Pelican Parts Forums

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)
-   Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/)
-   -   "Operation Wetback" (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/380560-operation-wetback.html)

Racerbvd 12-03-2007 09:13 AM

"Operation Wetback"
 
"Operation Wetback"




report, you decide ....
Quote:

Quote:

HOOVER & EISENHOWER DEPORTED MILLIONS OF ILLEGALS!

Here is something that should be of great interest for you to pass around.
I didn't know of this until it was pointed out to me. But, back during the
Great Depression, President Herbert Hoover ordered the deportation of all
illegal aliens in order to make jobs available to American citizens that
desperately needed work. And then again in 1954, President Dwight
Eisenhower deported 13 million Mexican nationals! The program was called
"Operation "Wetback" so that American W.W.II and Korean veterans had a better
chance at jobs. It took 2 years, but they deported them! Now, if they could
deport the illegal back then, they can sure do it today!! If you have
doubts about the accuracy of this information, enter Operation Wetback into
your favorite search engine and confirm it for yourself. Reminder. Don't
forget to pay your taxes... 20 million illegal aliens are depending on you!

Verified:

http://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback

dhoward 12-03-2007 09:28 AM

You're just looking for an opportunity to use the "W" word.

tcar 12-03-2007 09:36 AM

It's OK in this case, I think, but using wiki as 'the source' can bite you.

It often has errors, some of the articles are not researched at all, but merely someone's opinion.

Not recognized as a definitive source.

kstar 12-03-2007 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tcar (Post 3622745)
It's OK in this case, I think, but using wiki as 'the source' can bite you.

I often has errors, some of the articles are not researched at all, but merely someone's opinion.

Not recognized as a definitive source.

Any Wikipedia entry is only as good as the references/citations listed at the bottom of the entry. This is where, in many cases, one will find more definitive sources.

FWIW.

Best,

Kurt

kach22i 12-03-2007 09:52 AM

From PBS:
http://www.pbs.org/kpbs/theborder/history/timeline/20.html
Quote:

In 1949 the Border Patrol seized nearly 280,000 illegal immigrants. By 1953, the numbers had grown to more than 865,000, and the U.S. government felt pressured to do something about the onslaught of immigration. What resulted was Operation Wetback, devised in 1954 under the supervision of new commissioner of the Immigration and Nationalization Service, Gen. Joseph Swing.

Swing oversaw the Border patrol, and organized state and local officials along with the police. The object of his intense border enforcement were "illegal aliens," but common practice of Operation Wetback focused on Mexicans in general. The police swarmed through Mexican American barrios throughout the southeastern states. Some Mexicans, fearful of the potential violence of this militarization, fled back south across the border. In 1954, the agents discovered over 1 million illegal immigrants.

In some cases, illegal immigrants were deported along with their American-born children, who were by law U.S. citizens. The agents used a wide brush in their criteria for interrogating potential aliens. They adopted the practice of stopping "Mexican-looking" citizens on the street and asking for identification. This practice incited and angered many U.S. citizens who were of Mexican American descent. Opponents in both the United States and Mexico complained of "police-state" methods, and Operation Wetback was abandoned.

Racerbvd 12-03-2007 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dhoward (Post 3622733)
You're just looking for an opportunity to use the "W" word.

Wrong, I don't use it, but the US GOVERNMENT did use it to name a program used to fix a problem. Funny, go don't see the problem (illegals) but are more upset about the use of the name so you attack the messenger

dhoward 12-03-2007 10:07 AM

It was a joke, Byron.

Jeff Higgins 12-03-2007 10:24 AM

I had some dumb b!tch hand wringing ninnie liberal college student come knocking on my door the other night. From King County, no doubt. Surprised she had the chops to venture door to door with this agenda in redneck Snohomish County. Must not be from around here. Anyway, she had some petition she wanted me to sign. It had to do with "undocumented residents" and protecting them. "After all", she snivelled, "families are getting split apart..." I cut her off.

"What the hell is an 'undocumented resident'?", I asked rhetorically. "It's a resident without legal paperwork", she answered. "It's an illegal alien, then." "Sir, we don't like to use that term. It has such negative connotations." "Well I do. My mom is a first generation German imigrant. My dad was third generation Irish. Both here legally and 'documented'. If folks back then could follow the legal process, these folks sure as hell can today." "But sir, you don't understand... families get broken apart when..." "But they wouldn't if they either A) came here legally, or B) stayed home."

Fuch 'em. The only "amnesty" we should grant them is access to a free bus ride home. They can file the paperwork on the way out, and come back legally if allowed to do so. It is time to start upholding the law on this. We all come from somewhere; those of us very close to that history, with family members who can relate going through the legal process still alive or held close in our memories, probably resent these illegals more than most. There is no reason to be easy on these people. When and if they come back legally I will welcome them with open arms. Like I said, we all come from somewhere.

DanL911sc 12-03-2007 03:43 PM

Wow, such anger. Now I'm curious, did an illegal kick your dog? Date your daughter? Inquiring minds want to know...

widebody911 12-03-2007 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins (Post 3622870)
"What the hell is an 'undocumented resident'?", I asked rhetorically. "It's a resident without legal paperwork", she answered. "It's an illegal alien, then." "Sir, we don't like to use that term. It has such negative connotations." "Well I do. My mom is a first generation German imigrant. My dad was third generation Irish. Both here legally and 'documented'. If folks back then could follow the legal process, these folks sure as hell can today." "But sir, you don't understand... families get broken apart when..." "But they wouldn't if they either A) came here legally, or B) stayed home."

I'm pretty liberal, but I have to agree with Jeff's assessment.

I would go one better: for those can sneak over to whelp an 'anchor baby': the baby can stay (that's the current rule), but the parents have to go home. If they want to have Junior apply to get his parents into the country when he turns 18, by all means, have at it - but not until then.

dd74 12-03-2007 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by widebody911 (Post 3623549)
I'm pretty liberal, but I have to agree with Jeff's assessment.

I would go one better: for those can sneak over to whelp an 'anchor baby': the baby can stay (that's the current rule), but the parents have to go home. If they want to have Junior apply to get his parents into the country when he turns 18, by all means, have at it - but not until then.

Yeah, but whose going to take care of Junior? Us? The taxpayers? It's a wash.

Look, it's all or nothing.

Raise a huge wall, guard it with military, and round up the ones here now, and send them back. Pass English-only laws and get rid of any Hispanic-related social services that cater to undocumented/illegals or whatever they're called.

Or, leave it as is and face the socio-economic strain.

One thing's for sure: this is the real war on terror.

DanL911sc 12-03-2007 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by widebody911 (Post 3623549)
I would go one better: for those can sneak over to whelp an 'anchor baby': the baby can stay (that's the current rule), but the parents have to go home. If they want to have Junior apply to get his parents into the country when he turns 18, by all means, have at it - but not until then.

Heh, I suppose the Dickensian enforcement regime is left as an exersize to the reader?

jyl 12-03-2007 06:59 PM

The war on illegals is a little bit like the war on drugs.

Cutting off the flow of drugs, or illegal aliens, is very hard. You are struggling with extremely long borders and desperate people.

Cutting off the demand that draws the flow is going to be more effective. Here you are dealing with people who have a lot to lose - especially for the war on illegals, since the demand is US employers who have money to take, businesses to lose, and are downright terrified of even a short jail sentence.

The government needs to develop an effective way to check the names and social security numbers that are submitted with employers' payroll taxes, against actual SSA records. Identities flagged as fraudulent should be checked and employers penalized for employing those persons. Penalties should be severe and, in extreme cases, include criminal penalties for managers and supervisors.

Admittedly, this won't be easy. But I think, in the end, it will be the more effective approach.

Then, if it turns out that some US industries in fact cannot survive without migrant labor (agriculture, let's say), it will be possible to create a legal migrant worker program that is really enforceable. Because we'll be able to distinguish real identities from false ones, we'll be able to administer a legal program.

Right now, the illegal alien issue is a joke. Politicians use it to get voters riled up (on both sides of the issue). But businesses want the labor. And politicians want to please the businesses too. And consumers are happy to consume the goods and services. So the problem never gets solved.

Finally, I think there should be some way to be lenient, or humane if you will, for illegal aliens who were brought here as children, grew up in the US, have been law-abiding and productive, and have played by the rules - even if their parents broke the rules originally. At some point, there just isn't any purpose served by punishing a child for the decades-old sins of the father.

pwd72s 12-03-2007 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanL911sc (Post 3623532)
Wow, such anger. Now I'm curious, did an illegal kick your dog? Date your daughter? Inquiring minds want to know...

BOTH!

gt350mike 12-03-2007 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dd74 (Post 3623597)
Yeah, but whose going to take care of Junior? Us? The taxpayers? It's a wash.

Look, it's all or nothing.

Raise a huge wall, guard it with military, and round up the ones here now, and send them back. Pass English-only laws and get rid of any Hispanic-related social services that cater to undocumented/illegals or whatever they're called.

Or, leave it as is and face the socio-economic strain.

One thing's for sure: this is the real war on terror.


It is a strain on the U.S.A........We’re already taking care of Jr and his parents, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, etc.

I thought about letting my observation slide, but after ready this thread I have to blurt it out.....I was in Walmart tonight and when I walked past the electronics department, they were playing one of Tim Allen's "Santa Clause" movies on the LCD TVs. No big deal big except for the fact that the audio was in Spanish. I wanted to say something to the manager, but why bother……I just walked out without buying what I wanted to get in the first place.

I guess the next thing will be the Walley World greeters will be saying “Recepción al Wal-Centro comercial. ¿usted tienen gusto de un carro de compras?”

dzls rok 12-03-2007 08:17 PM

if the u.s. wanted to keep them out...they would. its not only south of the border aliens, but in nor cal/ bay area there is huge number of middle eastern/indian and asian invasian. i doubt they are all here legally.

Joe Bob 12-04-2007 04:25 AM

Constitutional amendment, repeal the automatic citizenship of anyone born on US soil if BOTH parents do not have the legal right to be here.

Do it quckly before there is enough to outvote us.....

Joeaksa 12-04-2007 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikez (Post 3624485)
Constitutional amendment, repeal the automatic citizenship of anyone born on US soil if BOTH parents do not have the legal right to be here.

Do it quckly before there is enough to outvote us.....

Totally agree! In Cali its already lopsided with regards to immigrants, and its time to do something before it happens everywhere.

sammyg2 12-04-2007 04:53 AM

In the Los Angeles public school system, over 70% of all students enrolled are hispanic or Latino.
Less than 10% are caucasion.

Mule 12-04-2007 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikez (Post 3624485)
Constitutional amendment, repeal the automatic citizenship of anyone born on US soil if BOTH parents do not have the legal right to be here.

Do it quckly before there is enough to outvote us.....

+1 Well said Mike.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2025 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website


DTO Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.