You can play semantics all you want. If he has a record of speaking up against the same "abuses" as he does now, the record will reflect even if it was less passionately. I think I have a right? I know I have freedom of speech just like Fred Smith, but I will always be careful in how use it.
What are you talking about? The minister said himself, even as early as his first term as immigration minister, that there was no structure in place for the DC. That is why it is being worked into the current amendment. Maybe if they go to Fox Hill instead, Fred Smith could then widen his base of humans with rights to support.
Asserting that he is not selective about when he speaks up on alleged abuses implies that he is consistent, when he is not. You are correct though, you were not the one that used the term "path to citizenship" but my comment still stands as it was stated within these comments section. Too late to edit my other post.
How is he not defending the policy? He has defended it to the public, internationally, and now to human rights organizations. Fred Smith has been the one to be quite loose with facts and misrepresentations, so if what he said publicly are evidence of his facts, he has already lost by default. Empty barrels make the most noise.
How has he not defended the policies? He has been defending them quite adamently in the press and in the HOA. Not meeting with people who want to twist the governments arm first, talk later is his right. I see his position quite clearly on this. They do not deserve the courtesy simply for their tactics.
Mr. Smith has the same audience as Mr. Mitchell. He could have built up local support regarding getting the DC in order and the alledged inhumane treatments. Instead he attempts to defame the country internationally at every opportunity.
Indeed it is silly for you to pretend that Mr. Smith is always up and active on this topic. How did the DC get so deplorable under the watch of this guardian angel? Talking about "paths to citizenship" as if it were a given certainly gives the impression this is a God given right of all illegal immigrants. Where is Smith's clear and concise counter propasal? He doesnt have to meet with the minister to discuss it. Put it in the mail.
It is possible that I could have missed some headlines or not recall everything referenced. Even with that said, that is not an unreasonable request. If you recall, the videos of the kids being "hauled off for deportation" did not match the hysteric propaganda that was added to it. You don't recall claims of ethnic cleansing, genocide, etc? If Mr. Smith has evidence of these abuses, he should simply present the evidence.Standing by what you say when it could very well be untrue, as history has proven, means nothing.
Actually it does. It does not take much research to find Mr. Smith denouncing these activities that have been taking place the whole time. Now he is in the press every other day. Resolving the illegal immigration issue does require effort at the border and also on land. Every illegal immigrant that is currently here should not be granted citizenship if they do not qualify.
Sometimes the "path to citizenship" will, and should be, no path at all. That is what he and illegal Haitian immigrants, enablers, and other supporters fail to accept. At least the government is making it feasible for some and always have. In Australia, it has been made quite clear that illegal immigrants will not be rewarded with citizenship under any circumstance and I wish the Bahamas would follow suit. You conveniently pick and choose from Mr. Smith's comments, but can you for example, say that he is correct in that people should not be penalized for aiding and abetting those who are in the country illegally? Assisting smugglers? Can you say that he is correct in saying that immigration officers do not have the right to arrest and detain persons that are suspected to be illegal? It is quite possible that he is doing more harm than good.
I am sure the government had nothing to do with that KKK mess and I am sure they denounce it. To present the tasteless actions of private citizens as somehow being supported by the government is just wrong. Are the police not looking into it? That is about all that can be done.
Cas0072 says...
You can play semantics all you want. If he has a record of speaking up against the same "abuses" as he does now, the record will reflect even if it was less passionately. I think I have a right? I know I have freedom of speech just like Fred Smith, but I will always be careful in how use it.
On Mitchell: Activists defamed country
Posted 23 March 2015, 8:23 p.m. Suggest removal
Cas0072 says...
What are you talking about? The minister said himself, even as early as his first term as immigration minister, that there was no structure in place for the DC. That is why it is being worked into the current amendment. Maybe if they go to Fox Hill instead, Fred Smith could then widen his base of humans with rights to support.
On Mitchell: Activists defamed country
Posted 23 March 2015, 8:02 p.m. Suggest removal
Cas0072 says...
Asserting that he is not selective about when he speaks up on alleged abuses implies that he is consistent, when he is not. You are correct though, you were not the one that used the term "path to citizenship" but my comment still stands as it was stated within these comments section. Too late to edit my other post.
On Mitchell: Activists defamed country
Posted 23 March 2015, 7:12 p.m. Suggest removal
Cas0072 says...
How is he not defending the policy? He has defended it to the public, internationally, and now to human rights organizations. Fred Smith has been the one to be quite loose with facts and misrepresentations, so if what he said publicly are evidence of his facts, he has already lost by default. Empty barrels make the most noise.
On Mitchell: Activists defamed country
Posted 23 March 2015, 7:03 p.m. Suggest removal
Cas0072 says...
If the minister is acting within the authority granted him by the Bahamas constitution, that does make it legal.
On Mitchell: Activists defamed country
Posted 23 March 2015, 6:53 p.m. Suggest removal
Cas0072 says...
How has he not defended the policies? He has been defending them quite adamently in the press and in the HOA. Not meeting with people who want to twist the governments arm first, talk later is his right. I see his position quite clearly on this. They do not deserve the courtesy simply for their tactics.
Mr. Smith has the same audience as Mr. Mitchell. He could have built up local support regarding getting the DC in order and the alledged inhumane treatments. Instead he attempts to defame the country internationally at every opportunity.
On Mitchell: Activists defamed country
Posted 23 March 2015, 6:49 p.m. Suggest removal
Cas0072 says...
Indeed it is silly for you to pretend that Mr. Smith is always up and active on this topic. How did the DC get so deplorable under the watch of this guardian angel? Talking about "paths to citizenship" as if it were a given certainly gives the impression this is a God given right of all illegal immigrants. Where is Smith's clear and concise counter propasal? He doesnt have to meet with the minister to discuss it. Put it in the mail.
On Mitchell: Activists defamed country
Posted 23 March 2015, 6:36 p.m. Suggest removal
Cas0072 says...
It is possible that I could have missed some headlines or not recall everything referenced. Even with that said, that is not an unreasonable request. If you recall, the videos of the kids being "hauled off for deportation" did not match the hysteric propaganda that was added to it. You don't recall claims of ethnic cleansing, genocide, etc? If Mr. Smith has evidence of these abuses, he should simply present the evidence.Standing by what you say when it could very well be untrue, as history has proven, means nothing.
On Mitchell: Activists defamed country
Posted 23 March 2015, 5:03 p.m. Suggest removal
Cas0072 says...
Actually it does. It does not take much research to find Mr. Smith denouncing these activities that have been taking place the whole time. Now he is in the press every other day. Resolving the illegal immigration issue does require effort at the border and also on land. Every illegal immigrant that is currently here should not be granted citizenship if they do not qualify.
On Mitchell: Activists defamed country
Posted 23 March 2015, 4:55 p.m. Suggest removal
Cas0072 says...
Sometimes the "path to citizenship" will, and should be, no path at all. That is what he and illegal Haitian immigrants, enablers, and other supporters fail to accept. At least the government is making it feasible for some and always have. In Australia, it has been made quite clear that illegal immigrants will not be rewarded with citizenship under any circumstance and I wish the Bahamas would follow suit. You conveniently pick and choose from Mr. Smith's comments, but can you for example, say that he is correct in that people should not be penalized for aiding and abetting those who are in the country illegally? Assisting smugglers? Can you say that he is correct in saying that immigration officers do not have the right to arrest and detain persons that are suspected to be illegal? It is quite possible that he is doing more harm than good.
I am sure the government had nothing to do with that KKK mess and I am sure they denounce it. To present the tasteless actions of private citizens as somehow being supported by the government is just wrong. Are the police not looking into it? That is about all that can be done.
On Mitchell: Activists defamed country
Posted 23 March 2015, 4:49 p.m. Suggest removal