Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Illegal Immigration: Clear and Present Threat to America
If this abomination goes the rest of the way through Congress and places somewhere between 12 and 20 million illegal aliens--lawbreakers--on a fast track to becoming U.S. citizens, and "ordinary" native-born Americans say nothing, or do nothing to investigate the root causes of this (the global power elites in the international banking cartel, on Wall Street, in subversive organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission, in the big foundations such as Ford and Rockefeller, in Congress, and in the transnational megacorporations) then there is just one conclusion: This country collectively does not deserve to survive!
VDARE.COM - http://www. vdare.com/guzzardi/060303_specter.htm
March 03, 2006
Meet the Senate Judiciary Committee: Your Fate Is In Its Hands Right Now
By Joe Guzzardi
When I sat down to write my column, I planned to lead by saying that no United States Senator is worse on immigration than the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter (R).
Based on his tortured immigration proposals this week, I thought that was a safe statement.
Then I looked at the entire committee roster. Specter has a lot of competition among the seventeen-man group.
Specter is touting what he calls “Comprehensive Immigration Reform of 2006,” an as-yet unnamed bill that is several of our worst nightmares rolled into one: amnesty, guest workers, new worker visas and everything but official open borders.
Specter’s proposal would give amnesty to 15-20 million illegal residents and create 1.1 million new green card holders among employment-based immigrants. Amazingly, the provision for more than 1 million employment-based green cards would renew every year in perpetuity.
And it would generate a brand-new American job-killer: the no cap H-2C visa for those soon-to-be omnipresent guest workers.
Read NumbersUSA.com’s outstanding analysis of the entire Specter disaster here.
To accompany the NUSA analysis, VDARE.COM readers might find it useful to have the following armchair guide that I developed to refresh your memory regarding the individual senators’ immigration leanings.
Meet, in all its ignominy, the committee:
Orrin Hatch, (R-UT)
Charles E. Grassley, (R-IA)
John Kyl, (R-AZ)
Mike DeWine, (R-OH)
Jeff Sessions, (R-AL)
Lindsey Graham, (R-SC)
John Cornyn, (R-TX)
Sam Brownback, (R-KS)
Tom Coburn, (R-OK)
Patrick J. Leahy, (D-VT)
Edward M. Kennedy, (D-MA)
Joseph R. Biden, Jr., (D-DE)
Herbert Kohl, (D-WI)
Dianne Feinstein, (D-CA)
Russ Feingold, (D-WI)
Charles Schumer, (D-NY)
Richard J. Durbin, (D-IL)
A thumbnail profile of the Republican bad guys:
The Worst of the Lot
Hatch and Brownback: Two holier than thou dirtbags who are beyond reach since they proclaim, Brownback more loudly than Hatch, that they take their direction from a higher authority.
Hatch, Specter’s predecessor as Judiciary Chairman, voted for S.1545, the DREAM Act, which would grant illegal aliens in-state tuition rates. And he cosponsored S. 1645 that protected illegal aliens granted temporary resident status from prosecution for Social Security fraud.
Brownback co-sponsored S. 644 to increase asylum claims by creating a new special immigrant visa category for an unlimited number of women and children who are said to be at risk of harm because of their gender and age.
Both Hatch and Brownback have moved sharply toward a more pro-immigration position in the last several years.
Read Rolling Stone’s recent, unflattering Brownback profile here: “ God’s Senator.”
DeWine: No one in the Senate, Republican or Democrat, has a worse immigration record than DeWine. Although DeWine represents Ohio, a state that has been devastated by job loss, he has backed every piece of legislation that promotes more illegal immigration and worker visas.
Among the low points of DeWine’s recent record is that he voted to invoke cloture, a procedural move requiring 60 votes to limit debate and ensure a vote on the AgJOBS amnesty amendment for up to 3 million illegal aliens, introduced by Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID).
The cloture motion failed, but DeWine’s attempt to force it revealed his sympathy for amnesty.
Cornyn and Kyl: Co-authors of their own bill, S. 1438 that Juan Mann describes as “a slickly packaged rehash” of bad old (and failed) amnesty bills. The “Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act” as S.1438 is misleadingly labeled, translates into amnesty and more guest workers.
While Kyl was once rumored to be sensible about immigration, he has always promoted more foreign workers. In 2005, Kyl voted against the Byrd Amendment to the Budget Reconciliation bill, which would have stripped a provision to increase permanent, employment-based immigration by as many as 366,000 annually.
Cornyn, a first term Senator from Texas who immediately began as a La Raza bag man by talking about getting illegal immigrants “ out of the shadows,” voted in 2005 with Hatch and Brownback in favor of S.1545. He also co-sponsored S. 1387, a bill to create a temporary guest worker program for illegal aliens with an amnesty-on-installment program.
Graham: As Capitol Hill insiders say about Graham, “Republican by day, Democrat by night.” The South Carolina Senator is another who has abruptly changed teams to join the open borders crowd.
Graham is now a champion of more worker visas. During the current Congressional year, Graham has cosponsored S. 1033, the McCain-Kennedy bill, which would add an extra 150,000 employment-based visas (mostly for unskilled workers) annually. Additionally, it would create a brand new guest worker program that would bring in 400,000 unskilled workers during its first year.
Many Capitol Hill observers think that Graham is maneuvering for a Vice Presidential spot on a possible McCain ticket in 2008.
Republicans; the Moderates
Grassley: The Iowa senator qualifies as a moderate by comparison only. His voting record is a mixed bag of supporting university tuition breaks for aliens and amnesty for wives and children of aliens legalized in 1986.
But Grassley also voted not to invoke cloture on the Craig AgJOBS amnesty amendment. Grassley’s vote helped keep the amnesty off the 2005 Iraq supplemental spending bill.
Interestingly, Grassley’s immigration voting record has improved over the last several years…unlike that of his colleagues.
Coburn: Another senator who runs hot and cold. No one has a worse record of supporting foreign-worker visas. In 2005, Oklahoma’s Coburn even voted against increasing L-1 visa fees that employers pay. Heaven forbid that employers displacing Americans with foreign visa holders might have to shell out a few extra bucks for the Treasury coffers!
On the other hand, Coburn co-sponsored S. 2061 to reduce illegal immigration through increased border controls. The bill requires construction of a border fence along the U.S.-Mexico border; provides for additional Border Patrol agents; and mandates the use of the entry-exit system at all ports of entry.
Republicans; the one solid Senator
Sessions: In addition to amassing a solid pro-American worker and anti-illegal immigration voting record, Sessions also co-sponsored S. 2061. Since 2003, Sessions has voted against every foreign-worker visa proposal considered by the Judiciary Committee.
Unfortunately, predicting the way the committee will vote is child’s play. Even before a single vote is cast, past history as outlined above tells us that the deck is stacked against us.
Immigration reformers can count, with 100 per cent certainty, on exactly one vote. Only Alabama’s Sessions stands ready to thwart the open borders, Chamber of Commerce lobby.
Three other possible votes for our side: Grassley, Colburn and, who knows, maybe even Dianne Feinstein, the notorious Democratic immigration waffler.
If the worst happens, lay the blame where it belongs: on the Republicans.
Whatever final scheme the Senate Judiciary Committee may come up with, the Republicans there are the heavies…they have aided and abetted the Democrats on immigration policy.
If the G.O.P. hadn’t turned coat, Specter’s crazy scheme would never have seen the light of day. But, unhappily, the Republicans of late are just as bad as the Democrats.
The good news is that even Specter admits that the road ahead will be rocky. Since the Senators are divided---each with his particular sell-out angle---no immediate consensus is likely.
“I have seen virtually no agreement on anything. Emotions are at an all-time high." [ Immigrant Bill Faces Tough Fight in Senate, Suzanne Gamboa, Associated Press, March 2, 2006]
Thankfully, the committee’s treasonous work is done for this week. The next hearing is tentatively scheduled for March 8th or 9th.
In the meantime, Specter remains hopeful.
As NumbersUSA.COM Executive Director Roy Beck told me,
“You can count on Specter, if he is given any chance, to do the wrong thing.”
Joe Guzzardi [email him], an instructor in English at the Lodi Adult School, has been writing a weekly newspaper column since 1988. This column is exclusive to VDARE.COM.
Here is the Washington Times report on this past Monday's decision:
The Washington Times
Panel OKs 'amnesty' bill
By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published March 28, 2006
The Senate Judiciary Committee last night approved a plan that would put millions of illegal aliens on a path to U.S. citizenship, would let them stay here while applying and would not punish their unlawful entry as a felony, contrary to a House-passed bill.
"A path to earned citizenship is what this bill is all about," Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, said after joining all Democrats and three other Republicans on the panel to approve the plan, which many consider an "amnesty."
The sudden approval -- after weeks of negotiations that often had appeared fruitless -- likely will lead to a showdown with the House, which last year approved an immigration bill that only tightened border security.
"If the bottom line is that all people that came here illegally have got to be made citizens, then we should have the vote now," Sen. Jon Kyl, the Arizona Republican who fought the proposal, said in the seven-hour committee meeting yesterday.
"That's amnesty, and that won't work. And the House won't even go to conference with something like that," he said.
The plan approved by the committee -- taken from a bill written by Sens. John McCain, Arizona Republican, and Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat -- would fine current illegal aliens $2,000 each. The bill also would require aliens to undergo criminal background checks and mandate that they maintain employment over the six years they wait to get in line for full citizenship, a process which takes several more years.
"All Americans wanted fairness, and they got it this evening," Mr. Kennedy said after the vote last night.
Many House Republicans -- and most U.S. voters -- oppose any new immigration legislation until the borders are secured and existing immigration laws are enforced. The vast differences between the House bill and the Senate Judiciary Committee proposal must be worked out before any legislation can go to President Bush for his signature.
It was still not clear last night whether the bill would even make it to the floor of the Senate, which yesterday began debating legislation offered by Majority Leader Bill Frist that bypasses the Judiciary Committee and deals only with border security.
"A nation that can't secure its borders can't secure its destiny or administer its laws," said Mr. Frist, who introduced his bill yesterday. "And the situation along our southern border now ranks as a national security challenge second only to the war on terror."
Mr. Frist's "Securing America's Borders Act" would hire more border-patrol officers, build limited fencing in high-traffic areas and toughen the penalties for being in the U.S. illegally. The bill does not, however, have the guest-worker provisions included in the committee bill.
The Tennessee Republican -- is widely expected to seek his party's nomination for president -- has made clear to the Judiciary Committee that he would not consider adopting any guest-worker or "amnesty" provisions that didn't garner a majority of the Republican vote in committee.
The panel proposal failed to get that majority, but Mr. Frist said yesterday that he hasn't decided whether he will consider the committee's bill. He was in negotiations last night with committee Chairman Arlen Specter and other panel members.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, has implored Mr. Frist to take whatever the committee approves and has threatened filibusters if the Republican leader bypassed the committee with his security-only bill.
"We need comprehensive immigration reform that secures our borders, protects Americans and addresses the 11 million undocumented immigrants currently living here today," Mr. Reid said yesterday. "I congratulate Chairman Specter, Ranking Member [Patrick J.] Leahy and the Judiciary Committee for reporting out a bipartisan bill today that does just that. I hope Senator Frist will immediately substitute this comprehensive approach for his wrongheaded bill as the full Senate begins debate tomorrow."
In addition to Mr. Specter and Mr. Graham, Republican Sens. Mike DeWine of Ohio and Sam Brownback of Kansas supported the committee proposal.
Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, the Utah Republican who faces a tough primary fight this year, missed yesterday's vote.
Rep. Tom Tancredo, the Colorado Republican who has led the fight against illegal immigration, said the committee's proposal "provides nearly universal amnesty" for the more than 11 million illegal aliens in the U.S. and adds hundreds of thousands of foreign workers to a background-check system that is "already on the brink of collapse."
"If the Senate follows the Judiciary Committee's lead, the prospects of getting a reform bill to the president's desk this year are slim, to say the least," he said.
"No plan with amnesty and a massive increase in foreign workers will pass the House. Amnesty and foreign workers are fundamentally incompatible with the House's approach and, according to every recent poll, they are not what Americans want. Americans want enforcement first, and disagreement over foreign workers should not prevent us from securing our borders," he said.
Now here is the problem: at least some of these illegals are radicals who have an agenda of their own: to destroy this country, which we note just happens to be the same agenda as the New World Order power elites, taken by a somewhat different rout.
Marchers say gringos,
not illegals, have to go
Activists turn tables, offer no amnesty for 'non-indigenous' on 'our continent'
Posted: March 29, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Mexica Movement activists protest in L.A.
WASHINGTON – While debates about guest-worker programs for illegal aliens take place in the corridors of power, in the streets of America's big cities no amnesty is being offered by activists calling for the expulsion of most U.S. citizens from their own country.
While politicians debate the fate of some 12 million people residing in the U.S. illegally, the Mexica Movement, one of the organizers of the mass protest in Los Angeles this week, has already decided it is the "non-indigenous," white, English-speaking U.S. citizens of European descent who have to leave what they call "our continent."
The pictures and captions tell the story.
"This is our continent, not yours!" exclaimed one banner.
"We are indigenous! The only owners of this continent!" said another.
"If you think I'm illegal because I'm a Mexican, learn the true history, because I'm in my homeland," read another sign.
"One of the more negative parts of the march was when American flags were passed out to make sure the marchers were looked on as part of 'America,'" said the group's commentary on the L.A. rally.
Both Rep. James Sensebrenner, R-Wis., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and a proponent of tougher border security, and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger were caricatured as Nazis by the group on its posters and banners.
The group insists the indigenous people of the continent were the victims of genocide – a campaign of extermination that killed, according to one citation, 95 percent of their population, or 33 million people. Another citation on the same website claims the toll was 70 million to 100 million.
The only solution, says the Mexica Movement, is to expel the invaders of the last 500 years, force them to pay reparations and return the continent to its rightful heirs.
The platform of the group illustrates the diverse – and sometimes extreme – agendas of those participating in the mass mobilizations that have been seen largely as protests against efforts to curb illegal immigration.
Some of those involved, including the Mexica Movement, have much bigger goals than stopping a piece of legislation before Congress.
The Mexica Movement has big issues with many other equally radical groups participating in the massive, united-front rallies. The group makes a point of distinguishing its goals and objectives from others, such as the separatist Aztlan Movement.
Aztlan, the mythical birthplace of the Aztecs, is regarded in Chicano folklore as an area that includes California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and parts of Colorado and Texas. The movement seeks to create a sovereign, Spanish-speaking state, "Republica del Norte," or the Republic of the North, that would combine the American Southwest with the northern Mexican states and eventually merge with Mexico.
A group called "La Voz de Aztlan," the Voice of Aztlan, identifies Mexicans in the U.S. as "America's Palestinians." Many Mexicans see themselves as part of a transnational ethnic group known as "La Raza," the race. A May editorial on the website, with a dateline of Los Angeles, Alta California, declares that "both La Raza and the Palestinians have been displaced by invaders that have utilized military means to conquer and occupy our territories."
Others in the coalition hope to see a "reconquest" of the American southwest by Mexico. This would not likely take place through military action, they say, but rather through a slow process of migration – both legal and illegal.
Subject: INS: Did Americans see what REALLY happened?
Did Americans see what REALLY happened?
By S. J. Miller
Most Americans saw video footage of mass protests, demanding "rights" for illegal aliens in major cities like Chicago, Atlanta, Phoenix and Los Angeles. From 12,000 in Phoenix to 500,000 in Los Angeles, illegal aliens converged and put centers of major cities into gridlock for hours.
Americans were shocked to see law and order defied, with the consent and even encouragement of local officials and the police. But did they really see what was happening? Probably not!
Americans didn't see what they don't know what to look for. Despite the touchy-feely, "we're all the same under the skin" human-rights rhetoric, Mexicans and third-world Latin American politics are much different than in the US, and not what Americans want here. While their distateful political habits and behavior are increasingly common in the US, Americans must recognize the tactics when they move from El Salvador or Mexico City to Kansas City or Atlanta.
To be blunt and politically incorrect, recognize third-world behavior as well as its source. when it appears in our back yards.
Mass Protests don't "just happen"
Despite what illegal alien advocates and their pandering politicians and media would have you believe, these mass protests weren't spontaneous gatherings prompted by mass emotional support for illegal aliens. Such operations require planning, time and most of all $$$$$$$$$. Big money. Luckily, the "illegal alien rights" movement has plenty of everything.
While benevolent-appearing entities like the Catholic Church, the Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Methodists and Quakers ("Friends") ally with ethnic groups like LULAC, MALDEF, National Council of LaRaza, Humane Borders, No More Deaths, present a sympathy-generating and politically correct "front," don't be fooled.
Use the same strategy the FBI uses to identify terrorists: Follow the money.
These groups receive their primary money from two sources: foreign governments (like Mexico) and wealthy open-borders groups like the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, US Chamber of Commerce and the like.
100,000 illegal aliens didn't converge on Chicago and shut down the Loop at afternoon rush hour by depending on the Chicago Transit Authority busses and the El Trains. They came from 8 surrounding states, and were moved there with the express purpose of protesting. The fleet of busses needed would put Ray Nagin's New Orleans school busses to shame.
Those of us old enough to recall the anti-Vietnam War protests and civil rights marches of the 1960s era learned that organizations prepared these operations months in advance to deposit thousands of bodies in to demonstrate. While the 30s and 40s age group are too young to remember, we're available to educate them.
Immediately after the passage of HR 4437 last December, Mexico and other countries whose economies depend on illegal alien wage remittances were planning to counteract Americans' demands of Congress for tough immigration law enforcement and elimination of illegal immigration. On Valentine's Day, foreign ministers of Mexico, Colombia, Panama and El Salvador flew to Washington to meet with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and voice alarm over the bill. (2)
It's both appalling and hypocritical that these countries so blatantly and arrogantly interfere with the American democratic process, particularly in view of Mexico's strict laws against foreigners' involvement or even commenting on Mexican internal affairs. In "Mexico's Undiplomatic Diplomats," Heather MacDonald comments on Mexico's hypocrisy:
"Mexican officials here and abroad are involved in a massive and almost daily interference in American sovereignty. The dozens of illegals milling in the consulate’s courtyard as Velázquez-Suárez speaks, and the millions more radiating outward from Los Angeles across the country, are not a naturally occurring phenomenon, like the tides. They are there thanks in part to Mexico’s efforts to get them into the U.S. in violation of American law, and to normalize their status once here in violation of the popular will.
Mexican consulates are engineering a backdoor amnesty for their illegal migrants and trying to discredit American immigration enforcementactivities clearly beyond diplomatic bounds.
Mexico’s governing class is not content simply to unload the victims of its failed policies on the U.S., however. It also tries to ensure that migrants retain allegiance to La Patria, so as to preserve the $16 billion in remittances that they send to Mexico each year. Mexican leaders have thus tasked their nation’s U.S. consulates with spreading Mexican culture into American schools and communities. Given the American public’s swelling anger about illegal immigration, it’s past time for Washington to tell Mexico to cease interfering and for the Bush administration to start enforcing the law." (3)
MacDonald's comments only validate what Americans see every day - Mexican consulates issuing their government's fraudulent matricula consular cards to their illegal aiens, and then urging state and local government to accept these cards as "identification." Mexican interests commonly lobby state and federal legislatures to pass laws favorable to their illegal aliens. Mexico won't tolerate such interference in their internal affairs.
But as usual, our wrath should be directed at American politicians who allow foreign governments to interfere. US laws against foreign political contributions are easily evaded, particularly since McCain-Feingold campaign legislation.
Violence and intimidation is part of "south of the border" politics.
Political change in Mexico requires mass protests and often violence. There's no history of peaceful change there, and every Mexican knows it. Nowhere is there a better example of "might makes right." "Taking to the streets" is their first resort, not the last resort as has been true in America. We all recall the stories of angry campesinos (farmers) who rode horseback into the Mexican Senate immediately after the passage of NAFTA put them out of business.
The recent success of former Mexican braceros in collecting from their government their long-overdue wages earned during the 1942-1962 work in the US required them to mob the private ranch of President Vicente Fox. Hypocritically, Fox was so angry that he spoke of prosecuting these Mexicans for criminal trespassing to protect his private property rights. The San Diego Union Tribune story bluntly told what led to success: "the bitter product of years of angry, sometimes violent protests, on both sides of the border demanding that the former workers get what's owed them." (1)
Although hushed up for years, news stories of kidnappings and murders in Mexico routinely appear in newspapers. Such violence is rife not only in border towns, but throughout Mexico.
Avoiding violence is the primary motive for Mexican government officials to grant popular demands. We all recognize that avoiding such violence is a strong motive for Mexico's ruling class to promote illegal immigration to the US - unemployed Mexican workers aren't in Mexico to protest and riot, and their US wages return to bolster the Mexican economy.
Americans who think this Mexican "custom" hasn't entered the US should "get a clue" and fast. Last Wednesday, I attended a Town Hall held by my Congressman (J.D. Hayworth of Arizona) for his constituents. The topic of illegal immigration was addressed, and Congressman Hayworth openly opposed the current "guest worker amnesty" legislation being debated in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
A Mexican stood and told everyone of the need for Americans to "show compassion" to illegal aliens in the demands for amnesty. When he saw that the audience wasn't buying his sales pitch, he switched his tactic to threats of violence and intimidation by warning of the "tension" in the US caused by American opposition to illegal alien amnesty, and said that it could produce violence.
While most citizens present didn't pick up on his threat, Congressman Hayworth wasn't fooled for a minute. "J.D." quickly told the man in no uncertain terms that Americans would not be threatened or intimidated into granting illegal aliens amnesty, and the citizens' loud applause showed that the "Mexican" tactic had backfired.
My reference to the man as "Mexican" is recognition of his national loyalty and the agenda he follows, not his citizenship. He may well have been a native-born US citizen. Congressman Jim Kolbe of Arizona is another that I'd call a Mexican - where he was born is totally counter to his loyalty and the agenda he promotes.
Wolves in "multicultural" clothing.
Many educational bureaucrats promote the Mexican/illegal alien agenda as ardently as the businesses who profit from dirt-cheap wages that fatten corporate wallets.
As with greedy, cheap-labor corporations and pandering non-profit groups, educational bureaucrats are adept at ignoring the huge public costs and negative impact generated by illegal immigration.
Do these supposedly well-educated people approve of the violence and intimidation that the illegal alien influence has added to the American political process?
Brenda Dean, Assistant Director of Hamblen County (TN) Schools recently commented of the effect of huge numbers of illegal aliens in their schools, burdening the local taxpayers: "I think that cultural diversity adds to the richness of our community," says Dean. Does that include the violence, intimidation and corruption brought to the US political process by people who demonstrate contempt for law and order? I'm sure Ms. Dean would tap-dance around the question and evade the issue with five-dollar educational words, as such people are so adept at doing.
Give me an airsick bag.
(1) Allen Wall, Memo From Mexico, Vicente Fox & the Braceros: Hypocrisy & Fraud, VDARE.com, March 23 2004,
(1) Migrant Pay Decades Late - Mexico to compensate for long-forgotten fund, San Diego Union Tribune, January 3 2006,
(2) Protests over immigration bill, Newsday, February 23 2006,
(3) Heather MacDonald, Mexico's Undiplomatic Diplomats, The City Journal, Autumn 2006
(4) (I>Senator: Newspaper 'Crossed Line', WXIA News, March 23 2006,
(5) Hamblen politician critical of spending on education for immigrants, WBIR News, October 10 2005,
~ About the author ~
S. J. Miller is a former veteran of the IT industry who sought another career rather than "follow the jobs" abroad, and a lifelong resident of border states, California, Texas, Arizona, and Nevada.
(c) S. J. Miller, 2006. All Rights Reserved
"Published originally at FederalObserver.com: republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."
The S. J. Miller Archive on The Federal Observer
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. GRG [Ref.
1) Conditions of poverty, expropriation, abuse,corruption, political instability, wars, famine, disease ,etc, force people to leave their homeland and come here.
THESE CONDITIONS ARE CREATED BY THE TOTAL LACK OF ANY EQUITY IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF ECONOMIC WEALTH AND SOCIAL COHERENCE ON A GLOBAL SCALE.
THIS PROCESS IS THE RESULT OF DRACONIAN POLICIES OF GLOBALIZATION AND CAPTIAL ACCUMULATION, AGAINST THE POOR AND THE POORER COUNTRIES BY THE UNITED STATES AND THE OTHER RICH NATIONS.
2) Immigrants are welcome because, they, in order to survive, will accept serfdom to corporate and
local businesses, by working for sub-standard wages and no benefits. This policy of coercing workers here to do the "dirty work", and to help
corporate and local owners, to institutionalize a lower ceiling on wages, has been practiced in America, for more than an century.
Irish, Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Italians, Jews,Eastern Europeans,etc-have all been treated this way by the powers that be.
3) America, despite it's atrocious record of world domination and it's imposition of commodified values that are counterproductive to the creation of
participatory democracy, still has a vibrant multicultural environment that offers rights and
opportunities to immigrants that far exceeds all countries.
The author should begin to read more of the history of struggles of people to survive in environments of economic stress and abuse perpetrated by corporate globaization, instead of burying his or her head in the sand of nativist and quixotic crusades against something he or she doesn't fully understand.
As a way of educating the reader I am including in my comment a short piece I wrote on my views on immigration.
Please feel free to comment here or on my blog:
A PERSPECTIVE ON IMMIGRATION We envision labor as the task of building, and demarcating, a space for profit and personal property to grow, When the global thrust for land, resources, technological advancement, and lower wages and tariffs, developed by international organizations(such as the World Bank, the IMF,etc,) hit it's peak,this globalization was escalated towards a spiralling debt and capital accumulation cycle. All nations on earth were effected by this process and it's cycle.-but the sections or nodes of poorer populations in the nations dominated by this matrix of capital, were grieviously repressed and their level of compensation for labor, as opposed to it's purchasing power of commodities, hit rock bottom. When the choices needed to resolve the crisis of living and working for themselves and family,were dissapated, and led to alienating circumstances so deeply rooted, it became almost impossible to stay put in their environment. So there arose a huge wave of globalization- immigration nomads. Fleeing the economic, cultural and political oppression of an ever constricting Empire of affluence as a weapon of mass attraction leading to mass distraction, it created mass destruction, for the majority of the poor and middle class, in many sectors, preyed upon by global unsustainable corporate growth, and mass subtraction, of workers and citizens. This the nature of immigration now. When people need to leave their countries to work somwhere else they are confronted with two problems. Where can they go ?-and how can they sustain themselves in other environments so they can help support themselves and their families. Where they go is dependent on their geographic location, assessibility of job markets, and their ability to be flexible in accomplishing many tasks in earning their living wage. How they support themselves depends upon freedom of movement, diverse opportunites, open-ended policies of support networks, and shear determination to work hard and overcome obstacles. In a global world-order of capital flexibility favoring the owners, and some of the managers, the conditions that I mentioned above, are lacking. So, obviously we must do something to re-direct globalization along more humane lines, and slowly develop societies that aim at full-employment and full-training of all of the members of these societies. If we can create the conditions for more equitable societies, immigration would be minimalized. Those who would came would be able to visit, study and possibly work in any nation, as a benefit to that society. Then to return to share the knowledge and resources gained in that nation. As for now-let those who want to work be given the opportunity and the fair wage-as well as complete worker amnesty, until our global world-system evolves, to a world-family of fair trade and freedom for the multitude.
get a new game system, Just go to the site below
and put in your zip to see what's available in your area.
I sold mine and got some extra cash!
Links to this post: