What Americans Can Learn From the Paris Riots (Implications for Immigration Policies)

There's an important question that Americans need to ask themselves about the Paris Riots: Could the same thing happen here?

Granted, there are some significant differences between this country and France. We do a better job of assimilating immigrants, have a much lower unemployment rate, a less cushy welfare system, tend to be much more aggressive in dealing with rioters, and percentage wise Muslims make up 8% of the population in France as compared to roughly 2% of the population in the US. So, it's unlikely that we're going to see Muslim rioters running wild in the streets here in the US anytime soon.

Still, the French riots reinforce a number of ideas and concepts that have been brought up many times before in immigration debates in the US.

#1) It is important that immigrants respect our laws: If we allow illegal immigrants to become citizens of the United States -- or even guest workers -- we're teaching them that it pays to break our laws. As they've found out in France, having immigrants in your country who care little for your nation's laws and traditions can have terrible consequences.

#2) It is vitally important for immigrants to speak English and be assimilated in our culture. When you have enclaves of people in this country who live with other immigrants, spend all their time with other immigrants, live in an area populated almost entirely by other immigrants, and don't even speak the language, you may see a "dual culture" develop (i.e. "We're in America, but we don't feel like Americans.") That's part of the problem in France and it's a problem in this country as well, although not to the same degree --yet.

#3) Our immigration policy needs to be updated for the 21st century. The United States is the strongest and most prosperous nation (of any size) in the world. Because of that, each year, there are far more people who want to come into this country than we can accept.

So, what's wrong with being choosy about whom we allow to become a citizen of the United States? For example, why shouldn't a computer programmer from India be given preference over a ditch digger from Mexico? Why couldn't we take in a scientist from Jamaica instead of a lawyer from Germany? What's the point of allowing a day laborer from Brazil into the United States when we could have a nuclear physicist from New Zealand instead?

Furthermore, we've got reams of data on every ethnic group that has been allowed into the United States. You can look up crime rates, average income, you name it. So what's wrong with saying:

"Immigrants from country X make an average of $40,000 a year, only 3% of them are on welfare, and only 1% of them have committed crimes over a 10 year period. On the other hand, immigrants from country Y make an average of $16,000 a year, 19% of them are on welfare, and 11% of them have committed crimes during a 10 year period. Therefore, only carefully screened handfuls of people from country Y will be allowed to become citizens of the United States while many more people from country X will be allowed in."

That's exactly what we should be doing. Our goal with immigration shouldn't be to bring in more day laborers, it should be to bring in the best and the brightest applicants from all over the world. Not only will that help keep America successful well into the 21st century, you can also be sure that it won't be an Iraqi doctor or an engineer from Poland who's out in the street throwing petrol bombs at cars.

Had the French made some different decisions 5, 10, or even years ago about how they were going to handle immigrants, these riots would have never happened. We should learn from their mistakes and correct our policies now to make sure we don't have our own problems further down the road.

If you do that you would have a better country.

That reasoning doesn't fit the agenda of the Socialists in this country or the UN. .

These one worlders want to handicap this country, just like in horse racing.

"In a handicap horse race, varying amounts of weight are added to the horse saddles. This is an attempt to even out the competition, in case some horses are clearly more dominant than others." The better the horse the more weight it has to carry to slow it down and even the field.

In our case we import illegal immigrants and criminals to to our population to slow us down. - Tom

"That reasoning doesn't fit the agenda of the Socialists in this country or the UN. "

You mean GWB's one fuzzy world policies?

See this, originally posted by "the gillman" (hope I'm not crossing the wrong line by not asking you first gillman, but more folks need to see this):

Start with this summary by Phyllis Schlafly, staunch conservative and friend to Ronald Reagan.

http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2005/july05/05-07-13.html

...This CFR document, called "Building a North American Community," asserts that George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin "committed their governments" to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" and assigned "working groups" to fill in the details....

This was the meeting where Bush called the Minutemen "Vigilantes."

...the CFR document calls for "a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution." Get ready for decisions from non-American judges who make up their rules ad hoc and probably hate the United States anyway...

Bye bye Constitution.

... The CFR document demands that we implement "the Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico." That's code language for putting illegal aliens into the U.S. Social Security system, which is bound to bankrupt the system...

Bye bye your retirement.

...U.S. taxpayers are supposed to create a major fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges...

How generous of you to support the higher education of all those foreignors. Will you have enough left over for your own children?

... The CFR document calls for allowing Mexican trucks "unlimited access" to the United States, including the hauling of local loads between U.S. cities...

Look out for that big scary truck!
Talk about drug smuggling and terrorist heaven.

... To ensure that the U.S. government carries out this plan so that it is "achievable" within five years, the CFR calls for supervision by a North American Advisory Council of "eminent persons from outside government....

See? You don't get to vote at all. You just get to pay and surrender your rights at the door.

You can see the plan here.

http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=8102

Pay particular attention the portion on "Dissenting Views."
That's where some say they haven't sold us out enough, and the the others say they'll have trouble with, "racists, xenophobes and nationalists" who aparrently don't approve of being robbed to support the utopian dream of these traitors.

The talking points of the OBL's on this site come directly from there.

Here's Senator John Cornyn's bill to establish the first building block of this momentous betrayal.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.2941:

Highlights:

SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

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.

Reduce the wealth gap.
Pure Marxism, from your republican administration.

More:

SEC. 4. PROJECTS FUNDED.

(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.

(Part two, there's your children's college fund, going to Mexicans.)

More:

SEC. 5. CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE FUND.

(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.

(Governments? They're talking about pillaging your paychecks!)

The terms of the agreement establishing the Fund shall require that the Fund operate for an initial period of 10 years.

By then, there will be nothing left of the Republic.

Is Paris Burning? ( Religion of Peace® Alert )
Click the picture:

Islam, The Alleged Religion of Peace® ( TARP™ )? Click this picture:

No, I am not exaggerating. Click the pic, go to "last," and read backwards.
If you are not informed about this stuff, you will be made sick. If you are informed, you will be made mad, all over again.

Then, there is this little problem...

For "Thunder on the Border," click the picture:

Kindly note tagline:

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.