[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by ThePits

Firstly I didnt make a point that tv was more accurate than wikipedia, I simply pointed out wikipedia isnt the best thing you can use as a reference

Get over it

And media some form of bias or inaccurracy including tv

I am also aware that there have been what could now be classed as inappropriate laws such as the one on sodomy, the point I made was instead of breaking a law if you dont like it, as with the law on sodomy you can always get it changed, not just set yourself up as being above the law

You would be the first one to moan if someone decided they didnt like the law on burglary and turned your house over

You cant just select the laws you choose to abide by and ones you wont

What you propose is to allow anyone who wants to enter a country to come in in a controlled manner

Don't you think there is a point at which a country is just too over crowded?

Infrastructures stretched to breaking point as is the case in the UK?

As for your point on the communities that have removed illegal immigrants collapsing

Out of the 14 areas that removed illegal immigrants only 1 ran into problems

1 out of 14

I can live with that

The solution is controlled immigration to satisfy the labour market from skilled to unskilled, with draconian penalties for anyone employing illegal immigrants and immediate deportation for illegal immigrants

you were quick to point out the limitations of wikipedia when i used it as a simple shorthand to illustrate--not base-- my argument.

but you mentioned your "programme" as the foundation of your knowledge on the mara salvatruca for your arguments here.

funny. get over it.

to address your other point, i would not moan if someone burglarized my house. i only moan when i ejaculate-- which is thrice daily. but if burglarized, i'd get pissed off and hunt down the culprits whenever possible.

yes, there are many good laws in place, and for a purpose. but do not claim --oh wise one!-- that there aren't any laws that you don't routinely break. not only the absurd ones like these:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle2251280.ece [disclaimer: newspaper article might contain inaccuracies]

but all manner of rules and regulations too cumbersome or absurd to even deserve being noticed.

anyway, i can choose to obey some laws and disobey others. i call it free will. i will have to deal with the consequences of flaunting the law of course, if caught and found guilty, but i CAN do that. i have a free mind. in fact, when you find a law to be unjust you can purposefully break it in an act of civil disobedience. it's a tool to fight tyrannies, used from gandhi to rosa parks. did you know gandhi broke colonial law by making his own sea salt? he chose. he wasn't a fucking drone.

and did you read the cornell article i posted? the texas law was repealed as a result of legal action-- two people were found in the act of "sodomy" and charged and tried with this stupid "crime". THEY WERE BREAKING THE LAW, and as a result of their trial the law was (finally) repealed.

sorry to disappoint your expectations, but society is not an S&M dungeon, and people do not compulsorily obey the master. societies are fluid, power shifts constantly, spaces are conquered and lost, laws are not written in stone but fought in court and in the court of public opinon; and people, societies, economies, and cultures mutate endlessly-- and it's a good thing.

now, i do not pretend to know what's the story with immigrants in england, what infrastructures are stretched or not; i have no fucking clue and i don't care. i am completely uninformed, so i will not issue an opinion on the matter. but what you claim is going on in the UK (if it's true) is not happening here.

in america, people have ranted against immigrants since its inception-- benjamin franklin was wary of germans, for example-- and the indians had all manner of complaints against the pilgrims---but immigrants have always been good for the country and the economy-- from the chinese who built the railroads to the mexicans that cleaned my backyard this morning. immigrants give to the economy more than they take away. that's why they wear ratty clothes.

so i'm speaking only about the united states, and my discusion is focused on that. if you have problems with the way your country is being managed, i suggest you take it up with your prime minister, as here on the board we are really unable to address those complaints.

now "1 out of 14" refers to... who, what , when , where, why, and how? i know at times i may come across as a know-it-all, but i'm not a mind reader, so i don't know who, what, when, where, why and how these "14" were.

in any case, i'm glad you're not running america, or your own country for that matter-- however, your protofascist "solutions" might play well in malaysia. you could try a career as a politician there:

http://news.scotsman.com/internation...?id=1240492007 [disclaimer: newspaper article might contain inaccuracies]

funny though, they still have millions of illegal immigrants, canings notwithstanding.

i would love to discuss how free markets require not only the free movement of capital, goods, and services, but ultimately, also the free movement of labor. however, i have no hope for this, as this is a dull discussion-- in spite of your adequate rhethorical skills (for which i commend you), you're not grasping the complexities of the situation being discussed, you're not demonstrating subtlety in your thinking but merely stating simplistic notions, and you present no ideas worthy of practical application. so i'm afraid this is not an enriching exchange for me. where is nature scene when one needs him?

in any case, please don't take this personally... feel free to continue this discussion, but i have a bunch of interesting books to read that demand my immediate attention.

...

oh yes, i may come back just to be a pain in the ass, of course. it's what i do.