I know you were just trying to be frivolous and sarcastic, but it doesn't help the debate.

You're just as bad at treating immigration as a homogenous group like genuine xenophobes.

You do realise there are valid points to being against certain parts of immigration - which most people are, they're against certain parts of it.

For instance, these people aren't refugees, they are however treated as refugees https://m.facebook.com/MissionDawahSverige Even though they openly support ISIS.

I call them invaders or invasion force, but that's for a lack of a better term.

However Sweden treat them as refugees and count them as "children" - (yeah even with the beard)

I consider myself an expat at the moment because while I have no plans to move back to the US, I also don't plan on renouncing my citizenship. But I use that definition for people from other countries as well - I know people from Australia, the UK, Germany, India, Japan, etc. who I consider to be expats. If you're willing to give up your citizenship, then you're an emigrant in my eyes.

But I'm also getting much closer to being willing to give up my US citizenship... The only benefit is that I can decide to go back to the US if necessary, and given the political crap there, that's an increasingly depressing thought.

I know quite a lot of first generation immigrants who call locals "foreigners." Seems especially common among east asians, I always assumed it's just a translation of language that makes sense in (eg) China (non-chinese = foreigners) that doesn't make literal sense in the new context but just stays a part of the language. Not everything is malicious.

Most people don't say that. But nice strawman you building.

Millions of people want to come to America. Most countries don't have open borders I am not sure why America is expected to.