Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Border blowback: Linda Bowles details dangerous U.S. immigration policies
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Tuesday, November 13, 2001 | Linda Bowles

Posted on 11/13/2001 1:13:36 AM PST by JohnHuang2

WND Commentary
Border blowback


© 2001 Linda Bowles

Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., is one of the few politicians in Washington, D.C., with the courage to speak out openly about America's dangerously flawed immigration policies and practices. The weekly publication Human Events selected a terse statement by Tancredo as its "Quote of the Week": "The U.S. can bomb Afghanistan to dust but terrorism will remain. In some bizarre thought process understood only in Washington, D.C., the possibility of tightening up immigration laws paralyzes most politicians."

America is being seriously damaged and endangered by uncontrolled immigration. But our elected officials studiously avoid facing the issue.

Although it is generally considered most insensitive to bring up such matters, Steven A. Camarota, research director of the Center for Immigration Studies, reports that the poverty rate for immigrants, defined as foreign-born U.S. residents, is 50 percent higher than that of natives. They and their U.S. born children account for 22 percent of all persons in the U.S. living in poverty.

When politicians deplore the number of people without health insurance, they conveniently neglect to mention that immigrants who arrived in the last 10 years and their U.S.-born children account for 60 percent of the increase in the size of the uninsured population.

When journalists and edu-crats discuss the problems of education in America – class size, high school dropouts, poor performance and costs – rarely do they explain that immigration accounts for essentially all the growth in the public school population over the past 20 years, and that currently there are about 9 million children from immigrant families in public schools. Nor do they mention that almost one-third of the immigrants arriving in America do not have a high school diploma – three times the rate for natives.

One powerful and courageous voice speaking for English as America's official language is that of John H. Tanton, M.D., founder of the Federation for American Immigration Reform and co-founder of ProEnglish. He reports that new data released by the U.S. Census Department show that the number of Americans who do not speak English has soared in the past 10 years. The number who do not speak English at all or speak it poorly has increased by 60 percent since 1990. Nearly 20 percent of Americans do not speak English in their own homes. Neither, of course, do their children.

Such reports are viewed as evidence of success in many quarters. In a Hoover Institution essay entitled "Bilingual Education: A Critique," Peter Duignan describes a growing problem: "Mexican American activists reject assimilation, insist on bilingualism and multiculturalism, and lay claim to Southwest America as belonging to Mexico! ... Their message is not pushing assimilation but rather the protection of the Spanish language and culture ... "

One sadly remembers the words of John Jay, recorded in the Federalist Papers: "Providence has been pleased to give us this one connected country, to one united people, speaking the same language."

The United States has no operative immigration policy. The evidence is clear. For example, of the 8 million to 10 million illegal aliens who live in the United States, between 250,000 to 300,000 of them have been brought to court and sentenced to deportation by federal judges. After their court hearings, these illegal aliens simply walked away and disappeared. The Immigration and Naturalization Service does not know where they are or what they are doing and has no plans to round them up and see that they leave the country.

Seventy percent of the cocaine smuggled into America comes across the Mexican border. Most of it comes from Colombia, home of the Marxist terrorist organization, Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, known as FARC.

According to a report from Reuters news agency, several weeks after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, D.C., FARC leader Jorge Briceno threatened to hit American targets "wherever they may be, until we get to their own territory, to make them feel the pain which they have inflicted on other peoples."

FARC has the means to move tons of cocaine across our borders. Who can say they would not use such means to move instruments of mass destruction into our cities?

It is time to face the reality that, according to no particular plan, America is being degraded, disunited and endangered by a powerful flow, wave after wave, legal and illegal, of poor, unskilled and uneducated people into our country, many of whom have no interest in becoming Americans or learning the English language. Unable to join the American mainstream, they will fester in ethnic ghettos, work for sub-standard wages, reproduce, vote the straight Democrat ticket and provide cover for terrorists.

As they say down Mexico way, "loco, completamente loco!"

For Education And Discussion Only. Not For Commercial Use.



TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 11/13/2001 1:13:36 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: Beccy
Eventually the politicians will get tired of looking over their shoulders trying to avoid terrorism and start thinking of making our country safe. The inconsistency of open borders and public safety cannot be ignored forever. We are fast approaching a showdown over our Southwestern region that resembles Kosovo and Chechnya seperatist movements that will create terrorism on a large scale.
5 posted on 11/13/2001 4:30:04 AM PST by meenie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Beccy
"We the People must fight to get our country back

Yes, and I believe the strategy has to be a third party movement that is based on fundamental American political values which draws from both existing political parties. I am convinced it could have enormous appeal to voters who want to be self-governing citizens rather than just "consumers" and "revenue generators" for the ruling elite.

There have been major party realignments in America before in which one of the political parties just goes away. Democrats and Republicans in Congress have spectacularly failed in their central duty of protecting Americans from foreign threat, both through terrorism and immigration, and they are continuing to fail us right now. Our political system is based on holding political officials accountable through the political system. This system has failed miserably, primarily because of a corrupt and biased media, and politicians no longer face any real consequences for failing in their duty to us. This must change if we are ever to recover our primary function as citizens of holding our elected officials accountable. Political organization is the key. Perot showed the appeal and the effectiveness of a reformist agenda combined with political organizational. Franklin told us it would be a struggle to "keep" the republic they had designed for us.

6 posted on 11/13/2001 5:08:38 AM PST by politeia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: politeia
"There have been major party realignments in America before in which one of the political parties just goes away."

Oh, really? Which party went away?

7 posted on 11/13/2001 6:24:40 AM PST by goodnesswins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
In the early 1800's, the Federalist party died or "went away" after the challenge from Jefferson's Democratic party, later called the Democratic-Republican party.
8 posted on 11/13/2001 8:01:53 AM PST by politeia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: politeia
Oh, Yeah...that ONE time about 200 years ago.....SORRY, but sidelight parties JUST don't MAKE it.....BUT, they do a good job of ripping apart the other parties, and causing problems all around.
9 posted on 11/13/2001 8:12:38 AM PST by goodnesswins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
No, there have also been major realignments of parties around the Civil War and again during the Depression when major shifts in popular opinion changed party allegiances and fundamentally altered the parties (I'm sure you are aware of how the Democratic party has changed its principles on fundamental issues since the Civil War!)

Rejecting a third party movement leaves as a reform strategy only the attempt to take over and structurally change one of the current two parties. This is something conservatives have tried to do with the Republican party for 30 years and they have been singularly unsuccessful. I believe this option for reform hasn't worked because the deck is stacked against it, and deliberately so. The two parties have designed primary systems that allow the existing ruling elites in each party to control voters choices. Only a new party can determine its own nomination process and offer voters a real choice of policies. Also, working within a party to achieve political reform ignores the opportunity for forging a coalition of people from both existing parties to form a new majority party. The current dissatisfaction with politics as usual is broadbased. Well, that is my argument for a third party movement. Since you reject my idea, I am sure you have thought of one of your own. What is it?

10 posted on 11/13/2001 1:01:15 PM PST by politeia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
Oh, really? Which party went away?

Also right before the civil war, the Whig party died and was replaced by the Republican Party. This was caused by a rift among the Whigs over the issue of the expansion of slavery into the territories. The issue was important enough to people so that most free soil Whigs left their party when it refused to endorse the position, and enough left so that the Whig party became too small to remain competetive and thus it died. Likewise the issue was important enough to enough free-soil Democrats so that they left their party over it, but not enough left to kill this party. The combinantion of free-soil former Democrats and free-soil former Whigs was large enough so that the new Republican party was strong enough to be a national party. It still was not strong enough, however, to win a national race until the Democrats had a disputed convention and the Democratic vote was split between two candidates in the general election. Lincoln would not have been elected otherwise.

You are right, though, such events are rare. I can only think of 2 times in our history when it happened, and it only happens when you get an issue comparable to slavery in its devisivness. I don't think immigration is a big enough issue, yet, to cause a major realignment. Major realignments in Partys, however, have happened repeatedly thoughout History. Reagan would not have been elected without one. People forget that tax cuts before Reagan were as taboo a topic among Republicans as immigration reform is today. I think are odds are much better at forcing a Party realignment than at creating a new party to replace the Republicans.

11 posted on 11/16/2001 1:11:13 PM PST by traditionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: politeia
Nope...don't have my own.....but I do like learning from others....thanks
12 posted on 11/16/2001 1:12:51 PM PST by goodnesswins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: JohnHuang2
The Trojan Horse is the oldest recorded military strategem....
14 posted on 11/18/2001 12:24:50 PM PST by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: candyman34
bump
16 posted on 11/18/2001 12:34:53 PM PST by junta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: JohnHuang2
I urge Freepers to support the lobbying efforts of Eagle Forum on this issue.

They are one of the few organizations mobilizing to effect real change on the U.S.'s crazy immigration policies.

Go here to read several interesting articles.

Go here to make a donation.

18 posted on 12/06/2001 11:27:59 AM PST by The Energizer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scratch shooter
You're wrong about those figures. I have seen the census bureau statistics, and they reveal that around 60% of the country's under-18 population is white. However, that is down by a lot compared to the past decades. In terms of over 18, around 76% of the population is white. Of course, these aren't actual numbers, but I'm going on memory.

I will agree, however, that there are serious balkanization factors that will become prominent in the next few decades. The third world is here, and I feel that the next five years will guide the future of our country. That is, I feel that we can get ahold of the problem, but the next five years offers the only time that I think that we'll be able to get control of it. After that, plus or minus two years, I feel that it will be too late.

19 posted on 12/06/2001 8:59:35 PM PST by FreedomFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson