The primary version of this blog is HERE. The Blogroll. My Home Page. Email John Ray here. Other mirror sites: Political Correctness Watch, Dissecting Leftism, Greenie Watch, Australian Politics, Socialized Medicine, Tongue Tied, Food & Health Skeptic, Education Watch and Gun Watch. For a list of backups viewable in China, see here. (Click "Refresh" on your browser if background colour is missing). The archive for this mirror site is here or here.
****************************************************************************************



31 July, 2007

When illegal migrants flood a city

A judge tells one city to let the feds handle immigration. But where are the feds when you need them?

A telling irony shines through last week's ruling by a federal judge that found only Congress can set immigration law. The judge knew full well that half the plaintiffs in the case were in the US illegally. But he let them challenge a city ordinance on immigration anyway - and anonymously. And so it's been in America for too long: Turn a blind eye to the massive lawbreaking of an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants.

Imagine if a scofflaw wanted by the FBI had sued a city for enacting a criminal law tougher than a federal law. Would that person also be given a day in court? No way. The difference, of course, is that FBI agents are vigilant in catching suspects. But federal immigration agents? Well, they do their best whenever Congress or the White House gives them a clear green light and enough resources. After all, for politicians, those millions of illegal immigrants are potential voters for whichever party gets the credit in winning them amnesty someday.

But back to the court decision itself: Should state and local governments be allowed to enact laws that penalize landlords or companies that do business with illegal immigrants and fail to check their US residency status? In a 1986 law, Congress clearly said no, despite a long precedent in the 19th century of states regulating immigrants coming into the US. The Pennsylvania city of Hazelton, however, passed such a law and then lost the first round in the courtroom of US District Judge James Munley. The judge even postulated that perhaps the federal government does not seek "the removal of all aliens who lack legal status."

The city plans to appeal. The case, or one like it, will make an interesting Supreme Court decision in a year or so. Last April, for instance, the high court did allow states to exceed federal rules on greenhouse gases.

For now, this lower-court ruling does not apply in most of the country. That's just as well because as many as 100 other cities and towns have similar measures cracking down on illegal migrants - all because the federal government is falling down on the job. Hazelton, for instance, has seen its population balloon with immigrants since 2001, straining schools and other resources. By some estimates, a quarter of the 30,000 residents are now illegal. The city, like many in the US, suddenly became a magnet for migrants drawn to cheap housing and low-wage jobs.

Strangely, Hazelton officials didn't get to face their accusers in court during this trial because they were allowed to remain nameless - nor did federal immigration agents show up to arrest the plaintiffs.

Another critical court case may be the legal challenge to an Arizona law, due to take effect Jan. 1, that sanctions employers who hire illegal aliens. Courts tend to give states more leeway than cities or towns to one-up federal law.

In the meantime, many cities are taking another route: training police to alert federal agents whenever they detain suspects for a local crime who can't prove their legal status. All this shows the urgency for Congress to beef up immigration enforcement. The Hazeltons of the US can't wait.

Source



NYT illogic on Immigration

Post lifted from Keith Burgess Jackson. See the original for links

What is it with progressives? Why must they demonize everyone who doesn't share their values? Read this [editorial in the NYT]. For a while, it looks as though the editorial board of The New York Times is going to stay focused on the arguments for and against enforcing immigration laws. But then, near the end of the opinion, comes the P-word. The mayor of the town in question is said to be "prejudiced" against immigrants. Two things.

First, no evidence is supplied that the man is prejudiced. It's simply assumed that he is. That's the opposite of charity. It's indecency. Second, even if he were prejudiced, it would have no bearing on the merits of his argument for enforcing the immigration laws. As a philosopher, this shift from reasons to motives-from the grounds of belief to the causes of action-is dismaying, to say the least. I would like to think that every philosopher, including those of a progressive persuasion, would condemn this fallacious maneuver. That they don't do so shows that they are progressives first and philosophers second. If you're a student of philosophy, take note.

The opinion as a whole is filled with vicious, manipulative rhetoric. The mayor is said to be a "vigilante" and to be "cruel." Those who support enforcement of the law are said to be "harsh" and "inhumane"-and to want to "dehumanize" people. You know the Times is losing the argument when it resorts to abuse.



New Haven Issues Phony ID Cards to Illegal Aliens

If you are a naturalized citizen you have papers. If you are here as a resident alien, you have papers. If you are here illegally, you don't have papers.

So, the only people that need phony ID's issued by the city of New Haven, or Senator Gil Cedillo's drivers license bill for illegal aliens, is illegal aliens.

In other words Cedillo, and New Haven are willing to provide documentation to folks who are here illegally. Do you see something wrong with that?

Since New Haven has issued phony ID's to illegal aliens, you would think that ICE would demand those records, then find those using the phony ID's...they have not.

Wonder why the U.S. Attorney has not stopped the issuance of the phony ID's? Actually, since everyone knows those using these IDs are illegal aliens, employers being shown the cards should know they would be violating the law to hire the card holder.

Source





30 July, 2007

Leftists try to shut down anti-immigration rally in Morristown, NJ

About 500 people gathered here Saturday to rally for and against immigrants' rights, in a town that earlier this year applied for entry into a federal program that would give its police officers authority to enforce immigration laws. The rally was organized by anti-immigration groups who say federal authorities have been lax in using immigration laws to curb illegal entries into the country and in finding and deporting people who are here illegally.

Launching into fiery speeches from a stage, anti-immigration protesters blamed illegal immigrants for drug smuggling, taking jobs from U.S. citizens, murders and diluting American culture. "I will never accept English as a second language," said Daniel Smeriglio, from Voice of the People USA, a Pennsylvania activist group. "You disgrace us."

Across the street, about 150 people gathered in support of immigrants _ shouting, chanting and holding signs saying "Working people have no borders" and "Immigrants are not criminals."

A team of 140 state, county and local officers wearing riot gear with helmets, batons and pepper spray were on hand. They arrested a man and woman for storming a stage and trying to destroy amplifiers as well as several others for fighting, Police Chief Pete Demnitz said.

Morristown, a suburban town about 30 miles west of Manhattan, would be the first New Jersey municipality in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement program if accepted. It would give city officers authority to check the immigration status of people and the power to bring civil immigration charges that are handled in federal immigration court. The 2000 Census found that nearly one-third of the town's 18,544 residents were born in other countries, but does not give a figure of how many may be illegal.

Source



Sweden tightens the rules

Changes to immigration rules that make it more difficult for refugees to bring their families to Sweden have been criticized by the Swedish Board of Migration and the Red Cross. Previously people who have qualified as 'quota refugees' have been able to bring their families to Sweden under the quota refugee scheme. But under new changes introduced by the government, families do not qualify as quota refugees, according to Sveriges Radio. The changes mean that families have to apply separately for visas to Sweden once their relative has been accepted as a quota refugee.

Officials at the Migration Board say that this can often lead to women and children being left alone and vulnerable in their home countries. It is often impractical for them to seek visas in Sweden, particularly if they live in countries without Swedish embassies. A Red Cross spokeswoman told Sveriges Radio that worry over relatives left behind was making it more difficult for refugees in Sweden to integrate.

Source





29 July, 2007

Congress must do much more to fix immigration

Comment from Arizona: Kyl's amendment is one step toward a comprehensive solution of border problems

The Senate's passage Thursday of the Border Security First Act must be the first step in a series of acts that eventually reform the nation's immigration system comprehensively. The legislation, an amendment to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security appropriations package, would allocate $3 billion to fund more Border Patrol officers, fencing, unmanned aerial vehicles and other mechanisms that would help plug the porous U.S.-Mexico border. The measure is similar to the security-only portion of the comprehensive immigration-reform package that died earlier this summer.

Thursday evening, Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., who championed the failed comprehensive plan and the new security act, got the Senate to add $60 million to the amendment for improvements to the Basic Pilot Program, the federal database of those able to work in the country legally. Kyl said Thursday that he has not given up on the comprehensive approach, but it will be hard to accomplish this session. Thus, he said, he "took advantage of an opportunity on the Homeland Security appropriation bill to send a strong message that we're serious about enforcement." Kyl said the public is reluctant to accept reform until there is action on enforcement.

Without question, security must be part of immigration reform. The Star's long-held position is that immigration reform must be comprehensive and include security, as well as a guest-worker program, workplace controls and an equitable system for dealing with the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants working in our country and contributing to its economy.

Kyl told us he hopes enforcement funding will encourage people to look toward other areas of reform. We hope he's right and that the security boost placates the enforcement-only factions and that other aspects of immigration reform will be able to move forward. The $60 million boost for the Basic Pilot Program should help Arizona employers smacked by a draconian state law that requires verification of new employees' legal status using the iffy system. Under the ill-conceived employer-sanctions law, a business' license could be suspended and the workplace shut down — leaving all employees out of work — if the business knowingly hires an undocumented worker.

The law was a knee-jerk response by a frustrated Arizona Legislature to Congress' inaction in solving the illegal-immigration problem. The law penalizes businesses and gives them responsibility for immigration enforcement without giving them adequate tools to meet the task. The unintended consequences of the law may be that U.S. citizens and folks legitimately in the country are denied employment because of an inaccurate database. This is a civil rights lawsuit against the state waiting to happen. The law goes into effect Jan. 1.

If the security amendment gets congressional approval and the president's signature, it must be a beginning to solutions on illegal immigration. It will not end the problem.

Source



Immigration of the illegal sort: when the numbers don't add up

Comment from Colorado

My local newspaper editor ran a piece the other day titled "D.R.: Immigration's a numbers game" In it he wrote that "America gives out thousands of work visas, but we have millions and millions of jobs that our own natives have proven they can't fill."

And to him I respectfully respond:

I too have friends who complain bitterly about illegal immigrants and want them gone yesterday, and say build that wall now. And these friends of mine don't hire workers without a second thought as is sometimes proclaimed. When these friends of mine hire new employees, they run the employees work eligibility information through the federal program titled Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements or "SAVE."

The use of the Basic Pilot Program is free for employers, it is successful and it is utilized by those who do uphold the laws in our country based on Rule of the Law. As far as the border goes, we say build the fence as was already promised to the American people. Doing that in and of itself sends a strong psychological message. Much, in fact most, of this battle is mental, not physical.

The illegal alien issue breaks down to simple math but adding 1 plus 1 does not equal 2 as editor Rogers writes, not for lawful American families anyway. Enforce the law and the problem would self-resolve. "Do as I say and Not as I do" resolves nothing but doing as Aspen Police Department did of late does add up.

When ICE was notified that a self-proclaimed illegal alien was not only illegal in our country but had cocaine in his wallet and ICE refused to take him into custody, Aspen PD responded not with a wink and a nod, but instead with "We didn't feel comfortable to let him go" so (Aspen) police took Orellana into custody.

Let me remind you, the man had cocaine in his wallet. It is a felony to possess cocaine in the amount of more than one gram. It is also against the law, criminal in fact, to enter America illegally under 1911 8 U.S.C.  1325 -- Unlawful Entry.

Here is one for dear editor Rogers, friend of mine. You ask, "Why do illegals risk life and limb to come?" And the answer is "Because." Because we lay out the Welcome Mat with many rewards and little repercussions.

Here are some simple numbers to factor in the mathematics game. The average illegal alien household pays $16 billion in taxes. But they use $26.3 billion dollars a year in welfare services! John Q Public provides that for them. We are John Q. Public folks. We taxpayers fund these welfare programs.

This so-called Cheap Labor doesn't come cheap; it carries a costly Behind the Scenes price tag. Multiply this by the millions and the numbers compound. Middle-class America is strained almost to our breaking point.

Our own Congress reports the following in regards to immigrants living in America and welfare support provided by the taxpayers.

"It continues to be the immigration policy of the United States that aliens within the Nation's borders not depend on public resources to meet their needs but rather rely on their own capabilities" and yet "despite the principle of self-sufficiency" aliens have been applying for and receiving public benefits from Federal, State, and local governments at increasing rates.

Our American ideals are best served by "balancing the work papers with the number of jobs that need doing, including in this valley" writes my editor pal. Yep. But he omits the following. Each low-skill illegal alien household will cost U.S. taxpayers $1.1 million dollars over their lifetime per the Heritage Foundation on a study of welfare programs available in America, April 2007. And what happens when a `local' hears the following, as I did, broadcast on National Public Radio with our own Eagle County Commissioner Menconi as an honored guest?

Well, I write about what I hear. John Burnett, NPR News closed his talk show with this statement; "American employers are hooked on cheap immigrant labor, both legal and illegal, but a longtime housekeeping supervisor in Vail offers a cautionary word to the backers of a new guest worker program. She says back in 1986 when immigration reform granted amnesty to more than two million undocumented immigrants, guess what was the first thing her Mexican hotel maids did when they got their papers? Many quit their jobs and looked for better ones. And what did the employer do? Rather than raise salaries, she replaced them with new immigrants who were, as she said, hungrier for the work."

And do note dear reading public, the "1986 immigration reform" was for agricultural workers. Not hotel maids.

America does give out thousands of work visas. In fact, talking in blunt numbers here, we give out more guest-worker visas than anyone in the world. The 35.2 million immigrants (legal and illegal) here in March of 2005 is the highest ever recorded - two and a half times the 13.5 million during the peak of the last great immigration wave in 1910 per the Center for Immigration Studies. These are indisputable facts.

To me, the mathematical solution is simple. Until our local, state and federal agencies can tell Americans exactly the numbers we have residing here and of those people, who is entitled to walk on our streets and who is not and what will be done with those illegal aliens who are intercepted one way or the other during the course of everyday activities, until then, no amnesty, no new guest-worker plan, no additional guest-worker visas.

I will agree with Editor Roger's final comment of the majority of Big Business and government having a "Don't ask, don't tell" attitude, but I will end my paragraph with a different statement. Remove the enticements and rewards of illegal residency. We, the United States of America, are a nation founded under the Rule of the Law. So we might want to start asking when it was that our country's leaders forgot about that part. Because in doing so they also forgot about the lawful residents living here.

Source





28 July, 2007

After A Good Night's Sleep, Harry Reid Now Believes Border Security Is Germane To Homeland Security.

Political reality trumps Leftist ego. Post below lifted from Hugh Hewitt. See the original for links

Not 24 hours ago, Senate majority leader Harry Reid threw a tantrum and arm twisted the rest of the Senate Democrats, most notably Barack Obama, into throwing out a border security amendment offered by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham as being not germane to the homeland security appropriations bill. Last night, $3 billion dollars of funding for Border Patrol agents, 700 miles of fencing, 300 miles of vehicle barriers, all of the recommended steps to regain control of our Southern border, that, to Democrats, was not germane to homeland security. Fortunately for America, Harry Reid slept on it. He arose this morning refreshed, with a more clear head, and took to the Senate floor this morning. This is what he had to say.

I say to my friend from Texas, what a difference a night makes. As you know, as some know, not very many, Senator Cornyn and I, Senator Graham and a few others, we were trying to work something out on this border security, and Senator Cornyn and I were the last two to speak on this issue. And like a lot of things around here, if you don't get your way, you kind of throw a tantrum a lot of times. And I didn't get my way, so I thought I would throw just a little tantrum. And the evening has brought to my attention that I was wrong, Senator Cornyn was right. I hate to acknowledge that, but that's basically valid. And so having said that, Mr. President, and swallowing a bit of pride that I shouldn't have had, I now ask unanimous consent that when the Senate resumes consideration of HR2638 today, which will be just in a few mintues, that the time until 11:35 be for debate with respect to the Graham-Pryor border security amendment. And that has Senator from Texas language in there.

Yes, Harry Reid threw a little tantrum. If you want to hear it, you can go here. Reid got caught off-guard yesterday by a Republican amendment to the homeland security appropriations bill, an amendment that would have embarrassed Reid two ways. It would have cut the legs out from under Ted Kennedy in that the amendment virtually ignored all of the liberal provisions written by Kennedy that caused so many conservatives to abandon support and openly revolt against the comprehensive immigration bill earlier this summer. This amendment focuses on an increase in funding for many of the security first provisions conservatives have been looking for. It's not enough, but it's a good start. The other embarrassment to Reid would be that the Republicans hijacked the floor agenda yet again, showing that Reid's management skills as majority leader were questionable at best.

So in order to prevent being embarrassed, Reid put Barack Obama on the spot, for no other reason than he happened to have presiding officer duty at the time, having him rule that border security not be germane to homeland security. The Senate voted largely along partisan lines to support that ruling.

Today, Reid realized that was probably not the smartest move he's made this year, which considering the Iraq and immigration gaffes he's made in the last seven months is saying something, and reversed himself. After eating crow on the Senate floor, and an hour or so of debate, the Senate voted 89-1 to approve the Graham amendment, attaching it to the homeland security bill, meaning that in a less than one day span, about 40 Democratic Senators reversed themselves.

Barack Obama abstained from voting, which coming on the heels of walking the plank yesterday, adds to the doubt as to whether the first term Illinois Senator has the political acumen required for the presidency. If he would flipped a coin to decide how to proceed on these two votes, yesterday and today, the odds are he would have at least gotten one right, instead of making an error yesterday, and not even bothering to take the opportunity to correct the mistake today.

It's good to know, however, that the Senate Democrats can get something right when it comes to national security.provided their leadership can sleep on it and have a second shot at it the next day.



7-Eleven fires Colorado clerk over immigration views

His favourite hat seems to have a lot to do with it



Bruno Kirchenwitz was fired Monday from his job at the Basalt 7-Eleven. The firing came nearly two weeks after Kirchenwitz may have been the target of a person or persons who fired five shots from a rifle into the store. Kirchenwitz said a 7-Eleven official who called to inform him of his dismissal claimed it was unrelated to the shooting incident.

He isn't buying it. Kirchenwitz believes he was fired because his presence as a clerk at the store could be bad for business. He is an outspoken critic of illegal immigration. "Freedom of speech takes a back seat to profits," he said.

Margaret Chabris, a 7-Eleven spokeswoman, declined comment Monday because it is a personnel issue, citing corporate policy. In general, she said, employees can be terminated after an investigation explores their relations with customers and fellow workers.

Kirchenwitz was on duty as a cashier June 26 when two Latino men entered the store and asked if he is the man who wears a "U.S. Border Patrol" baseball hat. He acknowledged he was, although he wasn't wearing it at the time. He said he wears the hat to and from work but never on the job. The men threatened to show him what they thought about the hat. "I smiled and laughed and made jokes, then shooed them out the door," Kirchenwitz said. The men said they would wait for him outside to get off work. They left a short time later, at about 6:30 p.m.

Kirchenwitz got off duty at 10 p.m. and left the store to catch a bus about 15 minutes later. The shots blasted through a front plate glass window in front of the cashier's station at about 11:10 p.m. Another cashier and four customers, including a family with a baby, escaped injury. Basalt Police Chief Keith Ikeda said it was fortunate no one was killed or hurt.

Kirchenwitz was placed on paid leave shortly after the incident while 7-Eleven officials were in town investigating the shooting. He was told late Monday afternoon he was being let go because of a customer service incident that allegedly occurred on June 9.

Kirchenwitz said someone apparently lodged a complaint about an incident with him after it was publicized that he was placed on leave. He said he remembered no altercation with a customer and that the official who fired him was vague on details.

Kirchenwitz started as a cashier with 7-Eleven on April 18. He said he never received a written or verbal reprimand and was complimented for his performance by the Basalt store's manager. The firing didn't surprise him. "In the back of my mind, it was expected," he said. On one hand, it makes sense, he said. About 75 percent of 7-Eleven's customers in Basalt are Latino, he said, so his presence could be bad for business, at least among anyone in the country illegally. But Kirchenwitz was angry that 7-Eleven wouldn't admit what he believes is the obvious reason for his firing. "That sucks canal water," he said.

When asked if he would appeal within 7-Eleven's system or discuss his firing with the American Civil Liberties Union, Kirchenwitz said he would like to seek help from a different source - conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

Kirchenwitz, an outspoken critic of President Bush, said illegal immigration is about the only issue where he sees eye-to-eye with conservatives. If he got a chance to speak to Limbaugh, he said, he would sum up his situation as: "Poor white boy get shot at then gets fired."

Source





27 July, 2007

Hazleton loses first round in court

A politically predictable judgment

A federal judge today blocked a local law designed to deter illegal immigration in a decision that is likely to affect dozens of other communities around the country that have passed similar measures or are considering them. Federal District Judge James Munley said the town of Hazleton in northeastern Pennsylvania had acted unconstitutionally when it passed its Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance under which businesses would be penalized for hiring illegal aliens and landlords would be fined for renting rooms to them. The ordinance, first passed by the Hazleton City Council in July 2006, also established English as the town’s official language.

Backers of the law, led by Mayor Louis J. Barletta, argued that illegal immigration, largely from Mexico and Central America, was overburdening local schools, hospitals and social services in this town of about 30,000. They also argued that an influx of undocumented workers was also driving up crime.

“Federal law prohibits Hazleton from enforcing any of the provisions in its ordinances,” Judge Munley wrote in an eagerly awaited 206-page opinion. “Thus, we will issue a permanent injunction enjoining their enforcement.”

Judge Munley’s ruling follows a federal trial in which the City of Hazleton was sued by civil-rights groups including the American Civil Liberties Union who claimed that the law was unconstitutional.

The civil liberties union said after the ruling that as many as 100 other towns had passed similar measures, though nearly all were waiting on the ruling before starting to enforce the rules. The judge also sided with plaintiffs’ arguments that local authorities such as Hazleton are not entitled to make laws on immigration, because that is the responsibility of the federal government. “The ordinances disrupt a well-established federal scheme for regulating the presence and employment of immigrants in the U.S.,” Judge Munley wrote, adding that such ordinances violate the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

At the federal level, lawmakers failed this summer to pass a comprehensive immigration bill backed by the Bush administration which would have strengthened border controls while opening up a path to citizenship for the estimated 12 million immigrants living illegally in the U.S.

Hazleton Mayor Louis J. Barletta, who led the campaign for the Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance, said the case would be appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Philadelphia. He vowed to take the fight to the Supreme Court if necessary. “This fight is far from over,” Mr. Barletta said at a news conference on the steps of Hazleton City Hall. “Hazleton isn’t going to back down.”

Mr. Barletta, a Republican, said he had received renewed offers of support from around the country in the wake of the decision, and he pledged to defend the ordinance in the wake of federal lawmakers’ recent failure to agree a comprehensive immigration reform package that would have addressed the issues raised by an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. “I will do everything that I can to make Hazleton the toughest city in America for illegal immigrants,” he said. “I will not sit back because the federal government has refused to do its job.” Mr. Barletta rejected a suggestion that the ordinance was driven by racism, saying, “This isn’t about ethnicity, it’s about legality.”

Source



Canadian government changes ignorant policy on common surname

By the same reasoning, the names "Smith" and "Jones" would have to be banned too

The Canadian government has reversed a decade-old policy that forced Indians with the last name Singh or Kaur to change their surnames when applying to immigrate to Canada.

For the past 10 years, the Canadian High Commission in New Delhi told Indians wishing to immigrate to Canada that the religious Sikh surnames were too common to process quickly and that a name change would be required. Sikhs typically give baptized males the name Singh and females the name Kaur.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada said Wendesday it was canceling the policy, after The World Sikh Organization raised the issue Tuesday. Immigration authorities said the policy was a misunderstanding based on a "poorly worded" letter.

Tarvinder Kaur, a Calgary woman waiting for her husband, Jaspal Singh, to arrive in Canada, told reporters that her husband's permanent residency application had been delayed for over a month because of his last name.

A national Canadian news organization posted the letter to Kaur from the Canadian High Commission in New Delhi on its Web site. The letter, dated May 17 and addressed to Jaspal Singh, said: "Please note that your surname must be endorsed on your passport. The names Kaur and Singh do not qualify for the purpose of immigration to Canada."

Source





26 July, 2007

Big Macs ferried in after rioting inmates run amok in British immigration detention centre

Rioting foreign criminals and failed asylum seekers were fed McDonald's takeaway meals by prison staff during a œ60million orgy of destruction which wrecked an immigration detention centre. Fearful that the human rights of inmates would be breached, staff ferried sackfuls of Big Mac meals with fries and soft drinks from a nearby branch of the fast-food chain. The revelation came in a damning official report into the riot at Harmondsworth Immigration Removal Centre near Heathrow Airport last November. More than 500 inmates awaiting deportation wrecked and burned down much of the site, and it took riot squads almost two days to regain control. The report also reveals:

* Walls and doors in the centre were so flimsy that inmates kicked them down with ease, especially after they were soaked by the sprinkler system;

* The fire brigade got lost because there were no signposts to the centre;

* CCTV cameras were easy for rioters to destroy - meaning control room staff had no idea what was going on;

* Increasingly desperate calls to the Prison Service headquarters begging for help were ignored for an hour.

The official Home Office investigation blames the riot partly on the huge pressure on the centre after last summer's foreign prisoners scandal. Hundreds of foreign national criminals were rounded up after being released from Britain's jails without being considered for deportation. Of the 501 men in the detention centre at the time 177 were foreign prisoners awaiting deportation - a volatile group who had 'nothing to lose'. The riot was triggered by inmates watching a TV news bulletin reporting criticisms of Harmondsworth from prison watchdogs. Fires were started and inmates began smashing CCTV cameras and attacking staff, who were unable to contain the violence.

As control room managers lost their grip, staff were ordered to retreat and seal the gates, as police arrived to guard the perimeter. Thirteen riot squads entered the centre next morning but took more than 24 hours to regain control.

During the day a row broke out between senior officials over whether to send food in for rioters. Those who favoured starving inmates into submission were overruled, as managers ordered that 'minimum needs of food and drink' must be supplied. "In the early stages food came from McDonald's," according to the report by senior civil servant Robert Whalley. Yesterday the Daily Mail tracked down a worker at the West Drayton branch of McDonald's who recalled Harmondsworth staff placing a huge order for 3.59 burger meals. He said: "I remember prison officers turning up and ordering around 100 Big Mac meals with fries and fizzy drinks. For a couple of hours they kept turning up with big bags, filling them up with meals and then ferrying them off in Securicor vans and then they'd return for more."

The Home Office was last night unable to provide details of the cost of the emergency supplies. The cost of dealing with the riot and rebuilding large parts of Harmondsworth is expected to top 65million pounds.

Tory immigration spokesman Damian Green said: "This situation required a fast response, and all they got was fast food. "We now know that this dangerous incident happened because the Government was forced to mix foreign prisoners with failed asylum seekers. Because of prison overcrowding, this is still going on."

Lin Homer, chief executive of the Border and Immigration Agency, said work was under way to 'expand and strengthen' removal centres. The Home Office said that five detainees had been charged and remanded in custody in connection with the riot.

Source



U.S. Immigration bureaucrats want a new computer system

What a disaster that will be! If new government computer systems ever work at all, it takes years before they can be got to work properly. Britain has just spent 12 billion (Yes: Billion) pounds on a new computer system for its hospitals and it is still not working properly

The Homeland Security Department's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division issued a pre-solicitation notice July 24 requesting project management support services for the Office of Detention and Removal (DRO). ICE Chief Information Officer Luke McCormack said the current DRO system is 20 years old. The office is responsible for enforcing U.S. immigration laws requiring "removable aliens" to leave the United States.

The notice states that the Detention and Removals System Branch, responsible for providing information technology support services for agency applications, has identified a need for assistance in the management and administration of the DRO program. "We are just in the beginning stages of modernization," McCormack said at a conference on law enforcement IT sponsored by AFCEA International's Bethesda, Md., chapter. "ICE is currently securing the funds for a 2008 rollout. The business plan was just put together."

Source





25 July, 2007

Canada relaxes student and family rules

They want smart Indians

In a bid to attract more foreign students Canada announced new rules that make it easier for them to work while studying in the country and also relaxed the entry for parents and grandparents of immigrants. Announcing the new measures here Monday, Joe Volpe, minister of citizenship and immigration, said: "International students who choose to stay in Canada after they graduate greatly contribute to our labour market. "It is important that they be exposed to the Canadian work force at an early stage to increase their chances of success following graduation."

The announcement of relaxed immigration rules to Canada comes at a time when several European countries are trying to corner foreign students even as the US is concerned it is losing some bright incoming researchers. "We are certain that these initiatives will help increase the global competitiveness of Canada by attracting and retaining more international students to our schools," said Volpe.

Volpe also announced measures to speed up the processing of sponsorship applications for parents and grandparents coming to Canada as family class immigrants. India is a major source country for immigrants coming here. With these new measures in place, it is expected that in both 2005 and 2006, the number of parents and grandparents immigrating to Canada will increase by an additional 12,000 each year. This triples the original 6,000 forecasted for 2005.

Volpe also announced that Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) will be more flexible in issuing multiple-entry visitor visas to parents and grandparents. This will allow them to visit their families in Canada while their sponsorship applications are in process, as long as they are able to prove that they are visiting temporarily. Regular security and health screening will still apply and some parents and grandparents may require health coverage to be admissible to Canada.

Canada has had over one million permanent residents since 2000. However, the number of sponsorship applications for parents and grandparents is growing and more applications are received each day than CIC can process, the agency admitted. "To address this concern, the government of Canada is investing $36 million a year over two years to increase processing of parent and grandparent applications and to cover integration costs once they arrive in Canada. Additional processing will begin immediately. In the coming weeks, CIC will add temporary duty officers and support staff at visa offices with the largest number of applications."

The new initiatives in the area of foreign students include:

1. Allowing international students at public post-secondary institutions to work off-campus while completing their studies and

2. Allowing students to work for two years, rather than one year, after their graduation.

This second initiative will apply outside Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver to possibly spread immigrants more widely rather than their current concentration in the above-named cities. Canada is investing $10 million a year for five years to support this announcement, the CIC said. The agency also announced other adjustments to its international study programme. For example, post-secondary international students can now transfer between programmes of study and institutions without applying for a change to the conditions of their study permit. Secondary-level international students can now obtain longer high-school study permits.

As of May 16, 2005, international students who meet the eligibility criteria for a second year of post-graduation employment will be issued a two-year work permit. For these students, the two-year work permit will only be valid for one year since they will have already completed their first year of post-graduate work. As with existing pilot projects, the off-campus work initiative will be implemented bilaterally in each province and territory, following agreements with CIC. The measures include an investment of $69 million over two years to restore, by 2007-2008, processing times to an average of 12 months for a grant of citizenship and four months for a proof of citizenship.

CIC is also exempting citizenship applicants from undergoing language ability and knowledge-of-Canada tests at 55 rather than 60 years of age. But the CIC said that in no way would the rigorous security screening requirements that all applicants for Canadian citizenship must go through before becoming citizens of Canada, be relaxed.

Source



Mosque leader accused of immigration fraud

Imam's arrest sparks protest outside court

The spiritual leader of a mosque in Sharon was arrested yesterday on federal immigration fraud charges, sparking a protest outside the courthouse in Boston by a group of religious leaders and civil rights advocates who called the case a witch hunt. Muhammad Masood, 49, imam of the 1,500 member Islamic Center of New England, is accused of lying repeatedly to federal immigration officials between 2002 and 2006 in a bid to obtain a green card and ultimately become a US citizen.

The criminal charges follow administrative charges brought by immigration officials last year. That case also drew wide protest from local Muslim leaders, who have accused authorities of ignoring efforts to smooth relations with members of various cultures. A detailed affidavit filed in federal court alleges that Masood told authorities that after attending a master's degree program in economics at Boston University in the early 1990s, he returned to his native Pakistan for two years, as required by law, before returning to the United States in 1993 and later applying for residency. But, the affidavit says, Masood never left Boston, and records show that he continued to live in Boston University housing with his wife and children, even though he was no longer a student. He was cited for a couple of traffic violations and was present when his fifth child was born in Boston in 1992, the affidavit indicates.

Authorities also allege that Masood did not disclose that he had collected state health benefits from 1997 to 2005 and initially denied ever being charged with any crimes, although he later acknowledged that he had been arrested for shoplifting in Norwood in 2000. The charge was later dismissed.

"This is an apparent witch hunt," said Bilal Kaleem, executive director of the Boston chapter of the Muslim American Society, who stood outside the federal courthouse yesterday with about 40 other supporters during a press conference denouncing Masood's arrest. Kaleem said that Masood had been interrogated by the US attorney's office for six hours last week and was threatened with jail and "humiliation," unless he cooperated by providing incriminating information against mainstream Muslim leaders in the Boston area. Kaleem described Masood as an upstanding man of high integrity who was charged with criminal violations after he insisted he had no incriminating information to offer.

In response to the allegations, the office of US Attorney Michael J. Sullivan released a statement saying: "The characterization of this as a government witch hunt is regrettable, as the detailed allegations contained in the complaint affidavit demonstrate there is a clear factual basis for the charges against Mr. Masood." US Magistrate Judge Joyce London Alexander released Masood on a $10,000 unsecured bond and scheduled a hearing Aug. 9 on the charges. Boston lawyer Norman Zalkind, who represents Masood, said his client surrendered yesterday after learning that the criminal complaint had been issued and will plead not guilty at his arraignment.

Masood's supporters criticized federal prosecutors for seeking criminal charges since he had already been arrested last November on immigration violations that were being handled administratively through the federal immigration court. In November, Masood and his 24-year-old son, Hassan, were arrested along with 31 others by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in a nationwide crackdown on an alleged scheme to provide religious worker visas to immigrants who were supposed to be working full-time secular jobs but were not. The immigration fraud charge brought against Masood last fall was dropped, but he is facing a hearing Oct. 11 on charges that he overstayed his visa in the 1990s.

Kaleem said the arrest of Masood on criminal charges damages an initiative launched two years ago to bring law enforcement officials and the members of the Muslim, Arab and Sikh communities together.

Source





24 July, 2007

Immigration into Britain so high that BritGov has lost count

The clues are there if you know where to find them. Walk around Slough's estates and look in the back gardens. There are buildings here you are unlikely to see anywhere else in the country. These are Slough's 'sheds with beds'. In some areas, row upon row of them. Lines of small houses tucked away behind the main homes. And inside them are the people who are transforming this place. A new workforce. So many that these illegally rented out sheds and garages are needed to house them all. They have been swept here by border changes across Europe and are now testing how we deal with mass immigration.

Slough is a success story. A manufacturing town with a booming economy. Positioned just outside London and down the M4 from Heathrow. It's factories and production plants have always attracted a large number of immigrant workers. "I came here in 1948. I wanted to work in Britain, and I got a job in the brickworks," said Fred Szymaczack, a Pole who says things were very different when he came to Slough. "When I arrived it was much stricter. The government knew how many people were coming to work here. Now, there's too many. The town can't cope."

The expansion of the European Union in 2004 has had an enormous effect here as it has across Britain. Local Polish community leaders say as many as 10,000 Poles have arrived in Slough in three years. Walk down the High Street and you can literally hear the languages and accents that are changing the make up of this town.

The problem is there is no accurate way of recording that change. When it comes to migrants arriving in our towns, it seems we've lost the ability to count. The government's estimates show Slough's population is decreasing, while the council in Slough reckons it is growing so fast that about one in ten people here are simply missing from the books, not accounted for. And that has a direct consequence for everyone living here. That is because the government uses the population figure to decide how much money it gives the local council every year. That money funds three quarters of the services provided by the council. If the population estimate is not accurate, then neither is the pay-out.

Andrew Blake-Herbert, director of finance for Slough council said: "Over the last three years, we've already lost 5 million pounds worth of funding and if the inaccurate population statistics aren't corrected before the next census, we stand to lose up to 15 million worth of funding" Of course, most of the migrants are working and paying tax but all that money goes to the exchequer, it does not come to Slough. All that does comes here is an increased pressure on services. So, that means the Council Tax in the town is as high as it can be. Cuts are on the cards and people are not happy.

But there is a bigger danger. This is a town that has known decades of tolerance. New communities have always been accepted but now some of the older migrants are saying things have to change. I went for a walk through Chalvey, an area of Slough that has become home to hundreds of new arrivals. One resident, Mohammed Choudary Sr told me if more money does not come from the government, the council has to get tough. "Chuck them out. It's simple. Just don't let them come in. Don't give them housing. Tell them to go to other places".

The stakes are high and the government accepts there is a problem. The Immigration Minister, Liam Byrne issued this statement to Panorama.

"We think it's utterly important that the wider - often social impacts - are taken into account before decisions are made. Next year we're introducing an Australian style points system which has worked well there. Before we decide how many points would-be immigrants need to come to Britain, we'll be looking at independent evidence from the Migration Impacts Forum on these wider impacts. Migration is important to the British business community, but businesses shouldn't be the only voice in the debates. Communities count too."

Of course, any points based system would not apply to migrants from Europe, like Slough's Poles. The current flawed system means people living here, hear the government say the town's population is falling while all around - from housing and packed schools, through to increased refuse collection and rising crime rates - the signs are it is on the up. And what is happening in Slough is being repeated across the country. In towns and cities across the land we simply do not know how many migrants are arriving. For more and more communities the numbers no longer add up.

Source



Obama "Walks the Walk" on Supporting Illegal Immigration

Appearing in Miami before La Raza, the largest Hispanic lobbying group in the country, Senator Barak Obama touted his credentials as a supporter of illegal immigration:

Sen. Barack Obama told the nation's largest Hispanic advocacy group yesterday that he earned their support for his presidential campaign by marching in last year's May 1 immigrant rallies and challenged them to learn whether others met that standard.

"Find out how many senators appeared before an immigration rally last year. Who was talking the talk, and who walked the walk — because I walked," Mr. Obama said at the National Council of La Raza's annual convention in Miami Beach. "I didn't run away from the issue, and I didn't just talk about it in front of Latino audiences."

The Illinois Democrat said the recent Senate immigration debate "was both ugly and racist in a way we haven't see since the struggle for civil rights."

Those rallies were clearly hijacked by the open borders lobby and sought to legitimize the lawbreaking done by illegal immigrants by agitating for amnesty. And the strategy of tarring their political opponents as "racist" for supporting measures that would keep the border from becoming a crossing point for terrorists as well as standing up for the rule of law is outrageous. Even pandering to increase his share of the Hispanic vote is no excuse for that kind of insulting rhetoric.

The intent. of course, is to cut off further debate on the issue - something the open borders crowd would dearly love since most Americans oppose their suicidal ideas about immigration. Obama may raise his standing among Hispanics with that kind of rhetoric. But it won't help him in many other areas of the country. And given that he is so far behind Hillary Clinton in the national polls, it may not be good politics to get so many so mad at you.

Source



American towns targeting illegal immigrants

Against a backdrop of perceived federal inaction, a growing number of cities, counties and states are taking matters into their own hands when it comes to trying to reverse the trend of illegal immigration. From the smallest town to an entire state -- Arizona -- governments are passing laws that target illegal immigrants in such indirect ways as preventing them from parking their cars to forcing city workers to decide who's legal and who isn't before someone can rent a home, use the library or get a job.

State attempts at targeting undocumented foreigners are nothing new and have raised constitutional questions for more than a decade. California's ill-fated Proposition 187, passed by voters in 1994, was one of the early attempts that sought to require health workers and teachers to card people. But legal skirmishes are expected with greater frequency after the U.S. Senate's failure this summer to enact immigration revisions. The void has only emboldened opponents of illegal immigration whose stridency seems unlikely to fade. "There's a great likelihood of mischief and trouble when local places get involved in immigration laws," said Kevin Johnson, a law professor at the University of California, Davis.

In Arizona, Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano reluctantly signed legislation on July 2 requiring all employers in the state to run new hires through a federal database operated by the Department of Homeland Security. Although Napolitano said she generally does not agree with local and state governments regulating immigration -- which falls under federal jurisdiction -- she signed the law because Congress failed to take action. The Senate bill would have legalized millions of illegal immigrants but also increased enforcement measures and ordered American employers to use Homeland Security's federal database.

Activists such as Marie Waldron, a City Council member in Escondido, about 30 miles north of San Diego, actually sought to topple the Senate bill, believing it treated illegal immigration too gently. Waldron once led a failed attempt to create a California state border police. She also was the architect of a local law that would have made it illegal to rent housing to any illegal immigrants. The housing law cost the city $200,000 to defend in court, money that Waldron believes was well spent, even though the law ended up being scuttled last December. "I wanted to see this all the way through court," Waldron said. "I was opposed to the city withdrawing from it. I also very much support training local police to be immigration officers."

Despite the setbacks, as long as the federal government fails to enforce current laws to their satisfaction, local officials say they're going to do it themselves -- using local power. Waldron said she's now pursuing an indirect method to drive out illegal immigrants, whom she blames for degrading Escondido's quality of life. She wants to outlaw overnight parking on residential streets unless people can prove they live there and have valid California driver's licenses.

Before the Escondido City Council decided to abandon the legal battle to defend Waldron's housing ordinance, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order against it, citing "serious questions" of due process and other constitutional issues. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF, sued Escondido, as did a landlord. The civil rights groups continue to sue or try to persuade other cities that similar laws will end up struck down.

In addition to unlawfully assuming federal power, civil rights attorneys argue, ad hoc local immigration policing leads to discrimination and abuse, while raising the specter of vigilantism. Even attorneys who support local efforts to crack down on illegal immigrants warn that laws have to be crafted carefully. Statutes that call for businesses or city workers to check someone's legal status have to be applied across the board, said Sharma Hammond, an attorney with the Washington, D.C.-based Immigration Reform Law Institute.

More here





23 July, 2007

The mechanical harvesting alternative to illegals

Australia has practically no illegals but all the crops get harvested and Australia is a major food exporter. Mechanical harvesting is instrumental in that. Now it is coming to America

Surrounded by shiny new tractors, Carl Capps spends most days talking about horsepower, hydraulics and transmissions. In the past he paid little attention to anti- and pro-immigrant activists marching at the state Capitol.

Then the immigration debate came to him last fall, after he sold a quarter-million-dollar machine that harvests wine grapes - the first in the Willamette Valley. The New Holland Braud grape harvester can do the work of 40 handpickers in a fraction of the time.

Suddenly, vineyard owners were calling Capps to schedule demonstrations, saying they couldn't cope with worsening worker shortages - or immigration raids. Their concerns were heightened after a U.S. Senate immigration bill that would have offered legal status for up to 900,000 undocumented agricultural workers failed, and immigration officers detained nearly 200 workers at a Portland produce processing plant.

Oregonians for Immigration Reform, a restrictionist group, touted the European machine as a beacon of a future without illegal labor. "As soon as word about this got out, the immigration issue was the first thing that came up," Capps said. "The bloggers are all over it. They're saying, 'Finally, see? We told you that you could get by without all this immigration.'"

The harvester is a powerful and controversial symbol as Oregon and the nation struggle with the economic realities of immigration. As public pressure drives a border crackdown and increased enforcement, farmers nationwide face labor shortages as high as 30 percent to 50 percent during harvest. Further complicating matters, large numbers of former migrant laborers have switched to construction jobs for the higher pay and year-round stability.

The high-tech machine - which uses "shaker rod" technology to coax grapes off the vine into molded silicon rubber collection baskets - may herald a future of all-mechanized agriculture. "Oregon doesn't have the scale or the research to make an immediate leap," said Brent Searle, special assistant to the director of the Oregon Department of Agriculture. "But in farming, it's always taken a crisis to make big changes. "Necessity is the mother of invention."

More here



Immigration 'fuelling housing shortage' in Australia

Getting rid of Greenie-inspired red tape and restrictions would soon get more houses built but given the existing regulations, housing prices will be pushed up by immigration -- as they are in Britain and the USA

Rising numbers of overseas workers could significantly increase the pressure on Australian housing stocks, according to a new report out today. As many as 170,000 new homes would need to be built around Australia this financial year in order to satisfy underlying demand. But industry forecaster BIS Shrapnel predicts actual housing starts will slip a further 1 per cent to just 148,000.

In its latest publication of long-term building forecasts, the firm says that would be the fourth consecutive year in which demand outstrips supply. Part of that demand is being fuelled by immigration as Australia's employment boom and skills shortage attracts temporary workers from offshore. But BIS Shrapnel says many cities will struggle to accommodate them over the next few years. It says the nationwide shortage of housing is now translating into rapid rent rises.

Last week, the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling and the Housing Industry Association (HIA) predicted the number of households suffering rent stress would jump to 750,000 by the end of the decade.

Source





22 July, 2007

Irish trying to kick out gypsies

Immigration papers have been served on the Roma family who are camped at the M50 roundabout in Dublin's Ballymun. Members of the Garda National Immigration Bureau, under the direction of the Superintendent at Santry, served the documents in the early hours of this morning. Similar documents were also served at a derelict house on the Old Swords Road. A total of 86 persons were presented with these documents, in accordance with immigration law. No arrests were made during the operation.

As the family are Romanian nationals, they can legally reside here, but not work without a permit. The documents state the intention of the Justice Minister Brian Lenihan to serve a removal order under EU law on them, on public health and financial grounds. They have 15 days to make representations to him on the issue.

Source



Sheriff unveils migrant hotline

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Friday launched a hotline for Valley residents to report information about undocumented immigrants. Details of exactly how the hotline will work and which tips will merit further investigation have not been ironed out. Officials say they aren't sure how many and what types of calls will come in. Still, Arpaio said deputies would investigate people only if they had "probable cause." "We want evidence," Arpaio said. "We're not going to go on a street corner and round up a group of people because they look like they're from a foreign country."

The hotline is part of an expanded immigration enforcement plan Arpaio unveiled. In another part, about 160 sheriff's deputies, cross-trained to enforce immigration law, will saturate Valley cities and roadways to find and arrest those who are here illegally, the sheriff said. The deputies now have broad powers not only to question people about their immigration status during traffic stops, but also if they commit even a minor infraction, such as littering. Arpaio stressed that people would only be questioned if deputies came across them "in the course of our duties."

The efforts come as Arizona officials have been trying to crack down on illegal immigration and on the heels of a new state law that would fine and threaten the licenses of businesses that knowingly employ undocumented workers. Experts say the federal government's failure to pass immigration reform is spurring more local governments to act on their own. Payson's Town Council, for example, passed an ordinance in April that requires all its businesses to sign an affidavit stating that all employees are legal residents. Business owners who refuse to sign the affidavit won't receive a license, said Payson Mayor Bob Edwards.

In the Valley, members of the Phoenix Police Department and the Arizona Department of Public Safety also have completed Immigration and Customs Enforcement training and can act as federal officers. But those agencies say the intent is to break up human- and drug-smuggling rings and other border-related crime groups.

Arpaio began arresting undocumented immigrants in March 2006, targeting them under a controversial interpretation of the state's anti-human-smuggling laws. Since then, Arpaio has been expanding his efforts to turn the Sheriff's Office into "a full-fledged anti-immigration agency." On Monday, 64 ICE agents will be deputized. "We want to go further," Arpaio said. "It's important to put the resources into this fight if you're serious about it."

The hotline is believed to be the first of its kind in the country, and some say it is troubling. Although the hotline is supposed to field calls about criminal activity, like loads of immigrants being smuggled into the Valley, some critics said Friday they fear it opens the possibility that neighbors, former lovers and others also could turn each other in. Critics also wondered if it could lead to racial profiling. "It makes every citizen, by proxy, an immigration cop," said Muzaffar Chishti, director of the Migration Policy Institute's Office at New York University School of Law. "This hard-line (plan) is a direct line on vigilantism," he said.

Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox said she approves of Arpaio's enforcement plan, but not the hotline. "I think a lot of innocent people will get caught up in this, just because their skin's brown," Wilcox said. "We just need to make sure we're not violating people's civil rights, or get into racial profiling. The county may open itself up to a lot of liabilities."

Arpaio insisted deputies would not engage in racial profiling but would target those contacted during routine patrols and investigations. He said he isn't encouraging people to turn in their neighbor's nanny, although he said, "Neighbors should be calling in when they see a crime." The line is an effort to get residents "to join the fight," he said. "We can't do it by ourselves." County Supervisor Don Stapley said Arpaio's plan is necessary to help reduce the flow of undocumented immigrants and the costs on local governments. The plan, he said, could become a model for other counties. "More power to him, I hope it helps," Stapley said.

Source





21 July, 2007

ICE arrests more than 270 in Dallas-Fort Worth area this week

Federal agents arrested 274 illegal immigrants over five days during raids in Dallas, Fort Worth and surrounding suburbs, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced Friday. Authorities took into custody 233 men, 28 women and 13 children, said ICE spokesman Carl Rusnok.

The operation, which began Monday and ended Friday, yielded illegal immigrants, people wanted by immigration authorities and immigrants with criminal records. Of the 274 arrested, 99 had criminal convictions, ICE said. "These operations are a critical element in removing threats to public safety," said Nuria T. Prendes, field office director for ICE's Office of Detention and Removal Operations.

Most of the arrests happened at homes. Some of those taken into custody weren't the targets of the operation but they were in the homes and were found to be in the country illegally, Prendes said. "Many of these individuals are in the wrong place at the wrong time, many live together," she said.

Police in Dallas, Irving, Fort Worth, Arlington, Farmers Branch, Carrollton and Blue Mound along with the Dallas County constable, helped agents in the operation, according to an ICE statement. Authorities detained people from Colombia, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nigeria, Romania and South Korea. Half of the 274 arrested have already been returned to Mexico, and the others were awaiting deportation proceedings, ICE said.

The minors taken into custody could have left voluntarily if they were from Mexico or released to a guardian, ICE officials said. Unaccompanied minors would be turned over to the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement. ICE has two fugitive apprehension teams in the area that regularly target people who can be deported, officials said.

Source



Cuban emigration held up by Cuba

Don't blame the United States for slowing down the processing of U.S. visas for Cubans. Cuba could easily speed things up if it stops blocking the U.S. Interests Section in Havana from getting the resources it needs, says the Miami Herald. Cuba also complains that the United States risks violating the 1994 U.S.-Cuba migration accords which oblige the United States to grant Cubans at least 20,000 U.S. visas a year. In reality:

* The United States acknowledges that it won't meet the 20,000 target, but the problem is that Cuba has blocked the U.S. Interests Section from bringing in personnel and materials for upgrading visa facilities.

* Cuba also refuses to allow the section to hire local replacements for 47 open positions.

This isn't the first time the Interests Section has fallen behind:

* In 1999 only 14,000 visas were issued; almost 28,000 visas issued in 2001 made up for the shortfall.

* Meanwhile, Cuba violates the accords all the time -- it does so by denying exit permits to hundreds of Cubans granted U.S. visas.

* Moreover, since 1998 Cuba has refused to allow the Interests Section to seek new applicants via a lottery; this means the section wastes time on outdated petitions, blocking necessary personnel is another violation.

But ultimately it is in the best interests of both countries to uphold the accords, says the Herald:

* For the United States, it is imperative to encourage orderly immigration and discourage dangerous sea crossings that have taken so many lives.

* Cuba benefits by having an escape valve for large numbers of disaffected Cubans who might otherwise stir social unrest.

* Those Cubans have been waiting for signs of positive change for a year since Fidel Castro became ill; under the current government, there is little hope that change will come.

Source





20 July, 2007

Governor Napolitano signs employer sanctions bill

If she wanted any political future in Arizona, she had to. She has already started to undercut it, though

Governor Janet Napolitano (D-Ariz) has signed the Legal Arizona Workers Act (HB 2779), a new law that imposes penalties on employers who hire illegal immigrants. At the same time, Napolitano announced she is willing to call for a special session of the Arizona State Legislature to repair defects in the bill.

In a written statement accompanying the bill, the Governor, who signed the bill on July 2, 2007, said she took the tandem action because Congress had failed miserably. She wrote, "Immigration is a federal responsibility, but I signed HB 2779 because it is now abundantly clear that Congress finds itself incapable of coping with the comprehensive immigration reforms our country needs. I signed it, too, out of the realization that the flow of illegal immigration into our state is due to the constant demand of some employers for cheap, undocumented labor."

According to the statement, HB 2779 takes the most aggressive action in the country against employers who knowingly or intentionally hire undocumented workers. The law requires employers to verify that the individuals they employ are present in the country legally. Knowing or intentional failure to do so will cause the employer's business licenses to be suspended. A second offense can result in the "business death penalty" - permanent revocation of an employer's licenses to do business in Arizona.

Yet, said Napolitano, the bill also contains flaws that must be addressed: (1) the bill does not adequately protect critical infrastructure, like hospitals, nursing homes and power plants, if they are shut down because of a single wrongful employment decision; (2) the revocation provision is overbroad, causing a business with multiple locations to face shutdown of its entire operation based on an infraction that occurred at only one location; (3) the bill is underfunded (only $100,000 has been appropriated by the Attorney General's office for an entirely new database to investigate complaints statewide and only $70,000 has been appropriated to notify employers of the change in the law); (4) there is no express provision protecting Arizona citizens or legal residents from discrimination under the terms of the bill; and (5) the bill cites the wrong portion of a federal law.

The bill's provisions do not take effect until January of 2008, allowing ample time for the state legislature to pass the necessary improvements to the law. Governor Napolitano is willing to call for the special session to occur sometime in the fall, but did not set the specific date until she has had the opportunity to consult with legislative leaders. The purpose of the special session will be clear: to correct and clarify the law, not to undercut it.

Along with signing HB 2779, the Governor also sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev), and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal). In it, she asks for improvements to the federal government's Basic Pilot program, which helps employers verify new employees' work eligibility. Napolitano has also directed her own Departments of Homeland Security and Public Safety to intensify efforts related to intercepting fraudulent documents used in the business of illegal immigration and to conduct training with businesses to aid them in detecting fraudulent documents.

Finally, in a letter to the Special Agent in Charge for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Arizona, the Governor asked that the state be notified when ICE officers encounter evidence of employers knowingly or intentionally employing illegal immigrants.

Source



British Labor Party politician speaks for his voters

And gets condemned for it

A MERSEYSIDE Labour MP has broken ranks by becoming the first in the country to blame the failed bomb attacks in London and Glasgow on rising immigration into Britain. Outspoken Birkenhead member Frank Field said his constituents were angry when the Government told them to be "vigilant" following last month's aborted terror scares. He said the reality was that ministers had failed to be vigilant by letting in so many immigrants, some of whom had turned to terrorism,

The manager of Liverpool's Asylum Link charity last night branded Mr Field's comments as irresponsible and potentially dangerous, as did Adam Kelwick, a Muslim-based chaplain in Wavertree. And the head of Merseyside police's community relations team said multi-ethnic and faith groups across the region had been overwhelmingly receptive to pleas for vigilance.

Superintendent Rowland Moore described any comments which undermined public reassurance in the wake of the failed London and Glasgow attacks as "not helpful". During a Commons debate, Mr Field said: "In the statements of relief that the last bombing episode had not wrought the evil on innocent people that had been intended, Cabinet ministers told us to be vigilant. "The report back from my constituents in Birkenhead market was: `What a damned cheek that they should lecture us on vigilance!' "If the political class had been a little more vigilant in the past, and responded to their regular doubts and worries about the level of immigration, we might not, they said, be listening to such statements."

Some of the suspects arrested after bombs failed to go off in London city centre and at Glasgow Airport grew up in Iraq, Jordan, India and elsewhere. During the debate on immigration, Mr Field went on to say that the Home Secretary's failure to track people leaving Britain to go to terror camps abroad would "haunt her as time goes on". And he attacked the decision to grant free movement to workers from the poorer countries of Eastern Europe, when their living standards were so much lower. He warned: "The future of the European Union is an unsure one if we continue blindly to turn our eyes away from what is now a mass movement of people within Europe."

In response, immigration minister Liam Byrne accepted there was a "social impact" as well as an economic one and pointed to the new points-based work permit system that was being brought in. He also highlighted new government systems that he said would track the majority of migrants by 2009.

Last night, Adam Kelwick, a Muslim chaplain based in Wavertree, said: "To use this kind of language is irresponsible. "He's obviously got an agenda to push, targeting asylum-seekers and immigrants who themselves are extremely vulnerable. "They would far rather live in their own countries, if there was no interference with their daily lives.

Superintendent Rowland Moore, who heads Merseyside police's community relations team, said in response to Mr Field's recounting of his constituents' views: "That may be what he's being told, but that is certainly not what we have been hearing on the ground. "The community has been very receptive to the message of vigilance - and that includes the white population of the city." Ewan Roberts, centre manager of Liverpool's Asylum Link charity, said: "I'd criticise anyone who uses emotive language and makes sweeping statements like this. "It is irresponsible and it could be dangerous."

Source





19 July, 2007

Waukegan shows the way with immigrant lawbreakers

Waukegan is in the Chicago area

Some Waukegan residents fear a controversial immigration program that is moving forward will erode trust in police and result in racial profiling. On Monday night, the Waukegan City Council voted to move forward with a controversial immigration program that gives police more teeth when it comes to enforcing the law. As CBS 2's Kristyn Hartman reports, despite the emotion of the evening, Waukegan aldermen in an 8 to 2 vote decided not to reconsider a decision in June to go forward with an application with a special program that would train police officers to enforce immigration law.

The program, known as 287 (g), has caused so much controversy in Waukegan that police with riot gear were ready to manage a crowd of hundreds. Many of them were protesters trying to convince the council to see things their way - both for and against. The population of Waukegan is 44 percent Latino.

Once trained, officers could identify, process and detain immigration offenders they come across on the job. Waukegan police say if they are selected, this program will give them the power to get rid of rapists and murderers who are living in their community illegally. But hundreds of protesters fear that power will be abused.

"I don't think they should have done this because there's a lot of families here that have been here for a while and they have not done no harm," said Elizabeth Gonzales, who opposes the program. But others said those who break the law should be held accountable, and the new law could ensure that happens. "The people that are here illegally committing crimes should be deported," said Alice Berczy. "At the bare minimum we need to be able to deport people who've committed crimes," said Brian Jacobsen, who favors 287 (g). "If the argument is that we don't want to deport rapists and murderers that is crazy to me."

A news conference, prayer vigil and rally before the vote drew hundreds of people opposed to Waukegan joining the federal program. About 50 supporters of the measure -- some singing songs like "God Bless America" through bullhorns -- demonstrated across the street.

Police Chief William Biang said being part of the program would streamline the deportation process and cut down on bureaucratic hurdles. "It has nothing to do with race," Biang said. "This has to do with getting criminals out of Waukegan."...

There was also strong debate in the City Council meeting. "I am opposed to 287 (g)," said Waukegan Alderman Tony Figueroa. That remark generated applause, which he asked spectators to stop. But Ald. John Balen said, "If we don't obey the law, then we really don't have a country."

Waukegan Mayor Richard Hyde and other officials have said the program would allow officers to start deportation proceedings for both legal and illegal immigrants convicted of crimes such as murder, rape and drug-related felonies. Hyde has said the city won't participate in raids on employers or community groups, but that the deportation procedures would apply to offenders police encounter on the job. If the federal government approves the application, two officers would get the special immigration training. ICE currently has such agreements with law enforcement agencies across the country, including the Alabama Department of Public Safety/State Police and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. About 75 applications from law enforcement agencies are pending, an immigration spokesman has said.

Source



If you can't do the time, don't do the crime

The heading above is an old motto among British criminals that criminals of immigrant origin in America may now be learning. I think that most Americans would see the deportation of 600,000 criminals as one of the few bright spots in immigration law enforcement

U.S. laws that order the deportation of legal immigrants found guilty of a criminal offense are a violation of human rights and have resulted in thousands of families being separated, New York-based Human Rights Watch said on Wednesday. Following changes to U.S. immigration law in 1996 authorities have deported more than 670,000 immigrants from the United States for criminal offenses, leaving behind an estimated 1.6 million spouses and children, the report said.

The study said deportees included immigrants who had come to the United States as children and who had committed crimes such as narcotics possession and petty shoplifting. "It may be reasonable, for example, to deport a newcomer to the U.S. who engages in terrible crimes after he has served his sentence. But many immigrants who are being deported from the United States are a far cry from the worst and most violent offenders," the report said.

The 88-page report said that almost two thirds of the deportees were sent home following conviction for non-violent offenses, the remainder were expelled after being found guilty of violent and other unspecified crimes. Among those deported was a 52-year-old U.S. military veteran convicted of possessing narcotics, who had lived in the United States for four decades and raised four sons. Other cases included a father of three U.S.-born children convicted of breaking into a car and stealing a bottle of eye drops from a drug store.

The study said mandatory deportations contradicted human rights law which requires a fair hearing in which family ties and other connections to an immigrant's host country are weighed against a country's interest in deporting him. "Unfortunately, that is precisely what U.S. immigration law fails to do -- it gives no opportunity to immigration judges to balance the individual's crime against his or her family relationships, other connections to the U.S. such as military service or economic ties, or fear of persecution in the country of origin," the report said. Prior to 1997, immigrants who committed a crime were allowed to go before an immigration judge who could exercise discretion in imposing penalties.

Source





18 July, 2007

New Zealand: Study finds Maori views on immigration hardening

Maori attitudes towards immigrants have hardened in recent years while New Zealanders generally are ambivalent about the impact of immigration, according to a just-published report. The study saw 750 people questioned last year and 1100 questioned in 2003, on a wide range of issues relating to immigration. It provides an overview of attitude trends, says one of its authors Sociology Professor Paul Spoonley. Although there was no dramatic change in results between the 2003 and 2006 reports, the most significant shift was a hardening of Maori attitudes regarding immigration over the three-year period.

This reflected Maori perceptions that New Zealand culture was being eroded by the effects of immigration, says Professor Spoonley, Regional Director and Research Director College of Humanities and Social Sciences at Massey in Auckland. "Maori are more likely to agree than non-Maori that Chinese, other Asians and Pacific peoples take jobs away from people who were born in New Zealand," the report says. Maori attitudes were consistent with their "protection of interests in maintaining a bicultural society, and the assertion of their rights under the Treaty of Waitangi; and their recognition of employment opportunities that might be compromised by ongoing migration". Interestingly, Maori were much less likely than non-Maori to agree that Chinese, other Asian or Pacific peoples increase crime rates, the survey found.

But New Zealanders generally were "still quite ambivalent about immigrants", says Professor Spoonley. "We like the (diverse) food and we like what they're doing to our economy by contributing skills and capital. "But New Zealanders also see immigrants as sticking together rather than integrating, and that is seen as a negative thing."

Aucklanders, young people and those without tertiary qualifications tended to be less positive towards immigrants, the report also said. "Attitudes to immigrants and various aspects of immigration are usually (but not always) more negative among Aucklanders than among other New Zealanders, though perhaps less so than might be expected given the greater impact immigration has had on Auckland compared to the rest of the country," the report says.

The 2006 census showed that Asians were the fastest-growing ethnic group - up 9.2 per cent to 354,552 since the 2001 census. Two-thirds of the Asian population live in Auckland, where almost one in five people identify with one or more Asian ethnic groups, the highest proportion nationally. More than a third of people living in Auckland were born overseas, compared with Southland, where around one in 13 people were born overseas. More New Zealanders in 2006 than 2003 saw value in having immigrants fill job shortages, but they also wanted more government consultation with the public on immigration matters, the report says.

Source



A faint twitch of decency and rationality from the constipated U.S. immigration bureaucracy

The immigration agency announced Tuesday that public opinion had caused it to reverse an earlier government decision that prevented thousands of legal immigrants from obtaining work-based permanent visas. On June 12, the State Department encouraged highly skilled immigrants here on temporary employment visas to apply for permanent employment visas, known as green cards, to become permanent residents. The department said the visas would be available starting July 2. But on that date, the department announced that all available employment-based visas had been distributed for the year.

On Tuesday, however, the immigration agency, Citizenship and Immigration Services, said it would accept applications for these visas if they were filed by Aug. 17. "The public reaction to the July 2 announcement made it clear that the federal government's management of this process needs further review," Emilio T. Gonzalez, the agency's director, said in a statement. "I am committed to working with Congress and the State Department to implement a more efficient system in line with public expectations."

State Department officials have said the alert in June was meant to speed visa processing, to make sure no visas went unused. Both agencies have tried to reduce green-card application backlogs. Applicants for these employment visas are required to submit certified documents, among them employer sponsorship forms and federal certification that no American workers are available for their jobs, and must also undergo medical examinations. Many of them have a long work history in the United States.

The American Immigration Law Foundation, a group that advocates for immigrants' legal rights, said in a statement that it had prepared, and had been poised to file, a class-action lawsuit to oppose the government's July 2 decision. Bill Wright, a spokesman for the immigration agency, would not comment on whether the threat of litigation had prompted the agency's reversal.

Source



Australia: Visa laws 'unfair' to Muslims

The poor little precious petals are being asked to name their families. What an outrage!

NEW laws that demand Arabs seeking visa entry into Australia provide the names of their parents and grandfather hint at racial and religious profiling, according to a leading Islamic group. "It would be pretty naive to think there is no religious profiling going on (with visa applicants), even if it's not officially recognised," said the Islamic Council of Victoria's spokesman, Waleed Aly.

Australian security agencies had asked for the new regulations that require extra personal information from Arabic visa applicants to include the names of their parents and grandfather. Other visa applicants, including those from China and Russia, are also being required to provide additional information about the spelling of names and ancestral names before being granted entry to Australia.

The Federal Government has insisted there is no racial or religious profiling in Australia's immigration programs. Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews' spokeswoman said the changes would help in the proper identification of applicants and their character. "The question that has been included in the new form (about Arabic grandfathers) is designed to enable more accurate and higher-quality identification of visa applicants," she said.

But Mr Aly said his own experiences had shown him racial and religious characteristics were focused on by border officials. Mr Aly said despite random searches being conducted at Australian airports, he had become used to always being stopped and questioned, and that many Australian Muslims knew that they would come under special attention, especially at airports. "They disproportionately focus on people who are Muslim or who appear to be Muslim," he said.

All visa applicants aged 16 and older wanting to visit Australia must fill out a character assessment form, which identifies their siblings and parents. But regulations brought in this year require Arabic, Chinese and Russian visa applicants to provide extra detail. For Russian citizens they must include their patronymic or ancestral name, and Chinese applicants must provide their name in commercial code numbers, which relates to Chinese characters, and in English

Source





17 July, 2007

Australian immigration law used to detain suspect Muslim doctor

The Australian government said Monday it would detain a doctor accused of supporting the foiled car bomb attacks in London and Glasgow on immigration violations, overriding a magistrate's order granting him bail. Mohamed Haneef's work visa was canceled because the Indian doctor had "failed the character test," and he would be taken into immigration custody if he meets his bail conditions, Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews said. "I reasonably suspect that he has, or has had, an association with persons engaged in criminal activity, namely terrorism, in the U.K.," Andrews told reporters in Canberra, the national capital. "That's the basis on which I have made this decision."

Hours earlier, Queensland state Magistrate Jacqui Payne granted Haneef bail, saying there was no clear evidence he was involved in the car bomb plot. Police, acting on information from British investigators in the attack plot, arrested Haneef on July 2 as he tried to board a flight from the eastern city of Brisbane to India. Haneef, 27, was charged Saturday with providing support to a terrorist organization by giving his mobile phone SIM card to British suspects Sabeel and Kafeel Ahmed when he moved to Australia in July 2006. Haneef is a distant cousin of the Ahmed brothers and he shared a house with them in Liverpool before moving to Australia for a job at a hospital on Queensland state's Gold Coast.

Haneef's lawyer Stephen Keim has slammed the government's case as "extremely weak," saying his client only left the SIM card so his cousin could take advantage of a special deal on his mobile phone plan. Under Australian law, the government can withdraw a person's visa for a variety of reasons, including if the minister judges a person is not of good character. Magistrate Jacqui Payne set the bail for Haneef with several conditions, including staying away from international ports, checking in with police three times a week and putting up an $8,700 bond. Andrews said that if Haneef meets the bail conditions, immigration officials would step in before he can be freed and bring him to a detention facility in Sydney.

Haneef's lawyer Peter Russo said he would appeal the government's decision. "We will start the next battle. If that's the way they want to do it - bring it on," he told reporters outside the Brisbane jailhouse where Haneef has been held for two weeks. The move was criticized by Cameron Murphy, the secretary of the Australian Council for Civil Liberties. "The reason we have an independent court system is so these incredibly important decisions are made for the right reasons, and aren't subject to political interference," Murphy said. "It is not appropriate for the government to just keep him incarcerated because they don't like the decision of the magistrates court." Haneef's wife has maintained her husband is innocent and pleaded with authorities to help free him, Indian media reported Sunday.

Source



Attempt to stretch immigration law fails in NY

The husbands of women forced to abort a pregnancy, undergo involuntary sterilization or face persecution under China's coercive population control program do not automatically qualify for asylum in the United States, a federal appeals court ruled Monday. Judge Guido Calabresi said the ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan conflicts with a dozen other federal appeals courts, as well as the findings of the Board of Immigration Appeals and 10 years of decisions in immigration cases.

A law adopted in 1996 broadened the definition of a refugee eligible for asylum by including anyone who has resisted a coercive population-control program, or who has been forced to abort a pregnancy or undergo involuntary sterilization, or who was persecuted for failing to undergo those procedures.

In 1997 the Board of Immigration Appeals ruled that past persecution of a husband could be established for asylum purposes if his wife had been forced to have an abortion or undergo sterilization. In the majority opinion written by Judge Barrington Parker said the immigration board "lacks authority to adopt a policy that presumes that every person whose spouse was subjected to a forced abortion or sterilization has himself experienced persecution based on political opinion."

Source



Some comments from Muslim liberals on Muslim immigration

Kurdish Journalist Tariq Hemo: The Western Countries Are Reaping the Harvest of Overly Liberal Immigration Policies

In a July 5 article on the liberal Elaph website, Tariq Hemo, a Kurdish journalist living in Germany, criticized Europe's immigration policies for being too liberal: ".The Western countries are currently reaping, in these terrorists, what they sowed when they flung their doors open wide to every malevolent fundamentalist and failed in putting in place a mechanism for managing and controlling immigration in an appropriate manner.

"The West's generosity in allowing the organizations of political Islam to penetrate into Islamic societies [in Europe], spread among their youth, and enlist them in order to achieve their own ends and realize their agendas, was a mistake, and was the prelude that led to the appearance of these disastrous consequences now. He who sows the wind reaps the storm.

"The forces of political Islam that were chased out of the East. have control over a wide swath of Islamic societies in Europe. Things that are forbidden and are lines that cannot be crossed in Arab countries, and lead to the one who says them. being [kicked out] way beyond the sun, are permitted here in the West: fiery sermons and takfiri pamphlets, meetings that openly discuss overturning governments and hanging the rulers, the conditions of carrying out the death penalty against an apostate, and imposing the jizya [poll-tax] on the dhimmis.

"[Religious] reform and putting things right is a great and serious task, and the Arabs and Muslims cannot undertake this alone. It is necessary that help be given to all of the liberal reformist forces in the Arab and Islamic worlds in order for this project to succeed."

Khudayr Taher: Europe and America Should Deport All Muslims - Including Myself

Khudayr Taher, an Iraqi Shi'ite writer living in the U.S. and a regular contributor to the liberal Elaph website, had a quite illiberal suggestion - he asked why Europe and America shouldn't deport their Muslim populations. He wrote: "Countries have the right to defend themselves and assure their citizens' safety from terrorism. Likewise, it is clear that the source of the terrorist crimes in Europe and America is the Muslims who live in these countries.

"The security services cannot know people's intentions and sort out who is the noble immigrant and who is a terrorist criminal. [But] wherever there are Muslims, their presence has produced crimes of terrorism and murder. "Among those Muslims in Europe and America who do not practice terrorism, most of them do not have loyalty and sincere attachment to these countries that have offered them all of the means of life in dignity - housing, studies, work, and citizenship.

"The legitimate question is this: Since the security services cannot sort out the good immigrant from the bad terrorist. why don't these countries deport all Muslims, of all races, from Europe and America, and [thus] find rest from the danger of terrorism, and protect their peoples? "I, as an Arab Muslim immigrant, sincerely call on the countries of Europe and America to deport all Muslims from their territories - including myself, despite my love and my sincere attachment to the U.S."

Source





16 July, 2007

Britain's terrorist immigrants

The government faces new embarrassment over Britain’s porous borders with the revelation that one in four terrorist suspects arrested in Britain is an asylum seeker. Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, there have been more than 1,100 arrests under antiterrorism legislation. While some of the most serious threats come from Al-Qaeda supporters born in the UK, there is new evidence of many suspects exploiting loopholes in the country’s immigration laws. It was confirmed last week that Muktar Said Ibrahim, one of the bombers involved in the failed suicide attacks of July 21, 2005, was given a passport even though he had convictions for indecent assault and robbery. Gordon Brown has said an applicant in similar circumstances would not now be granted citizenship.

A Home Office analysis of those arrested under antiterrorism laws from 2001 to 2005 found that almost a quarter – 24%, or 232 out of 963 – had previously applied for asylum. This figure includes failed asylum seekers who should have been removed from the country.

Omar Altimimi, 37, who was jailed for nine years this month at Manchester Crown Court for hoarding computer files on jihadi terrors, illustrates the ease with which Al-Qaeda supporters have been able to remain in the country and fund their activities using Britain’s often chaotic asylum system. Altimimi, a father of three who settled in Bolton, Greater Manchester, used the name Abou Hawas when he first arrived in the country, claiming he was an Iraqi fleeing persecution. In reality, he had come from the Netherlands where he had shared a flat with other extremists. When Altimimi’s asylum application was rejected, he should have been removed from the country. Instead he simply adopted another name. Over a six-year period he was given pay-outs from the National Asylum Support Service and other agencies of more than 100,000 pounds. This income helped support him as he spent hours at his computer, collating material on bomb making and identifying possible targets.

Susan Williams, the leader of Trafford council in Manchester and prospective Conservative candidate for Bolton West, said: “How many more terror sleepers are the British taxpayer funding? It is time we had a full, independent investigation into this appalling situation.”

The estimated backlog of 400,000 failed asylum seekers who have not been removed from the country is said by opposition MPs to be one in a series of systemic failings that undermine the security of Britain’s borders. They complain that while Tony Blair and now Gordon Brown have pledged tough action, not enough has been done. There is still no comprehensive system for checking the identities of people leaving the country. The lax regime was highlighted when Hussain Osman, one of the July 21 bombers, left the country undetected after the failed attacks.

The government has trumpeted the forthcoming introduction of a new electronic system– e-borders – to log all entries and exits. But the programme has been hampered by technical difficulties and it is unlikely to be fully running until 2014.

David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said that while he would welcome any “calm and effective” measures to improve border controls, the government should have acted more quickly to monitor and check people entering and leaving the country. “Our porous borders have got worse under this government,” he said. “It is a straightforward matter for people with criminal or terrorist intent to cross our borders in both directions with almost no control on them.”

Source



Do immigration amnesties work?

A reasonably informative comment from the BBC

A think-tank is calling for an amnesty on illegal immigrants in the UK - with claims that it would bring in 1bn pounds in tax revenue. But what's the record of places where an amnesty has been attempted?

Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal and Holland are among the European countries that have had amnesties in recent years - but the experiences of 20 such "regularisation" exercises have raised as many questions as they have answered. In Spain, there have been five separate amnesties since 1991 - in successive attempts to tax and control the large numbers of illegal workers that have entered the country from North Africa and South America. The initial ruling gave the right to stay to 135,000 illegal residents - but since then a further 1.2m people have been allowed to stay in subsequent amnesties. To be given a legal right to remain, these illegal immigrants had to show that they had lived in the country for more than six months, could support themselves in work and had no criminal records.

Italy has allowed more than 1.5m illegal workers to stay since the 1980s. In its most recent amnesty, in 2006, it gave permits to a further 180,000 people - but the number of applicants was more than 500,000, with no sign that the illegal economy was coming under control. In the United States, longstanding plans to grant legal status to illegal workers have been derailed - leaving 12m people in the shadows. In Malaysia, there was a recent amnesty of sorts, allowing illegal workers to leave the country without punishment - after which anyone remaining could face imprisonment.

From the European experience, the figures suggest that granting an amnesty - or not granting an amnesty - seem to make little difference to the pattern of migrants seeking work, legal or otherwise. What it does reveal is how difficult it is for a modern, globalised economy to put a fence around itself - when there is a highly-mobile workforce and demand for cheap labour.

There might be political pressure for clampdowns on illegal immigration, but putting it into practice is less than straightforward. The IPPR think-tank, which has suggested a amnesty, says it would take three decades to process the deportation of the UK's estimated 500,000 illegal workers - at a cost of 11,000 pounds per person. Such a huge operation - removing almost one in a hundred of the population - is not feasible, says the think-tank. Instead these workers should be taxed - and in return receive the right to remain and the protection of safer working conditions.

But opponents, such as campaign group Migrationwatch, argue that amnesties provide an incentive for further illegal immigration. "It is wrong in principle to reward illegal behaviour," says Migrationwatch. It also argues that "the problems surrounding social housing would be massively exacerbated if the government were to give an amnesty to illegal immigrants".

Both the Labour government and Conservative opposition are unsympathetic to amnesties - arguing they could provide an incentive for further waves of migrants. But there are MPs in both parties that have pushed for a legal status for such "irregular migrants". Labour deputy leadership contender Jon Cruddas and Conservative MP John Bercow both signed a recent early day motion in the House of Commons calling for a two-year work permit for people who had already been working in the UK for four years or more.

The Strangers into Citizens campaign, supported by trade unions and churches, wants to create a "pathway" for illegal immigrants to gain citizenship - giving workers a more dignified and secure future. Trade union leader Jack Dromey argued in a recent speech that there was growing support for a more pragmatic approach to resolving the large numbers of well-established workers who remained illegal. "The people of middle England will listen to new thinking on migration, they do understand that the current approach is failing and that the human costs are horrendous. They understand that the economic and moral case for an 'earned amnesty' for migrants is overwhelming," said Mr Dromey.

But there are deep political tensions over any attempt to resolve the situation of immigrants working illegally - with pressures over public services, housing and the possibility of attracting further illegal migrants.

Source





15 July, 2007

The NYT has found the boogeyman

The defeat of the amnesty bill was the result of a broad-based protest but Leftists like to find an evil boogeyman behind everything that thwarts them so the report from the NYT below focusing on just one group is the usual prescription

When a comprehensive immigration bill collapsed last month on the Senate floor, it was a victory for a small group that had been lobbying Congress for a decade to reduce the number of immigrants — legal and illegal — in the United States. The group, Numbers USA, tracked every twist and turn of the bill. Its members flooded the Senate with more than a million faxes, sent through the organization’s Web site. It supplied arguments and information to senators opposing the bill. “It was a David-and-Goliath struggle,” said Roy H. Beck, the president of Numbers USA, who had been preparing for this moment since 1996, when he wrote a book titled “The Case Against Immigration.”

Supporters of the bill included President Bush, the United States Chamber of Commerce, the high-tech industry, the Roman Catholic Church, many Hispanic organizations, farmers, restaurants, hotels and the construction industry. “The bill had support from the opinion elite in this country,” Mr. Beck said. “But we built a grass-roots army, consumed with passion for a cause, and used the power of the Internet to go around the elites and defeat a disastrous amnesty bill.”...

“Numbers USA initiated and turbocharged the populist revolt against the immigration reform package,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigrant advocacy group. “Roy Beck takes people who are upset about illegal immigration for different reasons, including hostility to Latino immigrants, and disciplines them so their message is based on policy rather than race-based arguments or xenophobia.” Representative Brian P. Bilbray, Republican of California and chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus, said, “We’re involved in weekly discussions with Numbers USA and other immigration-control groups as part of a team effort.”

Numbers USA had fewer than 50,000 members at the end of 2004, but now counts more than 447,000, with an increase of 83 percent since January alone. Turning to the next phase of the debate, those members will push for enforcement of existing laws and new measures to curb the employment of illegal immigrants. “Our No. 1 legislative goal is to begin a system of mandatory workplace verification, to confirm that every employee is a United States citizen or an alien authorized to work in this country,” said Rosemary E. Jenks, director of government relations at Numbers USA.

The organization wants to reduce immigration — as Mr. Beck says in the subtitle of his book — for “moral, economic, social and environmental reasons.” He contends that immigrants and their children are driving population growth, which he says is gobbling up open space, causing urban sprawl and creating more traffic congestion. Moreover, Mr. Beck asserts that immigrants and temporary workers, by increasing the supply of labor, have depressed wages in industries from meatpacking to information technology. Numbers USA has worked most closely with conservative Republicans, but in recent weeks has built alliances with Democrats who share the concern.

Numbers USA keeps a scorecard showing every vote by every member of Congress on immigration-related issues since 1989. The group assigns a letter grade to each member. Lawmakers who received an A-plus were all Republicans and included Representatives J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois and Tom Tancredo of Colorado, a presidential candidate. The lowest grades — F-minuses — went to Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Representative Joe Baca of California, chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

Numbers USA objects to proposals that increase the number of legal or illegal immigrants. It steers clear of debates over the allocation of visas. “It does not matter to us whether a visa goes to a high-tech worker, a farm worker or the sibling of a U.S. citizen,” Mr. Beck said. Numbers USA is one of many organizations fostered by John H. Tanton, an ophthalmologist from Michigan who has also championed efforts to protect the environment, limit population growth [A Greenie!] and promote English as an official language....

Mr. Beck said Numbers USA had been independent of Dr. Tanton since 2002. On the group’s Web site, Mr. Beck cautions against “immigrant bashing” and says, “Even illegal aliens deserve humane treatment as they are detected, detained and deported.” In the fight over the Senate bill, Numbers USA had daily conference calls with conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation and the Eagle Forum.

For tax purposes, Numbers USA has two arms, an educational foundation and an advocacy group that lobbies Congress. Together, Mr. Beck said, they have a budget of $3 million this year, but will probably raise and spend $4.5 million. Mr. Beck said that in the past the group received about two-thirds of its money from foundations like the Colcom Foundation of Pittsburgh and the Weeden Foundation in New York. Many of these foundations have an interest in conservation.

Numbers USA has raised the rest of its money from individual contributors over the Internet. The group collects detailed information on its members — their ethnic background, politics, religious affiliations, occupations and concerns — so it can choose the most effective advocates on any particular issue. In a survey question on religion, the group said the information would be useful because many lawmakers were likely to respond better to people with “a very similar religious worldview.” “This is our citizen army,” Mr. Beck said, pointing to a map that showed members of his group in every Congressional district.

Source



Israel: Sheetrit eyes Law of Return

I hear that there are now Russian Orthodox churches in Israel so the minister has some grounds for believing that the system is being abused

Israel's new interior minister urged a major reform of immigration law. Meir Sheetrit, who took over the Interior Ministry this month as part of a Cabinet reshuffle by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said in a weekend newspaper interview that current Israeli immigration policies are too porous and thus threaten the country's Jewish majority.

"In the area of immigration, I will lead a revolution. We have reached the point of no return," Sheetrit told Yediot Acharonot. "I recommend that we hold a debate on the Law of Return and see what can be done with it. Today the law grants any grandchild of a Jew, even if he or she is not Jewish, the right to immigrate. We should give that some thought."

Sheetrit complained that the "great majority" of recent immigrants from the former Soviet Union are not Jewish under Orthodox law, and lay part of the blame at the feet of the government for ceding responsibility for aliya to semi-autonomous and pro-active groups like the Jewish Agency for Israel. "The starting position has to be not what these groups want, but what is right for the state," he said.

Sheetrit called for aspiring Israeli citizens to be screened for criminal records and said they should be required to demonstrate knowledge about the Jewish state. He also suggested that Israel stop working so hard to bring in immigrants. "If we build up the quality of life here, even Jews from wealthy nations will immigrate. I want to make Israel a country that it is good to live in, on whose doors many Jews will knock. We should not be pressuring Jews into coming," he said.

Source



Turks protest new German immigration law

Germany is cracking down on "family reunions". It is rather refreshing to see a polite protest coming from a Muslim nation. A letter from the President of Iran would no doubt have called Germany a "tumour" or some such

In letter to Berlin, President Sezer condemns new German immigration law. While Hurriyet's description of the new Germany Integration Policy as `racist' is receiving wide coverage in the German press, Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer has sent a letter to German President Koehler in which he says that the law "infringes on human rights." Hurriyet has obtained a copy of the letter, dated 12th July 2007.

"Your Excellency,

Nearly 3 million Turks currently live in your country. These people immigrated to Germany on the German Federal Republic's request. Their effort and determination throughout 40 years have made Germany what it is today. When we take a look, we can see that they have achieved important success in many areas in today's Germany.

The new immigration law infringes one of the most fundamental human rights, the right to have a family.... We are saddened by the fact that this law will especially affect migrants from Turkey. As many experts working in this field in Germany have also stated, the restrictive amendments made to the existing immigration law `are against civil rights'. We cannot cause these people, assets to both Germany and Turkey, to relinquish their hopes about the future.

I wholly believe you will reconsider the matters that have rightly caused scepticism and uneasiness within the Turkish community. The Republic of Turkey is ready to make the necessary contribution in the case of a reconsidering of the law.

My deepest respect,

Ahmet Necdet Sezer, President"

Source





14 July, 2007

The latest from CIS

1. 'Give Me the Tools': They have them -- so use them

EXCERPT: Unfortunately, instead of making the United States a less appealing destination for would-be illegal immigrants, the administration often seems to be offering enticements. For instance, the Treasury Department formally told banks in 2002 that they could accept for the purposes of opening accounts the Mexican government's ID for its nationals living outside of Mexico -- the matricula consular -- thus helping illegal aliens embed themselves in American society. Reversing this decision would be a simple technical matter, but it requires leadership.

That is the core of the problem. The Silent Amnesty is not a function of the impossibility of enforcement, or the overwhelming size of the problem, or the lack of needed tools. The Silent Amnesty is a choice made by the Bush administration, part of a strategy to make a formal amnesty inevitable by creating what the Israeli settler movement called ''facts on the ground.''

********

2. Picking up the pieces: Immigration reform failed -- now what?

EXCERPT: Using these and other methods, the president could set in motion a policy of attrition that over time would persuade a large part of the illegal population that it is time to leave. But there is little chance of this president doing anything of the kind; his chief immigration enforcement officer, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, signaled very clearly in the wake of the defeat of the Senate bill that the silent amnesty would continue: "We're going to say to the members of Congress who think they have a better way that they should produce legislation and pass legislation, which they have not done for the past two years."

But the ball is not in Congress' court. Most of the needed laws already exist - it's up to the president to start enforcing them.

********

3. International Students and Visiting Scholars: Trends, Barriers, and Implications for American Universities and U.S. Foreign Policy

EXCERPT: The latest statistics suggest that foreign student enrollment and exchange program participation remains very strong after a slight drop-off in recent years. However, the government agencies administering student and exchange visas still lack robust information and compliance systems that would help ensure program integrity, minimize the contribution to illegal immigration, and prevent the entry of terrorists, all of which are still severe problems. The exchange visitor programs represent an important form of public diplomacy that could play a key role in improving America's image worldwide and fostering greater international understanding of American values and institutions. They must be reoriented toward academic exchanges and public diplomacy goals rather than continue as de facto work programs that now serve mainly the narrow interests of program sponsors, decrease opportunities for American workers, and often spoil rather than enhance the view young foreign visitors have of America.

********

4. Immigration, Social Security, and the Labor Market

EXCERPT: Even the relatively tiny positive effect they currently have on SS and Medicare is partly due their inability to collect benefits. If legalized, they would represent a long-term drain because illegals overwhelming have little education, and thus have low average incomes. Because Social Security pays more generous benefits to low-income workers relative to what they pay in, legalization would add millions of low-income workers to the system, further straining it. . . .

The main reason immigration cannot save retirement programs is that it has a small effect on the aging of American society. . . .

Looking to the future, Census Bureau projections indicate that if net immigration averaged 100,000 to 200,000 annually, the working age share would be 58.7 percent in 2060, while with net immigration of roughly 900,000 to one million, it would be 59.5 percent. . . .

There is no evidence of a labor shortage, especially at the bottom end of the labor market where immigrants, especially illegals, are concentrated. If there was, wages, benefits, and employment should all be increasing fast, the opposite of what has been happening.

********

5. The Security and Prosperity Partnership: Its Immigration Implications

EXCERPT: As officially characterized, the so-called Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) purports to advance ''regional cooperation'' toward the three NAFTA partners' common interests. Primarily, this involves trade and commerce, including both goods and services. However, in addition to the free flow of goods, SPP involves the free flow of people within the three nations' external borders. SPP also incorporates security and antiterrorism cooperation and integration.

The Security and Prosperity Partnership involves many things, from energy to transportation to customs standards, but this paper focuses primarily on its implications for immigration. Based on the experience of NAFTA and its progeny, the prospects under SPP do not bode well for American self-determination, economic and social stability, or sovereignty.

********

6. Immigration is Hurting the U.S. Worker: Low Paid American workers have borne the heaviest impact of immigration

EXCERPT: The number of immigrants -- legal and illegal -- living in the U.S., is growing at an unprecedented rate. U.S. Census Bureau data indicate that 1.6 million legal and illegal immigrants settle in the country each year. In 2006, the immigrant, or foreign-born population, reached about 38 million in the United States. Roughly 12 million of these were illegal aliens. Legal and illegal immigrants now account for one out of every eight persons living in the United States. As recently as 1970 the proportion was one in twenty residents. The U.S. has never confronted an immigrant population that has grown this much, this fast.

Low-paid American workers have borne the heaviest impact of immigration. This is largely because of the educational profile of the bulk of today's immigrants. Nine percent of adult native-born Americans (ages 18 to 64) were high school dropouts in 2006, while 34 percent of recent adult immigrants had not completed high school. (The rate was 60 percent for illegal immigrants.)



Unfettered illegal immigration boosts inflation

I am not entirely sure of the logic below but there is no doubt that the large illegal workforce must distort some economic statistics

I usually try to be timely, but this week in this column I admit I'm way behind. I unearthed a report released more than two years ago, but which contains such informational dynamite, its contents are worth dissecting even two years hence. So here goes.

I've often wondered why inflation is so clearly rampaging well beyond levels reported by the federal government. Case in point: On a fairly regular basis I buy 10-pound bags of carrots at my local Harris Teeter grocery store. When I started buying them two summers ago, a 10-pound bag was retailing for $3.99. It is now selling for $5.99. I'm sure each and every one of you has a similar story. Or many, many, many such stories. How did we get to the point where $4 isn't shocking as the tab for a cup of coffee (or a coffee drink, as renamed by Starbucks). How is it that when regular gas drops from $3.50 per gallon to $2.85 (as it recently did at my local gas station in suburban Washington, D.C.) we feel as if we're getting a bargain?

I've racked my brain trying to reconcile Labor Department reports of inflation running in the 2-3 percent range, while watching as housing, food, clothing and transportation costs rise by double digits each quarter. Is the government hiding something? I'm no conspiracy theorist, so that explanation seems not to fit. Here's one explanation, however, that might. In January 2005, Bear Stearns issued a report on America's growing underground labor force. It said in relevant part:

"The growing extralegal system in the United States has distorted economic statistics and government budget projections. The stealth labor force has enhanced many of the economic releases that investors follow closely. Payroll numbers understate true job growth and inflation has been artificially dampened by this seemingly endless supply of low-wage workers...Real estate prices have been boosted by the foreign population infusion. The productivity miracle may be exaggerated because the government is incorporating the output of millions of illegal immigrants but not counting their full labor input."

In other words, illegal immigration and the underground, cash economy it creates has become so powerful a force, it artificially dampens inflation rates, boosts real estate inflation (putting home ownership beyond the ken of young Americans) and reduces the wages of the average American.

Wow, that's blockbuster news. This part of the report was barely publicized when it came out two years ago. Reporters noted its finding that there are something like 20 million illegal immigrants in the United States, compared with the popularly cited 10 million figure. A Google search on the Internet revealed references to the inflation finding in Barron's and the Wall Street Journal.

The inflation finding should have been trumpeted on the front pages of the nation's major newspapers, on cable networks and on news Web sites. Instead, it was fairly buried. Did major news outlets bury this angle fearing its contents were not politically correct? Perhaps. But the American public may be getting the message nonetheless.

The U.S. Senate recently killed President Bush's signature effort at immigration reform that would have, in essence, granted amnesty over time to those here illegally. Senators reacted to polls showing the legislation was wildly unpopular with the American public. Perhaps the public is beginning to wake up to the U.S. environmental destruction wrought by unfettered illegal immigration. The equation is simple. More people equals more development and consumption, more pollution and less open space.

Now we have another, this time financial, equation to contemplate. Unfettered illegal immigration boosts inflation while hiding the effects from the general public. Bear Stearns' experts could be wrong. But I doubt it. By "outing" this hidden impact of illegal immigration, let's hope we build the political will to end it, or at least slow it down.

Source





13 July, 2007

There is no "need" for immigrants

Theodore Dalrymple, who has lived among Muslims - in Afghanistan and Africa, I mean, not just in France and England - and who said after 9/11 something to the effect that he'd personally rather be in a souk in Tangiers than a strip mall in Jersey, has a very shrewd piece in The Los Angeles Times. I was struck especially by this bit:

The plain fact of the matter is that British society could get by perfectly well without the contribution even of moderate Muslims. The only thing we really want from Muslims is their oil money for bank deposits, to prop up London property prices and to sustain the luxury market; their cheap labor that we imported in the 1960s in a vain effort to bolster the dying textile industry, which could not find local labor, is now redundant.

In other words, the economic rationale for mass immigration turned out to be bogus: Muslims came in huge numbers to do "the jobs Britons won't do" and be textile workers in northern English towns. Thirty years later, there are no textile mills, but those northern English towns are Muslim.

The economic argument for mass immigration is always reductionist, simply because people do not think of themselves as solely (or even principally) economic entities. The government may see immigrants as textile workers or bus drivers or even neurosurgeons, but what matters is how those individuals see themselves - and as Europe has discovered a significant segment of that population has embraced a core identity unrelated to textile mills, NHS hospitals or any other economic enterprise.

Source



Virginia: Prince William County makes national news

By all accounts, it was the biggest political circus the county has seen in decades. On Tuesday, hundreds of immigration activists descended on the McCoart Building, along with dozens of reporters and satellite trucks from CNN, National Public Radio and other national news outlets. At issue was a proposed crackdown on illegal immigration, which, after almost five hours of public testimony, passed unanimously.

Hailed by supporters as a means to keep illegal immigrants out of the county and reviled by detractors as racist and xenophobic, the resolution underwent a serious change before it was adopted on Tuesday. The original version of the plan would have required all county agencies to verify that residents are in the county legally before they can use county services. It would also have required the police to verify the immigration status of everyone they stop and it would have given private citizens the right to sue the county to ensure that the rules were enforced.

However, the version that was passed was "watered way down," according to Woodbridge Supervisor Hilda Barg (D) of the Prince William Board of County Supervisors. Other supervisors took issue with that description, but the resolution that passed basically instructs the police department to verify the immigration status of people who are stopped if the officer has "probable cause" to believe that the person is in the country illegally. Police Chief Charlie T. Deane said the department will have to come up with a policy for determining probable cause but that it is "a fairly high legal standard."

In addition, officers at the jail will now verify the immigration status of all inmates, although jail Superintendent Skip Land warned that it is the federal immigration officials, not the jail officers, who will determine whether an illegal immigrant is deported. At the most, he said, immigration officials will accept 40 illegal immigrants per month into the federal system and not all of those will be deported.

Deane had been opposed to the county's crackdown, which he warned would have "significant unintended consequences" and would hurt the department's relationship with the Hispanic community. However, after the resolution was adopted, Deane said he would ensure that his officers followed the board's instructions. Privately, officers agreed that despite the chief's personal misgivings, he would be meticulous in enforcing the policy. While there are no statistics on the number of illegal immigrants who commit crimes in Prince William, senior police officers said after the meeting that illegal immigrant crime does not seem to be a big problem. Illegal immigrants are more often the victims of crime than the culprits, they said.

As for the community services portion of the resolution, a conclusion is still up in the air. The version that was adopted simply states that a work session will be held later in the year to determine which services should be denied to illegal immigrants. According to County Executive Craig Gerhart, some services are already available only to those with proof of legality, such as Medicaid, food stamps and rental assistance. Others, like adult day care, immunizations and emergency care are required by federal law to be available to everyone. However, he said, libraries and parks could be restricted, as could mental health services, homeless shelters and aid to at-risk youth. But he warned that restricting those services will likely cause major problems. For one thing, he said, children don't generally have IDs and even driver's licenses aren't a surefire way to prove citizenship.

Also, he said, identification checks will likely be cumbersome. He pointed out that the supervisors recently opted to keep vehicle decals because they are used as proof of residency that allow county residents to use the landfill. The supervisors had felt that if landfill employees had to check the identification of every patron to ensure that they live in the county, a bottleneck would ensue and residents would become angry and frustrated by the delays. That same situation will likely develop at pools, parks and libraries if employees insist on checking the status of everyone who walks through the door, he said.

Then there are programs like the homeless shelter and mental health services. Gerhart said the homeless shelter could be restricted to legal citizens but he said residents don't want homeless people wandering the street, no matter what their legal status. And mental health services help to keep the community safe, he said, citing the example of the Virginia Tech killer. So there are a lot of issues to work out before the board holds its work session in the fall, he said.

In the meantime, residents met the resolution with a mixture of outrage and applause. Hank Azais of Bristow said many illegal immigrants do pay taxes. They also work hard and all members of the community reap the benefits of their labor. "They need our support as part of our community. They have built our homes, they have built our roads," said Azais, a 40-year resident of the county whose father came from Mexico. Others, however, said the resolution, which was sponsored by Gainesville Supervisor John Stirrup (R), was a welcome change. "If our government's not going to do anything, no one's going to do anything," said Chris King of Woodbridge. "I'm tired of pressing 1 for English."

Source





12 July, 2007

Feds still enforcing the law

The stepped-up raids of recent months were suspected of being a sop to help get the amnesty bill through. But they seem to be continuing. We will see. Interesting that the Feds now seem to be able to do their raids without producing much backlash

Agents with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement returned to at least one Swift & Co. meatpacking plant with arrest warrants for people suspected of identity theft in an operation that garnered union support. Officials with the United Food and Commercial Workers Union said agents did not appear to use the "same level of intimidation and overkill" as raids in December that resulted in more than 1,200 immigrant workers being arrested at plants in six cities. "To the extent this is the case, the UFCW supports law enforcement efforts that abide by the law and respect the rights of workers," the Washington-based union said in a statement Tuesday.

ICE regional spokesman Carl Rusnok confirmed one "worksite enforcement operation" in Greeley, but would not say how many people were arrested. Dave Minshall, spokesman for Local No. 7, said agents had at least 40 arrest warrants for suspects in Greeley; Cactus, Texas; Marshalltown, Iowa; and Worthington, Minnesota. Five people were taken into custody, though it was unclear where the arrests were made. Four people were questioned at the Greeley plant, Minshall said. Rusnok said details will be released in a news conference Wednesday.

In the December raids, no charges were filed against Swift, a Greeley, Colorado, firm which bills itself as the world's second-largest beef and pork processor.

Source



Tennessee sheriff firm but fair



He waves at everyone. The man on the motorcycle gets a wave. The young auditor gets chitchat. The lady walking into the County Commission room receives a hug. You get the feeling that Maury County Sheriff Enoch George knows every resident in Columbia, where on the Fourth of July folks place American flags on every downtown corner. Thanks to recent raids, however, George and his friends have lately been waving goodbye to dozens of illegal immigrants, some who live — or lived — across the street from George's office.

In Sheriff George's town, there is no room for lawbreakers, he says. The tough stance has caused his popularity to soar among those who are fed up with illegal immigration and glad to see law enforcement finally doing something about it.

But not everyone in Maury County loves George. Latino residents and their supporters say the sheriff is quietly taking it upon himself and his agency to do the job of federal authorities. In the process, critics say, George is focusing undue police attention on the county's hard-working Latino community and terrorizing people through roundups.

George disagrees. "My opinion of a roundup is a list of names that has been given to the Sheriff's Department," he said. "Whenever I do a roundup, I've rounded up individuals that are by name. In this case, these people are just coming out of the woodwork." George has been in office for the past 13 years, and loves to talk about the service he's provided to the county where he was born and raised. There have been nights, he says, when he maybe should have been home on his farm with Phyllis, his wife of 41 years. "She understands that this job is on a high-priority list in my life," he said.

At 59, he has an almost unnaturally full head of snow-white hair. His posture is so imposing that it's a wonder he didn't go through the police academy until he was 40 years old, after the chemical company where he worked closed down. He served as a sheriff's deputy, a Columbia police officer and a county commissioner before winning his post in 1994. He has sued the County Commission — and won — after arguing that he didn't have enough officers.

He wears cowboy boots everywhere, including with the suit he's wearing to a Safety Committee meeting on a recent afternoon. At the meeting, he has a special announcement: 13 illegal immigrants have been arrested after his men went out with immigration officials looking for a Juan Villa, who is wanted in the rape of a 15-year-old girl. Villa has not been found yet, George says, but the commissioners are still pleased. One asks for an "illegal" section on George's monthly reports. Another commissioner, Bob Farmer, says after the meeting that if it weren't for people like George, "we won't have a White House, we'll have a Brown House." "The illegal people are walking over everyone," Commissioner Gerald Adkison says. "They shouldn't be here."

Meanwhile, five more people are being taken from their homes at American Mobile Village, a mobile home park just off the main drag. The arrests are the second wave of the day after sheriff's deputies and Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials came by that morning searching for Villa. After not finding him during their initial search, neighbors say, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials began asking the residency status of other inhabitants of the trailer. When they admitted to being in the country illegally, the officials arrested six people, all relatives of Villa. "We went to another house where Immigration rang the doorbell, but we didn't answer," said Lino Castillo, 15, who said he waited with others before moving from trailer to trailer to avoid being detained. Some of his cousins were arrested, however, Castillo said. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials then went to other trailers, picking up seven more people. George says the door-to-door searches came after residents pointed officers to various trailers, suggesting Villa might have been staying there.

Barbara Haskins and her neighbors at American Mobile Village see a different story. On a Tuesday in May, her fiance, Luis Enrique Sanchez Castro, was arrested on his way to pick up co-workers when an investigation of a boy who took a gun to school resulted in the capture of 24 illegal immigrants. Another sweep in June resulted in 22 detentions after federal agents went looking for a man convicted of selling cocaine in Columbia. Now, after watching the morning's events, Haskins was fed up. "They're not helping people," Haskins said. "They're putting them through hell."

State Rep. Eddie Bass, D-Prospect, used to work closely with George when Bass was Giles County sheriff. He says they haven't kept up much, but he welcomes his friend's work. "I don't think Enoch is saying, 'Let's go arrest illegals,' " Bass said. "But if he is, so be it. They're illegal." Outside the Safety Committee meeting, many residents and local officials say the same: They don't have any problem with immigrants, as long as they come to the country legally. "I don't think people are against aliens who are legal," County Mayor Jim Bailey said. "The very idea of being illegal in anything is what turns off people."

Area police chiefs say they haven't been asked to help the Sheriff's Department on such assignments, mainly because they, like the sheriff's deputies, don't have the power to arrest people merely for being in the country illegally. Columbia Police Chief Barry Crotzer says he would help the Sheriff's Department, but concedes that the raids may be doing more harm than good among local Latinos. "We don't want them to think we're waiting in the bushes," he said.

For his part, George says he's looking to apply for a federal program that allows local officers to check the immigration status of anyone booked into local jails and turn illegal immigrants over to federal authorities. And he denies claims that he's racist, dismissing a recent meeting of Hispanic residents in which many said they felt afraid or targeted. He just does his job, he says, and lets his track record speak for itself. "I'm just a person who cares about people. I love people," he said. "I can fool people for a few minutes, a few days, maybe even a few months, but you can't fool them for years."

Source





11 July, 2007

Turning a blind eye to illegals kills an innocent kid

Prosecutors allege that Mwenda Murithi was a leader in the Imperial Gangsters and on the evening of June 25 he gave the order to shoot at a rival gang, killing 13-year-old Schanna Gayden, an innocent bystander. Murithi, 26, was charged with first-degree murder along with the alleged gunman, Tony Serrano, 19. The question at trial will be whether there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Murithi is guilty of that charge.

The question I have, though, is why Murithi was in the country at all that night. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement records show he emigrated from Kenya on a student visa at the end of 1999 to study civil engineering at the University of Wisconsin at Platteville. That visa was valid as long as he continued his studies. When he dropped out of U.W.-Platteville before the 2002-03 school year began, he was no longer legally in the United States. ICE, which now operates under the umbrella of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, formally terminated Murithi's visa Feb. 12, 2003, said Carl Rusnok, central-region spokesman for the immigration agency.

He became not just an uninvited guest in this country but a most unwelcome one: Chicago police records show Murithi was arrested 27 times from June 2003 until his arrest in connection with Schanna's slaying on a Northwest Side school playground. The charges weren't horrible -- mostly possession of cocaine, possession of marijuana, obstruction of traffic, drinking alcohol on a public way and other offenses commonly associated with the career of drug-dealing gang-bangers. Police said four of the charges were felonies; the Cook County state's attorney's office said Murithi had two misdemeanor convictions, one of which resulted in 30 days in jail this spring. But still. It's disquieting that anyone with that kind of track record for trouble spent so little time behind bars. And it's outrageous that Murithi was still in the United States June 25, more than four years after he became an illegal immigrant and began racking up arrests.

There's a good debate about whether honest, hardworking immigrants should be allowed to stay if their only crime is related to their immigration status. But there's no debate, at least in my mind, when it comes to criminal illegal immigrants. Murithi should have gone straight from jail this spring into federal detention and then back to Kenya. "If he was charged and did time, how come ICE wasn't notified so they could detain him?" asked Brian Perryman, former head of the Chicago office of what is now ICE. "Why wasn't he taken into custody after he served his sentence? And if ICE wasn't notified, why not? That's a big mistake."

Not us! said the Chicago Police Department. "We don't ever ask about immigration status," said spokeswoman Monique Bond. "We leave that up to the courts."

Not us! said the Cook County state's attorney's office. "We don't check," said spokesman John Gorman. "That's for [ICE] to do. We're not involved."

Not us! said ICE. "Law enforcement agencies can contact our Law Enforcement Support Center for timely and accurate information" 24 hours a day, Rusnok said. If "the person who is being inquired about is subject to removal, [ICE] can place a detainer with the Police Department ordering the department to hold the person ... to allow ICE officials to take the person into custody and begin removal proceedings."

ICE has employees who screen cases for immigration violations at the Criminal Courts Building, but they are on duty only during business hours, Rusnok said. He said security regulations prevented him from saying how many agency employees there are to check the immigration status of all those charged or convicted of serious crimes in Cook County. Not enough, though, clearly. Schanna Gayden paid for this joint abdication of responsibility with her life. Next time the anti-violence protesters take to the streets, here's an extra chant for them to direct to the mayor, the state's attorney and immigration officials: "Throw the bums out!"

Source



France: More initiatives from Sarko

President Nicolas Sarkozy charged France's new immigration ministry with working toward an EU pact that would include refusing to legalize clandestine immigrants en masse, according to a mission statement released Monday. Sarkozy laid out his goals on immigration in what amounts to a job description for Brice Hortefeux, in charge of the Ministry of Immigration, Integration, National Identity and Co-Development, created after Sarkozy took office May 16.

Among the new minister's objectives was ensuring that immigration for economic reasons accounts for 50 percent of immigrants entering France - and cutting down on the practice of allowing family members to join relatives installed legally in France. A bill to be debated in parliament in September toughens criteria for so-called "family regrouping," notably with tests before arrival of the French language and values. Of 185,000 residence permits delivered in 2005, only 7 percent concerned economic immigration, that is those who come here for work reasons, while half were here as part of the family regrouping scheme.

Sarkozy asked that France look to Canada and Britain where criteria, including geographic, are used. France should accept foreigners "to whom it can give work, who need to train in France or who answer its economic needs," Sarkozy said in his mission letter to Hortefeux.

The president also envisioned tighter cooperation with the European Union over immigration, including a single procedure for political asylum, creating a single consular network for delivering visas and generalization of biometric visas, as well as a "veritable European frontier police," said the orders to Hortefeux. A European immigration pact would include commitments to ban massive legalization of illegal aliens or on expelling clandestine immigrants.

The new ministry has been criticized by human rights groups, mainly because it combines immigration and the notion of national identity. Sarkozy made a campaign promise to reduce illegal immigration, and said he wanted to tailor the profile of new arrivals. In a similar mission letter to the head of the High Commission for Active Solidarity, another new post, Sarkozy said poverty must be reduced "by at least a third" in five years, the end of his mandate. Martin Hirsch, head of the commission, formerly ran Emmaus, the international organization to help the poor.

Source



10 July, 2007

Immigration is used to underwrite low standards in Britain

When the president talks about needing immigrants to do "the jobs Americans won't do," most of us assume he means seasonal fruit pickers and the maid who turns down your hotel bed and leaves the little chocolate on it. But in the United Kingdom the jobs Britons won't do has somehow come to encompass the medical profession.

Aneurin Bevan, the socialist who created the National Health Service after World War II, was once asked to explain how he'd talked the country's doctors into agreeing to become state employees: "I stuffed their mouths with gold," he crowed. Sixty years later, no amount of gold can persuade Britons to spend their working lives in the country's dirty, decrepit hospitals (they spend enough of their nonworking lives there, waiting to be seen, waiting for beds, waiting for operations). According to a report in the British Medical Journal, white males comprise 43.5 percent of the population but now account for less than a quarter of students at UK medical schools. In other words, being a doctor is no longer an attractive middle-class career proposition. That's quite a monument to six decades of Michael Moore-style socialist health care.

So today the NHS is hungry for medical personnel from almost anywhere on the planet, so hungry that the government set up special fast-track immigration programs: Mohammed Asha, Mohammed Haneef and their comrades didn't even require a work permit to come and practice as doctors in state hospitals. You don't have to be the smartest jihadist in the cave to see that as an opportunity, any more than it required no great expertise for the 9/11 killers to figure that the quickest place to get the picture IDs with which they boarded the planes was through Virginia's "undocumented worker" network. Everyone else from the Venezuelan peasantry to the Russia mafia knows the vulnerabilities of Western immigration systems, so why not the jihadists?

Maybe their mistake was trying to blow up the airport instead of wreaking subtler havoc on the infidels. Did you see this week's scare-of-the-week from the Chinese health system? "About 420 bottles of fake blood protein, albumin, were found at hospitals in Hubei province but none had been used to treat patients, said Liu Jinai, an official with the inspection division of the provincial food and drug administration."

Well, this being China, where public lies about public health are routine, we just have to take Liu Jinai's word that "none had been used to treat patients." But imagine what Doctor Jihad could get up to if he stopped trying to use the syringe as a detonator and just resumed using it as a syringe?

But beyond that the Glasgow Jeep story symbolizes a more basic reality. The NHS is the biggest employer in Europe, and it's utterly dependent on imported staff such as Dr. Asha and Dr. Abdulla. In the West, we look on mass immigration as a testament to our generosity, to our multicultural bona fides. But it's not: A dependence on mass immigration is always a structural weakness and should be understood as such. In the socialized health systems of the Continent, aging, shrinking populations of native Europeans will spend their final years being cared for by young Muslim doctors and nurses. Indeed, in the NHS, geriatric medicine is a field overwhelmingly dependent on immigrant staff.

And what of the other end of the medical business? Take Japan, a country with the same collapsed birth rates as Europe but with virtually no immigration. In my book, I note an interesting trend in Japanese health care: The shortage of newborn children has led to a shortage of obstetricians. For in a country with deathbed demographics, why would any talented ambitious med-school student want to go into a field in such precipitous decline? In Japan, birthing is a dying business.

Back at the Royal Alexandra Hospital, three doctors were under arrest, and the bomb squad performed a controlled explosion on a vehicle in the parking lot. Pulled from the flaming Cherokee, Dr. Kafeel Ahmed is now being treated for 90 percent burns in his own hospital by the very colleagues he sought to kill. But at one level he and Dr. Asha and Dr. Abdulla don't need to blow up anything at all. The fact that the National Health Service - the "envy of the world" in every British politician's absurdly parochial clich‚ - has to hire Wahhabist doctors with no background checks tells you everything about where the country's heading.

More here



Tulsa is on the leading edge

Tulsa is on the leading edge of local and state efforts to crack down on illegal immigration following passage by the Oklahoma Legislature of what is arguably the toughest anti-illegal immigration measure in the nation. The Tulsa City Council also embraced the get-tough approach by adopting a resolution calling on police officers to check the immigration status of "all suspected illegal aliens." Those actions have sparked a fierce political battle, spread fear among Hispanics - both legal residents and those in the country illegally - and triggered an angry public face-off between demonstrators on either side of the great divide.

Among the longtime residents shaken by the changes engulfing his city is Gary Rutledge, an MSNBC.com reader who said the demographic shift took his family and friends by surprise. "It's happened so quickly and our neighborhoods have changed so rapidly," said Rutledge, a political science professor at nearby Rogers State University. In East Tulsa, just across the main thoroughfare from his comfortable brick home, the broad avenues are now peppered with signs in Spanish and malls catering to Latino shoppers - offering everything from soccer wear and pi¤atas to check cashing services and Latin pop music. "That whole part of the city has become a miniature Juarez or Tijuana or whatever you want to call it," said Rutledge.

Like many longtime residents, Rutledge is quick to say that he is not opposed to immigration by legal means. But he says he objects to being unwillingly taken over by another culture as the result of unchecked illegal immigration. "I'm very concerned that this last wave (of immigrants) has no interest in becoming Americanized," he said.

It was Rutledge's story of a car crash involving an apparent illegal immigrant that led MSNBC.com to Tulsa. But when we arrived we encountered a bigger pileup: the chaotic fallout of a federal framework that neither prevents illegal immigrants from entering the U.S. to work nor provides a way for them to gain legal status. That Catch -22 has forced local jurisdictions like Tulsa to seek their own solutions to the explosive and complex issue. "Increasingly, because there's no consistent federal law, states and cities are cobbling together immigration laws on their own," says Sheryl Lovelady, assistant to Tulsa Mayor Kathy Taylor. In Tulsa, Lovelady said, such laws "have caused a lot of confusion, inconsistency and fear, mainly in the Hispanic community."

For Rutledge, a car accident personalized the issue. He and his wife were waiting in their pickup at a traffic light one evening when they were hit from behind by a vehicle traveling about 30 miles an hour. They were not badly hurt, only stunned. More shocking, though, was what they heard from the police officer who responded to the accident: The other driver, a young Hispanic man, did not speak English, did not have a driver's license or insurance. The officer suspected the man was an illegal immigrant, Rutledge said, but he did not check his immigration status because such inquiries weren't allowed in misdemeanor cases. Before taking the other driver to jail, Rutledge said, the officer told him he should just go home and forget about it. "He said, `We do a lot of this kind of thing and we can tell you that there's not much to be done about it,'" Rutledge recalled.

It's not clear what happened to the suspect after that. Tulsa police were not able to locate an accident report on the incident. But officers said that the maximum penalty the man could have faced for driving without a license, a misdemeanor, would be 30 days in jail. Driving without insurance is only a ticketable offense.

Rutledge said he was floored by the experience. Not only would his own insurance company have to absorb the cost for repairing his truck, but the other driver was soon going to be back on the streets. "It was . a feeling of helplessness," he said. "There's no recourse, there's nothing to do." Rutledge began comparing notes with friends and family and found that many had a similar story with a similar outcome. That got him thinking about the bigger picture.

"I think that when someone comes in this country illegally, it starts a tradition or culture," he said. "You come in illegally; everything you do from that point on is illegal. And so it's almost impossible to get a driver's license or insurance so you just start breaking one law after another. I think it's seductive. I think after a while ... you don't pay too much attention to rule of law that this country was established on."

More here



9 July, 2007

Another Maritime Security Breach In Florida

On U.S. Independence day, when homeland security was supposedly heightened following the London and Glasgow terrorist attacks, a group of migrants easily made it to south Florida undetected by the federal agency in charge of keeping America’s coasts safe. The 49 Cubans slipped by the U.S. Coast Guard in the night and were discovered strolling down a Miami Beach street before U.S. Customs and Border Protection took them into custody around three in the morning. This unsettling breach of national security could have easily been committed by terrorists planning a deadly attack.

A Customs and Border Protection spokesman had an interesting explanation for how the migrants made it to U.S. soil on the Fourth of July, saying “we don't have a vessel, so we're assuming it's a smuggling event." This statement probably gives citizens all the more reason to feel insecure about the country’s crucial yet largely neglected maritime security.

The Department of Homeland Security suffered a similarly embarrassing incident a few months ago when a large group of migrants slipped into the country during a huge drill involving hundreds of federal agents supposedly sharpening their border security skills off of the Florida coast. With more than 300 government employees from 50 agencies covering the waters off of Miami, two boatloads of Cuban migrants just cruised by and made it to a South Florida beach. A Customs and Border Protection agent actually offered Judicial Watch an explanation; no boat was found and there is a strong possibility that the illegal aliens were dropped by vehicle and told to make it appear as if they had landed by boat. Officials later confirmed, however, that those migrants were in fact from Cuba and, unless they came by aircraft, they had to use a boat since there is no road that connects the communist island to the United States.

These violations, during times of supposedly heightened homeland security, indicate that the government has work to in order to adequately protect the nation’s coasts. After a 2004 Congressional investigation revealed that maritime and port security was not efficient, the White House announced its new and improved multi agency National Strategy for Maritime Security yet the problems persist.

Source



Australia upgrades immigration information system

The government has accelerated plans to let spies share information with immigration officials, a week after a foreign doctor was arrested in connection with the failed British terror attacks, the prime minister said Sunday. Prime Minister John Howard said that new software linking the computer systems of the Australian Security and Intelligence Organization and the Immigration Department will allow deeper background checks on anyone applying to enter Australia. Howard called it a "major upgrade of Australia's control system." "These new resources ... give us extraordinary additional capacity to drill down into the backgrounds of people who seek to come to Australia," he told reporters.

ASIO is Australia's overseas spying agency and the new system could sharpen links between international security agencies, including those in the United States and Europe, with the country's immigration watchdog. The plans, which have been on the table since last year, are being brought forward after a possible Australian link was revealed in the British plot _ in which two unexploded car bombs were found in central London on June 29 and two men drove a burning, gas cylinder-laden vehicle into an airport in Glasgow, Scotland a day later.

Muhammad Haneef, a 27-year-old Indian doctor who migrated to Australia from Britain last year, was arrested in the eastern city of Brisbane last Monday as he tried to board a flight with a one-way ticket. Australian authorities acted on intelligence from British investigators into the failed attacks, and Haneef is believed to have known some of the suspects being held in Britain. He has not been charged.

Howard declined to give examples of how the new system would work, saying doing so could give clues to suspects about ways to could get around it. But he said the system would "track patterns of travel and other behavior which suggest a predisposition on the part of somebody towards malign behavior," he said. In addition to a person's travel history, the system would cross-check financial data with particular organizations, Howard said _ suggesting bank payments to banned groups would appear in searches. Australia already has watch lists that ban people with links to terrorist organizations or proscribed terrorist suspects, but the new system goes further, Howard said.

Source





8 July, 2007

Immigration Malpractice

The prickliness and glacial ineptitude of the immigration system is old news to millions of would-be Americans. Immigrants who play by the rules know that the rules are stringent, arbitrary, expensive and very time-consuming. But even the most seasoned citizens-in-waiting were stunned by the nasty bait-and-switch the federal bureaucracy pulled on them this month. After encouraging thousands of highly skilled workers to apply for green cards, the government snatched the opportunity away.

The tease came in a bulletin issued by the State Department in June announcing that green cards for a wide range of skilled workers would be available to those who filed by July 2. That prompted untold numbers of doctors, medical technicians and other professionals, many of whom have lived here with their families for years, to assemble little mountains of paper. They got certified records and sponsorship documents, paid for medical exams and lawyers and sent their applications in. Many canceled vacations to be in the United States when their applications arrived, as the law requires.

Then they learned that the hope was effectively a hoax. The State Department had issued the bulletin to prod Citizenship and Immigration Services, the bureaucracy that handles immigration applications, to get cracking on processing them. The agency is notorious for fainting over paperwork - 182,694 green cards have been squandered since 2000 because it did not process them in time. That bureaucratic travesty is a tragedy, since the annual supply of green cards is capped by law, and the demand chronically outstrips supply. The State Department said it put out the bulletin to ensure that every available green card would be used this time.

After working through the weekend, the citizenship agency processed tens of thousands of applications. On Monday, the State Department announced that all 140,000 employment-based green cards had been used and no applications would be accepted. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the definition of a hangdog bureaucracy, says the law forbids it to accept the applications. The American Immigration Lawyers Association says this interpretation is rubbish. It is preparing a class-action lawsuit to compel the bureaucracy to accept the application wave that it provoked.

The good news is that immigrants' hope is pretty much unquenchable. Think of the hundreds of people standing in the rain in ponchos at Walt Disney World on Independence Day, joining the flood of new citizens now cresting across the country. They celebrated on July Fourth, but for many of them the magic date is July 30, when a new fee schedule for immigrants takes effect, drastically jacking up the cost of the American dream.

The collapse of immigration reform in the Senate showed the world what America thinks of illegal immigrants - it wants them all to go away. But the federal government, through bureaucratic malpractice, is sending the same message to millions of legal immigrants, too.

Source



Blacks Join the Immigration Reform Fray

I'd like to thank President George W. Bush and Senator Edward M. Kennedy. And while I'm at it, I'll thank Senators Arlen Specter, Lindsey Graham, John Kyl and the rest of the dunces who drafted or supported S. 1639. Because of their insistence, in the face of all logic, that the proposed amnesty immigration acceleration legislation was good for America blacks-long-time fence-sitters regarding illegal immigration-have joined the fray. We welcome them as allies to our cause.

Black conservative talk show hosts have hammered away at illegal immigration for sometime with modest success. They are aware of the danger posed to blacks by the illegal alien invasion. Several years ago, I had lunch with Tony Brown, the host of Tony Brown's Journal. Brown told me that unless something was done to end illegal immigration, black Americans would be "finished."

Is Brown prophetic? Since my meeting with him, Hispanics-because of the unchecked alien population and their inevitable anchor babies-have passed blacks as the nation's largest minority. And although blacks aren't finished, the government trend toward supporting all Latino causes is troubling.

But it isn't just black conservatives who see the light. When he was a guest on the Lou Dobbs Tonight program Washington, D.C. radio personality Joe Madison, a strong anti-illegal alien voice, said that when he guest hosted Al Sharpton's broadcast, every caller (who one assumes are largely liberal) that phoned in was irate about S. 1639. Madison, by the way, said that he is routinely subjected to harsh criticism from the Congressional Black Caucus for appearing on the "racist" Dobbs show.

Some black voices that traditionally have supported-at least in broad terms-illegal immigration have changed their tune. Listen here to this NPR interview with Earl Ofari Hutchinson who has previously indicated sympathy toward aliens. Guest host Michel Martin, a black, moderated. Hutchinson, who lives in Los Angeles, said that fellow black Angelenos view illegal immigration with "fear," "anxiety," and "fury." And Hutchinson posed interesting questions that indicate that his eyes are opening.

* What, Hutchinson asked, if African Americans had entered the U.S. illegally and took to the street to demand their "rights"? He speculated that the "full force" of the authorities would come down on them.

* Why, Hutchinson wondered, were the citywide student marches that supported illegal immigration handled with "kid gloves"? Where were city officials, Los Angeles Unified School District Administrators or the Los Angeles Police Department? Had the marchers been black, Hutchinson said, the riot squads may have been summoned.

* Where, Hutchinson wanted to know, is the outreach to blacks from Latino leaders? According to Hutchinson, if it isn’t forthcoming soon the African American middle class will feel the full impact of the shifting demographic as Hispanics are voted into political office while blacks are marginalized.

* Black youths find it difficult to get low-end jobs because of the abundance of cheap illegal alien labor. This fact, according to Hutchinson, is "undeniable."

Martin chimed in too. She said, more than once, that it is "intuitively obvious" that more illegal aliens means more cheap labor. And that makes it tough for black youths to get any kind of job.

Blacks are no longer willing to be duped. Chicago-based VDARE.COM reader and thirty-year anti-illegal alien activist " Braveheart" forwarded me an e-mail she received from a friend she described as "a former card-carrying liberal" but now "an ardent patriot with regard to illegal immigration." "Braveheart's" friend was furious about uninformed remarks sympathetic to illegal aliens made by radio personality Tavis Smiley. Here, in part, is what she wrote to Smiley:

"You have no idea what it's like when black men in my family go for jobs. They are always asked if they are bilingual. A student of mine quit a construction job when he found out that the foreman paid his Hispanic friend $5 more an hour than he paid my student.. In the weeks following Hurricane Katrina, NPR reported that illegal aliens were paid in cash up to $1500/day to haul garbage. My own cousin, a native of New Orleans, was prevented from even entering the city. These illegal aliens broke the law and entered the country, settling in Houston, TX. They drove to New Orleans looking for work. When asked when they would leave, they replied through an interpreter, `Never!'

"My cousin and thousands of other black men were refused entry in Katrina's early days because they had `no place to live.' My cousin offered to sleep in his truck, just like the illegal aliens did, but he was turned down. Go to New Orleans, as I did recently. Hit me back and tell me when you can count the number of black men working by using two hands. I saw exactly one and I photographed city workers for hours. I am 60 years old and never saw a black man begging for food on the streets of New Orleans. This time I did."

Shortly after I read this mail, Brenda Walker's blog item appeared chronicling the sad truth about New Orleans today-a city increasingly in the grasp of Mexico.

Braveheart and her friend are not the only grassroots blacks that are increasingly vocal. Read this press release from the National Leadership Network of Conservative African-Americans that "applauds" the defeat of S. 1639.

Americans of all creeds and religions can no longer deny the overwhelming evidence that illegal immigration threatens our country's future. Some, like the blacks, have been slower to come around than others. But all are welcome. As Terry Anderson, the first black radio host to expose illegal immigration's evils, likes to say: "If you ain't mad, you ain't paying attention." The good news is that America is listening to us now.

Source





7 July, 2007

The revolt on illegal immigration

By Victor Davis Hanson

After the utter collapse in the Senate last week of a comprehensive immigration bill, Washington insiders are blaming everyone and everything. Supposedly, talk-radio hysteria killed the bill. Or was it the purported racism of yokels? Or did most of us fail to appreciate the hidden benefits of open borders so clear only to those in Washington?

In reality, the bill failed because millions of Americans opposed it, believing, among other things, that it provided virtual amnesty to illegal aliens. Through the "Z visa," the bill offered illegal aliens legal worker status -- along with a ticket to eventual citizenship -- after only a precursory background check.

More important, people were skeptical, to say the least, of hundreds of pages of more regulations when the last "comprehensive" immigration legislation, in 1986, either made things worse or was largely unenforced. That's why various polls reveal that most Americans were against the new bill, with less than 25 percent in favor of the Senate version, according to a Rasmussen Reports poll in June.

What causes this grass-roots furor, and where will it lead? The public thinks anti-terrorism efforts are futile when hundreds of miles on our southern border are, for mysterious reasons, left wide open. Then there is the American sense of fair play: Thousands of would-be legal immigrants wait in line from all over the world to come to this country. So why the special considerations that seem designed to address the concerns of just one group -- especially when Mexico already supplies the largest number by far of our legal immigrants?

Americans were brought up on lectures about the sanctity of the law. We were supposed to revere the Social Security system. Yet when the government discusses millions of phony Social Security numbers used by illegal aliens, it is usually in the cynical sense of whether that con enriches or bankrupts the system -- not whether such rampant fraud is legally and morally wrong. Most citizens fret if they leave the house without their driver's license. They get nervous when their car registration or proof of insurance is lost -- and so grow irate that millions of others on the road don't or can't share their concern.

Another public irritant was that the present state-sponsored bilingual documents and ballots along with government interpreters were all never legislated. According to a Susquehanna Polling & Research poll, in February, nearly 70 percent of Americans supported an ordinance in a Pennsylvania town that included making English the sole official language.

Illegal immigration and the efforts to accommodate it have come about from either bureaucratic prerogative -- under pressure from employers and lobbyists -- or court decisions. In contrast, polls, referendums and legislative action all reflect a public desire to reduce illegal immigration and close the borders now. In fact, in a June Rasmussen poll, 70 percent of the public supported an immigration bill that does that -- and only that.

If the American public wants the border closed first, and discussion of everything else later, is that really such a bad thing? Were the government to enforce laws already passed -- fine employers for hiring illegal aliens, actually build the approved fences, beef up the border patrol, issue verifiable identification -- we would then soon deal with a static population of illegal aliens. And that pool would shrink, not annually grow.

Some of the 12 million here illegally would willingly return home. Some with criminal records could be deported. Some would marry U.S. citizens. Some could be given work visas. Some could apply for earned citizenship. The point is that our formidable powers of assimilation would finally catch up and have time to work on a population that would be at last fixed. As aliens were more readily integrated with the general citizen population, Spanish would evolve into a helpful second, not a single alternate, language. Wages would rise for workers already here -- many of them soon to be Mexican-American citizens -- without competition from a perpetual influx of illegal aliens who work more cheaply.

Mexico would be forced to deal with rather than export its own problems. Billions in earnings would stay in the United States to help our own entry-level and legal immigrants from Mexico, not be sent back as remittances to relatives. In short, a savvy public is neither racist nor hysterical in wanting the border closed now. It's the only comprehensive solution to the present mess of illegal immigration.

Source



Crackdown in Virginia

Prince William County is moving to enact what legal specialists say are some of the toughest measures in the nation targeting illegal immigrants, including a provision that would direct police to check the residency status of anyone detained for breaking the law -- whether shoplifting, speeding or riding a bicycle without a helmet.

The measures would also compel county schools and agencies -- including libraries, medical clinics, swimming pools and summer camps -- to verify the immigration status of anyone who wants to use services in Virginia's second-largest county. Courts have upheld the right of undocumented immigrants to a public education, raising the possibility of a legal challenge.

Although similar efforts to create inhospitable conditions for illegal immigrants have been attempted recently in Hazleton, Pa., Farmers Branch, Tex., and Valley Park, Mo., the Prince William resolution appears to be unique, specialists say. And with federal immigration reform stalled in Congress, officials across the country are increasingly likely to experiment with restrictions that test legal boundaries and push for a greater role for local police in immigration enforcement.

Other Virginia towns such as Manassas, Herndon and Culpeper have considered or adopted laws aimed at illegal immigrants, but none have been as extensive as the Prince William proposals. The county Board of Supervisors blames illegal immigrants for crime, spiraling school costs, overcrowded housing and cultural behaviors that they say undermine their constituents' quality of life. "Citizens will no longer accept that our hands are tied and that responsibility lies with the federal government," said Supervisor John T. Stirrup Jr. (R-Gainesville), who proposed the resolution last month. "They want action."

Drawn by relatively affordable housing and abundant construction jobs, thousands of undocumented migrants from Mexico and Central America have moved to Prince William in the past decade. Stirrup's resolution says that their presence is "causing economic hardship and lawlessness" and that county agencies might be fueling the problem "by failing to verify immigration status as a condition of providing public services."

The resolution is scheduled for a vote Tuesday, and most of the eight supervisors -- who are up for election this fall -- said they plan to support it, although changes could be made. The resolution does not address how county authorities would verify residency status, but supervisors said they wouldn't want residents to carry passports in Prince William; a valid driver's license or state-issued identification would suffice. If a police officer determined that a person was in the country illegally, the officer would contact federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials.

The resolution also would remove any restrictions on county employees to send, receive or maintain information on a person's residency status in determining eligibility for county services. "We don't get into [immigration status] for a library card. All we require is proof of address," said a county librarian who spoke on the condition of anonymity because she isn't authorized to speak to reporters. Checking a user's immigration status would be possible, she said, "but it would seem to be going a little too far into privacy."

Stirrup said the resolution's goal is to deny services to illegal immigrants -- including most forms of medical care and public education. "If they're here illegally, we have no responsibility to educate them," he said. In the case of emergency medical care, he said patients would be treated but promptly reported to the federal immigration agency.

More here





6 July, 2007

Legal immigrants race to apply for citizenship

The number of legal immigrants seeking to become U.S. citizens is surging, officials say, prompted by imminent increases in fees to process naturalization applications, citizenship drives across the country and new feelings of insecurity among immigrants.

The citizenship campaigns have tapped into the uneasiness that legal immigrants, especially Hispanics, say is a result of months of debate over an immigration bill that failed last week in the Senate.

Though illegal immigrants were the center of attention in the debate, it prompted many legal immigrants who have put down roots here to seek the security of citizenship, as well as its voting power, immigrants' advocates said.

Source



Stupid US limits on highly skilled workers force Microsoft to open shop in Canada

US software behemoth Microsoft Corp. said Thursday it would soon open an office in Canada, lamenting tough immigration rules in the United States that make it difficult to hire foreign staff. "It is about recruiting the best and brightest, and right now, the majority are coming from overseas," Marc Seaman, a spokesman for the world's biggest software company, told The Globe and Mail newspaper. "The United States has immigration quotas and some limitations for bringing in people from outside the country," he said. "That challenge is an opportunity for Canada, in the sense that this will bring the top software developers to Canada."

The development office, to be opened in Vancouver, a three-hour drive north from Microsoft's Redmond, Washington headquarters, will initially be staffed by some 300 recruits from around the world, the company said. Eventually, it could grow to house as many as 1,000 employees. Canada is currently the third-largest source of recruits for Microsoft outside the United States, after India and Japan.

Source



Missing Soldier's Wife Gets Green Card

A bureaucracy with a heart? No way! A bureaucracy that responds to publicity

A woman whose Soldier husband is missing in Iraq has gotten her green card after authorities threatened to deport her for entering the U.S. illegally. Yaderlin Hiraldo Jimenez walked out of a Citizenship and Immigration Services office in Buffalo, N.Y., on Friday with her permanent residency papers, her lawyer said.

"She was moved to tears," attorney Matthew Kolken, who accompanied his client, told The Boston Globe for Sunday's editions. "Her immigration problems have been solved in their entirety and now her focus is completely dedicated to her hope and desire that she's going to see her husband again," Kolken said. Army Spec. Alex Jimenez, of Lawrence, Mass., has been missing since his unit was attacked in Iraq on May 12.

His wife illegally entered the U.S. from the Dominican Republic in June 2001, paying $500 to a smuggler and walking three days from Mexico to California. The couple were married in 2004. Jimenez's request for a green card and legal residence status for his wife alerted authorities to her situation. She has been living in Pennsylvania and had been facing deportation but an immigration judge put a temporary stop to the proceedings after Jimenez was reported missing.

Last month, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said his agency would end the deportation case. He said in a letter to Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., that "the sacrifices made by our Soldiers and their families deserve our greatest respect."

Kolken said his client hopes to apply for citizenship and to attend college. "She commented about how much she loved this country," Kolken said.

On Friday, the Pentagon changed the status of Jimenez and a comrade, Pvt. Byron Fouty, 19, of Waterford, Mich., from "whereabouts unknown" to "missing/captured." The change reflects an official determination that the two were seized by hostile forces, but it does not mean the military has gained any new information about their whereabouts. An Iraqi insurgent group claimed in a video posted on the Internet last month that the missing Soldiers were killed and buried, but offered no proof they were dead.

Source



5 July, 2007

France gets a bit tougher

France plans to make it harder for families to immigrate to the country. The immigration minister, Brice Hortefeux, proposed new rules for family reunification in the national parliament Wednesday.

The proposals announced Wednesday apply mainly to people who want to bring their families to France, and it is going to make the process tougher. Under the proposal, the main breadwinner would have to show he has a steady job and earns enough money to support his family. Family members will have to show they speak French and understand French values. If they don't, they would be required to take a two-month course before their applications are approved. Parents would also have to sign a contract, promising to take a course on their rights and responsibilities toward their children.

This will be the third time the French government has toughened its immigration laws in as many years, in an attempt to crack down on illegal immigration. But activists say the changes announced Wednesday will do little to solve the illegal immigration problem. "This law is extremely bureaucratic," said said Pierre Henri, the director general of Terre d'Asile, an activist group fighting for the rights of immigrants on the RTL radio station, adding it will add several months to a procedure that is already very long.

The law also addresses concerns about how France treats people who seek exile in the country, and brings the rules in line with European Union regulations. The French parliament is scheduled to debate the law in September.

Source



The Canadian wall is bureaucratic

But it still keeps people out. It's just a dishonest method of immigration control

Since arriving in Canada seven years ago, Sithamparanthar Karalasingam has dreamed of seeing his family. Anxious to get them away from violence in Sri Lanka, the 25-year-old tractor-trailer driver applied in May of 2003 to have his parents and three siblings join him in Toronto. But his sponsorship application remained in bureaucratic limbo for more than three years.

Last August, Karalasingam's worst fears came true when Sri Lankan government forces battling Tamil insurgents launched a shelling attack on his family's village in the Jaffna peninsula. His parents, Thavayoganayaki Karalasingam, 51, and Karalasingam Sithamparanthar, 52, were killed when mortar shells hit their home. Their son is asking the federal government to admit his siblings into Canada on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, but so far the government has refused.

Karalasingham, who is in a position to support his family until they find jobs in Canada, is asking the Federal Court of Canada to review the decision. "I don't want to lose my brothers and sisters," he said. "I've lost my parents already."

What happened to Karalasingam's family is "a tragedy," said NDP citizenship and immigration critic Bill Siksay (Burnaby-Douglas). It illustrates the problems associated with a "terrible backlog" in family class applications - requests by Canadian citizens or permanent residents to have spouses, parents or dependent children admitted into the country, he said. "We know the backlog is such that five or six years is not unusual and it's completely unacceptable," said Siksay, adding the government needs to speed up processing times to prevent similar tragedies.

Canadian officials would have known that, as Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Karalasingam family was at serious risk of harm from all parties to the hostilities, including government and rebel forces, said Raoul Boulakia, Karalasingam's lawyer. A report from the United Nations refugee agency last December warned that Tamils in northern Sri Lanka, where Karalasingam's siblings are now living, were at risk of being kidnapped or killed. After their parents died, Karalasingam's brother, Sayanthan, 24, and sisters, Syanthini, 23 and Preethiny, 20, no longer qualified to immigrate under a family class application for permanent residency. But the government can make exceptions on humanitarian and compassionate grounds and has done so in the past, Boulakia said.

Last August, the siblings asked the Canadian High Commission in Colombo for help but in February they were told the file was closed. Boulakia said the government has made a settlement offer. If Karalasingam drops his lawsuit, officials will consider his request - but with no promises it will be granted. But Karalasingam fears his file could again disappear into another bureaucratic black hole.

Siksay said the handling of the case has been downright un-Canadian. We promise immigrants "they will be able to sponsor family members later." Instead, he said, delays often leave Canadians frustrated.

Source





4 July, 2007

Republicans move on illegal immigration

Post lifted from Don Surber. See the original for links

House Republicans are seizing the border patrol issue. Lamar Smith of Texas and Pete King of New York are pushing an Enforcement Only bill to put teeth back in Ted Kennedy's Immigration Reform Act of 1986, which President Reagan signed into law in an effort to rid the nation of 3 million illegal aliens. Now there are 12 million. Jackie Kucinich of the Hill will report tomorrow (Tuesday) that the Smith-King bill will add officers to the border patrol and beef up enforcement. She will report:

"Until we're able - the government's able - to demonstrate to the American people that we can in fact secure the borders and enforce the laws, the American people aren't willing to take those next steps in this process," House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said.

Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said he expected many of his members to line up behind a bill crafted by King and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), ranking member on the Judiciary Committee.

"I think many of us will be supporting the Lamar Smith/Peter King bill," Blunt said. "I actually think it carves out a special spot for temporary workers for agriculture. The concern that House Republicans have and have had for some time now is the order in which these things are accomplished."

This is a good way to rally Americans back to teh cause. It is not racist, sexist, nativist, skinheadist, talkradioist or any other name they want to call it to expect the government to uphold immigration laws with the same vigor shown by NYC toward its ban on trans-fats and smoking.



Idiotic rules keep out skilled, English-speaking workers

The immigration bill that was killed by the U.S. Senate focused on the nation's 12 million illegal aliens. To many farmers, the issue is more about such people as Thomas Murphy, an Irishman who leads a crew of combine operators from the U.K., cutting wheat across a swath of the Great Plains. Murphy's crew and 2,500 other skilled, legal immigrants who come from places such as South Africa, Australia and New Zealand to cut grain are among the most productive workers in the U.S., gathering one-third of all the wheat in a $7.7 billion market.

That's why farmers and the companies that hire the crews say Congress's failure last week to overhaul the immigration laws will heighten an already intense labor shortage by preventing them from importing more of the English-speaking workers, even as the need for them grows. That may lower crop yields, raise food prices and force some growers out of business, they say. ``You'll have labor that simply doesn't get done,'' U.S. Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns said in a June 28 interview after the Senate rejected the legislation. ``We have a system that doesn't work very well, so they're really struggling.''

The legislation was intended to create a path to citizenship for undocumented workers, tighten border controls and authorize a guest-worker program. It would also have relaxed rules limiting how many foreign workers the harvesters can hire. Efforts to revise those regulations were caught up in the fight over illegal Hispanic migration, which largely focuses on border security.

Great Plains wheat-cutting teams, once filled by Texas and Dakota farm kids, now rely on foreigners for as many as half the workers who cut grain sold to Archer Daniels Midland Co., Cargill Inc. and other companies, according to U.S. Custom Harvesters Inc., a trade group. That echoes trends across U.S. agriculture. Grain-cutters say they need more of the skilled workers: Their understaffed crews are falling behind in the harvest, leaving crops vulnerable to disease and weather. The wheat harvest was 40 percent complete as of July 1, compared with 62 percent at the same time in 2006, the U.S. Department of Agriculture says. That's mostly because of poor weather. ``Farmers could get more wheat cut if we had more labor,'' said Murphy's boss, Lance Frederick, whose Alden, Kansas-based harvesting company dispatches the workers to farms. ``You worry right up until harvest whether you'll have enough.'' Frederick, who serves 70 farms and seldom rejects customers, has declined 20 additional requests for workers this year.

The English-speaking, itinerant grain workers travel in crews, starting in Texas in May and finishing in North Dakota in November, harvesting corn and other crops as well as wheat. While their numbers pale in comparison to the more than 3 million, mostly Hispanic undocumented immigrants in meatpacking, produce and food service, an individual harvester's economic impact is far greater because of the mechanization of the grain harvest. U.S. wheat was worth more than the labor-intensive output of grapes, tomatoes and apples combined in 2006, according to the USDA.

Most of the harvest workers come to the U.S. on H2A visas for temporary agricultural labor. H2As require employers to buy newspaper and radio advertisements to prove that efforts to hire domestic workers were unsuccessful. That slows hiring and increases costs. Once a foreign worker arrives, the employer must pay the government-set prevailing wage and provide free housing.

A provision of the immigration legislation known as AgJobs, which was intended to offer legal residence to as many as 1.5 million currently illegal farm workers, would have made visas more easily available to foreign workers. AgJobs would also have eased ad requirements, reduced paperwork that delays visas, and permitted employers to give workers housing allowances rather than housing, saving costs.

South Africans are the largest contingent among the English-speaking immigrant harvesters, sending 1,054 workers to the U.S. on H2A visas last year, up from none 10 years ago, State Department figures show. U.S. grain-cutters came to rely on international harvesters as the domestic worker supply fell, said Tim Baker, operations manager for U.S. Custom Harvesters, the Hutchinson, Kansas-based trade association. Age restrictions for commercial drivers' licenses eliminated most high schoolers. The harvest season's length deters college students. Tight job markets in Plains states, where unemployment runs below the rest of the U.S., also make domestic recruitment difficult, as does the seasonal, itinerant nature of harvest work, Baker said.

Work starts once the morning dew has dried and continues for 16 hours until night moisture makes the wheat too wet. A harvester must be able to work continually while making quick repairs to keep a $300,000 combine in motion. For that, a worker bunks with crewmates in a mobile trailer for free while seeing the U.S. heartland on net pay of about $1,800 per month. The high-quality, low-cost labor ``keeps costs down and keeps the producer profitable, which keeps the U.S. competitive in the world market,'' said Kenneth Hobbie, who heads the U.S. Grains Council, a Washington-based group that represents Archer Daniels, Cargill and other companies.

The wage is less than what a U.S. worker with mechanical skills and a trucking license can make doing something else, said Greg Thurman, a Burlington, Oklahoma-based harvester who employs workers from New Zealand, Australia and Denmark. ``Any American who would be good at this can find something with better hours and holidays off,'' he said.

More here



Italy has illegals too

ROME-Ciampino airport was closed for several hours today when a man walking on the runway sparked a security alert, ANSA news agency reported.

The tower at the low-cost airline airport raised the alert at 9pm (5am Tuesday AEST) when it noticed the man crossing the runway with two bags, diverting flights to the city's main Fiumicino-Leonardo de Vinci airport.

Police and anti-terrorism troops quickly detained the man, an Ethiopian without identity papers, who appeared to be in a confused state. His bags contained nothing dangerous.

Flights were due to resume this morning at the airport, which is normally closed for the night.

Source





3 July, 2007

They Made My Day

By Burt Prelutsky

June 28th was a very fine day, indeed. For one thing, under pressure from my fellow Americans, the boobs in the Beltway caved in, and stopped trying to shove the amnesty bill down our collective throats. It was also the day that the Supreme Court finally got around to deciding that in a society that keeps insisting that it's colorblind, race can no longer be used as a means to determine the makeup of student bodies. I'd like to think that Martin Luther King, Jr., would have approved, just as I take comfort in knowing that Jesse Jackson doesn't. My spirits were so uplifted by the news, it nearly made up for the fact that the 2007 New York Yankees are beginning to remind me a lot of the 1962 New York Mets.

The wonderful thing about the demise of the immigration bill is that it managed to delight not only those who wish Ted Kennedy would retire to the home for old sots, but those who are eagerly counting off the days until George Bush can finally devote all his waking hours to clearing the brush down in Crawford.

The bill not only drove a wedge between Republicans, with the smarmy likes of Hagel, Gregg, Snowe, Lott, Lugar, McCain, Craig, Specter, Martinez and Graham, siding with Biden, Kerry, Clinton and Obama, but even between me and one of my favorite radio talk show hosts, Michael Medved. He was clearly irked that the bill failed to pass. In fact, on the day of the bill's demise, he even railed against the mere notion of amending the Constitution to prevent the offspring of those in the U.S. illegally from being granted automatic citizenship. I happen to believe that such an amendment is long over-due. I grant that reasonable people can disagree about this issue, but whenever I hear anybody carry on as if the Constitution was etched in stone, I remind myself that two of the 27 amendments deal with booze!

I can't help feeling that whether our forefathers were Christians, deists, agnostics or atheists, they would have strongly opposed the proposition that an infant could benefit from the commission of a crime committed by its parents.

Those who promoted passage of the bill argued that it would allow the U.S. to finally get a handle on illegal immigration. What a laugh! Millions of illegals have come here on visas, but once they decided to overstay their welcome, absolutely nothing was done about it. You may recall having read about several of them in the aftermath of 9/11. When the feds can't even cope with so-called legal immigration, why on earth would we trust them to deal with the far more complicated problem of illegal aliens?

The biggest joke is when the number of those who have snuck in is placed at 12 million. Is that a figure that somebody saw in a crystal ball or deciphered in a glob of wet tea leaves? The president's mouthpiece, Tony Snow, has admitted that nobody knows who or where these people are. But the one thing we know for certain is their number?! Inasmuch as I keep hearing from readers in the Southeast, the Northwest and the Midwest, not to mention those in Texas, California and Arizona, that their towns are being over-run with illegals, I'm willing to wager that the actual figure is close to double that number. Besides, I have too much faith in the venality of our elected officials to believe they'd prostrate themselves and ignore their oaths of office for a mere 12 million votes.

Harry Reid has vowed that the bill, though severely wounded, will live to rise another day. It reminds you of those scary movies in which the evil creature, apparently dead and buried, suddenly climbs out of its grave. Come to think of it, that also reminds me of Harry Reid.

Those who scratch their heads and ponder the impossible logistics of deporting millions of people make me want to shake them until the marbles come tumbling out of their ears. There is one simple solution, and one that wouldn't even require the building of a wall. We'd simply make it a felony for anyone to hire illegals. If the potential employee was unable to supply a verifiable birth certificate and social security number, he couldn't get a job. You would soon see a mass exodus. After all, if they were able to make their way north, they sure as heck can make their way south.

It's a big fat lie that there are all those jobs Americans won't do. The fact is, Americans will do anything from picking fruit to cleaning cesspools, but they won't do them for lousy wages. But, then, nowhere in the Bill of Rights is it written that the people who own farms, hotels, restaurants and construction firms, will be guaranteed an endless supply of cheap labor. And nowhere is it written that providing the illegals with housing, schools, food stamps and health services, is the responsibility of the American taxpayer.

The question isn't why politicians on the left pander so shamelessly on behalf of these millions of aliens. After all, this is the same corrupt crowd that has made a practice of offering suffrage to convicted felons and even longtime residents of Chicago cemeteries. The real question is why George W. Bush has elected to lead this ill-advised crusade. There are those who thought his reason was political, that he foolishly believed he'd provide the GOP with millions of grateful Hispanic voters. That's a possible motive. One must remember, after all, that this is the same fellow who thought he'd garner a lot of black votes by putting Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice in his cabinet.

Then there are those who believed that because brother Jeb was married to a woman born in Mexico, thus making his niece and nephews half-Latino, George was just overly sympathetic to the plight of poor Hispanics. The latest theory I've heard espoused was that young George may have had a Mexican nanny to whom he was particularly attached. Although most people might regard that as a frivolous reason for endangering our national sovereignty, not to mention scuttling the GOP's chances of recovering from the 2006 elections, it's certainly within the realm of possibility. If Charles Foster Kane's implausible life could be traced all the way back to a sled named Rosebud in the movie classic, "Citizen Kane," I'm willing to accept that in pushing so aggressively for this lousy piece of legislation, the president was merely trying to atone for some youthful shenanigan that provoked his beloved Maria, Consuela or Esperanza.

So, instead of dismissing the bill as amnesty in sheep's clothing, perhaps we should merely think of it as the nanny bill. After all, there's no getting around the fact that those childhood experiences often have a very profound effect on us. For instance, do any of you have the slightest doubt that Ted Kennedy was a bottle baby?

Source



The Immigration Revolt Was Bipartisan

The article below is via Yahoo news so it is good to see at least one mainstream source not blaming the defeat solely on the "racist" GOP

The immigration mess showed that not every divisive issue in American politics is partisan. Much has been made of the split among Republicans over immigration, but in the end it was the division among Senate Democrats that was the most surprising. The key question this raises is whether Democrats, who regained their congressional majority with candidates who might not adhere to every tenet of party orthodoxy, can control those folks when they need them.

Of course, immigration was a defeat for President Bush. But given his dreadful poll numbers, it is no surprise he can't control Republicans on an issue in which the majority fundamentally disagree with him. If the Democratic leadership can't control its troops, then it won't be any more successful than were the Republicans in recent years when it comes to getting Congress to tackle the big stuff that Washington, D.C. seems unable to solve.

Just as in recent years when Bush often could not win over GOP lawmakers who weren't sufficiently conservative, the Democrats have a problem with their members who aren't die-hard liberals. Any notion that the Democrats' bare 51-49 Senate edge and similar percentage margin in the House translates into real control is illusionary. And, ironically, the reason is a result of the way they fashioned their new majority.

To be sure Democrats and Republicans have differing views and values, but the inability of Congress to come up with an acceptable immigration solution stems from as many intra-party divides as partisan ones. There were both Democratic and Republican senators who thought the measure did not tilt enough toward immigrants' rights, and those who thought it unacceptably slanted in that direction. At the margins, the majority of Republicans wanted to err on the side of toughness and the Democrats wanted to make it less onerous for illegal immigrants.

Democrats took Congress last November by winning the deciding seats in conservative states where the party had suffered recently. Many, perhaps naively, assumed that the results meant that the country was moving further left from its more conservative perch that began with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. But, the 2006 sweep wasn't necessarily the result of a public decision that the Republican worldview was wrong. Rather it was the public's judgment about competence, reflecting popular frustration with the bogged-down war in Iraq, Republican congressional scandals and profligate spending. Democrats who were sent to Congress from those conservative states last November did not necessarily share the views and values of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and aging liberal icon Sen. Edward Kennedy. The $64,000 question was always whether the new members would follow the lead of their generally more liberal, senior brethren who controlled the Democratic agenda.

Freshmen Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Jon Tester of Montana and Jim Webb of Virginia voted were among the 15 Democrats who helped kill the immigration bill. It turned out their votes were not decisive. The margin of defeat was so large because a majority of senators up for re-election in 2008 decided it was in their best interests to oppose the bill. But had the Democrats who wanted a bill more generous towards immigrant rights - and voted against the bill because they thought it too tough -- gotten their way, then these three might well have been enough to kill that more liberal proposal. In all, 14 of the 15 Democrats who voted to kill immigration reform were from states that George W. Bush carried in 2004. They understood that to survive in Red America they can't always toe the Democratic line.

And, let's not forget had the immigration compromise emerged from the Senate, its chances of passage were even lower in the House. In the end, the lesson from the immigration debacle on Capitol Hill is that the leadership of neither party can be assured of delivering their rank-in-file members when it counts. On the Republican side that's because of palpable disillusionment with the White House incompetence. Ironically, among the Democrats, the differences with the leadership might well be a matter of ideology. That's what happens when the Democratic criteria for finding candidates are electability first and philosophy second.

Source



2 July, 2007

Georgia crackdown

Immigration reform might be dead in Washington, but it's only beginning in Georgia. Tomorrow, more than a year after the state legislature passed a sweeping law to keep illegal immigrants out of jobs, away from taxpayer-funded benefits and more easily within the reach of local police, most parts of the legislation will go into effect.

Supporters say Senate Bill 529, as the law is known, only requires local governments to enforce federal immigration law - for example, verifying that adults applying for non-emergency public benefits are eligible under federal statutes.

Opponents and immigrant rights advocates, however, say the new law will make immigrants - legal or not - more afraid of being scrutinized by government officials and law enforcement just because of the way they look or the language they speak.

The bill's sponsor, Republican Senator Chip Rogers of Woodstock, and other supporters have promoted it as a way to reduce Georgia's appeal for illegal immigrants.

Source



Record year predicted for American aliyah

The Jewish Agency for Israel predicted a peak year for immigration from North America. Immigration to Israel from the United States and Canada will increase between 5 and 10 percent this year, marking the highest rate in a quarter-century, the Jewish Agency said Sunday.

According to the agency, in recent years Reform and Conservative communities have become more active in promoting aliyah, a movement generally dominated by the Orthodox. The Jewish Agency, in turn, is trying to help Reform and Conservative immigrants find new homes in Israeli communities identified with their religious denominations.

"We are seeing a continued increase of olim of all religious streams and age groups," said Boaz Herman, head of the Jewish Agency's Aliyah Department in North America. Herman noted that 70 percent of immigrants from North America are younger than 35.

Source



Australia: Doing immigration the right way (mostly)

Australia chooses its immigrants. Still too many troublesome refugees accepted though

As Australia celebrates the population meter ticking over to 21 million, a record immigration figure for a financial year is expected to escalate the population boom. A spokeswoman for Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews said the projected target of up to 148,000 new immigrants for 2006-07 would be met once the figures were tallied.

It represents one of the greatest immigration influxes in decades. Aided by a rising number of births, Australia is experiencing a rise in population numbers not seen since the two most significant boom periods, after World War II and in the 1980s. The secretary of the Department of Immigration, Andrew Metcalfe, had already hailed the previous year's growth as a record. In the department's annual report, he commended the outcome for 2005-06 of 143,000 new migrants as "the largest migration program for several decades".

This year's intake and projections for coming years suggest the increase will continue. The Government is aiming to accept 152,800 new migrants in 2007-08, a far cry from the low immigration stance it adopted on coming to power in 1996. After huge immigration numbers during Bob Hawke's years as prime minister in the 1980s, his successor Paul Keating slashed immigration in his first year as prime minister.

The rapid increase in immigration has been fuelled by a growing skills shortage. The Government has altered the mix of the immigration program to focus on attracting more skilled migrants. Two-thirds of those expected to settle permanently this year and next will fall under the skilled migration category.

Source



1 July, 2007

Federal bureaucracy already swamped by legal immigration

Among the key features of the Bush/Kennedy/McCain immigration reform proposal is the creation of a guest-worker program. Advocates claim the program will solve the problem of illegal immigration by making every immigrant legal, putting them through a complicated process of bureaucratic red tape. But it won’t work for one simple reason: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the agency in charge of processing legal immigrants, is an operational disaster. The White House and Congress continue to ignore urgent warnings published in The Examiner and elsewhere of whistleblower Michael Maxwell, who explained more than a year ago that a guest worker program would be a national security disaster.

The former head of security for USCIS, Maxwell documented security breaches that allowed hundreds of thousands of immigrants to enter the United States with no independent verification of their identity. An automated system in USCIS even let some foreign nationals bypass all background checks and print out their own green cards and work permits. The agency, Maxwell told Congress, was “a viper’s nest” of political hacks and career federal employees who covered up criminal allegations of bribery, document fraud, extortion, money laundering and espionage within their ranks.

Maxwell’s testimony, corroborated by congressional staff and investigators at the Government Accountability Office, and a four-part editorial series in The Examiner (“Leaving the front door wide open”), described gaping security holes at USCIS, including the failure to check names against terrorist watch lists and to fingerprint applicants. All the while, USCIS personnel were being offered cash bonuses, time off, movie tickets and gift certificates to speed up processing times for their “customers.” There were no incentives to keep undesirable applicants out. Indeed, the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General’s office found that 45,000 high-risk illegal immigrants from countries known to sponsor terrorism were allowed to legally enter the U.S. since 2001.

And the backlog of fugitive immigration cases increases every year. More than 600,000 known criminals refuse to obey court orders to leave the country; they commit, on average, 25 homicides a day. If that is not enough, consider the agency’s logjam of 4 million regular immigration applications, about 329,000 of which are still waiting for FBI clearance.

Blogger Michelle Malkin reported in January that, under pressure to reduce their backlog, USCIS supervisors in California ordered workers to destroy 90,000 identity documents, including “passports, birth certificates, approval notices, change of address forms, diplomas and money orders” — like a mail carrier dumping a too-heavy load instead of delivering it. Does this sound like an agency that can responsibly handle even one more case, let alone another 12 million to 20 million, as proposed by Bush/Kennedy/McCain?

Source



Our Democracy Will Never Be the Same

Post lifted from Shrinkwrapped. See the original for links

The defeat of the Comprehensive Immigration bill is the single most important advance for democracy in recent memory. While most commentators point to opposition tot he amnesty provisions in the bill as the impetus for opposition, in reality, amnesty was a minor part of the problem with the bill.

When the bill was first announced I wrote that I was provisionally in favor of a comprehensive bill but offered the caution that "the devil is in the details." At the same time I was fully aware that there was no way I was going to spend the time and energy to actually read the bill. Legalese is a foreign language that I have no desire to learn. It has always struck me as being unnecessarily arcane; of course, the same can be said of medicalese, so I should be measured in my criticism. In any event, I lack the interest and energy to learn how "sausages and laws" are made.

Two important developments occurred in the debate over the Immigration bill which will forever change the way Laws are made. First, and most important, primarily because of the internet, people who had the interest were able to actually take the time and spend the energy required to read and understand the bill. They were then able to leverage their understanding via the Blogosphere to allow a multitude of engaged individuals to piggy back on their expertise. Hugh Hewitt performed such yeoman work and when he pointed out that the fantasy of a comprehensive reform was not matched by the reality in the bill, I withdrew my provisional support for the bill. Nothing that followed caused me to change my mind a second time.

As the Immigration debate continued, with the powerful forces in favor of the bill using all their legislative legerdemain to escape scrutiny, they found themselves being watched and caught every step of the way.

The second key point was the not surprising revelation that not only had no Senator even read the bill but that most of them had no real idea what was in it. Once their ignorance was documented, the bill was finished. It is one thing to know intellectually that most bills are passed with little in the way of real debate or understanding by those poseurs who reside in Congress, but to actually be able to see, hear, and savor their ignorance, all the while they were protesting how much smarter and wiser they are than the hoi polloi, has been truly enlightening. The fact is that the American people, via their unelected representatives int he Blogosphere, understood the bill better than its proponents in the Senate.

The Comprehensive Immigration Bill did not fail because people did not support its aims but because once people examined the bill, they noticed that it was not designed to do what it said it would do and in fact was a disastrous melange of mismatched pieces that would have exacerbated every problem we currently face with illegal immigration.

Democracy is always painful to those who wish to wield power. At long last, we are able to actually "Question Authority" with more than mere adolescent oppositionalism. This represents a profound change in American politics and our democracy will never be the same.



States Turn the Screws on Illegals

"Frustrated with Congress's inability to pass an immigration overhaul bill, state legislatures are considering or enacting a record number of strongly worded proposals targeting illegal immigrants. By the time most legislatures adjourned in May, at least 1,100 immigration bills had been submitted by lawmakers, more than double last year's record total, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.... These laws limit illegal immigrants' ability to obtain jobs, find housing, get driver's licenses and receive many government services. They also empower state law enforcement agencies to inquire into an immigrant's legal status and hold for deportation those deemed to be here illegally. The idea is to make life so difficult for illegal immigrants that they will leave the state -- if not the country."

Source