The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

Boon Mee

Those Queers for Palestine have forgotten what happens to turd burglars and carpet-munchers in the Arab world.

raycarey

the pussy christians on this forum are really showing their desperation.

not speaking of anyone specifically....just in general.

Boon Mee

^
Pussy Christians?

Desperation at what/whom?

...that's right, forgot - according to redcarey, ya gotta be a Fundamental Christian to believe in G_D...heh

attaboy

Time to update Boon's colossal topic concerning the lunatics of San Francisco.


The city of San Francisco refuses to cooperate with federal authorities when it comes to identifying and deporting juvenile illegal immigrants who have been arrested for criminal offenses. In the case of Ramos who eventually murdered three people, there was some sort of mix up between the SF police and the Feds. Ramos' arrests were never communicated to the Feds.

Ramos' criminal time spent in the United States reached it's zenith when he gunned down a father and his two sons over a traffic incident. The family's car blocked Ramos' car for a period long enough to incense Ramos to the point that he killed all the passengers in the other vehicle.


I hope the surviving wife and mother sues the Hell out of San Francisco and the mayor and council members too. And the Police Chief.

Another thing to note in the article, the city of San Francisco spends taxpayer's money to advertise that it is a sanctuary city. Illegal immigrants are welcome there. But when it comes to housing young illegals who become criminals the city dumps them off in group housing in the surrounding counties. They say they welcome illegals but then they dump the problems generated by young illegals on to others.

A person could argue that SF leadership is more concerned with ideology than public safety but then remember criminals are taken from the city and dumped in the outlying counties. I seldom use the word hypocrite. What other term can explain a group of individuals who declare their compassion and when consequences from their actions arise they dump the criminals off on others thus retaining the sterling image of their ideological pursuits?


San Francisco: Sanctuary City Gone Awry


Cinnamon Stillwell
Wednesday, July 16, 2008




San Francisco's political establishment has long prided itself on providing a haven for illegal immigrants. Mayor Gavin Newsom even launched a taxpayer-funded $83,000 "public awareness campaign" earlier this year assuring illegal immigrants that the "sanctuary city" by the bay was in their court.

And indeed it is. Under the city's 1989 voter-approved sanctuary ordinance, police officers and other city employees are prohibited from inquiring into immigration status. In addition, the city will not direct municipal funds or employees towards assisting federal immigration enforcement, unless such assistance is required by federal or state law or a warrant.

No doubt such protections warm the heart of the city's liberal leadership. But San Francisco's status as a sanctuary city is having unintended consequences.

The brutal and senseless murder last month of Tony Bologna and his sons Michael, 20, and Matthew, 16, at the hands of Edwin Ramos, a native of El Salvador and known member of the Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) street gang, was a reminder that inviting illegal activity can turn deadly. The Bolognas were on their way back from a family picnic when they inadvertently blocked Ramos' car from making a left turn in the Excelsior district. When Bologna politely backed up to let the other car past, Ramos responded by opening fire and killing all three passengers. Ramos has been charged with three counts of murder, with the added penalty of street-gang involvement.

So far, much of the outcry surrounding the case has centered on San Francisco district attorney Kamala Harris' policy of not seeking the death penalty, in this case, against the wishes of widow, Danielle Bologna. But in the process, Ramos' immigration status has largely been overlooked. Ramos' original lawyer, Joseph O'Sullivan, claimed that his client was in the country legally and applying for permanent residence, but federal immigration authorities insist otherwise and promise to deport Ramos if he is convicted. O'Sullivan has since asked to be removed from the case, claiming a connection via a previous client. Thus, he has never had to explain his assertions regarding Ramos' immigration status.

This certainly wasn't Ramos' first brush with the law. He was booked both on felony weapons charges and for being a member of a criminal street gang earlier this year, but escaped prosecution for lack of evidence. However, as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle, the San Francisco Police Department "cited 'numerous documented contacts' that officers had with Ramos and [his companion] Lopez, and said both were active members of the MS-13 street gang.'" But thanks to San Francisco's sanctuary city status, instead of being reported to federal immigration authorities and deported, Ramos was allowed continue to roam the streets of San Francisco until his arrest for the Bologna killings.

San Francisco's sanctuary policy has also taken a statewide toll. While adult illegal immigrant felons are not protected by the ordinance, no such stipulation exists for juvenile offenders, and city officials have used that loophole to dump the problem onto other counties. Earlier this month, San Bernardino County officials threatened to sue the city of San Francisco for sending a group of Honduran, illegal immigrant, juvenile crack dealers to group homes in the city of Yucaipa without notification. Eight of them simply walked away from the unsecured group homes and only one has been recaptured. Officials later acknowledged that this wasn't the first time San Francisco had unloaded criminal illegal immigrants onto San Bernardino County. In fact, Yucaipa has seen a rise in violent crime in accordance with the influx of foreign offenders to its group homes in recent years.

This time around, the outcry from San Bernardino officials caused Mayor Newsom to alter the city's approach to juvenile offenders. No doubt, Newsom's interest in running for governor of California, which he announced just before the controversy erupted, influenced his decision. While Newsom may find a sympathetic audience in San Francisco to his former commitment to sanctuary protections for illegal immigrants, it could prove a liability on the statewide level.

Even on a local level, there's some indication that people are getting fed up with the city's insistence on emphasizing ideology over public safety. In a local CBS poll, 79 percent of respondents agreed that San Francisco should "turn over convicted illegal immigrants for deportation."

Monetary concerns are another factor. It doesn't help that Mayor Newsom and other officials bemoan the city's $338 million budget deficit, even as funds continue to pour into sustaining San Francisco's sanctuary city policies. San Francisco has spent millions of dollars housing juvenile, illegal immigrant offenders and hundreds of thousands of dollars flying them back to their countries of origin in recent years, instead of turning them over to federal immigration authorities as federal law requires. In the wake of the furor over the Honduran case and federal authorities' demand that San Francisco end the flights, the city started housing some of the dealers in youth rehabilitation centers, costing taxpayers $7,000 per month, per person.

Then there's San Francisco Supervisor and State Assembly candidate Tom Ammiano's brilliant plan to provide municipal identification cards to those who either cannot or will not obtain a state-issued driver's license – or in other words, illegal immigrants. Set to go into effect next month, the ID program could cost up to $2.86 million in the first three years, according to a County Clerk estimate. As it turns out, Newsom's aforementioned $83,000 taxpayer-funded love letter to illegal immigrants was just the icing on the cake.

Supporters of San Francisco's sanctuary city policies, which include members of the local faith community who inspired the original ordinance, argue that the current approach is the only humane solution. In its 2007 pledge, the New Sanctuary Movement, describing immigration raids, stated that "We cannot in good conscience ignore such suffering and injustice." But where is the compassion for the injustice inflicted upon American citizens? Others argue that juvenile illegal immigrants deserve special treatment because they are minors. But this ignores the fact that criminal illegal immigrants and the drug cartels for whom some of them work, are aware of San Francisco's former sanctuary loophole and have taken to falsely claiming juvenile status as a result. Still, others argue that police departments need to work with illegal immigrants in the community in order to effectively tackle crime and that fears of deportation get in the way. But extending the current, chaotic state of affairs will only lead to further crime and misery, even for those within such communities.

While San Francisco's sanctuary city ordinance may have been well-intentioned, it has resulted in an untenable and anarchic situation that is taking its toll on city residents and surrounding counties alike. Providing sanctuary for law-breakers at the expense of law-abiding citizens is neither a compassionate nor a moral approach. The issue is not one of callousness towards illegal immigrants, but rather, the duty owed American citizens by their government. In some respects, every layer of the government has failed this test, but in this case, it's the local government that is absconding on its duties. And all San Francisco officials can seem to offer up is more of the same.

They don't call it the Wild West for nothing.

Cinnamon Stillwell is a San Francisco writer. She can be reached at cinnamonstillwell[at]yahoo.com. She also writes for the blog at campus-watch.org.

__________________
As a kid I always thought my nickname was "attaboy" until I realized they were rooting for the dog: "Attaboy, get 'em! Get 'em!".

Texpat

These so called criminals are victims! Much like the fine boys at Gitmo.

Can you say V-I-C-T-I-M?



Those that support this kind of absolute nonsense are intent on destroying what's left of America.

And the Loonies-Abroad campaign are encouraging it because misery loves company. Thankfully, most of America sees it for what it is.

Boon Mee

In the "loonies abroad" catagory, I wonder who we can include aboard here?

...heh

Milkman

From some above posts: yes, the "Sanctuary" concept seems not only stupid, but a reason I wouldn't bother living in the Bay area, nor LA area, for that matter. What a joke. Please secede, CA.

sabang

Well firstly attaboy, would you provide a Link for those articles please.
Several of you are getting very lax on this lately- and it is an important issues rule.

So SF does not voluntarily co-operate with Fed authorities on the Immigration status of offenders? Well that seems pretty crazy to me, and I kinda wonder why.

Is it as simple as ideological issues? I mean, what ideology- that illegal immigration should be encouraged? No matter how liberal the council may be, that doesn't quite ring true.
Or is it more grounded in pragmatism- SF is an expensive city, and most of the residents are pretty affluent (except for the legions of Homeless folk there). So it must be damn hard to get burger flippers, cleaners and so on that are willing to work for stingy minimum wages. So maybe the local municipality just chooses to turn a blind eye, and has institutionalised the policy. That rings truer to me.

Either way, I reckon not getting an II felon who commits a serious offence like this deported (after his jail term) is Lunacy.

__________________
To err is human. To blame someone else is politics.

Accidental Ajarn

When did Jews start becoming targets of the radical left? Used to be it was completely not PC to support the Nazi program of mass murder and only racist kooks did so. But now the radical left seems to be getting on the bandwagon as well. Is this to show how European-thinking they are? (Europeans are not known for religious tolerance and mass murder of jews is a constant part of European history). Or is it to show how much the radical left supports the islamic terrorists as Israel is also a common target?

funny how these things go in cycles. Far right (at least the far religious right) used to consider the jews as the enemy, now they are close allies while the radical left used embrace the jewish community has now switched sides and has joined forces with all enemies of Judaism.

Amazing how the people of the left will uncritically change their views to keep in lockstep in opposition to their perceived enemy.

sabang

I'm confused what you mean by that AA.

If you mean support for the establishment of a Palestinian state ('Land for Peace'), that is basically a Centrist philosophy, indeed a majority opinion worlfwide and within the US. That is not the preserve of the Far Left at all, although large elements of the Far right are resolutely opposed to it.

If you mean the elimination of the Jewish state, well that is a lunatic fringe philosophy shared by some fringe groups on the Far Left, Far Right, and some Fundamantalist, Messianic Jews.

Either way, I'm still uncertain how that fits into SF values- unless you are referring to the fact that 'Queers for Palestine' or whoever are allowed to hold a public rally there. Unless I'm very mistaken however, the 'for Palestine' is referring to the establishment of a Palestinian state- not the destruction of the state of Israel.

Accidental Ajarn

^

Wasn’t this thread about a loony in SF attacking a Holocaust survivor because this loony believes Hitler was really a great guy and didn’t really mean any harm? This has been followed by a string of “anti-Jewish” posts by our resident left wing radicals while supporting those freedom and peace loving Palestinian suicide bombers.

Strange how times change.

“Leftists” today seem to have really gone down hill intellectually; they seem to be against most everything while not ever focusing on what they are for. What are they for by the way? We know they hate Bush, American values, capitalism, and democracy, but what do they really want?

Also, when was the last time any of the leftist posters here have ever posted anything that goes against the orthodox leftist ideology? Seems very little independent thinking in the modern left, just repeating the propaganda they have been brain-washed with.

By the way, lived in the Bay area in the late 80s, the city was a great place. Lots of good times, but mostly steered clear of the Castro distict, not my scene you know.

Norton

Preferred the Tenderloin district, I presume.

San Francisco is a great city. This sanctuary law is however, ridiculous. San Francisco is a city/county in a state in the US. Refusal to "cooperate" with other law enforcement agencies is not only silly but, if constitutionally challenged would be struck down.

__________________
There is such a thing as a nation being so right that it does not need to convince others by force that it is right.

Woodrow Wilson

Accidental Ajarn

^

North Beach and Chinatown mostly, but the old tenderloin was a great place to visit, but wouldn't want to live there.

Silliness, weirdness and SF do seem to go together, but at least it keeps things interesting!

But, when will we see the 49ers make a comeback?

Norton

Probably have to wait until the franchise moves to another city.

sabang

I lived on the corner of Jones and Vallejo for a while, in the late 90's. Great times- it was my GF's other place, for work reasons.
SF values baloney. I reckon many more Americans would like to live there than actually do.

sabang

Must say, my favourite pub was in the loin, just down the hill from the Hilton on Union.
Real friendly corner pub, full of characters. Even the cops used to come in for a smoke (this was when they had that non-smoking referendum going on). A crazy chick maced us one night though, which was a bit rough- she'd had an argument with some other bloke.

Accidental Ajarn

^

Tenderloin bars were a great place to people watch. Amazing city, never knew who you would run across or what you might see during a normal stroll through the city.

But I left right after the earthquake of 89, haven't been back so I suspect lots have changed.

Used to date a Thai chick from Khon Kaen working in a Thai restrauant right next to the Grasslands bar in Chinatown. Is the Grasslands still open? Weird crowd hung out there. Merchant seamen, artists, drunks and whatever scum that happened to drift in off the street. Loved it.

Boon Mee

Well, here we go boys & girls.
If this isn't SF Values in its purest form...?

Up Your Alley 2008

Milkman

I used to fly into SF on the United Shuttle flights from Seattle. Late 90s it was about $81 USD round trip. A short hop. Would visit some friends and/or stay in the Green Tortoise on North Beach.

Yeah, the city does attract a lot of characters. Beautiful place.

__________________
Military men are dumb, stupid animals, to be used as pawns for foreign policy

attaboy

San Francisco: Sanctuary City Gone Awry