American-Rattlesnake » Washington Times http://american-rattlesnake.org Immigration News, Analysis, and Activism Wed, 11 Apr 2012 05:26:21 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Speaking Frankly http://american-rattlesnake.org/2012/04/speaking-frankly/ http://american-rattlesnake.org/2012/04/speaking-frankly/#comments Wed, 11 Apr 2012 05:22:57 +0000 G. Perry http://american-rattlesnake.org/?p=9713

The withdrawal of Rick Santorum from the battle for the GOP nomination brings with it new speculation over the path ahead for conservatives. Santorum’s exit from the Republican presidential sweepstakes dashes the hopes some may have harbored of casting their ballots for a Gingrich-Santorum ticket this November. On the other hand,  Congressman Ron Paul’s supporters have seized upon this development in order to argue on behalf of their candidate as the only conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.

Whatever comes to pass, it will undoubtedly be an fascinating fall campaign. That’s why I urge all who are able to join me at the upcoming quarterly meeting of the New York City Indie Republicans in the Abe Lincoln Room of the 3 West Club. We’ll be discussing a host of issues-including, hopefully, the latest developments in the 2012 election-and you can ask me questions during what will likely be a lively Q&A session.

You can RSVP at the NYC Indie Republican Meetup page, where you’ll also find some information about a great liberty-oriented, independent-minded Republican organization which exists in the depths of Manhattan. Who would believe it?

Hope to see you all there!

 

]]>
http://american-rattlesnake.org/2012/04/speaking-frankly/feed/ 0
An Open Debate About Open Borders http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/12/an-open-debate-about-open-borders/ http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/12/an-open-debate-about-open-borders/#comments Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:21:58 +0000 G. Perry http://american-rattlesnake.org/?p=4087

One of the most persistent divides between traditional conservatives and their libertarian/anarcho-capitalist counterparts involves a fundamental philosophical disagreement about immigration. While most conservatives view immigration primarily through the lens of preserving American culture by only accepting those immigrants who are assimilable and will tangibly benefit our society in the future, a view expressed repeatedly during debates over illegal immigration in this country, many libertarians view the subject in an altogether different light. For them, the question is not so much whether a particular cohort of immigrants will be an asset to the United States but whether we have any right to prevent them from settling in this country in the first place, which many answer in the negative.

Libertarians extol the primacy of individual rights, which in this case entails the right to emigrate from your country of birth whenever you so desire-something that I don’t think any conservative would take issue with-and to immigrate to whatever country you want to live and/or work in for an extended period of time, which is where the divide between the two camps emerges. Libertarians view the issue as one of freedom of association-and by extension, contract-wherein willing employers, such as large agribusinesses and meatpacking plants, seek out willing employees coming from nations with under-performing economies that can’t meet the personal and financial needs of their citizens. They believe that the nexus between trade and unfettered migration is inextricable, if not completely self-evident, and that the two can not be severed if a nation hopes to grow its economy. While this may well be true as a matter of law, there are numerous holes in this thesis intellectually, which opponents of open borders-even anarcho-capitalists such as Hans-Hermann Hoppe-have exposed through well-researched arguments of their own.

However, underlying the debate over whether immigration and settlement is a natural right is the assumption that all libertarians/anarcho-capitalists agree on the immigration issue, which is not as much of  a given as it would seem on the surface of things. One of the things that I’ve attempted to do with American Rattlesnake is debunk commonly held assumptions about immigration issues, and the assumption that libertarians all subscribe to Gary Johnson’s point of view is one that needs to be reexamined. There are many libertarians and  anarcho-capitalists who recognize both the practical difficulties and existential problems inherent in society based upon unfettered immigration, especially one with the vast social welfare apparatus of the United States. One of the chief exponents of the view that welfare programs need to be curtailed in order to solve the immigration problem is Gary Johnson’s opponent in the Republican presidential race, Congressman Ron Paul. Paul has repeatedly emphasized the need to do away with the generous, taxpayer subsidized social welfare programs that-while not serving as the initial magnet-provide incentives for illegal aliens to extend their stay in this country indefinitely. The population density of legal immigrants is also heavily correlated with the availability of welfare benefits. Even acclaimed economist Milton Friedman, who held a rather benign view of immigration in general, emphasized the incompatibility of a welfare state with unfettered immigration.

The same opinion is held by many libertarians today, including self-professed constitutionalist Andrew Napolitano, who views Arizona’s landmark immigration law primarily through the prism of the Constitution’s supremacy clause and potential violations of the 4th Amendment via racial or ethnic profiling by law enforcement officers. I’m not sure that the Constitutional objection to statewide laws is dispositive, because-as Andrew McCarthy has pointed out repeatedly in National Review-there is no precedent for prohibiting states from enforcing laws that are consistent with federal statutes. Furthermore, if we look to the broader issue of legal immigration, there’s nothing to suggest that the men who drafted the United States Constitution supported the sort of unfettered immigration we have endured since passage of the Hart-Celler Act fundamentally altered this nation’s demographic destiny. This is a concept that is seldom grasped by arm-chair commentators on immigration these days, whose default option is to repeat the platitudinous-not to mention, factually incorrect-bromide that we are a “nation of immigrants.” What they neglect to mention is that most this nation’s founding fathers would have been implacably opposed to the present lassez-faire system of immigration, a fact that Thomas Woods-as anti-statist an individual as you’ll find among academics-expertly limns in this Human Events column published during the height of the amnesty debate in Washington D.C.

Yet, even if we were to concede that there’s no firm historical or Constitutional foundation for this nation’s current open borders policies, can it not be argued that there is a compelling moral case for the views espoused by those at the Wall Street Journal editorial boardCato Institute, Reasonoids, and other trendy, beltway cosmotarians? You would definitely think so if you took their arguments at face value. The notion that we have no moral basis for barring certain immigrants from entry into the United States is certainly widespread in certain libertarian circles, but I don’t believe that makes the idea, ipso facto, libertarian. Julian Simon, in a 1998 essay published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies, articulated the perspective felt by many that individual autonomy takes precedence over other “public” goods, including our national borders. In an anarcho-capitalist reality, nation-states would not exist, therefore deciding who should or should not be admitted to your nation would be a moot point.

But while it might seem logical that freedom of movement, freedom of association, and freedom of contract-and at its most essential level, the individual him or herself-are all prioritized over the wishes and feelings of citizens who have a vested interested in preserving the character of their nation, there are those that don’t think these competing values are necessarily mutually exclusive. In a persuasive essay written for Lew Rockwell several years ago, N. Stephan Kinsella made a very compelling argument that while the disposition of property in our society is unjust-insofar as the state has no right to expropriate land that rightfully belongs to individuals-so long as that property is entrusted to the state it has a responsibility to act as caretaker for the rightful owners. In this case, it has the responsibility to prevent the ingress of people that citizens do not want to welcome into their country. While those who are opposed to communitarianism in even its most minimal form might reject Kinsella’s public pool analogy, I think he makes a convincing case that some prophylactic measures need to be enforced to prevent the exploitation of your property-even if it’s already been subjected to theft by the state.

There are many cogent arguments against the current trendy libertarian support for open borders, several of them outlined by the first presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party, John Hospers, in paper published by the Journal of Libertarian Studies over a decade ago entitled A Libertarian Argument Against Open Borders. The concluding paragraph of the essay is especially perceptive in its analysis of the problem:

Occasionally, we hear the phrase “limousine liberals” used to describe the members of the liberal establishment who send their children to expensive private schools while consigning all the others to the public school system, which educates these children so little that by the time they finish the eighth grade they can barely read and write or do simple arithmetic, or make correct change in a drug store. It would be equally appropriate, however, to describe some other people as ”limousine libertarians” —those who pontificate about open borders while remaining detached from the scenes that their “idealism” generates. They would do well to reflect, in their ivory towers, on whether the freedom they profess for those who are immigrants, if it occurs at all, is to be brought about at the expense of the freedom of those who are not.

This passage describes, in a nut shell, the quintessence of cosmotarianism, and why most Americans-and even some in the libertarian movement-continue to reject it. I could post the most meticulously researched George Borjas journal article, the most statistically devastating backgrounder from the Center for Immigration Studies, or the most irrefutable essay by Mahattan Institute scholar Heather Mac Donald. And although all of these sources are invaluable in the fight to define the terms of this debate, they wouldn’t hold a candle to the self-evident fact that none of the greatest exponents and defenders of open borders, be it Tamar Jacoby, or Jason Riley, or Nick Gillespie, abide by their own exhortations. None of these individuals partake of the glorious mosaic which their unyielding ideology has done so much to create.

You won’t find many Reason Magazine editors or Cato Institute scholars living in Bergenfield, New Jersey, Maywood, California, or Eagle Pass, Texas. Why, you might ask? Because they would rather pass off the tremendous costs of their bankrupt philosophy onto ordinary Americans than to admit that they might just be wrong. These people are insulated from unfettered immigration’s worst effects, including chronic unemployment, violent crime, and environmentally devasting pollution from Arizona to California and throughout the country. They have the luxury of ignoring the impact of this country’s changing demographic profile while promoting the patently absurd notion that our open borders are a boon to all but the small percentage of high school dropouts.

What’s more, they make the equally ludicrous assertion-outlined in the Caplan speech above-that importing millions of unskilled, uneducated immigrants, who will be dependent upon costly government services, from quasi-socialist nations will expand this nation’s economic liberty. Forget the fact that we now enjoy less economic freedom than our northern neighbors, a development concurrent with the greatest expansion of immigration in this country’s history, the entire premise underlying this concept is flawed. You do not build a prosperous, 21st century, post-industrial society around foreigners from countries with low human capital. And the amount of time, energy and economic resources that need to be shifted in order to improve the educational prospects and earning potential of these immigrants, e.g. the billions funneled into ESL programs each year, is so cost prohibitive that it outweighs whatever benefits can be gleaned from such an arrangement.

Another seeming inconsistency in the archetypal libertarian solution to our immigration problem is the reluctance of most libertarians to support any sort of relief for American taxpayers who are tasked with paying for millions of illegal aliens and immigrants who are dependent upon costly social services. Particularly, public schooling and emergency health care. Invoking Friedman’s argument once again, we find that while many libertarians will concede that dependency upon welfare programs is a bad thing they will do nothing to limit access to these programs by illegal aliens or permanent residents. To the contrary, if any such bill-which is immigration neutral-is proffered, they will stalwartly oppose it. Just ask new Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson, who supports the DREAM Act, despite the fact that taxpayers would be subsidizing the in-state tuition discounts of its recipients. Paleolibertarian writer Ilana Mercer deftly skewers  purported libertarians who routinely call for the abolition of the welfare state while adding a proviso that excludes immigrants and illegal aliens from the fiscal demands of their libertopia.

True believers in liberty, like Mercer and the late Murray N. Rothbard, recognize the inherent contradiction in persuading your fellow Americans to reject the embrace of the state while simultaneously welcoming millions of non-Americans into the country who prefer a larger and more intrusive government in almost every respect into our society. They realize that the banal platitudes used to support unfettered immigration are grossly inaccurate, if not transparent lies. They also realize that the interests of the National Association of Manufacturers, the Chamber of Commerce, the Farm Bureau, and the hospitality industry do not necessarily coincide with the interests of the free market, and that to a large extent our current immigration policy is another form of corporate welfare, which putative libertarians would be quick to denounce in any other context. The time-saving, productivity-increasing technological innovations that would normally be welcomed by these same individuals are rejected by those who apparently think pre-industrial stoop labor is the best method of improving  our agricultural production. Finally, they recognize that the  utopian, globalist conception of freedom-where people living in Gabon or the Hadhramaut have just as much say in how we are governed as American citizens living in New York-contravenes the distinctively American, Constitutional, federalist, representative republic designed by this nation’s founding fathers.

In short, the issue before the house is not whether it is an abandonment of principle for libertarians to embrace sensible immigration restrictions, it’s why institutional libertarians representing organizations like the Cato Institute and the Reason Foundation have stifled an honest, open intellectual debate about this subject. Even as the negative repercussions of our government’s devotion to open borders become harder to ignore for all but the most oblivious, the gatekeepers of respectable opinion on this subject continue to narrow the parameters of discussion to their own narrow, ahistorical perspective. I don’t expect that to change any time in the near future, but those of us who want an intellectually honest debate about the most important issue of our time can at least begin to clarify its terms, if for no other reason than to educate those novices interested in how mass immigration has impacted our society who are asking themselves how they should view these changes from a liberty-oriented perspective.

 

 

]]>
http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/12/an-open-debate-about-open-borders/feed/ 4
Laboratories of Democracy http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/12/laboratories-of-democracy/ http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/12/laboratories-of-democracy/#comments Thu, 15 Dec 2011 05:29:08 +0000 G. Perry http://american-rattlesnake.org/?p=7461

John, a member of both NY ICE and the Republican Governors Association, went to the RGA’s annual meeting held in Orlando, Florida earlier this month. In addition to the recreational activities-which looked like a blast-he also had the chance to meet some of the nation’s governors, including two who are on the front lines of the battle to enforce the immigration laws our current administration has so woefully neglected.

Here he is with Governor Bob McDonnell, who has had a spotty record on immigration issues in the past.

Governor Martinez, who’s fought valiantly to reverse New Mexico’s reputation as a document mill for illegal aliens, was also in attendance.

As was Ohio governor John Kasich, who up to this point has been reluctant to embrace the cause of immigration enforcement.

Finally, one of the most exemplary state executives when it comes to these issues, Governor Mary Fallin. Not only has she wholeheartedly supported Jan Brewer and the people in Arizona in their fight against the Obama Justice Department, Mexico, and scads of well-paid lawyers, but she made immigration enforcement a central plank in her election platform.

Let’s hope that 2012 sees the election of many more politicians in the mold of Governor Fallin, and that their job will be made easier by a less obstructive White House which only seems interested in rewarding people who’ve broken the law.

]]>
http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/12/laboratories-of-democracy/feed/ 0
Railroaded http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/10/railroaded/ http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/10/railroaded/#comments Fri, 28 Oct 2011 23:33:39 +0000 G. Perry http://american-rattlesnake.org/?p=5494

Most of you who are regular readers of American Rattlesnake are aware of our continuing focus on the plight of Border Patrol Agent Jesus Diaz. Now, it appears that Agent Diaz has been convicted and given a two year prison sentence for arresting a fifteen year-old, illegal alien drug smuggler. This prosecution, and ultimately conviction, was undertaken by President Obama’s Justice Department at the behest of the Mexican government-a government that does not recognize our border and encourages its nationals to break our immigration laws-through its consulate in Eagle Pass, Texas. This occurred after Agent Diaz was cleared of any wrongdoing by both DHS’s Office of Inspector General and ICE’s Office of Professional Responsibility, but these exonerations were not enough to satisfy an administration that is intent upon dismantling any and all attempts at securing our southern border. 

The statement issued by the National Border Patrol Council-the union that represents the 17,000 non-supervisory Border Patrol agents in the United States-illustrates the deeply ingrained hostility exhibited by the Western District of Texas when dealing with cases involving Border Patrol agents. The fact that we even have to discuss this issue after the abuse of prosecutorial discretion in the cases of agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compeon-another instance of our government abandoning dedicated law enforcement officials in order to sate the blood lust of the Mexican government-is evidence of how skewed the priorities of the Executive branch remain.

One of the few bright spots about Agent Diaz’s conviction-if any can be found in such a heinous miscarriage of justice-is the realization that it will put a spotlight on the case of a man wrongfully prosecuted, one who should have been lauded for doing his job correctly, not persecuted by time-serving bureaucrats who could care less about protecting ordinary American citizens. For more information about how you can help spread the word about this ongoing travesty of justice, I suggest you visit the Law Enforcement Officers Advocates Council, which has been instrumental in speaking out on behalf of Agent Diaz during this tumultuous time. 

We can’t let an innocent man be punished for the unthinkably craven and misguided policies of the federal government. 

 

]]>
http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/10/railroaded/feed/ 0
All in the Family http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/08/all-in-the-family/ http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/08/all-in-the-family/#comments Mon, 29 Aug 2011 04:05:44 +0000 G. Perry http://american-rattlesnake.org/?p=4412

In what has become an increasingly routine occurrence, an illegal alien was arrested last week for crimes committed in Deval Patrick’s Massachusetts. The fact that someone here illegally would be detained for crashing into the car of a Massachusetts police officer is not surprising, unfortunately. What makes this particular case of criminality unique, however, is that the perp in question is Onyango Obama, the half-uncle of the President of the United States, Barack Obama. Like many illegal alien absconders,  ICE has an outstanding warrant for his arrest, and has in the past ordered him deported to Kenya.

Whether this particular Obama relative falls under  the purview of the administrative amnesty his administration is planning to implement is a question left unanswered. However, the fact that his first response, upon being arrested, was to demand a telephone call to his half-nephew in the Oval Office demonstrates the impunity with which he-and millions of other illegals-violate the law. He needn’t fear being punished, let alone being deported. And the staggering sense of entitlement felt by Onyango isn’t limited to him alone, as our previous reportage on Aunt Zeituni, another member of the extended Obama clan, makes clear.

While I would like to think that President Obama’s unstinting support for open borders, and concomitant disregard for our nation’s immigration laws, is borne out of political conviction-however misguided and destructive-the fact that so many members of his extended family benefit from this unequal application of the law smacks of nepotism. After all, were you or I detained by the police for driving under the influence, I doubt we could fall back on the excuse that we were distant relations of the President. Just like Aunt Zeituni, I doubt Uncle Onyango will be held accountable for his actions. Apparently, being illegal-or even doing things illegal while you’re illegal-really isn’t a crime.

]]>
http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/08/all-in-the-family/feed/ 0
Policy Priorities http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/06/policy-priorities/ http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/06/policy-priorities/#comments Wed, 01 Jun 2011 04:02:55 +0000 G. Perry http://american-rattlesnake.org/?p=3100  

I’ve been remiss in addressing this subject, but I think that the recent Supreme Court decision mandating the eventual release of thousands of prisoners currently incarcerated in California’s penal system is worth commenting upon for several reasons.

There is obviously the question of whether courts are excessively involved in micromanaging statewide corrections facilities, as well as a debate over whether the fiscal illiteracy and general profligacy of the California state legislature paved the way for this dramatic ultimatum from the Supreme Court. However, I’d like to address another aspect of this issue, which involves abiding by the Court’s decision without endangering the lives and security of Americans. 

I believe the Washington Times has stumbled upon a perfect solution-or as perfect as can be devised, given the exigent circumstances-to California’s dilemma. Namely, reach a memorandum of understanding with the federal government that would entail the deportation of an estimated 19,000 illegal aliens serving prison time in that state’s correctional facilities. Considering Governor Jerry Brown’s ambiguous record in opposing illegal immigration, it’s far from certain that he would embrace such a course of action. However, as the Times notes in the editorial above, less than two years ago the idea of alleviating California’s budget woes by repatriating foreign nationals imprisoned in California was openly discussed. 

Although deporting the sub-population of California inmates that consists of illegal aliens will not completely resolve the prison crisis, it will be a step in the right direction, not only in terms of satisfying the Court’s ruling, but in ensuring the security of ordinary Californians. As Heather Mac Donald pointed out in her congressional testimony several years ago, their state is the American epicenter of criminal alien gangs, such as MS-13, the 18th Street Gang, and other predominately Mexican and Central American gangs that wreak havoc on a daily basis within Los Angeles. If California decides not to pursue this tack, it will be a decision born of political expediency and shameless pandering, not made with the best interests of California residents at heart.

]]>
http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/06/policy-priorities/feed/ 0
Barack Obama’s Alternate Reality http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/05/barack-obamas-alternate-reality/ http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/05/barack-obamas-alternate-reality/#comments Thu, 12 May 2011 06:33:27 +0000 G. Perry http://american-rattlesnake.org/?p=2764  

Yesterday the President delivered his much-anticipated address on immigration at the Chamizal National Memorial Park, a landmark that commemorates the settlement of  a century-old border dispute centered around the Rio Grande, which has traditionally served as the demarcation line between what is Mexico and what is the United States.

Unfortunately, Barack Obama used the occasion to yet again smear honest opponents of his administration’s open borders policy, obfuscate what the White House has actually done to secure the border, ignore the catalog of horrors occurring in Ciudad Juarez-El Paso’s neighboring city across the border-and engage in boilerplate rhetoric intended to stoke one of the Democratic Party’s key constituencies for the upcoming 2012 presidential election.

National Review has published a pretty devastating refutation of almost every word uttered by the President, which takes the form of an NRO symposium that includes luminaries on this subject such as the great Heather Mac Donald and Victor Davis Hanson. Although not much can be added to the thorough dissection submitted by NR, I will address one issue raised by President Obama’s speech that is of particular importance. That subject being the subservience he once again showed towards our southern neighbor.

In an incisive article about the President’s speech, The Washington Times described the symbolic representation of this subservience, which takes the form of a 300 foot-tall Mexican flag that spans half of a regulation-sized football field and dominated the optics of Barack Obama’s highly-publicized speech. Perhaps the choice of this venue-along with the unsettling visual of a Mexico figuratively dominating an American state that had obtained its independence from a military dictatorship over a century and a half ago-was unintentional. However, you have to bear in mind that this is the same president who allowed the Mexican head of state, Felipe Calderon, to lecture Congress about its responsibilities to Mexico. The same speech that, need I remind you, was lustily applauded by Mr. Obama’s open borders friends on the Democratic side of the aisle, as well as the two cabinet members charged with enforcing American immigration law, Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. 

Yes, Mexicans do have the right to take pride in their country in a manner they see fit, even if everyone else regards it as a tactless, gauche display of jingoism and a figurative thumb in the eye to American “yanquis.” Yet, just as the former Mexican president believes that his country is a “sovereign nation,” so too do the vast majority of American citizens, even if their president and his cabinet officers do not share that view. That’s why President Obama’s speech was so disappointing on such a fundamental level. Beyond the lies, beyond the refusal to admit that his administration is not doing all it can to enforce the law-which would include punishing states and localities that refuse to abide by federal immigration law-there was a disconcerting willingness on the President’s part to cede a vital part of our American heritage in order to placate domestic political constituencies and foreign countries that do not feel any allegiance towards America’s history and values.

The words of Rick Melendrez, a Texan who is both Hispanic and a Democratic activist-presumably, someone whose opinions President Obama would at least entertain, if not value-are instructive in this regard. His work to construct an American flag to rival that of the garish Mexican standard shadowing the border is not simply a fit of pique, or chest-beating American bravado. It is a reflection of a deep and abiding patriotism that many Americans-even those Americans whom President Obama condescendingly believes do not value their citizenship-share and want to express publicly. 

The men who stood up to defend the Alamo, and who fought and died in order to obtain independence for Texas from a brutal, military autocracy-many Tejanos among them-shared Mr. Melendrez’s sense of pride and patriotism. Barack Obama might not realize this, but his speech yesterday was not only an insult to those Americans who listened to it-with the exception of the shills and cronies that were his intended audience-but an insult to the memory of those who gave up everything in order to preserve the Texas that is uniquely and distinctly American, not merely an appendage of Mexico. That perhaps, is the most galling aspect of the President’s deeply troubling speech. 



]]>
http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/05/barack-obamas-alternate-reality/feed/ 1
Criminals And The Communities Who Love Them http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/01/criminals-and-the-communities-who-love-them/ http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/01/criminals-and-the-communities-who-love-them/#comments Sun, 23 Jan 2011 16:58:55 +0000 G. Perry http://american-rattlesnake.org/?p=1781

A story so familiar to us that I almost hesitate to post it. Yes, yet another community-not a community of Americans, mind you-is outraged that the federal government is enforcing laws that criminalize being a criminal.

Here’s the full, disgusting story.

Essentially, the Department of Homeland Security arrested or detained several dozen illegal aliens who had been engaging in document fraud, identity theft and unspecified other crimes within Ellensburg, Washington. Of course, this has prompted howls of anguish and fury from the community of illegal aliens that DHS has targeted.

As we’ve seen in the past, this hysterical reaction is nothing new, unfortunately. The heretofore lax, tacitly pro-amnesty leaders of federal agencies charged with ensuring our nation’s homeland security and the integrity of its borders decide to finally crack the whip and stage an immigration raid. The “community,” filled with people who were never granted permission to remain in this country and led by opportunistic politicians, then proceeds to bemoan the harsh tactics of federal law enforcement agencies.

This is something that we’ve become accustomed to, but something else that we seem to have become inured to is the continued indifference of these same agencies to the threats posed by illegal aliens. You need go no further than the bottom of the article I’ve linked to in order to discover how little the federal government’s attitudes towards IAs has changed, despite the new administration.

DHS said the 16 others were taken into custody on administrative immigration violations. Three of them were released “for humanitarian reasons” while they await a hearing before an immigration judge, and the rest are in the custody, according to DHS.

In other words, Catch and Release. The fact that this practice continues despite its lethal consequences illustrates the fundamental lack of seriousness of our government in addressing this issue. The fact that this raid occurred is good news, but it doesn’t mitigate the harm inflicted by the government’s haphazard enforcement of our laws. It certainly doesn’t do anything to address the fact that there are large swathes of this country filled with people who view those laws with as much indifference-if not antipathy-as the chief executives of our nation’s top immigration enforcement agencies.

Something in this equation has to change if we are to ever hope of making progress in reasserting our national sovereignty.

]]>
http://american-rattlesnake.org/2011/01/criminals-and-the-communities-who-love-them/feed/ 0
Flyboys http://american-rattlesnake.org/2010/11/flyboys/ http://american-rattlesnake.org/2010/11/flyboys/#comments Sat, 06 Nov 2010 08:02:46 +0000 G. Perry http://american-rattlesnake.org/?p=1253

You would think that after the September 11th massacres, the United States would be a little more selective of who it allows to participate in flight-training programs. You would think, but you would be wrong. According to the New York Times, 33 Brazilians in this country illegally-and awaiting deportation-were allowed to take lessons at a flight academy just outside of Boston. They were taught (quelle surprise!) by an illegal alien, who just happens to be from Brazil.

Now, what does this story tell us?

1. Despite the rosy picture painted by the Department of Homeland Security, the implementation of recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission Report is sorely lacking, and in some cases, non-existent.

2. While the Transportation Security Administration serves some purpose in making a dent in this country’s chronic unemployment, more often than not it does not fulfill its intended purpose, unless that purpose is to lull the public into a false sense of security.

3. Finally, and most importantly, this report substantiates the charge that the hierarchy of ICE is more concerned with face-saving measures and publicity stunts, and policies that are astoundingly irrelevant the agency’s mission, than actually ensuring that its agents receive adequate support to bolster this nation’s defenses against threats originating overseas and potentially lethal foreign nationals transgressing our borders.  

In short, ten years after the ineptitude of federal agencies allowed Islamic terrorists to enter our country and obtain the weapons necessary to murder thousands of American citizens, we are still stumbling along in the dark.

]]>
http://american-rattlesnake.org/2010/11/flyboys/feed/ 0
Catch And Release http://american-rattlesnake.org/2010/08/catch-and-release/ http://american-rattlesnake.org/2010/08/catch-and-release/#comments Wed, 04 Aug 2010 01:43:42 +0000 G. Perry http://american-rattlesnake.org/?p=467

Yet another victim of de facto amnesty lost her life this weekend. And while open-borders enthusiasts would like to minimize the human toll illegal aliens impose on our society-or bring up the fascinating, but ultimately irrelevant, observation that there are American citizens who commit equally heinous crimes-the truth is that Carlos Montano is not a bad seed, but the tip of the iceberg.

]]>
http://american-rattlesnake.org/2010/08/catch-and-release/feed/ 0