No announcement yet.

Read this ,urgent for illigal aliens.

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Read this ,urgent for illigal aliens.

  • #2


    • #3
      CNN is reporting it as well:

      Hopefully this will help stemming the wave of illegal aliens, and/or give Homeland Defense more authority, as long as they don't abuse it.


      • #4
        By SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press Writer

        WASHINGTON - Most illegal immigrants can be jailed indefinitely without bond when national security risks exist, Attorney General John Ashcroft (news - web sites) has declared in a legal opinion. Immigration advocates are calling that an abuse of power in the name of fighting terrorism.

        The order means such aliens will not be released on bond while their cases are being decided by immigration judges if the government can show national security issues are involved. "Such national security considerations clearly constitute a reasonable foundation for the exercise of my discretion to deny release on bond," Ashcroft said in the 19-page opinion, which was signed last Friday. The opinion was requested by the Homeland Security Department, which now enforces most immigration laws, after the Board of Immigration Appeals upheld a judge's decision to release Haitian asylum-seeker David Joseph on $2,500 bond.

        Cheryl Little, executive director of Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, said Ashcroft's opinion is the latest in a string of government decisions "manipulating our very serious national security concerns to justify targeting nationals of Haiti." Advocates for Latino and Muslim immigrants made similar comments on behalf of their constituencies. Ashcroft's opinion says the attorney general has broad discretion in determining the status of would-be immigrants. During an appearance Thursday in New Orleans, Ashcroft defended his decision and said aliens held without bond have the right to defend themselves in court. He said he would continue to seek new, legal ways to detain people suspected of terrorism. Immigration advocates have been troubled by Ashcroft's continued influence over immigration policy after most of the nation's immigration apparatus was transferred to the Homeland Security Department March 1. Since then, Ashcroft has given the FBI, U.S. Marshals and local police authority to arrest people on immigration violations. "As disturbing as this decision is, it's really not that surprising, because Ashcroft has managed to keep his finger in all the immigration-related pies and ensured he can exert his authority shoulder-to-shoulder with (Homeland Security Secretary) Tom Ridge," said Angela Kelley, deputy director of the National Immigration Forum. In the David Joseph case, which prompted Ashcroft's legal opinion, the immigration judge and appeals board concluded they did not have authority to deny bond based on the national security concerns cited by the government, which has sought to detain more illegal immigrants since the Sept. 11 terror attacks. Joseph was among the 216 Haitians who arrived in Miami by boat on Oct. 29, then leaped from the craft into Biscayne Bay and ran along a major causeway. The scene was captured live on television. Little, whose group represented Joseph, said the appellate ruling questioned the Bush administration's decision to detain all Haitians. A total 100 Haitians who arrived on the same boat as Joseph had been granted bond by judges. Ashcroft's decision also will affect them "and then some," Little said.

        "It's a very sweeping decision. The attorney general has designated it as precedent setting, meaning it could apply to all previous decisions made regarding bond," she said. Several federal agencies have opposed the release of the Haitians on bond, arguing it could trigger a wave of immigrants attempting to reach U.S. shores. That would overtax the strained Coast Guard, Border Patrol and other agencies and interfere with their anti-terrorism activities, the government said. In addition, the State Department has warned that Haiti has become a staging point for non-Haitians considered security threats, including Pakistanis and Palestinians, to enter the United States. The National Coalition for Haitian Rights said it will fight to overturn Ashcroft's order. Dina Paul Parks, the New York-based coalition's executive director, said the decision further erodes immigrants' legal rights.
        "If you were lucky enough to get a sympathetic judge you could potentially get released on bond. Now even that prospect is taken away," she said. Ashcroft's decision applies to all illegal immigrants except Cubans, who by law automatically are permitted to stay in the United States if they reach its shores.


        • #5
          New poll: 85% of Americans say illegal immigration a "serious" problem
          Issue 152: Apr 26, 2003

          +== TIME-OUT PROJECT ==+

          According to a Roper Poll released Tuesday by the United to Secure America
          Coalition, 85% of Americans consider illegal immigration to be a serious
          problem -- a majority believing it to be "very serious." Two thirds of us
          say the United States should actually set the goal of completely halting
          illegal immigration and should reduce the number of foreign nationals
          illegally residing in the United States to "near zero."

          Furthermore, among that majority, a stunning four out of five respondents
          were willing to take very strong measures against illegal aliens, including
          "mandatory detention and forfeiture of property, followed by deportation."

          Nevertheless, in clear contravention of the will of the American people,
          high officials in the Bush Administration continue to push aggressively to
          make it easier -- rather than harder -- for illegal aliens to remain in the
          United States. These officials are working behind the scenes in support of
          the matricula consular card -- the Mexican ID widely used by illegal aliens
          to access public services in the United States and to open bank accounts.

          One such official is Bush political guru, Karl Rove, a staunch foe of the
          immigration reductionist movement. While sending mixed messages to Members
          of Congress about his position on U.S. acceptance of the Mexican ID card,
          Rove's underlings at the Domestic Policy Council (DPC) have been
          orchestrating a push to have the card accepted at the federal agency level.
          While the DPC did not return a call asking for verification, a source
          familiar with the struggle now going on in an inter-agency commission
          studying the issue says Karl Rove and the White House are behind strong
          pressure to endorse the illegal alien ID card.

          In particular, the White House is working with factions within the State
          and Treasury Departments to override national security concerns from the
          Departments of Justice and Homeland Security as well as objections from
          those in the State Department who, rightly, understand that acceptance of
          the card will undermine many of State's functions.

          One big motive for the pro-Mexican ID forces is corporate profit. Certain
          officials at both State and Treasury have publicly endorsed the idea of
          Mexican nationals having access to America's banking system, a huge
          financial boon to financial corporations.

          Career Foreign Service Officer Alan P. Larson, Under Secretary for
          Economics, Business, and Agricultural Affairs, and the senior economic
          advisor to Secretary of State Collin Powell, has praised U.S. Treasurer
          Rosario Marin's attempts to help banks tap into the remittance money
          illegal aliens send to Mexico. "Rosario Marin," Larson said in testimony
          before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April 2002, "will work to
          highlight awareness of competitive products by promoting financial literacy
          and expanded use of the banking system by American Hispanics. Last year
          Mexicans and Mexican-Americans in the U.S. sent nearly $9 billion home to
          family and friends in Mexico, often at a high cost."

          Treasurer Marin, who was born in Mexico, has also publicly advocated giving
          U.S. banking corporations access to the remittance market of "un-banked
          Latinos." In prepared statements at the Capitol Hill Club earlier this
          month, Marin said "I look to my fellow Latinos -- hard-working,
          responsible. Some send, on average, $200 to $300 dollars on a regular
          basis home to their relatives in Mexico and Latin America."

          However, national security and the right of the American people to
          determine the fate of their own country must not be sacrificed -- either to
          the naked "ethnicism" of Rosario Marin, or to the profiteering of
          corporations, or to the political calculations of Karl Rove.

          ProjectUSA hopes our elected leaders understand the significance of the
          important new Roper Poll and recognize the enormous political potential of
          standing up to the financial and ethnic interests working within the
          Administration for the illegal alien ID cards.
          Americans Favor Tough Approach to Illegal Immigration

          Complete poll: "Americans Talk about Illegal Immigration"

          Prepared Remarks of the Honorable Rosario Marin (Treasury Dept)

          U.S.-Mexico Bilateral Economic Relations (State Dept)

          Groups encourage banks to serve Hispanics (Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta)


          +== TAKE POSITIVE ACTION ==+

          As we have often written, ProjectUSA objects to the use of the term
          "Latinos" when talking about "illegal aliens." Obviously, not all Latinos
          are illegal aliens, nor are all illegal aliens Latinos. We regard this
          practice as racist and offensive, not to mention inaccurate. However, both
          of the officials cited above, Larson and Marin, employed this obfuscating

          So, we called their offices for clarification.

          When asked whether Ms. Marin's support for banking services for "un-banked
          Latinos" meant that she supports allowing banks to open accounts for
          illegal aliens, a spokesperson at Treasury said "no comment."

          A spokesperson for the State Department said there is no official policy

          Maybe you will have better luck. Please contact the two offices below and
          ask them whether they support access to banks for illegal aliens. You
          might mention that the majority of the American people want illegal aliens
          deported -- not given public services and bank accounts. If the office
          actually gives you an answer, we'd definitely like to hear about it here at

          It is very important that these offices receive a lot of negative, but
          polite, feedback on their push for illegal alien ID cards.

          Department of State
          (202) 647-7575

          Treasury Department
          (202) 622-2960


          • #6
            VDARE.COM -

            April 24, 2003

            SARS: The Immigration Dimension II
            By Walter Pringle

            Recently, I received an email from a New York Times reporter with the unusual name of Jennifer .8 Lee about my April 2 VDARE.COM article SARS: The Immigration Dimension. In that article, I dared to make this politically incorrect observation: "The brutal truth is that SARS is, currently, a predominantly Chinese disease..."

            I was not terribly surprised that Ms. Lee wanted to ask only about my credentials and my alleged belief that SARS was an "Asian Disease." Subsequently, she published a superficial SARS article about anxious residents in Chinese communities on the West Coast.

            Here's an example:

            "Now only non-Asian customers are coming, Mr. Hong [owner of a Chinese restaurant] said, not the white-collar, immigrant Asian workers who used to fill the restaurant after work."

            In U.S., Fear Is Spreading Faster Than SARS, By Dean E. Murphy The New York Times, Apr 17, 2003

            This article was reported by Jennifer 8. Lee, Dean E. Murphy and Yilu Zhao and written by Mr. Murphy.

            So judging by the behavior she describes"”avoiding Chinese businesses, to the point of business dropping by 70-90% in North American Chinatowns - the Chinese certainly think it's a Chinese disease, if not an Asian one!

            They may be right"”but we'll never know based on the PC "reporting" of SARS in the major media and the racially null data put out by US and Canadian health authorities. We do get the odd name when the SARS victim is white (cf. current crime reporting) but not when the victims are non-white, in this case Asian.

            Toronto officials and media especially, to no one's surprise, have been disgorging a steady effluvia of PC drivel in their silly attempt to maintain PC uber alles in their "highly diverse" metropolis.

            The result of this censorship: everyone, especially the Chinese here in North America, assume that all risk of infection is from Chinese.

            Again, we don't know if this is true. However, the health authorities most certainly know it and record it. The information is an essential variable of epidemiology"”which is defined as "the study of populations in order to determine the frequency and distribution of disease and measure risks." Yet the best we get from the authorities is that SARS "is milder" here than in Hong Kong and China.

            In fact, SARS does seem to be milder in the U.S."”as of now. But, since it's the same virus, mustn't the "mildness" be due to lower susceptibility among Americans? And if not, then why?

            And what will happen next?

            The history of our world significantly resulted from racial differences in immunity to disease. Examples: In 1500s Mexico and Peru, the decimation of the Aztecs and Incas by smallpox and measles infections carried by Spanish invaders. In 1800s Haiti, the virtual annihilation of Napoleon's invading army by Yellow Fever infection"”which barely affected the defending African blacks. That led directly to the collapse of French colonial power in the Caribbean and America and the fire sale of the French-owned Louisiana territory to America, thus doubling the size of our county.

            A more recent example: the recent spread of TB in the US by immigrants. Donald G. McNeil Jr. and Lawrence K. Altman noted this recently in the New York Times while describing the important concept of disease "super spreaders:"

            "A famous tuberculosis 'super spreader', described in The New England Journal of Medicine in November 1999, was a nine-year-old boy in rural North Dakota, an immigrant from the Marshall Islands, who in 1997 and 1998 infected his family and 56 schoolmates. The boy had deep cavities in his lungs, while his twin brother, who was 5 cm taller and 5 kg heavier, had a mild case and was not infectious.

            "Some populations are genetically more susceptible, so the first carrier to get it often becomes a 'super spreader'. For example, [Dr. James] Plorde [an infectious disease expert with the University of Washington] said, 'people of European descent handle TB much better than American Indians - presumably because their genetic stock survived more epidemics of TB.'" [italics added].

            Also, chronic diseases differ in their incidence among groups for many reasons. These chronic diseases in turn can cause differences in resistance to new infections.

            TB is very wide-spread in China. And Hepatitis B has been estimated as infecting up to 65% of the population of China. (In fact, the vast majority of Hepatitis B in the U.S. right now is due to Chinese immigration and lax border control.)

            Could the existence of a chronic disease among Chinese explain their apparent higher rates of infection and death from SARS? Could some unknown lung tissue characteristic render them more susceptible to SARS, like the boy who brought TB from the Marshall Islands?

            Or could the apparent relative immunity among Americans be due to prior exposure to some form of coronavirus, the suspected SARS virus?

            Regardless of the reason, this should be a subject for open discussion - not only among for the scientific elite, but for the rest of us who are among the potential victims of a SARS epidemic.

            My non-PC summary of the current SARS situation:
            SARS totals continue to rise in Toronto, Hong Kong, China and Singapore. Some experts feel containment in these hotspots may be impossible.

            China has finally fessed up to an astounding 20x under-report of SARS cases in Beijing alone"”700 now - thus pretty much blowing any remaining credibility for their numbers. SARS has now spread to the hinterlands, where medical care is extremely limited and hygiene is terrible. The odds of containing it there are nil if it continues spreading for the next few weeks. Unfortunately for containment, panicked residents are fleeing Beijing. China also contains about 1.5M AIDS cases who will have little defense against SARS. China currently claims a preposterously low 2300 SARS cases and 106 deaths, 4.5% death rate.

            Canada/Toronto WHO now advises travelers to avoid Toronto, though Canadian officials are protesting. Toronto, where all of the SARS fatalities in Canada have occurred, now has 140 cases with 16 deaths, an 11.5% death rate. And the disease is "out in the community", including 30 members of a religious group and some people in a condo complex. SARS may not be containable in Toronto.

            Singapore has instituted a severe new SARS control regime, possibly a little late. They have 192 cases and 19 deaths, a 10% death rate.

            Hong Kong now has 1458 cases and 105 deaths, about a 7% death rate (n.b. and that in a hospital setting.) A Hong Kong doctor feels that the newer cases, with more severe symptoms and deaths among the young and healthy, may have become more virulent through mutation.

            Africa has reported only one SARS cases as yet, in South Africa. This will likely not last. With limited to non-existent health care in Africa, 300M crammed into urban areas and 30M+ AIDS cases, the African situation may ultimately be the worst of all.

            India has 3 cases and has a worse public health environment than China. It is expected to be imported there by travelers.

            And now the good news (for us):

            The U.S. is remarkably free of SARS at this time. Having revised their SARS reporting criteria, the American authorities now list only 39 cases and no deaths.

            But this may just be luck"”the "super-spreaders" from China just didn't happen to traveling here. It gives us no excuse whatsoever for allowing SARS to spread here. Some feel that a respiratory disease, ultimately, cannot be contained without a vaccine. The more time we have to develop one, the better.

            Other points to note:

            SARS death rates appear to be rising, partly due to the greater virulence of a newly-mutated SARS virus. Some feel that current global SARS death rates of about 6% are closer to 10%. Either number is alarmingly high - yet it would be far higher without the immediate, modern medical care that most current patients enjoy. Of course, the death rate in immunosupressed patients - such as those with HIV or Measles"”is expected to be far higher.

            The origin of SARS was thought to have been the transfer of a coronavirus from poultry to man in South China in November 2002. This is a common route for new flus and colds originating in that area. However, the gene sequencing revealed that this particular coronavirus was previously unknown and had gene sequences common with not only the chicken, but the cow! This has led to speculation among Russian microbiologists that it could be a bioweapon and, by others, that it could have been created in a genetics lab, accidentally or otherwise. Amazingly, WHO did not immediately discount this speculation.

            My conclusion: Unlike some people, I do not believe that the SARS threat is overblown. The fact that we are in the early stages of this epidemic is the only reason for hope"”nobody can predict the outcome, but we can make some good guesses.

            When the Spanish Flu of 1918-1919 started in April 1918, in Fort Riley, Kansas, among young army recruits, people thought it was just a bad flu. A bit later, it was a bad flu with pneumonia. But after it traveled with the troops across the seas, the virus found a huge new incubation source in the millions of soldiers over there. Then it mutated and ultimately killed 30M (650,000 in the U.S.) in less than 2 years. And this was before massive immigration bloated this country's population"”then it was only 100M and international travel was by boat and train.

            The SARS virus is expected to mutate"”and for the worse"”but it may not. It could mutate to a benign form, and leave us alone. Or it could fade away over the summer, like the 1918-19 flu, then resurge in a more virulent form.

            SARS is also expected to spread"”particularly in the Third World. This will create an enormous incubation source for the disease.

            In the end, we cannot eliminate the risk of SARS for sure without strict border control - and much-reduced immigration.

            Walter Pringle (email him) studied biomedicine at a major university.


            • #7
              Los Angeles Daily News

              Illegal immigration must be confronted

              By Yeh Ling-Ling

              Saturday, April 26, 2003 - While the war against Iraq is winding down, many serious problems facing California and this country remain unresolved.

              Our federal budget deficit is at a record high. Most states, especially California, are facing their most severe budgetary crises in decades, as schools and jails overflow.

              Large numbers of workers continue to lose their jobs every day.

              These stark facts ought to give our politicians the courage to advocate an immigration policy that would immediately reduce the number of social service users and save jobs for all legal residents.

              Yet instead of supporting HR 946, which would reduce legal immigration from 1 million a year on the average to 300,000, and taking immediate steps to seriously control our borders and deport illegal immigrants, President Bush and many in Congress favor amnesties for illegal immigrants!

              Oblivious to the fact that illegal immigration costs California taxpayers billions of dollars a year in services, the Senate Transportation Committee in Sacramento passed AB 60 this April 1, which would grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. This bill will be heard before the Assembly Appropriation Committee on Wednesday.

              If passed, AB 60 would undoubtedly encourage higher illegal immigration.

              Shouldn't Sacramento adopt a resolution urging Congress to deport the estimated 2 million illegal immigrants in California, which would free up jobs for unemployed low-skilled Americans, and reduce the number of drivers on our freeways and students in our schools?

              Advocates for driver's licenses for illegal migrants argue that illegal immigrants will continue to drive anyway and that AB 60 would better protect the safety of California drivers.

              Are they saying that we should give our house keys to burglars since they will trespass anyway and we would not want them to break our expensive windows?

              Legislators should be reminded that the September 11 attacks happened in part because U.S. immigration laws were not enforced. Some of the 9-11 perpetrators who were in the U.S. illegally used American driver's licenses to open bank accounts and to circulate freely by air and by car.

              In addition, as most states are bankrupt and their infrastructures extremely overburdened, it is not realistic to expect that thorough background checks of illegal immigrants will be performed.

              Thousands of Americans have already lost their lives and tens of billions of tax dollars have been spent because of homeland insecurity.

              But eliminating Saddam Hussein or continuing our crusade against countries suspected of possessing weapons of mass destruction alone will not free the United States from terrorist attacks as long as our borders remain porous and our law enforcement agencies absolutely overwhelmed.

              If the U.S. continues to allow 800,000 illegal immigrants and large quantities of drugs to be smuggled into this country, why not terrorists or anthrax?

              Recently, U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Arizona, warned: "It's hard to imagine terrorists not trying to come in through this southern border."

              How many more innocent Americans should die and how many more tens of billions of dollars should we spend in window-dressing homeland security measures before the American leadership seriously implements a comprehensive plan to effectively stop terrorism?

              The costs of porous borders extend beyond our national security. American taxpayers nationwide spend $1.5 billion a year just incarcerating illegal aliens who committed crimes. Hospitals in many states are on the verge of bankruptcy due to emergency health care provided to illegal migrants. Educating illegal students also costs billions of dollars annually.

              Is it responsible to cut programs and services which adversely impact existing legal immigrants and U.S-born Americans while we continue to pay for the high cost of services for illegal immigrants?

              Assuming that illegal immigrants pay taxes, the little fiscal revenue they generate is not enough even to offset the cost of educating their children, which averages $6,000 a year, let alone pay for their share of other infrastructure.

              Illegal immigrant families also pollute, use water and need housing, just like all native-born Americans.

              Can the most populous state afford more people to put additional pressure on its environment, budgets and infrastructure?

              Gen. Tommy Franks, U.S. commander of the war in Iraq, recently stated, "Any nation that wants to control its borders can do so."

              Elected officials in Sacramento should start by opposing AB 60 and all other benefits for people who are here illegally.

              Drastic immigration reduction will not solve all America's ills, but is the necessary first step if our leaders are serious about realistically dealing with our concerns.


              Yeh Ling-Ling is the executive director of Diversity Alliance for a Sustainable America, .


              Sorry, you are not authorized to view this page

              Home Page

              Immigration Daily


              Processing times

              Immigration forms

              Discussion board



              Twitter feed

              Immigrant Nation


              CLE Workshops

              Immigration books

              Advertise on ILW



              About ILW.COM

              Connect to us



              Immigration Daily