Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...
video production in Manassas and Prince William County

Papal Visit Scalping Crackdown May Impact Illegal Aliens

By Greg L | 14 April 2008 | Uncategorized | 42 Comments

In an effort to prevent folks from scalping their tickets to see the Pope, the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington will be requiring everyone attending events with the Pope to present valid government ID. I’ll bet Mexicans Without Borders will be absolutely thrilled. Didn’t they just raise a stink recently about this kind of requirement being imposed in the county’s public schools so the schools could ensure that sex offenders wouldn’t be wandering around using false identification documents? I can’t wait to see who is more accommodating to illegal aliens — the Prince William County Schools which now accepts the fraud-prone Matricula Consular and other equivalents, or the Archdiocese of Washington.

From WTOP:

The Baltimore Sun reports that every ticket for the mass will be tied to a name, and each adult wanting to get in will have to show a government issued ID…

Liz Kay of the Baltimore Sun says tickets could be revoked if ticket holders do not have identification.

“if the identification of the person didn’t match the seat that it was assigned to, the Archdiocese could actually cancel that ticket,” Kay says. “They are keeping pretty close watch.”

There’s a disturbing irony here about people attempting to personally profit from a papal visit. It vaguely brings to mind this potential enforcement effort:



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.

42 Comments

  1. Rick Bentley said on 14 Apr 2008 at 6:53 am:
    Flag comment

    Hilarious! I hope some of the illegals start to get the message.

  2. Krutis said on 14 Apr 2008 at 7:37 am:
    Flag comment

    “Hilarious” = A rather strange reaction. Did you laugh? If so, what’s so funny?

  3. Beck said on 14 Apr 2008 at 8:54 am:
    Flag comment

    “Do as I say, not as I do.”

  4. Johnson said on 14 Apr 2008 at 9:58 am:
    Flag comment

    Once again, responsible adults can and do produce valid identification upon request.

  5. Advocator said on 14 Apr 2008 at 10:34 am:
    Flag comment

    What’s even more ironic is the fact that el Pape will be here bemoaning how some jurisdictions have “treated” the illegals. He’ll disregard the facts that we’ve educated their anchor babies, provided social services, indulged their vulgarities, cleaned up their trash, and provided them with a higher standard of living and more freedoms than their own countries used to give them. He’ll berate us for not embracing them wholeheartedly, for not allowing them access to our universities at the expense of our own children, and for not rewarding them for violating the sanctity of our borders. He’ll be pandering to them to gather members to replace those who left the Church due to the institutionalized approval of his priests’ penchant for little boys’ behinds.

  6. Anonymous said on 14 Apr 2008 at 10:35 am:
    Flag comment

    We just need to be damned careful this whole “Papers please” thing doesn’t turn our society into a police state.

    In Virginia you only need to produce an ID when driving a motor vehicle, or if you are about to be given a summons. It might not help in the fight against illegals, but the right to walk around without being harassed by law enforcement is worth protecting.

  7. Rick Bentley said on 14 Apr 2008 at 10:56 am:
    Flag comment

    What’s so funny? The fact that the illegal alien apologists :

    1. Complain bitterly when organizations like schools or libraries or even police want them to produce ID

    2. Planned to petition the Pope about it

    3. Can’t get in to see him without ID

  8. Anonymous said on 14 Apr 2008 at 11:13 am:
    Flag comment

    Advocator,

    The previous Pope was shot and nearly died because as assassin showed up at an event. The Church does not want a repeat of that episode, and under the circumstances tight security is warranted. The tickets were handed out to people who requested them through their local parish. Only a small fraction of those who requested them received them. Because of the high demand and short supply, making sure that the ones who requested and received those tickets are the one who are using them is another good reason for the ID checks.

  9. Advocator said on 14 Apr 2008 at 12:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    Yes, Anonymous, we have good security in this country and for good reason. I have no problem with the security checks because we’ve allowed terrorists and other Illegal Invaders to violate the sanctity of our borders with impunity. Some of our citizens even encourage this invasion in order to reap the benefits of slave labor so they can get their grass cut, toilets washed, and kids raised while they go to the golf course/nail salon etc.

    What I find ironic is that the Pope will preach to us to accept the Illegal Invaders so that his church can replace its members who have left due to the incessant kiddie diddling of its priests.

  10. The Truth said on 14 Apr 2008 at 1:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    Advocator,

    You and bigots like you are the ones who aid and abet the violation of our nation’s security by constantly conflating the non-issue of illegal immigration with the national security threat of an unguarded border.

    We can’t secure the border because self-serving bigots like you hate having to deal with a demographic shift so you refuse to promote amnesty. Amnesty would allow us to move past the illegal immigration issue so that we could secure the border. But you would prefer to see our country suffer a devastating attack from terrorists.

    You promote this viewpoint with inflammatory words meant to keep hatred burning…words like ‘anchor babies’, ‘invasion’, and ‘criminals’. Words that cloud people’s judgment. Words that keep us focused on the wrong issue.

    God forbid it should come to pass, but if we see mushroom clouds rising over multiple american cities one day, it will be partly because you and men like you preferred to spit never ending torrent of excrement out of your mouth…rather than show generosity and give amnesty…so that we can move on to the life or death issue of securing the border.

    Advocator…you are in the same category as Ricardo Juarez…you are both useful idiots and helpers of Al Queda and Osama Bin Laden.

  11. Greg L said on 14 Apr 2008 at 1:38 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’ve seen trash collected from Arizona ranches that are illegal alien smuggling routes that includes candy wrappers with arabic writing, telephone numbers written on scraps of papers that are from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, and addresses that have turned out to be drug warehouses for Mexican drug cartels in Phoenix. To claim that there is no national security issue here is utterly delusional.

    Since you say that the illegal alien problem is a “non-issue”, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. The consistent reports from folks who had to deal with exploding problems in their neighborhood over the past few years have fallen on your deliberately deaf ears. No, that’s not quite right. You do hear these witnesses, but instead of making any effort to understand them, it’s just easier for you to demonize anyone who expresses an opinion different from those who share your far-left fantasy world.

    Declaring all criminals non-criminal as a potential solution is a complete non-starter, and I’m surprised anyone still bothers to peddle such nonsense.

  12. Johnson said on 14 Apr 2008 at 2:24 pm:
    Flag comment

    Criminals don’t carry I.D. because they don’t want to be arrested. Irresponsible adults don’t carry I.D. because they forgot or can’t be bothered. Obnoxious liberals don’t carry I.D. because they want to be self-rightous elitists. When one of the above has a medical emergency and is unable to communicate, who will be to blame for the consequences? How much will their family suffer because of their carelessness? Or if they are detained for a possible violation of the law, who is to blame as they sit in jail, trying to contact someone to bring their I.D. to the Magistrate? Or wait for a fingerprint match, which can take days?

    It’s called Personal responsibility for a reason. If you can’t identify yourself when you need to, it’s nobody’s fault but your own.

  13. Advocator said on 14 Apr 2008 at 3:28 pm:
    Flag comment

    Dear Truth:

    After wading through your name-calling it seems that your position is that if we grant amnesty we could secure the border. I’m not sure how that would happen. We granted amnesty in ‘86 and all it did was encourage the Illegal Invasion we have now. Without calling me a bigot and racist (or anything else), please explain to me how we could secure our borders now by granting amnesty to all those who violated the borders?

  14. The Truth said on 14 Apr 2008 at 4:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    Advocator,

    In ‘86 we didn’t have to concern ourselves with the threat of people coming across the border to stage mass attacks on americans. After granting amnesty in 86, there was no threat of people coming here to kill us so there was no strong motivation to secure the border.

    Whether the amnesty in 86 encouraged more illegal immigration or not doesn’t really matter. Illegal Immigration is an issue of minor importance considering the danger to our nation. What does matter is putting the illegal immigration issue behind us so our elected officials can do whats necessary to secure the border.

    The main reason we haven’t been able to secure the borders is because our leaders won’t touch it due to the tricky issues (race relations, business interests, sovereignty, take your pick) that inevitably crop up because of illegal immigration. If we can separate the illegal immigration issue from the border security issue, we take all the tricky issues out of the picture. The best way to separate the illegal immigration issue from border security is to kill the illegal immigration issue by granting amnesty.

    After amnesty, our officials will have the space they need to secure the border without putting their political careers in jeopardy. Americans will probably be clamoring for border security at that point and hopefully our politicians will be competing with each other to show who can make the border the most secure.

    They’ve had 7 years since 9-11. They clearly are unable to summon the moral courage necessary. We’re setting the bar too high. Lower the bar.

  15. Advocator said on 14 Apr 2008 at 4:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    Well, Truth, keep on keeping on with that circular, inane reasoning. I’m sure you have some ulterior motive for espousing that stuff. We’ll just leave it there.

    I’ll discuss amnesty, if ever, only after the borders are locked up tighter than a virgin on prom nite.

  16. /\/\3|)iç 64 (Winner of the BVBL 40k and 50k post award) said on 14 Apr 2008 at 5:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    Advocator,

    Exactly, where will the deterrent be for crossing after the amnesty. It will be said if we wait them out long enough and have enough people cross they will grant us citizenship every 20-25 years.

  17. /\/\3|)iç 64 (Winner of the BVBL 40k and 50k post award) said on 14 Apr 2008 at 5:17 pm:
    Flag comment

    Here is a solution:

    http://www.eagledigitalsoftware.com/reform.html

  18. The Truth said on 14 Apr 2008 at 5:33 pm:
    Flag comment

    Advocator,

    If it’s circular and inane, show me how. It’s a cheap shot to ascribe ulterior motives that exist only in your head. It means you can’t refute the substance.

    “I’ll discuss amnesty, if ever, only after the borders are locked up tighter than a virgin on prom nite.”

    You’re in denial. Don’t let ‘perfect’ become the enemy of ‘good enough’.

    How many american cities are you prepared to sacrifice just to try to roll back this demographic shift? How many millions of americans have to die?

    The country is in mortal danger, and you’re bitching about ESOL classes.

  19. /\/\3|)iç 64 (Winner of the BVBL 40k and 50k post award) said on 14 Apr 2008 at 6:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    # The Truth said on 14 Apr 2008 at 5:33 pm:

    Advocator,

    If it’s circular and inane, show me how. It’s a cheap shot to ascribe ulterior motives that exist only in your head. It means you can’t refute the substance.

    “I’ll discuss amnesty, if ever, only after the borders are locked up tighter than a virgin on prom nite.”

    You’re in denial. Don’t let ‘perfect’ become the enemy of ‘good enough’.

    How many american cities are you prepared to sacrifice just to try to roll back this demographic shift? How many millions of americans have to die?

    The country is in mortal danger, and you’re bitching about ESOL classes.

    I do not think wanting the borders secure is being in denial.

    Why do any American cities have to be sacrificed as you say?
    Why do ANY Americans have to die?

    Your doom and gloom is exactly what the country does NOT need.

    Take emotion out of the equation, if you can, and then respond to this:

    I understand it is hard on people in their own countries, I have experienced it first hand for 18 months in the Philippines. However, why should those that have overstayed their visas, walked across the border or were smuggled in get the “free pass” to citizenship when some people, like my co-worker, who are waiting their turn in the line, may have to leave if they can not get a chance at the H1B visa lottery?? How is that fair and equitable for all? Why do they have to go through the expense of an attorney and such while those mentioned above can just be granted blanket citizenship. He is from Cambodia and he is frustrated at the situation with the illegal aliens. He has come here the right way and will leave when is visa expires. He can not renew his driver’s license if he does.

    We need to remove the incentive to be here illegally. We have to remove all illegal aliens and we have to adjust the 14th Amendment IMMEDIATELY. Automatic citizenship is not what the 14th amendment was intentionally meant to provide in today’s sense!!

    Time has come for us to make those who have entered through the back door aware that there are consequences for your actions and those consequences are not good ones. Deportation is the first step as well as removing incentives to stay. I am sorry if this means that people will have to leave, but they came here without permission and they can leave without it as well.

  20. The Truth said on 14 Apr 2008 at 8:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    Medic 64,

    You’ve completely missed my point. I’m not arguing for amnesty for amnesty’s sake. I’m arguing that we need to settle the illegal immigration issue as soon as possible so we can focus on the most important issue, securing the border from terrorists. So the challenge is to figure out which is easier to accomplish, amnesty or deportation. Clearly, considering the racial/political pitfalls, energy required, and impact on business, deportation is a whole heck of a lot harder to accomplish. For example, look at the disaster unfolding in PWC…
    Amnesty would just require us to issue some papers. Problem finished. Then we can finally secuire the border.

    Only an ignorant man or a willfully blind man would believe our country is not in mortal danger.

  21. The Truth said on 14 Apr 2008 at 8:17 pm:
    Flag comment

    Medic and Advocator,

    We’re all on a bus, and the bus is barreling towards a cliff. And you guys are ignoring the cliff and screaming to high heaven because some people got on the bus without paying for their tickets. And you refuse to do anything about the cliff until you’ve kicked the non-ticketed people off…

  22. jfk said on 14 Apr 2008 at 9:10 pm:
    Flag comment

    The kiddie diddling remarks are disgusting. It’s obvious you don’t like Catholicism, Advocator. Is that the best smear you’ve got?

    I never really saw the hate on this site until recently when the different stories concerning the Pope and Hogar Hispano came up. Then it became open season on Catholics for people like Advocator.

    I’m starting to wonder what motivates a lot of the people on this site. It doesn’t seem like patriotism….

  23. jfk said on 14 Apr 2008 at 9:13 pm:
    Flag comment

    The border will be secured for illegal ENTRY. Anyone is free to exit at any time. There is no reason to think that the border cannot be secured first.

  24. Advocator said on 14 Apr 2008 at 9:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    Well, Trufe, if indeed we’re headed for a cliff, I’d suggest the Illegal Invaders follow a simple economic principle: Last in, First out.

    An’ thass right, Trufe, I am bitching about ESOL classes. Those anchor babies be costing me money.

  25. Advocator said on 14 Apr 2008 at 9:18 pm:
    Flag comment

    By the way, Trufe. I’d be willing to sacrifice NYC, San Fran, LA, a large part of DC., Arlington, and Manassas Park.

  26. Advocator said on 14 Apr 2008 at 10:29 pm:
    Flag comment

    jfk said on 14 Apr 2008 at 9:10 pm:
    The kiddie diddling remarks are disgusting.

    That’s right, JFK. Those remarks and the acts they describe are disgusting. So disgusting that you would like to deny them. And I’m not castigating all Catholics, JFK. Only those priests who took advantage of their flock’s blind faith to perpetuate heinous crimes on defenseless victims, and those in the institution who knowingly tolerated and covered up the crimes, thus encouraging more. My rendition is factual, sir, not bigoted. The facts are that the Catholic church, as an institution, tolerated and covered up a culture of pedantry. I have nothing against individual members of that faith. I’ve worshipped with them and have the highest respect for the tenets of that faith and for those who try to live by them. But I cannot abide an institution that encourages, by its tolerance, such disgusting, heinous crimes by the very people who should be standing against such evil.

  27. 999 said on 14 Apr 2008 at 10:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    The Truth said on 14 Apr 2008 at 8:12 pm:

    You are very nieve if you think granting amnesty to 20 million illegals will get the border secured. How long is it going to take for the next 20 million to come across? (probably faster that the last 20 million.) There is no resolve from our government to secure our borders. Pelosi and her group are now trying to kill the SAVE ACT as they want nothing but amnesty and open borders. DEPORT THEM ALL. IT CAN BE DONE!

  28. The Truth said on 15 Apr 2008 at 6:08 am:
    Flag comment

    Advocator said:
    “By the way, Trufe. I’d be willing to sacrifice NYC, San Fran, LA, a large part of DC., Arlington, and Manassas Park.”

    Someday you might get your wish, and you will be partly to blame.

    There were many elected officials who were equally glib and flippant a few years ago…and then they wet themselves on 9-11.

  29. Rick Bentley said on 15 Apr 2008 at 6:56 am:
    Flag comment

    That’s a pretty good smear against Catholicism … it seems obvious that either the Catholic God isn’t real, or is a pedophile …

  30. Advocator said on 15 Apr 2008 at 8:43 am:
    Flag comment

    That’s a pretty good smear against me, Rick. It seems obvious that you lack the ability to discern criticism of an institution from the dogma that institution is supposed to be espousing.

  31. /\/\3|)iç 64 (Winner of the BVBL 40k and 50k post award) said on 15 Apr 2008 at 8:53 am:
    Flag comment

    # The Truth said on 14 Apr 2008 at 8:12 pm:

    Medic 64,

    You’ve completely missed my point. I’m not arguing for amnesty for amnesty’s sake. I’m arguing that we need to settle the illegal immigration issue as soon as possible so we can focus on the most important issue, securing the border from terrorists. So the challenge is to figure out which is easier to accomplish, amnesty or deportation. Clearly, considering the racial/political pitfalls, energy required, and impact on business, deportation is a whole heck of a lot harder to accomplish. For example, look at the disaster unfolding in PWC…
    Amnesty would just require us to issue some papers. Problem finished. Then we can finally secuire the border.

    Only an ignorant man or a willfully blind man would believe our country is not in mortal danger.

    I didn’t call you names, so why did you go there?

    The bus wouldn’t be headed off the cliff if the bus driver didn’t have to be distracted with those who didn’t pay their fair share of the fare.

    I do not think it is in MORTAL danger, in danger yes, but not mortal. If it is in mortal danger, the powers that be would step in. Your doom and gloom is just too emotional.

    Remove the incentives and self deportation will happen, just like it is in PWC. Remove the anchor babies, employers able to pay under the table for slave labor and welfare benefits for those who make it across the border in time to have an anchor baby. Once the incentives are removed, they will leave. Just look at Oklahoma and HR 1804. It has made a difference in their state.

  32. jfk said on 15 Apr 2008 at 10:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    No, your words are disgusting. You imply that the entire leadership of the church was in on this scandal. If you look at the facts, the abuses were conducted and covered up by a few individuals who are no longer in leadership roles. They will stand in judgement before God for what they did, as will all of us. You are attempting to tar an entire group for the sins of a few.

    Just drop the crude references and try to show a little tact and class.

  33. The Truth said on 16 Apr 2008 at 12:14 am:
    Flag comment

    Medic 64 said:
    “I do not think it is in MORTAL danger, in danger yes, but not mortal. If it is in mortal danger, the powers that be would step in. Your doom and gloom is just too emotional.”

    At least you recognize that there is a danger…and then you propose that we waste more time. I think the wisest course would be, as always, to hope for the best but prepare for the worst. You recognize there is a danger but still say it’s more important to waste precious time on an ultimately fruitless struggle to exile a few lawnmowers. Your priorities are the reverse of what they should be. How many americans have to die so you can wage your private war on lawnmowers and construction workers?

    You and many like you actually believe you are helping the country when in reality you are the greatest enemy to our security.

  34. Rick Bentley said on 16 Apr 2008 at 9:19 am:
    Flag comment

    Give the current Pope some credit for admitting the pedophiles-in-the-church problem is real and important to correct. But also give the previous Pope his due and let’s admit he was a backwards fool who probably wreaked more outright harm and I would say evil on humanity than anyone else in his era.

    In the end the Catholic Church is a business like any other and their amoral stance on birth control, their cynical desire to grow “market share” via unplanned pregnancy disgusts many or even most people.

  35. jfk said on 16 Apr 2008 at 10:30 am:
    Flag comment

    I guess abortions are moral? What a strange world you live in!
    It’s not a place I would like to be. I’d invite you to learn more about natural family planning, but I doubt you would have any interest. It’s easier for you to sit in your desk chair and type hateful and downright evil messages on the computer than to actually learn the truth.

    I’ll have to remember Advocator and Rick Bentley in my prayers this week.

  36. Advocator said on 16 Apr 2008 at 11:41 am:
    Flag comment

    Thanks, JFK, I never turn down a prayer.

    I’ve got to agree w/ Rick that the Pope’s admission to shame about his priests’ proclivities for little boys’ backsides goes a long way toward healing the cynicism, but you also have to consider Bill Maher’s point: Didling a few hundred kids in a compound in west Tex gets you raided. Didling thousands over several years all across the world earns you a pass.

  37. jfk said on 16 Apr 2008 at 1:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    My friend, when you have to start quoting Bill Maher then you know you have some deep moral issues.

    I guess you want to continue with the insulting and disturbing language, so go ahead. Your words and attitude show that you have some issues, and you probably aren’t able to discuss things like a rational human being.

    God bless.

  38. Wine Please said on 17 Apr 2008 at 1:56 pm:
    Flag comment

    Medic64–liked your reform ideas

    jfk–abortion is not birth control (albeit there are those who use it as b.c., but you’ll aways have people like that); the “natrual family planning” can be tedious (counting days or taking temperatures), doesn’t take in account for cycle irregularities, doesn’t allow for spontaneous intimate interactions between a husband and wife (can’t have sex on the fertile days), and is a little yucky (do you sit down and discuss the thickness of vaginal mucous with your spouse?)…but mostly it’s unreliable…average rate of failure is 25%…that is ridiculously high compared to oral pill (4-8% when accounting for human error), condoms (7%), and IUD (0.5-0.8%). How can families who are strapped for cash reliably prevent additional children when their church tells them they can only practice one of the most unreliable methods of family planning, which also makes it hard to keep a strained marriage stable if there are days that a couple aren’t “allowed” to be intimate with one another, which is often what heals a lot of troubles and spats in a marriage?…that is why a lot of folks consider the Catholic Church’s stance on birth control to be amoral.

  39. Wine Please said on 17 Apr 2008 at 2:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    oh, and props to Greg for the Monty Python video…hilarious to see that again!

  40. Benton said on 17 Apr 2008 at 6:36 pm:
    Flag comment

    jfk - feel your pain. Just wonder what has taken you so long? :)

  41. jfk said on 18 Apr 2008 at 2:54 pm:
    Flag comment

    Wine Please, the stats you quote for NFP are incorrect. The success rate is actually much higher than 75 percent for couples who have been properly trained and follow the program.

    Catholics beleive that sexual relations between husband and wife should be love giving and life giving. You can’t acheive that with artificial birth control methods. To say that our beliefs are amoral shows a total lack of understanding of our faith. The Planned Parenthood group makes the same arguments that you have stated when opposing abstinence programs. In the end, people have to accept that they can’t always have everything they want when they want it. This applies to every facet of life.

    And sadly, you are wrong in stating that abortion is not used as birth control. Thousands of babies die every day because their parents don’t want them.

  42. Freedom said on 20 Apr 2008 at 10:37 am:
    Flag comment

    /\/\3|)iç 64 said at 5:17 pm:
    Here is a solution:

    http://www.eagledigitalsoftware.com/reform.html

    Not bad at all….in fact, I agree, and while your solution might require a little tweaking here and there, the basic concepts certainly apply. Oh, and the sealed border should be for northbound traffic only; leak like a seive to those wishing to go southbound to get the heck out of this racist, xenophobic, bigoted, unloving, hate-filled, selfish country that they chose to visit.

    …and as for your premise, “the truth” man, if we get rid of those politicians, e.g., Nancy Pelosi, who are so clouded by the number of potential voters that they can’t agree to letting them go home OR ANY OTHER REASON, there would be no argument to securing the border.

    I’m getting more than a bit tired of politicians who insist upon and support THEIR view rather than that of their constituents.

Comments are closed.


Views: 2554