Immigration Is Not National Security: Lack of It Imperils the Nation

Policy Review ^ | Dec 2006 | Mary Eberstadt

[arnoldfwilliams]

In sum, the insistence by impassioned theorists that illegal immigration south of the border is the pre-eminent problem of our time makes perfect sense — or would, had those been Salvadoreans piloting airplanes on 9/11, Guatemalans bankrolling their efforts, Hondurans plotting attacks on the subways and government buildings of Europe, and Mexicans across the global labor diaspora plotting how to bring down the American government, presumably by poisoning our gardens and toilets. If you do not think that is the way it went down, then Occam's razor dictates this: The sheer volume of emotion on the subject of illegal aliens makes most sense as a manifestation of denial about who would really like to see the end of the American republic — as it turns out, one form of many now circulating.

[arnoldfwilliams]

And with that, I close correspondence. It's been interesting. I think the biggest problems I have are with those who confuse security angles with the whole immigration problem, and those who cannot differentiate between things that are bad in themselves and things that are bad because the legislature has said so.

Nonetheless, I've learned a few things I didn't know before, so it was worthwhile.

Probably the biggest surprise was the willingness of people to attribute malign wishes and devious plots in process, based on fantasied associations. Probably that was my problem with the association between Mexican illegal immigration and all illegal immigration (while about a third of illegal immigrants don't fit that profile).

Mortgage brokering is a boring profession, mainly concerned with getting the needs of small businessmen met, many of whom have cash flow squeezes as interest rates rise, and who need the relief: but under the gaze of those to whom no activity is innocent, it's a fountain of evil overspreading the land.

Honi soit qui mal y pense.

[gubamyster]

ping

[William Terrell]

Of course, we have the silly theorists here who get all worked up about the Mexican Border, where infiltration by Islamists is not much of a hazard, and forgetting about Canada, where it is.

Both, dear heart.

[Edit35]

I have always disagreed with the alarmists (Sean Hannity is one) who harp on the "huge threat" of terrorists coming across the Mex-US border.

However, I see the massive influx of third world Hispanics as even MORE perilous for America, in that it is destroying our Eurocentric culture, balkanizing our society into third-world ghetto's, not to mention the increases in crime, etc.

No country can survive for long with multiple languages, which is exactly what's happening with forced bi-lingual education, phone-trees, voting requirements, and 'no englais' cities. (ever been in downtown LA lately, or Miami? It's more like an open air goat auction in Borneo than it is an American city)

America can NOT absorbe so many third worlders so fast. Once the voting population is made up of MORE foreign born people, many of whom are socialists thru and thru, there's no telling WHAT or WHO they might vote into power.

Dont say it cant happen. The Mayor of Los Angeles gives half his speeches in Spanish, for heavens sake.

What's to stop a Mayor of an all third world born border town from mandating Spanish only schools, or laws similar to the countries from which they came?

Paranoid? Maybe slightly.

But I'm not willing to bet the life and welfare of my children, grandchildren (already have three), and the fate of this great nation which, like William Bennett says, is "The Last Best Hope".

[Edit35]

We are being invaded, while not a military invasion, it is an invasion non-the-less.

You are SO correct.

America will deteriorate quickly due to the ongoing massive influx of third world masses, most of whom will not give up their language or culture.

IF WE don't put a stop to the invasion, that is.

No country can maintain its economic viability or military superiority if it is balkanized with multiple languages and cultural sects.

The thing which has kept America the fabulous melting pot (in the past) that it IS is the fact that no one group could out muscle another group because of parity.

Once third world Central American Hispanics make up 50-percent or more, there is no telling WHAT and WHO will be voted into power.

Am I paranoid? Just look at history. Look at the problems of the former Yugoslavia.

[Pelham]

Well said.

[Pelham]

Lave las manos.

[Pelham]

Welfare, for which aliens don't qualify until they've been here a while,

Proof that you have no knowledge of what you're babbling about.

[raybbr]

Quit distracting the Border Patrol with immigration. Unless you think that they should all be there to catch one.

The only way to do that would be to eliminate them. That's their job. How did you arrive at that statement?

[raybbr]

Look at me. Don't I look smarter than the rest of you?

[wolfcreek]

"Your suspicions are, like everyone who denies the rule of economics, misplaced economics."


I've been involved in the construction business for over 30 yrs. I don't know about CA but, in Texas, use of illegal workers is wide spread. There are businesses whose entire operation and profit margin were based on the employ of *cheap* labor. There's nothing *misplaced* accept ethics. All these people see is the bottom line.

[EnochPowellWasRight]

"That's because we have sensible laws on coffee import. We don't have sensible laws on people."

Sure we do. In fact, we have some of the most lenient LEGAL immigration laws of any nation.

You desire to make much of the 3rd World voting citizens here?

Ok, we'll just tax YOUR income to pay for the social programs they'll vote for.

"to say nothing of the housing and transport costs to get them back to the border."

As opposed to paying for them to stay here with free medical care, education, and government-backed housing loans....

[Rurudyne]

arnoldwilliams, since you've decided to close I would like to call attention to the structure of the arguments you have presented.

You have presented us with a dilemma. Dilemmas have been likened to bulls: attempt to wrestle one horn and you take the other in the chest. The only way to deal with these is to try to grab both horns or else grasp the proverbial bull's neck.

As I see it, you have presented two "horns":

The Horn of Social Justice and the Economic Horn.

The Horn of Social Justice questions or posits a number of things: the soundness of our laws, the needs of those who are entering the country illegally, and so forth.

The Economic Horn questions or posits a number of things: the manifest presence of illegals already here most notably.

These are not unconventional defenses of Illegal Aliens––they are generally considered the strong arguments for leniency and tolerance.

However, I've tried to point out that the real issue isn't any of these things. If there is an economic need for more people in our society then shouldn't it be up to us––the Citizens––to determine how that need will be met? Isn't the real issue of social justice if a society has a right to set for itself its own laws and expect that these should be respected? Also if those laws are problematic, isn't it our privilege––indeed our obligation––to look after that ourselves?

As it is your whole position must fall back on the preeminence of Illegal Aliens in deciding for themselves which of our laws they should respect AND of our tolerating their presence once they are here––now that they have made the sovereign decision to impose themselves on us––since they may be of use to us materially.

That is a very crass view, IMHO.

Certainly, it is not one enjoined by the Mexican government when their OWN laws are called into question.

Respectfully, Rurudyne

[ckilmer]

the best you can say for arnoldwilliams is that he thinks he's a shill for the federals in Mexico city. The worst you can say about arnoldwilliams is that he's a shill for the transnational sodomites north american union project. Given the nature of his arguements--its likely the latter.

[VOA]

Even with all the discussion on this and other threads since the November
elections, I still believe the war is over.
The Illegals have won.

A sufficient number of my fellow citizens voted for the party of
open-borders and open-ended (endless) Amnesty. And those will be law
sometime next year.
Dubya, Pelosi and Reid no longer have those pesky law-n-order Republicans
standing in their way; their way to victory is open and clear.

If not, I'll be glad to eat crow (with plenty of BBQ sauce).

[ckilmer]

the trouble with this is that if the illegals have won then the USA has lost big time. Why? Because there is another larger wave behind this one. This is actually the last time americans have a say in the matter.

[wolfcreek]

"he's a shill for the transnational sodomites north american union project"


I suspect there are a few on every forum who try and create an illusion that everything will be fine.

I've noticed, most of the people who are proponents of open borders and amnesty are the ones who have backgrounds in economics. They tend to let money get in the way of country.

[VOA]

This is actually the last time americans have a say in the matter.

I really, really, really hope I'm dead wrong.

But that time passed on Nov. 7, 2006.
Unless the cabal of Democrats and Open-Border Republicans
self-destructs...I don't see how US voters will have a real chance
to reverse what's going to happen next year.

Too many of the illegals (with plenty of voting sympathizers)
are already within the gates.
And Dubya left that gate WIDE OPEN even given the best of all reasons
for tightly controlling the influx on the morning of 9-11-01.

[EnochPowellWasRight]

"Too many of the illegals (with plenty of voting sympathizers)
are already within the gates. "

Get ready for the sacking of the City on the Hill....

[Lurker]

is a good example of a statistically invalid study

I don't care if it's one every 6 months.

They broke the law getting here. Deport them. Now. All of them.

L