The primary version of this blog is HERE. The Blogroll. My Home Page. Email John Ray here. Other mirror sites: Greenie Watch, Political Correctness Watch, Education Watch, Dissecting Leftism, Food & Health Skeptic, Gun Watch, Socialized Medicine, Eye on Britain, Recipes, Tongue Tied and Australian Politics. For a list of backups viewable in China, see here. (Click "Refresh" on your browser if background colour is missing) See here or here for the archives of this site

****************************************************************************************



31 January, 2010

Ultimate jobs program for America: Immigration timeout

In his State of the Union speech a few days ago, President Obama said, "Jobs must be our number one focus in 2010." I agree with that statement. But unfortunately, Obama's solution will just make things worse and he overlooked a real jobs program that would not cost taxpayers a penny. Many Democratic strategists and talking heads are saying the party erred by putting health care before the economy. But the real problem is not Obama's priorities, but that his solution to every problem is more government spending.

Obama first took on jobs by wasting over a trillion dollars in his stimulus package, and then he tried to deal with health care by proposing another trillion-dollar boondoggle. The new jobs bill he outlined in the State of the Union speech was more of the same: spending money we don't have on public sector jobs in infrastructure, education and energy.

Instead of putting future generations further into debt, we could immediately free up millions of jobs by tackling immigration reform – true immigration reform, not the imposter called amnesty. Barack Obama mentioned immigration only briefly at the end of his speech when he said, "We should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system – to secure our borders and enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nation."

Like with the economy and health care, Obama has identified a problem but then proposes a solution that makes the problem worse. While the statements in the speech seemed innocuous and vague, the White House's website issued talking points that explained what the line meant: The president is pleased Congress is taking steps forward on immigration reform that includes effective border security measures with a path for legalization for those who are willing to pay taxes and abide by the law. Obama is referring to a bill by Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) that will gut enforcement, reduce border security, grant a blanket amnesty to illegal aliens, and massively increase legal immigration. This will cost Americans literally millions of jobs!

In last week's column, I discussed a number of real reforms we should make to fix our immigration system. The final step I advocated was a three-year "timeout," a moratorium on legal immigration. In light of the growing debate on job creation, I'd like to elaborate on what exactly a moratorium is and why we need to enact one immediately.

Every month our government lets in 75,000 permanent foreign workers via "green cards" and 50,000 temporary workers through numerous guest worker programs. That's 1.5 million new foreign workers each year. Then add all the illegal aliens flooding across our open borders. Every one of those new arrivals is competing with American citizens for jobs – and contrary to the propaganda of the open borders lobby, they are not taking only "jobs Americans won't do."

Last month, the Census Bureau data showed one out of six people in the American workforce is foreign born. That's the highest figure since the 1920s and over three times as high as it was in 1965, when our immigration system was overhauled by the then-junior senator from Massachusetts, Edward Kennedy.

When our economy was growing, these figures were easy to ignore, but with 25 million Americans out of work, it is insane to continue these policies. Yet, few members of Congress in either party are willing to discuss reducing legal immigration to safeguard American jobs.

While I applaud immigrants who arrive legally, who want to assimilate and become Americans, our immigration policy needs to put the interest of the American economy and American citizens first. And with so many Americans out of work and millions of legal immigrants already in the work force, we need a three-year timeout on legal immigration as well as secure borders to halt illegal immigration.

In addition to freeing up jobs for American workers, a three-year moratorium will free up resources to help government immigration agencies deal with existing case backlogs and fraud investigations. A timeout on immigration will also make it easier for the legal immigrants already here to assimilate. And unlike Obama's jobs program, a moratorium will not cost a penny and will create new private sector jobs for Americans and legal immigrants already here.

It is true that a moratorium on immigration will not solve our unemployment problem, but this is a classic case where the old axiom ought to be heeded: when you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is – stop digging.

SOURCE



Australian detention centre continues to grow

Australia's Christmas Island detention centre is expected to keep growing as "asylum seekers" continue to arrive

Labor in opposition called it a white elephant, the Australian of the Year has labelled it a factory for mental illness, while the federal opposition says it's a visa factory. However it's described, the Christmas Island Immigration Detention Centre is never far from the spotlight.

A group of Tamils staged a peaceful protest inside the compound this week, which included a short a hunger strike that has now ended. Refugee advocates say the Tamils are angry about a mobile phone ban and long processing times, inflamed by the fast-tracking of asylum seekers from the Oceanic Viking who struck a deal with the federal government after refusing to disembark from the Australian customs boat in Indonesian waters.

Built by the former Liberal government at a cost of more than $400 million, the centre has operated only under the current federal Labor government. Tucked away on Christmas Island's northwest point, the detention centre is holding about 1564 asylum seekers. The latest boatload arrived on the island for processing on Friday. Despite the monsoon season asylum seekers continue to arrive in Australian waters bound for Christmas Island, with one group intercepted last week just one nautical mile (less than 2km) to the north of the detention centre.

Last year Immigration Minister Chris Evans announced capacity of the centre and other facilities on the island would be doubled from 1200 to 2200, at a cost of $40 million, to cope with the expected influx of asylum seekers. A Department of Immigration and Citizenship spokesman said the current capacity is 1848.

Senator Steve Fielding and opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison visited the island last week to inspect the detention facilities, which also include alternate accommodation for children and women, along with traumatised asylum seekers. Senator Fielding likened the accommodation for most as 'akin to a motel'. He said Australians did not need to be concerned about how detainees were being looked after other than those who are living in tents erected to provide further capacity at the centre. 'It's very good accommodation, I think people are well fed, they're well looked after, I think the only concern is the tent city and quite frankly they are at capacity and bursting at the seams and that just can't continue,' he told AAP.

Senator Fielding said both he and Mr Morrison were kept away from the protesting Tamils who were sitting outside under a shaded area near the centre's oval. 'We were kept well away from there, in one way it would have been nice to go and chat to them about their concerns but they were very concerned about making the situation worse,' he said. 'They're basically saying they are going to remain on a hunger strike until they're treated as human beings. 'The conditions here are quite good so I'm not so sure exactly what they are complaining about.' Mr Morrison said some of the detainees had been living in tents for 28 days. [How sad!] The federal government had to realise it had a problem and the real issue was to halt the number of boats arriving, he said.

The hunger strike had been triggered by the fact asylum seekers from the Oceanic Viking had been given a special deal to fast track their cases that others had not, Mr Morrison said. 'I don't think they have a claim frankly when it comes to their treatment, I think their treatment here is outstanding,' he said.

Reports of interviews with detainees showed people smugglers were selling a good product to asylum seekers bound for Christmas Island, which was essentially a 'visa factory', Mr Morrison said. He said detainees reported people smugglers were saying the only country to come to was Australia. 'They never said that about Australia when the coalition was in government.'

Boats will continue to arrive, both Mr Morrison and Senator Fielding say. And with the boats come the immigration workers, the police, customs staff, health workers and security guards needed to run the detention centre. The remote island, 2600km northwest of Perth, is closer to Indonesia than the Australian mainland.

SOURCE





30 January, 2010

Immigration Webinar Discusses State and Local Policy

CIS Staffer Hosts Ongoing Law Enforcement Series

The latest government data show that over one-fifth of incarcerated criminals in America are foreign-born. A large share of these individuals may have violated immigration laws and could be subject to deportation. Immigration status may be relevant to investigations of criminal activity, so officers in every police and sheriff's department need a basic understanding of immigration issues and policies and how they intersect with public safety matters.

The Center for Immigration Studies and Law Enforcement and Public Safety TV (LEAPS.TV) announce the release of the first in a year-long series of webinars, entitled 'Immigration Policy for State and Local Law Enforcement.' The series is designed to provide useful information on immigration issues and assist state and local agencies in developing appropriate policies to deal with criminal aliens and crime problems associated with illegal immigration. The first program is an introduction to the issues and is presented by Jessica Vaughan, CIS Director of Policy Studies. Future programs will feature subject matter experts from a mix of federal and local law enforcement agencies.

The webinar is available here

The above is a press release dated Jan. 28 from the Center for Immigration Studies. 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076. Email: center@cis.org. Contact: Bryan Griffith, press@cis.org, (202) 466-8185



Australia: Christmas Is detainees 'have nothing to complain about'

Opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison has stirred up controversy during an inspection of Christmas Island, saying that protesting asylum seekers have nothing to complain about.

Mr Morrison has been visiting the island's detention centre with Independent Senator Steve Fielding to speak with detainees and inspect the facilities.

His description of the island as a 'visa factory' and Mr Fielding's comment that the island's facilities are too attractive have drawn the ire of Labor MP Michael Danby, who nicknamed the pair "Laurel and Hardy" and accused them of fear mongering.

Immigration Minister Chris Evans says he has been told 130 Sri Lankans are staging a peaceful protest, including a hunger strike. But Mr Morrison says the facilities are first class and the protest is a cry for attention. "I think Australians can rest easy about the treatment of asylum seekers on Christmas Island," he said.

"I think this is more of a cry for attention rather at this stage rather than anything of any great seriousness, and frankly they have nothing to complain about in terms of the facilities or the services, or the treatment that they're receiving on this island. "I think we have a lot to be proud of in the way that people are being looked after here. I thought the standard of facilities at least met that standard, if not better in some cases."

Activist groups say more than 350 detainees are staging a peaceful protest and hunger strikes against the time it is taking to process their claims. Earlier, Senator Evans said the protest would do little to help the detainees' cause. "I want to make it very clear to them and to the community ... we're not going to be responding to this," he said. "What we are going to do is ensure proper process is followed - that is people have to have had their health, identity and security checks and then they have to have been successful in their application for protection."

SOURCE





29 January, 2010

Immigration Reform Dead in 2010?

As I noted yesterday, the chances of getting an immigration-reform bill passed this year dimmed dramatically in the wake of Scott Brown's victory in the Massachusetts special election. Last night President Obama's SOTU speech pretty much snuffed out any remaining possibility. He waited until roughly word 6,300 of a 7,000-word speech to address the issue. He devoted all of one sentence to it ("And we should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system," etc. etc.). And he offered no specifics for a potential measure or timeline to get it done. That fleeting reference was "a crumb that was placed on the domestic-policy-agenda table to really satisfy the hunger of the immigrant and Latino communities," says the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, which has pushed for a reform package. "It was the death knell of immigration reform in 2010."

This is no surprise. Given that much of last year was squandered on a health-care debate that has yet to produce an agreement, and given that Americans are clamoring for the administration to focus on jobs and the economy, immigration has fallen far down the priority list, for both the president and Congress. "I don't think there's been a diminution in the desire to do it," says Simon Rosenberg of the New Democrat Network, which has also pressed for an overhaul. "But there's a greater recognition that the pipeline got backed up in 2009." The top two priorities now, he says, are a jobs bill and financial-services reform. "If those get done, and Washington is working better, then I think other things will be possible this year." Even, perhaps, immigration reform, though he says it may well get pushed to 2011.

The pro-reform forces, including the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and advocacy organizations, are mostly striking a measured and realistic tone. They realize that Obama has his hands full, that he's rightly focused on jobs, and that it's perhaps time to regroup on the immigration front. Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), who introduced a reform proposal in the House in December and has often expressed impatience with the administration's handling of the issue, had mostly supportive words for Obama in a blog posting this morning. Though he lamented the president's cursory mention of immigration in last night's speech, he argued that ultimately it was up to Congress to seize the reins. Lawmakers "cannot wait for the President to lay out our timeline for comprehensive reform," he wrote.

For now, Hispanic voters appear to be cutting Obama some slack. "From the perspective of the Latino community, the most pressing issue is the economy and job creation," says Clarissa Martinez of the National Council of La Raza, just as it is for Americans generally. Even in good economic times, immigration usually ranks as only a midlevel concern for Hispanic voters. The problem, however, is if they perceive that the president has betrayed them on the issue. At this point, that's not the prevailing sentiment. "We know that he's committed, that he's opened the door to make progress on the issue," says Martinez. But there's "definitely an expectation that there will be movement [on an immigration overhaul], and there will be disappointment if that doesn't happen." My guess is he's safe not dealing with it this year. But if he waits beyond 2011, Hispanics' patience may wear out.

SOURCE



Amazing: Migrants with HIV, cancer allowed to settle in Australia

Chronically ill foreign workers and their families, including those with HIV-AIDS, will be allowed to settle in Australia for the first time as the Immigration Department loosens its stringent health rules to alleviate the skills shortage. The department is widening a loophole that lets it waive the health requirement for some sick dependants of Australian citizens.

Taxpayers will spend nearly $60 million on healthcare for 288 migrants granted special clearance last financial year to live in Australia, despite failing health exams. These included 59 cases of HIV infection, 10 of cancer and 26 of intellectual impairment. Most of the waivers were granted to the foreign partners of Australian citizens.

Now the federal government wants to widen the health loophole in a bid to lure skilled immigrants who otherwise would be turned away on the grounds of illness, mental health or chronically ill family members.

But NSW -- the strongest magnet for new migrants -- has so far refused to sign the change, which requires state and territory agreement because of the potential drain on their hospital systems. In a submission to a parliamentary inquiry into Australia's treatment of disabled migrants, the Immigration Department warns that removing health restrictions could strain health services already in short supply, such as organ transplants or dialysis. "Additional migration, particularly if current health restrictions were to be removed, could lead to increased pressure on healthcare systems," it says. "Any significant change to the current health requirement would need to be considered in the context of potential impacts on health and welfare expenditure . . . particularly in terms of prejudice to the access of . . . citizens and permanent residents to healthcare and community services."

Departmental data reveals that 42 health waivers were granted to foreign workers on temporary skilled visas during 2008-09. The department plans to extend the waivers to workers seeking permanent residency, and those who have set up businesses in Australia.

Health bans were lifted last financial year for 138 temporary immigrants seeking to remain in Australia -- at a total cost to taxpayers of $19.5m in health and community services. Another 150 immigrants who applied offshore were granted waivers, at an estimated cost of $38.2m. HIV was the most common health condition, involving 59 cases at a cost of $14m, with 26 cases of intellectual impairment at a cost of $1.2m, and 10 cases of cancer, at a cost of $751,500. The department knocked back applications from another 1586 would-be migrants who failed health tests -- at an estimated saving to taxpayers of $70m.

Federal parliament's migration committee began inquiring into Australia's treatment of disabled migrants after Immigration Minister Chris Evans intervened in 2008 to grant permanent residency to a German doctor whose son had Down syndrome.

SOURCE





28 January, 2010

Poll: Fla. voters want immigration laws enforced

Florida voters don't want immigration laws waived to make it easier for Haitians to stay in the United States or immigrate into the country, a new poll shows.

Fifty-one percent of 1,618 registered Florida voters surveyed by Quinnipiac (Conn.) University said they wanted immigration laws enforced compared to 43 percent opposed to them being waived in the wake of the deadly Haitian earthquake Jan. 12.

Voters were opposed, 50 percent to 46 percent, to a decision by the Obama Administration to grant temporary legal status for 18 months to Haitians living in the U.S. when the earthquake hit and divided on allowing more immigrants into the country. Quinnipiac said the survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.4 percentage points.

SOURCE



Perils of population growth for Australia

Do you get the feeling your back yard is getting smaller? Or that the patch of turf you laid last year has disappeared to be replaced by a slab of concrete? It’s one of Australia’s most pressing issues, yet political leaders refuse to do anything to stop it. I am referring to Australia’s surging population growth. Recent projections that Australia will have to accommodate 35 million people by 2050 - up from 22 million at present - is a worrying prospect.

In the post-World War II years, the rallying call in this country was to populate or perish - a response to the fear of military invasion from a powerful northern neighbour. This gave us the Baby Boomer generation, which is now nearing retirement and creating imminent pressures of an aging population.

The greying of the nation has prompted Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to espouse a new call for a “big Australia”, propelled by a higher birth rate and increased immigration. It’s a short-term solution to a long-term problem. What will happen in another 50 years? Will another prime minister call for an even bigger population boom to replace the generation reaching retirement then?

The population debate has been hijacked until now by economic greed and rationalism. The argument has been that the higher the population growth, the greater consumption will be and therefore economic prosperity and profit - at least for the wealthy few in society. Little or no attention has been paid to the limited availability of natural resources, the dire effect on the environment and loss of quality of life as more people compete for living space in our cities.

It is good to see that questions are finally being raised about Australia’s sustainable population. This week enterpreneur-adventurer Dick Smith became the latest in a string of forward thinkers who criticised Government plans to encourage population growth, saying Australia did not have enough water or food to support millions more people. He also urged slashing immigration and discouraging women from having more than two babies, thereby allowing population growth to be contained.

Just because people in many other countries have to live in cramped high-rises in concrete urban jungles does not make it a lifestyle model Australians should aspire to.

In 1798, the Rev Robert Thomas Malthus published his Principles of Population in which he stated: “The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man”. He predicted that endless population growth would block progress towards a utopian society. As an Anglican minister, Malthus, believed that God had created an inexorable tendency to human population growth for a moral purpose, with the threat of poverty and starvation designed to teach the virtues of hard work and virtuous behaviour.

We carry a responsiblity to make the world a better place for the generations that will follow. Australia is well placed to embark on a journey to a more sustainable future. The future of the country may depend on it.

SOURCE





27 January, 2010

CIS roundup

1. Fixing Flores: Assuring Adequate Penalties for Identity Theft and Fraud

Excerpt: This Backgrounder proposes statutory language fixes to federal identity theft and aggravated felony language in 18 U.S.C. §§ 1028 and 1028A to reverse the practical implications of the May 2009 Supreme Court ruling in Flores-Figueroa v. United States.1 Flores crippled prosecutors’ longstanding practice of using the aggravated identity theft statute by requiring that prosecutors now also prove that a defendant knew he was using a real person’s identity information, as opposed to counterfeit information not connected to an actual person. The statute is an important tool for immigration enforcement. Proving a defendant’s knowledge about his crime is always difficult, and impossible in some cases, even where there is substantial harm and clear victims. This is especially the situation with illegal aliens who buy identity information from third parties. The inevitable result of the Flores decision is to enable perpetrators an easy defense and to tie prosecutors’ hands. The defendant in the case was an illegal alien working at a steel plant in Illinois.

********

2. Failure to Uphold Immigration Laws Leads to the Death of a Deputy Sheriff

Excerpt: During the past several months, I have commented on the failure of law enforcement officials to enforce the nation's immigration laws, thereby giving illegal alien criminals an advantage that they should not have. Law enforcement officials argue that they have to give illegal aliens a pass for violating immigration laws in order to gain their confidence and support. While this may work in some cases, it also leaves violent, criminal illegal aliens free to go about their business.

********

3. The Answer to the World's Problems — Immigration to America

Excerpt: For the second time to three days, the Washington Post has an op-ed calling on us to help Haiti by reducing the number of Haitians living there. Elliott Abrams' piece, which I critiqued here on Friday, was wrongheaded in calling for substantial increases in Haitian immigration but at least it didn't reject American sovereignty. On the other hand, this most recent piece, by tranzi economist Michael Clemens at the Center for Global Development, is remarkable as an example of forthright post-Americanism. For instance

********

4. ICE Speaks Up for State and Local Immigration Enforcement

Excerpt: A funny thing happened on the way to the coliseum, where open-borders advocates and other strident ethnic activists thought the lions would deal a final blow to state and local immigration enforcement. An Immigration and Customs Enforcement official — from the Obama administration, no less — actually defended the program. ICE Assistant Secretary John Morton praised the 287(g) program in comments reported by the Arizona Republic.

********

5. Help Haitians — in Haiti

Excerpt: Elliott Abrams has a piece in today's Washington Post calling on the United States to substantially increase Haitian immigration, so as to reduce the population of Haiti and increase the amount of remittances sent there from abroad. It's so wrong-headed I'm not sure where to start.

********

6. Illegal Use of Welfare Can Justify Fee Waivers for Haitian TPS Applicants

Excerpt: One of the ironies of the new Temporary Protected Status program for Haitians illegally in the country on the date of the earthquake is that they can use illegally obtained welfare benefits to support an application to waive the $470 application fee for the TPS program.

********

7. Making Sure H-1Bs Actually Work for Their 'Employers'

Excerpt: A couple of news items have converged with research. Recently, I have been reading the legislative history of the H-1B program. It is interesting to see how some things have changed and other things keep repeating. The H-1B visa was created in the Immigration Act of 1990. From the House Judiciary Committee we have the findings that:

********

8. Use TPS Fees Paid by Haitian Illegals to Help Haiti

Excerpt: The Miami Herald tells us that something like 200,000 Haitians, now in the U.S., illegally, are going to be given temporary legal status in the U.S. through grants of Temporary Protected Status. The number is much larger than earlier estimates issued by the government, and might be an over statement.

********

9. Mixed Reports from the Immigration Reform Front

Excerpt: Under the pressure of constant questioning from the Spanish-language media, the White House continues to insist that it wants to move quickly on 'comprehensive immigration reform,' even as congressional Democrats indicate that they have no desire to deal with the issue this year. 'This is something we take very seriously,' Obama aide Cecilia Munoz told Univision newsman Jorge Ramos on Sunday's Al Punto program. 'His commitment is there.'

********

10. Spreading the Inevitable Flood of Haitian Refugees Around the Region

Excerpt: It is highly likely that there will be a flood of Haitian refugees in the next few months, no matter how heroic the Administration‘s efforts are to meet the short- and long-term needs of the people in Haiti. It is time to make some hard-nosed suggestions about the distribution of those refugees. I heard on the news last night a reporter say that Haiti is 'on America's doorstep.' Compared to Afghanistan, well, yes, but a look at the map would be helpful.

The above is a press release dated January 25, from from Center for Immigration Studies. 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076. Email: center@cis.org.





26 January, 2010

Fact Sheet on Haitian Immigrants in the United States

Since the terrible tragedy in Haiti, many have sought information about the Haitian community in the United States. Below are some basic socio-demographic statistics:

* The last Census Bureau data (2008) indicates there are 546,000 Haitian immigrants in the United States. That is up from 408,000 in 2000 and 218,000 in 1990.1

* Of the 546,000 foreign-born Haitians in the United States, 48 percent are naturalized U.S. citizens; this compares to 43 percent for the overall foreign-born population.2

* The top states of Haitian immigrant settlement are Florida (251,963; 46%), New York (135,836; 25%) New Jersey (43,316; 8%), Massachusetts (36,779; 7%), Georgia (13,287; 2%), and Maryland (11,266; 2%).3

* Our best estimate is that there are 75,000 to 125,000 illegal Haitian immigrants in the country. In 2000, the INS estimated there were 76,000 illegal Haitian immigrants.4

* When it extended Temporary Protected Status to Haitians, the Department of Homeland Security estimated 100,000 to 200,000 people could be eligible. While most are illegal immigrants, this estimate also includes those on temporary visas such as tourists, foreign students, and guest workers who will not have to go home.5

* Between 2000 and 2008, 183,188 Haitians were given green cards (permanent residence). These figures do not include those who entered on a long-term, temporary basis such as guest workers and foreign students nor does it include short term visitors like tourists. Of those given permanent residence, 135,913 (74 percent) were admitted under family-based immigration.6

* There are 310,000 U.S.-born Americans who have at least one parent born in Haiti.7

* Of Haitian immigrants (ages 25 to 65) 22 percent have not graduated from high school and 18 percent have a college degree. This compares to 9 percent and 30 percent, respectively, for native-born Americans.8

* The share of Haitian immigrants and their young children (under 18) living in poverty is 20 percent. For native-born Americans and their young children it is 11.6 percent.9

* The share of Haitian immigrants and their young children who lack health insurance is 29.5 percent. For native-born Americans and their children it is 12.6 percent.10

* Of households headed by Haitian immigrants 46 percent use at least one major welfare program. For households headed by native-born Americans it is 20 percent.11

* The share of Haitian immigrants who own their own home is 49 percent. For native-born Americans it is 69 percent.12

For more information on the subject, please visit our Haitian Immigration overview page.

End Notes

1 Figure for 1990 and 2000 come from the public use file of the 1990 and 2000 Census. See “Where Immigrants Live: An Examination of State Residency of the Foreign Born by Country of Origin in 1990 and 2000,” http://www.cis.org/ImmigrantsStateResidency. Figures for 2008 come from a Center for Immigration Studies analysis of the public use file of the American Community Survey.

2 Based on Center for Immigration Studies analysis of public use file of the 2008 American Community Survey (ACS).

3 Based on Center for Immigration Studies analysis of public use file of the 2008 American Community Survey (ACS).

4 For the INS estimates see Table 2 in “Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: 1990 to 2000,” see here

5 The TPS announcement and the estimated number who may be eligible can be found here.

6 Office of Immigration Statistics annual year books 2000 to 2008. See here.

7 Based on Center for Immigration Studies analysis of a combined sample of March 2008 and 2009 Current Population Survey (CPS). The CPS is the primary source for statistics on the labor force, income, poverty, welfare use, and health insurance in the United States. The CPS is smaller than the ACS, but it includes a question on birth place of mother and father. By using a two-year sample of the CPS we are able to get a more robust estimate of those born to Haitian immigrants in the US.

8 Based on Center for Immigration Studies analysis of public use file of the 2008 American Community Survey (ACS).

9 Based on a Center for Immigration Studies analysis of a combined two year sample (2008-2009) of the public use files of the March Current Population Survey (CPS). See endnote 5 for more information about the CPS. Figures for immigrants and their children are for immigrants from Haiti and their US-born children under age 18 who have a father born in Haiti. Figures of natives exclude the US-born children of immigrant fathers. Poverty figures are based on the official federal threshold.

10 Based on a Center for Immigration Studies analayis of a combined two year sample (2008-2009) of the public use files of the March Current Population Survey (CPS). For more explanation about the CPS see Footnote 7. Those lacking insurance indicated that they did not have health insurance for the entire calendar year prior to the survey. Figures for immigrants and their children are for immigrants from Haiti and their US-born children under age 18 who have father born in Haiti. Figures of natives exclude the US-born children of immigrant fathers.

11 Based on a Center for Immigration Studies analysis of a combined two-year sample (2008-2009) of the March Current Population Survey (CPS). For more explanation about the CPS see endnote 5. For cash programs (TANF & SSI) the use rate for Haitian immigrant households was 7 percent, for food assistance (food stamps, WIC or free lunch) the use rate was 28 percent, for housing (public housing & rent subsidies) the use rate was 8 percent, for Medicaid the use rate was 31 percent. It is important to note that a large share of welfare programs used by immigrant households are received on the behalf of their US-born children (under 18). The comparison figures for households headed by native-born Americans is 5 percent for cash programs, 11 for food programs, 4 percent for housing programs and 15 percent for Medicaid.

12 Based on Center for Immigration Studies analysis of the 2008 public use file of the American Community Survey. The figures represent the share of households headed by Haitian immigrants who own their own home.

The above is a press release dated January 25 from from Center for Immigration Studies. 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076. Email: center@cis.org. Contact: Steven Camarota, (202) 466-8185, sac@cis.org



Popular Australian entrepreneur fears the impacts of high immigration levels

Plans to massively boost Australia's population are a bad idea and must be stopped, entrepreneur Dick Smith says. 'The Federal Government favours a "big Australia" and wants to increase the country's headcount from 22 million to 35 million by 2050, largely by immigration. But Mr Smith said this was ridiculous.

"We need to do something about this incredible increase," he said at an Australian of the Year dinner in Parliament House today. "No one is allowed to talk about it ... I am."

Mr Smith said Australia did not have enough water or food to support millions more people. It was crazy that seawater was being desalinated for drinking water to supply a booming population. "I believe in 100 years time people in Australia will be starving to death."

The intake of skilled migrants should be slashed and women should be discouraged from having more than two babies, Mr Smith said. He believes nine out of 10 Australians do not want a population boom. Mr Smith is working on a documentary on the issue.

The Government wants to increase the population because it means more young taxpayers to pay the rising health and pension costs of the ageing population. But a recent poll showed most people did not like that plan and some green groups have voiced concerns about the environmental costs.

SOURCE





25 January, 2010

Insane Leftist Britain again

Iraqi who killed two British doctors wins right to stay in UK, under Britain's perverse "human rights" laws

An Iraqi immigrant who stabbed to death two NHS doctors has won the right to stay in Britain, it has been confirmed. An immigration judge ruled Laith Alani, a 41-year-old paranoid schizophrenic, could pose a danger to people in his homeland, the Sunday Telegraph reports. It says the tribunal found deportation would also breach his human rights. The government said it must accept the immigration court's judgement.

Alani has spent 19 years in a secure hospital for the 1990 killings. Cosmetic surgeons Kenneth Paton and Michael Masser were attacked at Pinderfields Hospital in Wakefield, West Yorkshire, after Alani claimed to have received "a command from Allah". Alani, who was 24 at the time, was sentenced to an indefinite term of imprisonment in a maximum-security unit at Rampton Hospital, near Nottingham, in 1991.

He appealed to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT) where a panel led by senior immigration judge Lance Waumsley ruled he could remain in the UK, the Telegraph reports.

If discharged, restricted patients are subject to intensive supervision by doctors and mental health professionals. It is understood one of the reasons given was that if Alani was sent back to Iraq, he would be unlikely to receive the drugs needed to keep his mental illness under control.

Immigration minister Phil Woolas said: "The UK Border Agency vigorously opposes any appeal against deportation, but when the courts insist an individual cannot be removed, we have to accept their judgement."

The Ministry of Justice would not comment on the individual case but said restricted patients were carefully managed for public protection and underwent rigorous risk assessment. "They can be discharged from secure hospitals by the Mental Health Tribunal which is entirely independent of government," a ministry spokesman said. "If discharged, restricted patients are subject to intensive supervision by doctors and mental health professionals. "The Secretary of State has the power to recall a conditionally discharged patient to hospital immediately if he receives information that the patient's risk to others is increasing as a result of his mental disorder."

The Home Office said a record 5,400 foreign criminals were deported in 2008. All foreign national prisoners were now considered for deportation before release, and over the past three years about a quarter have gone before the end of their sentence, it added.

SOURCE



Poll shows Australians want immigration capped

AUSTRALIANS are spooked by record high immigration and also believe the country is increasingly racist, according to an exclusive Sunday Mail poll by Galaxy. Two-thirds of respondents - 66 per cent - think the Federal Government should cap immigration rates. Of these, 72 per cent of Australians polled favour an immigration cap, while 55 per cent of those who live here but do not consider themselves Australian also favoured an immigration cap.

Leading immigration expert Dr Bob Birrell said the figures show "the tide is turning". "It's a significant finding because it suggests public discussion of congestion and house prices may be beginning to bite," Dr Birrell said yesterday.

In the past four to five years, polling indicated Australians were reasonably comfortable with immigration levels, which are based on a Government target of around 190,000 a year.

The results come as Opposition Leader Tony Abbott used an Australia Day Council address during the week to raise immigration issues, stand by the tough stance on boat arrivals in the Howard era and suggest he favoured more migration to boost our population. "My instinct is to extend to as many people as possible the freedom and benefits of life in Australia," Mr Abbott said.

Dr Birrell said the economic shock of the global financial crisis, increasing house prices and continuing controversy over illegal immigration would have played a part in changing opinions. He also pointed to the fact that only 55 per cent of non-Australians were in favour of an immigration cap, compared to 72 per cent of locally-born Australians. Dr Birrell said Australian-born people took a more negative view of immigration, because they did not like their culture threatened by change. "(Many people) like things the way they were when they came into this world. Some see it as a threat to their inherited culture," he said.

More than half the respondents felt Australia had changed for the worse in the past 20 years. But the poll also shows we're basically happy with our flag, our national anthem, and with the standard of living.

Galaxy polled 1000 residents nationwide on Thursday and Friday, and found that we rate meat pies as our favourite national dish and think Australian history lessons should be compulsory in secondary schools....

More here





24 January, 2010

Hardline attitude to illegals aids immigration overall -- says Australian conservative leader

Tony Abbott has moved to portray his tough border protection stance as pro-immigration, arguing that it helps to maintain public support if people think immigration is controlled by the government rather than by people-smugglers. The Opposition Leader, in an Australia Day speech last night, urged minority leaders to respect mainstream Australian values, just as they demand respect for their own, arguing that would help to bolster public support for immigration.

And Mr Abbott called on Kevin Rudd to take some "courageous decisions" to meet projections of an extra 13 million people by 2050. "It's good that the Prime Minister is talking about the need for planning and for courageous decisions to meet the challenges of the mid-century," Mr Abbott said. "It would be even better if he would actually make some prior to the next election."

Mr Abbott used his address to the Australian Day Council in Melbourne to defend a tough border protection regime, arguing it was consistent with a large and inclusive immigration policy. "In fact, it's probably essential if the public is to be convinced that Australia's immigration policy is run by the government rather than by people-smugglers," he said.

Mr Abbott said 67 per cent of Australians thought the immigration intake was too high in 1993 but that had dropped to 34 per cent by 2004, even though the immigration intake had increased after the Howard government toughened its border protection regime. He warned critics of tough border protection that their concerns could "end up undermining Australia's traditional openness to immigrants". "The last thing that any Australian should want is to make recent immigrants feel unwelcome in their new country," the Opposition Leader said.

Mr Abbott said people should be especially concerned that ethnic Indians could have become the victims of racially motivated crime: "It would be an affront to our self-perception as a society where people are judged on their merits rather than on their skin colour."

Mr Abbott likened the controversy over Muslim cleric Taj Din al-Hilali's comments on women and Jews to Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne Daniel Mannix's criticisms 90 years earlier on the conduct of World War I. He argued that there had hardly been a time when there were not some reservations about the loyalty of some ethnic groups, but "thus far at least" all had eventually become as Australian as everyone else.

Mr Abbott said immigration had been a success almost unparalleled in history, but it regularly featured as an issue of concern. Factors contributing to this included an increase in unauthorised boat arrivals, raising fears that Australia's borders were again uncontrolled.

He said there was a concern about whether the natural and built environments could cope with the population pressures.

SOURCE



Massachusetts open-borders lobby deflated after Scott Brown win in Senate

For months, immigrant advocacy groups like the Chelsea Collaborative and Berkshire Immigrant Center have been gearing up to push lawmakers on state and federal immigration reforms. They’ve held statewide forums, marched in Washington, D.C., and organized rallies with hopes of seeing the major immigration overhaul promised by Gov. Deval Patrick and President Barack Obama. But after the historic election victory of Republican Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate, those illusions may be evaporating. Political observers say Brown, who ran on a platform opposing some of those reforms, has emboldened conservative voters, and they will likely table reforms in the near future.

"Much of the angry and frustration of voters, particularly those on the right, are clearly aligned with forces that oppose immigration reform," said Paul Watanabe, a political science professor at University of Massachusetts-Boston. "They are vocal opponents of anything other than enforcement." Watanabe said it’s now doubtful that Patrick and state lawmakers will spend political capital pushing any controversial proposals in an election year shortly after Brown’s victory. Patrick has said he is planning to seek re-election this fall, but is struggling with sagging poll numbers.

During his campaign, Brown said he opposed granting driver’s licenses and in-state tuition rates to illegal immigrants — ideas Patrick vowed to support in November after receiving recommendations from an advisory panel. As a state senator, Brown also introduced legislation that would have required proof of citizenship or right to work in the U.S. for wage enforcement cases. "His record is concerning," said Eva Millona, executive director of the Massachusetts Immigrants & Refugee Advocacy Coalition, a group that represents 130 immigrant groups.

But Brown’s positions excited conservative voters and won him endorsements and praise from national groups like Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, who hailed him for opposing "amnesty." It’s a dramatic shift from positions taken by his predecessor, the late Sen. Edward Kennedy. The Democratic senator sponsored a 1965 immigration law that changed the nation’s demographic makeup by scrapping an immigration quota system that favored Western Europeans, and he remained for decades a "go-to" legislator for immigrant advocates.

After Brown’s victory over Democrat Martha Coakley, the Federation of American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, sent out a statement arguing that Brown’s win showed even Massachusetts voters oppose some of Kennedy’s ideas on immigration and that it would be "suicide" for any politician to support certain reforms. "If support for amnesty and benefits for illegal aliens won’t fly in Massachusetts, it won’t fly anywhere," said FAIR president Dan Stein. "Democrat or Republican, any candidate who ’leans into’ amnesty in 2010, as some advocates advise, is likely to share Martha Coakley’s fate."

Massachusetts is home to around 1 million foreign-born residents, or 14 percent of the state’s population.

For their part, immigrant advocates in Massachusetts say they aren’t giving up on prospects for state and federal immigration reform. But Millona acknowledged, after Brown’s win, "It makes it harder for us."

Still, Millona said advocates hope to meet with Brown soon. "In the state Senate, Mr. Brown did not always support issues that were important for immigrant communities," Millona said. "But the sober responsibility he demonstrated in his victory speech was very promising, as was his humble recognition that he has a lot to learn."

SOURCE





23 January, 2010

Jobs, immigration and the Massachusetts upset

For all the analysis of all the issues that contributed to a Republican winning the Kennedy Senate seat yesterday, I believe the Democratic candidate could have won had she advanced a credible program that would put jobless Bay Staters back to work without spending a fortune of taxpayer money.

A reduction in both legal and illegal immigration fits the bill precisely. The immigration solutions would cost very little. And they would immediately increase the number of Americans with jobs.

Democrats are fortunate that congressional Republican leadership has refused to fight for the American worker by reducing the number of foreign workers competing for the remaining U.S. jobs.

Moderate Democrats across the country are scratching their heads on how they can distance themselves from the Reid-Pelosi open-borders reputation of congressional Democratic leadership -- and how they can persuade voters they can do the most to put 23 million U-6 unemployed Americans back to work.

The answer is Jobs & Immigration. And here is what they can do to show they are serious immediately:

* Co-sponsor Heath Shuler's (D-N.C.) SAVE Act in the House and Sen. Pryor's (D-Ark.) SAVE Act in the Senate. It would immediately start opening up jobs held by illegals so they can be filled by Americans seeking construction, service, manufacturing and transportation jobs.

* Co-sponsor Rep. Gingrey's (R-Ga.) bill in the House to end chain migration categories that needlessly bring in thousands of foreign workers every month to permanently compete with U.S. workers. In the Senate, somebody needs to introduce a similar bill.

* Co-sponsor Rep. Goodlatte's (R-Va.) bill in the House to shut down the visa lottery (or introduce a similar bill in the Senate).

Democrats can boldly advocate for these measures to improve the job possibilities for U.S. citizens and immigrants already legally here, and they don't have to appear antagonistic to any ethnic group or even to illegal aliens. But by showing they are willing to be so practical in putting Americans to work, they can recover credibility with a lot of independents.

I make these recommendations to Democrats in part based on a common theme among Democratic analysts that Coakley did not give people a jobs reason to vote for her.

It remains a stretch to think the the Democratic Party as a whole would switch to a pro-American-worker position on immigration and jobs. But we'll see whether dozens of Democratic Members of Congress individually take the opportunity.

In the meantime, do-nothing Republican congressional leaders might want to reconsider their decisions to support the status quo of 125,000 permanent and temporary visas to new foreign workers every month -- plus their refusal to demand mandatory E-Verify to open up jobs for unemployed Americans.

SOURCE



DHS Making Plans to Entice Haitians to Risk Illegal Boat Effort Into U.S.?

We are getting conflicting stories out of the Department of Homeland Security that it may be preparing to entice hundreds of thousands of Haitians to try to illegally enter the U.S. and then grant them some kind of legal status and work permits. Here is what we are hearing . . .

A source from within DHS is hearing of an effort to gather all French and Creole speakers in DHS to move to our Gitmo base in Cuba. This is where Haitian boat people trying to illegally enter the U.S. would be taken after being intercepted on the seas. At Gitmo, according to this DHS source, the boat people would be processed and then allowed to enter the U.S. for some undetermined amount of time with work permits.

Another source says DHS Chief Janet Napolitano was asked about this plan by a journalist and has denied it. I was certainly pleased to see her over the weekend trying to send a message to Haiti that people should not take risks to take a boat to the U.S. and in warning people contemplating it that they would be picked up and taken back to Haiti. But it could be that internally there are fears that a flotilla will emerge anyway and the floaters really won't be repatriated.

At this point, I am not weighing in on the credibility of any of the information.

But I do want to point out that it would be incredibly cruel to the Haitian people for the Obama Administration to provide any sign whatsoever that Haitians who try to enter the U.S. illegally would be allowed to stay and work.

Even without a devastating earthquake, Haitians for decades have shown a willingness to drop everything and risk their lives on leaky boats to try to get to the U.S. when they thought they might have a chance to settle illegally.

Many of you may remember that thousands of Haitians took to the seas just before Pres. Clinton was first inaugurated because they thought from some of his campaign comments that he would allow them to sneak into the country. Many Haitians drowned in the process. The first act of the Clinton Administration was to intercept the Haitian boats and make it clear that taking to sea was fruitless because the boats would not be allowed to land in Florida and illegal aliens who evaded the Coast Guard would be sent back to Haiti when caught on land.

In short, the first time that Haitians try to illegally enter the U.S. and are allowed to stay legally, we can expect to see a massive flotilla of rickety boats heading here from Haiti, and hundreds or thousands of Haitians will die in the process.

For now, we can hope that if DHS is setting up a processing center at Gitmo, it will be for the purpose of moving Haitians rescued from their boats back to Haiti.

The whole world is committed at this moment to assisting the 8 million Haitians who are in their home country. The Haitians are suffering from a momentous tragedy. Since there is no indication that the vast majority of them will be accepted for resettlement in other countries, it only makes sense to put all resources into rebuilding their own country for their habitation, rather than allowing a small fraction to move to the U.S. and further exacerbate the unemployment and economic distress of our own most vulnerable Americans.

We must watch very carefully to make sure that the humanitarian efforts for the Haitians are the most effective for the largest number, rather than helping a few move to the U.S. and enticing far more to risk their lives to get the same treatment.

SOURCE





22 January, 2010

Tariq Ramadan permitted to enter the U.S.

The Swiss Islamist Tariq Ramadan was about to take up a position at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana in 2004 when the U.S. government prevented him from entering the country on the grounds that he had funded two Hamas-related groups. For five years, his exclusion has been debated and tried. Finally, it was reversed today. The Associated Press explains:

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has signed orders enabling the re-entry of professors Tariq Ramadan of Oxford University in England and Adam Habib of the University of Johannesburg in South Africa once they obtain required admittance documents, department spokesman Darby Holladay said.

Clinton "has chosen to exercise her exemption authority for the benefit of Tariq Ramadan and Adam Habib," Holladay said. "We'll let that action speak for itself." In a prepared statement, Holladay noted the change in U.S. posture since both professors, who are frequently invited to the United States to lecture, were denied admittance after making statements counter to U.S. foreign policy. Both the president and the secretary of state have made it clear that the U.S. government is pursuing a new relationship with Muslim communities based on mutual interest and mutual respect.".

Comments: (1) I always expected this outcome, that Ramadan would be allowed in, because so many forces were aligned in his favor. That the exclusion lasted over five years was impressive.

(2) Note that this change was ordered from the very top, specifically invoking Obama.

(3) Note also the sleaziness of the State Department spokesman, ascribing Ramadan's exclusion to his "making statements counter to U.S. foreign policy." No, the reason was explicitly his having provided funds to a terrorist-related organization. Why the gratuitous lie, State Department?

(4) The Obama administration puts this case into the context of "pursuing a new relationship with Muslim communities based on mutual interest and mutual respect." But it's always been a terrorism case, with no connection to issues of Islam. What amateurs.

(5) Note the term "mutual respect," the hackneyed phrase repeatedly applied to the U.S. government and Muslims – so much so that I have devoted a whole blog to Obama's use of these words.

(6) So, fellow Americans, how many of you feel safer with the prospect of Tariq Ramadan present in person to talk to our Islamists?

SOURCE



Netanyahu: Illegal immigration threat to Israel

Illegal African immigration is a serious threat to Israel's Jewish and democratic character, Benjamin Netanyahu said.

"We have become almost the only First World country that can be reached by foot from the Third World," Netanyahu said Thursday in an address to the Manufacturers Association of Israel. "We are flooded with a surge of refugees who threaten to wash away our achievements and damage our existence as a Jewish democratic state."

The Israeli government earlier this month announced approval for the construction of a border fence with Egypt to prevent migrant workers from illegally entering Israel.

Netanyahu said the thousands of African and other migrant workers who have infiltrated to Israel from Egypt "are causing socio-economic and cultural damage and threaten to take us back down to the level of the Third World. They take the jobs of the weakest Israelis."

The prime minister reportedly said that the government would work to encourage employment to hire local manpower and encourage fervently Orthodox Jews, or haredim, to join the work force. Laws against hiring illegal workers also will be more stringently enforced, he said. Netanyahu has said that Israel will remain open to war refugees.

SOURCE





21 January, 2010

Scott Brown’s Victory: New Englanders Love Their “Little Platoons”. Immigration Is Hurting Them

By a happy Massachusetts native

“To be attached to the subdivision, to love the little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it were) of public affections”, wrote Edmund Burke in Reflections on the Revolution in France.

New England has always been a region of “little platoons”, where people proudly retain their local customs and accents. It’s not a place you can just move to and suddenly “belong” (as my California-born wife can attest). You have to put your time in here before you can become a bona fide New Englander. That is something we both love about New England—and it is also one of the many things our elites can’t stand about it.

During his 1831 visit to America, Alexis de Tocqueville was the most impressed with New England. It was in New England’s “little platoons” that de Tocqueville found the American spirit of self-reliance and volunteerism to be the strongest and most admirable.

Unfortunately, New England—and Massachusetts in particular—has also produced an elite culture, a class of people who are largely the product of the region’s many prestigious universities and prep schools.

In recent decades, however, there has been a growing antagonism between everyday New Englanders and the post-American elites who claim to represent them. Granted, we rarely read about it in the press, but the tension is definitely there. Just ask the good people of Lewiston, Maine and Nashua, New Hampshire who never voted to have Somali Bantu refugees forced into their neighborhoods at their own expense.

In my opinion, and I travel extensively though New England, the forced introduction of refugees into New England communities whose only crime was being too white and well-functioning has jolted the political awareness of people here more than any other public policy trend in my lifetime.

In a recent interview, Peter Brimelow said that people are drawn to VDARE.com because they feel especially discouraged about the way their country and culture are being forcibly dismantled, “and they feel also that something is being done to them”. That is certainly the way people feel in places like East Boston, which was until recently a charming neighborhood with great Italian restaurants, but has been transformed by Salvadoran immigrants and turned into a stronghold of the MS-13.

It is this sense of helplessness and frustration that has drawn many people together to support Scott Brown. I can’t tell you how many Scott Brown signs I’ve seen in places I would never expect to vote Republican—even handmade “Vote for Brown” signs made out of plastic, wood, and cardboard. The farther you go from Boston, the more Brown signs you see.

Prior to this election, the closest thing I have ever seen to this level of voter enthusiasm was Mitt Romney’s 1994 Senate campaign against Ted Kennedy. Back then, vast numbers of Massachusetts voters were enormously enthusiastic about the chance to finally unseat Kennedy. Unfortunately, as I wrote in my VDARE.com obituary for Ted Kennedy, Mitt Romney ran a poor campaign. He also came across as a polished out-of-town CEO, which hampered his ability to connect to voters. But Scott Brown is a local guy who comes across like someone you might know. He retains his regional accent and mannerisms. He is married with kids and serves in the National Guard. In other words, he is not your typical senator, and that’s a big reason why people like him-and dislike him. “We are running against the machine” Scott Brown and his supporters keep saying, a reference to the Democratic Party Establishment that has had a stranglehold over Massachusetts for generations.

For example: One piece of the Massachusetts machine who excelled at pretending he was “one of us” was former Speaker of the House of Representatives Thomas “Tip” O’Neill. “All politics is local” was Tip O’Neill’s famous phrase. And for years now many Democrats, especially in Massachusetts, have tried to ride the strength of this feel-good slogan into elected office, repeating it ad nauseam. The problem is that most people actually believe that Tip O’Neill was giving advice on how to govern. Actually, it was only advice on how to campaign.

In 1936, Tip O’Neill ran for the Cambridge City Council. He campaigned everywhere except in the neighborhood where he was born and raised simply because he assumed that he already had those votes in the bag. After O’Neill lost the race, he reviewed the vote totals by precinct and discovered that he had actually done worse in his own neighborhood. “People like to be asked,” a neighbor explained to him. O’Neill never made that mistake again. And he never lost another race.

When it came to governing, however, Tip O’Neill believed that all politics was really national, or rather, international. O’Neill cared little about the people in his own congressional district, as is clear from his life-long support for Open Borders. “We have committed our nation to the preservation of freedom for all peoples of the world; not only those of Northern Europe” he loftily told the House of Representatives during the debate over the 1965 Immigration Act.

In 1983, Speaker O’Neill continued to defend America’s open borders immigration policy, claiming that “The pluralistic society which has resulted from the amalgamation of so many cultures has enriched the lives of all Americans and has strengthened our national character.” But when O’Neill resigned from office in 1985, he immediately sold his Cambridge home and moved to a racially homogeneous Cape Cod village—Harwich Port, MA, six-tenths of one percent black, nine-tenths of one percent Hispanic. So much for being a local guy (with an “enriched” life).

Martha Coakley’s biggest mistake was that she ignored Tip’s advice and did not ask for our votes. In fact, Coakley took a week-long vacation between Christmas and New Year’s Day, so sure was she of being elected senator. While Martha Coakley was on vacation, Scott Brown was driving his now-famous truck across the state. In freezing-cold temperatures, he stood on street corners and in front of supermarkets. Brown shook hands, he listened to voters, and asked for their support.

One of Martha Coakley’s more revealing moments was when a reporter asked her why she wasn’t spending more time on the stump like Scott Brown. “As opposed to standing outside Fenway Park? In the cold? Shaking hands?” Coakley sneered, referring to a recent Brown ad that showed him talking to voters outside Fenway Park. Standing outside in the cold is not unusual for people around here. Most of us do it every day.

Michael Kinsley defined a gaffe as the moment when a politician inadvertently tells the truth. Perhaps Martha Coakley’s most revealing gaffe was when she told a radio host that former Red Sox ace Curt Schilling was a “Yankees fan.” The Schilling remark vividly illustrates that Martha Coakley is really not a member of one of the New England’s little platoons, but a post-American elite who wishes only to preside over them. It’s hard to imagine how anyone can be both a diehard Red Sox fan and a “citizen of the world”. You will not find people like Martha Coakley or Ted Kennedy cheering on the local high school team, attending the church fair, riding the subway, or having coffee at the local diner. They look down on local customs as bourgeois.

Some Republican elites, of course, are just as good at pretending to be one of the gang as Tip O‘Neill. For a time, George W. Bush convinced millions that he was regular Texan who loved Jesus and baseball. In reality, Bush was actually a fan of Hispanicizing the game, attempting to turn baseball into the “international pastime”.

Last week, I wrongly predicted that Brown would lose the election after his last debate performance because of his stammering delivery, and reluctance to attack Martha Coakley, especially on immigration (where his position was actually quite good). However, Brown scored a knockout punch with the now-famous line: “With all due respect, it’s not the Kennedy’s seat. It’s the people’s seat.”

What people don’t seem to realize about this oft-quoted remark is that Brown did not direct it at Martha Coakley, but at the debate moderator, David Gergen—a permanent fixture of the political establishment, who clearly leaned toward Coakley. It was David Gergen [email him] who referred to the open Senate seat as “the Kennedy’s seat”. And he obviously did not enjoy being corrected. Our elites never do.

Another cog in the Massachusetts machine that is now slowing is the Open Borders Boston Globe, which has been lording over the commonwealth for more than a century. For weeks, The Boston Globe has been shrilly denouncing Scott Brown’s ascendancy, furious that the public is no longer listening to them when it comes to electing people to public office. Have you ever seen the look on someone’s face when they’re giving a public speech, and people suddenly start getting up and leaving the room? That has been the tone of the Boston Globe lately.

The Boston Globe is reportedly losing $1 million per week and has had to lay off much of its staff (although it still has a full-time immigration reporter). They have only themselves to blame for their declining influence.

Quietly, immigration has been no small factor in this election. I’ve talked to several workers in the Brown campaign in recent days and they all say that frustration with out-of-control immigration is a top voter concern. Brown used illegal immigration in his push-polling. And we have the testimony of liberal policy analyst Karen Dolan [Email her]that many of her Massachusetts female friends were supporting Brown, to her disgust, not merely because “he looks good naked” (in his celebrated 1982 Cosmopolitan centerfold) but because “they think [Coakley] wants to bus in immigrants take over their schools…They think she will take their tax dollars and give it to an "illegal alien" in Arizona for an abortion.”[ Scott Brown’s Body seduces. Take A Cold Shower, Huffington Post, January 19, 2010.]

And, over the last few weeks, I’ve also been asking lots of voters why they support Scott Brown. Significantly, they are not primarily motivated by popular issues like healthcare, taxes, or terrorism, important as these are. Rather, what motivates a great many Brown supporters is the preservation of their way of life—a way of life that has gradually been undermined by a political class that cares nothing for them. People love their little platoons. The Scott Brown phenomenon was really their opportunity to band together to defend and reclaim them.

Is this a great country or what?

SOURCE



Assuring Adequate Penalties for Identity Theft

New Report Looks at Statutes, Cases, and Solutions

A key statutory tool to prosecute identity thieves was significantly weakened by a May 2009 Supreme Court ruling in the case of Flores-Figueroa v. United States. The case held that prosecutors not only must prove that there was an identity-theft victim, but that the defendant knew he had used a real person’s identity information, as opposed to not knowing whether the information was counterfeit or real. The result is to curtail prosecutors’ ability to go after the crime of identity theft, which is disproportionately committed by illegal immigrants.

A new Center for Immigration Studies report explores this issue with an eye toward offering a solution. In 'Fixing Flores: Assuring Adequate Penalties for Identity Theft and Fraud,' CIS Director of National Security Studies Janice Kephart does the following:

* Provides a first-time review of 250 aggravated felony identity theft cases within the past three years that used the statute in question.

* Reviews legislative history of both Sections 1028 and 1028A of the U.S Criminal Code.

* Analyzes the Circuit Court and Supreme Court cases that led to the current interpretation of Section 1028A.

* Proposes minor but important changes in the statutory language for Sections 1028 and 1028A.

As biometric immigration-control programs become more widespread in the United States (including E-Verify, US-Visit, REAL ID, and the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative), the fake identities illegal aliens and criminals have traditionally used will no longer pass muster – they will increasingly have to use a real person's identity information to be “verified” under these initiatives, rather than just making up numbers and other information. Add in possible amnesty for 11 million illegal aliens, and issues of identity theft, vetting, verification, and assurance become of increasing concern. Being hamstrung by a Supreme Court interpretation of a criminal statute that enables perpetrators to hide behind a cloak of deniability about their crime will inevitably lead to increased attempts at identity theft. Congress needs to provide a fix, and quick.

The above is a press release received Jan. 19 from from Center for Immigration Studies. 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076. Email: center@cis.org. Contact: Janice Kephart, 202-466-8185, jlk@cis.org





20 January, 2010

U.S. to repatriate "most" Haitian refugees

U.S. authorities are readying for an influx of Haitians seeking to escape their earthquake-racked nation, even though the policy for migrants remains the same: With few exceptions, they will go back. Fears of a mass migration have not materialized so far, but conditions in Haiti become more dire each day and U.S. officials don't want to be caught off guard.

Between 250 and 400 immigration detainees are being moved from South Florida's main detention center to clear space for any Haitians who manage to reach U.S. shores, according to the Homeland Security Department. U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, could house migrants temporarily — far from the terrorist suspects also being held there — and a Catholic church is working on a plan to accept Haitian orphans.

Homeland Security spokesman Sean Smith said Monday that orphans who have ties to the U.S. — such as family members already living here — and Haitians evacuated for medical reasons are among those who can gain special permission to remain in the U.S.

The mass migration plan, known as Operation Vigilant Sentry, was put into place in 2003 because of experiences with Caribbean migrations, said Coast Guard Lt. Cmdr. Chris O'Neil, a spokesman for the Homeland Security Task Force Southeast, which would manage any Haitian influx. "There is no new incentive for anyone to try to enter the United States illegally by sea," Cmdr. O'Neil said. "The goal is to interdict them at sea and repatriate them."

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano underscored the message during a weekend appearance at Homestead Air Reserve Base south of Miami, a key staging area for Haiti relief flights. "This is a very dangerous crossing. Lives are lost every time people try to make this crossing," Ms. Napolitano said, addressing Haitians directly. "Please do not have us divert our necessary rescue and relief efforts that are going into Haiti by trying to leave at this point."

Some immigration advocates say the U.S. should shift away from stopping migrants and ease safe passage. They say those on approved waiting lists should be able to join spouses or relatives in the U.S. "We should be figuring out an orderly transition for people to come here, instead of being panicked about it," said Ira Kurzban, a leading Miami immigration lawyer.

The Obama administration's decision last week to grant temporary protected status to Haitians in the U.S. illegally as of Jan. 12 does not extend to those attempting to enter the U.S. after that date. The Coast Guard has intercepted 17 Haitians at sea this year, all before the earthquake struck.

U.S. policy notwithstanding, the Catholic Church in Miami is working on a proposal that would allow thousands of orphan children to live in the U.S. permanently. A similar effort launched in 1960, known as Operation Pedro Pan, brought about 14,000 unaccompanied children from Cuba to the U.S. Under the plan dubbed "Pierre Pan," Haitian orphans would be placed in group homes and then paired with foster parents, said Mary Ross Agosta, a spokeswoman for the Archdiocese of Miami. "We have children who are homeless and possibly without parents and it is the moral and humane thing to do," Ms. Agosta said. Officials said many details would have to be settled and the Obama administration would have to grant orphans humanitarian parole to enter the U.S.

SOURCE



Six-year farce of asylum seeker who wants to go home and has been trying to escape FROM Britain

Unlike the many asylum seekers desperate to remain in Britain, all Rashid Ali wants is to leave and get out of the cold. The 31-year-old Moroccan has spent the past six years trying to escape and has stowed away on cargo ships at least six times. Yet more than 12 months after a judge vowed to 'kick some backsides' and get him deported, he remains stuck in the system. He is being held in a detention centre costing taxpayers more than Ł100 a night.

Immigration officials say they will not send him home until he produces his passport, as the authorities in his native country will not allow him in without proof that he is one of its citizens. But Ali ripped up his passport and identity papers on arriving in Britain in 2004, hoping he would have more chance of gaining asylum if he pretended to be Algerian.

It was in December 2008 that Judge Michael Hubbard, QC, vowed to 'kick some backsides', saying he would write to government ministers to make sure Ali was promptly repatriated. But with border officials still at an impasse with Moroccan authorities, there appears little prospect of Ali being allowed to leave, even though the saga has cost the public more than Ł300,000.

As the chairman of MigrationWatch UK, Sir Andrew Green, put it: 'This is the stuff of Alice in Wonderland. How can it possibly take so long to get a passport from the Moroccan authorities?'

Ali had dreamed that Britain would be a land of opportunity, but his illusions were shattered soon after his arrival and he began his unsuccessful attempts to stow away on ships. Eventually he was jailed for nine months in June 2005 after stealing a coat to keep warm. North Somerset magistrates ordered him to be deported after serving his sentence.

But on release from Horfield Prison in Bristol he was sent to a detention centre for almost three years, despite constant pleas to go home. In October 2008, when he was finally freed, immigration authorities offered Ali his own flat for fear he would harm himself hiding on board vessels. But he refused the offer and two days later was found hiding on another boat leaving Bristol. He was charged with stealing a mobile phone and jacket and damaging a door at the docks, which he admitted.

At Bristol Crown Court in December 2008, Judge Hubbard called for an inquiry, saying it beggared belief that the Home Office had failed to repatriate him. 'The sooner he gets back to Morocco, the better for everybody,' said the judge. 'It beggars belief that during that time in detention it wasn't sorted out for him to return home.'

Since then Ali has been held at Colnbrook Removal Centre, near Heathrow, as officials fear he will abscond. Immigration staff are liaising with Moroccan authorities to find some documents that will prove his nationality. It costs around Ł43,000 a year to lock up failed asylum seekers - more expensive than sending them on a world cruise. Figures obtained by the Tories show it costs Ł119 a day to hold a detainee compared to Ł90 for a prison cell. Removal centres cost so much to run because they must follow rules including providing failed asylum seekers with activities, TVs and health care.

Tory immigration spokesman Damian Green said it was 'appalling' that nothing had changed since Judge Hubbard's demand for action. A UK Border Agency spokesman said: 'There are countries where we can have difficulty returning people.'

SOURCE





19 January, 2010

CIS ROUNDUP

1. Dirty Work: In-Sourcing American Jobs with H-2B Guestworkers

Excerpt: Americans don’t want to mow your lawn. They don’t want to serve you your lobster roll sandwich during your summer holiday in Maine. They won’t drive the trucks that bring food to the grocery store you shop in, or chop down the trees that produce the paper you use, or perform at the circus you attend every summer. You’ll also need the helping hand of a “temporary, seasonal” guestworker to help you get on the chair lift in Vail, and to learn how to ski or snowboard. Nor will Americans guard your swim club’s pool, shovel the snow in your driveway, operate the rides at the amusement park you take your kids to, tidy up the hotel room you sleep in, or process the seafood you eat. Americans can’t even be counted on to coach sports, or work construction jobs. American workers have grown soft, young people don’t want to work, and the unemployed don’t want to do much of anything strenuous these days.

These are the kind of flawed assumptions that have led to the creation and rapid growth of the H-2B visa program, which has resulted in more half a million jobs being filled by foreign guestworkers over the last five years, rather than Americans and immigrants already in the United States.

********

2. Update on Fuzzy Words in the Immigration Policy Debate

Excerpt: The open-borders supporters continue to push the linguistic boundaries as they seek to impose on all of us new and fuzzier ways of discussing immigration policy, a subject covered in an earlier blog of mine.

********

3. A Response to Amy Mehta's Call to Strip the 'Mask'

Excerpt: One of the reasons I came to work at CIS a year ago was that I wanted to oppose the effort by some who favor increased immigration to stifle debate by impugning the motives of those, including CIS, who make a case for reduced immigration. That smear campaign, led by the National Council of La Raza and their allies at the Southern Poverty Law Center, seeks to present us as part of an 'anti-immigrant' cabal whose claims to be concerned about the economic, environmental, and social consequences of immigration are merely a mask that seeks to cover our bigotry and xenophobia.

********

4. 'Temporary' Status for Haitians

Excerpt: Temporary Protected Status (TPS) was invented precisely for cases like Haiti today — when a natural disaster is so devastating that illegal immigrants from that country temporarily can't be deported. And there are already several members of Congress calling on the administration to grant TPS, and rightly so.

But the earthquake is also an argument for why we need to fix TPS — it's a necessary tool, but as currently structured it functions as a permanent amnesty for anyone 'lucky' enough to come from a country that suffers a natural (or even man-made) disaster. As far as I've been able to determine, not a single person who has ever been granted this 'temporary' status has later been deported.

********

5. Green Cards for Rich Family Actually Cost Less Than Previously Reported

Excerpt: In an earlier blog I said that it would cost about $100,000 each for a rich alien family of five to secure green cards through the investor visa program. I also said that the program generates jobs for Americans. I was wrong on both accounts.

The jobs can be hard to identify and the costs can be much less.

********

6. When in Doubt, Keep Them Out

Excerpt: Monday's Washington Times included a piece echoing Elliott Abrams's NRO article from a couple weeks ago: The State Department needs to get out of the visa business. It managed to hold onto to the visa process after 9/11 only with oversight from DHS, but State has continually fought DHS efforts to tighten up the process and 'again and again has sided with foreigners seeking access to the United States.' This is why, as my Center for Immigration Studies colleague Jessica Vaughan points out, State didn't even check whether the panty-bomber had a visa after his father's warning, let alone revoke it.

********

7. CNN Segment on State Dept. Failures

Excerpt: The CNN segment on the Christmas Day plot features Janice Kephart discussing why we need to think about this plot not so much as an intelligence failing, but a successful terrorist travel operation akin to that used by the 9/11 hijackers. She also discusses the need to re-vet visas close to time of travel.

********

8. Political Pushback for Soft-on-Immigration Republicans

Excerpt: There are new indications that supporting mass amnesty and liberal immigration levels may carry political costs. Two prominent Republican lawmakers who've pushed amnesty now face political heat for those actions. U.S. Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham have become targets for their open-borders stances.

********

9. Illegal Aliens: Turning the Dreams of American Children into Nightmares

Excerpt: American citizens and legal residents would be left on their own to recover their credit histories and to undo all of the other problems they have been saddled with by illegal aliens.

They would have to do this at their own expense with no help from the U.S. government, which would prohibit any information about the illegal aliens' criminal activities from being made available to law enforcement agencies or to the victims of their crimes.

Congress will, however, ensure that the government collects a small fine and some back taxes and closes its eyes to the injustices done to ordinary working Americans and their families.

Isn't it time that Congress started looking out for the well-being of American citizens and legal residents rather than rewarding criminal illegal aliens with a path to citizenship?

The above is a press release received Jan. 16 from from Center for Immigration Studies. 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076. Email: center@cis.org.



Migrants to Britain ARE driving down wages of the poor

The 'almost unprecedented' influx of 1.5million Eastern European workers into the UK in recent years is likely to have driven down the wages of less well-off Britons, the equalities watchdog said yesterday.

Poorer parts of the country may become locked in a 'vicious circle' where the only jobs which are created are low-skilled and likely to be taken by migrants, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission said in a landmark study.

The research also found that, overall, Eastern Europeans had better employment rates than British workers and had received dramatically bigger pay rises from bosses who value their 'excellent work ethic'.

'Their wages have grown by an average of 5 per cent a year compared with 1 per cent for natives', the study says. Many are highly skilled but downgrade their 'occupational status' when they come to the UK, making them more attractive to employers.

Researchers for the EHRC examined dozens of studies into the 'almost unprecedented scale and speed' of migration from Eastern Europe since 2004 when the UK's labour market was thrown open to workers from Poland and seven other former Eastern Bloc countries.

They estimate that 1.5million people have arrived here, although only 700,000 remain, and found that the 'new EU citizens' overall fiscal impact is probably small but positive'.

But their report adds: 'Perhaps more significant is the impact on local areas: local public services have had to adjust to concentrated increases in population and larger numbers of non-English speakers.'

The warning that wage levels for poorer Britons may have been hit will worry the Government - particularly coming just after Communities Secretary John Denham was forced to admit that many working class whites had been left struggling to adapt to the new Britain.

Ministers had always denied that pay to British workers had suffered from the influx of Eastern Europeans predominantly doing low-skilled jobs.

But the report, written for the EHRC by the Migration Policy Institute, says: 'The recent migration may have reduced wages slightly at the bottom end of the labour market, especially for certain groups of vulnerable workers, and there is a risk that it could contribute to a "low-skill equilibrium" in some economically depressed areas.' It defines this as 'a situation in which the local labour force has low skill levels and so local employers only create low-productivity jobs'.

SOURCE





18 January, 2010

Muslim peer: rising immigration is 'damaging race relations' in Britain

Lord Ahmed of Rotherham, a leading Muslim peer, has urged the Government to keep a tight rein on immigration and warned the issue is damaging race relations. Lord Ahmed, who was Britain's first Muslim member of the House of Lords, accused ministers of aiding the rise of Far Right extremists by neglecting the white working class. He said that many people believed immigration was damaging their chances of getting a job or accessing public services.

The outspoken peer, formerly a Labour member, said: "I honestly think that we have got to see what increased migration does to our economy, our resources, our race relations in this country. "People say Europe needs 50 million immigrants in the next 30 or 40 years. Of course there are all these arguments, but this perception that foreigners are coming in and taking all the jobs creates difficulty in communities and has a detrimental impact on community relations in this country. "As a result you have people looking towards the BNP and other right wing fascist groups."

Lord Ahmed, who was born in Pakistan, is a member of the Cross-Party Group on Balanced Migration, which also features Lord Carey and Frank Field, and which has called for the UK population to be capped at 70 million.

The peer said: "It is better for learned people to be driving this debate, which is needed for our country, rather than those who are racist and fascist. It is important that we discuss this. "There is this perception that people are coming in from Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia as well as Eastern Europe. There is the perception that they are taking all the resources and that British white working class people are not getting them. That perception is bad. More needs to be done to make sure that the white working class are not in the position and the condition that they are."

He accused the Government of neglecting education and training in white working class areas of Britain. "I think it is very clear that the white working class communities, particularly in the north, have not economically benefited over the years because the gap between the rich and the poor has increased, so the opportunities have diminished, and because of the lack of achievement and education they have not been able to get the jobs that are available to more qualified people from abroad who are fitter and more educated.

"The government should have done more to provide incentives for white working class citizens to engage in these employments. "Most of the white working class people in these areas are not equipped, they are not trained, they are not empowered."

Lord Ahmed said he did not agree with Lord Carey's view that immigrants should be predominantly Christian. But he did want to see controls put on immigration. "I honestly think that to maintain our country in good economic and political and social health, to make sure that there are not problems in terms of unemployment and also to make sure that there is no race relations problem, that you need to have control [of immigration]. "I want to make sure that we have a balanced migration policy which is looking at the need of Britain and why we need migrants coming in."

SOURCE



Cap on immigration an election winner in Britain

[Conservative leader] David Cameron could clinch a general election victory by placing a cap of 50,000 on net immigration, a new opinion poll shows. A YouGov poll in 43 Labour marginals shows that nearly half the respondents were more likely to vote Tory if Cameron backed a 50,000 cap. The poll is significant because it suggests for the first time that immigration curbs could have a decisive impact on the general election result. The Conservatives need to win the marginals to help to secure an effective working majority at the election.

With 85% of voters worried about the population reaching 70m by the end of the next decade, the poll indicates that Cameron’s pledge to cut net migration to ensure the population remains below that figure could reap benefits.

The Tories will seize on the poll as evidence that placing immigration centre stage in their coming campaign will not backfire , as it did when Michael Howard led the Tories to defeat in 2005.

Then, any talk of a cap on migrants was considered political suicide by most MPs. But the recession and the pressure that record migration has put on jobs and public services has transformed the debate. Last year Alan Johnson, the home secretary, broke the mould when he became the first Labour minister publicly to acknowledge voter alarm. He admitted the government had been “maladroit” in dealing with the issue. But Labour has so far been reluctant to spell out how it would keep the population under 70m, a figure that the Office for National Statistics predicts will be reached by 2029.

Cameron last week went further than before in marking out the immigration battleground. Speaking after Lord Carey of Clifton, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, had called for a cap on net migration of 40,000 a year, partly to protect Britain’s Christian ethos, the Tory leader said he did not “support our population going to 70m” and that his concern was to relieve pressure on public services. “In the past decade net immigration in some years has been sort of 200,000, so implying a 2m increase over a decade, which I think is too much,” Cameron said. “We should see net immigration in the tens of thousands rather than the hundreds of thousands.”

The poll, commissioned by Migrationwatch, a right-wing think tank, found that only the economy is more important than immigration to voters in Labour seats. When asked which issue was most likely to influence them, 36% of voters in Labour seats named the economy while 13% said it was immigration. Taxation, at 8%, and health, at 6%, were next.

YouGov found that 85% of people in the Labour marginals were worried about the population reaching 70m, with 49% saying they were “very worried”. The poll found that 44% in Labour marginals would be more likely to vote Conservative if Cameron were to say outright that a Tory government would reduce immigration to 50,000 or below.

Sir Andrew Green, the chairman of Migrationwatch, said the poll showed how the issue could change the balance of power. “The polling numbers tell us yet again that immigration is a matter of deep concern to a large majority of the population and that they are likely to respond very positively to parties that seriously address them,” he said.

SOURCE





17 January, 2010

Protest Against America's Toughest Sheriff Turns Violent in Arizona

The report below is from HuffPo so beware Leftist bias. I am using it only because other reports are less detailed

A peaceful march for immigrant rights turned violent Saturday after a small number protesters allegedly threw water bottles and rocks. The march was organized by a coalition of immigrant rights groups and drew several thousand to protest the strict immigration enforcement practices of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

The protest was mostly peaceful as demonstrators marched more than 3 miles from a Phoenix park to the famous "tent city" jail to protest Arpaio who has become an embattled local symbol for both sides of the immigration debate. He is infamous for controversial practices, including immigration "sweeps" in Hispanic neighborhoods, pink handcuffs, old-fashioned striped jail uniforms, pink underwear, and pink flip flops. He is most famous for housing inmates in outdoor tent-based jails.

According to a police spokesperson and witnesses, a handful of protesters, dressed in black, began throwing rocks and water bottles at officers who had been stationed at the jail to keep the peace. A horse-mounted officer attempted to enter the crowd to take the items away from the troublemakers who retaliated by pushing the horse with sticks. As the altercation quickly escalated, other officers used pepper spray to separate the horse and officer from the crowd. Some witnesses also reported that tasers were used to subdue them.

Ruben Gallego, a local city staffer, witnessed the incident and said the anarchists were not part of the organization and did not share the agenda of the protest, "There do not represent 99% of the 15,000 people that were there. They tried to take away the message."

Immigration protests in Phoenix have been peaceful in the past, and many demonstrators brought their children and elderly relatives. Gallego and other witnesses reported that children downwind from the incident were affected by the pepper spray.

At least four protesters, including two men and two women, were detained (all yet to be named), but police say only one is expected to be charged with a crime. That protester is likely to be charged with "aggravated assault on a police officer." Chris Newman, one of the organizers says, "We are asking for a full investigation into the incident, both with respect to the conduct of those who are accused of disrupting the march and the actions of the police."

A few nearby protesters shouted for the police to release those who had been detained, but most kept moving forward with the march. Because the incident happened near the back of the mile-long line of marchers, most people in the crowd did not even realize any altercation had taken place.

The protest was headlined by Zach de La Rocha (of Rage Against the Machine) and Linda Ronstadt (pop singer). The protest was organized by Puente, along with a coalition of immigrant rights groups, including the National Day Labor Organizing Network.

SOURCE



Australia: Wealthy migrants pricing locals out of Sydney property market

This is an almost inevitable result of a high level of immigration anywhere and Australia's Leftist Federal government is deliberately and openly fostering a high level of immigration. The price problem would be much alleviated if more land for housing were released from restrictive land-use regulations but the Greenies would raise hell if that were done so the problem will only get worse

AUSTRALIAN families are being priced out of the property market by record numbers of highly paid skilled workers arriving from overseas. Research by The Sunday Telegraph has revealed for the first time how skilled immigrants - predominantly from Britain, India and China - are forcing house prices to some of the highest levels in the world when compared with average incomes.

Almost 115,000 permanent skilled visas were issued last year, compared with just over 40,000 in 1998-99 - an increase of 187 per cent. During the same period, the median house price rose 168 per cent, from $156,600 to $420,600.

Although the number of migrants is relatively low compared with total property transactions, which have averaged 500,000 a year over the past 10 years, experts say property-price inflation is driven not by what the average buyer can afford to pay, but by the highest bidder. And because skilled migrants command above-average salaries, they pay above-average prices. As a result, a relatively small number of highly paid buyers can have a disproportionate effect on house prices.

"There's no question the number of skilled migrants is a key factor in driving up prices," John Edwards, of property monitor Residex, said. "You need only two highly paid buyers at an auction to take the price of a property well above what any other party could afford to pay."

Proof of this theory came when Mr Edwards plotted a chart of the increase in skilled migration alongside national house-price growth. "It correlates at a rate of 98 per cent, which is almost unheard of," he said. "It even has an 18-month time lag, which is obviously the period between immigrants arriving in Australia, getting themselves settled and when they first purchase a property."

Coinciding with the surge in skilled immigration, the median Australian property now costs 5.5 times the average household income, and about eight times income in Sydney. That compares with a ratio of 2.5 times household income in the US and five times income in Britain.

Property prices in the US and Britain have collapsed, but neither country approached Australia's peak of six times income even before their markets crashed. Australia's skilled migration program is likely to keep prices rising for years to come. As The Sunday Telegraph revealed last week, the median Sydney house price is forecast to hit $1 million by 2020.

"We need immigration for our economy, but the fact they have higher-than-average incomes at a time when the supply of housing is constrained, inevitably results in prices going up," AMP Capital chief economist Shane Oliver said.

Other economists, however, say the shortage of housing supply is only partly to blame. "The fact there is a shortage of property doesn't necessarily mean prices have to keep rising," Steve Keen, professor of economics at the University of NSW, said. "There was still a shortage of property in the UK when its housing prices crashed."

The list of skilled professions issued by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship is dominated by high-earning professions such as accountants, IT workers, engineers and health-related specialists, from chiropractors to radiographers.

Meanwhile, the number of visas issued to unskilled families has been falling for years, from around 60,000 in 1995 to about 50,000 last year, further increasing the bias towards high earners. The result is a higher proportion of higher paid workers among skilled migrants, even as the number of skilled visas is reduced. Last year, the Government cut permanent skilled migration visas by 14 per cent from 133,500 to 115,000. It has proposed a further cut to 108,100 for 2009-10, a reduction of almost 20 per cent on previous levels.

[Skilled migration visas are only one of several ways to migrate legally to Australia. The present Federal government is reorienting the migrant intake towards less skilled people while increasing numbers overall. But low-skilled people still have to be housed so that will bid up prices in poor suburbs, which will be MUCH more disruptive than the situation described above. When poorer native-born people find themselves priced out of housing in their old suburbs while immigrants are increasingly moving in, the result could well be expolosive]

SOURCE





16 January, 2010

New Jersey Victory Sets the Tone

The year got off to a positive start after a New Jersey bill died in the state senate earlier this week. The state legislative leaders were hoping to pass an in-state tuition bill for illegal aliens knowing the incoming Governor opposed such a bill. But under consituent pressure, lawmakers couldn't secure enough votes and were forced to cancel the vote.

States across the country will soon begin considering measures like the one in New Jersey, and these battles are just as significant as the ones we fight on the national level. So, if you receive an Alert dealing with an issue in your state, we hope you'll take Action just like our members in New Jersey did over the past 10 days.

State legislatures are not the only battlegrounds. A few weeks ago, Lancaster, Calif. passed a city ordinance requiring businesses to use E-Verify, and many other local municipalities are doing the same. The story out of Massachusetts earlier this week is an example of the Administration's unwillingness to enforce immigration laws, so it'll be up to the states to protect American workers.

The above is part of a circular from NumbersUSA [immigrationinfo@numbersusa.com] of 1601 N. Kent Street, Suite 1100, Arlington, VA 22209, dated Jan. 16.



Fixing Europe's Immigration Problem

The article below by an Indian writer is, I think, unduly negative both in its descriptions and in its prophecies. The article comes from the "open borders" WSJ. But its call for secure borders plus an efficient "guestworker" system would appear to be the most politically acceptable solution not only for Europe but also for the USA. Note however, that illegal workers are very few in Australia so it is a myth that a modern Western country "needs" guestworkers

Italy's recent race riots are only a forerunner of things to come. Massive illegal immigration and native resentment are inevitable by-products of the European Union's broken immigration system, while xenophobia and rampant racism undermine its moral authority and put it in the camp of many of the tyrants it claims to despise. Italy and other European countries must learn from the American experience that comprehensive immigration reform is essential. Here's why.

Even the most hot-headed Italian xenophobe cannot drive all of Italy's foreigners out of Europe. It is estimated that there are over 4.5 million immigrants in Italy. Precise numbers about the illegal population are hard to find: The Christian charity Caritas Internationalis puts it at over one million, but others claim that it is between 500,000 and 700,000. This is small fry compared to the 12 million illegal immigrants that the U.S. faces, and makes real reform possible.

Italian law makers have sought to institute harsh financial penalties and imprisonment to tackle illegal immigration. Under a recent law, those caught can be fined up to €10,000 ($14,000). In early 2009, the Italian Senate approved a law to authorize doctors to report illegal immigrants who come to them for medical treatment. Landlords face jail terms of up to three years for renting their properties to illegals. The government even entered into an agreement with Libya's Moammar Gadhafi to return illegal migrants to Africa via Libya in exchange for $5 billion over 25 years. These are quixotic follies.

Despite all the legal saber rattling, immigrants pack Italy's jails: Almost half of the jail population is comprised of foreigners either awaiting trial or serving their sentences. Other than creating soft targets for blame and alienating immigrants, what exactly have they achieved? Criminalization and lack of opportunities guarantee a vicious cycle of self-perpetuating ghettoization. Crime becomes the only option, reinforcing popular stereotypes about African immigrants being dangerous criminals. The result is a net social loss.

What is the alternative? The Italians have tried amnesties before. Hundreds of thousands of people have been granted legal status under these amnesties, most notably between 1986 and 1998, but millions more are attracted by the possibility that they will become legal one day. Similarly, in an attempt to sustain its construction-fueled economy, Spain legalized over half a million illegals just a few years ago, but the flow of migrants continues unabated there also.

Illegal immigration is not just an Italian problem. It is a European problem and the EU must act. Many immigrants who enter Italy and Spain move to other countries. Given that many of these people come from countries with strong terrorist activity—like Somalia—illegal immigration poses dangerous national-security threats. The involvement of human trafficking rings with links to organized crime syndicates is another cause for alarm. In addition to the security implications, the horrendous plight of most illegal immigrants poses a challenge to European humanitarian values. All of these provide sufficiently strong incentives for all European states to confront the problem at an EU level.

There is no escaping this reality. Even the U.K., which is relatively friendly to immigrants, has seen horrific attacks on immigrants in cities like Belfast. Unless something is done fast, fortress Europe will show the world its most ugly face. This will be a return to Mussolini's Europe—not the image to project if Europe is to be taken seriously in international relations.

Piecemeal legislative responses will not solve the problem. They make for good political theater and embolden local thugs to take the law into their own hands. The U.S. experience with the Minutemen—armed vigilantes who patrol the Mexican border—must be a sobering reminder of what lies in store. Italian vigilantes have already conducted house-to-house attacks on immigrants and the day is not far off when they escalate matters further.

Opportunistic politicians will also seek to take advantage in Europe, just as they have in the U.S. Many states in that country have passed harsh laws to take enforcement action against illegals, most notably the border state of Arizona. Backed by aggressive local police officials, these laws are used to harass both locals and foreigners. Employers, landlords, hospitals, and state agencies, all risk penalties unless they turn into government spies.

The current situation will increase tolerance for xenophobia and racism in Europe. Progress in human rights—achieved over decades—will be undone.

Comprehensive immigration reform must be built on strong borders and legal rights to employment. First, all EU states must contribute resources to border states to ensure that illegal crossings are prevented. This must include better policing, electronic fences, and more enforcement personnel. Funds must also be used to transport those worthy of deportation to their home countries after a legal process.

Second, a transparent and efficient regime of legal work permits must be put in place. Most immigrants come to Europe because there is a market demand for their services. A system of guest work permits granted in the applicant's home country is the first step. This would be funded almost entirely by application fees. Illegal immigrants must be allowed to qualify for these guest passes upon payment of a fine, with a guarantee of returning to their home countries upon expiry of the work permit. Work permit holders must have the right to change employers without losing the right to work—essential to prevent exploitative slave labor. Employers must be able to hire and fire workers under the scheme, and there must be no entitlement to welfare payments from the state. This model will eliminate the black-market economy, ensure tax revenues, and create a climate for acceptance and reconciliation.

Whether the EU likes it or not, a multicultural society is the reality for many states because of demographic challenges. If Europe does not act quickly, its politics will return to the dark ages of racism and xenophobia.

SOURCE





15 January, 2010

Clinton says Haitians to get temporary immigration status

Many thousands of undocumented Haitians who live in South Florida and other parts of this country will be given a temporary legal immigration status to prevent their deportation, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton indicated on Thursday

When asked on CBS’ Early Show whether officials are considering giving Haitians temporary asylum in Florida or elsewhere, Clinton responded: “Well, we have, as you know, many Haitian Americans. Most are here legally. Some are not documented. And the Obama administration is taking steps to make sure that people are given some temporary status so that we don’t compound the problem that we face in Haiti.”

The administration already has suspended deportations of Haitians in the immediate aftermath of a devastating earthquake in Haiti. But officials have stopped short of changing the immigration status of Haitians, which would extend beyond the crisis.

For many years, Haitian-Americans and South Florida members of Congress have been urging President Obama and his predecessors to grant “temporary protected status” to undocumented Haitians so they can live and work here legally.

Advocates say it makes no sense to send Haitians back to an impoverished land devastated by a series of natural disasters and periodic outbursts of political violence and turmoil. Far better, they say, to allow Haitians to work here and help sustain their homeland by sending remittances to their families. Congressmen Kendrick Meek, Alcee Hastings and others renewed the call on Wednesday.

But several administrations have been reluctant to grant TPS for fear it would encourage more Haitians to flee the island on dangerous voyages bound for Florida. Critics in Congress say it would reward illegal immigration and strain schools and social services in places like South Florida.

Meek predicts that the Obama administration will grant TPS over the next few days or weeks. Clinton’s comments on Thursday indicate the process may be underway.

SOURCE



FAIR Urges Termination of TPS for Other Nations to Accommodate Influx of Haitians

In response to Tuesday’s devastating earthquake in Haiti, Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), issued the following statement on the suspension of deportation of Haitians in the United States:

“The magnitude of the devastation in Haiti makes it impossible for people to return home under current conditions. In light of the catastrophe our government should grant Haitian nationals the ability to remain in the United States until the immediate crisis has passed.

“However, it is incumbent upon our national leaders to not only act compassionately, but to act responsibly to the American people and ensure that their compassion is not abused. In keeping with these important objectives, allowing Haitians affected by the earthquake to remain in the country must be accompanied by termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for nationals of other nations where conditions no longer merit their continued presence in this country. In some cases, such as TPS for citizens of El Salvador, the triggering event occurred more than a decade ago.

“Suspension of deportation for Haitians must also include a definitive termination date, so that we do not repeat mistakes of the past. The purpose of extending temporary humanitarian leave to remain in the United States must be to help the Haitian people and government get through the immediate crisis, not to facilitate an extended or permanent transfer of large segments of their population to the United States, imposing significant burdens on American taxpayers.

“As Americans, we believe it is in the best traditions of our nation to offer a helping hand to a neighbor as they deal with a devastating earthquake, to offer humanitarian aid and provide temporary refuge to people who cannot return home. Our long term objectives must be to help Haitians return home at the early possible date to do the important work of getting their country get back on its feet.”

The above is a press release dated October 9 from Federation for American Immigration Reform, 25 Massachusetts Avenue - Suite 330 Washington DC, 20001, Office 202-328-7004. Contact Bob Dane 202-328-7004 or Ira Mehlman 206-420-7733 for details of the above. Email: media@fairus.org. Founded in 1979, FAIR is the oldest and largest immigration reform group in America. FAIR fights for immigration policies that enhance national security, improve the economy, protect jobs and wages and establish a rule of law that is recognized and enforced.





14 January, 2010

Jakarta set to force illegals off boat

INDONESIA will force 240 Sri Lankan asylum-seekers into immigration detention by the end of next week, at gunpoint if necessary, after admitting it has concerns there are former Tamil Tigers militants among the group. As the [Australian] opposition stepped up its attack on the government over its decision to bring to Australia four Tamils deemed a security risk by ASIO, Indonesian immigration officials said they suspected the three-month standoff at the port of Merak was being directed by Tamil militants on the boat.

Indonesia's action is being discussed ahead of a visit to Jakarta by Australia's ambassador for people-smuggling issues, Peter Woolcott, to talk about how the two countries will in future treat a crisis such as that in Merak. The Sri Lankan government claims to have identified former Tigers members aboard the Merak boat, based on press photos.

Senior decision-makers will meet tomorrow to determine whether the Sri Lankans are to be sent to the Australian-funded detention centre in Tanjung Pinang, where the 78 Tamils from the Oceanic Viking were processed, or to rented accommodation closer to Jakarta. The 240 refugees have refused to leave their 30m wooden cargo boat, the Jaya Lestari, since a request by Australia in October that the Indonesian navy intercept them on their way to Christmas Island.

Harry Purwanto, the most senior immigration official in Banten province where the asylum-seekers are holed up, confirmed that Indonesia believed the standoff was due to pressure from people on board with links to the defeated rebel Tigers movement. "Many of them want to get off, but a small number of militants don't want to, and many of the others are frightened because this small group are Tamil Tigers, according to military intelligence," Mr Purwanto said. The Australian understands officials in Canberra have noted the level of discipline apparent on the Merak boat.

A senior Indonesia navy official said yesterday former militants were believed to be aboard the boat. "It's thought to be the case, and if you ask me, I think it's definitely likely -- it's logical that, in a group like this that wants to leave (Sri Lanka), there would be either family members or (Tigers)," the source said. Mr Purwanto said officials from immigration and foreign affairs would meet tomorrow to decide what to do. "We are trying to resolve the issue this month," he said. "This is our nation, so why can't we (use force) in the name of our sovereignty? After all, this has all only happened because we followed an Australian request."

Sanjeev "Alex" Kuhendrarajah, a spokesman for those on board, said if there were former fighters on the Jaya Lestari, "they should have more credibility in their request for asylum than even a regular refugee because they really are fleeing for their lives".

SOURCE



Australian border security committee meets as more boatpeople arrive

Amid a continuing and uninterrupted flow of illegals -- a flow which the conservative Howard government had completely stopped

THE border security committee of cabinet met today in Canberra amid a deepening row over Kevin Rudd's decision to allow four asylum-seekers who ASIO deemed a security threat to be flown to Christmas Island. The meeting followed the interception of another boatload of arrivals near Christmas Island carrying 42 suspected asylum-seekers, the fifth boat for the year.

National Security Adviser Duncan Lewis attended the meeting in the Prime Minister's office as the government confirmed another boatload of asylum-seekers had been detected near Christmas Island.

Immigration Minister Chris Evans confirmed the meeting but would not discuss the agenda, arguing it was a routine meeting. “We are just managing what is hopefully a temporary peak in arrivals,” Senator Evans said.

He also conceded that Australia may have to activate a contingency plan to transport asylum-seekers from the offshore detention centre on Christmas Island to the mainland. There were 1724 people at Christmas Island - its capacity is 1820 detainees - with another 42 to arrive for processing. However, the immigration department said some people had been granted visas and would soon be transferred to the mainland. “We've still got some capacity at Christmas Island. I've always made clear we've got a detention centre at Darwin with a capacity for 500 that's purpose built,” Senator Evans told Perth Radio 6PR. “If we need to we will use that for the final stages for processing. But people will be taken to Christmas Island and they will be treated as offshore entry arrivals and all the legal structures that go around that.”

The cabinet committee was established last year to tackle the recent surge in asylum-seekers arriving by boat and has a $2.8 million budget to source advice and support for the committee to respond to “the resurgent maritime people smuggling threat”. Chaired by Senator Evans, it includes Foreign Affairs Minister Stephen Smith, Defence Minister John Faulkner, Attorney-General Robert McClelland and Mr Lewis. The Prime Minister, who remains on holidays in Tasmania, did not attend the meeting.

Earlier, the opposition accused the Rudd government of committing a “grievous security breach” by sending four asylum-seekers deemed a threat by ASIO to Christmas Island.

Yesterday Senator Evans confirmed the decision to transfer the Tamils by charter plane to honour an agreement with Indonesia to end the Oceanic Viking standoff.

Opposition customs spokesman Michael Keenan said today it was difficult to understand “why the reaction of the Labor Government to the news that these four pose a security risk was to charter a plane to go and collect them from Indonesia and bring them to Australia”. “Now why any Australian Government would commit such a grievous security breach is very difficult to know,” Mr Keenan told ABC Radio. “It's really an extraordinary set of circumstances and it's the final calamity that's been associated with Labor's failed border protection policies.”

The Rudd government confirmed this morning that HMAS Bathurst, operating under the control of Border Protection Command, intercepted another vessel at 2.24am (AEDT) about five nautical miles north of Christmas Island. In a statement today the government said there were 42 people on board. It's the fifth vessel to be detected this year, pushing the detention centre to the brink of capacity.

SOURCE





13 January, 2010

Wow! Australian authorities finally realize that some Tamil "refugees" are terrorists

Sri Lankan terrorists should be returned to Sri Lanka for appropriate action by the Sri Lankan authorities

FOUR of the Tamil asylum-seekers rescued by the Oceanic Viking and offered a special deal by the Rudd Government will be refused visas after ASIO determined them a threat to national security. The government lobbied furiously to resettle the 78 Sri Lankans swiftly following their stand-off aboard the Australian Customs boat, but The Australian revealed today that four of the Tamils being held at Christmas Island have been issued with adverse security assessments by Australia's chief domestic security agency, ASIO.

In a further complication for authorities struggling to manage a fresh wave of boat-borne asylum-seekers, it is believed one of the four is a woman who travelled to Australia in the company of her two young children. The situation presents a conundrum for the Government, which cannot return the four to Sri Lanka without exposing them to potential harm from the Sri Lankan Government, which in May crushed the decades-old Tamil insurgency with a comprehensive military offensive.

Australia would also be in breach of its legal obligations if it returned the four, as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees has designated all 78 of the Sri Lankans as legal refugees. However, people subject to adverse security assessments are by law ineligible for an Australian visa, which means the four have no hope of coming to the Australian mainland. Other countries will also be highly reluctant to take them now that Australia has deemed them a security risk.

The four were part of a group of 16 Tamils who flew from Indonesia to Australia in the final days of last year, amid concerns about their background. They had been held in Tanjung Pinang for about a month after agreeing to leave the Oceanic Viking. On December 29, six of the Sri Lankans, including the four who have been issued adverse security assessments, flew via charter aircraft from Indonesia directly to Christmas Island. The next day, 10 of their fellow passengers flew on a commercial flight into Australia, where they joined other Oceanic Viking passengers, who had flown in before Christmas.

Of the 78 rescued, 44 are in a UN transit facility in Romania awaiting resettlement in the US and Canada, 18 have come to Australia and 16 remain in Tanjung Pinang.

The revelations pose new questions about the Rudd government's handling of the stand-off and whether the decision to offer a special deal to leave the boat was driven by security fears.

Yesterday, ASIO refused to comment on the matter. However, an Immigration Department spokesman, Sandi Logan, confirmed adverse security assessments had been issued. "The passengers from the Oceanic Viking who received adverse security assessments will not be granted permanent visas to resettle in Australia," Mr Logan said. "They are being held in secure and appropriate detention arrangements while Australia continues to explore resettlement options or they choose to depart voluntarily." Mr Logan confirmed Australia would not seek to deport the four to Sri Lanka, acknowledging it would be a breach of the UN Refugee Convention. [Rubbish! There is no convention protecting terrorists]

SOURCE



Australia doesn't want quality immigrants

As in America and Britain, low-skilled illegals can get in with little trouble. In the Australian and British cases, they just have to say the magic word "asylum". But in all three countries it's not so easy if you are highly qualified and likely to be an unusually valuable citizen

AUSTRALIAN universities are training top scientists in areas of importance to the national economy. Some of these students come from overseas, pay fees for their education and want to work and settle in Australia. They are young, highly qualified and have lived in Australia for some years, so they are making informed judgments when they apply for permanent residence with a view to becoming Australian citizens. They meet all the Department of Immigration and Citizenship criteria for permanent residence. Yet they have been pushed to the end of the immigration queue, where they face several years of delay before being considered for permanent residence. While they are waiting they cannot work in scientific positions of benefit to Australia.

Until mid-2008, students completing PhDs in Australian universities were eligible to be considered for permanent residence within three to six months, with the prospect of being eligible for Australian citizenship after a further two years. Two changes were then made to the skilled migration program. Priority was moved from independent skilled migrants (category 885) to those sponsored by employers, and a critical skills list was created. This list does not include specialisations in advanced areas of science in which recent PhDs have graduated.

As a consequence of these changes in immigration procedures, the permanent residence applications of the majority of PhD research scientists who graduated during 2008 and since that time will now not be considered until at least mid-2011. This pushes the likely time when they can expect a decision to 2012. This means a four-year delay.

While waiting in the immigration queue, these PhD graduates cannot apply for many positions, particularly those of high scientific value and those with long-term career prospects. These require permanent residence, if not Australian citizenship. Both government and private employers are reluctant to apply for immigration status for such positions. Heads of scientific laboratories often cannot spare the resources for the lengthy process involved in immigration sponsorship. Some high-level science positions that PhDs trained in Australia could fill are left empty and scientific work is stalled because PhD graduates waiting for permanent residence are confined to limited temporary positions.

Australia is thus wasting the talents and training of PhD graduates who have proved their ability to work at the leading edge of science.

The scientific problems on which we worked as students in human nutrition and food processing are typical. Our research was focused on improving the taste, texture and health-giving qualities of food so as to encourage consumers to enjoy eating more healthily. Such shifts in diet enable people to reduce the high costs of negative lifestyle diseases, contributing to the long-term sustainability of Australia's high living standards. On the production side, research in food technology aims to use water, soils, energy and other resources more efficiently to improve environmental sustainability. Other recent graduates whose permanent residence applications are stalled have worked on PhDs in renewable fuel technology, superconductivity, material science, radiopharmaceutical research, the development of vaccines and immunisations, hydrogen economy and other areas of advanced applied science that are important to maintaining Australia's position at the cutting edge of science and technology.

Studying for advanced degrees in science and contributing through conference papers and publications in peer-refereed journals takes commitment. So does the decision to become an Australian citizen. Yet although we have made these commitments, our lives have been put on hold. We have been told that it will take at least to 2011, and probably longer, before our applications for permanent residence are considered.

Scientists are an important component of any nation's strength and dynamic potential. The market for scientists is international. There are attractive openings worldwide. The US congress is considering a bill that would prevent PhDs trained in the US from leaving the economy. The bill is aimed at amending immigration legislation to exempt science PhDs from migration quotas. Australia does not need new legislation, but immigration rules and procedures should be amended so that scientists trained in Australia are able to work in their fields of expertise and are not discouraged from becoming Australians.

SOURCE





12 January, 2010

CIS roundup

1. Chronic Backlogs at USCIS Show Agency Is Not Ready for CIR-ASAP

Excerpt: One of the many reasons why lawmakers have been loath to enact a mass amnesty and immigration expansion, such as the new Democratic amnesty bill (HR 4321, or CIR-ASAP), has been the government’s chronically poor performance in administering all of our current (and previous) immigration benefits programs. Obama administration officials have assured the public that they are ready for this task.1 But a look at the most recent workload report2 from USCIS reveals that the agency is actually still deep in the weeds and unable to keep up with the existing workload. As of the end of June 2009, the agency had a backlog of nearly 2.7 million applications and petitions that were pending review, above and beyond the 1.8 million that had been completed that quarter. And recent statements3 by agency head Alejandro Mayorkas suggest that huge fee increases for immigrants and hundreds of millions of dollars in increased taxpayer-funded appropriations will be required to improve the situation.

********

2. Rich Immigrants, in Families of Five, Can Buy Green Cards for $100,000 Each

Excerpt: The headline above was not the headline used by the Washington Post of January 9 over an immigration policy story; the Post's bland take was: 'Immigrants invest in U.S. businesses in exchange for visas', but either heading would have been equally accurate.

********

3. Mexicans Reflect on Their Nation's Future

Excerpt: The opinion pages of the Mexico City daily Reforma are often bubbling with ideas. Three year-end essays struck me as particularly interesting because of their reflections on the future of our southern neighbor.

The first was written by a researcher who said better schools are imperative if the country is to redress its brutal inequality and poverty. The second was a passionate call for civic engagement by a university professor. The third was a grim lament by a journalist who moved to the U.S. a quarter century ago and now claims Mexico is crumbling so badly that millions more will leave as soon as the U.S.economy picks up.

********

4. Alien Criminals: Jail or Deport?

Excerpt: Of course, he should have been deported in 1992 after his first brush with the law. But after his felony convictions he served a year or so of his prison sentence and was then deported. The question is, how to best keep scum like this off America's streets — keep them in prison for their full sentences (which in this case was 15 years, according to a Utah law enforcement source), at a high costs to our taxpayers, or save money by deporting them quickly, raising the possibility of their re-entry. Handing alien criminals over to immigration before the conclusion of their sentences is becoming more common as states look for ways to cut costs; Marketplace did a radio story on this just a couple days ago regarding Arizona.

********

5. Open Letter to President Obama on His Leadership Regarding the Christmas Day Plot

Excerpt: Dear Mr. President,

As an American and former counsel to the 9/11 Commission familiar with substantial failings of our government to foil the September 11 terrorist attack, I am concerned about the tenor of your comments of January 5, 2010. You point to 'substantial failings' of the intelligence community who held 'sufficient information' yet 'did not connect the dots,' an outcome you find 'unacceptable and I will not tolerate.'

********

6. BBC Interviews on the Christmas Plot

Excerpt: Below are the full set of interviews I did with BBC 2 Radio in the last 24 hours. In all, my comments follow President Obama's statements regarding his review of the Christmas Plot.

********

7. Adventures in Myth-Busting

Excerpt: The Washington Post's Outlook section has a regular '5 Myths about . . . ' feature, this week about 'keeping America safe from terrorism.' The author was Stephen Flynn, who has long been scathing in his opposition to any use of immigration-control measures to protect the nation against terrorists. Predictably, myth number three was 'Getting better control over America's borders is essential to making us safer,' which was itself full of myths.

********

8. Latest Terror Attempt Shows State Dept. Still Shirking Security Duties

Excerpt: The tale of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian terrorist who nearly blew up a Northwest Airlines plane landing in Detroit on Christmas Day, reveals an alarming number of vulnerabilities in our immigration system still in place, even eight years after 9/11. One of the most troubling is the State Department's persistent failure to pull its weight in preventing terrorist travel to the United States.

The above is a press release dated Jan. 12 from from Center for Immigration Studies. 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076. Email: center@cis.org.



“Hide, the Police Are Coming!”

Another interesting crime-facilitating speech issue, which I discussed in my Crime-Facilitating Speech, 57 Stan. L. Rev. 1095 (2005):

An advocate for immigrant and civil rights has started using text messages to warn residents about crime sweeps by a high-profile Arizona sheriff.

Lydia Guzman, director of the nonprofit immigrant advocacy group Respect/Respeto, is the trunk of a sophisticated texting tree designed to alert thousands of people within minutes to the details of the sweeps, which critics contend are an excuse to round up illegal immigrants.

Guzman said the messages are part of an effort to protect Latinos and others from becoming victims of racial profiling by sheriff’s deputies....

So what’s the First-Amendment-relevant difference, if there is one, between this and a lookout who alerts criminals when the police are coming? (Assume that the lookout isn’t getting a share of the loot, but is just helping his friends avoid getting locked up.) Should it matter, as one expert who’s mentioned in the article suggests, whether Ms. Guzman’s real goal is preventing lawful arrest of illegal immigrants (as opposed to preventing racial profiling, assuming such profiling is unlawful)? I think there may indeed be a difference between such revelation of facts to the public and individualized communications to a small group of criminals, and I don’t think it should turn on jury inferences about the speaker’s true purpose; my article discusses the question at length. But in any event it’s helpful to think about what the difference might be.

SOURCE (See the original for links)





11 January, 2010

Norwegian insanity

What is Norway up to? The question can be put directly to the country’s Prime Minister, Jens Stoltenberg, because in his New Year’s speech he placed particular emphasis on the fact that it will be work that will make the difference in securing Norway’s future. Work, work, work – and now comes the news that criminal foreigners who serve more than a year in jail will henceforth automatically qualify for welfare. After three years in prison, they will have a right to a government pension and to health coverage. This will be the case even if they have come to Norway illegally. In other words, it pays for foreigners to come to Norway and commit serious crimes – and the more serious the crime, the greater the reward.

The word ”shocking” is hardly sufficient. Indeed, some news is so shocking that one hardly believes what one is hearing. This new development falls under the category of things that you just can’t imagine a country’s leaders ever coming up with. But I am not making this up. You can read all about it on the website of the newspaper Aftenposten: in order to qualify for welfare, foreign criminals will have to commit crimes that are serious enough to put them behind bars for a year or more. But if they are found guilty of even more serious offenses, so that they are sentenced to at least three years, they will also have the right to a basic government pension starting at age 67.

According to Aftenposten, a person who has spent three years in the can will receive a so-called 3/40 basic pension, which amounts to 455 kroner ($80) a month. I assume this means that somebody who has served seven years will get a 7/40 basic pension, and so forth. It is impossible to imagine a policy that would more clearly reward people for breaking the law. And unfortunately, this isn’t all. Because if the same criminal foreigners are citizens of countries belonging to the EU or the European Economic Area, such as Lithuania, Poland, or Bulgaria, they will also have a right to Norwegian pensions even if they have moved out of Norway. We can thus expect that in the years to come, the Norwegian welfare system will find itself paying out considerable amounts in health and pension benefits to felons living abroad.

We can also expect that the Norwegian “goodness industry,” as I like to call it, will soon be telling us that this new policy is discriminatory: why shouldn’t criminals from countries outside the EU or EEA have the same rights as criminals from Europe? For under Norwegian law, citizenship is not predicated on one’s land of birth: if a man is a Norwegian citizen, all of his children have the right to Norwegian citizenship as well, regardless of whether they are born in Norway, Lithuania, Pakistan, or Somalia, and regardless of whether their mother is wife #1 or wife #33. As Human Rights Service has noted repeatedly, if this is called equality under the law, there is something wrong with the law.

There is also something wrong with a law that encourages people to pursue lives of crime, and that in fact amounts to a gilt-edged invitation to come to Norway to commit serious crime. According to Aftenposten, we already have quite enough crime of this sort, thank you very much. As of January 2010, 1,001 foreign citizens are in Norwegian prisons. This amounts to 32 percent of all prisoners. Seven out of ten of these foreigners, moreover, are serving terms more than a year long.

According to Aftenposten, the background to this story is that there have been several cases in which disagreement has arisen as to the rights of foreign prisoners. For example, several of them have been denied hospital care in other than acute or emergency situations. Also, as recently as May of last year, the government stated, in the revised national budget, that a foreigner prisoner serving a sentence in Norway will not thereby earn the right to residency – and will thus not be entitled to welfare benefits. But who protested the government’s decision? Those who act more and more as if they are the real government of Norway – namely, the Norwegian civil service, the people who are supposed to administer the laws that the government is supposed to formulate. As Aftenposten reports,

Afterwards the civil service protested to then Minister of Health and Care Services Bjarne Hĺkon Hanssen and argued that the Minister of Labor should cover the bills [for foreign criminals in Norway]. As a result, the government revisited the question of the status of foreign prisoners and offered a new interpretation of the National Insurance Law.

In an e-mail to Aftenposten, the Ministry of Labor wrote that “Serving a sentence in Norwegian prisons in accordance with a legally valid judicial order should not be regarded as illegal residence. Persons with sentences of 12 months or more will therefore be regarded as members of the National Insurance Scheme under paragraph 2-1 of the National Insurance Law.” Minister of Labor Hanne Bjurstrřm declines further comment on the matter.

Take a good look at that statement: A foreigner who is a prisoner in a Norwegian prison is not in Norway illegally. There are other ways to look at this situation – for example, a foreigner is a foreigner precisely because he didn’t have legal residency in Norway before he was imprisoned. The foreigner is not only a foreigner, he is also a prisoner. The individual who was in Norway illegally has done something illegal in Norway, and has thus become a foreign prisoner in a Norwegian prison. And now that this individual is behind bars, after his case has been investigated and evaluated, and we have spent mountains of money to protect this condemned criminal’s rights – the conclusion by the civil service, and consequently by the government, is that this very same person should now be treated like a legal resident in Norway. There are other points that the civil service could make, for example that this same foreign prisoner has not been granted the right to higher education, so the conclusion must be that the prisoner – who is, after all, legally in Norway – should also have this right. By the same logic, this foreign inmate should also have the right to family reunification with his wife, children, and parents.

Aftenposten reports, however, that the same prisoner won’t have a right to child benefits or cash support for his children, if those children do not live in Norway. The same goes for social security benefits related to work. But I’m not sure of this. The welfare rules and regulations in Norway are anything but simple, but I have often observed that persons who are considered to be qualified to receive welfare benefits are thereby accorded a number of rights. For example, I seem to recall that children of foreign nations who have Norwegian working permits have the right to cash support (even if the children are not in Norway) because earners of taxable income in Norway automatically qualify for welfare support. I plan to look into this.

Fortunately, several politicians have reacted to the creativity of the civil service and the government’s approval of its machinations. Both the Progress Party and the Conservative Party (two of the parties on the Norwegian “right”) have asked the government to rethink its decision: “The new cabinet has to reverse itself on this one. It cannot be the case that if foreigners do something criminal that leads to a long prison sentence, they will automatically qualify for welfare.” “It is unprecedented and unacceptable to give welfare benefits to hardened criminals who come to Norway illegally and commit extremely serious acts of violence,” says Robert Eriksson (Progress Party), head of the Parliament’s Labor and Social Committee. “It seems entirely unreasonable to reward criminals with welfare benefits. We are talking about convicts who should be expelled from Norway, and who should be serving time in their own countries,” says the Conservative head of the Health and Care Committee, Bent Hoie.

Aftenposten concludes its report by mentioning that the government recently formed a so-called Welfare and Migration Committee under the leadership of Professor Grete Brochmann of the University of Oslo, which will examine the potential consequences of increased immigration for the Norwegian welfare and social security system. ”Increased immigration” would seem, in any case, have taken on a new meaning. Perhaps in the future we will see immigration statistics divided up into the categories of family reunification, asylum seekers, labor immigrants – and prisoner immigrants?

SOURCE



Australia: asylum seeker situation 'an absolute mess'

Like Obama, Rudd lied his way into power

The Federal Opposition is calling on Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to act immediately on illegal immigration, as another boat of asylum seekers are processed at Christmas Island. A Customs boat intercepted a boat with 27 people and three crew members off the West Australia coast on Friday afternoon.

The Opposition's immigration spokesman Scott Morrison says in the last six weeks, there has been an average of 100 people a week arriving in Australia illegally.

He says before the last election the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd pledged to be tough on border security. "Before the election Mr Rudd actually said that he would turn back seaworthy boats and he took every opportunity to echo Mr Howard on the issue of illegal boatload arrivals into Australia," he said. "Now in government we've had 75 boats arrive on his watch. We see failed policies, weak decisions and an absolute mess."

SOURCE





10 January, 2010

Calabrians hit back at demonstrating illegals

Calabrians are not the right people to push around -- unlike the British

Residents of an Italian town have shot at immigrants, beaten them with iron bars and run over them, injuring nine including two seriously, in a second night of racially charged violence. The clashes in the southern town of Rosarno, which erupted on Thursday during a protest by mainly African farm labourers, had injured 18 policemen and 19 foreigners in two days, authorities in Reggio Calabria province said.

Around 100 locals armed with batons and metal bars, and some carrying clubs and cans of petrol, had meanwhile set up a barricade near a place where many immigrants meet, Italian news agency ANSA reported. Others had earlier occupied the town hall to demand immigrants be removed. In separate incidents, two immigrants were beaten and seriously wounded with iron bars. One of the wounded was admitted to hospital for brain surgery. Two other immigrants were shot in the legs with hunting shotguns and five more were deliberately run over by vehicles driven by locals. They were lightly hurt.

Police arrested the occupants of one of the vehicles, ANSA said, quoting investigators. Police reinforcements had been sent to the area as Italian President Giorgio Napolitano called for "an immediate end to the violence".

Buses arrived last night to ferry out 150 immigrants, local journalist Mario Tosti told AFP.

The violence broke out on Thursday when hundreds of immigrants, most of them Africans employed illegally as farm labourers, demonstrated after some of them had been shot at with an air rifle, ANSA said. Demonstrators set fire to cars and smashed windscreens before police intervened, leading to a scuffle that left several of the demonstrators wounded. The disturbances continued on Friday with about 2000 immigrants holding a sit-in in the centre of Rosarno while Italian residents blocked roads and occupied the town hall.

Earlier Friday the UN refugee agency's spokeswoman in Italy Laura Boldrini said the body feared an "immigrant hunt" in Rosarno. A team from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees was to visit the area on Saturday, she said.

Interior Minister Roberto Maroni, a member of the anti-immigrant Northern League party, said the tensions were a result of "too much tolerance towards clandestine immigration".

According to Italy's main trade union CGIL, about 50,000 immigrant workers in Italy live in poor conditions similar to those in Rosarno. It said immigrants employed as farm labourers earned low wages of around €25 ($39) a day. The union also accused the mafia of controlling the sector and criticised Mr Maroni's statement, saying immigrants were paid "miserable salaries and have terrible hours, similar to slavery".

SOURCE



Any trash will be accepted as an "asylum-seeker" in Britain

An Afghan asylum seeker was caged for eight years today for the horrific gang rape of a woman who was kidnapped off the street. Evil Ahadullah Khughiani, 20, was one of five men who took turns to have sex with their helpless victim in a city park. The monster LAUGHED and SANG in court while the traumatised 25-year-old woman relived her terrifying ordeal.

She was abducted as she walked to a takeaway near her home in Bristol one afternoon and forced into the back of a car. It was dark by the time the mob had driven her three miles to a deserted park where she was dragged by her legs across the muddy ground to a football pitch. The woman told a jury how Khughiani — then aged 18 — "laughed and joked" with the others as they repeatedly raped her. He was convicted of the attack after DNA found on the victim matched samples he gave when he arrived in Britain seeking asylum just months earlier in 2008. Khughiani also stole the woman's mobile phone but a jury cleared him of kidnap during his trial in December.

The Recorder of Bristol, His Hon Judge Neil Ford, sentenced him to eight years in a young offenders institute with an additional month for the phone theft. He also ordered his deportation from Britain as soon as he is released. [Which is unlikely to happen]

The judge told Bristol Crown Court: "She was held down while a number of you took it in turns to have sex with her against her will. "I am satisfied that she had been abducted from the street although on the jury's verdict I do not find that you played any part in that abduction. "But you knew full well how it was that she was in the car and how she came to be transported to the park."

Prosecutor James Patrick said the victim later became pregnant by her long-term partner but suffered a miscarriage at eight months due to the trauma of the attack and court case.

The judge told Khughiani: "The effect of your offence upon that young woman has understandably been significant. "She has been depressed and lost confidence and she is subject to anxiety attacks. It is my view that the anxiety of the attack contributed to the loss of her child. "Throughout the proceedings you have shown yourself to be manipulative and uncooperative. "You will serve one half of that term before you are released, and if you are not deported thereafter you will be subject to licence for the balance of that term."

Khughiani, who is on benefits, denied rape but admitted having sex with a prostitute a few days earlier and paying Ł10. His victim picked him out in an ID parade as one of the five rapists. The other four men are still being hunted.

Defending, William Eaglestine said Khughiani had no previous convictions and added: "He is bound to have a deportation order made to take him back to Afghanistan which will have a profound effect on him." He said his singing and laughing as his victim gave evidence raised concerns over his mental health.

Outside court Detective Inspector Will White of Avon and Somerset police said: "This was an extremely rare incident. "We don't want the public to be unduly fearful because of this one incident."

SOURCE





9 January, 2010

The church fights back against Islamification of Britain

Lord Carey's brave call to limit immigration is a timely defence of Christian values, says Damian Thompson

We have had to wait decades for this moment, but it has finally happened. A leading British clergyman has said something sensible about immigration.

Lord Carey of Clifton, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, this week signed a declaration by the Cross Party Group on Balanced Migration calling for an urgent tightening of borders to stop the British population reaching 70 million by 2029. He also gave an interview yesterday in which he called for a tougher Church. "We Christians are very often so soft that we allow other people to walk over us, and we are not as tough in what we want, in expressing our beliefs, because we do not want to upset other people," he said.

Tougher church … people walking all over us … controls on immigration: it really is not all that difficult to join the dots. Later in the interview, Lord Carey almost joined them for us, suggesting that there might be a "points system" based on respect for Britain's Christian heritage.

Some of Lord Carey's critics will accuse him of blowing a dog whistle to racists. That is nonsense. Lord Carey is a veteran anti-racist: he enjoys the sort of following among African evangelicals that Bill Clinton did among black Americans. But if Lord Carey were accused of whistling to Christians worried by the prospect of millions of dogmatic Muslims in Britain, then he would find it difficult to rebut the charge. Politicised Islam is at the forefront of his mind: he knows that Britain's evangelical Christians are fed up with being told to develop ever closer ties with their Muslim neighbours.

These evangelicals see Muslim communities that are increasingly hard to distinguish from ghettos; whose young men are sympathetic towards Islamist insurgents; and whose elders enforce a Sharia law that bullies young British Muslim women at home and persecutes Christians abroad. (Nothing, not even the issue of homosexuality, has done more to damage the authority of Dr Rowan Williams in the conservative provinces of the Anglican Communion than his idiotic equivocation on British Sharia.)

Britain's black and Asian Christian leaders will support Lord Carey in this controversy; many of them have seen Islamism at work in their home countries. Only one Church of England bishop has resigned his see in protest at Church leaders' feebleness in the face of Islamism, and he is an immigrant: Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, the former Bishop of Rochester. In contrast, the rest of the hierarchy, together with all the Roman Catholic bishops of England and Wales, still adhere to the old orthodoxy that immigration is by definition a glorious blessing because it "enriches" our culture.

In Europe, however, many Catholic bishops never really subscribed to that orthodoxy in the first place, and now they are talking openly about the coming "Islamification" of Europe. Yesterday, just as Lord Carey was issuing his own warning, Cardinal Miloslav Vlk, the Archbishop of Prague, marked his retirement with a melodramatic prophecy. "Unless the Christians wake up, life may be Islamised and Christianity will not have the strength to imprint its character on the life of people, not to say society," he said.

The Cardinal is right, but only up to a point. The Islamification of parts of Europe is indeed under way. As Christopher Caldwell says in his book Reflections on the Revolution in Europe, Muslims "vie for dominance" in Rotterdam, Strasbourg, Marseilles, suburbs of Paris and Berlin, Bradford, Leicester, the periphery of Manchester and east London.

Where Cardinal Vlk displays naivety is in his proposed remedy: he is optimistic that the Church can persuade the West to reject the empty secularism that has created a Europe-wide vacuum filled by people of another faith.

The message that "secularism" is the real enemy of Christianity is parroted by liberal bishops everywhere. Although they may be horrified by Cardinal Vlk's talk of Islamification, they share his belief that the essential division in the world is between "people of faith" and rootless materialists. Pope John Paul II also subscribed to that world-view. But Pope Benedict XVI, significantly, does not. Benedict wants to convince secular-minded people that, in an odd way, they are already part of the Christian flock, because many of their ideals are rooted in the ethics of Christianity.

In other words, the Church's respect for the dignity of the human person is broadly shared by those secular intellectuals committed to a free society. The Pope recognises this, which is why he has spent so much time talking to them; so does Bishop Nazir-Ali, whose friends include atheist thinkers whose respect for the West's Christian heritage is far greater than that of Muslim community leaders or their multiculturalist allies.

In the long term, the future of Western civilisation can be secured only by an alliance between Christians and secularists against the totalitarian ideology of Islamism. That is a strange prospect; and even more uncomfortable is the realisation that Christianity's survival as a mass movement may depend on something as prosaic as immigration control. But that is surely what Lord Carey is hinting at, and it is brave of him to do so.

SOURCE



Debate in France over unassimilated Muslims

JEAN-MARIE Le Pen is, against all odds, back in political business. As France's major political parties agonise over whether to ban the burqa and slap a E750 ($1170) fine on the husbands of the estimated 2000 women who wear it, the 81-year-old warhorse of the far-right National Front is enjoying an unexpected "new youth" and rubbing his hands together with glee, as Liberation newspaper puts it.

Le Pen was declared all but politically dead when Nicolas Sarkozy won the presidency in 2007 on a strong anti-illegal immigration platform. The extremist leader's sudden resurrection is thanks to the so-called hyperpresident's personal initiative for a "noble" national debate about what it means to be French. The controversial project was launched late last year.

For Sarkozy, the debate, which is taking place in town halls and online on the official state website, offered a diversion. National outrage over his attempted promotion of his law student son Jean to a plum political post in the family's Paris political fief of Neuilly was threatening the President's grip on power. Commentators pointed to the coming regional elections in March, and the government's fears of a poor showing.

But the process has been hijacked by xenophobes and is running out of control, according to figures from the President's own centre-right UMP Party. At least one-fifth of the 50, 000 contributions to the official website were erased because of obvious racism and Muslim-bashing. As former Chirac spokesman Francois Baroin said, the debate has opened a Pandora's box of baser instincts that can only help the National Front.

Once again France is in the grip of national angst linked to its colonial past, and its failure to integrate the children of its former colonies, many of them Muslims.

Former prime ministers Alain Juppe, Jean-Pierre Raffarin and Dominique de Villepin have deplored the debate for stigmatising migrants and especially Muslims. France has Western Europe's largest Muslim minority population, more than 6 million. Key figures across French politics also object to a debate about national identity and the need for a minister for Immigration and National Identity. Next Monday, a group of 20 leading intellectuals will present a massive public petition calling for the abolition of the ministry that French with long memories detest for its resonance with the darkest days of collaborationist Vichy France.

For Juppe, the question of what it means to be French "does not truly pose itself". French identity is contained in "three words", he said, citing the revolutionary slogan of liberty, equality and fraternity. With the addition of laicite (secularism and the strict separation of church and state) national identity is fully expressed. "What we should be debating is whether we are remaining faithful to our tradition of welcoming those who join us, in particular Muslims," he said. France was a country of immigration and any process that set up Muslims against other communities was "detestable".

Even the President seems to acknowledge the racist cat has jumped too far out of the bag. Sarkozy dumbfounded voters and commentators when his more-socialist-than-thou New Year's "wishes" discourse failed to mention his pet subjects of immigration and national identity.

The President is playing a clever game, and has refrained from shutting down the debate, which will conclude early next month. For the moment Sarkozy is leaving the trench warfare to his over-zealous Minister for Immigration and National Identity, the former Socialist Eric Besson. Besson, the "most hated man in France" in the words of Marianne magazine, launched a PR offensive in the new year, lauding the national identity debate as a resounding success. He even released his contribution to the debate, a short book titled For The Love of the Nation, which newspaper critics ridiculed as littered with historical errors.

Besson congratulated himself for outdoing government targets for expulsion of illegal immigrants. Yesterday, however, the minister was forced on the back foot, cancelling a meeting as part of the national identity debate. He would have been confronted by Le Pen's political heir and daughter, Marine Le Pen, in Pas-de-Calais, near where the "jungle" constructed by illegal immigrants waiting to cross the channel was controversially demolished last year.

The debate about what it means to be French couldn't be nastier. Sarkozy's New Year address included pleas for the French to be nicer to one another and rediscover the republican notion of fraternity.

This week Le Pen senior, recently elected to the European Parliament, delivered his New Year's wishes. Jumping on the identity bandwagon, Le Pen declared that Frenchness was essentially about ethnicity (ie, white French). He resurrected his push for a referendum on immigration, in line with the Swiss vote against minarets. The wily Le Pen spoke triumphantly of his forthcoming memoirs and even offered a solution to the major political parties torn over the proposed ban on the burqa.

While Sarkozy's UMP Party majority leader, Jean-Francois Cope, announced that women who wore the burqa in public would face a E750 fine, levied on their husbands who forced them to wear such garb, the Socialists said they were opposed to the burqa yet would not back a law banning it. For Le Pen there was no need for prohibition. "It is already forbidden to walk the streets and public spaces with a mask on," he said.

As France proceeds with a debate many citizens abhor, the question of immigrant and especially Muslim integration poses itself everywhere.

The national identity debate was unexpectedly drawn into a push for education reform this week with the imperious refusal of the Grandes Ecoles, or France's most elite colleges, to admit 30 per cent of students on scholarship, as directed by the Sarkozy administration. Their argument? That the general standard would be lowered.

SOURCE





8 January, 2010

Migration threatens the DNA of our nation

By George Carey, a former Archbishop of Canterbury

If we are to stop the extreme Right, we must respond to real fears over the number and nature of those coming to Britain. Too often in recent years the call for a rational debate on mass migration has degenerated into name-calling and charges of racism. Even the campaign for Balanced Migration, which I have supported, representing cross-party politicians, has barely been heeded by party leaders who have run scared of the issue.

This is why we have launched a declaration calling on the leading political parties to make manifesto commitments to prevent the UK population reaching 70 million, which is projected in official figures by 2029. The fact is that a rise in the UK population by ten million in two decades will put our nation’s resources under considerable strain, stretching almost to breaking point the enormous reserves of tolerance and generosity of the British people.

The declaration by no means spells out a halt to immigration. In fact we welcome the contribution of both economic migrants and asylum seekers to our lively cosmopolitan culture. But we urge a return to the levels of the early 1990s, about 40,000, compared with 163,000 in 2008. Failure to take that action could be seriously damaging to the future harmony of our society.

Last year nearly a million votes were cast for the British National Party. We cannot ignore the fact that such far-right groups exploit genuine concerns about both overpopulation and the ability of this nation to integrate new communities whose values are sometimes very different, even antithetical, to our own.

In Dagenham, where I was brought up, there is a very real danger that a white working-class electorate, alienated by far-reaching social change and largely ignored by the mainstream parties, could vote for a BNP Member of Parliament. This would be a tragedy in our long history of parliamentary democracy. Yet we play into the hands of the far Right if we do not seriously address the concerns that have led to some otherwise decent people supporting modern-day fascism.

There are two aspects to this debate, but they are related. The sheer numbers of migrants from within Europe and elsewhere put the resources of Britain under enormous pressure, but also threaten the very ethos or DNA of our nation.

Recent debates over what it means to be British have been urgently arranged against the background of constitutional changes and the exigencies of mass migration. The Prime Minister has urged us to heed shared values such as tolerance, fair play, pluralism. However, the reality is that these values cannot be said to be solely British. So we must look also to language, institutions and our shared history in valuing what it means to be British and what we could lose if the make-up of our nation changes too rapidly.

Democratic institutions such as the monarchy, Parliament, the judiciary, the Church of England, our free press and the BBC also support the liberal democratic values of the nation. Some groups of migrants, however, are ambivalent about or even hostile to such institutions. The proposed antiwar Islamist march in Wootton Bassett is a clear example of the difficulties extremists pose to British society.

Furthermore, the idea that Britain can continue to welcome with open arms immigrants who immediately establish their own tribunals to apply Sharia, rather than make use of British civil law, is deeply socially divisive. The last thing any of us want is ghettos. And while we don’t expect groups to assimilate, there must be a willingness on their part to integrate with the rest of British society.

Yet, is there anything distinctly Christian about such a call? Some will say “no”. Our values lie rather with the Enlightenment than with the Church. I believe that history is against them. It is my firm view that our society owes more to our Christian heritage than it realises and to overlook this inheritance of faith will lead to the watering down of the very values of tolerance, openness, inclusion and democracy that we claim are central to all we stand for.

This is not to say that I am calling for Christians as a group to be given priority in any migration points system. The tragedy is that any intervention into such sensitive matters is open to such widespread misinterpretation.

But what I am saying is that those who seek to live in this country recognise that they are coming to a country with a Christian heritage and an established Church. Just as we should expect immigrants to subscribe to democratic principles, abide by our laws, speak English, support freedom of speech and a free press, so they should also respect the Christian nature and history of our nation with its broad, hospitable Establishment.

SOURCE



Big fall in the number of Indian students coming to Australia

As the African "refugees" whom Australia has kindly taken in show their gratitude by half-destroying a major Australian industry. The coverup is tight but all indications are that most attacks on Indian students are the work of African gangs. Letting tens of thousands of Africans into Australia may be seen as virtuous but it cannot be seen as wise. African populations everywhere have egregiously high rates of crime, usually crimes of violence

THE number of Indians applying for visas to study in Australia has fallen by almost half, heightening fears for the nation's $17 billion international education industry. The news come as India seethes over the recent murder of an Indian national, Nitin Garg, in Melbourne.

The Immigration Department figures, for the period from July to October 31 last year, show a 46 per cent drop in student visa applications from India compared with the same period in 2008. The decline follows a year in which reports of attacks on Indians and unscrupulous practices by some colleges and migration agents have battered Australia's reputation as a study destination.

The figures also show overall offshore student visa applications have dropped by 26 per cent. Applications from Nepal plummeted 85 per cent, from 5696 to 845, and those from Korea, Brazil and the United States each fell by about 20 per cent. However, applications from China increased slightly, by 0.2 per cent, and those from Vietnam rose 19 per cent.

The chief executive of Universities Australia, Glenn Withers, said the number of Indians applying to study at universities had dropped by about 20 per cent on the previous year. He said a reduction in Indian students would be likely to have a greater impact on vocational colleges, where a greater proportion of Indians enrolled. But Dr Withers said there were anecdotal reports that negative publicity had caused some middle-class Indian parents to turn to universities in countries such as Britain and Canada.

He said part of the problem was that Indians had started studying in Australia in large numbers only recently, so there were few alumni to counter bad press with stories of their own experiences.

Dr Withers said he was more concerned that interest from China may be softening, possibly because of warnings published by the Chinese Government about the quality of some colleges.

Andrew Smith, the chief executive of the Australian Council for Private Education and Training, which represents private colleges, said he was expecting a "significant" decline in enrolments this year from several countries, including India and China. He said reputational damage, the strength of the dollar and a tightening of the visa application process had all contributed to the drop, which could threaten the viability of colleges and lead to job losses.

Research commissioned by the council predicted a 5 per cent drop in international enrolments could lead to 6000 job losses.

SOURCE





7 January, 2010

"America needs to shut the path to illegal entry and employment while opening smoother and more rational routes to legal immigration"

Who said that? Rather to my surprise, it is from an editorial in the NYT. It's not often that I agree with the NYT but I agree with that. But do they really mean it? "Shutting" off illegal entry means full fencing of the border for a start. The NYT supports that?? I think they are just being sneaky: Creating an impression of moderation while aiming for open borders. But perhaps I am just a suspicious old git. Below is the full editorial. Decide for yourself. Note that they support the Gutierrez amnesty bill, which is not widely supported even among Democrats

The quest for overhauling immigration received two very welcome lifts on New Year’s Day. Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City, at his inauguration, pledged to help the Obama administration pass immigration reform. Mr. Bloomberg is a force to reckon with, as he proved with his national campaign against illegal guns. On the same day, four young people in Miami, current or former students at Miami Dade College, began their own determined march to Washington in an effort to bring pressure from the grass roots.

Three of the four were brought to this country illegally as children. Like thousands of other young people, they bear no blame for their status, and they are frustrated that their hard work and bright promise lead to a brick wall. Their protest for a chance to become Americans is courageous because it exposes them to possible arrest and deportation. “We are risking our future because our present is unbearable,” one of them, Felipe Matos, told The Times.

The Obama administration has vowed to press ahead with reform this year. Given the hard economic times, the politics may be bleaker even than in 2007 when reform was scuttled in an ugly battle. The need is just as real — for the undocumented and for the country.

America needs to shut the path to illegal entry and employment while opening smoother and more rational routes to legal immigration. Opponents of reform say the downturn is a terrible time to fix the system, but they are wrong. When the recovery comes, the country will need a functioning system more than ever — one that encourages legal entry and bolsters all workers’ rights.

To do this, the country needs to bring its huge undocumented underclass into the light. This means putting 12 million people on a path to being assimilated. It is not a question of adding new people to the work force; they are here, many helping keep the economy afloat while tolerating low pay and abuse from lawbreaking employers who prefer them to American workers.

Representative Luis Gutierrez, a Democrat of Illinois, already has offered a sensible bill that legalizes immigrants who show that they have been employed, pay a $500 fine, learn English and undergo a criminal background check, among other things.

Opponents will try their best to scuttle reform by claiming to be open to compromise while they insist on prohibitive fees, penalties and requirements that turn the path into a fiction — not a wait of months but of decades or never. That is not reform. And it won’t solve the problem.

After years of tightening the screws, the system is hopelessly frozen. Those who want to fix it will have to shut out the choruses of no-amnestys and over-my-dead-bodys, sidestep the false arguments and press into the headwinds while holding firm to the core of the better solution. To legalize the undocumented, collect their unpaid taxes, free them to earn more and spend more, to get the immigrant escalator to the middle class moving again. The country needs it; the economy needs it; the immigrants need and deserve it.

“No city on earth has been more rewarded by immigrant labor, more renewed by immigrant ideas, more revitalized by immigrant culture,” Mr. Bloomberg said of New York City last week. Substitute “country” in that sentence, as in America, and it is every bit as true.

SOURCE



70 million is too many: Immigrant-fuelled population boom will damage British society, say leading public figures

Immigration must be urgently curbed to stop the population hitting 70 million and causing ‘serious harm’ to society, an alliance of leading public figures demanded yesterday. The call to action comes in a report signed by a host of respected names, including former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey, ex-Labour speaker Betty Boothroyd and former Tory Party chairman Michael Ancram.

The cross-party group wants manifesto commitments from Labour and the Conservatives to cut net migration to fewer than 40,000 a year – compared to the current rate of 163,000. This is the reduction to net migration – the number of immigrants arriving in the UK, minus those leaving – needed to stop the population reaching 70 million within the next two decades.

Other signatories to the report, headed ‘70million is too many’, include Lord Jordan, former president of the Amalgamated Engineering and Electrical Union, Tory MP Peter Bottomley, Labour MP Peter Kilfoyle and the economist Lord Skidelsky.

The document pulls no punches in its warning of the consequences for society if the population hits 70million by 2029, as Whitehall statisticians predict. It says: ‘We are gravely concerned about the rapid increase in the population of England that is now forecast. We believe that immigration on such a scale will have a significant impact on our public services, our quality of life and on the nature of our society.’

The demand has been issued by the Cross-Party Group on Balanced Migration, chaired jointly by Labour MP Frank Field and Tory MP Nicholas Soames. The group says it recognises a large reduction in net migration will be difficult to achieve but warns of the danger signals of increasing support for ‘extremist’ political parties. Its document continues: ‘Over the last decade or so we have lost control of immigration. It will take several years to put this right.’

The group calls for a clear political decision to restore control over UK borders and to break the ‘almost automatic link’ between entering Britain and later being granted citizenship. It states ‘We are convinced that failure to take action would be seriously damaging to the future harmony of our society. Nearly a million votes by our fellow citizens for an extremist party amount to a danger sign which must not be ignored. ‘For too long the major political parties have failed to address these issues and the intense, if largely private, concern that they generate throughout our country. ‘If politicians want to rebuild the public’s trust in the political system, they cannot continue to ignore this issue, which matters so much to so many people. The time has come for action.’

The Office for National Statistics suggests the population of the UK will increase from 61.4 million in 2008 to hit the 70million mark by 2029. Looking further ahead to 2034, the population is forecast to grow by 10million, with almost all of the increase in England. Of this rise, 7million will be due to immigration.

In a statement, Mr Field and Mr Soames said: ‘Poll after poll shows the public to be deeply concerned about immigration and its impact on our population. 'Yet, as we enter the General Election campaign, neither party has promised the British people they will prevent our population hitting 70 million. ‘It is time the parties turned their rhetoric into reality by making manifesto commitments.’

Last month, Home Secretary Alan Johnson said the public was being ‘terrorised by the spectre’ of the population hitting 70 million. The Home Secretary said the Office for National Statistics, which has repeatedly made the projection, had been proved wrong in the past. But he added that, if the politicallysensitive 70million barrier was reached, Britain would ‘cope’ as it is a ‘civilised’ nation.

SOURCE





6 January, 2010

Lessons from the Last Amnesty

Problems with the 1986 IRCA Legalization Program

The Obama Administration and Democrats in Congress have announced they will try to pass an amnesty for illegal aliens this year. Only the House version of their bill has so far been introduced: H.R. 4321. The Senate companion bill will be sponsored by Sen. Charles Schumer, who, while in the House, was a key player in passing the last big amnesty, the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA).

Lawmakers would be remiss if they did not examine the implementation of the IRCA amnesty, and consider its cautionary lessons. To assist that process, the Center for Immigration Studies has published a report that details the dysfunctional inner workings of the legalization program. “A Bailout for Illegal Immigrants? Lessons from the Implementation of the 1986 IRCA Amnesty” was prepared by Center Fellow and longtime immigration researcher David North, who spent nearly two years (funded by the Ford Foundation and a federal agency) examining the IRCA amnesty as it was being implemented. Among the report's conclusions:

* The agency running the program, the old Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), far from being the tough law-enforcement agency the immigrants’ advocates feared, turned out to be a typical governmental agency with a strong case of client-itis, one that usually said “yes” to its applicants.

* Operating without many useful precedents, INS created a new and questionable decision-making process that severely hampered the detection of fraud.

* A great deal of money intended for the legalization program was diverted to other government programs.

* As a result, there was a tremendous amount of fraud, largely ignored by INS. A subsequent Center for Immigration Studies estimate, based on population estimates, found that fully one-quarter of those granted legal status had secured that status through fraud.

The above is a press release from from Center for Immigration Studies. 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076. Email: center@cis.org. Contact: Bryan Griffith, press@cis.org, (202) 466-8185



Arrival of 30,000 migrant IT workers 'deprives Britons of jobs’

Indians are good at finding LEGAL loopholes in the ramshackle structure of British immigration law. Stowing away on trucks is for dummies

Tens of thousands of foreign IT workers are being sent to work for their companies’ subsidiaries in Britain, sparking fears that British workers are being denied job opportunities. Almost 30,000 non-EU technology workers entered the country under so-called intra-company transfers last year, with the overwhelming majority coming from India. Most of those arriving came for low and mid-level IT jobs where there are not significant skills shortages among British-born workers, fuelling suspicion that British workers are losing out to foreign workers who are being paid lower wages.

Ann Swain, the chief executive of the Association of Professional Staffing Companies, which represents recruitment companies, said that such transfers were designed to allow specialists within a particular company to fill senior positions abroad. But he added that they were being abused to fill lower level roles in which the skills used are largely standardised. “Intra-company transfers are being done on an almost industrial scale,” she said.

The system allows international companies to transfer their staff to Britain without having to advertise a job vacancy here. They are supposed to pay their employees an equivalent British salary. Staff can stay in the country for three years with a possible extension of two years. From next year they will have to work for the company for twelve rather than six months before being eligible for transfer and will no longer be able to apply to settle.

A total of 45,000 non-EU foreign workers came to Britain under the scheme last year — up from 15,400 when Labour came to power. Almost 70 per cent of them were Indians, according to Home Office figures.

Damian Green, the Shadow Immigration Minister, said: “It seems extraordinary that when British workers can’t find jobs we are bringing foreign workers from halfway round the world. “This is another sign that Gordon Brown’s ‘British jobs for British workers’ was a meaningless soundbite.”

Figures released by the Border and Immigration Agency show that seven of the top ten companies bringing in IT workers were Indian. Topping the list is Tata Consultancy Services, which sponsored 4,465 intra-company transfers last year, followed by Infosys Technology with 3,030. Many of the applications approved were in low-level jobs, including almost 18,000 in what were described as “other IT-related occupations”. There were 7,430 approved applications for software engineers and 3,470 for analyst programmers.

Ms Swain said that many of the transfers were for jobs for which there were not shortages of British workers. She said: “These figures show how easy it is for foreign companies to bypass the UK labour market.” She added: “Foreign companies are supposed to pay workers brought in on intra-company transfers UK market rates but you have to wonder whether there is some economic benefit to transferring Indian workers from a low-wage economy to Britain.”

Tata Consultancy Services, which builds and maintains IT systems for government departments and British-based firms, said that it needed to bring in additional staff to meet an increased demand for its services and expertise. “Intra-company transfers are temporary, typically only lasting for around 17 months, when the employee will return to their home base. “Where we can identify the need for a permanent UK-based role then it is our preference to have UK nationals doing that work,” Keith Sharpe, the European marketing director at Tata, said.

Phil Woolas, the Immigration Minister, defended the transfers, saying that they made Britain an attractive place in which to do business. He said: “Workers that come in via this route must display the appropriate level of earnings and qualifications and the numbers are strictly controlled by the points-based system, meaning only those the UK needs can come here.”

Peter Skyte, the national officer for IT at the trade union Unite, highlighted the “need to strike the right balance between enabling employers to recruit or transfer skilled people from abroad and providing fair access for UK workers”.

Infosys did not answer questions put to it by The Times, including whether it pays its Indian workers “broadly similar” wages to British-born staff as required under the rules. A statement said: “As standard practice, we cannot disclose any information related to wages and employee payment in the UK.”

SOURCE





5 January, 2010

Australia: Must not oppose immigration?

We read:

"More than a dozen elite schools are embroiled in a race hate scandal as many of their students join a Facebook group calling for immigrants to get out of Australia.

The group's page, which features a picture of the Australian flag with the words "F--- off we're full" written across it, tells non-English speakers "if you wanna speak your crappy language, go back to were (sic) you came from".

The Facebook group is called "Mate speak english, you're in australia now" and has more than 5000 members from across the nation. It is growing by more than 300 people a day.

Anti-racism groups and school principals yesterday condemned the site, started as a prank, and called for Facebook to delete it.

Source

CIS ROUNDUP

1. A Bailout for Illegal Immigrants? Lessons from the Implementation of the 1986 IRCA Amnesty

http://cis.org/irca-amnesty

Excerpt: By now most of us realize that the government handled the $700 billion bailout of the big banks badly. The money went out in a whoosh to the Wall Street outfits that had created the crisis, but without the needed regulatory changes to prevent its repetition.

Is Congress about to make a parallel mistake about the illegal alien population and give that group a blanket amnesty like the one it lavished on the (much smaller group of) bankers, without giving a thought to the inevitable impacts of such an action?

********

2. Religious Leaders vs. Members: An Examination of Contrasting Views on Immigration

http://cis.org/ReligionAndImmigrationPoll

Excerpt: In contrast to many national religious leaders who are lobbying for increases in immigration numbers, a new Zogby poll of likely voters who belong to the same religious communities finds strong support for reducing overall immigration. Moreover, the poll finds that members strongly disagree with their leaders' contention that more immigrant workers need to be allowed into the country. Also, most parishioners and congregants advocate for more enforcement to cause illegal workers to go home, while most religious leaders are calling for putting illegal immigrants on a path to U.S. citizenship. The survey of Catholic, mainline Protestant, born-again Protestant, and Jewish voters used neutral language and was one of the largest polls on immigration ever done.

********

3. Immigration Policy in Free Societies: Are There Principles Involved or Is It All Politics?

http://cis.org/immigration-principles

Excerpt: Free societies with industrialized economies such as Canada and the United States are characterized by certain unique features. Among these is the fact that they both allow their citizens to come and go across their borders with few restrictions and they annually permit millions of non-citizens to travel, to conduct business, to visit, and to study in their countries with only minimal regulation. Both nations also allow some non-citizens to enter their countries and to work in competition with their citizen work-force for temporary periods under specific conditions. Furthermore, they regularly allow a generous number of non-citizens to immigrate or to take refuge as permanent residents and eventually to become citizens. It is primarily these latter situations, where work and residence issues arise, that pose the question whether years of experience have generated any principles that can guide policy makers when debates re-surface? Or, is it always simply a matter of political power and special interests at the moment that determine immigration policy on an ad-hoc basis?

********

4. Immigration-Related Provisions of Senate and House Health Reform Bills

http://cis.org/immigration-related-health-provisions

Excerpt: The Senate's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, substituted into HR 3590, and the House-passed Affordable Health Care for America Act, HR 3962, each contain provisions that purport to bar illegal aliens from benefiting from certain health programs. But neither bill would satisfactorily or effectively keep unlawful U.S. residents from obtaining new health benefits - thus forcing American taxpayers to subsidize health care for illegal aliens and certain unscrupulous employers.

********

5. Three Years of Fraud in the U.S.: The Case of Manoj Kargudri

http://cis.org/Videos/CaseOfManojKargudri

Excerpt: Kephart examines the case of Manoj Kargudri, an Indian national who exploited simple loopholes in our immigration system five times over three years to enter and remain in the United States. Kargudri was finally stopped at the San Antonio airport on August 28, 2008, by the Transportation Security Administration. He was not stopped because of his immigration violations, but rather because he had a one-way ticket to Washington and in his carry-on luggage were box cutters and a homemade battery strapped to his MP3 player. Luckily, he turned out not to be a terrorist, but the fraud in the immigration system allowed Kargudri to obtain a visa and enter and stay in the United States for three years before he was finally arrested and deported.

********

6. Marriage Fraud Bill: An Argument for a Targeted Approach to Immigration Reform

http://cis.org/north/marriagefraudamendments

Excerpt: Most of the conversation about immigration policy reform these days involves the word 'comprehensive', as if this is the best, if not the only, way to tackle the issue. (The latest attempt at a comprehensive bill will be introduced today.)

I argue that there also is utility in a more targeted approach - the use of a rifle rather than a blunderbuss - and that an excellent example of this is the Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986 (Public Law 99-639).

********

7. The American-Bashers Revisited

http://cis.org/miano/americabashers2

Excerpt: Recently I authored a posting titled 'The American-Bashers,' describing how those who seek to increase the supply of cheap foreign labor in technical fields have resorted to name-calling and the bashing of U.S. natives to promote their agenda. Apparently to prove my point, 'The Startup Visa and Why the Xenophobes Need to Go Back into Their Caves' by Vivek Wadhwa appeared just two days later. Its content reflects the current marketing campaign to sell more cheap foreign labor by promoting it as 'entrepreneurs.'

********

8. Dead on Arrival

http://cis.org/krikorian/democraticamnestybill

Excerpt: Not all change is reform. Sometimes the status quo is better than proposed changes, and the new Democratic amnesty bill is a case in point.

********

9. Let's Abolish the Casino Visas - a Bit of Targeted Immigration Reform

http://cis.org/north/visalottery

Excerpt: Restrictionists should call them Casino Visas, and the awarding body, the Visa Casino. The terms are equally as accurate as Visa Lottery, but the negative implications are - appropriately - stronger.

A good way to tackle the needless expenditure of up to 55,000 'diversity' visas each year is to use the congressional Floor Amendment as a technique for targeted immigration reform, the subject of an earlier blog. If a majority of the members of a legislative body favor a measure, even one bottled up in committee, they can often bring up the matter on the floor; this is usually done in the shape of an amendment to another bill.

********

10. Every City a Sanctuary City

http://cis.org/krikorian/statelocalauthority

Excerpt: The Democratic amnesty bill (HR 4321) is relatively modest in size, compared to other recent efforts, at a 'mere' 644 pages. But those pages are packed with juicy bits of open-borders goodness. I mentioned some of the highlights yesterday, here and here, but there's plenty more.

********

11. Diagnosis for Congressional Dems: Battle Fatigue

http://cis.org/kammer/battlefatigue

Excerpt: Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who was lead pollster for John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign, surveyed the political terrain this morning in a discussion with Charlie Cook of the National Journal, Democratic pollster Fred Yang, and Hotline editor Amy Walter. McInturff predicted that congressional Democrats, exhausted with the Obama agenda, will have little enthusiasm for immigration reform bills in the near future.

********

12. Taqiyya in Immigration

http://cis.org/Krikorian/Taqiyya

Excerpt: The Democratic amnesty bill is almost like something I'd write as a parody. Sec 157, for instance, prohibits the arrest of any illegal or criminal alien on the premises of, or in the immediate vicinity of, a childcare provider, a school, a legal-service provider, a Federal court or State court proceeding, an administrative proceeding, a funeral home, a cemetery, a college, university, or community college, a victim-services agency, a social-service agency, a hospital or emergency-care center, a health-care clinic, a place of worship, a day-care center, a head-start center, a school bus stop, a recreation center, a mental-health facility, or a community center. Depending on how you define 'immediate vicinity,' that wouldn't leave much of anywhere to arrest illegal aliens, which is the point.

********

13. Senate Amendments Seek to Plug Immigration Loopholes

http://cis.org/edwards/senatehealthamendments

Excerpt: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid continues to try to force a Senate vote to pass health reform before Christmas. Not even a pep talk/arm twisting, when all Democratic senators met with President Obama at the White House Tuesday, could secure the votes needed to end a filibuster.

While his arbitrary deadline looms and the timing to break off debate dwindles, Reid's bill that he's revising behind closed doors seems to keep his immigration loopholes intact. That is, there's no indication Reid has fixed any of the several serious flaws in H.R. 3590 through which illegal aliens would get taxpayer-funded health care.

********

14. Rhymes With Dumb: Legalizing Illegals Before They Even Immigrate

http://cis.org/north/rhymeswithdumb

Excerpt: The proposed House amnesty bill (HR 4321) not only grants legal status to virtually all 12 million illegal aliens in the country, it also provides (in Sec. 317) legalization 100,000 wannabe illegals each year for three years who have not yet even set foot in the country. For a summary of the 644-page bill see here, and for the complete text see here.

********

15. Insane Asylum

http://cis.org/krikorian/insaneasylum

Excerpt: Another thing the Democrats' amnesty bill would do is eliminate the requirement that asylum applications be filed within one year after the person's last entry into the United States. The deadline rule was passed by Congress in 1996 to incorporate into U.S. law a provision of the UN refugee convention that illegal aliens must be permitted to apply for asylum 'provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities.' One might think that a full year is a pretty broad definition of 'without delay' (the Republican sponsors of the bill originally wanted 180 days), but at least it's a deadline. But if the deadline were repealed, an illegal alien who'd lived here for years and finally gotten caught would again be free to concoct a bogus asylum claim in order to delay his removal. This would take us back to the bad old days when asylum claims were routinely used by immigration lawyers as a dilatory tactic and the backlog of unresolved asylum claims ballooned.

********

16. Who Profits from Casino Visas? Well, There's Williamsburg, Ky. (Pop. 5,143)

http://cis.org/north/williamsburgky

Excerpt: We all know that the benefits of immigration are highly concentrated, on the immigrants themselves, their family members, their lawyers, and their employers - and that the costs of massive (low-income) migration are spread almost invisibly throughout society in terms of lower wages for many workers, and higher costs for many taxpayers

********

17. Rep. Gutierrez's Long Road to Al Punto

http://cis.org/kammer/gutierrezunemployment

Excerpt: Rep. Luis Gutierrez offered a curious set of responses to a question about how the high unemployment rate among U.S, workers affects his newly presented legislation (HR 4321) to legalize all illegal immigrants who entered the country before December 15.

********

18. The Self-Censorship of a Would-Be Truth-Teller: Paul Krugman's 'Spots of Commonness'

http://cis.org/steinlight/spotsofcommonness

Excerpt: Krugman's 'spots of commonness,' his susceptibility to being infected by 'conforming falsities' or accepting 'silly conclusions' in order to go on leading his comfortable, privileged, high-profile but ultimately ordinary life is what likely caused him to retrace his steps. Through his silence, through a sin of omission, he disowned the truth and made meet obeisance to the politically correct household gods of his social universe, knowing them to be false gods whose worship has become a grave social danger. He didn't face the headman's axe: only the disapproval of his peers, but that was evidently enough to suppress a truth that might have helped millions of his countrymen.

********

19. Amnesty without Justice: Sacrificing American Children on the Pathway to Citizenship

http://cis.org/mortensen/hr4321

Excerpt: The advocates for the 'comprehensive immigration reform' bill that was recently introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 4321) claim that it is not an amnesty bill because illegal aliens have to pay a $500 fine, which is roughly 5 percent of the cost of the services of a good 'coyote' or alien-smuggler.

This means that for a $500 payment, illegal aliens will be granted total amnesty from the multiple felonies that they commit in order to get jobs - document fraud, perjury on I-9 forms and identity theft.

********

20. Napolitano's Lack of Leadership on Secure Driver's License Legislation Leaves States Worse Off than Before

http://cis.org/kephart/realiddeadlinepushedback

Excerpt: A key secure driver's license deadline of December 31, 2009, has now been pushed back to May 11, 2011, due to the Secretary of Homeland Security's failure to push through Congress her top priority for this Congress: repeal of a law known as REAL ID that encapsulated the intent of the 9/11 Commission recommendation pertaining to state-issued ID security. For the past year, even before former Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano's confirmation as DHS Secretary, she vowed to work closely with the National Governors Association to repeal the REAL ID law. Key issues the secretary had with the law, including the imposed deadlines she is now pushing back, she spent the year claiming she did not have the authority to do without congressional approval. We now find out she had the authority all along.

********

21. Taxpayers Losing Potential Quarter of a Billion Dollars in Casino Visa Program

http://cis.org/north/diversityapplicationfees

Excerpt: While I think the Casino Visa program is a terrible idea, as I argued in a previous blog - granting 55,000 totally needless 'diversity' visas by lottery to people with no U.S. connections - we taxpayers might as well get something out of it if it has to continue.

How about a quarter of a billion dollars a year?

********

22. Washington Post's Take on Illegals in Health Reform

http://cis.org/edwards/illegalsexchange

Excerpt: Post editors aren't much concerned whether illegal aliens receive taxpayer-funded subsidies in the exchange to pay their insurance premiums. Yet that subsidy, which the Senate makes some attempt to prevent from going to illegals, unjustly would force lawfully resident Americans to pay their own plus foreign lawbreakers' health premiums. Paying tax money for illegal aliens' emergency care already happens and remains unchanged in the legislation. That's bad enough. But forcing extra payment on the backs of people living here lawfully would unduly make illegal residents better off than they already are and in many cases better off than their American counterparts. It's effectively a reward for breaking immigration laws. It's unjust, unfair, and partial. And such 'free' health care would increase even more the incentive to immigrate outside the law.

********

23. Increased U.S. Financial Support for Foreign PhD Students

http://cis.org/north/foreignphdsubsidies

Excerpt: Hidden within the pages of a newly released, highly regarded federal report on higher education in the U.S. are these facts: in 2008 there were more new PhDs with temporary visas than ever before, and their degree of reliance on American funding, always high, was higher than in earlier years.

********

24. New PhDs with Temporary Visas Much Less in Debt than U.S. Counterparts

http://cis.org/north/lessphddebt

Excerpt: A comprehensive survey of America's more than 15,000 new PhDs indicates that the ones on temporary visas, such as student visas, have much less debt than their U.S. citizen and permanent-resident (i.e., green-card holding) counterparts.

The above is a press release from from Center for Immigration Studies. 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076. Email: center@cis.org.





4 January, 2010

Who needs help -- illegals or America?

While the health care fiasco, underwear bomber and antics of Tiger Woods distracted Americans, a piece of controversial legislation was introduced to the House of Representatives. Like most of the Democrats' legislation, it requires scrutiny as it ignores the will of the majority of Americans.

Congressman Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., an open borders advocate, introduced the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America's Security and Prosperity Act of 2009." Amnesty for some 12 million illegal aliens is on the table - again.

According to CNN, in October, 73 percent of those questioned wanted a reduction in the number of illegal immigrants. With unemployment at 10 percent and the economy in the dumpster, Americans don't want to fast track immigration, especially for those illegal aliens who have already been taking advantage of American generosity and lack of enforcement backbone.

Conveniently, a recent study sponsored by the Migration Policy Institute, a pro-immigration think tank, concludes that illegal aliens do not drain jobs or tax dollars and have a neutral impact on the U.S. economy. However, this pro-illegal group failed to include the costs of identity theft, drug smuggling and the moral cost of supporting criminal behavior combined with the exploitation of illegal aliens.

The sponsors of this study state that, "Because illegal immigrants occupy a small share of the workforce - about 5 percent - and work low-skilled jobs at lower wages than other workers, their overall influence on the economy is trivial." Tell that to Americans struggling to save their homes and provide for their families. The myth that Americans are too arrogant to take low-paying jobs is baloney.

The smart thing to do is to close the borders to all immigration for the next seven years until America gets back on her feet and then reopen them with strict enforcement of the law. At the same time, provide legally employed, law-abiding, tax-paying individuals already stuck in the red tape-infested visa system with a clearer path to permanent legal residency.

On Capitol Hill, Republicans and some Democrats have already denounced Gutierrez's bill as amounting to amnesty. As nice as they might be to know and illegally hire for less than minimum wage, illegal aliens have broken American law. Why do they get a free pass?

Gutierrez states, "We have waited patiently for a workable solution to our immigration crisis to be taken up by this Congress and our president. The time for waiting is over." Further, "It is an answer to too many years of pain - mothers separated from their children, workers exploited and undermined security at the border - all caused at the hands of a broken immigration system. This bill says 'enough,' and presents a solution to our broken system that we as a nation of immigrants can be proud of."<0x00A0><0x00A0>

The simple solution to prevent the separation of mothers from their children and worker exploitation is for immigrants to follow the legal path to naturalization and for illegal immigrants to be deported.

Gutierrez does not want the passage of this bill because of his empathy for the plight of illegal aliens. It is not about empathy; it is about securing the loyalty of a massive 12 million strong voting bloc for the liberal machine. After all, from the liberal perspective, an illegal alien is just an unregistered Democrat.

Under the new legislation, illegal aliens already here simply need to be employed, pay a $500 fine, learn English and undergo a criminal background check to win amnesty. The bill also abolishes the E-Verify system, which has allowed employers to check easily if a job applicant is in the United States legally and eliminates the programs that permit local law enforcement officials to work as immigration officers.

American citizenship is a privilege not a right. It is time to stop rewarding unlawful behavior and stressing America's limited resources by providing illegal aliens the rights and benefits afforded legal immigrants and citizens. Illegal immigration is just that - illegal. Because of a lack of enforcement, Americans now have to choose between empathy for the plight of illegal aliens or following the law and doing what is right for America.

SOURCE



Jobs for illegals throughout the British government

Illegal immigrants have been working at some of the most sensitive Government offices in the country - including the headquarters of the UK Border Agency - a Mail on Sunday investigation has discovered.

Following our enquiries, the Home Office admitted employing a dozen illegal foreign staff over the past four years - 11 Nigerians and a Ghanaian. Ten of them secured cleaning jobs at Becket House, the headquarters of the UK Border Agency, which vets immigrants. The building in Croydon, South London, also serves as an immigration detention centre, holding up to 270 people awaiting deportation. Two other illegal immigrants worked at the Whitehall headquarters of the Home Office, which houses the office of Home Secretary Alan Johnson. One was a chef in the canteen, while the other worked as a security guard on the front door for 19 months. The Home Office headquarters is regarded as one of Britain's most high-profile terrorist targets and receives round-the-clock police protection. Eight of the 12 have since been deported, three are detained pending appeals and one was later granted leave to remain in the country.

The embarrassing disclosures come despite repeated pledges by Labour to crack down on illegal immigration. Using Freedom of Information legislation, The Mail on Sunday contacted each Government department, council and hospital in Britain for details of employees later discovered to be illegal immigrants since 2006. Three Government departments, 34 local authorities and 54 NHS trusts admitted hiring a total of 349 unlawful foreign workers. The list featured 37 nationalities, including migrants from Kazakhstan, Zambia and Venezuela.

Disturbingly, several bogus entrants managed to secure jobs in sensitive positions. Councils admitted hiring six illegal immigrants as teachers in secondary schools and ten got jobs as social and care workers, working with some of the most vulnerable in society. Health trusts revealed four became doctors and 13 secured nursing work in NHS hospitals. Many councils and health trusts admitted that some fraudulent workers vanished when questioned about their immigration status.

The Government has made repeated pledges to crack down on illegal immigration. In June 2008, then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith announced new powers to fine organisations caught hiring illegal immigrants and warned that she would name guilty company bosses on the Home Office website. She said: 'Good employers have everything to gain from us clamping down on the bad ones.' However, The Mail on Sunday asked each of the 91 public bodies who admitted employing illegal foreign workers to provide details of any penalties they received. Not one of them had received a fine, which can be as high as ś10,000.

The local authority that employed the highest number of illegal immigrants was Haringey, in North London. It gave jobs to 35 unlawful foreign workers, including two Jamaican carers working with elderly and disabled residents. The news will heap more pressure on Haringey, which was heavily criticised by Government inspectors over its role in the Baby P scandal. In December 2008, Haringey's head of children's services, Sharon Shoesmith, was sacked by Schools Secretary Ed Balls after the 17-month-old boy was tortured to death despite being on the Child Protection Register.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'This is an absolute scandal. The Government has taken tough action against private companies over the employment of illegal immigrants, yet on this evidence it is quite clear the public sector has taken on bogus workers and escaped any form of censure. 'We have Ministers constantly telling us they have got to grips with the chaos in our immigration system, yet the Home Office itself has been employing illegal workers. It is completely unacceptable and we need an urgent explanation from Ministers.'

Mr Grayling pledged to write to Home Secretary Mr Johnson to ask him about The Mail on Sunday's findings and demand a review of security at the Home Office. He said: 'It is breathtaking that procedures and checks at the Home Office are so lax that an illegal immigrant could cook food for the Home Secretary himself. This is a huge security breach. We cannot go on like this.'

Three Whitehall departments admitted employing unlawful workers: the Home Office, the Ministry of Justice and the Department for International Development.

The Ministry of Justice gave jobs to three illegal foreign workers, including a Botswanian administrator working in the Access To Justice Department in Central London, which routinely handles sensitive data concerning legal aid funding. Failed Zimbabwean asylum seeker Eugene Madzima used a fake passport to land a job processing immigration appeals at a tribunal in Leicester. He was jailed in 2008 for holding forged documents.

The Department for International Development admitted employing 'fewer than five' illegal immigrants in each of the past four years. Despite repeated requests, it refused to provide any more details.

Suffolk County Council employed a 31-year-old Colombian as a modern languages secondary-school teacher before discovering she was in the country unlawfully. A spokesman for the council refused to comment.

Other local authorities that employed illegal immigrants as teachers were Leicester, Bromley, Wiltshire and Nottinghamshire. Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council admitted giving jobs to 15 illegal immigrants, including Ghanaian and South African home carers. Town halls in Bromley, South London, Hounslow, West London, and Nottingham also gave illegal immigrants jobs as carers.

In hospitals across Britain, The Mail on Sunday found 176 unlawful foreign workers treating patients and running clinics. North Cumbria University Hospitals NHS Trust admitted employing two doctors who were later found to have fake identity papers. One 34-year-old Indian managed to land a job as a dentist after providing health chiefs with forged documents generated by what the trust described as a 'sophisticated national fraud'. However, the trust refused to provide further details. The same NHS trust also employed a 46-year-old Ghanaian illegal immigrant as a part-time doctor in a Carlisle hospital. The trust refused to comment.

In another striking case, two South American illegal immigrants stole the identities of a British couple living abroad and used them to get clerical jobs in an Accident and Emergency unit in South London.

Guyanan nationals Indra Kumar Mohan and Kamini Shukram worked full-time at Mayday Hospital in Croydon, South London, for three years while claiming more than ś100,000 in benefits. They were jailed for eight months in 2008.

Sir Andrew Green, of MigrationWatch UK, said: 'It is essential that the Government and other public bodies do not break the law by employing illegal immigrants. 'There are now approaching one million illegal immigrants in Britain and the Government's failure to take action threatens the credibility of the entire immigration system.'

A Home Office spokesman said: 'The 12 illegal workers identified were all sub-contractors. None of them were directly employed by the Home Office. 'It was our checks and the strict regime we operate on illegal working in the UK that brought these cases to light. We are doing more than ever before to crack down on illegal working, with raids taking place up and down the country every week and thousands of rule-breakers deported.' The Home Office said it had fined 2,400 organisations for employing illegal immigrants in the past two years. However, it refused to say whether any were in the public sector.

A Haringey Council spokesman said: 'We took the correct action for dismissal when illegal status became known. We will continue to be vigilant and work closely with other agencies to identify any future cases.'

Employers in both public and private sectors, including individuals, must check and take copies of identity documents from foreign workers before giving them jobs. Failure to keep copies is a civil offence, attracting a maximum ś10,000 fine. Knowingly and deliberately employing an illegal immigrant is a more serious criminal offence, punishable by two years in jail and an unlimited fine. According to the Act, an employer can avoid any penalty if they take 'specified steps to verify, retain, copy or record the content of an [identity] document produced'.

It was steered through Parliament by Attorney General Baroness Scotland when she was a Home Office Minister. But in September last year, it was revealed that she was employing a Tongan illegal immigrant as a housekeeper. Gordon Brown ordered the peer to issue a humiliating apology. But the Prime Minister allowed her to cling to her job after the UK Border Agency backed her claim that she did not know Loloahi Tapui had illegally overstayed a student visa. However, Baroness Scotland's version of events was questioned when the housekeeper told The Mail on Sunday she never showed the Minister her passport and that, even if she had, it was out of date.

Baroness Scotland admitted failing to take copies of Ms Tapui's papers and became the first individual in the country to fall foul of the new laws. The Labour peer was fined ś5,000 but sparked controversy by comparing the matter to not paying the ś8 London Congestion Charge for motorists. She said: 'It's like driving into the city and not paying the Congestion Charge. It is not a criminal offence. 'I made an administrative, technical error for which I am bitterly, bitterly sorry. I got it wrong. It was a technical breach and I have paid the penalty.'

Ms Tapui was charged with immigration and fraud offences and is due to appear in court later this month.

SOURCE





3 January, 2010

Foreigners' visa appeals are costing Britain ś1m every week, says report

Foreigners seeking permission to visit relatives in Britain are costing taxpayers ś1million a week in legal fees. The public is being saddled with the bill after Labour decided that applicants for family visas should not be expected to pay their own appeal costs. Each appeal after a rejected application costs ś762.

According to a report by Migrationwatch, there are as many as 120 relatives - including first cousins, uncles, aunts, nephews, and nieces - who can claim the right to visit and then appeal if refused. The number of appeals now stands at almost 65,000 a year, an eightfold increase since 2001. Migrationwatch chairman Sir Andrew Green said: 'The Government talk up their so-called tough points-based system for work permits but leave gaping holes elsewhere. They have ducked the issue of family visitors for years. 'Obviously, family members should be able to visit relatives in Britain but such visits need to be properly regulated. There is a clear risk that, once here, some of these visitors will stay on illegally knowing that the chance of being removed is remote.'

The report claims that the definition of a family member is so wide that someone from a country where families often have four or five children could have between 80 and 120 relatives who could apply to visit. The 65,000 annual appeals at ś762 mean the cost to the taxpayer in 2007/8 was ś50million. The Home Office has suggested the figure could be as high as ś60million.

Migrationwatch is calling for changes including a substantial tightening of the definition of a family visitor. It says excluding uncles, aunts, nephews, nieces and first cousins could cut the projected figure of 120 relatives who could claim the right to visit by up to 68. The group also says relatives should meet the cost of appeals, as was the case before 2002.

In the 1990s, there was no right of appeal for rejected applications. A UK Border Agency spokesman said: 'The Government is committed to reducing the cost of the appeal system by cutting out unnecessary and inappropriate appeals and improving decision quality. 'The overall cost of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal has been falling over the last three years. We are consulting on options for migrants to cover at least some of the cost of appeals.'

SOURCE



Number of illegal migrants arriving in Spain falls

The number of illegal immigrants risking their lives in rickety boats to reach Spain's Canary Islands from northwest Africa has descended to levels last seen a decade ago, officials said Saturday. In 2009, a total of 2,041 adults - and 201 children - arrived in the islands or were rescued as they sailed toward them, an Interior Ministry spokeswoman said. Levels this low were last recorded a decade ago, when 2,165 people made landfall on the archipelago, made up of seven main islands - and two tiny ones - 1,380 kilometers (858 miles) off Spain's southwestern tip.

The number of immigrants began to shoot up in 2002, when 9,929 arrived, and peaked in 2006 when 31,859 had to be housed, the spokeswoman said on condition of anonymity in keeping with government rules. More than 96,116 people have sought shelter and a chance of a better, European-style life on the islands since 1994.

The recession, which has caused unemployment in Spain to ascend to nearly 18 percent, along with coastal patrols, have helped slow immigration.

The European Union agreed in 2006 to beef up Frontex, the bloc's external borders agency, after Spain lobbied for years for more funding. In May of that year, it agreed to deploy planes, boats and rapid reaction aid teams from its member states to deal with the flood of African illegal migrants trying to reach the Canary Islands.

It is not known how many people have died trying to make the perilous ocean crossing against prevailing trade winds. However, 45 died in 2008 compared to 32 in 2009. In February a ramshackle boat with 32 migrants aboard overturned just 20 meters (22 yards) from the northeast coast of Lanzarote and 25 of its dazed and exhausted passengers, including four children, drowned.

SOURCE





2 January, 2010

Bloomers is just another stereotypal liberal Jew

Good financial brains don't guarantee political realism. Note the dumb remarks below

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg pledged on Friday to promote a more open U.S. immigration policy during his third term, much as he made a campaign against illegal guns a hallmark of his second term. "With leaders from across the country, we will assemble a bipartisan coalition to support President Obama's call for comprehensive immigration reform that honors our history, upholds our values, and promotes our economy," Bloomberg said upon being sworn in for his third term as mayor.

The White House has said it will aim for immigration reform in 2010, possibly including a path to citizenship for the 12 million immigrants who live in the country illegally.

Bloomberg, who considered running for president in 2008 as a political independent, raised his national profile by assembling a coalition of 500 U.S. mayors who banded together in a campaign against illegal guns.

On the hot-button issue of immigration, he favors more liberal laws on allowing immigrants into the country and legalizing those who lack documentation. That will draw opposition from advocates of tightening the border and deportation of illegal aliens. "We're committing what I call national suicide," Bloomberg said on the NBC's "Meet the Press" last Sunday. "Somehow or other, after 9/11 we went from reaching out and trying to get the best and the brightest to come here, to trying to keep them out. [Semi-literate Hispanics are "the best and the brightest"?] "In fact, we do the stupidest thing, we give them educations and then don't give them green cards." [He's right about that being stupid -- but for the wrong reason. Illegals should not be able to access ANY taxpayer-provided service]

Bloomberg, a longtime Democrat, switched to the Republican Party before his first mayoral campaign in 2001 and was re-elected as a Republican in 2005. He dropped party affiliation for his third campaign.

The mayor was able to run for a third term after engineering changes in election law to extend term limits from two terms to three. He has vowed not to seek a fourth term.

SOURCE



$30 million cheap at the price

Most "asylum seekers" coming to Australia on ramshackle boats are not remotely desperate and are certainly not penniless. They are just economic migrants making a good investment. Leftists however always highlight the cases who tell a good story

ASYLUM-seekers trying to get to Australia paid up to $30 million to people smugglers to make the perilous journey in 2009. In a growing problem for the Federal Government, almost 2700 asylum-seekers were intercepted on 59 unauthorised boats last year. Three boats arrived in just 48 hours this week. The year before, just 161 asylum-seekers arrived on seven boats.

The going rate to get to Australia from Afghanistan is up to $US10,000, or about $A11,000, sources said. Tamils fleeing war-torn Sri Lanka pay less because of the shorter distance.

Refugee advocate Pamela Curr said not all asylum-seekers paid their full travel costs up front; many took out loans. Those rejected as refugees often faced death threats from smugglers when they returned home, she said. Many families faced terrible choices about which family members to send on the journey.

"There was a man on Christmas Island with his daughter," she said. "He and his wife had five children but she was the one who had to go, the eldest girl, because she had been marked by the Taliban for a forced marriage."

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd branded people smugglers the "scum of the earth" last year after a deadly explosion on an unauthorised boat. As more boats arrived, he defended his border protection policies as "tough but humane".

Flagging a renewed assault on the issue this year, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott said the Government lacked the "steel" to send the boats back. "An Australian government that doesn't have the option of turning boats back in the right circumstances is a government that is not doing enough," he said.

SOURCE





1 January, 2010

Immigration no solution for Israel

The report below is mainly a conventional shot at religious Israelis by a secular Israeli. Such complaints are common but the setting for this lot was particularly ill-mannered. There is however a lot of truth in what he says. The very orthodox Jews in Israel are a large and growing proportion of the population and they are in many ways parasitical on the rest of society -- via welfare payments, exemption from military service etc. And many don't work -- preferring to be full-time students of religious texts. So a lot of the work in Israel is done by Arab illegal immigrants! And the education system is full of the destructive Leftist tendencies well-known in the USA. While I am about it, I might as well mention the antipathy between the Ashkenazim and Sephardim. So Israel does indeed have large internal problems. To be optimistic, however, it could be said that Israel thrives on problems. It is perhaps a glimmer of hope that the antipathy between the Ashkenazim and Sephardim seems to be fading.

The boost in Anglo immigration in 2009 will not help ensure Israel's survival as a Western and Jewish democracy over the next two decades, a leading economist told an astonished crowd of lone immigrant soldiers on Wednesday. "It feels strange to say this to people who chose Israel, but our current trend means fewer people will come here and more will leave as our position deteriorates," Professor Dan Ben David from Tel Aviv University told the hundreds of soldiers at the Zionist Organization of America House who came to a symposium on their contribution to Israeli society. "Immigration will not prevent our current decline."

This year, 3,814 North Americans immigrated to Israel - the most since 1983, according to Nefesh B'Nefesh. Some 350 South Africans brought aliyah from that country to a 10-year peak, while 835 British arrivals upped immigration from the U.K. by 34 percent. Total Anglo immigration rose in 2009 by 17 percent, to 5,254 out of a total of world total of 16,244 people, according to the Jewish Agency. But these figures - 17 percent higher than last year's total - will have a negligible impact on internal degenerative processes occurring within Israeli society, according to Ben David. He told the crowd that Israeli society's situation is "unsustainable" because of a "growing group which does not work, does not study and does not produce."

The Israel-born scholar said the rise in people living under the poverty line - the rate of which rose from 25 percent in 1980 to 33 percent today "were not affected by a highly skilled immigration of one million people in less than a decade." Noting that fewer than half of Israeli pupils will be secular by 2001, he said, "The topping on this crappy cake is that scholastic achievements of this secular system are among the lowest in the West."

At the Jewish Agency event - which celebrated five years since the inauguration of the Wings program dedicated to preparing lone soldiers for civilian life - Ben David said that while "some Israelis will stay here no matter what, most of us have a price and a breaking point, and will leave."

These trends are still reversible but through educational and labor legislation not Western immigration, according to Ben David, who ran for the Knesset in 2006 with Kadima - which based its socioeconomic platform on his research.

Eli Cohen, head of the Jewish Agency's Aliyah Department, commented that the hour-long lecture "showed how important the Wings project is, and how important philanthropy is," referring to external support of the program for lone immigrant soldiers, who number some 2,500.

Cohen added in jest: "I hope the photographer here didn't focus too much on this lecture."

SOURCE



Turn the "refugee" boats away, says Australian conservative leader

TONY Abbott says he will turn asylum-seeker boats back out to sea if the Coalition wins the next election, accusing Kevin Rudd of lacking the "steel" to fulfil his promise to do the same. As authorities intercepted another refugee boat - the 59th this year - the Opposition Leader said asylum-seekers must know what a risky business it was coming to Australia by boat.

Mr Abbott attacked the Prime Minister over his lack of "steel" in handling the issue, The Australian reports. "If the circumstances permit it, you've got to be prepared to turn boats around," Mr Abbott told The Australian yesterday. "John Howard was fiercely criticised for this. Nevertheless, Kevin Rudd said he would be more than tough enough to turn boats around were he prime minister, but he singularly failed to show any steel whatsoever since becoming our leader."

The Opposition Leader's comments were accompanied by a fresh broadside against the Rudd Government's proposed emissions trading system. Mr Abbott challenged Mr Rudd to release Treasury modelling on who would be worse off under the scheme. Given that this is dribbling out piecemeal, I think it's high time that Mr Rudd came clean with the Australian people," Mr Abbott said.

The remarks prompted a government counter-attack, with Acting Climate Change Minister Peter Garrett challenging Mr Abbott to provide evidence for his claim the ETS would cost the average household an extra $1100 a year.

Mr Abbott's comments on boats echo a promise made by Mr Rudd in the dying days of the 2007 election campaign. "You'd turn them back," Mr Rudd said of approaching asylum boats. In the interview, given to The Australian, Mr Rudd acknowledged such an approach was contentious, but emphasised the importance of deterrence. "Deterrence is effective through the detention system but also your preparedness to take appropriate action as the vessels approach Australian waters on the high seas," the then opposition leader said.

Mr Abbott acknowledged the electoral potency of the asylum-seeker issue, saying the spike in boat arrivals had registered in the electorate. Perhaps in a measure of how the debate had evolved since the Tampa crisis of 2001, Mr Abbott indicated the refugee issue was unlikely to dominate next year's election campaign. "I think it's an important issue," the Liberal leader said. "I'm not saying it's the most important issue, I'm not saying it's necessarily a decisive issue. "But I think it has been a significant issue in terms of illustrating the comparative weakness of Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister."

When asked if he was prepared to turn boats back to sea, Mr Abbott replied: "I think you've got to be prepared to turn boats around, as Kevin Rudd said he would be."

Mr Abbott's comments came as 16 Tamil asylum-seekers rescued by the Customs vessel the Oceanic Viking touched down in Australia. A total of 18 have flown to Australia, while the remainder have been taken to a UN transit facility in Romania where they will be vetted by Canadian and American immigration teams.

The Australian understands Canberra will admit more of the 23 Tamils still in detention, although it is not clear how many. The Tamils have been resettled under a special deal underwritten by the Rudd government to find them homes in the West within four to 12 weeks, in exchange for ending their month-long stand-off aboard the Oceanic Viking with Australian authorities.

SOURCE








Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.


The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:

1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.

2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.

3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.

4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.

5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: You usually CAN buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.

6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.

I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.