Whatever ther deal is called: It is time to do
something. The United States of America are-
supposed - I must add at thisw point- a country
of immigrants. Treating immigrants with condescension is exactly the wrong approach, because people who are never welcomed will turn into troublemakers.
Immigration and emigration are forms of
destiny: You might not belong in your own home-
country and instead you may belong somewhere else:
For example, the U.S..Thatīs why politicians make
too much of a fuss about rules:They actually
have no right to do so. They do it very often
out of anxiousness of losing voters- those kind
of bigoted voters who believe america belongs to them. Should there be amnesty for politicians who mess with the lives of immigrants?
Iīd like to raise this as a question.Because
they are blocking the path of destiny for a lot
of people. Immigration isnīt about americaīs economy. It is about the people only who need
to be given a status. With regards to this, I must remark that there isnīt a single good immigration-
bill in existence , as we speak.
I was very much on the popeīs side, when I heared
about his throwing a wreath into the Mediteranean
sea in order to commemorate the 20000 boat-people
who died over the past years in an attempt to
reach the island of lampedusa, Italy.
He remarked: "People have lost the ability to
cry( to feel compassion)." I do believe that.
They also may have lost god in not giving any one
single undocumented person the benefit of the doubt that they came with good intentions on their
minds.Of course will the word "amnesty" Have lost its punch when it no longer really is an amnesty:
No actual amnesty: No punch.A lot of immigrants
say to themselves:" If I wonīt get any benefits
for x numbers of years- why should I even bother
with reading the papers about immigration?"
The question of immigration isnīt something
that can be decided by using the word. "Legal"
or "illegal". All this legalism also doesenīt
solve the problem. Carefully beating around
the bush by seeing whom citizenship might be
denied shall only permanently damage the image
of Republicans until there is nothing left of it.
Until their attitude is identified as being a
kind of white suprematist attitude.
You get the meaning: Thereīs also what certain
attitudes look like to third parties:
If they donīt look good, thsatz message is going
to spread just as well, if only in a subliminal
manner. Republicans have beeb so busy digging a grave for their reputation-so busy, itīs enough
to make one chuckle.
So- this apparantls is an article from the perspective of the famous third party: Enjoy it,
as it contains a lot of useful information.