Whose America [Archive] - Big Big Forums - Coupons, Freebies, Deals & Discounts

Jolie Rouge

03-30-2006, 09:23 PM

Jesus, Politicians and Scripture
Hillary Mixes Immigration and Religion
3/30/2006
By Jan LaRue, Esq.

Would the GOP's immigration proposal make Jesus a criminal?

Even politicians can remind us of the sweet sound of amazing grace. It extends to one who manages to defame the Good Samaritan and the Good Shepherd in one fell swoop. Such is the forgiveness of Christ on the Cross.

We now have the Gospel on border control and illegal immigration according to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-New York), who is using her "understanding" of the Bible to attack an immigration bill introduced in the Senate.

First, let's acknowledge and give thanks that the United States is a nation of immigrants and descendents of immigrants. Two of my grandparents came through Ellis Island from Hungary and one came from Greece. They gladly joined the "melting pot" to become unhyphenated Americans. They never waved any flag but Old Glory or held allegiance to another nation.

Clinton told a press conference on March 23 that "Jesus Himself" would be judged a criminal under a "mean-spirited" GOP immigration proposal. Clinton said, "It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scriptures. This bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus Himself."

Call it "Scripture Smorgasbord," "Cafeteria Christianity," or "Erratic Exegesis"-it's the practice of those who quote Scripture when it suits a personal preference but ignore it when the preference is condemned. It's not the sole practice of politicians. Some members of the cloth and their followers also engage in it.

Those who quote the Bible should make sure that Holy Writ supports their position. There is a stern warning in Proverbs 30:6: "Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar."

Politicians, who want to appear "faithful" to their religion while supporting policies that are inconsistent with it, employ an inconsistent, two-pronged tactic. They politicize moral and religious issues such as abortion, for example. How many times have you heard, "I'm personally opposed to abortion but who am I to legislate my faith?"

Conversely, we have the example of Sen. Clinton trying to make U.S. immigration policy a religious issue and citing Scripture as authority. So much for not legislating one's faith.

While reasonable people can disagree on immigration policies, and would do well to do so in a civil manner as the President has urged, anybody who tries to use Scripture in support of their position should heed a principle of interpretation: "Text without context is pretext."

Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Who but Christ could remain unchallenged by asking, "Which of you convicts Me of sin?"1 Jesus never violated the Law of Moses or Rome in order to do good. He didn't call those who violated law "good." He called them lawless.

Jesus told parables, "an earthly story with a heavenly meaning," to teach truth. Jesus told the parable recorded in Luke 10: 25-37,2 in answer to a "lawyer" who tried to "test Jesus" by asking, "Who is my neighbor?" As Solomon said, "There is nothing new under the sun," and that includes the arrogance of lawyers.

Note first that Jesus immediately referred the "expert" in the law to the law. By the end, even the lawyer understood that it was the alien in Israel who was a "good" neighbor to the victim.

Second, there isn't a shred of evidence in the story that the Samaritan violated any law or that the "certain man" who fell prey to robbers was an alien, much less an illegal alien. Jesus said the man was on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho. He may have been a Jew and a citizen of Israel. That would more strongly make Jesus' point that the other two men were neighbors of the man but failed to act as such. One was a priest and the other was a member of the priestly tribe of Levi. Both intentionally avoided helping the man. The irony of the parable is that the "good" guy was one of the Samaritans that Jews generally avoided because the Samaritans had intermarried with Gentiles and worshipped at a temple in Samaria rather than the temple in Jerusalem.3 Ouch.

Third, the Samaritan, who made himself vulnerable to criminals by stopping to aid the man, used his personal resources to care for him at a private inn, and didn't bill the government of Israel for reimbursement.

Is this to say that the Samaritan wouldn't have given emergency aid to an illegal alien or that we in the United States shouldn't? No.

Reasonable people may disagree over the interpretation of the bill to which Clinton objects. But one is hard-pressed to set forth a Biblical policy from the parable of the Good Samaritan or any Scripture to support the notion that the if the bill had been law in Israel, it would have required the Samaritan and Jesus to engage in a campaign against Israel's immigration laws in order for a good neighbor to lawfully provide emergency aid to aliens or anyone else.

Sen. Clinton needs to spend more time exegeting Scripture before citing it in what appears to be an effort to turn the United States into a global village with citizen tax-payers footing the bill.

Anyone intent on using the Bible to support an immigration policy should consider the whole counsel of what Scripture teaches about God's view of aliens within nations, the law of individual nations, respect for national boundaries and real property rights. The verses cited below and a Bible concordance would be a good starting point.4

Our Founders' knowledge of Scripture and their Christian faith motivated them to acknowledge in the Declaration of Independence the God-given "unalienable rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness" and "to institute new government … as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." They further protested that the King of Great Britain was "obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners, refusing to pass others to encourage their Migrations hither."

The Founders secured protection and enforcement of these rights in the U.S. Constitution, which sets forth the authority and responsibility of the Congress to "establish a uniform rule of naturalization" and "for calling forth the militia … to repel invasions." [Emphasis added.] They also placed all "executive Power" in the President and made the President the "Commander-in-Chief of … the Militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States."

What could be less "uniform" than to enforce a "rule of naturalization" against aliens who apply for legal entry into the U.S. to become citizens while failing to secure our borders from those invading them in violation of the rule?

http://www.cwfa.org/articles/10423/CWA/nation/index.htm

Jolie Rouge

03-31-2006, 09:33 PM

Mexicana Airlines: "Los Angeles is Now Ours"

Thanks to Peter Boyles of KHOW radio (630 AM in Denver) for bringing this rather disturbing (though not influential) editorial to our attention. It shows aggressive arrogance by Mexico and Mexicans of a sort that can only backfire on them here in the USA.

http://khow.com/pages/img/boyles_LA.jpg

stresseater

04-01-2006, 03:54 PM

*Gag me with a dead smurf * :rolleyes:

Chiizii

04-01-2006, 06:33 PM

These people seem to think that America belongs to them and most of us who are white should move on and return it to them.

Gran Marcha, LA (http://www.mexica-movement.org/granmarcha.htm)

Take a look at their philosophy: Mexica Movement Philosophy (http://www.mexica-movement.org/timexihcah/KNOWLEDGELIBERATION.htm)

When I read it I got the idea they don't even like Mexicans.

We speak to you as the Mexica Movement
in the spirit of our last great civilization,
the Mexica, the so-called, miscalled, Aztecs.
We are Mexica Movement.
The Mexica are our guides
to the liberation of our people.
The name of our nation is Anahuac.
We are the Anahuac nation.
Anahuac is this whole continent.
We are the
people of Anahuac.

Here is another opinion that you might be interested in reading:

Gringos, not Mexicans, have to go (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49482)

The Website (http://www.mexica-movement.org/ENTERHERETEXTONLY.htm)

This group claims genocide.

Is this the "fruit" of diversity and muliculturism? And I wonder how the Native Americans feel about this line of thinking...

stresseater

04-01-2006, 09:55 PM

It's been nothing short of an invasion for a long time. They seem to be getting tired of invading us slowly and now want us to just let them all in and feed,shelter and give them free medical care. I think we should close the borders totally until we round up the illegal aliens and ship them all back home. Then we can go back to allowing so many in for different reasons. :mad:

Jolie Rouge

04-01-2006, 10:01 PM

IMMIGRATION ROUND-UP: HUBRIS EDITION
By Allahpundit · March 31, 2006 08:42 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...av=rss_politics (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/31/AR2006033100187.html?nav=rss_politics)

Summit's over. Apparently, illegals are just "guests" we forgot to invite.

Elsewhere at the summit, Vicente Fox displayed some cojones of his own. From the WaPo article linked above, open borders for thee but not for me:

Fox also noted that Mexico has its own migration problem. "We are working in the inner part and in the southern part of the country to stop migration flows that come from Central America that are crossing illegally the southern border of Mexico," he said. "And with all due respect to the dignity of these people, respecting their human rights, they are stopped, they remain on temporary basis in the stations. We offer them services with dignity. And then we send them back to their communities of origin: 240,000 people [have been] detained . . . and sent back to Central America."

Minutemen Gather to Press Border Control
By ARTHUR H. ROTSTEIN, Associated Press Writer

THREE POINTS, Ariz. - Minuteman volunteers concerned about the continued flow of illegal immigrants across the border from Mexico gathered Saturday with lawn chairs, binoculars and cell phones for a new monthlong campaign aimed at raising public awareness of the issue.

A year after their first watch-and-report operation along the border in southeastern Arizona, members of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps embarked on a much larger effort in the busy migrant-smuggling corridor. "I'm concerned about what's not being done by the government — hasn't been done for ages, apparently," said J. Glenn Sorensen, a retired school administrator now living in Flagstaff.

Sorensen, who was not involved with the Minutemen last year, said he thinks the organization has accomplished part of its intended purpose already, "to draw national attention to an insecure border. I don't think anybody wants to close the border — I certainly don't. Basically, I think they need to be secure."

No one in the group had any illusions about their campaign's effectiveness, since it targets a relatively short section of the border for just a month. However, it comes at a time when Congress is debating proposals seeking to reform immigration laws, which have drawn supporters of legitimizing illegal immigrants to demonstrations in cities across the country. "This is like sticking a finger in the dike," said Ken Raymond, a retired electrical engineer and airplane mechanic from Tucson.

At a rally kicking off the effort at a remote southern Arizona ranch Saturday afternoon, politicians and activists opposing illegal immigration gave fiery speeches calling for more border control.

At least 200 mostly older men and women heard more than a half-dozen speakers praise their efforts and call the Minutemen heroes.

Don Goldwater, a Republican candidate for Arizona governor, said he had a message for President Bush. "Build us that wall — now!" Goldwater said, referring to a measure that would add 700 miles fences along the border. He promised that if elected, he would put illegal immigrants in a tent city on the border and use their labor to build the wall. Goldwater is a nephew of the late Sen. Barry Goldwater.

Each month, thousands of illegal immigrants cross into Arizona. So far this fiscal year, which began Oct. 1, agents have caught more than 48,000 in the area staked out this weekend, up 53 percent from the same period a year earlier.

Chris Simcox, the Minuteman group's national leader, said four watering stations placed by the group Humane Borders to keep migrants from dying in the desert will be among the sites under surveillance. Last year, more than 400 people died trying to cross the desert, many from dehydration or heat exposure, according to the U.S. Border Patrol. "We watch them all the time," Simcox said of the water stations. "It's a great place to report illegal activities."

President Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox support a so-called guest worker program that would allow illegal immigrants already holding jobs in the U.S. to stay.

The Minutemen Saturday arriving south of Tucson plan to patrol private ranch property about 30 miles north of the border.

The group says it plans similar exercises along the border in California, New Mexico and Texas, and along the Canadian border in Washington, New Hampshire, Vermont and New York state.

Along with their binoculars, cell phones and radios, a number wore sidearms, including state Rep. Russell Pearce, a Republican and a leading voice in the Arizona Legislature calling for a crackdown on illegal immigrants.

Those planning to patrol were under strict orders to call the Border Patrol and to avoid confronting intruders or drawing their weapons, said Simcox and Stacey O'Connell, in charge of the Arizona chapter.

Although last year's patrols were nonviolent and disciplined, there are still concerns about having armed groups in a busy trafficking area, Gus Soto, a Border Patrol spokesman, said last week.

Minuteman leaders have said that all the group's members have been screened to weed out members of racist organizations.

Still, groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union-Arizona say they're concerned over "the potential for taking actions and ... attempting to enforce immigration laws," executive director Alessandra Soler Meetze said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060402/ap_on_...WtkBHNlYwM3MTg- (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060402/ap_on_re_us/minuteman_return;_ylt=AgnOVzqfw9a1Xdkrh_UdsmRH2ocA ;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MjBwMWtkBHNlYwM3MTg-)

Jolie Rouge

04-01-2006, 10:07 PM

Quit posturing, stop illegal immigrants
Fri Mar 31, 6:45 AM ET

In the ongoing immigration debate, there is one word people seem to be overlooking: illegal ("Latest immigration 'crisis' defies simplistic solutions," Our view; "Myths vs. facts," Opposing view, Immigration reform debate, Thursday).

The issue is not immigration, per se; it's about illegal immigration. To top it off, we have such illustrious leaders as Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., offering so-called solutions such as allowing people who came here illegally to work in the USA for six years, then permit them to become citizens.

Did anyone hear of exploitation? What about upholding the laws of the United States?

Politicians need to stop posturing for re-election and deal with the hard issues they are in office to deal with, including enforcing the law.

David Tishim, Dover, N.H.

Immigration still works

We must protect our borders and insist upon legal immigration first. Anyone in this country illegally needs to be sent home immediately, and our borders must be sealed for protection against terrorists and from people who want a pay check but aren't willing to pledge allegiance to our country.

Immigration, the old-fashioned way, has worked since the birth of this nation. It must continue. Immigrants who come here legally, learn the language and eventually take a pledge of allegiance are always welcomed. This way helps maintain the unique and vibrant culture that makes us what we are.

Otherwise, forget July Fourth and start celebrating Cinco de Mayo.

Harry Hoover, Huntersville, N.C.

What about U.S. security?

It is disgraceful that the illegal immigration fanatics - who have no regard whatsoever for our national security, the rule of law or the welfare of 300 million Americans - want an unlimited, unregulated amount of immigrants to be allowed to enter the USA.

Illegal immigration already costs U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars yearly - not to mention the lost wages resulting from illegal immigrants taking jobs at the lower end of the economic ladder.

Illegal immigration lowers the wage scale and hurts the middle class. It is a major cause of overpopulation in our country and cannot continue unabated without serious, detrimental and irreparable harm to life as we know it in the USA.

Greg Horak, Aurora, Colo.

'Country's borders are weak'

I see on the news there are marches and protests against immigration reform in this country. How is it possible that there are people in this country who do not feel immigration is out of control?

How is it that anyone in this country can be against some sort of immigration reform? What is the problem with proposing some effort to curb the illegal invasion happening in the USA? What is the problem with trying to fix the already strained social services departments, caused in part by the influx of illegal immigrants?

This country's borders are weak and failing more every day. Until we strengthen the borders, our safety, our culture and our way of life are all in danger. It is time to roll up the "welcome" mats at the borders and replace them with "keep out" signs.

Debra Adkins, Roanoke, Va.

Solutions will take guts

When it comes to getting a deal on immigration, Congress has no guts - just as our lawmakers lack guts to deal with other larger problems facing this country, such as Social Security and the war in Iraq.

Our politicians don't want to upset their political base.

A fair deal, in my view, would be to allow illegal immigrants who are in this country six months to register with immigration authorities without facing criminal charges.

Let them have their cases heard as to why they should or should not be allowed to stay in this country.

After that - and no matter what - no one should be allowed to remain in this country illegally, and anyone who gives illegal immigrants cover should face charges and a stiff jail sentence.

Garry Allyn DeManty, Stockton, Calif.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20060331/...nA2BHNlYwM3NDI- (http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20060331/cm_usatoday/quitposturingstopillegalimmigrants;_ylt=AkK23xdugr T1_5FcIEKLnOGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3YWF***A2BHNlYwM3ND I-)

Jolie Rouge

04-01-2006, 10:07 PM

Q&A: Three Goals of Senate on Immigration
By SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press Writer
Fri Mar 31, 4:59 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Immigration and border security proposals being debated in the Senate encompass three goals: to stem the influx of illegal immigrants across the U.S.-Mexico border, to deal with people already here illegally and to satisfy U.S. companies that say they need the workers.

The task is anything but simple. And any legislation produced by the Senate would have to be negotiated with the House, which has passed a harsher bill that would make being an illegal immigrant a felony.

Here are some questions and answers on the issue:

Q: How many illegal immigrants are in the United States?

A: The Pew Hispanic Center, a research organization in Washington, estimates between 11 million and 12 million. The number includes children. An estimated 850,000 illegal immigrants have arrived each year since 2000.

Q: Where do they come from?

A: About 6.2 million, or 56 percent, are from Mexico, according to Pew. An additional 2.5 million are from Central America and elsewhere in Latin America. About 1.5 million are from Asia, 600,000 from Europe and Canada and about 400,000 from Africa and other countries.

Q: How many legal immigrants are in the country?

A: About 13.1 million, not including naturalized citizens.

Q: What is a green card?

A: A green card, which is not necessarily green, signifies an immigrant has legal permanent residence, a right to stay in the United States as long as he or she doesn't commit a deportable act. The immigrants can hold any job in which U.S. citizenship is not a requirement. They are protected by all local, state and federal laws, can vote in state and local elections that don't require U.S. citizenship and can petition for visas for a spouse, parents and minor children. Permanent residents also must pay income taxes and men 18 to 25 must register with Selective Service.

Q: How does a legal permanent resident become a citizen?

A: Immigrants can apply for citizenship five years after becoming legal permanent residents. They must pay a naturalization fee, pass English, history and U.S. government tests and be of good moral character.

Q: What are guest workers?

A: Guest workers have employer-sponsored visas to work in the country for a limited time, usually two to seven years. Some are allowed to apply for permanent residency.

Q: What do lawmakers want to do about illegal immigrants already in the country?

A: The House has passed a bill that would make all illegal immigrants felons. It would also make offering them non-emergency aid or assistance a federal crime.

The Senate essentially is looking at two proposals. The main differences between them are:

_One would let them stay in the country for up to five years if they apply within six months and pay fines that start in the second year at $2,000 and rise by that much each year. But they would have to leave the country at the end of five years. They could then apply to return to the country as permanent residents or guest workers. As guest workers they can work in two-year intervals for up to six years, but must leave for a year between each two-year period.

_The other allows them to stay for up to six years after clearing a background check and paying a $1,000 fine. If they pay all their taxes and don't get into trouble they can apply for permanent residency without having to leave the country. Critics call this approach amnesty, saying it is unfair to immigrants who get in line to come to the United States legally.

Q: What is President Bush's position?

A: Bush supports giving temporary legal guest worker status to illegal immigrants who have jobs and providing them with a path for becoming permanent residents and naturalized citizens. They could not get in front of legal residents already in that process.

Q: What do businesses want?

A: Businesses want a steady supply of legal workers to do jobs that they say Americans won't do. Most oppose proposals that would require them to verify the legal status of employees unless the government provides them with a low-cost way to do it.

Q: Are illegal immigrants' children born in the United States citizens?

A: Yes.

Q: What do the various proposals in Congress do about border security?

A: All of the proposals would add more Border Patrol agents, investigators to enforce laws against hiring illegal immigrants and inspectors to check for contraband at ports of entry. They would increase detention beds, and give more power and money to local law enforcement to enforce immigration laws.

Q: What about employers who hire illegal immigrants?

A: Employers could be fined from $5,000 to $20,000 for each illegal immigrant they hire under a proposal by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. Fines would range from $5,000 to $40,000, under the House bill per illegal immigrant. Under current law, the range is $250 to $10,000 per violation.

Q: What are these proposals about a fence on the border between U.S. and Mexico?

A: The House wants to erect several double fences totaling about 700 miles or about a third of the 2,000-mile border. The fences would be put in areas where illegal entry into the U.S. is most prevalent. Proposals in the Senate would create a "virtual" fence of more cameras, sensors and other technology to augment a larger Border Patrol.

Q: Is anybody looking at allowing more immigrants to come to the U.S. legally?

A: Various Senate proposal would increase the number of guest worker, family and other residency visas by 150,000 to 800,000 a year.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_...migration_q_a_1

Jolie Rouge

04-03-2006, 12:28 PM

Jolie Rouge

04-03-2006, 12:29 PM

And reader J.W. sends info on the Skyline H.S. incident in Colorado that Allahpundit blogged about here on Friday:
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004897.htm

I'm a retired Colorado cop who is now a driving instructor in northern Colorado. I'm a regular reader of your blog and, yes, I voted for George Bush in the last election. One of my male driving students attends Skyline High School in Longmont, CO and today gave me this version of the past week's events: On Friday, March 24, a group of Skyline H. S. Latino students, some citizens and some not citizens, showed up at school, many wearing or prominently displaying the flag of Mexico. At some point during the day these Latino students left the campus and went to downtown Longmont to participate in a protest over the impending immigration legislation. Some of the non-Latino students, angry and offended at the display on campus of the flag of Mexico, and angry at the walkout, decided to stage a pro-American "protest." On the following Tuesday morning, March 28, 2006, a group of the "pro-American" students parked their pickup trucks in the school student parking lot. The American flag was displayed prominently on these trucks. While the students were in classes, members of the Skyline H.S. administration went to the student parking lot and summarily confiscated the American flags.

When the students returned to their trucks later in the day and discovered their American flags missing, they went to the administration building to report the thefts. These students were detained by the adminstration, the students' parents summoned to the school and, by the virtue of the confessions of the students to having brought the American flags to school, they were summarily suspended from school for a period of two days. My student, who says he is a friend of several of the suspended students, told me that his friends claimed they were suspended because their display of the American flag was, according to the adminstrators who suspended them, "inappropriate" in these circumstances.

My student is not aware of any student who displayed or carried a Mexican flag on campus having been suspended. I neglected to ask him if any of the Mexican flags had been confiscated. On the following Thursday, March 30, 2006, some of the suspended students returned to the school parking lot. The suspended students sat in their trucks, on which were once again displayed American flags, and loudly played "God Bless America" by means of boom-boxes. Latino students approached the parked trucks. Words and threats were exchanged and fist fights broke out. All students who got into fist fights were summarily suspended from school. The "patriots", counting their original suspensions, now had 11 days of suspension to serve.

On the morning of Friday, March 31, 2006 the adminstration received "intelligence information" that another student walkout was imminent, as a result of the "flag" suspensions. The principal used the intra-school P.A. system to warn students that they would be video-taped if a protest occurred, that the police would be present, and protesters would be arrested.

The "patriots" decided to stage their protest at lunch-time, to avoid getting into more trouble with the school authorities. Lunch-time begins at 11:00 a.m., according to my student. At about 10:30 a.m. the Latinos and some "patriots" began to walk out of classes. My student saw one of his classmates carrying an American flag in a back pocket. My student received instructions by phone from his mother, who was watching events unfold on television, to leave the school and to go home for lunch.

On his way home, my student saw a group of Latino students, some of whom had come from the nearby Junior High School to join the high school students, gathered west of Skyline High School on Mountain View Ave. The Latinos were waving Mexican flags and yellling in Spanish at a group of "patriot" students, who were gathered closer to the school. My student later heard a story he could not directly substantiate that a truck carrying Latinos in the rear bed, from which a Mexican flag was displayed, drove by the gathering confrontation. Affixed to the rear of that truck and dragging on the pavement was a tattered American flag.

According to my student, the Longmont Police responded in force and surrounded the "patriot" students. The police did not surround or try to contain the Latino students. The Latino students approached the "patriots." My student continued walking home for his lunch break. When my student returned to the school from his lunch break he saw some of his friends in handcuffs and sitting inside police cars. My student said that virtually all of his teachers, in talking to students about this situation during classes, have "sided" with the illegal aliens or sympathizers there-with in the situation, and he does not at all understand why this is so.

Jolie Rouge

04-03-2006, 12:34 PM

Kristinn Taylor at Free Republic announces "Take an American Flag to Work Day, Thursday, April 6, 2006:"

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1608081/posts

How it works is simple : Proudly carry an American flag with you wherever you are in public. Small parade style flags on sticks would work best for those who commute by bus or subway and those who walk to work. Carry it around with you when you go out for lunch and when you leave work.

Wear red, white and blue patriotic attire. Fly the American flag at your home. Fly an American flag from your car antenna. Tape an American flag in your car window. The goal is to have Old Glory be given the prominence it deserves and to remind everyone--politicians, illegal aliens and their enablers--that the American flag comes first in this country.

Folks have been clamoring for a march to respond to the pro-illegal alien marches. This is a way to do that without having to take time off from work and family responsibilities and still take a stand in public.

John McCain has been touting the pro-illegal alien marches as being effective in influencing polticians in Washington. Now's your chance to exercise your influence.

Please pass this message along to everyone you know and every patriotic blogger you can think of. Contact any patriotic group you belong to. Contact your local media and talk radio shows. We don't have George Soros to bankroll a publicity campaign. We just have us. Stand up for America and Old Glory this Thursday.

Jolie Rouge

04-04-2006, 07:42 AM

IF IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR MEXICO...

The Center for Security Policy has published an excellent primer by J. Michael Waller on how Mexico treats its own "undocumented" residents.

For example, according to an official translation published by the Organization of American States, the Mexican constitution includes the following restrictions:

Pursuant to Article 33, "Foreigners may not in any way participate in the political affairs of the country." This ban applies, among other things, to participation in demonstrations and the expression of opinions in public about domestic politics like those much in evidence in Los Angeles, New York and elsewhere in recent days.

Equal employment rights are denied to immigrants, even legal ones. Article 32: "Mexicans shall have priority over foreigners under equality of circumstances for all classes of concessions and for all employment, positions, or commissions of the Government in which the status of citizenship is not indispensable."

Jobs for which Mexican citizenship is considered "indispensable" include, pursuant to Article 32, bans on foreigners, immigrants, and even naturalized citizens of Mexico serving as military officers, Mexican-flagged ship and airline crew, and chiefs of seaports and airports.

Article 55 denies immigrants the right to become federal lawmakers. A Mexican congressman or senator must be "a Mexican citizen by birth." Article 91 further stipulates that immigrants may never aspire to become cabinet officers as they are required to be Mexican by birth. Article 95 says the same about Supreme Court justices.
In accordance with Article 130, immigrants - even legal ones - may not become members of the clergy, either.

Foreigners, to say nothing of illegal immigrants, are denied fundamental property rights. For example, Article 27 states, "Only Mexicans by birth or naturalization and Mexican companies have the right to acquire ownership of lands, waters, and their appurtenances, or to obtain concessions for the exploitation of mines or of waters."

Article 11 guarantees federal protection against "undesirable aliens resident in the country." What is more, private individuals are authorized to make citizen's arrests. Article 16 states, "In cases of flagrante delicto, any person may arrest the offender and his accomplices, turning them over without delay to the nearest authorities." In other words, Mexico grants its citizens the right to arrest illegal aliens and hand them over to police for prosecution. Imagine the Minutemen exercising such a right!

The Mexican constitution states that foreigners - not just illegal immigrants - may be expelled for any reason and without due process. According to Article 33, "the Federal Executive shall have the exclusive power to compel any foreigner whose remaining he may deem inexpedient to abandon the national territory immediately and without the necessity of previous legal action."

Read the whole thing - http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/Mexicos_Glass_House.pfd - and then demand that our lawmakers have the guts to enforce America's immigration laws as unapologetically as Mexico enforces its own.

Jolie Rouge

04-04-2006, 09:20 PM

Illegal Workers Have Mixed Impact
By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON - They pick fruit and vegetables and clip hedges. They hang drywall and clean houses, hotels and office buildings.

The millions of illegal workers in the United States have come under a fresh spotlight as Congress and President Bush grapple with revamping the nation's immigration policies.

Illegal workers' relationship to the economy is intricate.

They are willing to work for lower wages than legal workers, helping to keep down prices. But illegals also can depress wages for unskilled, legal workers and strain local hospitals and schools.

"There is not a simple economic case here. It is complex. It is interwoven, and it is very hard to extract," said Terry Connelly, dean of the Ageno School of Business at Golden Gate University in San Francisco. "It is like pulling some sort of piece of thread out of a fabric. If you pull that thread out, you don't know to what degree you have weakened the fabric."

There are an estimated 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States. Some 7.2 million of them are employed — about 5 percent of the U.S. labor force — according to the Pew Hispanic Center, a research organization. The illegal workers are mostly men and are heavily concentrated in construction, agriculture and cleaning jobs, Pew says. Those jobs tend to be low skill or unskilled manual labor, economists said.

"From lawn services to meat packing. You name it. The primary benefit to consumers from illegal workers is lower prices," said Nariman Behravesh, chief economist at Global Insight.

For businesses, cheap labor can translate into fatter profits. If owners use those profits to expand their businesses, it would boost economic activity.

While consumers and businesses may benefit from such cheap labor, the U.S. born-worker could be hurt by it, according to some research.

Between 1980 and 2000, legal and illegal immigration reduced the average annual earnings of U.S.-born men by an estimated $1,700 or roughly 4 percent, according to research done in 2004 by George Borjas, economics professor at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

The situation was worse if one considers only the 10 million U.S.-born men who lack a high school degree. For them, the increased supply of workers depressed wages by 7.4 percent, he found.

Economists at the Federal Reserve banks in Dallas and Atlanta found no evidence in 2003 that wages of higher-skilled U.S.-born workers were hurt by immigration, although lower-wage workers were impacted.

Illegal immigrants use federal, state and local resources, including schools, medical care and emergency services, straining government coffers and costing taxpayers money. However, many of the costs are tied to their kids — many of them American-born children who are U.S. citizens.

At the federal level, the big cost is through Medicaid and food-assistance programs, according to Steven Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors stricter immigration rules.

Camarota acknowledges that some illegals pay federal taxes, but he said their cost to the federal government — $12 billion, according to his estimate — is greater.

There's another way to look at it. Since some illegals pay payroll taxes, they're helping to bankroll Social Security and Medicare but won't get to participate in the programs because of their immigration status.

"From our standpoint, this is not a top fiscal issue," said Pete Sepp, spokesman for the National Taxpayers Union.

Experts note that illegals spend part of their paychecks in this country — for food, clothes, furniture, living expenses and other things — all of which contribute to economic growth. But many also send some of their earnings to their families in their native countries.

Still, they expand the nation's overall labor pool and productivity. "We can make more stuff and that can add to overall economic activity," said Andrew Bernard, professor of international economics at Dartmouth College's Tuck School of Business.

In Congress, diverse proposals have been offered to deal with the immigration issue.

House-passed legislation takes a tough approach, including provisions making illegal immigrants' presence in this country a felony. A Senate proposal sets out a path that would make illegal immigrants who came to the United States before 2004 eligible for permanent residency.

If all the illegal workers in this country were booted out tomorrow, economists believe wages would have to rise significantly to get U.S.-born workers to take their jobs.

"It would take time for that to occur and during this period of adjustment — some things might not get done — maybe some crops won't be picked or some hotel rooms won't get cleaned," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com. In some cases, companies might opt to invest in machines and other automation rather than hire higher-paid workers, economists said.

Under these scenarios, consumers' prices could rise.

Two-thirds of Americans polled think illegal immigrants fill jobs that most Americans do not want, according to a recent AP-Ipsos poll.

But the survey found greater ambiguity on whether illegal immigrants are good or bad for American society. Fifty-one percent said illegal immigrants mostly make a contribution to society, and 42 percent said they were mostly a drain.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060404/ap_on_bi_ge/underground_workers;_ylt=Aur56fEqtjYihkoQAFXzItpv2 4cA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3bGI2aDNqBHNlYwM3NDk-

___

On the Net:

Pew Hispanic Center: http://pewhispanic.org/

Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta: http://www.frbatlanta.org/

Golden Gate University: http://www.ggu.edu/

Center for Immigration Studies: http://www.cis.org/

Jolie Rouge

04-06-2006, 08:14 AM

Tensions Prompt School To Alter Dress Code
Mike Hooker

(CBS4) WESTMINSTER, Colo. The immigration debate and recent demonstrations over the issue have led to a change in the dress code for a middle school in Adams County.

Students at Shaw Heights Middle School are no longer allowed to wear anything that is patriotic, including camouflage pants, because they have become a political symbol for a version of patriotism, CBS4 reports.

"It upsets me that we cannot support our troops -- the military," said Kirsten Golgart, an eighth grader who was told she'd be suspended if she didn't change her clothes. "We can't support our country. If we're American, I think we should be proud to be an American."

A letter went home to parents last week that explained for student safety, no clothes were allowed with political messages or flags of any sort.

Myla Shepherd, the principal, said that tensions over the immigration issue were apparent when more than 20 students came to school wearing camouflage jackets and pants, apparently to show what they call their patriotism and American pride.

"We started seeing name calling," Shepherd said. "Safety is my first concern, so I'm going to do things to keep us from getting to a point where anybody is hurt or being suspended for fighting."

She said the dress code alteration diffused the tension immediately.

"I don't think that's a solution, though because you're punishing 400 students because the action of 100," said Eric Golgart, Kirsten's father.

He gathered signatures against the dress code, but the principal said that for safety, freedom of speech can be limited in schools, even as students get involved in the national immigration discussion.

In Longmont, the principal of Skyline High School banned all flags, including the American flag, because of tensions related to immigration reform.

Shaw Heights Middle School is located at 8780 Circle Dr. in Westminster, and it is part of Adams County School District 50.

http://cbs4denver.com/topstories/local_story_094003340.html

Jolie Rouge

04-06-2006, 08:21 AM

FLAG WARS

By Michelle Malkin · April 03, 2006 08:00 AM

There's no rest for the reconquistadors. They marched this weekend in Costa Mesa:

http://MichelleMalkin.com/archives/images/costamesa.jpg

And Brooklyn:

http://MichelleMalkin.com/archives/images/brooklyn.jpg

And more are planned in coming days (via Alternet):

In the coming weeks, there will be plentiful opportunities to stand in solidarity with this nation's undocumented immigrants. Below is a short listing of demonstrations being planned across the nation. Please post information about any other rallies or marches being planned in your area.

* Sunday, April 9: Salt Lake City: "Dignity March" to the state capitol is scheduled for noon to 5 pm, starting and ending at the City-County Building in downtown Salt Lake City.

* Monday, April 10: April 10, the National Day of Action for Immigrant Justice will be the biggest day of demonstrations around the nation. The following cities have rallies in the planning stages: Houston; San Antonio; Austin, Texas; Dallas; St. Louis; Minneapolis; Detroit; Chicago; Pittsburgh; Philadelphia; Miami; Charlotte, N.C.; New Haven, Conn.; Danbury, Conn.; Hartford, Conn.; Birmingham, Ala.; New York; Boston; Milwaukee; Washington, D.C.; and many more. As of today, here are the cities that have confirmed a time and location: New York: "Full Rights for All Immigrants" at Battery Park, 3-6pm; Salt Lake City: "Unity Rally" at the City-County Building in downtown Salt Lake City, 4:30pm.

* Saturday, April 29: Los Angeles and New York rallies are being organized by the Progressive Labor Party, which is calling for a Communist revolution.

Diana West diagnoses the foreign flag outbreak:

This outpouring may be the tangible fusion of every liberal orthodoxy, from multiculturalism to "inclusiveness" to "self-esteem"; it's also in-your-face symbolism of the abysmal failure to assimilate, to Americanize, even on the most superficial level, an ever-growing influx of foreign-born millions.

And reader J.W. sends info on the Skyline H.S. incident in Colorado that Allahpundit blogged about here on Friday:
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004897.htm

I'm a retired Colorado cop who is now a driving instructor in northern Colorado. I'm a regular reader of your blog and, yes, I voted for George Bush in the last election. One of my male driving students attends Skyline High School in Longmont, CO and today gave me this version of the past week's events: On Friday, March 24, a group of Skyline H. S. Latino students, some citizens and some not citizens, showed up at school, many wearing or prominently displaying the flag of Mexico. At some point during the day these Latino students left the campus and went to downtown Longmont to participate in a protest over the impending immigration legislation. Some of the non-Latino students, angry and offended at the display on campus of the flag of Mexico, and angry at the walkout, decided to stage a pro-American "protest." On the following Tuesday morning, March 28, 2006, a group of the "pro-American" students parked their pickup trucks in the school student parking lot. The American flag was displayed prominently on these trucks. While the students were in classes, members of the Skyline H.S. administration went to the student parking lot and summarily confiscated the American flags.

When the students returned to their trucks later in the day and discovered their American flags missing, they went to the administration building to report the thefts. These students were detained by the adminstration, the students' parents summoned to the school and, by the virtue of the confessions of the students to having brought the American flags to school, they were summarily suspended from school for a period of two days. My student, who says he is a friend of several of the suspended students, told me that his friends claimed they were suspended because their display of the American flag was, according to the adminstrators who suspended them, "inappropriate" in these circumstances.

My student is not aware of any student who displayed or carried a Mexican flag on campus having been suspended. I neglected to ask him if any of the Mexican flags had been confiscated. On the following Thursday, March 30, 2006, some of the suspended students returned to the school parking lot. The suspended students sat in their trucks, on which were once again displayed American flags, and loudly played "God Bless America" by means of boom-boxes. Latino students approached the parked trucks. Words and threats were exchanged and fist fights broke out. All students who got into fist fights were summarily suspended from school. The "patriots", counting their original suspensions, now had 11 days of suspension to serve.

On the morning of Friday, March 31, 2006 the adminstration received "intelligence information" that another student walkout was imminent, as a result of the "flag" suspensions. The principal used the intra-school P.A. system to warn students that they would be video-taped if a protest occurred, that the police would be present, and protesters would be arrested.

The "patriots" decided to stage their protest at lunch-time, to avoid getting into more trouble with the school authorities. Lunch-time begins at 11:00 a.m., according to my student. At about 10:30 a.m. the Latinos and some "patriots" began to walk out of classes. My student saw one of his classmates carrying an American flag in a back pocket. My student received instructions by phone from his mother, who was watching events unfold on television, to leave the school and to go home for lunch.

On his way home, my student saw a group of Latino students, some of whom had come from the nearby Junior High School to join the high school students, gathered west of Skyline High School on Mountain View Ave. The Latinos were waving Mexican flags and yellling in Spanish at a group of "patriot" students, who were gathered closer to the school. My student later heard a story he could not directly substantiate that a truck carrying Latinos in the rear bed, from which a Mexican flag was displayed, drove by the gathering confrontation. Affixed to the rear of that truck and dragging on the pavement was a tattered American flag.

According to my student, the Longmont Police responded in force and surrounded the "patriot" students. The police did not surround or try to contain the Latino students. The Latino students approached the "patriots." My student continued walking home for his lunch break. When my student returned to the school from his lunch break he saw some of his friends in handcuffs and sitting inside police cars. My student said that virtually all of his teachers, in talking to students about this situation during classes, have "sided" with the illegal aliens or sympathizers there-with in the situation, and he does not at all understand why this is so.

Jolie Rouge

04-11-2006, 11:03 AM

THE SIGNS YOU DIDN'T SEE...
...on the front pages of the NYTimes and Washington Post:

From James Hudnall...

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/sign1.jpg

From Robert Bluey in Washington, the translation is: "Open the door or I'll break the window"...

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/sign007.jpg

From Bryan Preston's Texas correspondent, the requisite Nazi smears...

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/sign004.jpg

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/sign005.jpg

Three from Allah Pundit in NY...first up, the lead singer of the open borders band "Outernational" wearing a t-shirt that reads "AMERICA IS SCARY"

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/sign002.jpg

...next, a cozy merger of open borders Jihadists, reconquistas, and Socialists...

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/sign003.jpg

...last from Allah Pundit, a revealing look at the real agenda of NYC protesters. It's not just about amnesty for peaceful "undocumented workers." It's about sabotaging U.S. immigration policy and stopping immigration enforcement against anyone...

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/sign006.jpg

And Mary Katherine Ham snapped this expression of gratitude for America in D.C.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/givetake.jpg

Now, back to your regularly scheduled MSM open borders propaganda...

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/nytimesprop.jpg

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/washpostprop.jpg

moogle

04-11-2006, 03:30 PM

Personally, I think it is now the tax payers America.....
If you want to become legal - and work and pay taxes,
you're welcome to stay......

(Granted - there are some people out there that for health reasons
can't work - they are exceptions to my comment above.)

Jolie Rouge

04-17-2006, 12:41 PM

School Makes Kids Use Buckets for Toilets
2 hours, 19 minutes ago

INGLEWOOD, Calif. - A principal trying to prevent walkouts during immigration rallies inadvertently introduced a lockdown so strict that children weren't allowed to go to the bathroom, and instead had to use buckets in the classroom, an official said.

Worthington Elementary School Principal Angie Marquez imposed the lockdown March 27 as nearly 40,000 students across Southern California left classes that morning to attend immigrants' rights demonstrations. The lockdown continued into the following morning.

Marquez apparently misread the district handbook and ordered a lockdown designed for nuclear attacks.

Tim Brown, the district's director of operations, confirmed some students used buckets but said the principal's order to impose the most severe type of lockdown was an "honest mistake."

"When there's a nuclear attack, that's when buckets are used," Brown told the Los Angeles Times. The principal "followed procedure. She made a decision to follow the handbook. She just misread it."

In some cases teachers escorted classmates to regular restroom facilities, students said.

Telephones rang unanswered Monday at Worthington Elementary School because of spring break and messages left for Marquez and Brown at school district headquarters were not returned.

Appalled parents have complained to the school board. Brown said the school district planned to update its emergency preparedness instructions to give more explicit directions.

Parents and community activists asked the school board at its April 5 meeting to explain the principal's decision. They also sought promises that the lockdown wouldn't be repeated. "There was no violence at the protests, so this was based on what?" activist Diane Sambrano asked. "It was unsanitary, unnecessary and absolutely unacceptable."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060417/ap_on_re_us/immigration_classroom_buckets;_ylt=AgjCW9npSJv3TpH ur6r3MUoEtbAF;_ylu=X3oDMTBhZDJjOXUyBHNlYwNtdm5ld3M-

Jolie Rouge

04-17-2006, 08:57 PM

GEORGIA VS. ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
By Michelle Malkin · April 17, 2006 08:16 PM

Since Washington can't get its act together on immigration enforcement, the state of Georgia is taking security into its own hands (via Reuters): http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2006-04-17T231323Z_01_N17284809_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-IMMIGRATION-GEORGIA.xml

The state of Georgia approved a sweeping measure on Monday to crack down on illegal immigrants and the people who hire them as a passionate debate on immigration heats up in the United States.

The law could fuel a national controversy as the federal government and other states consider how to deal with millions of undocumented workers while immigrants, many of whom are Hispanic, are displaying their political power through mass demonstrations in cities across the United States.

The Georgia Security and Immigration Compliance Act, signed into law by Gov. Sonny Perdue, denies many state services paid for by taxpayers to people who are in the United States illegally. It also forces contractors doing business with the state to verify the legal status of new workers, and requires police to notify immigration officials if people charged with crimes are illegal immigrants.

"It's our responsibility to ensure that our famous Georgia hospitality is not abused, that our taxpayers are not taken advantage of and that our citizens are protected," Perdue said before signing the law. Other provisions of the law prohibit employers from claiming a tax deduction for wages of $600 or more paid to undocumented workers, impose prison terms for human trafficking and limit the services commercial companies can provide to illegal immigrants.

May this become a trend.

***

PrivatePigg is on the samewavelength.

Monday, April 17, 2006
Georgia Takes Immigration Into Its Own Hands

Via Reuters:
The state of Georgia approved a sweeping measure on Monday to crack down on illegal immigrants and the people who hire them as a passionate debate on immigration heats up in the United States.

The Georgia Security and Immigration Compliance Act, signed into law by Gov. Sonny Perdue, denies many state services paid for by taxpayers to people who are in the United States illegally.

It also forces contractors doing business with the state to verify the legal status of new workers, and requires police to notify immigration officials if people charged with crimes are illegal immigrants.

What a novel - and great - idea. The Founding Fathers were on to something when they established a system of partially independent states, and this is it. The ability of the local governments to be responsive to the people was apparent even back then. Keeping things local and establishing rules "brick-by-brick" (from the bottom up), rather than with a federal "umbrella" (from the top down), is a surefire way to solve many of today's problems.

In today's world of unending bureaucracy, red tape and waste, this strategy should be even more attractive. I encourage the "big" pundits of the blogosphere to push for similar measures in their own states. If the federal government can't get the job done, I'm sure our states can. Heck, we could even get Texas, Arizona and New Mexico to start policing their borders with Mexico. Last time I checked, they all voted for Bush in 2004. Make it an issue in the governors' reelection campaigns.

http://publicfiguresbeware.blogspot.com/2006/04/georgia-takes-immigration-into-its-own.html

EVA LONGORIA: OPEN BORDERS ACTIVIST

Hollywood actress Eva Longoria, most recently seen in a bikini on the cover of Shape Magazine, is mad that people don't talk about her brain. So, what exactly is in her brain that's so important to know? Read on (via Reuters):
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=peopleNews&storyid=2006-04-17T121908Z_01_N13268663_RTRIDST_0_PEOPLE-LEISURE-LONGORIA-DC.XML

Eva Longoria is annoyed. The Latina beauty on hit television show "Desperate Housewives" is bugged by all the newspaper, magazine and Web gossip about her sex life when there are more important issues to think about.

She is as comfortable talking about U.S. immigration policy and the plight of migrant farm workers as she is having her bikini-clad body on a mega-sized magazine cover spread out in the Nevada desert so that it can be seen from outer space.

Longoria, 31, is a beauty, but her brain is big, too and she wants folks to know it...

...beyond the Hollywood glitz. Longoria holds a degree in kinesiology from Texas A&M University - Kingsville. She is a spokeswoman for Padres Contra el Cancer, which is dedicated to helping Latino kids with the disease, and works with the United Farm Workers labor union.

She said it was "unfortunate" that in the United States -- a nation of immigrants -- some lawmakers want to deport illegal aliens and fence off the Mexico/U.S. border.

"Mexicans contribute an enormous amount to our society, economically and socially," she said. "I don't think this administration can afford to have things end badly."

Now you know.

Jolie Rouge

04-18-2006, 02:57 PM

Employers risk little in hiring illegal labor
By Faye Bowers, Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
Tue Apr 18, 4:00 AM ET

PHOENIX - It's a topic often lost in the heated battle over whether to add more border patrol agents, build a bigger fence, or deploy the US military along the border with Mexico. But in the end, most analysts agree, the United States can't stem the flow of illegal immigrants until it resolves to do one thing: punish employers who hire them.

Current law provides for sanctions against such employers, and legislation now under consideration in Congress would stiffen employer penalties.

The tougher provisions are not lost on companies here in Arizona, which now has more illegal immigrants crossing its border than any other state and which owes its decades-long growth spurt in part to a huge workforce - at least 12 percent - of undocumented laborers.

But federal enforcement has long been so weak, and employer fines so few and far between, that many here still laugh off the prospect of serious sanctions - though the laughs are a little more nervous now.

"There's a pretty universal consensus that this is the single largest missing point of our enforcement regime," says Marc Rosenblum, a visiting scholar at the Migration Policy Institute, an independent think tank in Washington that tracks the worldwide movement of people. "But there's never been enough commitment or resources thrown at it. The bills being considered now would go a long way toward addressing that problem."

p>The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), enacted in 1986, requires employers to verify that prospective employees are either US citizens or authorized to work here. But rather than mandate a national identity card - because of privacy reasons - the legislation gives employers wide latitude in determining eligibility. Workers can offer employers at least 25 different documents to prove they are authorized to work in the US.

"The law has been so difficult to enforce that the number of cases brought against employers is about half what it was a decade ago even though the number of unauthorized workers has roughly doubled in that time," a Pew Research Center report concluded last month.

One local businessman, who wishes to remain anonymous, knows firsthand the weaknesses in the enforcement regime. He owned a large landscape business for more than two decades in which he employed up to 300 people at a time, most of whom were Latino immigrants.

His human resource department checked the documents of prospective employees and filled out the IRCA-required I-9 forms. "The quality of the documents varied quite a bit from being very, very good in terms of forgeries to the point of some pretty strange looking things, like misspelled names on social security cards," says the businessman. "The problem is where do you draw the line? And to what extent do we [employers] need to become experts in counterfeiting?"

He says the then Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) audited his business three times during the 1990s. Each time, he lost more than half his workforce, but never received a fine because "we did a good job of filling out all the paperwork."

"It became almost humorous that every time they came in, we knew we'd lose a bunch of people, but gradually we'd hire other ones, and that was just the way of doing business," he says.

The INS is now the US Citizenship and Immigration Services.

"Everyone knew" some workers were illegal immigrants, says a young man who has supervised wait staffs at three Phoenix-area establishments. One had a bunkhouse where "no fewer than 10 illegal immigrants lived at a time."

So when the INS raided that establishment in the mid-1990s, "we lost over half the workers that night and had to close early," he says. "But within a week, they hired a whole new staff of illegals." There was no fine.

"The promise of IRCA was that with the penalization of employers there was an assumption the demand would dry up and that the pull factor would diminish," says Louis DeSipio, professor of Chicano/Latino studies at the University of California at Irvine. "But in practice it became evident by the late 1980s that the INS wasn't making interior enforcement too much of a priority, and employers frequently had a good excuse for violating the law because so many illegal documents became available."

Enforcement has fallen since '80s
In fact, the emphasis peaked in that period with the INS spending about 5 percent of its budget on work-site enforcement, says Mr. Rosenblum, then began to lag behind other priorities.

Since the 9/11 attacks, there has been even less focus on interior investigations. The government formed the Department of Homeland Security, which took in INS and made Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), responsible for interior investigations, but they've focused much more intently on border enforcement.) In fiscal 2004, ICE issued three notices of its intent to fine a business for hiring illegal immigrants - down from 417 five years earlier, according to a 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office.

But the bills currently wending their way through the Senate, and the one passed by the House, are likely to beef up work-site enforcement. Any final version is likely to make mandatory today's voluntary employment-verification program. Moreover, the bills call for an increase from 50 to up to 5,000 ICE agents who monitor work sites and significant increases in the fines, and perhaps jail time, for employers who break the law.

"I don't think employer enforcement alone will stop illegal immigration," says Dr. DeSipio. "But it will decrease the incentive for a new migrant who doesn't have family here. That person wouldn't take the risk if he/she didn't have the confidence that he/she could move directly into a job."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20060418/ts_csm/aemployers;_ylt=AkS4IgAuELQG0C8KeI9Ak09g.3QA;_ylu= X3oDMTA4b3FrcXQ0BHNlYwMxNjkz

Jolie Rouge

04-19-2006, 02:57 PM

Students March in Colo., Back Immigrants
By MELISSA TRUJILLO, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 50 minutes ago

DENVER - Waving U.S. and Mexican flags, hundreds of high school students descended on the Colorado Capitol Wednesday for a rally in support of illegal immigrants.

About 1,000 marchers jammed Denver's Speer Boulevard on Wednesday morning and temporarily blocked other intersections as they headed toward the Capitol, but no major problems were reported, police spokeswoman Virginia Quinones said.

"We are not trying to hurt your country," said Jorge Macias, a high school sophomore who said he is a U.S. citizen. "It is big enough for everyone."

The march was the latest in a string of rallies that have drawn tens of thousands of demonstrators across the country as Congress considers immigration reforms. Many of the demonstrators have said they want more immigrant-friendly policies and oppose a measure that would make it a felony to enter the country illegally.

Police said the Denver students had obtained a permit for the rally. Arvizu Derr, 17, who helped organize the event, said students at a number of area high schools helped promote it through mobile-phone text messages, Internet posts and fliers.

Denver Public Schools officials were not as enthusiastic about the demonstration.

Schools spokesman Mark Stevens said principals and teachers had discouraged students from participating and that absences would be considered unexcused. Any discipline will be handled on a student-by-student basis, he said.

Gov. Bill Owens, who was not at the Capitol during the march, said he believes the students are sincere but noted their demonstration was in the middle of a school day.

"I'd be much more impressed if I saw these students out marching on a Saturday," Owens said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060419/ap_on_re_us/immigration_protests;_ylt=ApNW.C0dS1h4SkmRavoAGVBH 2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MjBwMWtkBHNlYwM3MTg-

Jolie Rouge

04-19-2006, 02:58 PM

A lesson in immigration
Guest worker experiments transformed Europe
By Colin Nickerson, Globe Staff | April 19, 2006

BERLIN -- Germany needed workers. Turks needed work.

So starting in 1961, the country invited Turkish ''guest workers" to come do the dirty jobs that Germans didn't want.

Only 7,000 ''gastarbeiter," as they were called, arrived that first year, a curiosity in a country where non-European faces were rare. Press flashbulbs popped. Politicians made speeches of welcome. Ordinary Germans watched, bemused.

Nobody grasped that the country -- and the continent, because neighboring nations soon undertook similar experiments -- was on the brink of a transformation whose effects are still reverberating across Europe.

In Berlin, which today ranks as the largest ''Turkish" city outside Turkey, falafel stands and kebab joints far outnumber eateries offering schnitzel. In the Dutch city of Rotterdam, Islamic calls to prayer are as common as church chimes. In the raw-knuckled housing projects ringing Paris, graffiti are more likely to be scrawled in Arabic than in the language of Voltaire.

''The idea, originally, was that the foreign workers would stay for as long as economically necessary, then go home," said Michael Bommes, director of the Institute for Migration Research at Germany's Osnabrueck University. ''It didn't quite go like that."

As the US Congress wrestles with comprehensive immigration reform, one idea under discussion is a new program that would allow guest workers to enter the country, but not necessarily to stay on and become citizens.

In Germany, guest workers -- mostly poorly educated young men who were issued special visas allowing them entry for one or two years to take unskilled jobs -- helped the nation to become the third-richest in the world. The fabulous post-war prosperity of France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, and other West European countries was also boosted by immigrant labor, mainly from Turkey and North Africa.

But more recently, as economic growth has slowed, swelling numbers of Muslim immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa -- many of them arriving without any visas, or overstaying their visas and melting into the ethnic suburbs -- are being blamed for social stresses from urban blight to chaotic schools.

In the words of the late Swiss writer Max Frisch: ''We wanted workers, we got people."

Guest workers, unlike ordinary immigrants, were admitted under special jobs programs, and at least under the original plans, had no prospects of becoming citizens or permanent residents. Germany, like other European countries, at first refused even to allow them to bring families, hoping to discourage them from trying to put down roots. Later, Germany granted work stays of up to five years, and permitted wives and children to come along.

For decades, there were no efforts to integrate the newcomers. They were entitled to social benefits, but not citizenship. Their children could attend schools, but little effort was made to give them language skills. Far from a melting pot, Europe in the post-World War II era became the realm of ''parallel societies," in which native and immigrant populations occupied the same countries but shared little common ground.

Now, the presence of millions of largely unassimilated newcomers, coupled with terrorist attacks in London and Madrid, has triggered furious debates in Europe over national identity and the future of immigration.

France, in an about-face, has decided it no longer wants to admit the poorest of the poor, just skilled workers who speak fluent French and respect the ideals of secular democracy. Germany and the Netherlands have passed new laws that seem intended to thwart immigration from Islamic lands -- with potential newcomers queried about attitudes toward women's rights, Jews, and gays.

The only unskilled guest workers still recruited in large numbers are the migrant harvesters who perform the mostly seasonal stoop labor disdained even by the jobless in more affluent countries, including Germany and Britain.

But, in a major shift, even migrant workers these days are mostly recruited from within Europe -- tens of thousands of Poles, for instance, harvest Germany's famous white asparagus; pickers from Lithuania and Latvia pluck strawberries and other crops in Great Britain. Europe's guest worker programs were mostly scrapped during the recessions of the 1970s, but in a pattern reflecting the Hispanic flow into the United States, the movement of Muslims to Europe only accelerated. Those early guest workers routinely overstayed their one- or two-year permits, or lived from extension to extension, but faced scant risk of deportation unless they committed serious crimes.

Many of the first generation of workers bought houses or established small businesses, although usually confining themselves to immigrant enclaves. Their German-born children were registered as ''foreigners." They often spend years or even decades resolving their legal status.

While many European governments failed to seriously pursue integration, many Muslim immigrants were equally unwilling to shed their own languages and national identities.

''Neither side really thought hard about issues of citizenship, nationality, or integration because neither side truly expected the immigrants to stay," said Eren Uensal, a Berlin sociologist whose parents emigrated from Turkey in 1972.

''My mother insisted we were going to stay in Germany just long enough to earn money for a new sewing machine, to start a tailor shop back home," she said. ''Now we're into the third generation, and my mother still hasn't bought her sewing machine. Of course, that's because they made comfortable lives. No one really wanted to go home."

Legal workers were followed by waves of family members and illegal immigrants. In the 1960s, a few hundred thousand Muslims lived in Western Europe. Today, best estimates peg the number at more than 20 million -- including 3 million in Germany, mainly Turks; 5 million in France, mainly North African Arabs; 1.7 million in Britain; and 900,000 in Holland.

If the immigration controversy in the United States is really about Latinos, in Europe it's really about Muslims. And America's efforts to crack down on illegal immigration is spreading alarm among Muslim immigrants

( there is a third page but I can not get it to load ... )

http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/04/19/a_lesson_in_immigration/

Jolie Rouge

04-19-2006, 03:02 PM

Mexico blasts Georgia illegals law
By JEREMY SCHWARTZ
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 04/19/06

MEXICO CITY — The Mexican government blasted Georgia's new illegal immigration law Tuesday, calling it a half-measure that discriminates against Mexicans.

Ruben Aguilar, spokesman for President Vicente Fox, told reporters Tuesday morning that implementing parts of the Georgia law could result in "acts of discrimination" against Mexicans living in Georgia. "It's the position of [Fox] that the half-measures in this law are insufficient to resolve ... the complex phenomenon of immigration between Mexico and the United States," Aguilar said.

The Georgia bill, signed into law Monday by Gov. Sonny Perdue, requires verification of the legal status of those seeking certain taxpayer-funded services. The law also prevents employers from claiming the wages of illegal workers as a state tax deduction.

Perdue spokesman Dan McLagan dismissed the Mexican government's characterization of the bill, Senate Bill 529, as a discriminatory measure. "This is not an anti-immigrant law. It is a fairness issue. This is saying that people should come in the front door, not the back door, and that the laws of our country and our state need to be obeyed. We are a hospitable people in the state of Georgia, but when folks wish to immigrate to the country, they need to do it in a legal way," McLagan said.

Sen. Chip Rogers (R-Woodstock), the sponsor of SB 529, fired back at the Mexican government. "I challenge President Fox to reread Senate Bill 529, and if he can find a single reference to Mexico or any foreign nation, I will move to repeal 529," he said.

"I would suggest the government of Mexico stop concerning themselves with what we do in Georgia and instead worry about their own corrupt government, which has caused millions of their own citizens to leave their home country. A foreign government has no place in making Georgia law," Rogers said.

Polls show about 80 percent of Georgians want their elected leaders to confront the issue of illegal immigration.

The Atlanta office of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund has said it is contemplating a legal challenge to the law, calling it "unjust and unfair." There are an estimated 250,000 to 800,000 illegal immigrants in Georgia.

Activists in Georgia favoring stricter immigration controls predicted the bill would be used as a model by other states and influence the national debate, which resumes in the U.S. Senate next week. That's something that worries some officials and observers in Mexico, who are pushing for U.S. reforms that would legalize the status of illegal immigrants and offer guest worker programs.

"The news has everybody concerned," said Ana Cristina Castillo Petersen, an international relations expert in Mexico City. "It's having an impact on how [Mexicans] believe immigrants are perceived — as a threat to cultural values, as a cost to the state."

Castillo said the Georgia law appeared to follow the lines of bills and laws in California and Arizona that are perceived as anti-immigration. "And now in Georgia," she said. "It's certainly seen as a negative impact."

While condemning the Georgia law, Aguilar praised Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, who vetoed a bill Monday that would have allowed local authorities to arrest illegal immigrants under broadened trespassing definitions.

Fox, a former executive for Atlanta-based Coca-Cola Co. in Mexico, has pushed hard but unsuccessfully over the last five years for immigration measures that would allow more Mexicans to work legally in the United States. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants in the United States range from 10 million to 12 million.

Jorge Bustamante, a special rapporteur to the United Nations on the human rights outlook of migrant workers and one of Mexico's leading experts on the topic, called the complaints by Fox's government "absolutely irrelevant" because Mexico has so far failed to influence immigration policy in the United States.

"Unfortunately, some people are confused by these statements because they think Fox is doing the right thing by protesting, when in reality it has no impact," Bustamante said.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/0419metmexico.html

Jolie Rouge

04-19-2006, 08:42 PM

Pallet Maker Target in Immigration Raids
By MARK SHERMAN

WASHINGTON (AP) - Immigration agents arrested seven executives and hundreds of employees of a manufacturer of crates and pallets Wednesday as part of a crackdown on employers of illegal workers.

Authorities raided offices and plants of IFCO Systems in at least eight states, the culmination of a yearlong criminal investigation, law enforcement officials said.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrested seven current and former IFCO Systems managers on charges they conspired to transport, harbor and encourage illegal workers to reside in the United States for commercial advantage and private financial gain, said Glenn T. Suddaby, the chief federal prosecutor in Albany, N.Y., where some arrests were made.

ICE spokeswoman Jamie Zuieback confirmed an unspecified number of raids and arrests, but declined to provide additional details because the investigation was continuing. One official, speaking on condition of anonymity because numbers were still being tallied, said the arrests were in the hundreds.

Raids took place at several locations in upstate New York and in Biglerville, Pa.; Charlotte, N.C.; Cincinnati, Houston, Phoenix, Richmond, Va., and Westborough, Mass.

``ICE has no tolerance for corporate officers who harbor illegal aliens for their work force. Today's nationwide enforcement actions show how we will use all our investigative tools to bring these individuals to justice, no matter how large or small their company,'' said ICE chief Julie Myers.

She and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff are expected on Thursday to lay out an immigration enforcement strategy that targets employers' disregard for immigration law.

Last week, operators of three restaurants in Baltimore pleaded guilty to similar immigration charges, while nine people affiliated with two temporary employment agencies that do business in New Jersey, Ohio and Pennsylvania were charged in a $5.3 million scheme involving the employment and harboring of illegal aliens.

Several immigration proposals pending in Congress would stiffen penalties against employers who hire illegal immigrants.

German-based IFCO Systems describes itself as the leading pallet services company in the United States, focusing on recycling millions of the wooden platforms used to stack and move all manner of goods. It operates about five dozen facilities nationwide and has been expanding steadily, according to the company's Web site.

IFCO Systems did not immediately return calls seeking comment Wednesday.

The current and former IFCO Systems managers arrested were identified by Suddaby as: Michael Ames, 44, Shrewsbury, Mass.; Robert Belvin, 43, Clifton Park, N.Y.; Abelino Chicas, 40, Houston; Scott Dodge, 43, Albany; William Hoskins, 29, Cincinnati; James Rice, 36, Houston, and Dario Salzano, 36, Amsterdam, N.Y.

Last year, Wal-Mart stores agreed to pay $11 million to settle allegations concerning the employment and mistreatment of illegal immigrants.

Wal-Mart has maintained that top executives did not know that cleaning contractors were hiring illegal immigrants, who sometimes slept in the backs of stores. An ICE affidavit unsealed as part of that case, however, asserted that two executives were aware of the practice.

On the Net:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement: http://www.ice.gov

IFCO Systems: http://www.ifco-us.com/

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp.../1812624132.htm

YES ! Now that is what I am talking about !!

Jolie Rouge

04-19-2006, 08:44 PM

Minutemen to Bush: Build Fence or We Will
By ARTHUR H. ROTSTEIN, Associated Press Writer

TUCSON, Ariz. - Minuteman border watch leader Chris Simcox has a message for President Bush: Build new security fencing along the border with Mexico or private citizens will.

Simcox said Wednesday that he's sending an ultimatum to the president, through the media, of course — "You can't get through to the president any other way" — to deploy military reserves and the National Guard to the Arizona border by May 25.

Or, Simcox said, by the Memorial Day weekend Minuteman Civil Defense Corps volunteers and supporters will break ground to start erecting fencing privately.

"We have had landowners approach," Simcox said in an interview. "We've been working on this idea for a while. We're going to show the federal government how easy it is to build these security fences, how inexpensively they can be built when built by private people and free enterprise."

Simcox said a half-dozen landowners along the Arizona-Mexico border have said they will allow fencing to be placed on their borderlands, and others in California, Texas and New Mexico have agreed to do so as well.

"Certainly, as with everything else, we're only able to cover a small portion of the border," Simcox said. "The state and federal government have bought up most of the land around the border. I suspect that's why we'll never get control of the border."

But he said the plan is to put up secure fencing that truly will be an effective deterrent, and to show how easily it can be accomplished.

Simcox gave this description of the envisioned barrier-and-fencing complex:

Start with a 6-foot deep trench so a vehicle can't crash through; behind it, roll of concertina (coiled, razor-edged barbed wire), in front of a 15-foot high heavy-gauge steel mesh fence angled outward at the top.

Behind the fence will be a 60- to 70-foot wide unpaved but graded dirt road, along with inexpensive, mounted video cameras that can be monitored from home computers. On the other side of the road will be a second, 15-foot fence, with more concertina wire on its outside.

"It's a very simple, effective design based on feedback we've had from Border Patrol and the military," Simcox said. "It's a fence that can be built on the cheap, effective and secure."

Simcox said supporters will try to build the fencing with volunteer labor. Surveyors and contractors have offered to help with the design and survey work, he said, and some have said they will provide heavy equipment.

Simcox said those involved in the planning hope to keep costs to between $125 and $150 a foot.

Access to land literally on the border is an issue because so much is state-leased trust property or federally owned, he said.

"You may have to deal with a situation where private property owners erect their own fences and may be faced with the president sending the National Guard to prevent them from protecting their private property," Simcox said.

He said the Minuteman plan is "to keep turning up the heat" until President Bush has to respond somehow.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060420/ap_on_re_us/border_fence_minuteman;_ylt=Ar3QZePVEojxMeN9qEoFiy NH2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MjBwMWtkBHNlYwM3MTg-

______

On the Net:

Minuteman Civil Defense Corps: http://www.minutemanhq.com

Let Freedom Ring: http://weneedafence.com

Jolie Rouge

04-20-2006, 10:24 AM

POLITICALLY-TIMED IMMIGRATION RAIDS
By Michelle Malkin · April 20, 2006 09:05 AM

http://michellemalkin.com/

I speak regularly with dedicated men and women who work for the Department of Homeland Security, and especially agents from across the country who work for the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

I can tell you based on my reporting over the last five years that the Bush administration's belated efforts to look tough on immigration enforcement at worksites amount to a cynical, politically timed effort to salvage the White House's guest worker program dreams and schemes. I'm referring to this story linked prominently today on Drudge and spread elsewhere:

Federal immigration authorities rounded up more than 1,000 illegal immigrants at dozens of sites and charged nine individuals of the firm that employed them, federal law enforcement officials announced. Seven current and former managers of IFCO Systems, which has offices in several states, were arrested and charged in connection with the employment of illegal immigrants, said U.S. Attorney Glenn Suddaby in Albany, New York.

Suddaby said two lower level employees were also charged in the case.

Wednesday's action against IFCO Systems -- an industry leader in the manufacture of wooden pallets, crates and containers -- came as Homeland Security and Justice Department officials prepared to announce steps to toughen internal enforcement of the nation's immigration laws.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and other Bush administration officials and a federal prosecutor will appear at the agency's Washington headquarters Thursday. They will announce the new strategy aimed at employers and disclose the results of the enforcement actions targeting IFCO Systems.

Customs officials said agents made more than a thousand arrests in nearly 40 locations including Houston, Texas; Cincinnati, Ohio; Phoenix, Arizona; and Albany, New York.

Well, this is all sounds good and tough...until you look at the Bush administration's record for the last several years. Don't be fooled.

For those covering DHS Secretary Chertoff's press conference today, ask him to explain this:
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/employerstats.jpg

Via Edwin S. Rubenstein. Sources: GAO, "Immigration Enforcement: Weaknesses Hinder Employment Verification and Worksite Enforcement Efforts," August 2005. Figures 3, 4, and 5. (1999-2004.); Dept. of Homeland Security, 2003 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, September 2004. Table 39. (1997-1998); Dept. of Homeland Security, 2001 Statistical Yearbook, Table 61. (1992-1996).

As Rubenstein points out, this means that from 1997 to 2003, worksite arrests under the Bush administration fell by a factor of some 97 percent since 1997--and plunged by another 2/3rds by 2004.

Where have they been all this time?

As for getting tough on employers, Rubenstein also notes these stunning statistics: "[O]f the 3,064 workforce investigations closed [in 2004], fines were imposed in just 3 (three!) of them – one out of one thousand. . By contrast, fines were imposed in about 11 percent of closed investigations in 1997."

Notices of intent to fine employers:

1997: 865
1999: 417
2000: 178
2001: 100
2003: 162
2004: 3

Based on my reporting and interviews with ICE agents, I can also tell you that this week's dog-and-pony show will result in very few of the arrested illegal aliens actually being deported. Despite what the administration claims, "catch and release" is still the order of the day.

Just ask local and federal law enforcement officers in the Galveston, Texas, area, where in January of this year, following a collaborative effort between local police and area ICE agents, some 62 illegal aliens were caught at a day labor site...and released after local open-borders activists from LULAC kicked up a fuss and Washington ordered its local ICE agents to cave in. It happens every day.

More Bush-era catch-and-release background:here and here and here. and here. Must-read from indefatigable deportation analyst Juan Mann here.

You want "comprehensive immigration reform?" Then stop talking about making existing problems worse by piling on a new guest worker/amnesty program.

Clean our own house first.

Jolie Rouge

04-20-2006, 01:44 PM

: No place for ‘Reconquista’
The Washington DC Examiner Newspaper
Apr 20, 2006 7:00 AM

WASHINGTON - It received little coverage in the mainstream news dailies, but many bloggers highlighted the significant influence of “Reconquista” advocates and concepts in the recent pro-immigration marches across the country. Reconquista aims must be honestly confronted by all sides if the immigration debate is to be honestly conducted and credibly resolved.

The first thing to understand about Reconquista is that while it is perhaps not the official policy of Mexico, it might as well be. Current and former top Mexican government officials and advisers, for example, along with leaders of U.S. groups like the National Council of La Raza, the League of United Latin American Citizens and the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, routinely co-host seminars of the Foundation for Solidarity of Mexico and America, according to Hector Carreon of the Aztlan Communications Network. The basic aim of FSMA, which is a key convergence point of open-borders advocacy in both countries, is uninterrupted immigration from Mexico to the U.S.

“Aztlan” is the ancient Aztec word for the lands of California, Texas, Arizona and New Mexico, which more radical Hispanic activists have long claimed were stolen by “gringos” from Europe and that are now to be retaken via massive immigration that eventually produces Hispanic majorities at all levels of governance. But whether expressed more moderately by groups such as FSMA or more radically by explicitly separatist voices like MEChA, Aztlan is the animating spirit of the Reconquista movement. That spirit is reflected in remarks like this by a former California state secretary of health, education and welfare: “California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn’t like it should leave.”

Behind such calls looms the dismal Mexican economy, which, as author and historian Victor Davis Hanson notes in the latest Claremont Review of Books, desperately needs the flow of workers to the U.S. because they send an estimated $10 billion to $15 billion back home annually. Plus, there are the immense costs shifted from Mexico to our education, health care and law enforcement systems that must serve the needs of the waves of immigrants, legal and illegal. Those of us living north of the border are thus subsidizing corruption south of the border that enables Mexican politicians and their wealthy friends and family members to live the good life without being held accountable for the millions of Mexicans who suffer grinding poverty and hopelessness.

President Bush should call upon President Vicente Fox and other Mexican political leaders to disavow the Reconquista movement explicitly and to adopt much-needed reforms to expand economic opportunity and spread the wealth more widely in their nation. And Congress should reiterate in law and regulation that, while we will always welcome the world’s huddled masses, those who immigrate to America are expected to become Americans.

To do otherwise is to risk growing in the U.S. precisely the same sort of fevered separatism that now racks France and Germany.

http://www.examiner.com/Editorial-a83602~Editorial__No_place_for__Reconquista_.html

Jolie Rouge

04-22-2006, 09:08 PM

The Star-Spangled Banner meets reconquista...and has been renamed "Nuestro Himno"

Who's assimilating whom?

Latino Pop Stars Sing to Support Migrants
Sat Apr 22, 6:14 PM ET

NEW YORK - Mexican pop diva Gloria Trevi, Puerto Rican reggaeton Ivy Queen and Tito El Bambino and other Latino artists are recording a Spanish-language version of the U.S. national anthem in a show of support for migrants in the United States.

The Latino-oriented record label Urban Box Office (UBO) said Saturday it plans to release the new version of "The Star-Spangled Banner" to coincide with the U.S. Senate's debate on immigration legislation next week.

Congressional debate over immigration bills proposing everything from toughened border security to the legalization of undocumented migrants in America have triggered huge demonstrations across the United States in recent weeks.

"We chose to re-record 'The Star-Spangled Banner' to show our solidarity with the undocumented immigrants and their quest for basic civil rights," UBO President Adam Kidron said in a news release.

The recording, dubbed "Nuestro Himno" or "Our Anthem," is set to "rhythmic Latin musical arrangement" but respects the song's traditional structure, UBO said. The song will be primarily in Spanish with a few words sung in English.

The song is on the album "Somos Americanos," which will be sold for $10, with a portion going to Washington-based National Capital Immigration Coalition, UBO said.

Others participating in the Spanish version of "The Star-Spangled Banner" include Voz a Voz, Frank Reyes and Kalimba. UBO said it had also approached other artists, including Daddy Yankee and Don Omar, about taking part in the project.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060422/ap_en_mu/spanish_national_anthem;_ylt=AqU6vmEwOQfpQpzZk.Fom wSs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3YXYwNDRrBHNlYwM3NjI-

Jolie Rouge

04-24-2006, 07:49 AM

Banner of inclusion
Stars do anthem with Latin beat

Between the rockets' red glare and the bombs bursting in air, America's national anthem offers plenty of fighting words.

It has also triggered fighting words, and there's a good shot it will trigger more this week when Latino pop stars release a version of "The Star-Spangled Banner" set to "urban Latino rhythms" and sung mostly in Spanish.

The singers, who include Mexican diva Gloria Trevi, Puerto Rican reggaeton star Don Omar, Ivy Queen, Reik, Voz a Voz and Franco De Vita, didn't make this recording because they think America's national anthem is such a splendid piece of music that it begs for multilingual exposure.

No one, anywhere, has ever thought that about "The Star-Spangled Banner," whose tune started life as an unpretentious British drinking song.

The intent with "Nuestro Himno," or "Our Anthem," is quite specific.

"We decided to show our solidarity with the undocumented migrants," says President Adam Kidron of UBO Records, which is releasing the track

to coincide with a U.S. Senate debate on an immigration bill whose carrots and sticks could change the lives of maybe 12 million immigrants, documented and otherwise.

The song tries to say in music what millions of immigrants have argued

in recent street demonstrations: America's tradition is inclusion.

Let's just not be surprised if it stirs other folks to say that America also has a tradition of English, and that if you really want to be part of things here, you don't make it by singing her song in some other language.

Kidron dismisses the cultural-subversion theory. Today's immigrants want to become part of America just like earlier generations of Germans, Italians, Irish and Russians, he says.

In fact, he argues, they have: "Today we are Americans and 'The Star-Spangled Banner' represents everything to us."

It sure would lower our national blood pressure if everyone accepted that.

But the national anthem, ridiculed though it may be as a piece of music, has deceptive emotional power.

That's why artists from Jimi Hendrix to Marvin Gaye as well as jokers like Roseanne Barr have used it to make some larger point - and that's why they were all blasted by choruses of critics who told them to make their point somewhere else with some other song.

Can a national anthem coexist in two languages? Sure. The late Roger Doucet sang "O Canada" in French and English before Montreal Canadiens hockey games, and it was stirring in both.

So maybe "Nuestro Himno" will be heard as simply an eloquent voice asking that America give everyone a chance.

Or maybe it will be another bomb bursting in an already dangerous patch of air.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/story/411553p-348112c.html