“But what about their civil rights?!” critics will demand to know. They’re illegal aliens; they don’t have civil rights! “Civil rights” are the rights due citizens.
Updated at 3:10 a.m. on May 6, 2007.
They want your job, your property, and your country.
Last Tuesday, Americans again saw thousands (but at least this time, not millions) of criminals take to the streets, demanding recognition of their “right” to continue committing crimes. The criminals were supposedly also “boycotting America.”
I am speaking, of course, of illegal immigrants, aka undocumented immigrants, aka undocumented workers, aka unauthorized migrants, aka Mexican nationals, whose number may be as high as 30 million – 22 million adults who have invaded this country since the previous mass amnesty in 1986, and as many as eight million children whom female illegal aliens have borne in this country during that time, and which have been improperly defined by the federal courts, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, as “American citizens.”
In a sane, just society, upon hearing of such a massive mobilization of criminals, the authorities would mobilize virtually every local, state, and federal law enforcement officer, as well as the National Guard, bottle up all the parade routes in cities across the nation, block the side streets and, section by section, bearing plastic handcuffs, arrest all of the suspects. Reporters would show the arrests on live TV, exclaiming each time, “They got another one!” The suspects would then be bused in convoys to tent cities on the outskirts of each city, until their legal status could be determined.
Any suspect determined to be an American citizen or lawful permanent resident alien, would be released just as soon as buses became available for non-deportation. Of course, that might take a while.
Anyone determined to be in the country illegally, but not wanted on any criminal warrants, or previously deported, would be deported within days, after signing a letter acknowledging that being found in America at any future time would result in his immediate imprisonment as a felon, as per federal immigration law. (I am not fantasizing here; according to current federal immigration law, it is a felony for any foreign national previously deported from the U.S. to re-enter it without permission from the federal government. That the federal government has for years refused to enforce federal law is not my fault.) Anyone determined to be in the country illegally, and to have previously been deported, would immediately be imprisoned as a felon.
“But what about their civil rights?!” critics will demand to know. They’re illegal aliens; they don’t have civil rights! “Civil rights” are the rights due citizens.
As soon as the felon in question completed his prison sentence, he would be deported to his own nation, again as per current U.S. immigration law.
Anyone who was determined to be in the country illegally, to have previously been deported, and to be wanted for additional crimes, would immediately be imprisoned as a felon, and bound over for trial on the additional charges. Regardless of the disposition of the additional charges, he would do hard time as an immigration felon; should he be convicted of the other charges, he would serve his sentences consecutively, not concurrently, after which, should he still be alive, he would be deported to his own nation.
That’s the way a sane, just nation would handle things. (In Mexico, for instance, foreign nationals, including those legally there, are not permitted to demonstrate against the government. All foreign nationals who do demonstrate are arrested, imprisoned, and deported.) Of course, a sane, just society would never permit 22 million illegal adults to invade it, in the first place!
Like last year, this year we again had law enforcement officers acting as welcoming committees, aiding and abetting the criminals, and the media acting as cheerleaders, leaving no doubt as to their loyalties.
The traitor media started its advance work the day before, with brain- dead propaganda appealing only to members of the Hispanic supremacist-cheap labor alliance, and perhaps to dull eight-year-olds.
Except for one new wrinkle, in “Lazy, Job-Stealing Immigrants?,” in the Washington Post, British expatriate Sebastian Mallaby stuck to the dog-eared script. He calls amnesty “immigration reform.” He insists on using the euphemisms “immigrants,” as if these were legal immigrants, and then “migrants,” as if these were Americans who had merely moved from, say, Appalachia to California in search of a better life, even though he is talking about illegals.
Mallaby maintains that illegals are much better behaved than Americans. That must be why, if the government does not undertake mass deportations of illegals and secure the borders, in 10-20 years, every major American city will be controlled by illegal gangs.
Dripping with condescension towards his critics, he asserts that far from stealing jobs from Americans, “economists have patiently explained for years that there is no finite ‘lump of labor’ in an economy. The presence of migrants causes new jobs to be created.” True enough. He speaks of factories being created that otherwise would have been set up abroad. But why on earth would anyone celebrate the opening of criminal enterprises? The owners of such factories are engaged in criminal conspiracies to break every labor, immigration, and tax law in the book. The factories provide a net negative benefit to the economy. And they refuse to employ American workers. The only people who benefit from them are the criminals who own them, and the criminals who work in them, respectively.
And let us not forget all of the “jobs” created for illegal immigrant indentured servants by people who otherwise would be raising their own children, walking their own dogs, and mowing their own lawns.
Mallaby observes that “undocumented immigrants are ineligible for welfare, food stamps …” but in time-honored “a half-truth-is-a-whole-lie” fashion, does not tell the reader that they are getting these benefits, the law be damned. Fortunately, the average allegedly uneducated, non-Washington Post reader already knows that.
Mallaby claims that “the total effect of undocumented workers on native-born Americans is roughly zero.” This is supposed to console the reader? Rather than losing his country for a mess of pottage, the average American is losing it for … nothing in return.
But even that’s not true. Robert Rector has estimated that, due to the costs that illegals and their employers inflict on American taxpayers (schools, hospitals, crime, prisons, etc.), each illegal costs Americans $1 million over the cost of a lifetime, and that another mass amnesty like that sought by the Open Borders Lobby, which includes Pres. Bush and Mallaby, among others), which would open up programs like the Social Security Administration’s supplemental security income and social security pensions to present-day illegals, would cost us $2.5-3 TRILLION over and above any contribution the amnestied “immigrants” would have made to the fisc. (If George Bush has his way, tens of millions of illegals will tap into social security even without another mass amnesty.)
And that’s not counting the additional billions Americans pay every year, to protect their children from public schools that illegal children have destroyed through violence and by dragging down academic standards. American parents have to variously buy overpriced homes in the increasingly rare public school districts whose schools have yet to be destroyed, or pay exorbitant private school tuition. As Elizabeth Warren and her daughter, Amelia Warren Tyagi, and Steve Sailer have reported, such additional expenditures are fueling an epidemic of bankruptcy among middle-class families with school-aged children.
And of course, another mass amnesty would bring hundreds of millions more illegals in the wake of those amnestied.
To my knowledge, the one new wrinkle Mallaby came up with, is the claim that immigration restrictionists say that illegals are “lazy.” I’ve never heard any restrictionist say that. So, that’s a whole lie.
But the children of illegals, who are themselves illegal, do not share their parents’ work ethic or docility. The children are often lazy, are predominantly hateful, and commit crimes at rates far above the American statistical norm. Imitating the worst qualities of American blacks, they refuse to patiently work their way up the ladder of social mobility, and despise everything that America stands for. Meanwhile, they demand that everything that law-abiding Americans have worked so hard for be taken from them and given to the second-generation illegals.
Mallaby, who is also a honcho at the Council on Foreign Relations and has a 23-word-long title, doesn’t tell the reader of the CFR’s agenda to dissolve America into a North American Union with Canada and Mexico. He tries to inoculate himself from criticism by tarring all critics as “demagogues and nativists.” (So my title, “demagogue and nativist,” is only three words long. That hurts!)
Arellano: “Already I can hear the backlash, and it makes me wonder:
“If today's immigrants were from white European countries, would the anti-immigration backlash be so ferocious? [She forgot to say “illegal”!]
“Of course not.
“Race and ethnicity make-up the ugly underbelly of the immigration debate that no one likes to talks about.”
Arellano’s condemnation of white American citizens as “racists” and abuse of the cliché of an anticipated racist “backlash” is supposed to terrify whites, and get them saying, defensively, “But we’re not racists! Some of our best friends are …,” so that they won’t dare take the offensive, and condemn her for her own racism.
Note that Arellano’s photograph depicts a comely woman as white as I am.
Arellano has only racial intimidation to offer:
“Instead, anti-immigrant complainers wrap their arguments around assimilation and citizenship -- largely nonissues -- when what they're really upset about is the fact that today's newcomers are overwhelmingly non-European and brown.”
Assimilation and citizenship are non-issues? Such nonsense is what comes of not being a journalist, but rather a professional “Latina,” who was hired and is paid to be racist.
And then the big day arrived. CNN called Tuesday “Immigration Day,” and denigrated the citizenship test, comparing it to a “TV quiz show.” Between 1 and 2 p.m. alone, pretty, lefty CNN airhead Soledad O’Brien betrayed her cheerleader status in no less than three ways. She said, “You see a day with a half day of school, coincidentally.”
That was no “coincidence”; school officials cut the school day short, in order to send their propagandized charges out to support the criminals, and to protect themselves against charges of criminal behavior.
(In spring 2006, public school officials across the country were guilty variously of acting as accomplices to trespassing and theft, of obstruction of justice, and of contributing to the delinquency of a minor, when they illegally led students out of school during school hours, and took them to other schools to vandalize property, steal state flags, turn the American flag upside down, and hoist the Mexican flag on school flagpoles above the Stars and Stripes. To my knowledge, not one of the criminal “educators” was reprimanded, let alone fired or prosecuted. See the section “Bilingualism and Reconquista” in this newly published report.)
O’Brien had an Irishman on camera, who demanded legalization and full rights for all illegals – translated into English, that’s amnesty. (Full disclosure: Like O’Brien, I am part Irish.)
Someone needs to whisper in O’Brien’s (and Arellano’s) ear that opponents of illegals do not give a damn if a few thousand of them are Irish. Apparently, she (and Arellano) thinks that if white Americans see a white illegal face, they’ll have a racial chauvinist epiphany and say, “Oh, my God!
There are white illegals, too! Let’s legalize them all! Who cares if it means the legal, economic, and political destruction of America! Let’s help the white people!”
O’Brien also spoke of countries such as “Honduras and Puerto Rico,” saying that last year people tended to see illegal aliens as only Mexicans (perhaps because the majority are!), and that this year, organizers were seeking to diversify the demonstrators.
Oops! Someone needs to whisper in O’Brien’s ear that Puerto Rico is not a country, but a part of America. Thus, Puerto Ricans cannot be immigrants in America, let alone illegal immigrants, because they are all American citizens by birth. (In their case, one actually can speak of people “migrating” from the island to the mainland.) Like it says in the classic Bernstein-Sondheim song, “Puerto Rico’s in America!”
(Media and Olympics officials have for years perpetuated the fiction, according to which Puerto Rico is a sovereign nation. Every year during baseball’s All-Star game, Hispandering sportscaster Tim McCarver lists Puerto Rican players as a separate nationality, along with real nations like the Dominican Republic, Venezuela, Japan and South Korea, and Olympics officials have even created a fictional “Puerto Rican” team.)
O’Brien tried to give the appearance of balance by interviewing an Hispanic woman from an organization of Hispanic Americans opposed to amnesty. O’Brien asked the woman if she didn’t feel sympathy for illegals that have American-born children who are “citizens.” The woman said, “No.”
For those who would argue that in calling for sympathy for criminals, O’Brien was playing Devil’s advocate, that argument falls flat, since it would require that she also play Devil’s advocate with amnestisiacs, something she never did while I was watching.
While I was out, my wife saw another alleged reporter at CNN, a white guy, speak to an illegal in New York who has sired eight illegal children during his time ‘living in the shadows’ here. The illegal complained that the law does not permit him to go back to his country, to visit his family. Instead of playing Devil’s advocate, and pointing out that the man chose to break the law and may return home anytime he wishes, the Hispandering reporter told the audience that this is a case of the law keeping families apart.
Organizers helped out their media sycophants this year, by bringing in tons of American flags, large and small.
Back at CNN’s Atlanta headquarters, an anchorwoman spoke of “More National Guard troops on the border, which might cause more tensions,” without explaining why the Guard should “cause” more tensions or why she was insinuating that America does not have the right to protect her own borders. CNN unveiled its new, pro-criminal slogan: “Immigration Nation.”
“11:28 AM: Guadalupe Vazquez, 80, came to Union Park in a wheelchair, with help from her son. A U.S. citizen since 1967, the Mexican native brought a corn tortilla filled with beans and fried eggs, water and an orange. She planned to make a day of it.
“‘It's important for me because I am Latina and I want to support my brothers and sisters,’ Vazquez said in Spanish. ‘They are suffering. Their families are being separated over paper.’”
Over forty years here, and she still hasn’t bothered to learn English? How did she ever pass the citizenship test, in the first place? And note that she considers foreign criminals, not law-abiding Americans, her “brothers and sisters.” But even speaking Spanish, she’s got the talking points down cold. “Paper,” indeed.
“[Vazquez] wore a large gold Cross necklace and walking shoes. She said she hoped to walk at least part of the march. "More than anything I feel it in my heart," she said of her desire to demonstrate for immigrants' rights.”
That’s illegal immigrants’ rights, Ms. Olkon.
Olkon also provided a pulpit for Ethiopian taxi driver Derege Abebe, 37, in Chicago now for 21 years. "People who work very hard all their life -- just because they don't have no paper? They should have a chance. They deserve to live and work in peace."
What about Americans’ right to live and work in peace, Mr. Abebe?
(I identify people like Sara Olkon as “alleged reporters” based on the principle of the presumption of innocence. I am allowing for the admittedly unlikely possibility that any one of them will say, “I’m not a reporter, I’m really just a propagandist.”)
In Los Angeles, some of the demonstrators turned violent, pelting policemen with rocks and bottles, but that wasn’t the news that a CBS/AP joint communiqué reported. “Cop Tactics At Immigration Rally Draw Ire; L.A. Police Seen Firing Rubber Bullets Into Crowds That Included Children,” reported that it was the LAPD that became violent and assaulted the rioters, er demonstrators. Under the new dispensation, it’s not enough to romanticize criminals as demonstrating for their “rights”; one must also criminalize the good guys. (Note, in this regard, the federal government’s habit of persecuting Border Patrol agents for doing their jobs.)
Initially, LAPD Chief William Bratton was marching in tune with CBS/AP, denouncing his own men, while holding fire from the rioters.
“Police Chief William J. Bratton said Wednesday some of the police tactics to clear immigration protesters from a park were ‘inappropriate,’ as numerous news videos showed officers striking people with batons and firing rubber bullets into crowds that included children.”
Bratton was quoted as saying, “Quite frankly, I was disturbed at what I saw.”
The chief had no words of praise or support for the officers that were wounded in the attack. That part didn’t disturb him.
Nice touch about the children, CBS/AP. Whoever wrote that would be quite comfortable working as a La Raza press spokesman.
The anonymous writer’s implication – like that of Chief Bratton – was that thugs hiding behind children may do what they will to policemen, but the cops may not do anything in response. Is this America or the territories in Israel?
And what the hell kind of people take toddlers and infants to a criminal demonstration, anyway?
AP reporter Peter Prengaman wrote,
“March organizers had long predicted lower turnouts, blaming stepped-up raids, frustration that Congress hasn't passed immigration reform and an effort by many groups to shift their focus from street mobilizations to citizenship and voter registration drives.”
As for the “frustration” factor, that was supposed to explain the massive turnout last year. And “voter registration drives” is a code phrase for organized voter fraud. Telling the story of voter fraud by illegal immigrants is apparently yet another of those jobs that Americans don’t want to do.
Since the L.A. mini-riot, the media are seeking to turn it into a Hispanic version of the Rodney King Hoax. In 1991, the media manufactured a case of police brutality against drunken black speeder Rodney King, by showing only an edited version of the videotape taken of King’s confrontation with police that showed them hitting King with their batons, while cutting out the earlier part of the tape, in which King, after refusing to submit to verbal orders to surrender, and getting up after being tasered with 50,000 volts, charged the police officers at the scene.
Oddly enough, although even Hispanic amnesty activists admit that the police were assaulted, none of the news videos I’ve been able to find show that part of the incident. They show only police using force against non-violent bystanders.
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa alias Tony Villar, who in college was the president of the UCLA chapter of the irredentist, racial supremacist organization, MEChA, itself a leading light in the Reconquista movement, has turned up the heat on the LAPD. After racist Hispanic pols responded to Bratton’s opportunism by screaming for his scalp, Bratton realized that sacrificing his officers will not save his own job, and is now defending them.
And just so there was no confusion as where the national loyalties of NBC’s Houston affiliate lie, their cameraman covering that city’s demonstration by illegals flew the Mexican flag on his camera.
I wonder if the plan to Boycott America also includes not giving birth to their 'jackpot' babies, not driving while drunk, not accepting welfare payments, not using food stamps, not dealing drugs, not murdering, stealing or raping, not attending government schools, not buying homes using government financing, not clogging our court system, not sending remittances to Mexico, not breaking our laws by being here and not insisting that we speak Spanish?
Stewart’s question is, of course, rhetorical.
Americans have become increasingly frustrated at lawless, treasonous lawmakers, judges, and chief executives, not to mention their accomplices among “legitimate businessmen,” “educators,” and “journalists.” As the wish of loyal Americans that the law be enforced is ignored, their nation slips away. What must be done?
Clearly, faxes to congressmen are not enough. Massive demonstrations are necessary. The demand that Pres. Bush be impeached for his attempts to amnesty the illegals is necessary. Non-violent civil disobedience is necessary. And Americans are going to have to begin exercising their legal right to effect citizens’ arrests of illegals.
Award-winning, New York-based freelancer Nicholas Stix founded A Different Drummer magazine (1989-93). Stix has written for Die Suedwest Presse, New York Daily News, New York Post, Newsday, Middle American News, Toogood Reports, Insight, Chronicles, the American Enterprise, Campus Reports, VDARE, the Weekly Standard, Front Page Magazine, Ideas on Liberty, National Review Online and the Illinois Leader. His column also appears at Men's News Daily, MichNews, Intellectual Conservative, Enter Stage Right and OpinioNet. Stix has studied at colleges and universities on two continents, and earned a couple of sheepskins, but he asks that the reader not hold that against him. His day jobs have included washing pots, building Daimler-Benzes on the assembly-line, tackling shoplifters and teaching college, but his favorite job was changing his son's diapers.