Along with the news the Media won't report, we have the best of the web with wisdom & insight.

Illegal immigration is simply 'share the wealth’ socialism and a CRIME not a race!


My Photo
Location: Pacific Northwest STATE OF JEFFERSON!, United States

William Wilberforce, the British parliamentarian and abolitionist, told his colleagues, “Having heard all of this, you may choose to look the other way, but you can never say again that you did not know.”

Saturday, October 29, 2005

Posts of the Day-Best of the Web-MS-13

Comments from
America's Most Dangerous Gang (MS-13)
URL Source: rank=90876
Published: Oct 27, 2005
Author: Shelly Feuer Domash

Spreading from El Salvador to L.A. and across the United States, Mara Salvatrucha 13 is increasingly well organized and deadly. (snip)
14. To: fitz (#13)

It's pretty much like "our" national lands are being turned over to this bunch. Americans will not be out hiking or camping after these guys take over. These guys will kill for the sheer fun of it, or just to get practice.

Our Sheriff told our entire community to stay out of the woods. He said he simply could not protect us. And don't think the perps don't know it.

AuntB posted on 2005-10-29 17:06:43 ET Reply Trace

15. To: AuntB (#14)

A lot of our immigration is the result of the breakdown of Mexican and Central American society. The disintegration of their families and the takeover of their countries and cultures by criminal narco-trafficking gangs.

These kids grow up abandoned to the streets or abused by the serial lovers of their mothers, they never learn love or compassion of any kind. Bush can claim all he wants that these cultures have strong family values but anyone who has traveled to those countries has seen the small children begging on the streets with no parent nearby watching out for them. Or their parents actually send them out to beg or whatever else they can do for money and steal their money from them when they return home. These MS13s are not salvageable.

fitz posted on 2005-10-29 17:20:12 ET

16. To: fitz (#15)

These MS13s are not salvageable.

I understand how totally emotionally based people could get all bent out of shape over that statement. After all, PC dictates that EVERYONE is salvageable. I wish it were true. Most psychology tells us that someones values, priorities, behaviour are pretty much "set" by age 5. Many think earlier. I am very blessed that I grew up around a culture and family who knew right from wrong, and not to go through life lying,cheating and stealing or judging someone by the color of their skin. (Which I believe is a mental disorder).

We have no power to change these MS-13 types and their supporters. And they function on a big support system of "their" commuinity. Allowing them to stay here under a sham amnesty is never going to change them. Maybe one in a thousand might make something of himself. Not good enough odds for me and my "culture".

AuntB posted on 2005-10-29

Friday, October 28, 2005

Wisdom in History ---Immigration --Teddy Roosevelt

Theodore Roosevelt Advocates Americanism, 1915

... There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all. This is just as true of the man who puts "native" before the hyphen as of the man who puts German or Irish or English or French before the hyphen. Americanism is a matter of the spirit and of the soul. Our allegiance must be purely to the United States. We must unsparingly condemn any man who holds any other allegiance. But if he is heartily and singly loyal to this Republic, then no matter where he was born, he is just as good an American as any one else.

The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic. The men who do not become Americans and nothing else are hyphenated Americans; and there ought to be no room for them in this country. The man who calls himself an American citizen and who yet shows by his actions that he is primarily the citizen of a foreign land, plays a thoroughly mischievous part in the life of our body politic. He has no place here; and the sooner he returns to the land to which he feels his real heart-allegiance, the better it will be for every good American. There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.

For an American citizen to vote as a German-American, an Irish-American, or an English-American, is to be a traitor to American institutions; and those hyphenated Americans who terrorize American politicians by threats of the foreign vote are engaged in treason to the American Republic.


The foreign-born population of this country must be an Americanized population - no other kind can fight the battles of America either in war or peace. It must talk the language of its native-born fellow-citizens, it must possess American citizenship and American ideals. It must stand firm by its oath of allegiance in word and deed and must show that in very fact it has renounced allegiance to every prince, potentate, or foreign government. It must be maintained on an American standard of living so as to prevent labor disturbances in important plants and at critical times. None of these objects can be secured as long as we have immigrant colonies, ghettos, and immigrant sections, and above all they cannot be assured so long as we consider the immigrant only as an industrial asset. The immigrant must not be allowed to drift or to be put at the mercy of the exploiter. Our object is to not to imitate one of the older racial types, but to maintain a new American type and then to secure loyalty to this type. We cannot secure such loyalty unless we make this a country where men shall feel that they have justice and also where they shall feel that they are required to perform the duties imposed upon them. The policy of "Let alone" which we have hitherto pursued is thoroughly vicious from two stand-points. By this policy we have permitted the immigrants, and too often the native-born laborers as well, to suffer injustice. Moreover, by this policy we have failed to impress upon the immigrant and upon the native-born as well that they are expected to do justice as well as to receive justice, that they are expected to be heartily and actively and single-mindedly loyal to the flag no less than to benefit by living under it.

We cannot afford to continue to use hundreds of thousands of immigrants merely as industrial assets while they remain social outcasts and menaces any more than fifty years ago we could afford to keep the black man merely as an industrial asset and not as a human being. We cannot afford to build a big industrial plant and herd men and women about it without care for their welfare. We cannot afford to permit squalid overcrowding or the kind of living system which makes impossible the decencies and necessities of life. We cannot afford the low wage rates and the merely seasonal industries which mean the sacrifice of both individual and family life and morals to the industrial machinery. We cannot afford to leave American mines, munitions plants, and general resources in the hands of alien workmen, alien to America and even likely to be made hostile to America by machinations such as have recently been provided in the case of the two foreign embassies in Washington. We cannot afford to run the risk of having in time of war men working on our railways or working in our munition plants who would in the name of duty to their own foreign countries bring destruction to us. Recent events have shown us that incitements to sabotage and strikes are in the view of at least two of the great foreign powers of Europe within their definition of neutral practices. What would be done to us in the name of war if these things are done to us in the name of neutrality?

One America

All of us, no matter from what land our parents came, no matter in what way we may severally worship our Creator, must stand shoulder to shoulder in a united America for the elimination of race and religious prejudice. We must stand for a reign of equal justice to both big and small. We must insist on the maintenance of the American standard of living. We must stand for an adequate national control which shall secure a better training of our young men in time of peace, both for the work of peace and for the work of war. We must direct every national resource, material and spiritual, to the task not of shirking difficulties, but of training our people to overcome difficulties. Our aim must be, not to make life easy and soft, not to soften soul and body, but to fit us in virile fashion to do a great work for all mankind. This great work can only be done by a mighty democracy, with these qualities of soul, guided by those qualities of mind, which will both make it refuse to do injustice to any other nation, and also enable it to hold its own against aggression by any other nation. In our relations with the outside world, we must abhor wrongdoing, and disdain to commit it, and we must no less disdain the baseness of spirit which lamely submits to wrongdoing. Finally and most important of all, we must strive for the establishment within our own borders of that stern and lofty standard of personal and public neutrality which shall guarantee to each man his rights, and which shall insist in return upon the full performance by each man of his duties both to his neighbor and to the great nation whose flag must symbolize in the future as it has symbolized in the past the highest hopes of all mankind.

From Philip Davis (ed.), Immigration and Americanization (Boston: Ginn and Company, 1920)

Let’s Not Discuss Immigration Reform

This is a great piece by our friend JackelopeBreeder who lives on the border and lives the nightmare of the invasion every day.

Published: Oct 27, 2005
Author: JackelopeBreeder
Post Date: 2005-10-27 23:41:06 by JackelopeBreeder
Ping List: *Immigration Issues Ping List*

The current usage of the phrase “immigation reform” easily qualifies as one of the most savagely twisted examples of semantics in current politics. Absolutely none of the proposals I have read to date has anything to do with immigration.

Nowhere in all the rhetoric and sophomoric sound bites is there a single reference to that forgotten group – legal immigrants. Remember them? They’re the honest people who are trying to reach this country using the legally prescribed channels. They spend thousands of dollars in fees, submit reams of paperwork, undergo thorough background and health checks – and wait for years while the bureaucracy shambles along and randomly loses key documents. It’s a miracle we have any legal immigration at all.

Has anyone reading this screed seen any proposals to fix legal immigration? If so, I really want to hear about it. Our government can’t even begin to handle the 500,000 still legally waiting offshore at any one moment in a timely fashion. Our politicians must be living in a drug-addled alternate reality if they think the government can even begin to handle the 10 to 12 million illegal aliens estimated to be working here. Toss in their families and we could easily be talking about 30 million “guests”.

First, stop and think of the sheer size of the bureaucracy needed to administer a guest worker program of that magnitude. You would needs tens of thousands of new government workers: clerks, investigators, adjudicators, etc. One of the first things to happen would be diversion of a very large chunk of the legal immigration workforce at Citizenship and Immigration Services to handle the illegal alien hordes. Legal immigration would slow to a virtual halt; is that fair to those who have been trying to get here legally? Does this constitute “immigration reform”?

It is about amnesty, even if few of our politicians have the spine to admit it. Most politicians would have to put on a double pair of Depends undergarments before uttering the word. Unfortunately, amnesty is a constant aspect of the game on our southern border.

When an illegal alien is caught crossing the first time, it’s a misdemeanor. If they’re Mexican, they are offered voluntary deportation in lieu of charges – a form of amnesty – and returned home. The Border Patrol sees a lot of repeat clientele; under Federal law, each repeat offense is a felony. Still, they are “amnestied” back across the border, sometimes dozens of times. Do we let all the felony counts slide?

Let’s look at the colorful life of an illegal alien and the list of legal issues that make their existence here possible: document fraud, forgery, identity fraud, identity theft, working illegally, tax evasion, tax fraud, fraudulent use of government benefits, etcetera ad nauseum and most are considered felonies. Do we amnesty all of these activities as well?

If an American citizen gets caught at any of these pursuits they end up as a Guest Worker – as a Guest of the State – and amnesties are few and far between for them.

The government owes the rest of us the assurance that any guest worker meets the same background checks as anyone trying to legally immigrate. They at least owe us something better than the existing system that renewed several 9/11 hijackers’ visas six months after they died whacking the World Trade Center and killing a few thousand people.

Most illegal aliens have totally inadequate personal documentation. Many have fraudulent documentation, often in a variety of names. We really don’t know who they are and have little chance of adequately checking their backgrounds in their home countries or here. And remember, their home country really doesn’t want them back, especially if they have a troublesome past.

From a taxpayer viewpoint, just looking at the size of the required bureaucracy for screening illegal aliens to become guest workers, all the cheapness in cheap labor went right out the window. Tax collections go up to pay for it, or tax revenues are diverted away from programs for American citizens.

Now let’s look at the side of “immigration reform” that our leaders constantly promise, but haven’t delivered since the days of Dwight Eisenhower: enforcement. Every “immigration reform” measure since that time consisted of an amnesty and a promise of future enforcement. We certainly got the amnesties, but apparently the future that contains the enforcement has not arrived yet.

So, if it ain’t “immigration reform”, just what is all this bizarre yammering from the District of Corruption?

Well, part of it is economic reform for Mexico. Until recently, their oil revenues were at Number One on the official revenue list. Mexico’s oil revenues for 2004 amounted to $24 billion; remittances from its erstwhile citizens here in El Norte almost matched that. Add in the $8 billion generated by trafficking in aliens and oil comes in second. (Those who dabble in diplomacy advise me not to mention this, but aliens and oil are at a very distant second and third place disadvantage when compared to Mexico’s illicit narcotics revenues. Mentioning this rude fact in polite company is the same level of social and diplomatic faux pas as openly remarking on the Queen of England’s buns.)

Another part is political reform, again for the advantage of Mexico. The best one can say for Mexico’s government is that it has been totally ineffectual since its independence from Spain. Then again, it was worse before that. Now, however, they have the advantage of being able to ship the discontented, the indigent and uneducated off to El Norte, thus delaying any serious reforms in that benighted country – and our government lets them.

The last part is labor reform pure and simple, but this time on behalf of certain industries in the United States that have become addicted to cheap labor. The more cunning amongst this crowd do not want to see any reforms whatsoever. Why?

Hector, the legal guest worker would have the same protections as an American employee: prevailing wages, Workers Compensation, Social Security, and all those other expenses the employer is trying to avoid. Remember, it’s all about privatizing profits and socializing costs. If Hector costs as much as a gringo, then he’s no longer cheap labor. But hey, there’s always Carlos, the next illegal alien over the fence, to replace him in the under-the-table wage group. Besides, if our previous history of non-enforcement is any indication, our unscrupulous employers can expect a visit from unicorns long before they see a visit from Immigrations and Customs Enforcement.

Do you want a peek at the real dirty little secret of “immigration reform”? Just look closely at the AgJobs bill championed by Congressman Chris Cannon of Utah. Hidden away in the details (and truly the Devil is in the details) is language giving amnesty and official forgiveness to any employer who ever transgressed against hiring illegal aliens. I’m willing to bet the entire bankroll that similar language gets weaseled into any new version of “immigration reform”.

So, if this really isn’t immigration reform, let’s not waste legislative time discussing it. Let’s talk about enforcement instead. Once the government proves the long term ability and will for real enforcement – from the border to the boardroom – maybe we can take another look at some sort of guest worker program in a few years. We’ve seen enough amnesties; now it’s enforcement’s turn. We don’t need new laws for enforcement; we have plenty that have just never been used. We just need the resources to make the system work – and an absence of political interference.

A parting shot at the Cheap Labor Lobby: It’s almost Halloween; a lot of us would like to see some of you wearing orange in honor of the occasion.

Thursday, October 27, 2005

The USA - NOT a nation of immigrants

Yesterday Sen. Bill Frist noted that American was founded by immigrants.

Not so fast, Mr. Frist. Our founding fathers were by a great percentage born and raised in the colonies. Many of them second and third generation "Americans".

The 55 delegates who attended the United States Constitutional Convention were a distinguished body of men who represented a cross section of 18th-century American leadership. Almost all of them were well-educated men of means who were dominant in their communities and states, and many were also prominent in national affairs. Virtually every one had taken part in the Revolution; at least 29 had served in the Continental forces, most of them in positions of command.

Geographic and educational background

Most of the delegates were natives of the 13 colonies. Only eight were born elsewhere: four (Butler, Fitzsimons, McHenry, and Paterson) in Ireland, two (Davie and Robert Morris) in England, one (Wilson) in Scotland, and one (Hamilton) in the West Indies. Reflecting the mobility that has always characterized American life, many of them had moved from one state to another. Sixteen individuals had already lived or worked in more than one state or colony: Baldwin, Bassett, Bedford, Dickinson, Few, Franklin, Ingersoll, Livingston, Alexander Martin, Luther Martin, Mercer, Gouverneur Morris, Robert Morris, Read, Sherman, and Williamson. Several others had studied or traveled abroad.

MORE good reading on this subject.

Wrong on the Founders
The Wall Street Journal Independence Day tradition.

By John Fonte

(snip) However, the open-borders ideology continues to haunt the Journal's otherwise sensible editorial pages. On July 3, on the paper's website, assistant editor Brendan Miniter begins his op-ed, "Let Their People Come," with the quotation from the Declaration of Independence that complained about George III's restrictions on European immigration to the American colonies. Miniter then uses this quotation as a launching pad to endorse a "fundamental right" of emigration to America and implies that this "right" is one of the founding principles of our nation. He thus maintains that the "right and necessity to allow people to live and move freely is self-evident indeed."

In fact, exactly the opposite is true. As the Declaration of Independence states our nation is based on " rights " and "consent" — or "government by consent of the governed." Clearly, in American democracy, immigration policy is decided by the "consent of the governed," that is to say, by the American people. There is not — and never has been — a "fundamental right" to immigrate to the United States against the consent of the American people. To suggest otherwise, as the Wall Street Journal editorial page did on July 3, is to ignore the crucial principles of "consent" central to our democratic republic.

Nowhere in their voluminous writings do any of the Founders endorse the idea that everyone in the world has a "fundamental right" to immigrate to the United States. They would have considered such a notion preposterous. The Founding Fathers' views on this subject are best explained by the Claremont Institute's Thomas G. West in Vindicating the Founders in his chapter on immigration.

At the beginning of the chapter, Professor West notes that the United States from the first days of the republic has "always set limits" on immigration and citizenship. Moreover, he argues that:

To say that there is a fundamental right to immigrate is as much as to say that the government of one country is obliged to secure the rights of every person in the world who presents himself and demands it. Such an obligation is by nature both impossible and unjust….a violation of the fundamental terms of the social compact.

On immigration, assimilation, and citizenship naturalization, West finds that the views of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, Franklin, John Jay, and Gouverneur Morris are remarkably similar.

First, the Founders believed that the American republic had the right to set the limits and conditions of immigration and eventual citizenship. As Gouverneur Morris stated at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, "every society from a great nation down to a club had the right of declaring the conditions on which new members should be admitted."

Second, they welcomed immigrants, but on the condition that they become good citizens. As George Washington explained, "We shall welcome [them] to a participation of all our rights and privileges, if by decency of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment."

Third, the Founders insisted on assimilation. Washington wrote to Adams that he worried about immigrants "retain[ing] the language, habits, and principles (good or bad) which they bring with them" and favored "an intermixture with our people [where] they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures, [and we] soon become one people."

In short, the Founders maintained (sensibly enough) that immigration/assimilation policy be judged on the basis of national interest, i.e., what was good for America. There is not a scintilla of agreement between the Founders' views and Miniter's position that there is some "fundamental right" of free immigration. (Incidentally, Miniter's position is also rejected by leading libertarians such as Milton Friedman). (snip)

Wisdom in History ---Immigration --Barbara Jordan

Barbara Jordan was an eloquent, outspoken legislator, and it's a shame congress did NOT take her recommendations.

Testimony of Barbara Jordan
Chair, U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform
Before the U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Appropriations for the Departments of
Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary and Related Agencies
March 29, 1995

Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, thank you for providing this opportunity to testify today. I am Barbara Jordan, the Chair of the Commission on Immigration Reform.
The Commission on Immigration Reform was created by the Immigration Act of 1990. We are a fully bipartisan body. In addition to the Chair, we have eight members who were appointed by the majority and minority leadership in each house of Congress.

The Commission's 1994 report to Congress was entitled U.S. Immigration Policy: Restoring Credibility. The title is telling of our recommendations. The Commission believes it is essential to control illegal immigration if we are to have a credible immigration policy. We believe legal immigration is in the national interest, but see illegal immigration as a threat both to our long tradition of immigration and to our commitment to the rule of law.

The Commission recommends a comprehensive, seven-point strategy to restore credibility. Let me tell you that the strategy is neither cheap nor painless. There are no quick fixes to our immigration problems; there are no inexpensive solutions. For too long we have neglected immigration as a public policy issue and now must pay for the consequences.

Four points in our report call for special attention. First, we need improved border management. The Commission calls for a strategy of prevention of illegal entry and facilitation of legal ones in the national interest. The concept is simpler, of course, than its achievement. The Commission was highly impressed with the border operations in El Paso that aim to prevent illegal entry. It is far better to deter illegal immigration than to play the cat and mouse game that results from apprehensions followed by return followed by re-entry. To accomplish a true deterrence strategy will require additional personnel as well as a strategic use of technology and equipment. We will also require new measures of effectiveness because apprehensions alone cannot measure success in preventing illegal entries. Our goal should be zero apprehensions-not because aliens get past the Border Patrol but because they are prevented entry in the first place.

While we tighten our control over illegal entry, we must also reduce the long waiting times at our ports of entry. It is ridiculous that people with legitimate border crossing cards feel it is more convenient to cross illegally than go through our ports of entry. But that is the case. Our own delegation waited for one and one-half hours to cross from Juarez into El Paso-and this wasn't even at rush hour. In an age of NAFTA, we must do a better job of handling the legitimate border travel. The Commission supports the development of a land border user fee whose resources would be used to open more lanes, add more inspectors and, if necessary, more ports of entry to speed this traffic.

Our second set of recommendations would reduce the magnet that jobs currently present for illegal immigration. We have concluded that illegal immigrants come primarily for employment. The Commission believes that we need to enhance our enforcement of both employer sanctions and labor standards. But, to make employer sanctions work, we must improve the means by which employers verify the work authorization of new employees. The Commission believes the most promising option is a computerized system for determining if a social security number is valid and has been issued to someone authorized to work in the United States. We are pleased that the Administration has endorsed our recommendations in this area, and we look forward to working with INS and the Social Security Administration on the design of pilot programs that will phase in and test this new verification approach. I urge this committee to provide the funding needed to develop the computerized system and implement the pilot programs.

Third, the Commission urges greater consistency in our immigration and benefits policies. We believe that illegal aliens should be eligible for no public benefits other than those of an emergency nature, in the public health and safety interest, and constitutionally protected. On the other hand, we urge the Congress to retain for legal immigrants eligibility for our safety net programs. The United States screens legal immigrants to determine if they will become public charges, but unforeseen circumstances-deaths, illnesses-occur. The Commission does not want to see individuals whom we have invited to enter become vulnerable when such situations arise. On the other hand, the Commission strongly supports efforts to make our public charge provisions work. We do not want the U.S. taxpayer to bear a burden when there is a sponsor in this country who has pledged to provide support for an immigrant. The affidavits of support signed by sponsors should be legally binding, and the provisions for deportation of those who do become a public charge-for reasons known prior to entry-should be strengthened.

The Commission also made recommendations regarding impact aid for states and localities experiencing the fiscal effects of illegal immigration. We believe the federal government has a responsibility in this area. The first responsibility is to control illegal entries; the second is to help states and localities with their fiscal problems. However, we are skeptical of some of the data used to calculate these fiscal impacts. At present, the Commission believes that the data to support reimbursement of criminal justice costs are sound and we urge immediate reimbursement of these costs. We are not prepared to make such a recommendation regarding medical and education costs. We also urge that any impact aid provided require appropriate cooperation by states and localities in the enforcement of immigration policy.

Our fourth area concerns the removal of criminal aliens. The Commission supports enhancement of the Institutional Hearing Program that permits the federal government to obtain a deportation order while criminal aliens are still serving their sentences. Once the sentence is over, it is far easier and less expensive to remove the alien after an IHP proceeding. The Commission also recommends further negotiation of bilateral treaties that will permit deportation of criminal aliens to serve their sentences in their home countries.

We are also looking at naturalization and the civic integration of newcomers to the United States. I, for one, would like to see all eligible immigrants become U.S. citizens-and become citizens for the right reasons, not to receive some federal benefit but to be fully participating members of our polity. Right now, there are too many barriers to naturalization. In some districts, it can take two years to complete the process. We plan to have recommendations to improve this situation.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Social Security benefits for illegal aliens...ACT NOW

The U.S.-Mexico Totalization Agreement

The U.S. Commissioner of Social Security signed a totalization agreement with the Director General of the Mexican Social Security Institute on June 29, 2004. Now that the agreement has been signed, it must be reviewed first by the State Department, and then by the White House, which will submit it to Congress. Congress will have then have 60 "legislative" days to review the agreement. During this period, current law authorizes either Chamber to pass a Resolution of Disapproval of the agreement, or it will take effect automatically at the end of the 60-day period. In addition, the Mexican Senate must affirmatively approve the totalization agreement.

"Totalization" agreements are bilateral agreements between the United States and another country to coordinate their social security programs. These agreements eliminate the need to pay social security taxes in both countries when companies in one country send workers to the other country, and they protect benefit eligibility for workers who divide their careers between the two countries. The United States currently has totalization agreements with 20 countries, including Canada, Chile, South Korea, Australia and most of Western Europe.

For additional details, see the NumbersUSA Proposed Immigration Bills in the current Congress page, which contains links to H. Res 20 and H.Con.Res 50 and other relevant information.

Social Security Benefits for Illegal Aliens

U.S. law bars aliens living here illegally from receiving social security benefits. However, until 2004, the law permitted aliens to claim credit for work performed while here illegally if the aliens either left the United States or obtained legal status in the United States. If such work - either alone or in combination with work performed while here legally - amounted to the 40 quarters of work required to become eligible for social security benefits, these aliens (and their spouses and dependents) would receive full benefits.

In February 2004, Congress passed H.R. 743, the Social Security Protection Act, which includes a provision authored by Senator Grassley (R-Iowa), Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, that prohibits aliens (and their spouses and dependents) from claiming social security credit for work performed while in the United States illegally unless the alien obtains legal status at some point. Although this represents a major improvement in the law, it does not entirely close the loophole that permits benefits to be paid on the basis of work performed by illegal aliens. As noted in the Senate Finance Committee's report on H.R. 743, "individuals who begin working illegally and later obtain legal status could still use their illegal earnings to qualify for Social Security benefits" despite this new provision (Senate Rpt.108-176, p. 24).

This law applies to aliens of all nationalities, regardless of the existence of totalization agreements. The agreements compound the problem, however, by increasing the pool of foreign workers who can qualify for U.S. social security benefits on the basis of work performed while here illegally. Under totalization agreements:

  • Foreign workers can qualify with as few as 6 quarters of work, rather than 40 quarters (benefits would be prorated to reflect only credits earned in the United States); and
  • More family members of workers are entitled to benefits, because the agreement waives rules that restrict certain payments to non-citizen dependents living outside the United States. Under current law, non-citizen spouses and children must have lived in the United States for at least five years (lawfully or unlawfully), and the family relationship to the worker must have existed during that time in order for them to receive benefits while outside the United States. A totalization agreement overrides this requirement.

What Makes the Mexico Agreement Different from the Others?

While the text of the agreement with Mexico has not yet been made publicly available, it is likely to be virtually identical to the 20 other agreements. The impact of the Mexico agreement is likely to be significantly different, however, because there are critical differences between Mexico and the other countries with which the United States has totalization agreements, including:

  1. The economic disparity between the United States and Mexico, combined with the fact that our countries share a land border, has generated migration from Mexico to the United States at levels not comparable to any of the other 20 countries; and
  2. The Department of Homeland Security estimates that Mexicans represent almost 70 percent of the 10 million illegal aliens currently residing in the United States. Among the other 20 countries, South Koreans and Canadians comprise the next largest shares - 0.07 percent each -- of the illegal population

The Costs of the Mexico Agreement

The Social Security Administration (SSA) estimates that a totalization agreement with Mexico would:

  • Result in 50,000 additional Mexicans qualifying for social security benefits during the first five years;
  • Cost the U.S. social security system $525 million over the first five years;
  • Cost $650 million per year by 2050;
  • Have a "negligible long-range effect" on the Social Security Trust Fund; and
  • Save 3,000 U.S. workers and their employers about $140 million in Mexican social security and health insurance taxes over the first five years of the agreement

In a review requested by Congress, the GAO found that:

  • SSA's cost estimate does not account for any of the millions of Mexicans living and working here illegally who may become eligible for benefits;
  • SSA "assumes that the behavior of Mexican citizens would not change and does not recognize that an agreement would create an additional incentive for unauthorized workers to enter the United States;"
  • The agreement with Mexico involves "highly uncertain" costs and would affect the long-term solvency of the Social Security Trust Fund if SSA has underestimated the number of beneficiaries by more than 25 percent (or 16,000 additional beneficiaries).

DHS statistics show that more than 28,000 Mexicans who had entered the United States illegally at some point were granted legal permanent resident status in 2002. Another 121,000 Mexicans who were already living here were granted legal permanent resident status in 2002, despite the fact that DHS had no record of them being lawfully admitted to the country. Under current law, these immigrants can claim credit for any work they performed while here illegally, in addition to work the perform after obtaining legal status. And these numbers reflect only one year.

Can the U.S.-Mexico Totalization Agreement Be Stopped?

Once the President submits the agreement to Congress, which was expected to happen after the elections in November (but has not yet happened), it goes into effect automatically unless the House of Representatives or the Senate adopts a resolution of disapproval within 60 legislative days. According to the Congressional Research Service, however, the resolution of disapproval mechanism currently in the Social Security Act is an unconstitutional legislative veto, based on the Supreme Court's decision in INS v. Chadha (462 U.S. 919 (1983)), in which the Supreme Court struck down a similar provision in the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Since Congress has never rejected a totalization agreement, the fact that the mechanism for disapproval is unconstitutional has not been an issue. Unless the law is changed, though, it is likely that passage of a resolution of disapproval would give rise to a judicial challenge, potentially resulting in a determination that the agreement is effective.

However, Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) has taken the lead in the fight to stop the U.S.-Mexico totalization agreement from taking effect. He has introduced H. Res. 20, a resolution of disapproval in the House.

Fax Congress free ( and ask your Representative to cosponsor H. Res. 20 to disapprove the U.S.-Mexico Totalization agreement. If your Representative has already cosponsored H. Res. 20, you can send them a fax of appreciation.

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

Posts of the Day/Best of the Web

THIS is the answer to give those free traitors that will sell your job to the cheapest labor, regarding Visas!

Here is an article by Edwin Rubestein over at that discusses this tech shortage (Looking (In Vain) For the Geek Shortage):

For years high-tech corporations have warned of a shortage of scientists and engineers. [See Why Americans Don’t Study Science—It Doesn’t Pay] The latest (alleged) evidence: the cap of 65,000 H-1b visas for fiscal 2006 was reached in August, 14 months prior to the fiscal year in which the visas would be used.(Towncrier: Thousands more have been requested since this article)

U.S. corporations love H-1bs. Why shouldn’t they? They pay them less, force their American workers to train them, and then fire the U.S.-born employees.

H-1b workers are little more than indentured servants, tethered to their sponsoring employers until they receive Green Cards.

But a high-tech manpower shortage? Rarely have cold hard facts offered less support to this assertion. Just look at the latest figures on science and engineering graduate enrollment as reported by the National Science Foundation (NSF). (Table 1)

In 2003 (the latest year of available data):

* U.S. citizen S&E enrollment rose 5.8 percent, to 327,332

* Foreign citizen enrollment rose 0.9 percent, to 146,871

The newly perceived attractiveness of a career in science and engineering is most dramatically seen in the numbers of first-year S&E grad students. In 2003:

* First-year U.S. citizen enrollment rose 9.4 percent, to 54,770

*First-year foreign citizen enrollment fell -8.1 percent, to 29,574

Foreign students accounted for a smaller share of S&E enrollment in 2003 (32 percent) than in 2002 (31 percent.) For nearly a decade this trend has gone in the other direction.

gargantuton posted on 2005-10-26

“some claim we can't locate all the present illegals. “

And what difference does it make if they can't find them all.... you never hear politicians justifying closing the IRS because they can't find ever tax evader, they don't close the police departments because they can't find every murderer or thief, traffic cops because they can't get every speeder.

(by) fitz posted on 2005-10-26

Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Quote of the Day / Best of the Web

The headline at

Civil rights heroine Rosa Parks dead at 92. Will ride in the front seat on the bus to Heaven


To: HiJinx; All
"Do I really have to say anything?" (about illegal immigration)

Yes, you do.

Because if you/we don't say it out loud today, and state the obvious often, you/we will eventually be silenced by the PC police.
Lots of folks already have been...even on this site.

13 posted on 10/24/2005 5:28:26 PM PDT by sarasmom (What is the legal daily bag limit for RINOs in the USA?)
To: axes_of_weezles

It's just the time-honored pact the US has with Mexico: You breed. We feed.

9 posted on 10/25/2005 8:08:49 AM PDT by kittymyrib

This is a raw and bad joke on the American people. 3.6 million Visa overstays!

LOU DOBBS/BrokenBorders/Cnn
Aired Oct. 24, 2005

And millions of foreigners in this country illegally, not because they crossed our borders illegally, but because their visas have expired. You'll be shocked -- I think you will be shocked to hear just how few immigration officials we have assigned to track down all of those people with expired visas.

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Visa holders who overstay exit date in this country can easily disappear into American life with little risk from immigration authorities. A report from the Homeland Security inspector general estimates at least 3.6 million illegal aliens are people here who overstayed their visas. Yet last year, there were only 51 agents dedicated to tracking visa violators.

REP. J.D. HAYWORTH, (R) ARIZONA: If there are so-called good people overstaying their visas, there are really bad people too. And more than just your garden variety of criminal, probably in that group, sad to say, are those folks who belong to terrorist cells who mean to do us harm.

ROMANS: Immigration and Customs Enforcement received more than 300,000 leads last year on visa violators. The inspector general found authorities investigated just over 4,000 and apprehended only 671.

The report found, quote, "efforts to identify visa violators and overstays results in few apprehensions. And actual removal of visa violators is minuscule." ICE counters that it's numbers are slightly higher. It says its apprehended 1400 visa violators and thousands of additional investigations are under way.

Still, the inspector general found investigations, when they occur, can take up to two months because of vague performance measures and inefficiency in the work flow process. Work flow in the two-year- old agency that looks like this.

The report finds "these delays allow visa violators to avoid apprehension and disappear into the U.S. population."

ICE defends its compliance enforcement unit by saying it was created only after September 11 to target national security threats.

Quote, "there are millions of leads, where do you start? With a dishwasher or with someone with a HAZMAT license and access to a port?"

ROMANS: ICE says the unit has apprehended a fuel truck driver with a HAZMAT license and a member of a terrorist organization and wanted sex offenders. ICE says, at the time of the inspector general's report last year, the agency was funded for only 50 positions to track down the high risk visa violators. Today there are more than 230 personnel in that unit.

And, ICE says, contrary to the inspector general's report, this unit is not the only one arresting visa violators, they say any immigration agent can. But keep in mind, there are at least 3.6 million people in this country who overstayed their visa a couple of hundred, a couple of thousand agents, you're not going to do much good on that.

DOBBS: Our federal employees do a magnificent job, but to ask 51 or 70 or 200 and some odd men and women to go after 3.6 million illegal aliens who have overstayed their visa, the visa that have expired, that absurdity even by federal government standards.

ROMANS: And Congressman J.D. Hayworth pointed out, it's public policy triage that they have to just go after the high risk individuals, because there are simply so many, there's no way humanly possible, you could be effective at that job. That's what Congressman Hayworth said. But he also points out that you don't know who is a public -- who is a risk. You just don't know, with 301,000 leads just for this one unit last year, any one of those could have been a risk.

DOBBS: So we're at a situation now where the federal government, not the State Department, not Homeland Security, not any department knows where those 3.6 million people are. They don't know where the database leads them. They don't know which database they're in, nor how to track them, and we only have fewer than 300 people at least to go after 3.6 million people.

ROMANS: In some cases, these are just closed because they don't have an address on record for some of these people, according to the inspector general.

DOBBS: And it takes how long to grant a visa and how long to run down one of these so-called overstays -- I love that word, overstay.

ROMANS: It takes about 30 minutes to grant a legal permanent residency, a green card. It takes about two months to investigate whether somebody overstayed, if there is an investigation.

DOBBS: We won't do the extrapolation on two months for each of 3.6 million violators, but that is remarkable. This is a government that's out of control, an immigration policy that doesn't exist. And one of the most, I think, criminally negligent attitudes on the part of this administration toward national security. This is nothing more than a raw and bad joke on the American people.

ROMANS: Can you imagine if you're one of these people out there and it's your job to track these people down? And you just, you know.

DOBBS: It's insufferable. The position we're putting them in, and the position we're putting the lives and the well-being of Americans in. It shouldn't be tolerated, but that it goes on is abysmal. Christine Romans, as always, thank you.

That brings us to the topic of our poll tonight -- do you believe the Department of Homeland Security should immediately learn the identity and location of those whose visas have expired, to assure our national security? Vote yes or no, cast your vote at We'll have the results coming up here in just a matter of moments.

Monday, October 24, 2005

3 Million have overstayed their Visas - just like the hijackers!

Lou Dobbs/Cnn is a must see today. Lou talks about the 3 million foreign nationals that government knows has overstayed the visas they've issued still remaining somewhere in this country and a handful of agents to find them.

The transcript of this conversation will be up today, check

Take Lou's poll!

Do you believe the Department of Homeland Security should immediately learn the identity and location of those whose visas have expired to assure national security?
854 votes
24 votes
Total: 878 votes

+++++++++++++++++++++++ A LOOK BACK


Siskiyou County, California, Feb. 26, 2005

They come from Mexico for jobs by way of a document called a “green card”. Such immigrants are termed “legal permanent Residents” with many of the same rights as US citizens outlined here,

o To live permanently in the United States provided you do not commit any actions that would make you removable (deportable) under the immigration law (section 237, Immigration and Nationality Act).
o To be employed in the United States at any legal work of your qualification and choosing.
o To be protected by all of the laws of the United States, your state of residence and local jurisdictions.
o To vote in local elections where United States Citizenship is not required. Click here for more details on voting.
o Some jobs will be limited to United States Citizens because of security concerns.

Today Siskiyou county Sheriff Rick Riggins and Captain Mike Murphy presented a slide show and details of Marijuana growing operations on federal forest land as a warning to residents of the dangers of happening across one of these farms. These operations are spearheaded by various Latino gangs, one being the powerful, well armed MS-13 gang that began in El Salvador. Sheriff Riggins stated that his biggest problem in combating this scourge is his office being labeled, "racist".

On Sept. 11, 2004, one such farm was busted by the Sheriff with help from BLM and the forest service netting thousands of plants and several Mexicans who either held green cards or were awol from the Mexican military and in this country illegally. These raids are no simple task as the terrain is nearly insurmountable and usually remote, however one growing operation was within 2 miles of the city limits of Etna, California. Resources are limited in such small counties, with little help from federal officials, even though this organized criminal enterprise has been going on in these mountains for many years. Homeland Security says such operations are not their concern.

The gangs are back this year getting ready for next falls harvest to be distributed across the US. Their supplies and equipment will be brought in from the cities and deliveries to replenish them are undertaken at night every few weeks. The farms are guarded at all times.

Slides of the “camps” complete with a “hooch” for living were shown. Huge pits are dug, one big enough for an SUV, for garbage and waste. The trees are cut or skinned to pile “moats” around the farms to camouflage them. Black irrigation pipe is buried for miles to get water to the plants. The environment on our national lands is being degraded by these operations, destroying habitat and watershed purity.

We saw the AK-47’s, axes, shovels, a . 22 rifle with the name “ Los Pleves” scratched on the stock. We saw notebooks of the growers with markings of MS-13 and a drawing of a Lexus that one “immigrant” intended to buy with the drug profits.

Most of the farms appear to be run by the same organizations mostly through the Mexican Mafia year after year. Though a few are busted, a substantive dent has not been made and they know they can operate here more safely and profitably than in Mexico and there is no worry of getting the product back into the states.

Across the border in Oregon, the story is the same. The Sheriffs of Jackson, Josephine and Klamath County work together to find the farms and arrest the perpetrators. All have been Mexican so far, most with green cards. These same gangs also brew Methanphetimine to finance their organized crime activities during off season.

We do not need yet another “guest worker” program to supply dangerous gangs with recruits. We need to find out why these people were ever allowed in this country in the first place and how to keep more of them out.

TheTownCrier copyright 2/26/05 Siskiyou County, California

FOLLOWUP: Michelle Malkin followed this story further in her article "GANGLAND".

"The most notorious criminal alien gang enterprise on the American landscape is Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, the El Salvadoran-based syndicate engaged in murder, drug trafficking, and human smuggling across Central America and the United States. MS-13 members, many of them juveniles, have been implicated in gang rapes, machete mutilations, and cop killings on both coasts. According to Siskiyou County Sheriff Rick Riggins, MS-13 paraphernalia and weaponry have been discovered deep on federal forest land in northern California, where Latino gangs have established massive marijuana-growing operations.

Most recently, Ebner Anibal Rivera Paz, the reputed leader of MS-13's Honduran branch, was nabbed in Texas last month after escaping from his native country, where he's wanted in connection with the Christmas holiday massacre of 28 people, including six children. "[snip]

Just How Temporary are 'Guest Workers?' Let’s Ask Their Grandchildren

Just How Temporary are 'Guest Workers?' Let’s Ask Their Grandchildren

by Mac Johnson
Posted Oct 24, 2005

In what a cynic would say was move to extricate himself from a “QuagMier” with his base, President Bush last week appeared to reverse course on illegal immigration. Apparently, he’s now against it.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff declared before Congress that:

Our goal at DHS (Homeland Security) is to completely eliminate the 'catch and release' enforcement problem, and return every single illegal entrant, no exceptions. It should be possible to achieve significant and measurable progress to this end in less than a year.

President Bush then reinforced this comment in a separate venue, stating:

We've got to work to ensure that those who are caught are returned to their home countries as soon as possible.

Before I go any further, just let me say that these statements are among the most welcome announcements from the Bush administration since it revealed that the first bomb had fallen on Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan four years ago. If the administration follows through on it’s promise, it will be a historic moment -- the moment that the overwhelming majority of the American people (Republican, Democrat, and Independent) finally had their wishes on illegal immigration acknowledged by their allegedly representative government. So, Huzzah! Hooray! And Halleluiah!

Now, unfortunately, I have to go further. It is a well-known fact that the last words of many a rodent have been “Look! Free Cheese!” So what is the potential trap upon which we find this enormous hunk of Immigration Cheddar? It is the fact that enforcement will be bundled with a so-called “Guest Worker” program.

Or, as Secretary Chertoff stated at the same Senate hearing in which he announced the administration’s new found sense of responsibility for law enforcement:

We're going to need more than just brute enforcement . . . We're going to need a temporary worker program as well.

First, let me say that we have no idea what “brute enforcement” can accomplish. We’ve never tried it. Right now we have “no enforcement.” So what do you say we start with pansy enforcement and work our way up to brute enforcement before we start bad-mouthing it? As a matter of fact, let’s declare December to be “National Brute Enforcement Month,” because I have really high hopes for it.

That being said, let’s look at just how “temporary” any proposed guest worker program is likely to be. This is not a subject we have to leave to our imagination either (like brute enforcement) because this idea has actually been tried in a very similar nation. “Guest worker” is a direct translation of the German term “Gastarbeiter.”

After World War II, Germany introduced a sweeping deregulation of its economy, that surprisingly (along with the “Marshall Plan” and Germany’s pre-welfare state work ethic) resulted in two decades of runaway growth, known in German as the “Wirtschaftswunder,” and in English as the German “Economic Miracle.”

In just a few years, Germany went from a nation of nearly total unemployment, a ruined infrastructure, and endless refugee camps for displaced Germans from the East, to a thriving nation whose growth seemed limited only by the number of workers it could lay its hands upon.

Labor shortages, of course, are a normal part of all economic expansions. Such wonderful problems have long been among the primary forces driving economic and technological innovations aimed at making existing workers more efficient. Such productivity innovations are a long-term phenomenon, however, and in the 1950’s Germany had recent experience with a much shorter-term solution to chronic labor shortage: imported foreign workers.

During the war, with manufacturing needs high and civilian workers in short supply, Germany solved the labor shortage by bringing in huge numbers of foreigners from the occupied territories -- some of them voluntarily, even. These workers significantly increased Germany’s strained wartime productivity. Those who survived Allied bombs and the moral expediencies of a wartime economy then promptly fled Germany upon her collapse.

Faced with the labor shortage of the Economic Miracle, Germany decided to simply revive the wartime practice, but with higher wages and fewer guards. To make the new program more palatable, they called the imported workers “Guest Workers”, rather than “Alien Workers” (fremdarbeiters) as they had been called during the war.

The idea was very appealing: the country would import large numbers of Turks, Italians, Greeks, Yugoslavs, Spaniards and Moroccans to cheaply do the jobs that “no German wanted to do.” Such impoverished foreigners would be happy as pie with piddly wages (by German standards) and then they would all go home after a few years. This second part was very important to the Germans, who had never been a nation of immigration and were rightfully proud of their long history as a distinct and continuous people.

So how did it work? Great -- right up until the part where the guests were supposed to go home. They didn’t. Employers became dependent on them and were reluctant to find and train replacements or adapt through innovation. And the workers found life as a janitor in Germany somewhat more attractive than life as a Goatherd in the backwoods of Anatolia.

So the employers and guests both fought for constant renewals and extensions and loopholes. The (very comfortable) guests then brought in their families at the first opportunity (or married other guest workers) and baby guests were born. Today, it has been forty to fifty years since the guest worker agreements were signed (depending on the guest-providing country in question), and the guests are still there.

There are two million Turkish guests, one million Yugoslav guests, half a million Italian guests, one third of a million Greek guests and a quarter million Polish guests, along with thousands of Moroccan, Tunisian, Middle Eastern, Russian, and assorted other guests. Guests are now 10% of Germany’s population. And many of these guests were born in Germany, being the children and grandchildren of Germany’s “temporary” workers from the fifties and sixties. Oh, and they’ve tired of the guest room, so they all expect to be made citizens now.

Germany was totally sincere in it’s original intent to have the guest workers be temporary, had no pre-existing pro-alien political lobby and no immigrant community for the newcomers to bond with -- and yet it has still not managed to be rid of its guests. So explain to me how America can ever make a guest worker program work. Especially since we grant citizenship to any and all that are born here, regardless of whether their mothers are here permanently, temporarily, illegally, or just visiting their guest worker husbands when the birth occurs.

An American guest worker program cannot work as anything other than a back-door amnesty for our current illegal aliens.

But, of course, that is the whole point of the program. Bush knows it. Chertoff knows it. And unfortunately for them, most conservatives know it.

Now, what was that part about brute enforcement again?

Do you believe President Bush will finally secure the border? POLL

Take the Bill O’reilly poll!

Do you believe President Bush will finally secure the border?



Dallas Morning News refuses to retract op-ed
The Dallas Morning News refuses to print a retraction--instead, columnist Macarena Hernandez wrote yet another column (registration may be required) denouncing the Factor.

If you would like to email the publisher of the Dallas Morning News, James M. Moroney III, you may do so at

NOTE: The Dallas Morning News/Ms. Hernandez tried to blame O’reilly for the recent deaths of illegal immigrants at the hands of another criminal gang.

Video of Minutemen on Border from Luca Zanna

This is a message from our new immigrant American, Luca Zanna. If you have not heard his patriotic music, click on He's a true patriot and a Minuteman!


"Watch the Video at Jacumba California/Mexico Borders, 24 hours with the High desert Minutemen"

Support the High Desert Minutemen... order a cd Wake Up America for
just $10.00 (contains 21 tracks + the song the Minutemen here some
tracks )
read instructions at the end of the video thanks... we need $ for gas and equipment!

Sunday, October 23, 2005

SW Conference on Illegal Immigration, Border Security and Crime

Conference Location

This year's Southwest Conference on Illegal Immigration, Border Security and Crime will be located at the Scottsdale Resort and Conference Center. Located in Scottsdale, Arizona, the resort features 50,000 square feet of meeting space.

Conference Objective:

To learn about the impact of illegal immigration on the Southwest and to empower communities to deal with these issues. The conference is open to all who wish to attend and a variety of viewpoints is encouraged.

Who Should Attend:

Interested citizens, lawmakers, law enforcement officers and officials, and political and community leaders seeking a better understanding of and solutions to the illegal immigration crisis through the Southwest.


Thursday, November 3, 2005 through Saturday, November 5, 2005.


Andrew P. Thomas, Maricopa County Attorney

Congressman Tom Tancredo, Sixth Congressional District of Colorado

John Leo, U.S. News and World Report

Stephen Moore, Wall Street Journal

Pete Nuñez, Former U.S. Attorney, Southern District of California

John Fund, Wall Street Journal

Mark Krikorian, Center for Immigration Studies

Larry Dever, Cochise County Sheriff

Debbie Schlussel, Political Commentator

Glynn Custred, Professor of Anthropology, California State East Bay

William Boyes, Professor of Economics, Arizona State University

and numerous other academic and law enforcement experts ...

Issues of Discussion:

  • The Effects of Illegal Immigration on States and Communities
  • Effects of Illegal Immigration on Public Safety
  • Improving Enforcement of Border Security
  • Employer Sanctions: What is to be done?

and many more topics . . .

Registration will end on Monday, October 31, 2005 at 5:00 p.m. EDT. Registrations will be accepted at the door the day of the conference, but please be advised that there will be no guarantee of food for registrants after this date.

Judiciary Committe hands out 30,000 more visas!

This from LOU DOBBS, our best friend in the media, aired 10/22/05

ROMANS: Case in point he says, a Senate Judiciary Committee this week to turn out 30,000 more temporary work visas so companies can hire foreign workers for jobs, adding even more work to an overburdened agency. Still, even immigration critics are pleased that 50 criminal alien sex offenders were taken off the street this week in New York, of 3,100 criminal alien sex arrested in just over two years.

Of course these arrests and deportations only help public safety if the government makes sure they don't come right back into the country. A success today on the border in Arizona, a Mexican national illegally entering this country, he was stopped and identified as a man deported in 1981 for having sex with a child. The question is, how many other dangerous criminals didn't get stopped? And made it through without any trouble, Lou.

DOBBS: Unfortunately the answer to that question is in terms of estimates quite large in terms of the population of criminal illegal aliens as they are called who have committed serious crimes and sex offenses.

The idea that the country continues to tolerate a border that is absolutely wide open, whether it to be terrorists, illegal aliens, to sex offenders, to criminals of all sorts is extraordinary.

ROMANS: You can see by the action from the Senate this week their concern seems to be making sure there are workers for companies, not to enforce immigration laws that are already on the books.

DOBBS: As Christine Romans reported this week, there is no accounting for most of those receiving visas in this country, our immigration officials, our State Department, homeland security department, none have an accurate count as to the number, the names, or the whereabouts of most of those. Christine Romans, thank you much.

That brings us to the subject of our poll tonight. The question is should sanctuary laws that prevent the apprehension of illegal aliens be abolished? Yes or no. Please you're your vote at We'll have the results here later in the broadcast. (vote at

NOTE: Recently Lars Larson reports from Portland, Oregon ( that Mount Bachelor will no longer hire local youth for their ski resort. Instead they are getting foreign students coming in on student visas. Higher education working a ski resort??


Riyadh, Asharq Al-Awsat- More than 10,000 Saudi students will travel to the US to attend university as part of a government-sponsored program following the adoption of new measures by the Ministry of Higher Education aimed at facilitating travel procedures for Saudis. In total, 21,000 Saudis are expected to take part in the program in the next four years.(snip 10/23/05)

AND Another thing!

There are so many "visa" programs being handed out by every agency of government that NONE of them know who is here. Remember many overstay their visas and just did the 9/11 hijackers.

Saturday, October 22, 2005

Good bye USA. Hello North American Union!

Here's Senator John Cornyn's bill to establish the first building block of this momentous betrayal to throw open the borders. 20 million illegal aliens aren't enough????

Senate Bill 2941. Sen. Cronyn has introduced this monster before and looks like it's coming again! Contact your senators if you don't want to be a Mexicanadan.



The purposes of the Fund shall be--

(1) to promote economic and infrastructure integration among Canada, Mexico, and the United States;

(2) to promote education and economic development in Mexico; and

(3) to reduce the wealth gap between Mexico and Canada, and between Mexico and the United States.



(a) IN GENERAL- The Fund shall make grants for projects to carry out the purposes described in section 3, including projects--

(1) to construct roads in Mexico to facilitate trade between Mexico and Canada, and Mexico and the United States;

(2) to develop and implement post-secondary education programs in Mexico;

(3) to install telecommunications technologies throughout Mexico; and

(4) to construct other infrastructure that will carry out such purposes.



(a) IN GENERAL- The terms of the agreement establishing the Fund shall, subject to the limitation in subsection (b), require the Governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States to contribute to the Fund.

Quote of the Day / Best of the Web ( Illegal Aliens)

"When discussing this, as a Christian I point out that hiring illegal workers is tantamount to theft.

I have a ranch and hire local kids to do work for me. I pay them good money because I appreciate the help and its part of owning a ranch. The kids learn to work. They make money. and I get work done.

If I hired mexicans, the kids would not get the benefit of working on my ranch and learning skills. I would be stealing from our next generation."

18 posted on 10/22/2005 7:20:50 AM PDT by Paloma_55 (Which part of "Common Sense" do you not understand???)