Mistake costs illegal immigrant dishwasher $59,000

[NavarreMan 10]

Time for a reality check. Most developed nations around the world have very strict immigration laws. The top 10 countries with the highest living standards in the world all have very tough immigration laws; hence their high living standard.

America is not hated around the world because if its policy on immigration. Actually the lack of respect is related to quite the opposite as people abroad laugh and think what sort of nation cannot protect its borders and people.

Yes, I hear that a lot in my travels. "We laugh at America because they cannot protect their borders." Yessiree, I hear that every where I go.

If you want to get technical the one thing I have heard from pretty much every person abroad whose opinion of America ranges from simply disliking to absolutely hating is how little respect they have for the laws and courts here. You know, the very thing you are saying over and over again should be used to determine whether someone has broken a law. For me personally, no court should be allowed to determine the fate of a nation and its security. Especially a court system who has been known to award someone millions for spilling hot McDonalds coffee on themselves. Or one that allows mobs like the ACLU to use it to bankrupt counties for having religious signs up. Ever heard the saying abroad "only in America"?

Certainly don't take my word for it alone. Have a look at a range of foreign forums and see what their opinion is. Even ask them what they think of whether something 'is constitutional or not'. That is probably one of the most laughed at liberal American phrases abroad.

Securing the border is actually something that will allow America to save face rather than be laughed at.

There goes the Constitution...

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

You're right, I stand corrected. I wasn't pretending, I've just never known anyone who was here on this type of visa as an unskilled worker:

"H-2B visa (skilled and unskilled workers) is required by an employee who is coming to the United States to perform a job which is temporary or seasonal in nature and for which there is a shortage of U.S. workers. The employer is required to obtain from the Department of Labor, a labor certification confirming that there are no qualified U.S. workers eligible for the employment on which the petition is based."

I wonder how many of these are issued.

11 years is temporary? he doent fit the bill,still illegal? try again.

I never said he wasn't here illegally! We were discussing possible visa types for dishwashers.

Okay this isnt a possible visa type! Got it. Geez! Spin it up.

My sentiments exactly. Hopscotch anyone? Off to the tool thread

Edited October 2, 2007 by CarolsMarc

[Jenn! 918]

You're right, I stand corrected. I wasn't pretending, I've just never known anyone who was here on this type of visa as an unskilled worker:

"H-2B visa (skilled and unskilled workers) is required by an employee who is coming to the United States to perform a job which is temporary or seasonal in nature and for which there is a shortage of U.S. workers. The employer is required to obtain from the Department of Labor, a labor certification confirming that there are no qualified U.S. workers eligible for the employment on which the petition is based."

I wonder how many of these are issued.

11 years is temporary? he doent fit the bill,still illegal? try again.

I never said he wasn't here illegally! We were discussing possible visa types for dishwashers.

Okay this isnt a possible visa type! Got it. Geez! Spin it up.

My sentiments exactly. Hopscotch anyone?

Look Marc, can you please quit it? I was just writing straight forward statements about visa types, no opinion involved. And you come and it's like you're not even reading what I'm typing.

This is tiring. I was trying to discuss something.

[Heracles 417]

There goes the Constitution...

Illegal immigration is a federal crime in most other developed nations. The US taxpayers should not have to waste hundreds of millions on court fees to basically debate, in a court room, whether someone is here illegally or not.

Simple questionnaire:

1. Was someone born here?
2. Are they are Citizen?
3. Are they a Permanent Resident?
4. Do they have a valid visa?
5. Do they have the appropriate pending visa?

If none of the above questions yields a verifiable Yes, they should be deported. It cannot get any simpler than that. Edited October 2, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[NavarreMan 10]

You're right, I stand corrected. I wasn't pretending, I've just never known anyone who was here on this type of visa as an unskilled worker:

"H-2B visa (skilled and unskilled workers) is required by an employee who is coming to the United States to perform a job which is temporary or seasonal in nature and for which there is a shortage of U.S. workers. The employer is required to obtain from the Department of Labor, a labor certification confirming that there are no qualified U.S. workers eligible for the employment on which the petition is based."

I wonder how many of these are issued.

11 years is temporary? he doent fit the bill,still illegal? try again.

I never said he wasn't here illegally! We were discussing possible visa types for dishwashers.

Okay this isnt a possible visa type! Got it. Geez! Spin it up.

My sentiments exactly. Hopscotch anyone?

Look Marc, can you please quit it? I was just writing straight forward statements about visa types, no opinion involved. And you come and it's like you're not even reading what I'm typing.

This is tiring. I was trying to discuss something.

Behind you all the way Jenn! I don't think this would work for 11 years but he could certainly try spending his time here on a temp basis. The point is that there is no long term visa available to an unskilled person if that is their only claim for visa benefits. A rocket scientist maybe, but not a dishwasher. So in this respect, poor Mr. Zapeta is out of luck. He does indeed need to be gone, both in my opinion and by law. Penalties for his crimes have yet to be levied and the government offered him a deal if he kept his mouth shut and foolishly he turned it down. But I wonder why they offered him that deal? Why would they want to keep it quiet? Interesting. Can't wait to hear more about this case. (from credible sources)

Edited October 2, 2007 by NavarreMan

[NavarreMan 10]

There goes the Constitution...

Illegal immigration is a federal crime in most other developed nations. The US taxpayers should not have to waste hundreds of millions on court fees to basically debate, in a court room, whether someone is here illegally or not.

Simple questionnaire:

1. Was someone born here?
2. Are they are Citizen?
3. Are they a Permanent Resident?
4. Do they have a valid visa?
5. Do they have the appropriate pending visa?

If none of the above questions yields a verifiable Yes, they should be deported. It cannot get any simpler than that.

The criteria that you mention is legislated law and upheld by COURTS OF LAW. Not Joe citizen with a gun. That is how it works in this country. Illegal immigration is a federal crime here as well. We are not spending hundreds of millions of taxpayers dollars debating whether or not Mr. Zapeta is here illegally or not. He knows he is, we know he is and the government knows he is. We, he and they know he paid no taxes. We, he and they know he did not declare the money. There is no doubt in anyones mind as to his guilt. So why has he not been given the option to pay his fines as dictated BY LAW and take the rest of the money, if there is any, and leave the country? They took all of his money and he does not even have a plane ticket to leave. People donated money to him to help and the IRS took that. He was trying to leave. We made him stay. Why don't you offer to buy his one-way ticket home. That would solve everything.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Penalties for his crimes have yet to be levied and the government offered him a deal if he kept his mouth shut and foolishly he turned it down. But I wonder why they offered him that deal? Why would they want to keep it quiet? Interesting. Can't wait to hear more about this case. (from credible sources)

Why did the government offer a deal? The government continuously cuts deals with those accused of breaking the law. Lawsuits are time-, resource- and cost consuming. It's a simple cost / benefit type consideration. Any bean counter will explain it to you.

[NavarreMan 10]

Penalties for his crimes have yet to be levied and the government offered him a deal if he kept his mouth shut and foolishly he turned it down. But I wonder why they offered him that deal? Why would they want to keep it quiet? Interesting. Can't wait to hear more about this case. (from credible sources)

Why did the government offer a deal? The government continuously cuts deals with those accused of breaking the law. Lawsuits are time-, resource- and cost consuming. It's a simple cost / benefit type consideration. Any bean counter will explain it to you.

Granted, but the "keep quiet" clause is what interests me. This is not quite the same as a settlement between two parties. This is a public issue. Just seemed odd.

Edited October 2, 2007 by NavarreMan

[Fandango 1,440]

Penalties for his crimes have yet to be levied and the government offered him a deal if he kept his mouth shut and foolishly he turned it down. But I wonder why they offered him that deal? Why would they want to keep it quiet? Interesting. Can't wait to hear more about this case. (from credible sources)

Why did the government offer a deal? The government continuously cuts deals with those accused of breaking the law. Lawsuits are time-, resource- and cost consuming. It's a simple cost / benefit type consideration. Any bean counter will explain it to you.

Shhhhhhhhhhhh you're ruining the conspiracy theory with logic!

[NavarreMan 10]

Penalties for his crimes have yet to be levied and the government offered him a deal if he kept his mouth shut and foolishly he turned it down. But I wonder why they offered him that deal? Why would they want to keep it quiet? Interesting. Can't wait to hear more about this case. (from credible sources)

Why did the government offer a deal? The government continuously cuts deals with those accused of breaking the law. Lawsuits are time-, resource- and cost consuming. It's a simple cost / benefit type consideration. Any bean counter will explain it to you.

Shhhhhhhhhhhh you're ruining the conspiracy theory with logic!

LOL... now that's a left turn!!!

Congrats on the no smoking. I quit 9/13. Hang in there.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Penalties for his crimes have yet to be levied and the government offered him a deal if he kept his mouth shut and foolishly he turned it down. But I wonder why they offered him that deal? Why would they want to keep it quiet? Interesting. Can't wait to hear more about this case. (from credible sources)

Why did the government offer a deal? The government continuously cuts deals with those accused of breaking the law. Lawsuits are time-, resource- and cost consuming. It's a simple cost / benefit type consideration. Any bean counter will explain it to you.

Granted, but the "keep quiet" clause is what interests me. This is not quite the same as a settlement between two parties. This is a public issue. Just seemed odd.

"No disclosure" clauses are just as common as the deals themselves. I don't see anything odd there.

Congrats on the no smoking. I quit 9/13. Hang in there.

I quit 8/12/05. Hang in there!

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

This is tiring. I was trying to discuss something.

So was I. Not liking someone based on subject would help tremendously and would go along way in helping the division.

[Fandango 1,440]

Thanks NM and BD...one hour at a time for me at this point, heh.

4 days, 22 hours, 41 minutes, 44 seconds lolz

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Thanks NM and BD...one hour at a time for me at this point, heh.

4 days, 22 hours, 41 minutes, 44 seconds lolz

Once you're through the first month, it gets easier. Just keep reminding yourself what prompted you to quit in the first place and keep thinking of the days and hours you made it without the cigarettes. There will be challenging times for years to come. I just had my mom and brother over for a visit and they both smoke. Sitting in the evening, having a beer and chatting, I wished I could light up just one. But there's no such thing as lighting up just one. I've learned that during earlier attempts to quit. Be aware of that and you'll make it.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

This isnt a non-smoking thread although somethin is smokin.