|This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.|
Locked on 08/26/2002 3:31:49 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator, reason:
Skip to comments.The Invasion of Los Angeles
Posted on 08/24/2002 2:37:20 AM PDT by FreedomFriend
Given that the illegal invasion in California and much of the country has come from our neighbor to the south, and being the Mexicans are considered "Hispanic", I think that it is only fair to show general graphic displays of the invasion.
For the following pictures, you will need to know what each color represents. Thus,, here is the key.
Beige 0.0%-16.6% Hispanic
Yellow 16.7%-33.2% Hispanic
Green-Yellow- 33.4%-53.0% Hispanic
Olive Green- 53.3%-75.2% Hispanic
Forest Green- 75.5%-100.0% Hispanic
Beige 0.0%-18.5% Hispanic
Yellow 18.6%-36.2% Hispanic
Green-Yellow 36.3%-55.6% Hispanic
Olive Green 55.7%-76.4% Hispanic
Forest Green 76.4%-98.4% Hispanic
Check out the size and scope of the invasion as it has manifested itself over the years in the LA area, and compare each LA area from 1990 to 2000.
LA Central 1990
LA Central 2000
LA East 1990
LA East 2000
LA Southeast 1990
LA Southeast 2000
LA North 1990
LA North 2000
LA West/Far West 1990
LA West/Far West 2000
Given that the numbers are slightly differentiating, the contrast between 1990 and 2000 is somewhat weakened. However, despite the number variation, the contrasts can clearly be seen.
Were you aware that if you created an equivalent demographic map of California for 1850 the majority of populated areas would be Chinese?!
There would also be very, very few "hispanics", the hidalgos (landlord class people) having withdrawn back to Mexico proper when the American Revolution reached the area. On the other hand, there would still be a lot of American Indians.
California was never "theirs". The United States inherited perfectly valid "sea to sea" land claims from Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia. When the Mexicans ran off the Spanish, we fairly reasserted those claims.
Will they teach "that" history in California schools?
Hispanic population growth from 1980 to 2000 in the following metropolitan areas exceeding 300%:
Las Vegas 753%
Fort Lauderdale 578%
Washington D.C. 346%
Fort Worth 325%
Source: "Latino Growth in Metropolitan America: Changing Patterns, New Locations," Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. Article was in the Washington Post.
Of course, there is always dual citizenship. That is approved for voting purposes.
The facts are that these are census tracts. If all the pictures are up, you can clearly see that some Census Tracts were in the beige or yellow colors in 1990, and ten years later the same tracts were in the yellow, yellow-green or olive green colors. Many of them have not grown in population, as their size has stayed the same. On the other hand, those areas where they have received more people in that ten year span reveal that the newcomers to those particular areas were primarily Hispanic. Thus, whether other groups fled or not really doesn't matter, as the Hispanic population percentage would go up either way. You can also see how many tracts were broken into two or three, particularly around Central Los Angeles. This represents a huge increase in population, and you'll also see that nearly zero of the tracts have turned in the direction of Hispanic to Non-Hispanic. Thus, with smaller tracts and increased percentages, this reveals that not only is the Hispanic population percentage increasing, but the shear numbers are huge.
Raleigh,NC 1,180% Atlanta 995% Greensboro,NC 962% Charlotte 962% Orlando 859% Las Vegas 753% Nashville 630% Fort Lauderdale 578% Sarasota 538% Portland 437% Greenville,SC 397% Washington D.C. 346% Indianapolis 338% Minn-St.Paul 331% Fort Worth 325% Tulsa 303%
Hmm...And how long have we been saying, that this is not just a Kalifornia problem anymore?
Central/East Los Angeles(LA Downtown, Covina, Anaheim, Downey, Arcadia)
Southeast Los Angeles (Santa Ana, Irvine, Tustin, San Juan Capistrano)
West Los Angeles (LA Downtown, Carson, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica)
Northwest Los Angeles (San Fernando Valley/Burbank/Glendale)
Far West (Ventura/Oxnard/Camarillo/Thousand Oaks)
(A 1900-2000 time-lapse animated image would be very effective.)
Unfortunately it IS predominantely a California problem..
35% of all hispanics who live in the US reside in California. Most of the California hispanics trace their ancestory to Mexico.
While the majority of California hispanics are US citizens over 90% are illegal aliens or the progeny of illegal aliens.
The figures which you sited are increases in population, not a percentage of population.
As an example: If Anywhere USA has a population of 1 and two more people move to Anywhere USA the town has seen a 300% increase in population yet the town still only has a population of 3 people
It is Sickening. What kind of American President is THIS? My anger with Bush and his open borders insanity is at the point where I have to change the TV channel if he is on it. The last time I did that was when Slick Willie was in office. Needless to say, I didn't watch much TV then.
If you are uncomfortable with Bush's posture on this issue and live in California you aren't going to be happy with Simon's posture either.
The greatest help would come from altering the 14th amendment.
Instead of location of birth being an automatic threshold to citizenship it should simply be a first step along the away.
The problem with the alien invasion is the drain on the infrastructure caused by their children. These new citizens (children) aren't immediately productive yet they place tremendous burdens on our tax suppoted infrastructure. They require health care, education and financial support but are unable to make a meaningful contribution to our society for over 20 years even under ideal circumstances.
If a graduated pace to citizenship was mandated for the children of illegal aliens and the alien parents were required (ala California's Proposition 187 and existing, unenforced, federal immigration regulations) then the tax payer, states and nation wouldn't find itself in the fiscal crisis that the current policies have brought to parts of our nation.
Opposition to Local Law Enforcement of Immigration Laws
May 22, 2002 Police Departments
Chicago (IL) Police Department, Tom Needham, Former General Counsel and Chief of Staff [Noting that the mission of police is to prevent and solve crimes] "It would be virtually impossible to do that effectively if witnesses and victims, no matter what their residency status, had some reluctance to come forward for fear of being deported." ("U.S. Weighs Local Role on Immigration," Chicago Tribune, 4/14/02)
Los Angeles (CA) Police Department, Sgt. John Pasquariello "Because of our immigrant population here and our diverse communities, we don't want to alienate anybody, or give anybody fear That's just not our policy. Hasn't been for twenty years."
("Police Want No Part in Enforcing Immigration," Los Angeles Times, 4/5/02) Austin (TX) Police Department, Assistant Chief Rudy Landeros "Our officers will not, and let me stress this because it is very important, our officers will not stop, detain, or arrest anybody solely based on their immigration status. Period."
("Austin Police Won't Arrest People Only for Immigration Status," KEYE CBS, Austin, 4/5/02)
Denver (CO) Police Department, Chief Gerry Whitman "Communication is big in inner-city neighborhoods and the underpinning of that is trust. If a victim thinks they're going to be a suspect (in an immigration violation), they're not going to call us, and that's just going to separate us even further."
("Immigration Bill Has Police Uneasy," Denver Post, 4/22/02)
San Diego (CA) Police Department, David Cohen, Spokesperson "Our policy has been and continues to be that we are not federal immigration officers, and our department guidelines for dealing with undocumented persons are very strict and are unlikely to change."
("Police May Gain Power to Enforce Immigration," San Diego Union-Tribune, 4/3/02)
Miami (FL) Police Department, Lt. Bill Schwartz, Spokesperson
"We will not function in an INS capacity. It's not our job. Our job is to solve crimes. We have way too much to do to be acting as INS agents."
("Critics Assail Plan to Have Local Police Enforce Immigration Laws," South Florida Sun-Sentinel, 4/25/02)
Sacramento (CA) Police Department, Chief Arturo Venegas, Jr "I don't think it's a good idea. We've made tremendous inroads into a lot of our immigrant communities. To get into the enforcement of immigration laws would build wedges and walls that have taken a long time to break down." ("Administration Split on Local Role in Terror Fight," The New York Times, 4/29/02)
Metropolitan Washington (DC) Police Department, Chief Charles H. Ramsey
"To begin in earnest checking immigration status, I can see where that could cause some tremendous strain. Unless there's some reasonable suspicion of a crime occurring, we need to be careful about the role we play." ("INS Role for Police Considered," The Washington Post, 4/4/02)
Putnam County (TN) Police Department, Sheriff Jerry Abston "I wouldn't have the resources to do that Money's tight in the state in the counties, too. It's [the INS'] job to take care of the borders, and I just think they need to do it." ("Midstate Authorities Balk at Possibly Enforcing Immigration Laws," The Tennessean, 4/15/02)
Hillsboro (OR) Police Department, Chief Ron Louie "We're trying to build bridges with people living in fear. If police officers become agents of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, their ability to deal with issues such as domestic violence and crime prevention will be severely curtailed."
("Helping People Without Papers," Portland Oregonian, 4/5/02)
Lake County (FL) Sheriff's Office, Mike Brewer, Legal Advisor
"It's an unfunded mandate. Now law-enforcement officers who should be looking for burglars and robbers are going to be looking for illegal aliens, with no additional monies for deputies coming down." ("Some Police Eager to Help INS Agents," Orlando Sentinel, 4/5/02)
San Antonio (TX) Police Department, Chief Albert Ortiz "Any time we get mandates and more work without a commensurate amount of resources, something has to suffer. One of the beauties of living in San Antonio is we have a lot of diversity and we seem to pull together. If that [mandate] happens, we'd really have to think very hard about where it would be on our priority list, and if it would even be a priority We've tried so very hard for years to build bridges to all segments of our community. This would be a setback in that regard."
("Sheriff, Top Cop Blast INS Proposal," San Antonio Express News, 4/5/02)
Ventura County (CA) Sheriff's Department, Eric Nishimoto, Spokesperson
"We're not in favor of having our department being responsible for that function. The number one risk is the potential for civil rights violations. Right now we're involved in preventing any kind of racial profiling and this type of function could open us to that kind of risk We feel our officers are not equipped to make that kind of determination of who is legal. In the 70's, one of our tasks was to round up illegals and it was very difficult to make that kind of determination. From a practical standpoint, we're not staffed to do that, especially in this time of budget reductions."
("Proposal for Police to Act as INS Agents Denounced," Ventura County Star, 4/6/02)
San Joaquin County (CA) Sheriff's Office, Lt. Armando Mayoya "If police officers start reporting to the INS, more undocumented workers could wind up as victims. Criminals soon would realize that undocumented workers would be unlikely to call police for fear of being deported and target them for attacks. Racial profiling also could intensify if police are tasked with upholding immigration laws, and it wouldn't just be Latinos targeted by police." ("U.S. May Let State, Local Authorities Enforce Federal Immigration Laws," Dallas Morning News, 4/3/02)
Whatcom County (WA) Sheriff Dale Brandland "My current policy is that if we run into an illegal alien, we detain them for the Border Patrol. We don't actively pursue illegal aliens. . . . We are underfunded as it is and to try to take on that responsibility is just unacceptable. . . . [The federal government has been trying to get us to do this] for years and quite frankly it just doesn't work. . . . It's really a sore subject for me. If there is a legitimate interest here, if there is a risk to our communities, we want to be a part of the team. What I would not do is go out and start hunting for illegal aliens just because John Ashcroft says I'm allowed to." ("Police balk at watching for
illegal immigrants," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 5/2/2002)
Metropolitan Nashville (TN) Police Department, Don Aron, Spokesperson "We don't have any desire for all 1,300 members of the Police Department to be quasi-INS agents." ("Midstate Authorities Balk at Possibly Enforcing Immigration Laws," The Tennessean, 4/15/02) Stockton (CA) Police Department, Chief Edward Chavez "To be quite honest, if people are law-abiding and are here to earn a productive life and be a contributing member of society they should be allowed to live their lives." ("S.J. Officials Blast INS Role for Police," Stockton Record, 4/4/02)
Waco (TX) Police Department, Chief Alberto Melis "I worry that there are people who don't ask for help because they have fear of the police." ("Waco Police Chief Asks Immigrants Not to be Afraid to Report Crimes," Waco Tribune-Herald, 4/15/02) Anaheim (CA) Police Department, Mike Hildalgo, Spokesperson "We have enough problems just doing our routine calls and investigating the everyday things. This would put additional burden on us that we probably wouldn't be able to handle."
("Immigrants Worried, Coe Pleased," Orange County Register, 4/4/02)
Glenwood Springs (CO) Police Department, Chief Terry Wilson "That's a whole different area of law that we have to come up to speed on. We have enough on our plates right now. It's not as if we're out looking for extra things to do." ("Immigration Bill Has Police Uneasy," Denver Post, 4/22/02) Newark (CA) Police Department, Chief John R. Robertson "This is a democracy, based on freedom, and people have a right to basic human dignity. That means they're not going to be questioned just because of their appearance." ("Administration Split on Local Role in Terror Fight," The New York Times, 4/29/02)
Arlington (TX) Police Department, Chief Theron Bowman "We can't and won't throw our scarce resources at quasi-political, vaguely criminal, constitutionally questionable, not any other evolving issues or unfunded mandates that aren't high priorities with our citizenry." (Dallas Morning News, 4/5/02)
Hillsdale (NJ) Police Department, Sgt. Robert Francaviglia "We've been trying to get the immigrants in our town to believe that we're not like many of the governments in their old countries, governments that were corrupt and wanted to railroad them, not serve them."
("Policing Immigration," Bergen Record, 4/22/02)
Palisades Park (NJ) Police Department, Chief Michael Vietri "If the Justice Department deputizes us and we make an arrest, then what do we do? Send them to the county jail? Now I'd be paying my officers to go to the county courthouse or jail, or worse, farther away to Newark? Who's going to reimburse us? There are so many people who could get arrested in Palisades Park alone, you're talking maybe having to deal with county and federal courts. The could take days, or more the point about doing this to fight terrorism sounds like a decent idea, but when you go deeper, you see the possible effects." ("Policing Immigration," Bergen Record, 4/22/02)
Fairview (NJ) Police Department, Officer Ronald Bononno "They're trying to make a living, that's what they're doing here. Ninety percent of the times, these guys are victims of crime. Should they have come legally? Sure, they should have. But they're working here, standing right on the same corner where my grandfather Carmine did when he came from Italy, to wait for people to pick him up for work." ("Policing Immigration," Bergen Record, 4/22/02)
New York Police Department, Chief Michael Collins [A New York City executive order forbids the police department from checking the immigration status of crime victims, persons seeking assistance, or coming forward as witnesses] "This will not change. The most important thing is that people should not be afraid to come to us for help." ("INS Work Improper for NYPD," New York Daily News, 5/6/02) Police Associations
California Police Chiefs Association, Chief Bob McConnell, President
"[I]t is the strong opinion of the California Police Chiefs Association leadership that in order for local and state law enforcement organizations to continue to be effective partners with their communities, it is imperative that they not be placed in the role of detaining and arresting individuals based solely on a change in their immigration status." (Letter to Attorney General John Ashcroft, 4/10/02)
Police Foundation, Hubert Williams, President "The nature of the police role is to establish the trust and confidence of people living in a community. That is a vital link for police for information on criminal activity Where does this fit in the context of priorities? Would it go ahead of robbery, homicide, drug offenses, any of those things?"
("U.S. Weighs Local Role on Immigration," Chicago Tribune, 4/14/02)
National Latino Peace Officers Association, José Carlos Marmots, President
"If this means that we have to stop Mexicans and ask them for their documents, we certainly won't support this. That's called racial profiling, and we don't condone that type of action. We have other more pressing priorities that are more important to ensuring the safety of our community." ("U.S. May Let State, Local Authorities Enforce Federal Immigration Laws," Dallas Morning News, 4/3/02) Dallas Police Association, Senior Cpl. Glenn White, President
"The strain on local police already is enormous, and to ask us to arrest and detain immigrants is something the federal government needs to address by funding the INS some more and hiring additional personnel." ("U.S. May Let State, Local Authorities Enforce Federal Immigration Laws," Dallas Morning News, 4/3/02)
Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, Larry Erickson, Executive Director "We don't have enough people to do what we are supposed to do -- without taking on jobs that the federal government is supposed to do."
("Police balk at watching for illegal immigrants," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 5/2/2002)
Elected and Appointed Officials
Congressional Hispanic Caucus "If state and local agencies begin to enforce immigration law, immigrant communities might hesitate to access police services, report crimes, or even step forward as witnesses to provide important information about criminal acts To allow state and local law enforcement agencies to arrest suspected undocumented immigrants based on immigration status would erode the trust that has developed between police and community residents in working together to combat crime it could interfere with effective anti-terrorist initiatives as local resources are stretched and directed to federal efforts that belong at the hands of the Immigration and Naturalization Service Involving local police officers in enforcing complex immigration law without adequate training or experience would likely result in false arrests and the detention of people who merely appear to be foreign-born or who speak a language other than English."
(Letter to Attorney General John Ashcroft, 4/11/02) House Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt (D-MO) "Since September 11, the workload and responsibilities of law enforcement agencies have increased dramatically. Adding enforcement of immigration laws to their duties would increase this burden and, as local authorities have argued, would hurt efforts to build relationships with immigrant communities who would be afraid to report crimes." (Statement, 5/15/02)
Representatives Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL) and Illeana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL)
"We are concerned that your proposal to grant authority to local police departments to enforce federal immigration laws will irreparably damage the delicate relationship between police and immigrant communities and undermine effective immigration enforcement By giving local police departments the power to enforce immigration laws, community-policing efforts will be endangered. The trust these localities have built between citizens and officers will be hampered if the local police are employed as a federal agency."
(Letter to Attorney General John Ashcroft, 4/25/02) Representative Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
"Using local police in that manner would very well interfere with combating terrorism if local resources are stretched widely on routine immigration violations." ("Plan to Let Local Cops Enforce Immigration Law is Opposed," Arizona Daily Star, 4/15/02)
San Antonio (TX) Assistant City Manager Rolando Bono "As a city, we've opposed unfunded mandates. We will be concerned with the shift of additional responsibilities to the local level."
("Sheriff, Top Cop Blast INS Proposal," San Antonio Express News, 4/5/02)
Ohio Attorney General Betty Montgomery "What you don't want is people who are in this country legally being harassed or embarrassed as a result of a failure to educate our officers. We don't want to make it difficult for legitimate visitors to our country to enjoy this country."
("Plan Would Involve Police in Immigration Cases," Columbus Dispatch, 4/18/02)
Queens City (NY) Councilman and Former New York City Police Officer Hiram Monserrate "It would be a terrible mistake for the NYPD to participate in the enforcement of immigration laws. There has to be a positive police-community relation and if the NYPD gets involved in doing INS work, immigrants are going to trust the police even less."
("INS Work Improper for NYPD," New York Daily News, 5/6/02) Community Leaders and Advocates
Most Reverend Thomas G. Wenski, Auxiliary Bishop of Miami and Chairman, Committee on Migration of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
"We believe that if carried out, such proposals would undermine the safety of both immigrants and citizens, and would overburden law enforcement [Undocumented immigrants] will be less likely to report crimes that they witness and to cooperate with police and prosecutors in investigating and prosecuting crimes. This will hurt immigrants as well as the wider community, by undermining the efforts of law enforcement and local communities to fight crime." (Letter to Attorney General John Ashcroft, 4/23/02)
Several National Ethnic, Religious, Civil Rights, and Immigrant Advocacy Organizations
"We believe that expanding the purview of state and local law enforcement officers to include civil immigration law could have serious, detrimental effects on community safety. We fear that the damage this arrangement would do in eroding non-citizens' trust in law enforcement could have far-reaching and unintended consequences, and we respectfully ask that your administration reject this proposal."
(Letter to President George W. Bush signed by American Immigration Lawyers Association, Arab American Institute, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, League of United Latin American Citizens, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund, National Council of La Raza, National Immigration Forum, and Southeast Asia Resource Action Center, 4/24/02)
126 National and Local Organizations, Businesses, and Attorneys
"This ill-conceived policy reversal will almost certainly increase racial profiling of both immigrants and non-immigrants at the hands of law enforcement authorities any trust that currently exists will be shattered and violent crime against immigrants, from muggings to modern-day slavery, will almost certainly rise. The key to providing adequate police protection to immigrant communities is to build trust in the authorities, not to build new walls between the community and the police."
(Letter to President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft, 4/24/02)
National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium "We strongly oppose such a policy because of the extreme damage it would do to the ability of police to work with Asian Pacific American communities Because many hate crimes are targeted against immigrant communities, investigating those crimes will be made even more difficult if police are tasked with the responsibility of enforcing immigration laws [community members] will be even more afraid fewer witnesses will come forth, crimes will go unreported, and people will be less likely to report suspicious activity - including acts leading up to terrorism."
(Letter to the White House signed by Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance, AFL-CIO, Hmong National Development, Japanese American Citizens League, Korean American Coalition, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, National Federation of Filipino American Associations, Organization of Chinese Americans, and Southeast Asia Resource Action Center, 4/19/02)
Raul Yzaguirre, President and CEO, National Council of La Raza (NCLR)
"NCLR believes that extending immigration enforcement authority to local police would not make the nation safer from terrorism but, rather, would lead to the erosion of trust between communities and the police, which would make us all less safe By creating a climate of fear, DOJ's proposed action would prevent immigrants and others who live in tightly-knit communities from providing information about crimes and public safety that police need to be effective."
(Letter to President George W. Bush, 4/22/02) Frank Sharry, Executive Director, National Immigration Forum "If the Justice Department is going to give the green light to local law enforcement to cooperate with the INS, it'll jeopardize the efforts by local police to build relations with local communities. It's a classic post-Sept. 11 Justice Department move. They want to improve security, but they're driving away the very people who can provide help to law enforcement."
("Ruling Clears Way to Use Police in Immigration Duty," The New York Times, 4/4/02)
John Dulles, Regional Director, U.S. Civil Rights Commission, Denver, Colorado
"No other metropolitan area in the United States considered cross-deputization after Salt Lake City voted it down. Folks all over the country were aware of that happened in Salt Lake City, and even the Justice Department backed off to some extent Public safety police functions are not compatible with making determinations about who is in this country illegally. Most police departments have passed policies to limit cooperation with immigration authorities. They don't want a part of the community fearful of reporting crimes or cooperating."
("Rights Advocates Slam Plan for Local Police to Enforce Immigration Laws," Salt Lake Tribune, 4/5/02) Margie McHugh, Executive Director, New York Immigration Coalition
"This would have a devastating effect on immigrant communities because immigrants would feel they can't come forward to report crimes for fear of deportation." ("U.S. May Seek Local Aid in INS Enforcement," Newsday, 4/4/02)
Cheryl Little, Executive Director, Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center
"It's going to make our community less safe, because immigrants are going to be less likely to trust the local police. This is going to drive people further underground." ("Immigrant Activists Rip Proposal," Miami Herald, 4/25/02) Frank Delgadillo, Orange County (CA) Congregation Community Organization
"This is going to affect our community. As it is, people are afraid of the police. They're afraid to report what's happening in the community."
("Immigrants Worried, Coe Pleased by Proposal," Orange County Register, 4/4/02)
Teresa Ortiz, President, Casa Guanajuato (TX) "This is a step backwards for immigrants because it would only make us suspicious of our local police and that's not good in building trust, especially among recent immigrants." ("U.S. May Let State, Local Authorities Enforce Federal Immigration Laws," Dallas Morning News, 4/3/02)
Henry Lacayo, President, El Concilio del Condado de Ventura (CA)
"It's a bad, bad idea. Many immigrants are not being preyed upon by unscrupulous folks so if the police become involved in immigration enforcement this will drive them further underground." ("Proposal for Police to Act as INS Agents Denounced," Ventura County Star, 4/6/02)
Xuan-Trang Tran-Thien, Associate Director, Washington Alliance for Immigrant and Refugee Justice "If the Seattle Police Department is serious about community policing, then they need to develop trust within those communities ... including the immigrant or refugee communities."
("Police balk at watching for illegal immigrants," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 5/2/2002)
Pramila Jayapal, Director, Hate Free Zone Campaign of Washington
"We have tried this approach before in 1942 with the Japanese internment; we can't possibly repeat those experiments again. One of our biggest concerns is that policies like this could lead to increased racial profiling. . . . Immigration enforcement is a federal matter, and local police are responsible for protecting the communityall of the communityincluding immigrants and non-immigrants, citizens and non-citizens." ("Police balk at watching for illegal immigrants," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 5/2/2002)
Allan Wenick, Immigration Attorney, New York "Law enforcement resources are limited. They should be used to go after bad people, not immigrants who are only seeking a better life for themselves and their families." ("INS Work Improper for NYPD," New York Daily News, 5/6/02)
LOS ANGELESLAX Sweep Nets Illegal Immigrants
All but two were from Mexico. Most were headed to the East Coast.
By PATRICK McDONNELL, Times Staff Writer.More than 140 illegal immigrants have been arrested at LAX this week as part of a federal crackdown on smugglers using the airport as a transshipment point for illegal immigrants being funneled to destinations throughout the U.S., officials said Wednesday.
The operation will continue for several days and could result in a permanent presence of agents targeting outbound domestic passengers, said Thomas J. Schiltgen, district director in Los Angeles for the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
The sweep is aimed at curbing an increase in smugglers' use of LAX, officials say. The airport has long been known as a conduit for illegal immigrants smuggled across the U.S.-Mexico border and heading to jobs and family members across the country.
The operation, which began Monday in Terminal 1, netted 147 illegal immigrants in its first two days, officials said.
All but two were from Mexico. Most were headed to the East Coast. All are likely to be quickly returned to their homelands. Some had paid as much as $2,000 for the services of the smugglers, known as coyotes.Schiltgen called the action routine. The agency has periodically run such operations at LAX, although this was the first such INS action at the airport since Sept. 11.
The terrorist attacks prompted the federal government to boost security at airports nationwide.The profitable people-smuggling business generally declined following the attacks, authorities said, but it has appeared to be rising again in recent weeks.Federal authorities concede that such sweeps generally do not stop ongoing smuggling networks, but rather prompt the rings to seek other routes for their clients.Responding to questions from the Spanish-language media at a downtown news conference, Schiltgen denied that agents were targeting people from Mexico or Latin America. Agents look for certain clues, such as nervous demeanor or passengers who buy one-way tickets, he said. "We don't base our arrests on the color of somebody's skin," Schiltgen said.Most of those arrested were seized before they cleared security to board planes, he said, but a few were taken into custody at departure gates.
There was an article in the OC Register a while back that said that illegal aliens are going to other parts of the country because the competition for the unskilled jobs that they seek has driven the wages that employers pay down. They are seeking higher wages elsewhere. Anybody that thinks that this problem is not coming to a neighborhood near them has got their head in the sand.
There have been other articles in this forum about illegals and an invasion of our borders. In almost ALL of those articles, an inherent bigotry has risen to the surface in a number of posters who bind ALL Hispanics into the same group of 'invaders'.
It does this forum no honor.
The data here presents a picure of a flourishing portion of the population. One that will be dominant in the next few years. A number of states are that way now, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas to a degree. California was once part of the great Spanish empire, which stretched all the way to Canadian border.
I have posted many responses to these articles on illegals. I have been called 'apologist', 'stupid', 'ignorant', 'dumb', and a number of invectives that I will not post here. These people sound just like the liberals Ann Coulter identifies in her book.
A lot of the growing Hispanic population is becoming Republican by way of the values that exist in this party, family values, lower taxes, less government, each man free to make his or her success. Yes, there are those that want on the government dole, the free ride, but the same is true of some blacks and whites alike.
There are ways to solve the 'illegals' problem.
1. Close the border. Period.
2. All illegals in the country,at that time, will have to gain sponsership from a US citizen to apply for citizenship.
3. Any falling into the criminal world or refuse to register, are deported immediately, along with their familes.
4. Illegals registered and sponsered will have 3 months to pass the requirements of US citizenship, under a probationary period, including renunciation of citizenship of their former country.
5. ALL, and I mean ALL forms of government assistance is stopped until these conditions are met.
What has to be done is to think 'outside the box' on solutions to the problem. Short of rounding all the illegals up and holding them in 'detention camps', which would not only be impractical, but create an even larger bureaucracy at the INS than already exists. A 'Committee of State Security' perhaps? This has been suggested by a number of other posters in other forums. In that case, how do you identify the 'illegal' from the US citizen? We are not required to carry papers indentifying us as legal or illegal. How do you discern between US citizen of Hispanic culture, and illegal. What will be the criteria?
We are talking millions upon millions, as our so-called leaders stand in stone silence........
As long as we're thinking outside the box let's try some tried and true methods. Register all illegals and require them to carry the registration at all times. We can expand airport security to include roadside checkpoints and neighborhood sweeps. " Su papeles, por favor."
You're right that won't work because neither citizens nor illegals would have papers. We could just require everyone to carry papers. "Your papers please . . .or it's off to the camps."
Maybe we could go for something more permanent like identification numbers tattooed on the forearm or 222 tattooed on the forehead or, uh, 666.
We could require a citizen to sponsor every noncitizen but I supose that sponsorship could be withdrawn and the hapless soul sent bact to Mexico. Hurry with this one, I need "my" messican to mow the lawn.
Uh, no. the sky is fine, it's our borders that are bleeding....
Meanwhile the Mexicans who stayed behind have kind of drifted off and can't be found. Happens every time. It's quite a show.
Uh, if they are legal, why would they run?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.