"Hawke" wrote in message
...
On 6/8/2010 7:47 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"Don wrote in message
...
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 21:19:13 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:



The term "immigrant" doesn't refer to a person's legality, only to the
fact
that he has move somewhere to take up permanent residence. It never did
have
anything to do with legal status. You can look it up anywhere.

So "illegal immigrant" is a perfectly valid term. It describes their
status
perfectly.

Finally, the law does not have eyes. The people who write laws have the
eyes. And all of them descended from immigrants. They just took a look,
didn't like all those new people moving in, and decided it's time to
pull
up
the ladder.

Illegal meant illegal before any new laws were written. Immigrants
willing to assimilate, learn English and pay taxes and respect our
laws are not the same as illegals who scoff our laws, our language,
and who come to take rather than join.

The question is not what's meant by "illegal," but what is meant by
"immigrant." Strabo and CalifBill are saying that they aren't immigrants
if
they're illegal. That's a misuse or a misunderstanding of the word.



In truth what they are is foreign nationals.

In "truth," if they come here with the intent to stay, and they succeed,
they are also immigrants. There are millions of them.

Their first act upon crossing into the sovereign territory of the U.S. is
to violate our laws. So they are foreign nationals who are guilty of
violating U.S. law. That makes them foreigners that have committed a crime
or crimes in U.S. territory. So what does that have to do with
immigration, whether technically legal or not?

Again, look in any dictionary and you'll find your answer. Or check an
encyclopedia.

And what do "documents" have to do with any of it?

They have nothing to do with immigration. They're about laws.

--
Ed Huntress