Can’t file a visa petition to immigrate your homosexual or lesbian lover? No problem!

Just have either one of you get a sex change, get married in a state that recognizes transsexual marriages, and then the federal government will give you the green light to file the papers to immigrate your new “spouse” through a visa petition under Section 201(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Immigration Act.


Read the full story in my latest column on VDARE.com


The Matter of Lovo [PDF] decision on May 18 by the DOJ/EOIR Board of Immigration Appeals recognizes transsexual marriage (for immigration purposes) as not precluded by the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (Public Law No. 104-199), as long as the marriage was recognized by the state in which it took place.

As previously discussed, the "Unite to Fight Against Illegal Immigration" conference is being held in Las Vegas this weekend. The L.A. Times offers a report in "Immigration Activists Gather". The AP has a variously-titled and bylined story (non-bylined in "Anti-illegal immigration conference opens in Nevada", "Anti-illegal immigration conference opens in Nevada" from Christina Almeida, then apparently rewritten by Adam Goldman as "Protests Hit Illegal Immigration Summit"). All three briefly mention around 200 protesters outside: they called those inside Nazis and racists (LAT), and waved either American and Mexican flags (Almeida) or just Mexican flags (Goldman).

You can see a picture of the protesters here. While it might be a case of selective cropping, I don't see any American flags in that picture, just Mexican ones and, in the background, a Guatemalan flag.

The non-bylined AP story quotes the president of the RAZ/Pac (full name: "Raza Political Action Coalition" or "Race/Group Political Action Coalition") as saying that opposition to the costs of illegal immigration "is a cover for racism".

An interesting article comes from Riverside's Press-Enterprise, entitled "Immigration showdown seen". It tells a tale of two conferences, combining the AP report with reporting on the "La Tierra es de Todos" ("The Land is Everyone's") conference held at University of California at Riverside:

...The UCR event drew students, union activists, attorneys, civil rights advocates, communists, socialists and a member of Union del Barrio, a group that says the southwestern states were stolen from the Mexican people and should be separated from the United States...

[The head of UCR's MEChA chapter] predicted tense confrontations if Minuteman Project volunteer border watchers patrol San Diego [, saying:] "If they come to San Diego there will be a big response."

From the AP report "Anti-immigration conference in Las Vegas spurs plan for protest":

A conference on the dangers of illegal immigration has drawn calls for protests from a coalition that claims the weekend meeting is designed to stir racial bias.

"We feel like they are attacking our community and trying to change the mentality of the people against us," said Alan Torres, who is planning a protest outside the conference in Las Vegas.

The event, called "Unite to Fight Against Illegal Immigration," is being organized at the city's Cashman Center by Mark Edwards, a radio talk show host and founder of the Wake Up America Foundation.

The two-day conference starting Saturday is scheduled to feature U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, a leading congressional voice against illegal immigration, and Jim Gilchrist, founder of the Minuteman Project...

...Torres represents Asociacion Civil del Estado de Durango, a group of Mexican emigrants living in Las Vegas...

This AP report appears to be based on the Las Vegas Sun report "Illegal immigration forum protested". Unlike the AP report, the LV Sun article quoted Torres as calling the event organizers "Nazi white supremacist(s)."

However, the LV Sun story left out Torres' affiliation. Thankfully, a quick search turned up the May 6 report from the same reporter in the same paper entitled "More Mexicans in Las Vegas lead dual lives":

Alan Torres, a local mortgage broker who is secretary of the Civil Association of the State of Durango, a civic group that helps Durango natives in Nevada...

Torres helped organize the first Congress of Communities of Duranguenses... The event featured groups like his from around the nation, as well as the mayors of almost half of Durango's 39 municipalities...

Perhaps the AP, the Las Vegas Sun, and the Review-Journal should look into this protest in a bit more depth. What are Torres' affiliations and who exactly is he protesting on behalf of? In brief, which country does he represent? Please ask the AP to look into this matter: feedback *at* ap.org

Sing along--"We have no border control strategy todaaaaaay."

To the tune of "Yes, We Have No Bananas", in cheesy MIDI style. I know, the meter needs a little work. Could use a verse or two. But as it is it's less embarrassing than our actual border policies.

Last night Jim Gilchrist of the Minuteman Project spoke in Garden Grove, CA (in Orange County south of L.A.) Left-wing supporters of illegal immigration protested, and it got ugly.

A group of protesters surrounded a car that was trying to enter the meeting and began beating it with their signs and other objects. The driver apparently tried to slowly drive through the crowd and struck a few protesters. From the L.A. Times report "Violence Erupts at O.C. Protest":

[Garden Grove Police Lt. David Kivler] said protesters gathered around one of their cars.

"They surrounded it and started beating on it," Kivler said. Then, a second car tried to get through the crowd as well.

"As he was doing so he hit at least three people," Kivler said. All three were transported to a local hospital. None had major injuries, he said.

Kivler said the crowd grew increasingly boisterous after the injuries.

He said protesters began throwing filled soda cans at the assembled Garden Grove, Anaheim and CHP officers. At least eight people were arrested on suspicion of felony assault, while others were booked for disturbing the peace...

Note that, contrary to what the LAT says, this incident apparently happened before the meeting, not afterwards. However, this report is at least better than their incredibly biased report (from two different reporters) about the similar protest in Baldwin Park. And, this article doesn't go into such things as how all those protesters got there, what groups they were affiliated with, what their signs said, and other details that might give the LAT's readers a clue to the goals of these groups. Please give faint praise to readers.rep *at* latimes.com

Reportedly, the driver was not charged and was released a few hours after the event. From the slideshow for this NBC4 report, the driver said:

"They converged onto my car, started banging with their posters and with other objects I'm not sure of... I start fearing for my life and so I went through them and some of them had to scatter out of the way."

The KCBS video report is short, but slightly less biased than the LAT report. You can view that video and find links to other reports currently on the front page of this site. Unfortunately, the OC Register article "Immigration event turns hostile" doesn't even mention the violence of the protesters. I had seen a notice of this protest and I sent an email to the NYT suggesting that they cover this, but apparently they chose not to. Send an email to their ombudsman if you think this falls in their purview.

And, from the other side, there are additional reports and pictures linked to from the front page of this site, such as these pictures. What does the first picture of two protesters on the ground remind you of? And, if this protester report is to be believed, most of those protesting were Chicano(a) and at least one leader of MEChA was there.

The AP report downplays the violence perpetrated by the protesters: feedback *at* ap.org

If you live outside Southern California, you might want to realize that trends and such tend to start here and radiate outward. Protests like this might be coming your way sooner than you expect.

UPDATE: According to the Garden Grove P.D., they found at least one soda can that had been filled with marbles, and the full soda cans were brought along for throwing and not for the usual purpose.

Also, the protesters surrounded several cars as they were entering the event. The police were near the van that was surrounded but didn't do anything to remove protesters from the van because there were 300 protesters and 60 police.

UPDATE 2: Slow as a snail, the Los Angeles Times is moving towards slightly non-biased coverage of this issue. Their follow-up report "After Minuteman Melee, Protesters Have New Beef" actually mentions a couple of the organizations involved in the protest. It doesn't give background information on them, but at least it's a start. And, of course, there's the protester-centric title. And, one gets the impression that the reporters think of people like Gilchrist as representing the fringe, and the NLG as representing the center. Nevertheless, we're informed that the van driver will not be charged:

...police watched a videotape that showed protesters surrounding the vehicle, banging on it and refusing to move, said Garden Grove Police Lt. Mike Handfield. About 300 protesters at the scene were "trying to intimidate him and refused to let him pass..."

And:

James Lafferty, director of the National Lawyers Guild in Los Angeles, said he was among those struck by Netkin's van. He said staging protests at Gilchrist's events was necessary, even if it increased his profile.

"I'm glad there were people there saying something [Wednesday night]. We need to have this debate," said Lafferty, who said he was not injured. "We can't just stand and watch this."

...Police said the sign-waving protest began calmly but grew agitated when Netkin tried to enter the parking lot. In addition to surrounding his vehicle, protesters broke the window of another vehicle, Handfield said.

The protesters blocked the entrance and tossed soda cans and cans packed with marbles at police and attendees, Handfield said. They kicked, banged and threw rocks at cars; some wore latex gloves and hoods so they wouldn't be identified by police, Handfield said. Some attendees decided not to enter the building because they feared violence.

Some of the protesters paid $5 for admission to the event and alerted protesters outside when attendees were leaving the building... [the arrested protesters] face various charges, including assault with a deadly weapon and misdemeanor disorderly conduct, Handfield said...

Yes, it's good to "say something" and have a "debate". Perhaps next time, however, the protesters might consider leaving the latex gloves, the soda cans filled with marbles, and all the rest at home.

BTW: If you've never heard of the National Lawyers Guild, please click the link. And, consider sending that link to the L.A. Times so they might perhaps give a bit more information on the organizations they quote.

The recent post "Other than Mexicans" briefly mentioned Fort Huachuca in southern Arizona. Yesterday the Washington Times published "Army base plagued by illegals' intrusions":

Fort Huachuca, a 150-square-mile U.S. Army base in Arizona just 20 miles north of the Mexican border, is home to the country's premier military intelligence school and, despite the sensitive nature of its assignment, has become a popular corridor for illegal migrants headed to America.

Law-enforcement authorities and congressional investigators said the illegals - some in groups of up to 60 - routinely wander through base housing units, drink from hoses and pools, and trample through the yards of military families and other private areas en route to nearby highways, where they catch northbound rides...

...In addition to having the nation's premier military intelligence school, Fort Huachuca hosts several other key military training commands and units from the Homeland Security Department.

You can probably imagine what would happen to you if you tried to traipse across a military base. (For entertainment purposes, here's an example from Area 51.) While Fort Huachuca is very large and it's located in rugged country, I'm sure more could be done if there were the will to do it. Apparently, not stopping the flow of "good-hearted", cheap, and exploitable labor is more important to Washington than things like securing a military base against incursions.

MetroWest Daily News:

A Framingham man who was piloting a Cessna aircraft carrying five illegal immigrants was arrested last week after making an emergency landing at a military base in New Mexico. Charles Bueno, a 28-year-old Brazilian pilot who is also an illegal alien, was arrested the afternoon of May 16 and faces alien smuggling charges. His five passengers, all from Brazil, were also arrested.

Follow-up story here.

Eleven Texas Senators have signed on to a resolution that "urge[s] Governor Rick Perry to oppose the plans of the Minuteman Project to come to Texas and to ask Minuteman Project representatives not to begin patrols of the Texas border with Mexico". The AP report is here.

The current text of SR 970 is here. You can get the full information on this resolution by going here and entering SR 970 in the "Bill Action & Vote History" search box. The lead author appears to be Sen. Juan Hinojosa (D-McAllen). Another is Leticia Van de Putte (D-San Antonio). In addition to being featured in "S.A. Lawmaker Wants to Grade Children on Weight", here's one of her quotes from 2003: "It is unconscionable that these white Republicans would attempt to hurt our constituents, even while we are making our stand to defend Texas."

The resolution says the MMP might interfere with legal crossings and trade, which is probably not true. It also says some parts of the TX-MX border are urbanized, but I doubt whether the MMP will patrol in El Paso. It also mentions a civil suit and assault charge, yet that case predates and had nothing to do with the MMP.

And, oddly enough, like nearly every MSM report about CA Gov. Schwarzenegger's support for the Minutemen, it mentions that Bush stated his opposition. It also brings up the opposition of the leadership of the Border Patrol and the charge from them that the MMP had tripped motion detectors.

Previously:
The Minutemen will need some ten gallon hats
Kay Bailey Hutchison supporting the MMP
"Other than Mexicans"

Advocates for illegal immigrants in Colorado assert that "immigrant-bashing" in on the rise in Colorado.

"Immigrant-bashing." Sounds scary. The Denver Post article describing concern about this trend, however, cites only one example of said bashing:

Organizers did not want to focus on the recent outcry over the illegal status of 19-year- old Raul Garcia-Gomez, the man suspected of killing Denver police Detective Donald Young, but they acknowledged it was part of the recent bashing.

It appears there has been no physical "bashing" of immigrants in Denver, just common-sense speech by citizens fed up with lax immigration enforcement.

You know the tide has turned when even Clarence Page is calling for enforcement of immigration laws:

If ever there was a time for Mr. Jackson to play his long-standing role as black America's burr under the saddle of the corporate establishment, this was it. At a minimum, Mr. Jackson, the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus and other mainstream black leaders in both parties should be holding Mr. Fox accountable for encouraging illegal migrants from Mexico to make the often-dangerous trek toward U.S. labor markets.

American business and political leaders also need to be held accountable for what amounts to a de facto open-borders immigration policy. In 1986, when Congress and President Ronald Reagan responded with an amnesty bill, an estimated 5 million people lived in this country illegally. Three million eventually qualified for amnesty under a bill that, it was hoped, would discourage further illegal immigration. It failed. Its sanctions against employers of illegals lacked teeth. The illegal population grew again to 7 million by the mid-1990s and an estimated 11 million today.

Now Congress is considering another immigration reform bill. It has a surprisingly broad coalition of business groups, labor organizations and immigrant-rights activists supporting it. It also has a strong skeptical opposition. Judging by history, it's easy to see why.

As a first step to restore public confidence, we need to enforce laws already on the books against illegal immigrants and the employers who hire them. Experience teaches us that when Americans don't take our immigration laws seriously, no one else does either.

You thought it was bad news that the REAL ID Act allows illegal aliens (that is, anyone with a "pending application for adjustment of status") to obtain "temporary" state driver’s licenses?
Unfortunately, there’s worse.

The REAL ID Act’s amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act’s asylum and withholding of removal standards have been rigged in the favor of illegal aliens like never before. Specifically, the amendments roll back some of the reforms made by former Attorney General John Ashcroft by federal regulation [67 FR 54878] in August 2002.

Read the full story in my latest column -- Treason Lobby Sabotages REAL ID Act -- on VDARE.com.

The more I read and study, the more I understand the dangers that are surrounding all of us throughout this nation. The illegal invasion brings criminals of every sort, including those who come to America carrying diseases.

One such disease is leprosy. According to Ben Whitford, Columbia Journalism, leprosy is being imported to the United States by immigrants, some who come here for free treatment. Experts fear it is going to spread into the native-born population.

Another disease that is running rampant now is tuberculosis. In an article written by Karin Brulliard of the Washington Post, health care workers are so worried about the spread of this terrifying disease, they are making house visits to ensure that the illegal aliens are taking their daily pills.

The brutal truth is that immigrants bring diseases. When immigrants landed at Ellis Island, they were screened for various sicknesses. If anything was detected, these people were not allowed to enter the states.

Too bad we don't have the same policies in the 21st Century. Stopping the illegal invasion WOULD curtail many diseases being spread through our nation. However, we couldn't do that....that would infringe on the non-citizens...never mind the rights of legal citizens. We are only good for paying the bills!!!

The titular phrase (usually just "OTM") refers to border crossers who come from countries other than Mexico. About 60,000 OTMs were detained after crossing the border last year. Some were originally from countries like North Korea, Iraq, and Libya. While most might be "good-hearted people who are coming here to work", certainly there are some who are not.

And, unlike Mexican illegal aliens, a large number of OTMs are released into the U.S. and are never found again.

The report "Officials: OTMs 'a very grave problem'" describes how many such OTMs cross in Texas because they know that due to the lack of detention space they'll be given orders to appear in court and then sent on their way. And, many of these OTMs are more or less giving themselves up, because news of the lack of detention space has been covered in the sending countries.

For background on this issue, see the following:
"Illegals detained at border released onto U.S. streets"
"[Rep.] Bonilla demands review of OTM release policy"
"Illegals from terrorist nations are crossing the border into Arizona"
"Rep Ortiz: Non-Mexican migrants getting free pass into U.S."
"Border Patrol Releases Immigrants at Bus Station" ("Action 4 News undercover cameras catch Border Patrol agents dropping off illegal immigrants at a local bus station [in Harlingen, TX] by the van load.")
"Unholy Border Alliance"
"Fun facts about Fort Huachuca" (not specifically about OTMs, but the fact that 3,000 illegal aliens have been caught on a military base should be worrisome)
"Other Than Mexicans" (Tuscon Weekly article has a roundup of several terrorism-related OTM incidents)
"U.S. Fears Terrorism Via Mexico's Time-Tested Smuggling Routes"

Chapter 3 of the 9/11 Commission Staff Report included the following:

...Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement [prior to 9/11 attack] were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity...

...there are uncorroborated law enforcement reports suggesting that associates of al Qaeda used smugglers in Latin America to travel through the region in 2002 before traveling onward to the United States...

...One smuggler, Salim Boughader-Mucharrafille, smuggled Lebanese nationals sympathetic to Hamas and Hizbollah into the United States and relied on corrupt Mexican officials in Beirut, Mexico City and Tijuana to facilitate their travel...

From this:

Tuesday night [5/17/05], in a vote of 15-4, a majority of the Madison Common Council signed off on a resolution allowing undocumented workers to apply for low-interest housing loans through the city Community Development Block Grant programs...

These "undocumented workers" need to have an ITIN ("Individual Taxpayer Identification Number"), which is similar to a Social Security number. SSNs are, of course, not available to illegal aliens, but ITINs are.

Note that this isn't just an isolated case of a "liberal" city deciding to support illegal immigration. As with other issues related to illegal immigration, it gets worse the more you look into it.

The quasi-governmental Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority already guarantees home loans to illegal immigrants. Here's a quote from their director, Antonio Riley:

"We don't see what can be so controversial about helping people realize the dream of homeownership."

Thankfully, WI Sen. Glenn Grothman has introduced legislation that would put an end to Madison's loan program as well as WHEDA guaranteeing such loans:

[Grothman] says the idea is "almost comical". He says it's absurd to offer assistance to people who are in the country illegally. "What type of message are we sending to people?" He says. "We're telling the border guards we don't appreciate their job. We're telling the people that inspect local business that we don't care what they do. We're telling anybody who is waiting to get into this country legally that they're a bunch of suckers for trying to obey the law. It's absolutely comical."

Now, here's where the story gets even worse. Not only are Madison, the WHEDA, and several banks involved, but so is the (U.S.) federal government. And, they're working with the Mexican government to get loans to illegal aliens.

The FDIC is "independent agency of the federal government", and last year they continued a pilot program they started in 2003:

...Under this pilot program, which is located in Chicago, the FDIC, the Mexican Consulate, more than 63 banks, credit unions, community organizations and government agencies have come together to form this New Alliance Task Force... One of its efforts is reaching out to persons who send money in the form of remittances to other countries...

Bankers who comprise the Task Force also developed a new mortgage product intended for use by potential homeowners who pay taxes using Individual Tax Identification Numbers...

When asked about the propriety of the FDIC helping banks give loans to illegal aliens, an FDIC spokesman replied:

"A home might be the ultimate dream, as with any other family. The important thing is that they have access. There might be some criticism, but immigration issues are not our purview."

For more information, see:
Who is the FDIC? And, why are they working with a foreign government to subvert our laws?
"Tax-number loans help immigrants buy homes" (lists a few banks that give ITIN loans, there are 10 more listed here.)

Homeland Security--the words sound as though the United States of America has taken care of all the major problems.........however, nothing could be further from the truth.

Arrests were made by the federal authorities this past week in Texas, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Oklahoma of 60 illegal aliens working in sensitive infrastructure locations. These illegals from Mexico, Guatamala, and Honduras were all working for Brock Enterprises and they had access to power plants, air cargo facilities, and pipeline facilities.

I am sure this information will make all of us sleep better tonight knowing our homeland is secure.........NOT.

A week ago, Vicente Fox said:

"There is no doubt that Mexicans, filled with dignity, willingness and ability to work are doing jobs that not even blacks want to do there in the United States..."

In response, Jesse Jackson called Fox's statement "a spurious comparison... [with] ominous racial overtones."

And:

Another American civil rights activist, the Rev. Al Sharpton, said the comment was especially disturbing because Fox was educated in the United States and "he is not unaware of the racial sensitivities here."

Jackson even visited Mexico. From "Fox 'expresses regret' to Jackson for remark":

...During a 40-minute meeting, Fox said he was sorry the statement had offended Americans, Jackson said.

"He expressed his sincere regret of any misinterpretation of what he meant," Jackson said afterward. "He expressed with a very contrite heart that he is not a racist."

The two men pledged to work together on human rights, U.S. immigration reform and other issues, Jackson said. After talking, they posed with a large picture of Jackson and the late Hispanic civil rights leader, Cesar Chavez.

Jackson was accompanied by Ann Marie Tallman, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund. The group is leading the legal challenges against Arizona's Proposition 200 and similar initiatives in other states...

Larry Elder responded to this visit on Lou Dobbs' show:

Think about that. MALDEF wants open borders, effectively. They want driver's licenses for illegals. They want in-state tuition for illegals. They want us really to do nothing about -- about the borders... Then Jesse Jackson is standing there and talking to Vicente Fox about the "problem of illegal immigration." It's a joke...

MALDEF was more or less created by the Ford Foundation, and they've received millions from them as well as from other left-wing foundations, such as George Soros' Open Society Institute. Much more about them at the link. The post "Mexico might sue Sgt. Patrick Haab" discussed how Mexico was considering suing that U.S. Army reservist with the help of a Los Angeles "human rights group", and, while I don't know the actual group, MALDEF would be the chief suspect.

Wait, it gets worse:

On the heels of a meeting with Mexican President Vicente Fox over his comments about American blacks, the Rev. Jesse Jackson announced he is forming a group that will address issues affecting blacks and Hispanics...

On Thursday, Jackson, along with Ann Marie Tallman, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said they were forming a human rights council that would focus on issues such as fair immigration policies, voting rights and a balanced trade policy...

For just a small example of what MALDEF might mean by "voting rights", in 2003 UCLA professor Joaquin Avila (bio) issued a report claiming that not giving the vote to non-citizens amounted to political apartheid. It turns out that Avila worked at UCLA's Chicano Studies Research Center, which was started with a grant from... the Ford Foundation. He was also a former president of... MALDEF.

In contrast, the latest from Rev. Al Sharpton is this:

...In a phone interview with The Associated Press, Sharpton said he wasn't satisfied with the contradictory expressions of regret issued by the administration of Vicente Fox this week. He said he would seek an "unequivocal, formal" apology during a meeting with Fox on Monday in Mexico City...

He said illegal migrants in the United States millions of whom are Mexican are working for low wages and no benefits, taking jobs from other minority groups who are in the United States legally.

"We also need to deal with the fact that there has been an inordinate amount of tension where people have come across the border for almost slave wages, competing with Latinos and blacks," Sharpton said. "It's almost like a 21st century slave trade."

In an earlier post, I quoted Norwegian blogger Fjordman on Sweden's trouble integrating its (mainly Muslim) immigrant population.

Fjordman now gives us this excellent post on Norway's "multicultural inquisition":

Dr. Ole Jørgen Anfindsen, editor, HonestThinking.org, believes that Norwegian authorities have cheated* with prognoses for the number of immigrants. According to his numbers, ethnic Norwegians will become a minority in their own country before 2050 if the current trends continue. The number of Muslims in Norway over 15 years has quadrupled, meaning an annual growth of more than 9%. A Norwegian researcher warns that ethnic gangs can give Norway the kind of immigrant-related organized crime that accompanied waves of migration to the USA. Dr. Inger-Lise Lien concludes that the ethnic groups themselves are worried. Oslo, which used to be a safe Scandinavian city, today looks more like New York City pre-Giuliani. Native Norwegians are quietly moving out of the immigrant ghettos in inner-city Oslo in large numbers. Tensions with immigrants have spread even to smaller towns. The trend is identical to what can be seen in neighboring Sweden, where several cities are now on the verge of collapse. Norway has already experienced what seems to have been an attempted Islamic terror attack. At the same time, there is new legislation proposed against "discriminating" statements made about specific groups, even on Internet discussion forums and websites. Which means that Norwegians can't say too much about Muslim immigrants destroying the country, because that is racism and thus illegal.

These are matters about which even the most obtuse leftist should be concerned. As I noted in my post on Sweden, the breakdown of social solidarity and the growth of social service dependence consequent upon mass immigration are undermining the foundations of the post-war providentialist state across Western Europe. While the Open Borders crowd likes to see mass immigration as a solution to collapsing birth rates and an aging population, their case simply isn't plausible any more.

* Related: With the UK elections over and Labour safely back in power, the British government reveals that immigration to the country is at record levels.

The Wall Street Journal has published several Open Borders editorials over the years. If any of them could be singled out as the low point, it might be the June 17, 2004 editorial "Borderline Republicans" which more or less endorsed U.S. Rep. Chris Cannon (R-UT). This was two days after the Deseret News published "Illegal plea for illegals' cash?" ("As Rep. Chris Cannon sat by, one of his aides urged any illegal aliens listening to a Spanish-language radio talk show to funnel money into his campaign by giving it to U.S. citizens who could donate it legally...") That editorial is also discussed in "Post-Americans". More on Cannon starting here.

Perhaps for some balance, or (much less likely) as indication of a sea change, today's WSJ has a guest editorial from Leo W. Banks entitled "Minutemen Are People, Too":

...In the view of most of the reporters who parachuted into Arizona for this story and, disturbingly, local ones as well, you'd get the distinct impression that the Minutemen are the problem along the border. That's right. America needn't worry about the thousands who bust into the country every night. No, the real danger are those yahoos who think calling the cops when they see somebody breaking the law is a good idea...

...But you haven't heard much about [crime problems on the border, large numbers of border crossers, etc.] nationally, because the media soft-pedal them. Why? It's politically incorrect. We've built a new third rail in American life. Leave the harmless illegals alone and go after their victims instead...

...It used to be that one or two [crossers] would ask a local resident for water and a sandwich, and, once fed, be on their way with a polite "Gracias, Señorita." The new breed now comes in groups of 50. They demand to be driven to their pickup spot, and if you refuse they flip you off. Sometimes they poison barking ranch dogs or cut their throats to quiet them. How long do you suppose such outrages would go on in Fairfield, Conn.? Or Greenwich? It'd be a day and a half before some kumbaya-liberal flipped sides and founded the Merritt Parkway Minutemen. Or the BlackBerry Brigade...

The cable TV show "What's right with America" attended the recent near riot in Baldwin Park and shot two hours of footage. They plan to air parts of it tonight in the Santa Barbara area on Channel 17. You can view a teaser here. It includes a protester yelling "Go back to Europe" and someone crossing out an American flag. The show's host promises even more in the full footage. It becomes clearer day by day that the L.A. Times reporters appear to have attended a completely different event or something similar (see "Protest Over Art Forces Police to Draw the Line" for their take).

Please contact readers.rep *at* latimes.com and suggest that they compare the story they printed with the videos and pictures from those who were on the scene.

Remember the REAL ID Act loopholes creating state driver’s licenses ("temporary" ones, that is) for illegal aliens?

Well, now they're the law of the land!

I've analyzed the newly-minted federal standards for temporary driver's licenses (benefiting various foreign nationals including assorted illegal aliens) in my latest column on VDARE.com.

Who says illegal aliens can't get driver's licenses? REAL ID gives a temporary license for every temporary worker. If John McCain and Ted Kennedy somehow carry the day with another amnesty disaster, the illegal aliens’ temporary state driver’s licenses will be a sure thing for anyone who so much as FILES for immigration status . . . courtesy of the federal government.

Bottom line: "temporary workers" (beneficiaries of the future amnesty) will get "temporary" state driver's licenses. But don't call it "amnesty" . . . and don't dare call it "driver's licenses for illegal aliens."

Full story

Juan Mann archive on VDARE.com

With the British elections over, France's upcoming May 29th referendum on the EU Constitution is Europe's next big story. While the US press seems to have hardly got wind of it, the referendum is in fact the most important European news story of the year -- and perhaps the decade. For however the vote goes -- and, in at least two countries, victory for the Constitution is anything but certain -- it will have a hugely important impact on the EU's 25 member states, not to mention the course of European-American relations.

Public attitudes to mass immigration may play a decisive role. In both France and the Netherlands, which will be holding its referendum on June 1st, the polls are running neck and neck. And, in both countries, a significant portion of the 'no' vote -- around 35%, in the French case -- seems strongly motivated by hostility to ongoing mass immigration and the prospect of eventual Turkish membership.

The latest polls put opposition to the Constitution at 54% in France, 58% in the Netherlands.

Like most things in Europe, the issue is more complicated than it needs to be. In the first place, the Constitution does not directly touch upon the Turkish question -- though unlikely, Turkey could in principle join the Union even if the referendum fails. And, as I noted in an earlier post, open borders between member states mean that the immigration policies of each member directly effect the rest. That will remain the case even if the Constitution is defeated.

Depending on your point of view, this is either a very good argument for giving Brussels yet more power to shape common policy or an equally good argument for returning to the bad old days when nation states were still, you know, sovereign...

The latter is not an option, at least for the moment. So what to make of the former?

In a front page story for today's Le Monde (translation here), ex-Foreign Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, now leader of Chirac's ruling UMP Party, is quoted arguing for further centralization:

Nicolas Sarkozy, President of the UMP, is opposed to Turkey's entry to the EU because, he says, "Europe can't welcome every country in the world". And yet Sarkozy maintains that the increased cooperation envisionned by the constitutional treaty will allow the country's of Europe to better fight againt illegal immigration. The former Foreign Minister thus hopes to convince those on his Party's right -- a priori, the most hotile to the European construction -- to vote 'oui' in the referendum.

But there's a catch: if EU immigration policy is a mess, it's because the EU made it that way. Since 1995, Europe has allowed the free movement of residents within its borders. What it has not done -- but promised to do beginning with the 1995 deal -- is enforce its external ones. Indeed, with key member states like Poland refusing to cooperate in joint enforcement efforts, it's not clear that it can, whatever happens with the referendum.

Ten years and many broken promises later, European elites are asking the public to give their stamp of approval to a Constitution in which they had no say and which, apparently, they can never change (at least if the Charter of Fundamental Rights has anything to say about it). And all that in the vague hope that, this time around, Brussels keeps its word.

As an unnamed staffer at the Dutch Finance Ministry told the UK's Telegraph:

"There should have been a referendum on the euro, there should be a referendum on Turkish entry [...] I'm voting against the constitution because politicians cannot tell me why I should be voting for it."

So what makes the best political sense here? Granted, from the point of view of immigration reform, voting 'no' is largely or entirely symbolic. But, in politics, symbolism can go a long way. For years, the EU has told voters that, if they just stayed the course, things would work out in the end. They've stayed the course, and things haven't worked out. In fact, they've gotten much worse.

Brussels' most recent gamble may prove one too many.

However things turn out, none of Europe's problems will be solved on May 29th. But since many of these problems, especially in immigration, are the direct product of EU "leadership", European voters may well decide that the time has come to give Brussels a black eye.

They would be right to do so. Whatever else it is, a 'no' vote will be a victory for democracy. And that, at least, is something worth voting for.

You just can't please Mexico City:

Mexico will send a diplomatic letter to the United States protesting the extension of a wall along the U.S.-California border, officials said Friday.

Ruben Aguilar, a spokesman for President Vicente Fox, said the president would also continue to pressure the U.S. government to approve a migration accord that would allow more migrants to work legally north of the border.

---

Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez said Thursday that Fox had instructed him to send the diplomatic letter with the message that the wall's construction was "unacceptable and not a solution."

A corrugated metal wall — dubbed the "Tortilla Wall" — goes all around the edge of Tijuana, but a second and more substantial layer of barriers that was built behind the first one that is incomplete and, among other things, does not stretch out into the Pacific. The measures passed this week allow for the completion of that second layer of barriers.

The upcoming letter will be Mexico's first formal protest of new U.S. immigration regulations that require states to verify that people who apply for a driver's license are in the country legally.

It seems that the only solution that Mexico will find acceptable is one that lets them swarm our borders at will. By such a policy, Mexico may export workers its own inefficient economy doesn't support--and it may export drugs, drug runners and other criminals as well.

Thanks, but no thanks.

A Monday round-up of immigration stories to keep an eye on:

- Vicente Fox, racist? La Shawn Barber examines and Reuters updates the story.

- Bloomberg News' Nicholas Johnston has an interesting piece on the split between Rep. Tom Tancredo and Denver open-borders business, First Data.

- The Denver Post's David Harsanyi braves the MSM's pro-illegal immigration waters with a column on the idiocy of sanctuary laws. Bravo.

- MS-13 Watch: Officials Fear Spread of Gang Activity From Washington

- Joe Guzzardi on the LA mayor's race

- Minutemen updates: Utah Texas

The Save Our State organization organized a rally yesterday at the monument in Baldwin Park CA discussed here.

A report is here, although I don't know whether it's exaggerated or not:

Everything that we argued the monument stood for was reinforced by the hundreds of activists who opposed our presence in Baldwin Park. Numerous times we were told that this land is Mexico and that they were taking it back. Numerous times racists epithets were hurled away. One person even hurled a full water bottle at our side and sent one of our activists to the hospital with bleeding in the brain. Unfortunately, she is now in the intensive care unit and we are all praying and hoping for the best.

What started as a rather peaceful and uneventful protest on our side ended in sheer hostility. The counter demonstrators were supposed to rally at the other end of the metrolink station, but proceeded to outflank the Baldwin Park Police Department and traveled through a local neighborhood so that they could formally confront us at the intersection allocated to us for our protest.

In waves they came. Soon outnumbered 500-50 in a community that is 85% Hispanic, crowd control soon became an issue. Rants, chants and Mexican flags filled the air. Their spit and a dragged and kicked American flag covered the ground. It is imperative to note that that was the only American flag displayed by our opponents...

Several links about this event, including pictures and video, are currently on the front page here.

The AP report ("Baldwin Park public artwork angers group opposed to illegal immigration") incorrectly states that no one was injured, and it's probably not a complete picture of the event. I confirmed with the Baldwin Park P.D. that there was the one injury described above and that the victim is in the ICU. The Baldwin Park police are investigating this matter.

However, I'm not holding out much hope of local or national political leaders condemning this attack.

UPDATE: There are more pictures here. Pictures from someone on the other side are here.

So far, I've seen banners from the Los Angeles branch of A.N.S.W.E.R., the San Gabriel Valley Neighbors for Peace and Justice, and the International Socialist Organization. Other, even less reputable outfits may have been involved.

Note that not all of those on the wrong side were Hispanic, and that reportedly 1/3 of those on the right side were Hispanic.

UPDATE 2: The AP report above appears to have been derived from the extraordinarily biased Los Angeles Times report "Protest Over Art Forces Police to Draw the Line" from David Pierson and Patricia Ward Biederman. The LAT report makes it sound like it was just one big party for peace and justice:

...Opponents of Save Our State consisted mainly of young adults who said they sent e-mails to Latino and immigrant worker advocacy groups. Many were politically active teenagers and college students who skateboarded to the scene...

They even describe A.N.S.W.E.R. L.A. as an "antiwar and anti-racism group" without any quotes or hedging. Apparently the L.A. Times didn't get the memo from committed lefties David Corn and Marc Cooper, neither of whom had good words for the parent organization.

There's more on the L.A. Times' report and on the groups involved here.

You can see a copy of the email that A.N.S.W.E.R. L.A. sent out at these google caches: that of polizeros.com and that of answerla.org .

Please contact readers.rep *at* latimes.com and feedback *at* ap.org with your thoughts on their coverage.

5/16/05 UPDATE: The LAT published a blurb from "a Times Staff Writer" stating that the victim had been observed overnight in an ICU. It also says that police are investigating the attack as an assault with a deadly weapon.

Also, the second paragraph of the main LAT article says that the protest was announced on the John and Ken Show (KFI 640AM Los Angeles). On their show, John and Ken say that that's false. The protest and the monument were discussed on two other KFI shows, but not theirs. They contacted one of the reporters and were told that a correction would be printed. Apparently the reporter was told that by one of the SOS protesters and didn't confirm it.

The California Mafia blog reports on a voter initiative sponsored by state Assemblyman Ray Haynes to establish a California Border Patrol:

The Assemblyman said that the CBP would be a comprehensive uniformed agency with sworn officers that would be charged with enforcing state and federal laws regarding immigration. As he said, one of the major problems right now in California is that the federal Border Patrol does very little beyond the actual border. The CBP would be used for "interior enforcement" of laws.

Haynes expressed confidence that "the governor would enforce the law if it passes." Looks like last year's controversy over the DHS' immensely successful -- and abruptly cancelled -- interior round-ups may finally be coming home to roost...

The initiative's text can be found here. There's more information at the initiative's home site.

Update:

Sac Bee political columnist Dan Weintraub writes (May 12, registration free):

Haynes holds out little hope that his proposal will be approved in the Legislature, where it would take a two-thirds vote in each house to place it on the ballot. But he has enlisted the help of Rescue California, the political committee behind the 2003 recall of former Gov. Gray Davis, to help him gather signatures. And the consultant who ran that signature gathering operation, David Gilliard, is filling the same role for this effort.

[...] Unlike Proposition 187, which sought to deny public services to illegal immigrants, the border police proposal seeks only to more effectively enforce current law. It will be difficult for opponents to demonize that concept.

Haynes has a long way to go to qualify his proposal for the ballot. But my sense is that if it qualifies, his proposal will probably be approved.

This is certainly a story to watch.

Reader Tim Sumner sent the Social Security Administration the following e-mail:

Subject: questions?

Date: 5/13/2005 12:51:09 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time

From: Tim Sumner

Reply To: employerinfo@ssa.gov

If I received a notice from the SSA that the number I submitted for an employee does not match your records, am I required to ask the employee to resubmit the information to me and, if so, how soon must they provide to me and how long do I have to resubmit the information?

If the employee fails to provide me with the information to resubmit their SSN within the time limit (if one exists) set by the SSA, should I lay-off, suspend, or fire the employee?

If I resubmit the information to the SSA and again it also comes back as not matching the SSA's records, should I lay-off, suspend, or fire the employee until such time they provide me with information that matches a number the SSA has on file?

So you know, I've already read this:

Legal Policy - Don't Discriminate or Misuse EVS - SSA will advise you if a name/SSN you submitted does not match our records. This does not imply that you or your employee intentionally provided incorrect information about the employee's name or SSN. It is not a basis, in and of itself, for you to take any adverse action against the employee, such as laying off, suspending, firing, or discriminating against an individual who appears on the list. EVS should only be used to verify currently or previously employed workers. Company policy concerning the use of EVS should be applied consistently to all workers, e.g. if used for newly hired employees, verify all newly hired employees; if used to verify your data base, verify the entire data base. Any employer that uses the information SSA provides regarding name/SSN verification to justify taking adverse action against an employee may violate state or federal law and be subject to legal consequences. Moreover, this makes no statement about your employee's immigration status.

Here's the response he got:

Subject: Response\zrNagy\1809188

Date: 5/13/2005 2:40:48 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time

From: SSA.Comments@ssa.gov

Reply To: Tim Sumner

Thank you for your inquiry.

There is no time limit for you to provide SSA with the correct information. SSA does not tell employers who to hire or fire. You should follow your companies existing guidelines for such a decision.

When an employer files a W-2 with SSA and the employee's name and SSN does not match our records we are not able to post the employee's wages to their Social Security record. SSA sends the employer a notice in the hopes of receiving the correct information so that the employee can get credit for their earnings.

For more information on how to verify an employee's SSN go to www.ssa.gov/employer.

If you have any additional questions or concerns please call (800)772-6270 or email again.

Sincerely,

Tony Nagy

Employer Reporting Specialist

In other words, Sumner explains, employers "never have to submit the accurate social security numbers of their employees. They never have to fire an employee who can not or will not give you evidence they have a valid social security number. In fact, the SSA warns employees against firing, suspending, or laying-off an employee whose number does not match the SSA's records."

So says a blatantly racist monument in Baldwin Park, a suburb of Los Angeles. Details at Blue State Conservatives.

Jerry Seper in the Washington Times has the story in "Border Patrol told to stand down in Arizona". BP supervisors allegedly told their agents to minimize arrests in the area patrolled by the Minuteman Project volunteers last month. An increase in arrests would show that the MMP did their job.

This was discussed here last week in the post "MMP organizer denied access to DHS press conference". Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) received an email from "a very credible source within the U.S. Border Patrol" who stated that Border Patrol Tucson Sector Chief Michael Nicely had given these orders. Nicely had also given the order to exclude MMP organizer Chris Simcox from a DHS press conference.

In their report, the Washington Times says:

...More than a dozen agents, all of whom asked not to be identified for fear of retribution, said orders relayed by Border Patrol supervisors at the Naco, Ariz., station made it clear that arrests were "not to go up" along the 23-mile section of border that the volunteers monitored to protest illegal immigration.

"It was clear to everyone here what was being said and why," said one veteran agent. "The apprehensions were not to increase after the Minuteman volunteers left. It was as simple as that."

Another agent said the Naco supervisors "were clear in their intention" to keep new arrests to an "absolute minimum" to offset the effect of the Minuteman vigil, adding that patrols along the border have been severely limited...

Sens. McCain and Kennedy have introduced the "2005 Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act". They were joined by Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), and Jim Kolbe (R-AZ). Kennedy specifically denies that this is an "amnesty", but any difference between SAOIA and amnesty is purely semantic. Expect semantics - or, more properly, doublespeak - to be a major part of the debate on this bill.

Reports on the bill are in "Bill would tighten border security, increase information sharing", "Bills could grant legality to 10 million immigrants". Kennedy's press release has a detailed description of the bill.

Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) issued a statement opposing the bill, including this:

...If recent history is an accurate guide, and I believe it is, this so-called guest worker notion would only encourage a new wave of illegal aliens and make America's uncontrolled and unacceptable immigration debacle even worse than it is now.

This legislation is a bad idea not only because it creates a transparent path to amnesty, but also because it would reduce work opportunities, depress wages, and lower worker protection for Americans. Further, it would be impossible to administer and even more unlikely to be enforced...

Meanwhile those in favor of the bill have issued their own press releases. (Click the links for background on the groups mentioned.)

The press release from FIRM ("Fair Immmigration Reform Movement") contains this statement from FIRM organizer Deepak Bhargava:

For too long Americans have benefited from the hard work of millions of law-abiding undocumented workers that have had to endure a life of fear of deportation and discrimination.

FIRM is a project of the Center for Community Change, and Bhargava is the executive director of that latter group. One of the members of FIRM's organizing committee is Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles.

The Service Employees International Union issued a press release in support of SAOIA here.

The National Restaurant Association's press release is here. It includes a statement from "Lee Culpepper, the Association's senior vice president of Government Affairs and Public Policy and Chairman of the National Immigration Forum." The page "Organizations Supporting Amnesty for Illegal Aliens" contains a 2002 quote from Culpepper, which sounds similar to something you've probably heard many times from another source:

...we believe that our nation's immigration policy should not only secure our borders, but also match willing employers with willing employees...

In an interesting twist, the Laborers' International Union issued a statement favoring the bill, but moderately opposing its guest worker provisions:

"In light of abuses that have historically occurred with guest worker programs, we believe the provisions in this bill for H5A visas should be improved to ensure that workers have legal recourse against unscrupulous employers and so that U.S. workers are protected from employers whose sole purpose in hiring H5A visa holders is to undercut existing workplace standards," [Terence M. O'Sullivan, General President of the Laborers' Union] said.

UPDATE: Continuing our guilt-by-association but entirely-justified tour, the office of Mexico's Foreign Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez has issued a statement. From "Mexico eyes immigration politicking":

"According to the preliminary information that we have, this initiative...supports substantive elements and distinct aspects of the migratory problem that reflect a serious interest and a political determination to adopt a balanced and integral focus on the treatment of the migratory issue and to tackle the issue of security from a wider context."