.

Mexico for years has been running programs  that make the Mariel boatlift pale in comparison. Mexican border states actively promote illegal immigration by providing maps, supplies, water and Consular IDs with the intent of easing their own pitiful social infrastructure. Rather than deal with their population problems they simply seek to export it to the US then sit back and enjoy the influx of American money that inevitably flows back to relatives/family.
The Mexican Police and Army regularly cross our borders ( a move which, if duplicated by US authorities ,would raise a huge outcry).
The Mexican government, Army and Police are riddled with corruption.

And somehow (surprise, surprise!) this is our fault.

Screw 'em.

Thanks for doin' all the typing, Clocker.

They want Texas back, and the rest of the country as a punitive award.

Seriously, I haven't the slightest clue why this continues; with all the ramifications? The people in charge (and it starts with Dubya) should be............I don't know, something really painful.

They don't even make a case-no wink, no reach-around, no nothin'.

I don't even have a theory.....

[myfiles3000]

Families of 11 dead illegals to sue U.S.
By Steve Miller
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The families of 11 immigrants who died illegally crossing into Arizona from Mexico have filed a $41 million claim against two federal agencies, saying the government's refusal to put water out in the desert contributed to the migrants' deaths
The action filed against the Department of Interior and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service asks for $3.75 million for each of the deceased, whose bodies were found last year in the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge between Tucson and Yuma.
Attorneys for survivors of the deceased said that U.S. Border Patrol policies had shut down more populous portions of the Arizona border and forced illegal aliens to enter through more remote areas.
"What these agencies knew — or should have known — is that by doing this, and with a history of deaths in the desert, these people would cross in these dangerous areas," said A. James Clark, one of the two Yuma lawyers filing the claim. "It would have cost the government nothing to put water stations in, as it had done in other locations."
The claim says the agencies rejected a request made shortly before the deaths by the Tucson humanitarian group Humane Borders to place 60-gallon water stations in the refuge, as it has done in other parts of the desert.
"The agency was on notice that death or serious injury would likely occur," the claim states. "The denial of the agency was based upon concern over animal habitat, which outweighed human life. This decision ran contrary to the stated mission objective of the agency, which is to protect human life on its property."
The claim, which must show the existence of injury and ask for damages, is the first step to a lawsuit under federal law. If unanswered within 180 days, the claim can then become a lawsuit.
A spokesman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Albuquerque, N.M., which oversees the refuge, acknowledged that his agency received the request for water stations last year.
"But of those places they requested to place water stations, none of them would have helped the poor people who perished there," said spokesman Tom Bauer. "In fact, the closest proposed water area for a water station was 12 miles and two mountain ranges away from where the migrants were found dead."
He added that the smugglers who were leading illegal immigrants through the more remote areas were "duping" their clients.
Several unmarked watering holes established by the government, supplied by 10,000-gallon tanks, are placed around the refuge, part of an effort to maintain the Sonoran pronghorn antelope, an endangered species.
"It is criminal that these smugglers are taking people on to that range," said Mr. Bauer, who added that 30-foot poles have been erected at some of the water holes on the refuge.
"The water has been out there for several years," Mr. Bauer. "Our idea is to mark where the water holes are as a humane gesture."
Fourteen persons died in May 2001 when smugglers led the immigrants into an area of the refuge known as the "Devil's Path" near the Mexican border.
The refuge is an 860,000-acre expanse with the closest major highway — Interstate 8 — 300 miles north of the border. Cabeza Prieta abuts a military range and offers little shade. Signs warn visitors that ground temperatures in summer can exceed 130 degrees.
In the past three years, the Immigration and Naturalization Service estimates that more than 1,000 migrants have died of various causes trying to cross into the United States.
One of the smugglers for the deceased named in the claim, Jose Lopez-Ramos, received a 16-year sentence for his role in the deaths earlier this year.
Lopez-Ramos was one of three guides working for a smuggling ring that led a group of about 30 illegal immigrants from Sonoita, Mexico, into the United States on May 19.
Each immigrant paid the smugglers $1,400 for the illegal crossing. They were told the trip would take two days and that they would walk at night to avoid detection and the searing desert sun.
The group got lost and ran out of water during the second day, Lopez-Ramos told authorities. One guide and three immigrants turned back and returned to Mexico.

[clocker]

S&A, I certainly didn't take it personally.
Living as I do in the West, the problem of illegal Mexican immigration may have more immediacy for me than for you.
That said, who are the "Liberals" you are referring to?
Mexican liberals?

Please be aware that I have no gripe with legal immigrants of any persuasion. More power to 'em and good luck.
I do have a problem with the Mexican government actively aiding and abetting the circumvention of our immigration policies.

Please don't equate liberalism with stupidity or anti-Americanism.

[myfiles3000]

The Arizona Republic
© Copyright 2003, The Arizona Republic. All Rights Reserved.


Friday, May 9, 2003


Local


LAWSUIT IN MIGRANT DEATHS A LONG SHOT, LAWYERS SAY
By Susan Carroll and Tessie Borden, The Arizona Republic

Constancia Landa Ortiz stands to make a fair chunk of $42 million if a
jury sides with the families of 11 migrants who died in the desert in
Arizona's deadliest border crossing.

The widow's plans for the money are as humble as her surroundings, a
tiny village high in the mountains of southern Mexico with rickety, dirt
roads and one community phone.

"I would deposit it in the bank to be able to eat in case there was an
illness in the family or an emergency," said Landa Ortiz, who lost her
husband and 15-year-old son in the May 2001 crossing.

But the lawsuit against the U.S. government, filed by attorneys for the
families of 11 of the 14 men who died in the crossing, has little chance
of succeeding at trial, some legal experts said Thursday.

"It's a tragedy, to be sure, but I think it will be a very difficult
case, both on the law and the facts," said Phoenix attorney Michael
Manning.

Phoenix civil rights lawyer Stephen G. Montoya was more direct: "It's
inconceivable" that the families will win, he said.

Attorneys for the family members of the undocumented immigrants declined
comment on the lawsuit, filed April 30 in U.S. District Court in Tucson.
The U.S. Attorney's Office also declined comment.

The lawsuit contends that the immigrants' deaths could have been
prevented if a humanitarian group had been allowed to install water
stations in the desert. A month before the 14 crossers died, the group
Humane Borders requested permission to put water stations in the "exact
area" where the men died in the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge
east of Yuma, according to the lawsuit. That request was denied.

The suit also said that the federal government's crackdown on illegal
immigration in urban areas along the U.S.-Mexican border forced
immigrants to risk crossing the desert in remote, dangerous areas.

The victims, all Mexicans ages 16 to 40, paid a "coyote," or smuggler,
$1,400 each to lead them through the Arizona desert to a highway where
they would be picked up and taken to Phoenix. They were told the trip
would take two days.

Instead, they were found dead of heat exposure on May 23, 2001, after
the smuggler abandoned them in temperatures that peaked at 115 degrees.

"I do think the policy of our government has created a very dangerous
situation for migrants," said Andrew Silverman, a University of Arizona
law professor. "By concentrating our efforts in more urban areas of the
border, we know from prior summers that people are going to die in the
deserts."

Silverman said there is "some legitimacy to the suit."

"Just because someone may have violated an immigration law, it doesn't
mean that if our government does something wrong it shouldn't be held
liable," he added.

But Montoya said lawyers for the plaintiffs are undermining, not
advancing, the cause of civil rights.

"This is a silly, poorly conceived lawsuit," Montoya said.

"I am a U.S. citizen. If I go hiking in the Arizona desert and die of
thirst, can I sue the federal government because I didn't plan right and
had a bad hike?" he asked.

"What happened was a tragedy, and those families have my condolences. I
praise the people who provide humanitarian aid," Montoya added. "But to
sue when they don't get the assistance they desire -- I think that gives
lawyers a bad name, and it gives undocumented immigrants a bad name."

Manning said although he does not believe the case will succeed at
trial, it would raise interesting questions about precedent if it did.

"If the government has a duty to protect these people while they're
breaking the law, how do you then say the government does not have to
protect a bank robber in a high speed chase?" Manning asked.

Landa Ortiz said she doesn't know much about the lawsuit. She remembers
two men coming to her home and asking her to "sign a paper" not long
after her husband and son died, she said.

She hasn't seen or heard from the lawyers since, she said.

"It would be so good if that money were to come along."

[clocker]

Next we'll be sued by Islamic terrorists who get killed while assembling a car bomb.
Explosives weren't labeled in Arabic.

Dying whilst engaged in an illegal enterprise may be sad , tragic even, but basically only rises to the level of tough luck.

[ShockAndAwe^i^]

Hey Clocker
I live in central California where tons of them are right now.
Out here "on the left coast" it is ridiculous policies created by the left wing dominated state government.
Yes and some are "Mexican Liberals".
Their starting to dominate a lot of local governments out here and their making headway into the state gov.as well.
Almost all of them advocate the most ridiculous immigration policies.
Your definitely not from the far left.
You really sound more like a libertarian to me.
I read your posts and agree with you a fair percentage of the time.
You've nailed this one.
My Files...Thanks
That was exactly what I was looking for.
Very informative!

Did anyone notice the discrepancys between the lawyers for the Mexican families and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

1. A spokesman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Albuquerque, N.M., which oversees the refuge, acknowledged that his agency received the request for water stations last year.
"But of those places they requested to place water stations, none of them would have helped the poor people who perished there," said spokesman Tom Bauer. "In fact, the closest proposed water area for a water station was 12 miles and two mountain ranges away from where the migrants were found dead."


2. The lawsuit contends that the immigrants' deaths could have been
prevented if a humanitarian group had been allowed to install water
stations in the desert. A month before the 14 crossers died, the group
Humane Borders requested permission to put water stations in the "exact
area" where the men died in the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge
east of Yuma, according to the lawsuit. That request was denied.

[WeeMouse]

I'm going to sue America for severe psychological damage - I have had to see and hear more of george W Bush than I have ever wanted to!

Seriously though - how can these people get away with these lawsuits?
I did hear a bit of gossip that Families of victims killed in the September 11th tragedy are planning to sue the airlines of gross negligence - is that true?