Enemies at the gates? Try already inside-

[Nightshade]

By John Perazzo:

America’s military might has been offset by a weakness of spirit that has become a hallmark of the modern Western world. It is a frailty that derives entirely from the leftist worldview that has infected America over the past half-century. This view identifies Western (especially American) culture as a uniquely evil, exploitative player in the story of mankind, and depicts all acts of barbarism against the U.S. as wholly understandable reactions to American transgressions. It is a mindset that has gradually, incrementally, and inexorably made its “long march through the institutions,” -- the schools, the seminaries and churches, the media, the entertainment industry, the courts, and the political sphere -- just as the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci prescribed in the 1920s.

Gramsci understood that by poisoning the culture from within, and by so degrading and undermining the culture’s faith in itself, the American people could be compelled to believe, to their very marrow, that their heritage was in fact unworthy of defending against those who would destroy it under the banner of so-called “multiculturalism.” Gramsci and his successors were patient enough to allow this time-consuming process to unfold, knowing that the American way of life could be bled to death ever-so-slowly, almost imperceptibly, without the firing of a single shot until the time was just right. The fact that the person who ultimately may fire that shot is a seventh-century-style savage whose fanatical “religious” worldview bears no resemblance whatsoever to the ideals of Gramsci and his fellow Marxists, is not as strange as one might think. As bin Laden himself declared in a fatwa issued on Al-Jazeera Television just before American and British troops entered Iraq in March 2003: “The interests of Muslims and the interests of the socialists coincide in the war against the crusaders.”

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU): Former ACLU Executive Director Ira Glasser attributes the concerns that many Americans have about illegal immigration to a “wave of anti-immigrant hysteria.” Wade Henderson of the ACLU’s Washington, DC office claims that the desire to regulate immigration can be traced directly to “hostility motivated by nativism, racism, and red scare.” In May 2008, the ACLU produced a tearjerker advertisement lamenting how a fence somewhere along the U.S.-Mexico border had ruined Mother’s Day for a Mexican woman and her daughter by keeping them apart.

American Friends Service Committee (AFSC): Viewing the United States as the world’s primary agent of evil and exploitation, this group has posted on its website a detailed list of strategies by which illegal aliens -- in the event that they are interrogated, detained, or arrested -- can avoid cooperating with immigration authorities or police. According to AFSC, a border fence would “disrupt” area residents’ “way of life” and “has never proven to be a long-term, practical solution to the immigration dilemma.” The organization further contends that such a fence would constitute “a form of violence to the environment” because “it is expected to cause irreversible damage to the Tijuana River Estuary environs as well as cause erosion and flooding in Tijuana.”

Border Action Network (BAN): This neo-Marxist group seeks “to ensure that those who are most impacted [i.e., illegal aliens] by border and immigration policies are at the forefront of movements calling for human dignity and civil rights …” Advocating the dissolution of American borders, BAN calls for unchecked, unregulated migration into and out of the United States. The organization has filed lawsuits against what it calls “an ugly movement of armed, militia-style civilian groups” and “anti-immigrant, white supremacist groups” -- such as American Border Patrol and Ranch Rescue -- for their practice of detaining illegal aliens and calling government border agents to arrest them. BAN co-director Jennifer Allen said in 2002: “They [illegal immigrants] have civil rights and human rights that take precedence over defending the country.” Former BAN spokesman Chris Ford, for his part, expresses concern that “this [fence] plan will cause massive environmental destruction” affecting in particular the Sonoran Pronghorn, an animal that resembles an antelope and is considered an “endangered species.”

National Council of Churches (NCC): A longtime enemy of the United States, NCC in the 1950s and 1960s, under the rubric of charity, provided financial assistance to the communist regimes in Yugoslavia and Poland. In the 1970s it helped finance Soviet-sponsored guerrilla incursions into Zimbabwe, Namibia, Mozambique, and Angola. It the 1980s it contributed large sums of money to the Marxist Sandinista Party in Nicaragua and communist guerrillas in El Salvador. Moreover, the organization has supported Fidel Castro’s (and now his successor’s) regime in Cuba for decades.

In April 2008, NCC co-signed an interfaith letter to Congress expressing “grave concern over the environmental destruction currently occurring in the U.S.-Mexico border region” as a result of the “hasty construction of hundreds of miles of fencing along the border.” “The current path of the border fence,” NCC explained, “cuts through places like Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, home to over 500 species of plants, 50 species of mammals, and nearly 300 species of birds. Construction of the fence is severing migration routes and destroying thousands of acres of wildlife habitat. In Arizona alone, 39 species protected or proposed to be protected under the Endangered Species Act are being adversely affected by Border Patrol activities, including construction of the fence….”

Defenders of Wildlife (DOW): This environmentalist group has warned that the erection of a border fence will have “serious and lasting” effects on the region’s wildlife, water, and air. According to DOW associate Jenny Neeley, such a fence will significantly impact biological diversity along the border by preventing desert animals from moving around freely. “Right now,” she says, “on the U.S.-Mexico border there are 47 endangered species, including the jaguar, the ocelot, the lesser long nosed bat and numerous bird species.” Neeley further complains that the bright lights used by border patrol officers during overnight hours can cause great harm to “nocturnal animals.”

National Council of La Raza (NCLR): This organization favors amnesty for illegals already residing in the U.S., and open borders henceforth. In NCLR’s calculus, any restriction on the free movement of immigrants constitutes a violation of their civil liberties, and any reduction in government assistance to illegal border-crossers is “a disgrace to American values.” Thus NCLR supports continued mass Mexican immigration to the United States, and hopes to achieve, by the sheer weight of numbers, the re-partition of the American Southwest as a new state called “Aztlan” -- to be controlled by its alleged rightful owners, the people and government of Mexico. In October 2006, NCLR President and CEO Janet Murguía said that the prospect of a border fence “doesn’t solve the immigration issue, it makes it worse.”

Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF): Over the course of its 40-year history, MALDEF has undertaken numerous legal campaigns to abet the cause of illegal immigration. In 1994, for example, the organization condemned Operation Gatekeeper, a U.S. government program intended to restore integrity to a particularly porous stretch of the California-Mexico border. Claiming that this initiative was callously “diverting” illegal border-crossers “from California to the harsh and dangerous Arizona desert,” MALDEF charged that Americans opposing unrestricted immigration were motivated largely by “racism and xenophobia.”

In 2006 MALDEF’s Interim President and General Counsel John Trasviña called the prospective border fence “a travesty” that “will take years to complete and does nothing to address America’s immigration or labor needs.” An official MALDEF statement said that such a fence would “make illegal crossings more deadly and dangerous” and would cause hardship for “American families who want to be reunited with loved ones.”

League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC): In December 2005 LULAC created a website titled “WeAreRacists.com,” which portrayed the Minuteman Project -- a nonviolent organization of U.S. citizens who alert the Border Patrol to the presence of unauthorized border-crossers in the American Southwest -- as “an anti-immigrant group” composed of “racists, cowards, un-Americans (sic), vigilantes, [and] domestic terrorists” who are “often affiliated with white supremacy groups.”

LULAC opposes border-patrol policies that would authorize the U.S. military to prevent illegal immigration, on grounds that “military personnel are not trained for border patrolling and might easily violate the civil rights of those they intervene with.” José Velez, who headed the League from 1990 to 1994, has said that the U.S. Border Patrol is “the enemy of my people and always will be.” In 2006 LULAC National President Hector. M. Flores condemned the prospective security fence as “an affront to immigrant communities [that] will create a permanent scar in the relationship between the United States and our southern neighbors.” “Building a ‘Berlin’ style wall between ourselves and our neighbor,” he added, “is un-American, undemocratic, and unacceptable in a free society.

Democrats: In April 2008, fourteen House Democrats, including eight committee chairmen, said they would file a brief supporting a legal challenge to the Bush administration’s plans to finish erecting nearly 500 miles of fencing on the U.S.-Mexico border by the end of the year. Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers said, “Our responsibility to be stewards of the earth cannot be thrown aside for the sake of an ill-conceived border fence.”

[Cuda68]

Well said.

[Will Robinson]

The border fence is proven to work well in places it has been used. It's a simple common sense application of making it harder for unwanted trespassers to get into an area. It makes it possible for the already under staffed border patrol to intercept more illegal crossings.

Personally I think all the Latinos that cross in the desert should be walking through a gate after meeting some simple requirements. Like having an ID and a job waiting for them. We don't need to immediately make them eligible for citizenship and all the welfare and other entitlements that goes along with it but if they stay and work full time they should be able to get a visa just like other people who come here following the rules. But those rules are way screwed up!

I have a friend from England who comes here and wants to stay. He owns two houses here, one he rents out and one he lives in when he's here. He can't stay more than a month or so each visit without being in violation. He's been trying to get a green card for years! He's now opening a restaurant as part of a plan to qualify for a visa that will let him stay for extended periods of time. The British authorities told him he needs to invest close to a million dollars if he wants to be guaranteed acceptance, he can't afford that much but he's already spent around $50,000 to get the restaurant ready to open up. He'll be employing 20 to 30 people and have to show he's planning to open more restaurants in the near future to convince the government he's an asset to our economy before he'll be given a visa.

Now why is it a Latino can sneak across the border to San Francisco and get asylum, welfare, and all sorts of financial aid while he kills people and sells drugs but my law abiding friend can't get a frikken visa?!?!

[TIGERassault]

Question: why can't he get a visa?

Also, I'd think that an immigrant would have to be pretty god damn sneaky to be killing people and selling drugs without being arrested, let alone when he's still being monitored for welfare benefits!

[Grendel]

Now why is it a Latino can sneak across the border to San Francisco and get asylum, welfare, and all sorts of financial aid while he kills people and sells drugs but my law abiding friend can't get a frikken visa?!?!

That's a rethoric question I hope.

[Will Robinson]

Tigerassault - He can't get a visa because the rules say he has to qualify. He can get a visitor visa or whatever they call it, just like any other tourist from Europe but he can't work here legally unless he gets approved for a different kind of visa, or gets a green card which is equally difficult to get. If he was the only brain surgeon looking for work and there were no Americans qualified then any hospital could sponsor him saying they needed a brain surgeon and can't find one...

Now why is it a Latino can sneak across the border to San Francisco and get asylum, welfare, and all sorts of financial aid while he kills people and sells drugs but my law abiding friend can't get a frikken visa?!?!

That's a rethoric question I hope.

Well yea but it's indicative of the system being abused for reasons other than serving the general good that's for sure. My friend is a by the book law abiding person who is a gracious guest in every sense of the word. He would be an asset to any country he lived in and he's been trying to get in legally for years! Contrast that to some of the scumbags that are coddled and protected everyday:

SAN FRANCISCO—The scene repeats itself every day on city streets: A driver gets stuck bumper-to-bumper, blocking the intersection and another car's ability to complete a left turn.

San Francisco authorities say that was enough to prompt Edwin Ramos to unload an AK47 assault weapon on a man and his two sons, killing all three.

The murders immediately sparked public outrage, which only intensified when authorities revealed that Ramos, 21, is an illegal immigrant who had managed to avoid deportation despite previous brushes with the law.

from here

[woodchip]

What I am unclear about is why people have a love affair with Mexican illegal immigrants? They are not here because of political persecution from their home country. They are here to line their pockets. If they want to earn income, go thru the proper channels and get a temporary work permit. The liberal left seems to want to lionize the illegals as some sort Grapes of Wrath hero or runaway 1820's Georgia slave and protect them. Coming here under the fence should not make it easier to live here than the trouble the guy in Wills example has to go thru.

[TechPro]

What I am unclear about is why people have a love affair with Mexican illegal immigrants? They are not here because of political persecution from their home country. They are here to line their pockets. If they want to earn income, go thru the proper channels and get a temporary work permit. The liberal left seems to want to lionize the illegals as some sort Grapes of Wrath hero or runaway 1820's Georgia slave and protect them. Coming here under the fence should not make it easier to live here than the trouble the guy in Wills example has to go thru.

Maybe some are here to "line their pockets" ... but a LOT of them are here for a job, just about ANY job that can help them help their family to just survive.

Until you've lived in the surroundings and economics they live among in Mexico ... you have no right to presume they're just here to take advantage of our system.

[Dakatsu]

What I am unclear about is why people have a love affair with Mexican illegal immigrants? They are not here because of political persecution from their home country. They are here to line their pockets. If they want to earn income, go thru the proper channels and get a temporary work permit. The liberal left seems to want to lionize the illegals as some sort Grapes of Wrath hero or runaway 1820's Georgia slave and protect them. Coming here under the fence should not make it easier to live here than the trouble the guy in Wills example has to go thru.

Maybe some are here to "line their pockets" ... but a LOT of them are here for a job, just about ANY job that can help them help their family to just survive.

Until you've lived in the surroundings and economics they live among in Mexico ... you have no right to presume they're just here to take advantage of our system.

QFT

[Spidey]

Boy, people really have a way of taking posts the wrong way. I believe Woody was pointing out the difference between political & economic immigrates, and how some people gush over those who just come here for a better life, like they are escaping some giant evil.

If I’m wrong Woody…feel free to correct me.

[woodchip]

No, you are correct Spidey. America has a long list of immigrants that came here to escape poor economic conditions. Most all of them came, did the paperwork and became Americans. They did not protest or say that people already here had to learn Italian or Serbian or any other nations language. Those immigrants came to stay. They brought their families and suffered their fair share of derogatory comments by those who preceded them.

Yet today we have the Latinos who think we have to cater to them. Press one for English, press two for Spanish. Stage protest marches to embellish their illegal status. Don't even bother to try and learn English. Sneak in and then collect benefits they don't contribute too. Yet some even here want to gloss over the free ride and say, \"You don't know what poverty is like\". Perhaps not as I worked hard all my life. Still Latino poverty is no different than what the Poles and the Irish and the Italians lived with either. So what makes the Latino's so special that their poverty should be given higher status than anyone else's?

[MD-1118]

I have a Mexican friend who lives here in the States. He has no green card, makes slightly in excess of $2\\hr working 10+ hours a day, six days a week, supports his own parents and yet never utters a word about how hard he has it or has had it. He's a great guy. He should get a card, sure, but he's still a great guy, and I envy him in some ways... so please, don't take what I'm about to say the wrong way.

If Mexicans/Hispanics/Latinos/whatever you want to call them (or more precisely, whatever they want you to call them) want to come here to America, then sure, let 'em in... after they go through the proper channels and processes. If they don't do it the right way because they don't know there's a right way, then why don't we tell them? Put some signs on the river Grande's banks that say clearly in Spanish exactly what they need to do to be welcomed into America. Make damned sure they know what they need to do. After that, if they still try to sneak in, stop them by any means necessary. This goes for the people that supposedly swim to Florida from Cuba as well, along with any other illegal immigrants.

[Will Robinson]

....This goes for the people that supposedly swim to Florida from Cuba as well, along with any other illegal immigrants.

I'm with you but I just want to say that anyone who can swim from Cuba to Florida should be allowed to stay just because!

[Dakatsu]

I like the concept of giving illegals two choices; turn themselves into the government, where they will become American citizens, pay taxes, etc, or get deported. Give them a long time, lets say a month after the announcement to do so. Then there will be no excuse for being illegal.