Closing the 'Anchor Baby' Loophole

vienna · 01-08-11, 03:23 PM

Another aspect of the "anchor baby" issue:

There are a rather large number of foreign nationals who come to the U.S. specifically to have their children born in the U.S. in order to have the child gain U.S. citizenship and then the parent(s) and child(ren) return to the homeland. This is often done as an "escape hatch" in the event of the need to flee their native country due to conditions in their native country. A lot of these persons having their children born in the U.S. are persons of some wealth and/or political position. Here in California it is not uncommon to see wealthy Middle-Eastern families (particularly Saudi) arrive with their preganant wives, have the child on U.S. soil, and then leave for thier homeland. The same holds for prominent familes in Latin American countries and other nationalities. These families, due to their wealth, prominence, and connections within the U.S. business and/or political worlds have effectively blocked any widespread immigration reform in fear that they would not have the refuge afforded by the "citizenship" rights held by their children. An acquaintance of mine who did work as a bodyguard for Middle-Eastern citizens visiting in the U.S. once told me that in the run-up to the fall of the Shah of Iran, he personally guarded several of the wives and families of high-level business and politcal leaders who feared what would happen to them should the Shah fall and they did not have an "anchor" to provide them with a rationale to flee to the U.S. This situation was in fact covertly encouraged by the State Department and various intelligence agencies in an effort to reassure their "assets" that the U.S. stood by them should anything happen. As long as this practice of turning a blind eye on the actions of the privileged few countinues, there will not be significant or effective immigration reform.

01-08-11, 03:36 PM

Quote:

English here is a second language.

Yeah, next thing they are going to do is change all the names of the cities in California to Spanish ones. Evil Mexicans try your worst , true americans will always call san diego san diego no matter how much the newcomers try and erase the past history

tater · 01-08-11, 08:08 PM

If you want spanish language pronunciation practice, all you need do is live in the US Southwest and watch the evening news. There are newsreaders with excellent accents on every local station, and virtually every name in the crime blotter allows them to trill their rs, etc.

It's very instructive.

Regardless, it's not about "mexicans" it's about ILLEGALS.

I don;t care how many mexicans are allowed to LEGALLY come to the US. Up it to 1 million per year for all I care. The ILLEGALS, on the other hand, should be shot as the cross over the border as the invaders they are. Fill out a form, and come in like a civilized person? Welcome! Sneak in illegally? Lethal force.

Let more in legally, but let NONE in illegally (as close to none as possible, no holds barred on how). I actually know many people from mexico here. Probably more than almost anyone on this forum who is a knee-jerk defender of illegals. I like Mexicans, they are by and large nice, hard working people (my best friend's mom—a sort of "extra" mom for me, actually lives in the DF). Coming in other than through proper channels should be met with force, though. Sorry. Kill a few and the flood over the border will cease, IMHO. They know we do nothing.

Ducimus · 01-10-11, 09:49 PM

Quote:

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American ... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag ... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

- Theodore Roosevelt

Wanted to post this, but couldn't find a better place then here. But it highlights a problem we have here in SoCal.

Aramike · 01-11-11, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Wanted to post this, but couldn't find a better place then here. But it highlights a problem we have here in SoCal.

Heh, that problem is even as far north as Milwaukee.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

01-08-11, 03:23 PM	#1
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,718 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	Another aspect of the "anchor baby" issue: There are a rather large number of foreign nationals who come to the U.S. specifically to have their children born in the U.S. in order to have the child gain U.S. citizenship and then the parent(s) and child(ren) return to the homeland. This is often done as an "escape hatch" in the event of the need to flee their native country due to conditions in their native country. A lot of these persons having their children born in the U.S. are persons of some wealth and/or political position. Here in California it is not uncommon to see wealthy Middle-Eastern families (particularly Saudi) arrive with their preganant wives, have the child on U.S. soil, and then leave for thier homeland. The same holds for prominent familes in Latin American countries and other nationalities. These families, due to their wealth, prominence, and connections within the U.S. business and/or political worlds have effectively blocked any widespread immigration reform in fear that they would not have the refuge afforded by the "citizenship" rights held by their children. An acquaintance of mine who did work as a bodyguard for Middle-Eastern citizens visiting in the U.S. once told me that in the run-up to the fall of the Shah of Iran, he personally guarded several of the wives and families of high-level business and politcal leaders who feared what would happen to them should the Shah fall and they did not have an "anchor" to provide them with a rationale to flee to the U.S. This situation was in fact covertly encouraged by the State Department and various intelligence agencies in an effort to reassure their "assets" that the U.S. stood by them should anything happen. As long as this practice of turning a blind eye on the actions of the privileged few countinues, there will not be significant or effective immigration reform.

01-08-11, 08:08 PM	#3
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	If you want spanish language pronunciation practice, all you need do is live in the US Southwest and watch the evening news. There are newsreaders with excellent accents on every local station, and virtually every name in the crime blotter allows them to trill their rs, etc. It's very instructive. Regardless, it's not about "mexicans" it's about ILLEGALS. I don;t care how many mexicans are allowed to LEGALLY come to the US. Up it to 1 million per year for all I care. The ILLEGALS, on the other hand, should be shot as the cross over the border as the invaders they are. Fill out a form, and come in like a civilized person? Welcome! Sneak in illegally? Lethal force. Let more in legally, but let NONE in illegally (as close to none as possible, no holds barred on how). I actually know many people from mexico here. Probably more than almost anyone on this forum who is a knee-jerk defender of illegals. I like Mexicans, they are by and large nice, hard working people (my best friend's mom—a sort of "extra" mom for me, actually lives in the DF). Coming in other than through proper channels should be met with force, though. Sorry. Kill a few and the flood over the border will cease, IMHO. They know we do nothing.