Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Restrictionist Watch, Volume 1, Number 2, March 19, 2004

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Restrictionist Watch, Volume 1, Number 2, March 19, 2004

    copy-paste

    Source: www.aila.org

    Restrictionist Watch, Volume 1, Number 2, March 19, 2004

    Cite as "Posted on AILA InfoNet at Doc. No. 04031910 (Mar. 19, 2004) ."


    AILA's
    Restrictionist Watch

    Volume 1, Number 2, March 19, 2004

    Welcome to Restrictionist Watch, a publication intended to alert AILA Members, our coalition partners, and the public to the ongoing activities of immigration restrictionists. These groups are well-organized and extremely well-funded and are gearing up to fight any and all positive immigration initiatives. Your voice is needed to counter their rhetoric and activities. Please visit the Advocacy Center on AILA InfoNet or AILA's public site for information on how you can help shape the future of immigration. Included on these sites are backgrounders and issue papers on the top issues of the day.

    Feature Article: Attacking Anti-Immigrant Extremism
    by Mark Potok

    Mark Potok is the editor of Intelligence Report, a quarterly investigative magazine specializing in the domestic radical right and published by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The magazine, which has a circulation of over 300,000 including some 60,000 law enforcement officers, has won both journalism and design awards, and its findings are regularly reported in the American print and broadcast media. To access the Southern Poverty Law Center's website, go to: http://www.splcenter.org

    In the fall of 1998, a small gathering in Cullman, Alabama, drew the attention of researchers at the Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights organization that has monitored and sued American hate groups since the early 1980s. At a protest that featured the burning of Mexican and United Nations flags and the arrest of a former state Klan official, a leader of the allegedly more "mainstream" anti-immigration movement was spotted. In a brief item in the Intelligence Report, the magazine I edit for the Center, the event was described as "a day laced with anti-Mexican and anti-Asian oratory" and the presence of Glenn Spencer - head of the anti-immigration American Patrol group and a leading activist behind California's Proposition 187 - was noted. The Report item was headlined "Right Meets Far Right."

    That small rally became the starting point for a series of investigative forays into the world of American anti-immigration groups. Over the course of the next six years, the Intelligence Report would report extensively on the cross-pollination of white supremacist hate groups and the larger immigration restriction movement. By 2004, the Center had exposed a number of racist elements in the movement, sued a violent border vigilante group, and become a key player in exposing the attempted takeover of the environmentalist Sierra Club by anti-immigration zealots.

    Traditionally, the Center had focused its attention on explicitly white supremacist groups like the Klan. But a second event, in early 2000, seemed to confirm that the hard edge of the anti-immigration movement was growing and was increasingly coming to embrace open racism. In Cochise County, Arizona, two ranch owners, Roger and Donald Barnett, drew national publicity as they complained of undocumented workers crossing their land and boasted of rounding up hundreds of migrants at gunpoint and handing them over to the authorities. The Barnetts - who were lauded as heroes by most immigration restriction groups - even took reporters from around the world on weekend "missions" to "hunt" their human prey.

    That May, a major gathering of anti-immigration activists was held in Sierra Vista, Arizona, to celebrate the Barnetts' armed vigilantism. More than 250 people showed up to listen to Barbara Coe, head of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform and another key Proposition 187 supporter - rail against "alien savages." Coe told her audience that every would-be immigrant caught at the border would be "one less illegal alien bringing in communicable diseases, one less illegal alien smuggling deadly drugs, one less illegal alien gang member to rob, rape and murder innocent U.S. citizens." Adding his voice to Coe's, Spencer showed his grotesque videotape, "Immigration: Threatening the Bonds of Our Union," which outlined an imaginary Hispanic conspiracy to retake the Southwest for Mexico.

    Spencer and Coe weren't the only hard-liners there. So were members of former Klan leader David Duke's latest organization, the National Organization for European American Rights (since renamed the European American Unity and Rights Organization, or EURO), and unrobed members of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. Klan fliers were placed on cars outside the event, just in case any of the participants hadn't yet realized the high interest being evinced by openly racist groups.

    The events in Cullman and Sierra Vista seemed to be part of a pattern, and Report writer and researcher Heidi Beirich began to investigate. A photo in our files showed that Coe had actually participated in the Cullman rally along with Spencer and former Klan leader William Burchfield. A search of the newsletter of the white supremacist group Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) revealed that that group was the sponsor of the event. And the newsletter disclosed something even more revealing - Rick Oltman, west coast representative of the well-known Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the largest such group in America - was an invited speaker. Later, Oltman would confirm that he did speak at the CCC event.

    It was the beginning of a major project. Over the following years, Beirich, Report writer Bob Moser and I would collaborate on a series of reports looking into the increasingly violent and racist aspects of the anti-immigration movement.

    Ultimately, our research, most of it carried out by Beirich, revealed a tight-knit and interlocking network tying the CCC - a hate group that has described blacks as "a retrograde species of humanity" - to several prominent anti-immigration activists going all the way back to the early 1990s. Emblematic of this relationship was a panel held at a 1999 CCC conference that featured Spencer and the leaders of three other well-known anti-immigration organizations: Wayne Lutton of The Social Contract Press; John Vinson of the American Immigration Control Foundation; and Virginia Abernethy of Population-Environment Balance. Not long after, Abernethy and Lutton joined the editorial advisory board of Citizens Informer, the racist tabloid published by the CCC. Since then, the publication and its parent group have shifted their attention more and more to the supposed evils of non-white immigration.

    Our investigation also included a visit by Beirich to the border to look into charges of vigilantism against the Barnetts and others. Documentation provided by the Mexican consul's office showed that detentions were frequent and often involved force. And the number of self-described immigrant-catchers was growing. In 2000, the armed outfit Ranch Rescue, which the Center sued in 2003 for violating the rights of seven immigrants, began patrolling ranches, first the Barnetts', and then those of others. According to its publicity materials, Ranch Rescue was repairing fences, but the Report investigation found that the group's activities were more paramilitary in nature. And e-mails later secured by the Center made clear that the leader of the group, Jack Foote, showed substantial racial animus towards Mexicans. This research ultimately led to our first major anti-immigration story, "Blood on the Border," published in spring 2001 [to view this report, go to: http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intel...le.jsp?aid=230 ]. Our research also led us to list as hate groups three organizations: American Patrol, American Immigration Control Foundation, and The Social Contract Press. The following year, Coe's California Coalition for Immigration Reform would also be added to the Center's hate group list.

    In early 2002, the Report expanded its research into the anti-immigration movement. For four months, Beirich teased out the financing and connections between the leading anti-immigration organizations in the U.S. What tax records revealed was something quite remarkable - the American anti-immigration movement was largely the creation of one man, a Michigan ophthalmologist named John Tanton, whom our Report cover story would dub "The Puppeteer."

    The fact that one man was so central to this movement was interesting, but Tanton's history of bigotry toward Hispanics and his close associations with white supremacist activists were critical to the research. Interestingly, Tanton came to immigration issues from the left. A Sierra Club activist starting in the late 1960s, Tanton was highly concerned with population growth in the U.S. and, for a time, he headed the Sierra Club's Population Committee. But by the late 1970s, Tanton had decided that immigration was the real cause of most environmental degradation. He also became concerned about its effects on our civilization. Tanton has openly said that one of his main inspirations for taking on immigration was The Camp of the Saints, a racist French novel that lays out a lurid vision of dark-skinned Third World hordes destroying European civilization. To this day, Tanton's organization, The Social Contract Press, sells the book, calling it "gripping." The special 1994 edition of the book published by Tanton carried an afterword from author Jean Raspail claiming that the "proliferation of other races dooms our race ... to extinction." When it was published, Tanton wrote that he was "honored" to republish the Frenchman's race war novel. "We are indebted to Jean Raspail for his insights into the human condition," Tanton said, "and for being 20 years ahead of his time. History will judge him more kindly than have some of his contemporaries."

    In the late 1970s, Tanton began to build a multi-organizational anti-immigration movement. He laid out his strategy in 1986 in secret memos that proposed, among other things, the creation of multiple think tanks to focus on the negative effects of immigration and a possible anti-immigration take-over of the Sierra Club. Unfortunately for Tanton, his memos were also marked by rank anti-Hispanic bigotry, something made public when they were leaked to the Arizona Republic in 1988. Several prominent persons, including newsman Walter Cronkite and conservative Republican Linda Chavez, left their positions at Tanton's U.S. English after the disclosures. Tanton, too, quit as the group's chairman. But the negative publicity didn't deter Tanton's ambitious work in organizing a crackdown on immigration. Between 1980 and 2002, Tanton had a hand in either the founding or the funding of 13 anti-immigration groups, many of them well known.

    Our investigation also found that Tanton had used his foundation, U.S., Inc., to channel thousands of dollars in contributions to these organizations. In addition, the foundation runs several anti-immigration programs itself, including The Social Contract Press, NumbersUSA and Pro English. Beirich also found that Tanton employs and shares his Michigan offices with racist anti-immigration activist Wayne Lutton, who is also a member of the editorial board of the Council of Conservative Citizens. And we found that many of Tanton's organizations inflate membership numbers and that nearly all rely on a very narrow donor base made up of a few major donors, most of them from the far right. Overall, the immigration movement was more "astroturf" - meaning lacking in popular participation - than grassroots.

    Our third major foray into immigration came in late 2002 in response to reports from the border that indicated vigilante activity was on the rise. In a series of e-mails obtained by the Center, the vigilante nature of Ranch Rescue's activities (including alleged attacks on migrants) that year were detailed. Rob Krott, the chief foreign correspondent for Soldier of Fortune magazine and an accomplished mercenary, wrote to Ranch Rescue members outlining their mission's goals as to "observe and surveill [sic] border incursions" and "deter criminal trespass." Earlier in the year, Spencer had moved his entire operation to the Arizona border and started up American Border Patrol, a group that claimed it would use high-tech devices, including aircraft drones, to monitor border-crossers. In addition, Chris Simcox, another California transplant who had recently purchased the local Tombstone Tumbleweed newspaper, established a new militia called Civil Homeland Defense. Simcox held weapons training and ran patrols throughout the Arizona border region. In addition, Ranch Rescue was still patrolling ranches in the area, as well as in Texas, as were the Barnetts on almost every weekend. To cover these activities, the Report dispatched staff writer Bob Moser to Arizona for two weeks.

    Moser found that not only was vigilantism exploding at the border, but it was also apparently becoming more violent - and race-based. Moser's interview with Simcox, for example, drew out a racial animus that at least partially explained his intense interest in apprehending border-crossers. Moser also discovered that there had been several highly suspicious shooting incidents in which border-crossers were murdered. In a sidebar, Moser documented a series of incidents where weapons were brandished or discharged by ranchers and others detaining border-crossers.

    Ultimately, the Center's work on immigration paid off in the form of a lawsuit by our legal department. In May 2003, the Center, with the help of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the law firms of Ricardo de Anda and John Judge, sued Ranch Rescue, three of its members including leader Jack Foote, and Texas ranch owner Joseph Sutton. The suit alleged that individuals in the group had assaulted and falsely imprisoned six plaintiffs, illegal border crossers who were unfortunate enough to find themselves on Sutton's ranch while Ranch Rescue was conducting operations there. Our hope is that this suit will serve as a warning to ranchers throughout the Southwest that there will be a high price to pay for those who allow armed vigilantes to ply their trade on their ranch lands.

    The latest episode in the rise of a hard-line anti-immigration movement began last fall, when Report staffers realized that an effort to take control of the board of the Sierra Club by immigration restrictionists was under way. In October, based on our research, I sent a lengthy letter to Club President Larry Fahn warning of a "hostile takeover attempt" by anti-immigration forces allied with Tanton and others. The Center also decided to run co-founder Morris Dees for the Club's board as a way of bringing additional attention to the purported takeover attempt from the national media. At this writing, it appears likely that the attempt to take over the Club will lose. But that will not be known until late April, when the Club is expected to officially announce the results of its hotly contested board elections.

    It is worth noting that the Southern Poverty Law Center claims no expertise on immigration and does not have a position on the best levels of immigration into the United States. The Center's expertise is the radical right, and it is through that lens that we view the events of the last few years in the anti-immigration movement. We seek to expose racism and racist groups within the movement in order to promote a democratic dialogue on immigration - a dialogue that is not shaped or directed by racists, racist organizations or racist ideology.

    Restrictionist Roundup

    What have the major anti-immigration players been up to recently? A brief roundup of their activities follows.

    Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) (www.fairus.org):

    Among his recent activities, FAIR Executive Director Dan Stein testified on February 4 before the House Committee on International Relations on the topic of L visa reform. As usual Mr. Stein's testimony, both written and ****, contained a substantial amount of misinformation, such as his mischaracterization of the L visa program as "the latest legal loophole that is being exploited to the detriment of American workers." Calling the L-1 visa program, as well as President Bush's recent immigration initiative, "mortal threats to the American middle class," Mr. Stein irresponsibly asserted:

    Major Fortune 500 companies like Bank of America and Sun Microsystems freely admit that they will use every legal opportunity to substitute cheaper foreign workers for Americans. Lacking a sense of responsibility for the common good of the nation, and only for the corporate bottom line, unrestricted access to L-1 visas is tantamount to leaving the keys to the liquor cabinet in the hands of an alcoholic....If the middle class is concerned about the out-sourcing bomb that is taking place all across the country, the L visa, and to a lesser extent the H visa, are the delivery technologies. They are helping to make this possible.

    He concluded his testimony by noting that, while FAIR supports the intent of some of the competing (and quite restrictive) L visa reform measures currently pending in Congress, the group believes that none of them are sufficiently restrictive.

    What Mr. Stein and FAIR refuse to recognize is that for almost 35 years the L-1 visa has been a vital tool both for U.S. companies with an international presence and for international firms expanding into the United States. Although not a heavily used visa in terms of numbers, the L-1 visa has done much to help U.S. companies be competitive. It also facilitates foreign investment in the United States. In fact it is the principal immigration vehicle U.S. companies use to bring in qualified personnel temporarily from their operations abroad to serve as managers or executives or to apply certain specialized knowledge. It also is the principal nonimmigrant visa category that foreign companies use to build U.S. factories, open offices, and hire significant numbers of U.S. workers to staff their U.S. operations. Unless U.S. and foreign companies are able to bring key personnel to their American operations, U.S. companies will be put at a competitive disadvantage and foreign companies will be unlikely to establish or expand their presence in our country.

    AILA's Issue Paper on L-1 visas and U.S. economic growth

    ProjectUSA for an Immigration Time-Out (www.projectusa.org):

    On the front page of its website this week, the Washington-based ProjectUSA for an Immigration Time-Out is conducting a poll which asks readers, "If President Bush continues to push for an amnesty for illegal aliens-and a massive new guest worker program-will you write in Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado on the ballot for president in November?" Readers are asked to check one of the following responses: (1) Absolutely yes; (2) I'd seriously consider it; (3) I would, but I don't vote for Republicans; (4) No, I'd actually be more likely to vote for Bush; (5) Who the **** is Tom Tancredo?

    Also on the topic of elections, ProjectUSA is "raising the immigration issue in" (read: targeting) nine "carefully selected" congressional districts, most of which, the organization states, were picked because the incumbent (1) is considered vulnerable in the next election (he won by less than 55% in his last election), and (2) has a poor voting record in Congress on immigration as determined by the restrictionist group Americans for Better Immigration.

    The lawmakers being targeted include Representatives: Jeff Flake (R-6th AZ), Jim Kolbe (R-8th AZ), Jim Leach (R-2nd IA), Leonard Boswell (D-3rd IA), Dennis Moore (D-3rd KS), Chris Cannon (R-3rd UT), Jim Matheson (D-2nd UT), Earl Pomeroy (D-At Large ND), and Baron Hill (D-9th IN).

    The group is using a combination of billboards, direct mail surveys, online surveys, and media appearances to raise the immigration issue in the targeted districts, and speculates that "if we are able to raise the anti-immigration issue in these nine districts, and inform voters of their Congressman's immigration voting record, the immigration issue might decide two or three contests."

    ProjectUSA goes on to pronounce that: "If that were to happen, it would trigger a political earthquake in Washington. Immigration moderates would gain enormous confidence, immigration extremists would suffer a serious setback, and pro-borders lobbyists would command new respect in the halls of Congress."

    Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) (www.cis.org):

    The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has been quite active in recent weeks. From early February to date, representatives of CIS testified four times before congressional committees and once before the Maryland House of Delegates' Judiciary Committee, espousing, on each occasion, the group's xenophobic and anti-immigration views. Testimony topics ranged from guestworker programs to the US VISIT program to the proposed issuance of Maryland state driver's licenses to undocumented aliens. During this same time period the organization also convened a panel discussion for members of the press entitled "INS, RIP: One Year Later," published two op-eds, and released a backgrounder in which it argued (unconvincingly and unrealistically) that additional enforcement would be more conducive to resolving this country's immigration issues than a well-crafted guestworker program.

    In one of his recent op-eds, published on March 22, CIS Executive Director Mark Krikorian, argued that a policy of "attrition" would be the best method of dealing with the current undocumented population. "The issue of what to do about illegal aliens living in the United States is often presented as a Hobson's choice," states Mr. Krikorian, "either launch mass roundups to arrest and deport 9-million-plus people, or define away the problem through legalization." "Fortunately for America there is a third way," he proclaims, "between the politically impossible and disruptive approach of mass roundups on one hand, and the surrender of our sovereignty by the open-borders Left and its libertarian fellow-travelers on the other. This third way is attrition, squeezing the illegal population through consistent, across-the-board law enforcement to bring about an annual reduction in the illegal population rather than the annual increases we have seen for more than a decade. Over a few years, the number of illegal aliens would drop significantly, shrinking the problem from a crisis to a manageable nuisance."

    Sounds like the status quo to us. And most everyone agrees that the status quo is no longer acceptable. What this country needs is comprehensive immigration reform that enhances our security, allows American businesses to bring in needed workers, and reunites families. To fully address our economic, humanitarian and security needs, such reform must include: an earned legalization for undocumented immigrants living and working in the U.S.; a new worker program that would legalize future flows of essential workers; and a reduction of the backlogs in family-based immigrant visas. AILA's latest information on comprehensive immigration reform.

    American Patrol (www.americanpatrol.org):

    American Patrol, in a March 4 "feature" on its website, highlighted the March 4 edition of the Lou Dobb's show which featured a debate between Ben Johnson of AILF's Immigration Policy Center and restrictionist Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado. Prominently displayed above a photo of Dobbs, Johnson and Tancredo is a large headline that reads "Liberal Immigration Advocate Says Secure the Borders, Then He Lies About Everything Else." To view the show, click on the following link and choose from either the Broadband or Dial-Up options.

    http://www.americanpatrol.org/04-FEA...4_Feature.html

    After listening to the inflammatory remarks of Messrs. Dobbs and Tancredo in the above clip, click on the link below for a reasonable approach to balancing our security needs with our country's economic interests.

    http://www.aila.org/fileViewer.aspx?docID=9845

    The Coalition for the Future American Worker (www.americanworker.org):

    The Coalition for the Future American Worker (CFAW), which bills itself as "an umbrella organization of professional trade groups, population/environment organizations, and immigration reform groups...formed to represent the [alleged] interests of American workers and students in the formulation of immigration policy," currently features a direct link on its website's homepage to the recent misguided testimony of FAIR Executive Director Dan Stein on the subject of the L-1 visa program (see above section on FAIR's recent activities). The group also has posted to its website a restrictionist-oriented "Legislative Comparison" of pending H-1B and L-1 legislation authored by FAIR's Congressional Task Force. View this document.

    For a more balanced view on the proven economic benefits of the H and L visa programs, click on the links below to view AILA's Issue Packets on the same. View the H-1B packet and the L packet).

    Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement (FILE) (www.fileus.com)

    Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement (FILE) bills itself as "an association of attorneys, researchers, law enforcement officers, legislators, and other experts working on behalf of Americans to ensure that immigration law is being enforced." FILE is involved in a range of restrictionist activities including targeting institutions and municipalities that currently accept the matricula consular as proof of identity, undertaking a suit to force Los Angeles County's Department of Health Services to seek reimbursement from the sponsors of legal immigrants for health care services accessed by legal immigrants access, and encouraging nonresident post-secondary school students to request out-of-state tuition refunds from educational institutions where the institution charges resident undocumented students in-state tuition rates, and threatening to bring suit against institutions that fail to comply.

    With reference to the latter, FILE, in a message on its website to postsecondary students, announces: "If you are a student attending any public postsecondary school in Washington state, California, New York, Illinois, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah, or some schools in Georgia, and are paying out-of-state tuition, you may be entitled to a refund."

    FILE then asks the students to send the organization an email with their name, telephone number, the school attended, and, if known, the difference annually between out-of-state tuition fees and in-state tuition fees at their school. FILE also asks students to add the following disclaimer to their email:

    I am providing this information to Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement (FILE) freely, voluntarily, and with no expectations or demands whatsoever. I agree this information is the property of FILE and its representatives, and FILE may use this information in any way it deems necessary. I hold FILE and its representatives harmless in every respect, and represent, warrant and confirm that the information contained herein is truthful. I agree that FILE may use any or all of this information in any way whatsoever, including, but not limited to, publication. I understand that FILE is not obligated to respond or act in any way due to this information or any request I may send to it. I further understand and agree that no attorney-client relationship exists between FILE and me or any related party unless agreed in writing.

    What FILE and similar organizations refuse to recognize is that, each year, a number of childen in the U.S. are prevented from pursuing their dreams of a college education because they have no legal status. Despite the fact that many of these children have grown up in the U.S., attended local schools, and have demonstrated a sustained commitment to learn English and succeed in our educational system, our immigration laws provide no avenue for these students to become legal. Bipartisan legislation introduced in the 108th Congress would allow immigrant students who have grown up in this country, graduated from high school, and have no criminal record, to go to college and legalize their immigration status. In our opinion, one talented child who is prevented from pursuing his or her college dreams is one child too many.

    View AILA's Issue Paper on this legislation (Student Adjustment/DREAM Act).

    Resources

    For additional background on these and other groups, see AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 02071545 for an eye-opening report on restrictionist groups from the Southern Poverty Law Center. In its report, the Center researches many of these organizations, classifying some as racial hate-based groups, and explains how many of these so called "grassroots organizations" were founded and funded. The report reveals that the organizations are actually run by a small group of individuals and the membership numbers are highly inflated.

    To view AILA's responses to the many inaccurate allegations put forth by these restrictionist groups and the Immigration Reform Caucus, see our section on AILA.org entitled "Myths and Facts." Please also visit the Advocacy Center for additional materials such as Issue Papers, Backgrounders, and AILA Press Releases. In addition, the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) of the American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) has developed other relevant materials. Please visit www.ailf.org and click on "Immigration Policy Center" to view these materials.

    We Can't Believe They Said That

    "In this new era, the single most immediate and most serious challenge to America's traditional identity comes from the immense and continuing immigration from Latin America, especially from Mexico, and the fertility rates of these immigrants compared to black and white American natives. Americans like to boast of their past success in assimilating millions of immigrants into their society, culture, and politics. But Americans have tended to generalize about immigrants without distinguishing among them and have focused on the economic costs and benefits of immigration, ignoring its social and cultural consequences. As a result, they have overlooked the unique characteristics and problems posed by contemporary Hispanic immigration. The extent and nature of this immigration differ fundamentally from those of previous immigration, and the assimilation successes of the past are unlikely to be duplicated with the contemporary flood of immigrants from Latin America. This reality poses a fundamental question: Will the United States remain a country with a single national language and a core Anglo-Protestant culture? By ignoring this question, Americans acquiesce to their eventual transformation into two peoples with two cultures (Anglo and Hispanic) and two languages (English and Spanish)."


    --excerpted from Samuel Huntington's soon-to-be published book, "Who We Are," and reprinted in the March/April edition of Foreign Policy magazine

    "So, while the Sierra Club impotently fritters away time and resources chasing the environmentally irrelevant goal of making white people a smaller percentage of the Club's membership, mass immigration will double the population of the United States within the lifetimes of today's children."
    --excerpt from ProjectUSA's online publication, Issue 182, dated March 5, 2004

    "While corporate America gets access to an unending supply of cheap, exploitable workers, American families will take a financial thrashing as wages and working conditions plummet across the country."
    --FAIR Executive Director, Dan Stein, discussing President Bush's immigration reform proposal in the March 2004 edition of FAIR's newsletter, "Immigration Report"

    "It is not the incivility of the Ashcroft-haters that galls me. It is the unmitigated insipidity and apathy they display toward what this man and his department have done to protect their right to be free, safe and stupid."
    --excerpt from a March 10 column by restrictionist writer Michelle Malkin entitled, "America, Land of the Ashcroft Haters." (Among her more notable achievements, Ms. Malkin is the author of the book, "Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists Criminals & Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores")

    Happy St. Patrick's Day-Restrictionists in History

    "In 1855, Massachusetts Gov. Henry Gardner denounced the Irish immigrants then swarming into his state as a 'horde of foreign barbarians.'"
    --Peter Carlson of the Washington Post, in a March 11 article

    Are there restrictionist media campaigns being mounted in your local area? AILA wants to know! Please forward details to Danielle Polen in AILA's Advocacy Department (dpolen@aila.org), 202-216-2400.

    47RR4002

  • #2
    copy-paste

    Source: www.aila.org

    Restrictionist Watch, Volume 1, Number 2, March 19, 2004

    Cite as "Posted on AILA InfoNet at Doc. No. 04031910 (Mar. 19, 2004) ."


    AILA's
    Restrictionist Watch

    Volume 1, Number 2, March 19, 2004

    Welcome to Restrictionist Watch, a publication intended to alert AILA Members, our coalition partners, and the public to the ongoing activities of immigration restrictionists. These groups are well-organized and extremely well-funded and are gearing up to fight any and all positive immigration initiatives. Your voice is needed to counter their rhetoric and activities. Please visit the Advocacy Center on AILA InfoNet or AILA's public site for information on how you can help shape the future of immigration. Included on these sites are backgrounders and issue papers on the top issues of the day.

    Feature Article: Attacking Anti-Immigrant Extremism
    by Mark Potok

    Mark Potok is the editor of Intelligence Report, a quarterly investigative magazine specializing in the domestic radical right and published by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The magazine, which has a circulation of over 300,000 including some 60,000 law enforcement officers, has won both journalism and design awards, and its findings are regularly reported in the American print and broadcast media. To access the Southern Poverty Law Center's website, go to: http://www.splcenter.org

    In the fall of 1998, a small gathering in Cullman, Alabama, drew the attention of researchers at the Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights organization that has monitored and sued American hate groups since the early 1980s. At a protest that featured the burning of Mexican and United Nations flags and the arrest of a former state Klan official, a leader of the allegedly more "mainstream" anti-immigration movement was spotted. In a brief item in the Intelligence Report, the magazine I edit for the Center, the event was described as "a day laced with anti-Mexican and anti-Asian oratory" and the presence of Glenn Spencer - head of the anti-immigration American Patrol group and a leading activist behind California's Proposition 187 - was noted. The Report item was headlined "Right Meets Far Right."

    That small rally became the starting point for a series of investigative forays into the world of American anti-immigration groups. Over the course of the next six years, the Intelligence Report would report extensively on the cross-pollination of white supremacist hate groups and the larger immigration restriction movement. By 2004, the Center had exposed a number of racist elements in the movement, sued a violent border vigilante group, and become a key player in exposing the attempted takeover of the environmentalist Sierra Club by anti-immigration zealots.

    Traditionally, the Center had focused its attention on explicitly white supremacist groups like the Klan. But a second event, in early 2000, seemed to confirm that the hard edge of the anti-immigration movement was growing and was increasingly coming to embrace open racism. In Cochise County, Arizona, two ranch owners, Roger and Donald Barnett, drew national publicity as they complained of undocumented workers crossing their land and boasted of rounding up hundreds of migrants at gunpoint and handing them over to the authorities. The Barnetts - who were lauded as heroes by most immigration restriction groups - even took reporters from around the world on weekend "missions" to "hunt" their human prey.

    That May, a major gathering of anti-immigration activists was held in Sierra Vista, Arizona, to celebrate the Barnetts' armed vigilantism. More than 250 people showed up to listen to Barbara Coe, head of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform and another key Proposition 187 supporter - rail against "alien savages." Coe told her audience that every would-be immigrant caught at the border would be "one less illegal alien bringing in communicable diseases, one less illegal alien smuggling deadly drugs, one less illegal alien gang member to rob, rape and murder innocent U.S. citizens." Adding his voice to Coe's, Spencer showed his grotesque videotape, "Immigration: Threatening the Bonds of Our Union," which outlined an imaginary Hispanic conspiracy to retake the Southwest for Mexico.

    Spencer and Coe weren't the only hard-liners there. So were members of former Klan leader David Duke's latest organization, the National Organization for European American Rights (since renamed the European American Unity and Rights Organization, or EURO), and unrobed members of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. Klan fliers were placed on cars outside the event, just in case any of the participants hadn't yet realized the high interest being evinced by openly racist groups.

    The events in Cullman and Sierra Vista seemed to be part of a pattern, and Report writer and researcher Heidi Beirich began to investigate. A photo in our files showed that Coe had actually participated in the Cullman rally along with Spencer and former Klan leader William Burchfield. A search of the newsletter of the white supremacist group Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) revealed that that group was the sponsor of the event. And the newsletter disclosed something even more revealing - Rick Oltman, west coast representative of the well-known Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the largest such group in America - was an invited speaker. Later, Oltman would confirm that he did speak at the CCC event.

    It was the beginning of a major project. Over the following years, Beirich, Report writer Bob Moser and I would collaborate on a series of reports looking into the increasingly violent and racist aspects of the anti-immigration movement.

    Ultimately, our research, most of it carried out by Beirich, revealed a tight-knit and interlocking network tying the CCC - a hate group that has described blacks as "a retrograde species of humanity" - to several prominent anti-immigration activists going all the way back to the early 1990s. Emblematic of this relationship was a panel held at a 1999 CCC conference that featured Spencer and the leaders of three other well-known anti-immigration organizations: Wayne Lutton of The Social Contract Press; John Vinson of the American Immigration Control Foundation; and Virginia Abernethy of Population-Environment Balance. Not long after, Abernethy and Lutton joined the editorial advisory board of Citizens Informer, the racist tabloid published by the CCC. Since then, the publication and its parent group have shifted their attention more and more to the supposed evils of non-white immigration.

    Our investigation also included a visit by Beirich to the border to look into charges of vigilantism against the Barnetts and others. Documentation provided by the Mexican consul's office showed that detentions were frequent and often involved force. And the number of self-described immigrant-catchers was growing. In 2000, the armed outfit Ranch Rescue, which the Center sued in 2003 for violating the rights of seven immigrants, began patrolling ranches, first the Barnetts', and then those of others. According to its publicity materials, Ranch Rescue was repairing fences, but the Report investigation found that the group's activities were more paramilitary in nature. And e-mails later secured by the Center made clear that the leader of the group, Jack Foote, showed substantial racial animus towards Mexicans. This research ultimately led to our first major anti-immigration story, "Blood on the Border," published in spring 2001 [to view this report, go to: http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intel...le.jsp?aid=230 ]. Our research also led us to list as hate groups three organizations: American Patrol, American Immigration Control Foundation, and The Social Contract Press. The following year, Coe's California Coalition for Immigration Reform would also be added to the Center's hate group list.

    In early 2002, the Report expanded its research into the anti-immigration movement. For four months, Beirich teased out the financing and connections between the leading anti-immigration organizations in the U.S. What tax records revealed was something quite remarkable - the American anti-immigration movement was largely the creation of one man, a Michigan ophthalmologist named John Tanton, whom our Report cover story would dub "The Puppeteer."

    The fact that one man was so central to this movement was interesting, but Tanton's history of bigotry toward Hispanics and his close associations with white supremacist activists were critical to the research. Interestingly, Tanton came to immigration issues from the left. A Sierra Club activist starting in the late 1960s, Tanton was highly concerned with population growth in the U.S. and, for a time, he headed the Sierra Club's Population Committee. But by the late 1970s, Tanton had decided that immigration was the real cause of most environmental degradation. He also became concerned about its effects on our civilization. Tanton has openly said that one of his main inspirations for taking on immigration was The Camp of the Saints, a racist French novel that lays out a lurid vision of dark-skinned Third World hordes destroying European civilization. To this day, Tanton's organization, The Social Contract Press, sells the book, calling it "gripping." The special 1994 edition of the book published by Tanton carried an afterword from author Jean Raspail claiming that the "proliferation of other races dooms our race ... to extinction." When it was published, Tanton wrote that he was "honored" to republish the Frenchman's race war novel. "We are indebted to Jean Raspail for his insights into the human condition," Tanton said, "and for being 20 years ahead of his time. History will judge him more kindly than have some of his contemporaries."

    In the late 1970s, Tanton began to build a multi-organizational anti-immigration movement. He laid out his strategy in 1986 in secret memos that proposed, among other things, the creation of multiple think tanks to focus on the negative effects of immigration and a possible anti-immigration take-over of the Sierra Club. Unfortunately for Tanton, his memos were also marked by rank anti-Hispanic bigotry, something made public when they were leaked to the Arizona Republic in 1988. Several prominent persons, including newsman Walter Cronkite and conservative Republican Linda Chavez, left their positions at Tanton's U.S. English after the disclosures. Tanton, too, quit as the group's chairman. But the negative publicity didn't deter Tanton's ambitious work in organizing a crackdown on immigration. Between 1980 and 2002, Tanton had a hand in either the founding or the funding of 13 anti-immigration groups, many of them well known.

    Our investigation also found that Tanton had used his foundation, U.S., Inc., to channel thousands of dollars in contributions to these organizations. In addition, the foundation runs several anti-immigration programs itself, including The Social Contract Press, NumbersUSA and Pro English. Beirich also found that Tanton employs and shares his Michigan offices with racist anti-immigration activist Wayne Lutton, who is also a member of the editorial board of the Council of Conservative Citizens. And we found that many of Tanton's organizations inflate membership numbers and that nearly all rely on a very narrow donor base made up of a few major donors, most of them from the far right. Overall, the immigration movement was more "astroturf" - meaning lacking in popular participation - than grassroots.

    Our third major foray into immigration came in late 2002 in response to reports from the border that indicated vigilante activity was on the rise. In a series of e-mails obtained by the Center, the vigilante nature of Ranch Rescue's activities (including alleged attacks on migrants) that year were detailed. Rob Krott, the chief foreign correspondent for Soldier of Fortune magazine and an accomplished mercenary, wrote to Ranch Rescue members outlining their mission's goals as to "observe and surveill [sic] border incursions" and "deter criminal trespass." Earlier in the year, Spencer had moved his entire operation to the Arizona border and started up American Border Patrol, a group that claimed it would use high-tech devices, including aircraft drones, to monitor border-crossers. In addition, Chris Simcox, another California transplant who had recently purchased the local Tombstone Tumbleweed newspaper, established a new militia called Civil Homeland Defense. Simcox held weapons training and ran patrols throughout the Arizona border region. In addition, Ranch Rescue was still patrolling ranches in the area, as well as in Texas, as were the Barnetts on almost every weekend. To cover these activities, the Report dispatched staff writer Bob Moser to Arizona for two weeks.

    Moser found that not only was vigilantism exploding at the border, but it was also apparently becoming more violent - and race-based. Moser's interview with Simcox, for example, drew out a racial animus that at least partially explained his intense interest in apprehending border-crossers. Moser also discovered that there had been several highly suspicious shooting incidents in which border-crossers were murdered. In a sidebar, Moser documented a series of incidents where weapons were brandished or discharged by ranchers and others detaining border-crossers.

    Ultimately, the Center's work on immigration paid off in the form of a lawsuit by our legal department. In May 2003, the Center, with the help of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the law firms of Ricardo de Anda and John Judge, sued Ranch Rescue, three of its members including leader Jack Foote, and Texas ranch owner Joseph Sutton. The suit alleged that individuals in the group had assaulted and falsely imprisoned six plaintiffs, illegal border crossers who were unfortunate enough to find themselves on Sutton's ranch while Ranch Rescue was conducting operations there. Our hope is that this suit will serve as a warning to ranchers throughout the Southwest that there will be a high price to pay for those who allow armed vigilantes to ply their trade on their ranch lands.

    The latest episode in the rise of a hard-line anti-immigration movement began last fall, when Report staffers realized that an effort to take control of the board of the Sierra Club by immigration restrictionists was under way. In October, based on our research, I sent a lengthy letter to Club President Larry Fahn warning of a "hostile takeover attempt" by anti-immigration forces allied with Tanton and others. The Center also decided to run co-founder Morris Dees for the Club's board as a way of bringing additional attention to the purported takeover attempt from the national media. At this writing, it appears likely that the attempt to take over the Club will lose. But that will not be known until late April, when the Club is expected to officially announce the results of its hotly contested board elections.

    It is worth noting that the Southern Poverty Law Center claims no expertise on immigration and does not have a position on the best levels of immigration into the United States. The Center's expertise is the radical right, and it is through that lens that we view the events of the last few years in the anti-immigration movement. We seek to expose racism and racist groups within the movement in order to promote a democratic dialogue on immigration - a dialogue that is not shaped or directed by racists, racist organizations or racist ideology.

    Restrictionist Roundup

    What have the major anti-immigration players been up to recently? A brief roundup of their activities follows.

    Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) (www.fairus.org):

    Among his recent activities, FAIR Executive Director Dan Stein testified on February 4 before the House Committee on International Relations on the topic of L visa reform. As usual Mr. Stein's testimony, both written and ****, contained a substantial amount of misinformation, such as his mischaracterization of the L visa program as "the latest legal loophole that is being exploited to the detriment of American workers." Calling the L-1 visa program, as well as President Bush's recent immigration initiative, "mortal threats to the American middle class," Mr. Stein irresponsibly asserted:

    Major Fortune 500 companies like Bank of America and Sun Microsystems freely admit that they will use every legal opportunity to substitute cheaper foreign workers for Americans. Lacking a sense of responsibility for the common good of the nation, and only for the corporate bottom line, unrestricted access to L-1 visas is tantamount to leaving the keys to the liquor cabinet in the hands of an alcoholic....If the middle class is concerned about the out-sourcing bomb that is taking place all across the country, the L visa, and to a lesser extent the H visa, are the delivery technologies. They are helping to make this possible.

    He concluded his testimony by noting that, while FAIR supports the intent of some of the competing (and quite restrictive) L visa reform measures currently pending in Congress, the group believes that none of them are sufficiently restrictive.

    What Mr. Stein and FAIR refuse to recognize is that for almost 35 years the L-1 visa has been a vital tool both for U.S. companies with an international presence and for international firms expanding into the United States. Although not a heavily used visa in terms of numbers, the L-1 visa has done much to help U.S. companies be competitive. It also facilitates foreign investment in the United States. In fact it is the principal immigration vehicle U.S. companies use to bring in qualified personnel temporarily from their operations abroad to serve as managers or executives or to apply certain specialized knowledge. It also is the principal nonimmigrant visa category that foreign companies use to build U.S. factories, open offices, and hire significant numbers of U.S. workers to staff their U.S. operations. Unless U.S. and foreign companies are able to bring key personnel to their American operations, U.S. companies will be put at a competitive disadvantage and foreign companies will be unlikely to establish or expand their presence in our country.

    AILA's Issue Paper on L-1 visas and U.S. economic growth

    ProjectUSA for an Immigration Time-Out (www.projectusa.org):

    On the front page of its website this week, the Washington-based ProjectUSA for an Immigration Time-Out is conducting a poll which asks readers, "If President Bush continues to push for an amnesty for illegal aliens-and a massive new guest worker program-will you write in Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado on the ballot for president in November?" Readers are asked to check one of the following responses: (1) Absolutely yes; (2) I'd seriously consider it; (3) I would, but I don't vote for Republicans; (4) No, I'd actually be more likely to vote for Bush; (5) Who the **** is Tom Tancredo?

    Also on the topic of elections, ProjectUSA is "raising the immigration issue in" (read: targeting) nine "carefully selected" congressional districts, most of which, the organization states, were picked because the incumbent (1) is considered vulnerable in the next election (he won by less than 55% in his last election), and (2) has a poor voting record in Congress on immigration as determined by the restrictionist group Americans for Better Immigration.

    The lawmakers being targeted include Representatives: Jeff Flake (R-6th AZ), Jim Kolbe (R-8th AZ), Jim Leach (R-2nd IA), Leonard Boswell (D-3rd IA), Dennis Moore (D-3rd KS), Chris Cannon (R-3rd UT), Jim Matheson (D-2nd UT), Earl Pomeroy (D-At Large ND), and Baron Hill (D-9th IN).

    The group is using a combination of billboards, direct mail surveys, online surveys, and media appearances to raise the immigration issue in the targeted districts, and speculates that "if we are able to raise the anti-immigration issue in these nine districts, and inform voters of their Congressman's immigration voting record, the immigration issue might decide two or three contests."

    ProjectUSA goes on to pronounce that: "If that were to happen, it would trigger a political earthquake in Washington. Immigration moderates would gain enormous confidence, immigration extremists would suffer a serious setback, and pro-borders lobbyists would command new respect in the halls of Congress."

    Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) (www.cis.org):

    The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has been quite active in recent weeks. From early February to date, representatives of CIS testified four times before congressional committees and once before the Maryland House of Delegates' Judiciary Committee, espousing, on each occasion, the group's xenophobic and anti-immigration views. Testimony topics ranged from guestworker programs to the US VISIT program to the proposed issuance of Maryland state driver's licenses to undocumented aliens. During this same time period the organization also convened a panel discussion for members of the press entitled "INS, RIP: One Year Later," published two op-eds, and released a backgrounder in which it argued (unconvincingly and unrealistically) that additional enforcement would be more conducive to resolving this country's immigration issues than a well-crafted guestworker program.

    In one of his recent op-eds, published on March 22, CIS Executive Director Mark Krikorian, argued that a policy of "attrition" would be the best method of dealing with the current undocumented population. "The issue of what to do about illegal aliens living in the United States is often presented as a Hobson's choice," states Mr. Krikorian, "either launch mass roundups to arrest and deport 9-million-plus people, or define away the problem through legalization." "Fortunately for America there is a third way," he proclaims, "between the politically impossible and disruptive approach of mass roundups on one hand, and the surrender of our sovereignty by the open-borders Left and its libertarian fellow-travelers on the other. This third way is attrition, squeezing the illegal population through consistent, across-the-board law enforcement to bring about an annual reduction in the illegal population rather than the annual increases we have seen for more than a decade. Over a few years, the number of illegal aliens would drop significantly, shrinking the problem from a crisis to a manageable nuisance."

    Sounds like the status quo to us. And most everyone agrees that the status quo is no longer acceptable. What this country needs is comprehensive immigration reform that enhances our security, allows American businesses to bring in needed workers, and reunites families. To fully address our economic, humanitarian and security needs, such reform must include: an earned legalization for undocumented immigrants living and working in the U.S.; a new worker program that would legalize future flows of essential workers; and a reduction of the backlogs in family-based immigrant visas. AILA's latest information on comprehensive immigration reform.

    American Patrol (www.americanpatrol.org):

    American Patrol, in a March 4 "feature" on its website, highlighted the March 4 edition of the Lou Dobb's show which featured a debate between Ben Johnson of AILF's Immigration Policy Center and restrictionist Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado. Prominently displayed above a photo of Dobbs, Johnson and Tancredo is a large headline that reads "Liberal Immigration Advocate Says Secure the Borders, Then He Lies About Everything Else." To view the show, click on the following link and choose from either the Broadband or Dial-Up options.

    http://www.americanpatrol.org/04-FEA...4_Feature.html

    After listening to the inflammatory remarks of Messrs. Dobbs and Tancredo in the above clip, click on the link below for a reasonable approach to balancing our security needs with our country's economic interests.

    http://www.aila.org/fileViewer.aspx?docID=9845

    The Coalition for the Future American Worker (www.americanworker.org):

    The Coalition for the Future American Worker (CFAW), which bills itself as "an umbrella organization of professional trade groups, population/environment organizations, and immigration reform groups...formed to represent the [alleged] interests of American workers and students in the formulation of immigration policy," currently features a direct link on its website's homepage to the recent misguided testimony of FAIR Executive Director Dan Stein on the subject of the L-1 visa program (see above section on FAIR's recent activities). The group also has posted to its website a restrictionist-oriented "Legislative Comparison" of pending H-1B and L-1 legislation authored by FAIR's Congressional Task Force. View this document.

    For a more balanced view on the proven economic benefits of the H and L visa programs, click on the links below to view AILA's Issue Packets on the same. View the H-1B packet and the L packet).

    Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement (FILE) (www.fileus.com)

    Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement (FILE) bills itself as "an association of attorneys, researchers, law enforcement officers, legislators, and other experts working on behalf of Americans to ensure that immigration law is being enforced." FILE is involved in a range of restrictionist activities including targeting institutions and municipalities that currently accept the matricula consular as proof of identity, undertaking a suit to force Los Angeles County's Department of Health Services to seek reimbursement from the sponsors of legal immigrants for health care services accessed by legal immigrants access, and encouraging nonresident post-secondary school students to request out-of-state tuition refunds from educational institutions where the institution charges resident undocumented students in-state tuition rates, and threatening to bring suit against institutions that fail to comply.

    With reference to the latter, FILE, in a message on its website to postsecondary students, announces: "If you are a student attending any public postsecondary school in Washington state, California, New York, Illinois, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah, or some schools in Georgia, and are paying out-of-state tuition, you may be entitled to a refund."

    FILE then asks the students to send the organization an email with their name, telephone number, the school attended, and, if known, the difference annually between out-of-state tuition fees and in-state tuition fees at their school. FILE also asks students to add the following disclaimer to their email:

    I am providing this information to Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement (FILE) freely, voluntarily, and with no expectations or demands whatsoever. I agree this information is the property of FILE and its representatives, and FILE may use this information in any way it deems necessary. I hold FILE and its representatives harmless in every respect, and represent, warrant and confirm that the information contained herein is truthful. I agree that FILE may use any or all of this information in any way whatsoever, including, but not limited to, publication. I understand that FILE is not obligated to respond or act in any way due to this information or any request I may send to it. I further understand and agree that no attorney-client relationship exists between FILE and me or any related party unless agreed in writing.

    What FILE and similar organizations refuse to recognize is that, each year, a number of childen in the U.S. are prevented from pursuing their dreams of a college education because they have no legal status. Despite the fact that many of these children have grown up in the U.S., attended local schools, and have demonstrated a sustained commitment to learn English and succeed in our educational system, our immigration laws provide no avenue for these students to become legal. Bipartisan legislation introduced in the 108th Congress would allow immigrant students who have grown up in this country, graduated from high school, and have no criminal record, to go to college and legalize their immigration status. In our opinion, one talented child who is prevented from pursuing his or her college dreams is one child too many.

    View AILA's Issue Paper on this legislation (Student Adjustment/DREAM Act).

    Resources

    For additional background on these and other groups, see AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 02071545 for an eye-opening report on restrictionist groups from the Southern Poverty Law Center. In its report, the Center researches many of these organizations, classifying some as racial hate-based groups, and explains how many of these so called "grassroots organizations" were founded and funded. The report reveals that the organizations are actually run by a small group of individuals and the membership numbers are highly inflated.

    To view AILA's responses to the many inaccurate allegations put forth by these restrictionist groups and the Immigration Reform Caucus, see our section on AILA.org entitled "Myths and Facts." Please also visit the Advocacy Center for additional materials such as Issue Papers, Backgrounders, and AILA Press Releases. In addition, the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) of the American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) has developed other relevant materials. Please visit www.ailf.org and click on "Immigration Policy Center" to view these materials.

    We Can't Believe They Said That

    "In this new era, the single most immediate and most serious challenge to America's traditional identity comes from the immense and continuing immigration from Latin America, especially from Mexico, and the fertility rates of these immigrants compared to black and white American natives. Americans like to boast of their past success in assimilating millions of immigrants into their society, culture, and politics. But Americans have tended to generalize about immigrants without distinguishing among them and have focused on the economic costs and benefits of immigration, ignoring its social and cultural consequences. As a result, they have overlooked the unique characteristics and problems posed by contemporary Hispanic immigration. The extent and nature of this immigration differ fundamentally from those of previous immigration, and the assimilation successes of the past are unlikely to be duplicated with the contemporary flood of immigrants from Latin America. This reality poses a fundamental question: Will the United States remain a country with a single national language and a core Anglo-Protestant culture? By ignoring this question, Americans acquiesce to their eventual transformation into two peoples with two cultures (Anglo and Hispanic) and two languages (English and Spanish)."


    --excerpted from Samuel Huntington's soon-to-be published book, "Who We Are," and reprinted in the March/April edition of Foreign Policy magazine

    "So, while the Sierra Club impotently fritters away time and resources chasing the environmentally irrelevant goal of making white people a smaller percentage of the Club's membership, mass immigration will double the population of the United States within the lifetimes of today's children."
    --excerpt from ProjectUSA's online publication, Issue 182, dated March 5, 2004

    "While corporate America gets access to an unending supply of cheap, exploitable workers, American families will take a financial thrashing as wages and working conditions plummet across the country."
    --FAIR Executive Director, Dan Stein, discussing President Bush's immigration reform proposal in the March 2004 edition of FAIR's newsletter, "Immigration Report"

    "It is not the incivility of the Ashcroft-haters that galls me. It is the unmitigated insipidity and apathy they display toward what this man and his department have done to protect their right to be free, safe and stupid."
    --excerpt from a March 10 column by restrictionist writer Michelle Malkin entitled, "America, Land of the Ashcroft Haters." (Among her more notable achievements, Ms. Malkin is the author of the book, "Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists Criminals & Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores")

    Happy St. Patrick's Day-Restrictionists in History

    "In 1855, Massachusetts Gov. Henry Gardner denounced the Irish immigrants then swarming into his state as a 'horde of foreign barbarians.'"
    --Peter Carlson of the Washington Post, in a March 11 article

    Are there restrictionist media campaigns being mounted in your local area? AILA wants to know! Please forward details to Danielle Polen in AILA's Advocacy Department (dpolen@aila.org), 202-216-2400.

    47RR4002

    Comment

    Working...
    X