If an illegal immigrant can openly show his face on national television and divulge many details about his life and circumstances, apparently without fear of detention or deportation, how can Americans have any confidence that the government will enforce the proposed new immigration law?At 6:43 am EDT this morning, CNN ran a segment sympathetic to illegal aliens, suggesting that the proposed immigration law created too many hurdles for them. "American Morning" host Alina Cho narrated the piece, which focused on an illegal Mexican immigrant in New York City. Among the details about him that were, with his obvious cooperation, revealed:
- His name, apparently not an alias, is Juan. He is from Mexico. We saw and heard him in a completely open and undisguised manner throughout the segment.
- He is a cashier in a wine store in New York City, where he earns $400/week. Considerable footage of the interior of the store and the street on which it is located were aired.
- Juan has a "long-time partner," Reina, and two children. Footage of Reina and the interior of his apartment were shown.Story Continues Below Ad ↓
- Reina is apparently also an illegal, since we were told she would have to pay the same $5,000 fine as Juan
- We were shown footage of what was apparently the outside of Juan's home, and of his neighborhood, with Juan, Reina and the children walking down the street.
- We were told that Juan's goal is to open a tae-kwan-do studio, and we saw Juan working out inside such a studio.
Given all the information about Juan, his family, job and home that the segment revealed, you would think an investigator could determine his identity with ease. Yet Juan was obviously unconcerned about that possibility. If illegals can so brazenly identify themselves under current law, why should Americans have any confidence that the government will strictly apply future regulations that would call for massive administration and enforcement for millions of people?
Contact Mark at mark@gunhill.net
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I'm trying to imagine the t
May 22, 2007 - 08:26 ET by sarcasmoI'm trying to imagine the treatment anyone who predicted the exact situation we have today would have gotten after the 1986 amnesty-they-didn't-want-to-call-amnesty...
JMR
Exactly, sarky, but it's even worse than that
May 22, 2007 - 10:19 ET by RJIt's even worse than that, sarky:
The amnesty of 1986 was supposed to be a "one time only" amnesty. Yet since 1986, Congress passed a total of 7 amnesties for illegal aliens:
http://www.theamericanresistance.com/issues/amnesty.html
quoted Juan as saying the bil
May 22, 2007 - 08:27 ET by dscottquoted Juan as saying the bill is a "trick," in that he's worried that once he returns to Mexico, as required under the proposed law, the U.S. government won't let him back in the country.
Curses, the man is too smart. He knows very well that ICE will not let him back in the country if he has any convictions. We can thank Homeland Security for information sharing between law enforcement and ICE. That's right Juan it's just a clever ploy on our part to boot you from the country, ok we'll get you on the next sweep.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
I don't understand how any ar
May 22, 2007 - 08:28 ET by Phan of TruthI don't understand how any argument could possibly be made beyond "illegal." Nothing but "Yeah, but...s."
I can save our Congress a l
May 22, 2007 - 08:39 ET by DingbatI can save our Congress a lot of time: simply take the immigration rules of Mexico, translate them to English and implement them. Problem solved. As one who RV's in Mexico a lot and who has done research on their long term stay policy I can tell you that THEY are very strict. Just a for instance: to get their equivalent of a green card, you must prove (using months of original bank statements) regular, steady, monthly income of about $2000. Also cannot have a police record. Also you cannot participate in the political process, even writing letters to the editor.There are other rules, that if the US were to apply them, Senior Blovator Kennedy would whine like the stuck pig he is. And, you can bet they do not have a catch and release policy.
Before a Lib whines: I love Mexico, I love the people. When we go there we try to speak Spanish (and shame on us if we cannot understand them in their country) and we follow their rules. It is their country and if I want to be there then I must follow their rules and customs. I expect the same thing from guests to the US.
Glad you brought this up Ding
May 22, 2007 - 10:53 ET by BeowulfGlad you brought this up Ding. I just had a friend research and provide me a list of pertinent Mexican immigration laws:
1. No special bilingual programs in the schools, no special ballots for elections, and all government business are conducted in their language.
2. Foreigners do NOT have the right to vote, no matter how long they've been there.
3. Foreigners can NEVER hold political office.
4. Foreigners will not be a burden to the taxpayers. No welfare, no food stamps, no health care, nor any other government assistance programs.
5. Foreigners can invest in Mexico, but it must be an amount equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.
6. If foreigners want to buy land that is okay, BUT options will be restricted. You are not allowed to own waterfront property. That property is reserved for citizens naturally born in Mexico.
7. Foreigners may not protest; no demonstrations, no waving a foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing their president or his policies. If you do you will be sent home.
8. If you do come to Mexico illegally, you will be hunted down and sent straight to jail.
The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers
Here's a Trick For You!
May 22, 2007 - 09:04 ET by OldSailor88Tell "Juan" that his employment opportunities are much better in Oklahoma. You think any other state in the union has the huevos to pass this legisltation? It would be really funny if Senator Mrs. Bill Clinton's adopted state would pass it. Then we won't have to worry about the Fed's "tricks" to get poor "Juan" home.
http://newsbusters.org/node/12868#comment-343700
Back when the US was consider
May 22, 2007 - 09:20 ET by FastEdBack when the US was considered the "place to live" because of it's standard of living and it's culture, tourists, when overseas were called "Ugly Americans", due to ignorance or bad manners. I'm thinking that todays' unlawful and blatant, sometimes ignorant and anti-assimilating lawbreakers, should now take over the term and become the "Ugly Immigrant".
It is a slight misnomer though, since they don't want to imigrate, and the term has nothing to do with their physical attributes - it is a statement of their disregard of the law, and their disregard of assimilation. So, we now have a term that is descriptive - Ugly Immigrant.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Because Juan knows Alberto Gonzales is incompetent
May 22, 2007 - 09:25 ET by Dave RJuan has absolutely nothing to fear from a US "Justice" Department, led by Alberto Gonzales, that seems far more interested in prosecuting the Scooter Libbys and Duke Cunninghams of the world, not prosecuting the Sandy Bergers and William Jeffersons of the world, going out of its way to not identify Muslim terrorists as Muslim terrorists, and expending vast resources in prosecuting Border Patrol agents for shooting Mexican drug dealers, as well as court-martialing our brave young soldiers for doing what they are supposed to do: kill the enemy.
IMHO, Mr. Gonzalez should have been sent packing a long time ago, but GWB won't fire him because we may actually wind up with an AG who might actually (gasp!) ENFORCE OUR CURRENT IMMIGRATION LAWS!
Oh, the humanity!
I don't blame Juan one bit. If I were him, I wouldn't be the least bit concerned, either.
*Yes, I'm being sarcastic, cynical, disrespectful and a smart-a**. When you see what I am going to post in today's OT, you will have no doubt as to why.
Our leaders are willing to ch
May 22, 2007 - 10:06 ET by Ten7sOur leaders are willing to change the entire nation to accomodate Juan, which probably makes him less than concerned about the threat of law enforcement. Also he's an illegal alien, which strongly suggests that he doesn't respect the law or the Republic. Changing the law will not change the basic nature of the illegal aliens and will only make the problem worse. We should be going after those who hire illegal aliens, defacto organized crime really. I think that stiff fines on such buisnesses (say $5,000 a head) w/ a percentage (say 10% tax free) given to those who turn them in and help prosecute. That would take care of the problem in short order. But then we'd have to face reality rather that put the problem off 'til tommorrow (when it will be MUCH worse). But we just can't face reality, ANYTHING BUT THAT!
Our 'leaders' are attempting
May 22, 2007 - 10:09 ET by Sergeant ROCKOur 'leaders' are attempting to address illegal immigration the same way they did tobacco.
Excellent point Ten. I didn't
May 22, 2007 - 11:10 ET by BeowulfExcellent point Ten. I didn't hear a word about going after the wine shop where Juan works, even though it was supposedly easily identifiable. I wouldn't think the owner can use the excuse that he didn't know Juad is illegal, at least not anymore.
So, if ICE doesn't receive a call from the shop owner in like the next 15 minutes, the feds should descend on him like the wrath of God, shut him down, fine him, then lock him up for a while. And never grant him a business license for the rest of his life.
It's time to put a stop to this. A friend suggested that now is the time to get off our lazy butts and contact ALL of our representatives in congress (and not just "our" senator and congress-critter, but ALL of them for our respective states), and remind them that they represent us, and are where they are to follow our wishes. Everyone reading this post obviously has a computer and internet. It is a simple matter to make up a statement on this issue, go to the congress-critter's website or go through the congressional contact site http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/ (go to the middle of the page where is has "Member Search", put in your state, and every congress-critter for your state will show up), cut-and-paste your statement, and send it off.
I can guarantee that if such were to occur, they would tear the doors off congress trying to be the first to vote this abomination of a bill down.
Of course, the opposite is true also. If they don't hear from us, they'll go ahead and do whatever they want, as usual.
Apathy will be the death of us.
The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers
"He is a cashier in a wi
May 22, 2007 - 10:58 ET by Gothampc"He is a cashier in a wine store in New York City, where he earns $400/week. "
I guess that is one of those jobs that liberals always say American workers won't do. You can also bet the $400 is cash under the table and no taxes are paid on it. Where is the IRS?
That's a good question. I wou
May 22, 2007 - 11:10 ET by Sergeant ROCKThat's a good question. I would be interested to the statistics on the subject or whether a 'hands-off' order was given to IRS agents from within or higher up the food chain when it came to illegals and taxes.
Here, this should help.
May 22, 2007 - 11:21 ET by RackieHere, this should help.
That report is nothing! I w
May 22, 2007 - 11:22 ET by BruzillaThat report is nothing! I was in traffic court in Jacksonville a few months ago, and there were several illegals in there for driving without a valid driver's license offenses. The judge would even ask them "are you illegal?" and when they said yes, he would just say "well, you need to get a license or stop driving" and let them off without ever charging court costs! He should know they can't get a license being illegals, and they dang sure aren't going to quit driving.
I was also surprised that any of these folks even showed up for court. They could give a cop a bogus name and address and how would the cop know they were lying? I had more respect for the illegals than the judge.
They need a license to get ba
May 22, 2007 - 11:28 ET by Sergeant ROCKThey need a license to get back and forth from their yob. Surprised? Imagine how many don't show up!
The folks at Townhall are get
May 22, 2007 - 11:46 ET by dscottThe folks at Townhall are getting riled up as well.
McCain, your candidacy has just ended and thanks for pointing the Repubs who are in opposition to this bill.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
I followed the link over to
May 22, 2007 - 13:44 ET by happyuscitizenI followed the link over to Townhall.com and I read this post. Since I am a Naturalized Citizen not Native Born & can't hold the office of President myself, I will say I would vote hands down for anyone who had a platform such as the Patriot that block under the handle "The Crawfish".
"The Crawfish writes: Tuesday, May, 22, 2007 12:36 PM
solutions.....
How would President Crawfish handle this mess? Glad you asked! (what? You didn't? Must be them little voices again.)
a) First step is to secure the border. A few battalions of Uncle Sam's Misguided Children, heavily armed and with orders to prevent any unauthorized incursion into our sovereign territory by any and all means necessary (deadly force authorized and encouraged), ought to do the trick. A couple of months of bodies piling up should discourage further encoursions. If the Mexican armed forces attempt to assist the invasion, toast 'em.
b) Immediately end all social services to non-drybacks. If ya ain't legal, ya gets nothing.
c) Immediately end the anchor baby interpretation. Make a federal law that a child born in the US only gets auto-citizenship if the parents are here in a legal status.
d) Any business that's caught with illegals working for it shall immediately forfeit all assets to the federal government and the head of the company and the head of it's personnel department shall be imprisoned for a minimum of 10 years (that's minimum assuming good behavior, etc.).
e) All monetary transfers from banks in the USA to accounts south of the border shall have a 35% fee placed upon them by the federal government.
f) Any illegal who is picked up on any crime shall not be released before the court date. All illegals who are convicted of crimes (state or federal) shall be sent to a new federal prison to be erected in Death Valley. No air conditioning for anybody but the guard staff. No activities for recreation at all. No TV. No radio. Space for each inmate is to be equivilent to that in E-5 and below berthing aboard the now decomm'd USS John F Kennedy. Sheriff Joe's Famous Bologna Sammiches three times per day. Upon completion of sentence, the inmate will be loaded aboard a ship and dropped off in Acapulco. If the Mexicans don't like it, we'll drop 'em off off-shore.
g) Any municipality, county, state, etc, that declares itself a sanctuary for illegals shall immediately lose ALL federal funding for ALL projects. All contracts with said city/etc shall be null and void, as shall all contracts for businesses within that area.
h) All federal government documents, including voting ballots, etc, shall be in ENGLISH ONLY unless they are for tourist and/or customs/immigration business. Why make voting ballots in English? Because that's the language the campaign info is distributed in, the language that the debates are in, the language of the speeches, and the language that you're required to be proficient in to get citizenship.
If the Mexican government complains, my response is...."Too bad. If your government wasn't so screwed up you'd have one of the best economies in the world. As is, your people would rather not be in your country. Fix your own mess!"
I'm a libertarian-leaning conservative who believes the law of the land needs to return to being the CONSTITUTION. The views expressed here are my own. If they have hacked off anybody, I don't care."
So there you have it, all those in favor of voting for the Crawfish raise your claws!
"I'm just a big fat hairy American Winning Machine!" - Ricky Bobby
No doubt about it Crawfish
May 22, 2007 - 14:52 ET by MightyMouthNo doubt about it Crawfish has "issues".
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Yep, I believe the only thing
May 23, 2007 - 04:49 ET by liberal_bug_zapperYep, I believe the only thing he left out was while guarding the southern border from intruders, build three fences. One outside 8 foot chain link, one inside 20 foot chain link with concertina wire inside and outside and the inside fence would be another 8 foot. In between the main fence and the inside one would be the patrol road. In between the outside and main fence would be electronic sensors and Automatic Intruder Pacification Laser Induced Plasma Channel (LIPC) towers that would be charged by solar arrays and would knock out any and all who tried to enter the US illegally.
Mind you, I don't quite like the idea of killing anyone trying to get in... but I have no qualms against shocking the shit out of them and making them crap their pants. We would of course put audible warnings in English and Spanish to say "Get back over the fence into Mexico or you will be killed!" Of course, we'd only knock 'em out... then pick 'em up and throw them back over the fence and let the coyotes get them.
____________________________________________________
"Important principles may and must be inflexible." ~ Abraham Lincoln
Nothing to worry about, Juan
May 22, 2007 - 15:43 ET by EllisWyatt" he's worried that once he returns to Mexico, as required under the proposed law, the U.S. government won't let him back in the country."
Come on Juan, that would only happen if we had a well-staffed, well-funded Border Patrol that was supported by the US government. If you've been here for any length of time, you should know that's not the case. I'll bet you 100 pesos you won't even have to leave the country in the first place, regardless of what the law says.
If you're not outraged at the media, you haven't been paying attention.
What makes this issue stand a
May 23, 2007 - 04:37 ET by liberal_bug_zapperWhat makes this issue stand apart from almost any other issue in politics is that most of the liberals as I know are just as pissed off about illegal immigration as I am. In fact, I don't think I know one person (other than what's his name here) who is not pissed off at all the illegal immigration.
My mother (who I disagree with on most issues) is completely horrified at all the illegal's in her town. Ten years ago, she made a decent living doing odd jobs cleaning homes and working as a part time maid. Now, she has almost no work and is beginning to think that her property will soon be repossessed if she can't pay the bills. And all because Juan and Juanita have come to steal jobs Americans needed.... and now are losing. Illegal immigration is much worse than people think. A little town in Washington State that almost no one has heard of is being overrun. Many other little towns are having problems now with illegal's.
We must stand up together, Liberal and Conservative and demand our congress and President close the boarder and kick every last illegal, including their kids they ILLEGALLY HAD HERE... out of the country. I don't care if we kick 25,000,000 people out.... it must be done. I'm ready and willing to pick up arms and become a part of the militia who is going to make sure that deportation is enforced.
____________________________________________________
"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peacable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peacable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possesions." ~ Samuel Adams