Interesting article from yesterday's Charlotte Observerhttp://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/15934100.htm
11/6/2006 4:12:08 PM
You know better than to do that. Or you should.
11/6/2006 4:14:13 PM
I wonder if you even read a single word from the article, which happened to be > 10,000 characters if I had quoted it
11/6/2006 4:14:58 PM
No, I didn't. The point here is that you have violated a longtime rule of this place. You have to get the conversation started. You know that. However, you didn't do it.
11/6/2006 4:16:52 PM
ok here we goBasically this article details a number of illegal immigrants who have been taken advantage of by supposed immigration lawyers who actually ended up ripping off the illegal immigrants and exposing some of them to immigration/deportationIn one hand its people breaking the law by scamming other people, who happened to break the law by coming here illegallySome would say both sides (con artists and illegal immigrants) should be punished/fined/go to jail...some would say this is "rough justice"hope that get the ball rolling...
11/6/2006 4:20:09 PM
I really think that both sides should be prosecuted, here. There's really no excuse for these people to scam illegal immigrants. Just because they're here illegally doesn't mean it in any way justifies the abuse.[Edited on November 6, 2006 at 4:23 PM. Reason : .]
11/6/2006 4:23:43 PM
Two wrongs don't make a right, I agreeI just wonder how many people who have that perspective on this particular issue, that both sides should be prosecuted, felt that the immigrants should be prosecuted before this story came out...because what the illegal immigrants did/do (note: coming to America illegally) hasnt really changed just because some other people committed some type of fraud/scam on them
11/6/2006 4:31:29 PM
CAPITALISM!!!!!!!!!!
11/6/2006 4:33:38 PM
As if immigrants aren't second-class citizens to began with. Nothing less than throwing the book at these lawyers will be acceptable.
11/7/2006 11:36:47 AM
11/7/2006 11:41:36 AM
Forgive me for trying to be non-biased in my initial postPlease feel free to add to the discussion, anyone
11/7/2006 12:00:40 PM
I can't articulate it any better, so i'll just quote this:
11/7/2006 12:18:24 PM