Archive for the ‘Immigration’ Category
By Alan Caruba
It’s not very often you will find me agreeing with an avowed environmentalist, but facts are facts and, when it comes to population growth, they are ignored at our peril if America is to avoid sliding rapidly into a Third World status.
“The American people, especially our leaders, must bring themselves to face the reality that our population cannot be allowed to continue to grow without disastrous consequences,” said Donald Mann, president of Negative Population Growth, Inc. in response to the news that on October 17, 2006 our population passed the three hundred million mark.
Of that number, the estimate of illegal immigrants ranges from twelve to twenty million. In his bestselling book, “State of Emergency”, Patrick J. Buchanan noted that “Rarely have immigrants constituted 10 percent of our number,” adding that “We have almost as many foreigners here today as came in the first 350 years of our history…(and) most of those coming are breaking in.” The U.S. Census bureau calculates that an immigrant sets foot in America, legally and illegally, every 31 seconds.
Americans, in addition to the out-of-control immigration crisis, have an even larger crisis looming and it too will impact every aspect of our lives. With more people being born every day than are dying, we are less than thirty years away from a population of 400 million!
We do need a new, replacement, younger work force and the current Social Security and other benefits programs depends on this. It’s predicted to go broke in a decade or so anyway.
A dramatically growing population is going to require more roads, bridges, power plants, airports, housing, jails, schools, hospitals, and other elements of our national infrastructure just to keep pace with our current needs. By any measurement you apply—crime, healthcare, education, transportation—life in America is going to grow worse without the facilities and the energy to maintain our current lifestyles.
The quickest, easiest answer is to stop all immigration, legal and illegal, into the nation and do not tell me this cannot be done. It has already been done. Between 1924 and 1965, America declared a moratorium, a forty-year pause that allowed the “melting pot” to facilitate assimilation into our culture.
By Thomas E. Brewton
Modern mass production with interchangeable parts was a good idea in the automobile industry a century ago. But is it a good idea to homogenize national cultures, either in the interests of economic prosperity, or to further the socialist ideal of a one-world government?
Carol Derbis drew my attention to the potential dangers of the proposed North American Union, which aims at making NAFTA into an analog of the European Union, eventually uniting Mexico, Canada, and the United States on political and cultural grounds, as well as on economic policies.
As she writes, we must have full and public Congressional hearings before the proposal goes much further.
Chris Adamo addressed the issue last year, as did Jerome R. Corsi in this article earlier this year.
Those who fear the worst say that President Bush intends to abrogate United States sovereignty. That seems unlikely, but any surrender of our own Constitutional rights to a supranational agency, however limited the surrender, is a very bad policy. Our experience with the UN makes that abundantly clear.
Apart from the huge controversy over illegal immigration from Mexico, there are plenty of other negatives to consider.
Foremost among them is spotlighted by this website's Statement of Purpose:
The View from 1776 presents a framework to understand present-day issues from the viewpoint of the colonists who fought for American independence in 1776 and wrote the Constitution in 1787. Knowing and preserving those understandings, what might be called the unwritten constitution of our nation, is vital to preserving constitutional government. Without them, the bare words of the Constitution are just a Rorschach ink-blot that politicians, educators, and judges can interpret to mean anything they wish.
As relatively little has been elaborated about the North American Union concept in the media, one can only conjecture about the exact intentions and methods. Whatever the specifics of the proposed North American Union, it can be said that it has the potential to promote further cultural disintegration in our nation, which is as lethal a danger as Islamic jihad.
Liberals (and it has to be said that most Republicans as well as Democrats have evident left-leanings) have been educated in our colleges and universities to accept the social sciences view that human beings respond only to material factors. Thirst, hunger, the need for clothing and shelter, and the sexual urges are said to be the ultimately controlling factors in human society.
One has to be oblivious to history, however, to believe that the list of social influences is limited to the atheistic materialism of socialism. Our colonial ancestors were definitely motivated by the economic issues of taxation to issue the Declaration of Independence. But there was a far deeper ethos underlying their action: the centuries old English tradition of inalienable natural- law rights of individuals to be free from the arbitrary exercise of power by the sovereign. Those conceptions grew out of the Judeo- Christian moral traditions that constituted Western Civilization.
Moving in the direction of a political and cultural North American Union is to unwind the very substance of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc.
The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets.
His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/
Email comments to viewfrom1776@thomasbrewton.com
I do not agree with everything that California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger says. But one statement he made I do agree 100%, is his views on immigrates. Arnold states that immigrants, such as Mexicans are coming into the United States and are making no effort to become part of the American experience.
And many political leaders in other countries such as Australia and Denmark are asking their immigrants to assimilate into their culture.
He speaks from experience, since he immigrated from Austria.
[..] that immigrants should learn English and U.S. history and "make an effort to become part of America."
"That is very difficult for some people to do especially, I think, for Mexicans because they are so close to their country here so they try to stay Mexican but try to be in America, so there's this kind of back and forth," he said.
"What I'm saying to the Mexicans is you've got to go and immerse yourself and assimilate into the American culture, become part of the American fabric. That is how Americans will embrace you," he added. (NewsMax.com)
His statements did cause some flak from the Democrats. They are saying he is insensitive toward immigrants and others. But I say he is speaking the truth of what all Americans and most legal immigrants are feeling towards immigration in the Untied States.
The population isn't exploding, it's imploding. In fact, there is a catastrophic population shrinkage. In many parts of the world, there aren't nearly enough babies, says Joel Garreau in the October issue of Smithsonian.
Population shrinkage is happening in Europe, Russia, Japan, Canada, much of East Asia, even China. It has potentially dire consequences for anyone wishing to retire and live off the goods and services of the younger generation.
According to Garreau:
- Sometime in October, the United States population will reach 300 million — most of that growth comes from immigration.
- For a population to replace itself, every couple has to produce about 2.1 children, but the United States falls just short of that.
- Italy and Spain are at 1.3 percent, and Hong Kong and Macau are 0.96 and 0.84.
- Russia has both a baby shortage and a strangely sick population.
- China's draconian methods of population control have created a situation in which it will soon have a disproportionate number of older citizens; many won't have a child to take care of them, and they'll have to work in the fields to the end of their days.
Few demographers ever dreamed that in the absence of war, famine and pestilence — in fact, as a result of urbanization, development and education — birthrates would drop so dramatically. No one knows where the bottom is. Keep this up, and eventually your civilization will disappear, says Garreau.
Source: Joel Achenbach, "The Population Implosion," Washington Post, September 27, 2006.
For text (subscription required):
For more on International Issues:
Congress wants to know why two border agents doing their job, stopping an illegal Mexican who was transporting 743 pounds of marijuana. Both agents are facing up to 20 years for shooting and wounding the illegal smuggler. Congress wants an investigation and the President to pardon these two agents who were doing their job.
U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton sought out the wounded smuggler in Mexico in order to pursue charges against the border agents. Sutton has a history of pursuing cases against law enforcement officers.
CNS News reports:
"These were good agents doing their job," said Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.). "There is something that stinks to high heaven."
On Feb. 17, 2005, U.S. Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean were on duty when they encountered Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila in a van carrying 743 pounds of marijuana. When the agents tried to stop Aldrete-Davila, he fled. Unable to shake the pursuing agents, he abandoned his van and continued running toward Mexico.
The agents' version of what happened next contradicts Aldrete-Davila's testimony. The one thing all agree on is that, while fleeing on foot, the illegal alien and drug smuggler was shot. Aldrete-Davila was treated at a hospital in El Paso and then returned to Mexico.
After learning of the shooting, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton sought out Aldrete-Davila in Mexico and offered him immunity from prosecution if he would return to the United States to testify against Ramos and Compean.
The initial immunity offer covered Aldrete-Davila's illegal entry into the U.S., the drug smuggling and his unlawful flight from the agents to avoid arrest. Sutton expanded the immunity to include a subsequent drug offense, when Aldrete-Davila tried to smuggle another 1,000 pounds of marijuana into the United States.
"The Justice Department says they don't have the resources to secure our borders, but somehow they found the resources to send agents to Mexico to find Aldrete-Davila and prosecute these agents," Tancredo said.
Rep. Red Poe (R-Texas) said the Justice Department is "on the wrong side" of this case.
Is the justice department working for the government of Mexico?
Americans and Mexicans have widely divergent views of border issues, according to a new poll by Zogby International.
Zogby found that a large majority of the Mexican population believes the southwest territory of the U.S. rightfully belongs to Mexico, and that Mexicans should have the right to enter the U.S. without first obtaining U.S. permission. By contrast, Zogby's survey of Americans conducted within a few days of the Mexican poll shows a large majority supports reducing immigration levels and wants the military deployed along the border to protect the U.S. from illegal immigration.
Zogby's poll found that 58 percent of Mexicans agree with the statement, "the territory of the United States' Southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico." Only 28 percent disagree, and 14 percent are unsure.
A similar majority, 57 percent, agree with the statement, "Mexicans should have the right to enter the U.S. without U.S. permission," while 35 percent disagree. Seven percent are unsure.
The survey has a margin of error of 3.5 percent. The Mexico portion of the survey was conducted in Spanish between May 25 and May 26 among 801 adults chosen at random throughout Mexico. The poll was commissioned by Americans for Immigration Control, Inc. (AIC), which advocates increased restrictions on immigration.
"There is obviously a large and significant gap between the attitudes of Americans and Mexicans," said Robert Goldsborough, AIC president. "While most Americans want immigration reduced, most Mexicans think they don't even need permission to enter our country. The poll clearly shows there is less common ground for immigration negotiations between Mexico and the U.S. than the leaders think. Support for a porous border and a loose migration policy occurs only on the Mexican side, not in the U.S."
Zogby's survey of American attitudes found wide majorities of Americans also oppose amnesty for illegal aliens. The U.S. portion of the survey was conducted of 1,015 likely voters in the U.S. from May 28 to May 30. It found that 65 percent disagree with the statement, "foreigners residing illegally in the U.S. should be given amnesty." Just 26 percent of likely voters support amnesty for illegals, while 9 percent are unsure.
A large majority, 58 percent, agree that the U.S. should "admit fewer immigrants each year." Only 6 percent want "more immigrants each year," and 30 percent want to "keep immigration at the current annual levels."
The single largest majority in the entire poll was found among Americans supporting use of the military to guard the border. Fully 68 percent of those surveyed agree with the statement, "the U.S. should deploy military troops on the border as a temporary measure to help the U.S. Border Patrol curb illegal immigration." Only 28 percent disagree, and 3 percent are unsure.
ABC, CBS, NBC Painting Tough Curbs On Illegals As ‘Far Right’ Harshness
Alexandria, VA—A new Media Research Center study released today shows that for this past spring’s extensive coverage of illegal immigration, the broadcast networks – ABC, CBS, and NBC – largely portrayed illegals and their lobbyists as heroic and deserving of support while proponents of secure borders were portrayed as “harsh” and “hard line.” This spin defies polls showing upwards of 90 percent of Americans view illegal immigration as a serious problem.
This blatant disconnect between the views of the American people and the elite media, as well as the administration, on the issue of illegal immigration is startling and fully detailed in the MRC Special Report, Election in the Streets.
“This new MRC study proves that the liberal media at ABC, CBS, and NBC have a left-wing political agenda when it comes to illegal immigration, and they will ignore the views of most Americans and misinform the public and our policy leaders to advance that agenda,” said MRC President L. Brent Bozell III. “Journalists must provide a complete, balanced picture of the immigration crisis and stop peddling propaganda.”
Major points in the study include the following:
-
309 broadcast network news stories were analyzed between March 24 and May 31, showing that in contrast to hundreds of words emphasizing a huge “wave” of “pro-immigrant” activism, the networks aired only 16 mentions of nationwide polls on immigration. ABC, CBS, and NBC largely ignored poll numbers – including from their own polls – proving that overwhelming majorities of Americans see illegal immigration as “out of control.”
-
Networks gave advocates for amnesty and guest-worker plans twice as many sound bites as those wanting tighter border control.
-
Networks used the “conservative” label 89 times while “liberal” was used only 3 times – all by ABC. CBS and NBC never tagged those pushing for more lenient policies as “liberal.”
-
Only 6 stories discussed how illegals cost more to government than they provide in taxes.
-
Networks never questioned the propriety of illegals protesting and lobbying on immigration while in violation of federal laws.
To schedule an interview with MRC President Bozell or an MRC spokesperson, please contact Tim Scheiderer (x. 126) or Colleen O’Boyle (x. 122) at 703.683.5004.
Last May 15th, President Bush addressed the nation about the flood of immigrants crossing into 
our nation. He pointed to the enormous financial pressures on schools and hospitals caused by the illegal entrants. He mentioned the crime wave they had caused and he promised to beef up the Border Patrol, construct high-tech fences, and employ motion detectors, infrared cameras, and unmanned aerial vehicles. He indicated that he would deploy some National Guard troops and terminate the infamous “catch and release” program under which illegal immigrants are caught and immediately released.
But Mr. Bush wasn’t being honest. In March 2005, and again in March 2006, he met with Mexican and Canadian counterparts to implement already agreed-upon plans to create the Security and Prosperity Partnership among the three supposedly independent nations. The whole truth is that Mr. Bush has already committed to a program that will deal with the border problem by abolishing the borders separating the three nations. A new creation to be known as the North American Union with a single border around the three formerly independent nations will be fashioned.
It is obvious that Mr. Bush intends not only to abolish our nation’s borders but also to abolish our nation. Meanwhile the flood of illegal immigrants continues.
Following is the text of President Bush's August 5, weekly radio address to the nation:
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This week, my Administration met a key objective in our efforts to better secure our Nation's border.
In May, I pledged to deploy up to 6,000 National Guard members to support the Border Patrol, and we fulfilled that pledge by August 1st. Through Operation Jump Start, National Guard members are now on duty supporting the Border Patrol in Texas, California, Arizona, and New Mexico.
On Thursday, I visited the Rio Grande Valley Border Patrol Sector in Texas. I saw firsthand how the National Guard is working with our Border Patrol agents to improve border security. National Guard troops are helping with surveillance, construction, and logistics. They're building and repairing fences, maintaining vehicles, and manning detection equipment on the border and in command centers.
The arrival of National Guard units has allowed the Border Patrol to move more agents into front-line positions, and this additional manpower is delivering results. With the support of the National Guard, Border Patrol agents have seized over 17,000 pounds of illegal drugs and caught more than 2,500 illegal immigrants since June 15th. Just last month, Border Patrol agents in the Rio Grande Valley Sector confiscated more than 4,200 pounds of marijuana hidden in a tractor trailer. And the support of the National Guard was important in making this seizure happen.
Last winter in France, the Muslim youth erupted in riots that lasted over 2 weeks before control was reestablished. Nathan Muller is co-founder of For the Cause, believes that similar riots could happen here in the U.S. I concur 100%, it is only a matter of time.
After two weeks of rioting throughout France among that nation's immigrant population, Americans are asking, "Could it happen here?"
American's are right to ask the question because the circumstances in the two countries are strikingly similar…
- Both countries have allowed immigration policies to deteriorate to the point that virtually anyone who wants to enter can do so with little difficulty.
- Both countries have large immigrant populations that will not assimilate into the host culture or accept its values.
- Most of the immigrants pouring into both countries cannot find jobs, which means they sap social welfare benefits beyond sustainable levels.
Politicians' favorite ploy
What the governments of France and the U.S. need to understand is that uncontrolled immigration naturally produces social inequalities that are difficult, if not impossible, to overcome. These social inequalities are not the result of the prejudices or fears of citizens, but of the misguided policies of government. Attributing social inequalities to "prejudice" or "fear" is a disingenuous ploy politicians use to mask their own policy failures.
With violence waning, President Jacques Chirac has called on France to confront the social inequalities and prejudices that fueled the violence. This is doomed to failure because it is based on a false premise. It's not the French people who are the problem, it's the French government.
The cause of the unrest in France is due mainly to the high rate of unemployment among a vast and growing immigrant population, which hovers around 40%. With an overall unemployment rate of 11%, it will be difficult for France to open the doors to employment, especially with all the bureaucracy and costs associated with job creation. Here the French government is clearly at fault.