Nativist Mark Krikorian Warns That ‘Saddam Hussein’s BFFs Are Coming To Town Near You’
Nativist Mark Krikorian Warns That ‘Saddam Hussein’s BFFs Are Coming To Town Near You’
Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the anti-immigrant Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), hit a new low this week when he warned National Review readers that 1,350 of Saddam Hussein’s best friends will be entering the U.S. Though not readily apparent, Krikorian is talking about the State Department’s decision to let a group of Iraqi Palestinians into the country as refugees. The U.S. hasn’t accepted many Palestinian refugees from Gaza or the West Bank in an effort to avoid stepping on Israel’s toes, but Iraqi Palestinians fall in a different category for many reasons. Krikorian writes:
“Besides the specific problem of welcoming to our shores people who danced in the streets at the destruction of the Twin Towers, there’s the more general issue of resettling as refugees people who have somewhere else to go…Resettlement in America, regardless of the total numbers (and I obviously prefer lower numbers), should be reserved only for those who can’t stay where they are and will never have anywhere else to go.”
It’s unclear whether Krikorian’s limited knowledge of the subject is driven more by his xenophobic agenda or intellectual laziness. Iraqi Palestinians are definitely not in a position to stay where they are and they have limited options in terms of where they could possibly go. Iraq’s Palestinian community is largely made up of those who were already driven from their homes in 1948 and others that were expelled from Kuwait in 1991. According to Refugees International, following the U.S. invasion, Iraqi Palestinians have fled killings, kidnappings, torture, and death threats as nearly 3,000 of them were left stranded in three of the “most desolate refugee camps in the world” along the border between Syria and Iraq. Most of the Arab world has shut its doors, as Europe and Canada have already accepted the responsibility of several hundred refugees. For many in the State Department and international community, accepting these individuals is “part of a moral imperative” the U.S. has to “clean up the refugee crisis created by invading Iraq.”
Krikorian’s suggestion that Iraqi Palestinians are terrorists is based on the same shamefully misleading logic that the Bush administration used to justify the war in Iraq. While it is true that Saddam treated them well, they are a far cry from being Saddam loyalists. Iraqi Palestinians are “apolitical,” and “basically desperate, scared, miserable and ready to just get out of Iraq,” says Human Rights Watch refugee policy director Bill Frelick.
Krikorian doesn’t just think that the U.S. refugee program is a load of crap, he’s also suggesting we dump our “problems” into the backyards of other countries. Krikorian insists that there must be some other country for the Iraqi Palestinians to settle in, preferably somewhere within the Arab League of Nations. Krikorian told the Christian Science Monitor:
“This is politically a real hot potato…[A]merica has become a dumping ground for the State Department’s problems — they’re tossing their problems over their head into Harrisburg, Pa., or Omaha, Neb.”
Krikorian’s perception of Iraqi Palestinian refugees isn’t just cold-hearted and stringent, it’s ignorant. In fact, it’s surprising he’s even recognizing their right to simply exist as individuals seeing as he’s previously described their homeland as having “no past, no distinctiveness, no commonality other than being the negation of Israel, the anti-Israel — anti-matter, if you will, on the periodic table of nations.”
56 Responses to “Nativist Mark Krikorian Warns That ‘Saddam Hussein’s BFFs Are Coming To Town Near You’”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Wonk RoomContact Us
Donate
The anti-immigration movement is nothing more than good old fashioned racism wrapped up in shiny new packaging. In this case they get to throw some anti-semitism and religious bigotry into the mix – a rare racist trifecta!
July 9th, 2009 at 9:50 amWhatever toasterhead. No doubt there are racists among the immigration restrictionists, just as there are in virtually every political issue group. My question to you is: If you believe that The People should have a say in the shape and direction of their state, the ability to effect change to unjust law and implement law they feel is just… if you believe in those things, how can that occur if citizens of other lands – with their own state – can just come in and say “No – your going to do it our way!”. Is it right when someone from New York votes both in New York and in Florida for a presidential election? Are YOU granting a method by which High Power can skirt around the Will of the People they are supposed to represent? Because history has documented Power doing exactly that, using this exact method. And by the way, its almost always accompanied by imperialism.
July 10th, 2009 at 10:19 amPerhaps the CIS is simply anti illegal immigration, a difference that is no doubt lost on those who write for this site.
July 10th, 2009 at 11:51 amSpeaking of intellectual laziness, Ms. Nill, your little essay is a prime example. Do you have any original thoughts or is it your job to just thread together the thoughts of people who clearly have more to say than you do.
Whether or not you agree with Mark Krikorian’s assertion of Palestine: “no past, no distinctiveness, no commonality other than being the negation of Israel, the anti-Israel — anti-matter, if you will, on the periodic table of nations”, there’s no doubt that he is capable of drafting a compelling and captivating sentence.
July 10th, 2009 at 12:09 pmHow about you?
Arabs are a race? Boy, you learn something new everyday from the people who are too cowardly to attach their names to what they write.
“Palestinians” are Arabs. Let them go to where Arabs came from. If none of the other Arab states want them, perhaps they know something that we don’t — and perhaps we ought to listen.
July 10th, 2009 at 12:13 pmGratefulman, how does this fit the definition of illegal immigration? These refugees are coming at the behest of the government of the United States of America. Krikorian is just another Malkinite, trying to burn the bridges that their own parents and grandparents crossed to come here. Luckily they’re a crazy fringe, and will most likely remain that way.
July 10th, 2009 at 12:16 pmPalestine doesn’t exist, it’s either a part of Israel or Jordan, depending on how you look at it. There never was a nation of Palestine, but there could be if they would give up their dream of killing all the Jews, stop electing terrorists to lead them, and just try to be peaceful.
July 10th, 2009 at 12:30 pmDio Genes, I believe Gratefulman was just taking issue with Ms. Nills intellectually lazy first sentence where she labels the CIS as anti-immigration, simply because it frankly discusses the impact of all kinds of immigration on this country.
July 10th, 2009 at 12:38 pmSo anyone who wants to have a frank discussion about immigration is labled a xenophobe, just like anyone who wants a frank discussion about the cultural differences between Muslims and Christians is an Islamophobe.
Great piece. Krikorian should not be seen as a neutral observer on these issues. Remember his take on Sotomayor?
Check out more of his extreme viewpoints here:
July 10th, 2009 at 1:01 pmhttp://www.AmericasVoiceOnline.org/KrikorianAttacks
Tim of Angle Says:
“Palestinians” are Arabs. Let them go to where Arabs came from. If none of the other Arab states want them, perhaps they know something that we don’t — and perhaps we ought to listen.
July 10th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
______________
Actually, they’re not. Genetically, Palestinians are much closer to Ashkenazi Jews than they are to Arabs originating from the Arabian Peninsula. The term “Arab” isn’t so much a racial or ethnic distinction as a linguistic conglomerate, since the term applies equally to Moroccans and Yemenis and Syrians and Egyptians of varying ethnic backgrounds.
It’s also, as your comment proves, a convenient way of denying Palestinians their identity, which is ethnically, linguistically, and culturally distinct from other “Arab” groups.
The fact is that Palestinians are not Egyptians, not Lebanese, and not Jordanians. Their culture evolved in Palestine, and to deny them access to their ancestral land is equivalent to genocide.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:01 pmCarolynM Says:
So anyone who wants to have a frank discussion about immigration is labled a xenophobe, just like anyone who wants a frank discussion about the cultural differences between Muslims and Christians is an Islamophobe.
July 10th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
_____________
In my experience, no people who want to have a “frank discussion about immigration” or a “frank discussion about Islam” are anything other than xenophobes and Islamophobes.
“Frank discussion” is just a cute code word you bigots use for “propaganda session,” and you know it.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:08 pmTwo points:
1. In a 2003 in-person conversation with Jan Ting, who had been Assistant Commissioner of the INS during 1990 – 1992 (and now teaches law at Temple U), I asked him, “Is it true what we hear that 90% of refugee and asylum cases are fraudulent?” He instantly replied, “95%.”
Odds are that these folks fit within Ting’s 95%. After all, why blithely accept assertions that other Arab countries are closed to them? (And if they can’t even get along with other Arabs, how are they going to fit in here??)
2. Most Americans are unaware that the large refugee stream that comes here (more than to all the rest of the world combined) is due to the good works [hah!] of those in the organizations (think Catholic Charities, Lutheran Family Services, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, …) who make a living off the flow. It’s important to note that’s a nearly 100% taxpayer-supported living. The whole refugee program is basically a scam, a backdoor route to immigration.
For all the depressing details about this public-policy snakepit, visit the Refugee Resettlement Watch website.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:12 pmI cannot believe there are people defending Mark Krikorian on this thread. Forget racism, Mark Krikorian believes the only solution to “illegal immigration” in the U.S. is what he calls “attrition through enforcement.” Attrition is a military term. It means to wear down your enemy to the point of collapse. Krikorian’s one big ideas is to make life so miserable for migrants they leave on their own. It is basically a policy of terrorism. Forget racism. Mark Krikorian is a terrorist.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:31 pmIf he’s so upset about Palestinians coming to the U.S., he should advocate for their rights to return to their homes in Palestine. They’re still Palestinian refugees, despite the State Department’s classification of them as Iraq refugees.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:31 pmGreat piece! Just scratch below the surface of FAIR, CIS, and NumbersUSA. These are not anti-”illegal”-immigration organizations, they are anti-immigrant, plain and simple. Its no secret that John Tanton and his hooligans are seeking to reduce immigration of ALL KINDS into the United States.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:32 pmCenter for Immigration Studies – a serious and thoughtful immigration policy group – that has NOTHING POSITIVE TO SAY ABOUT IMMIGRANTS WHATSOEVER?! You’d think that immigrants wouldn’t be all bad but according to CIS they cause global warming. Thanks for calling them out Andrea – about time someone did!
July 10th, 2009 at 1:36 pmreading this is is better than watching rasslin’ in my trailer. Actually, i watch it through my neighbors window since I got no lectric power in my trailer. I think the pro-migrants are winnin’ this match. come on guys and ketch up.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:47 pmResponding to Paul’s comment:
“Odds are that these folks fit within Ting’s 95%. After all, why blithely accept assertions that other Arab countries are closed to them? (And if they can’t even get along with other Arabs, how are they going to fit in here??)”
Thanks Paul for your telling contribution to this thread. You see, “odds are” isn’t a unit of measure that many think tanks – except maybe CIS – would take seriously.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:48 pmjustlivin Says:
Thanks Paul for your telling contribution to this thread. You see, “odds are” isn’t a unit of measure that many think tanks – except maybe CIS – would take seriously.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
__________
I’m sure the Heartland Institute could find some use for it as well.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:53 pmWhat we as a country should be concerned about is our lack of attention to the mass migration of people worldwide, directly affected by military and economic policies promoted by the U.S. Although migration has always been a part of our history, and by ours I mean our human history, its evident that today more than ever these policies have created an instability worldwide where nations are struggling to survive in a globalized environment and as a result those who suffer the most are the economic and political refugees.
Here in the U.S., they’re made scapegoats for domestic and foreign problems. We chastize them for not following the “rule of law” even though the rule of law is subject to convenience and political agendas.
So when are we going to start focusing on the root causes of immigration, which the U.S. as a maverick cannot solve alone. Our enforcement policies are useless and don’t provide anymore security or safety today, they only promote fear that manifest itself in racist logic and action with Krikorian’s rhetoric serving as a catalyst.
Ignorance is at the heart of the anti-immigrant frame because it’s unrealistic. The militarization of our border and our loss of privacy and freedoms nationwide don’t serve the purpose of security, they merely line the pockets of a few. If you really want to slow the flow of migration not only to the U.S. but to other parts of the world, then lets bring leaders together as equals to discuss a collective agreement. If not, then continue the xenophobic rhetoric, you’re only shooting yourself in the foot, or you’re really not serious about working towards a solution.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:53 pmnote2self: “ts no secret that John Tanton and his hooligans are seeking to reduce immigration of ALL KINDS into the United States.”
Along with 80%+ of the electorate.
Kind of hard to interpret as racism then, no. It’s not fear of the other, its a desire to maintain any semblance of a high quality emergent cultural apparatus, which is being crush – imo, intentionally.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:57 pmjdavenport Says:
Kind of hard to interpret as racism then, no. It’s not fear of the other, its a desire to maintain any semblance of a high quality emergent cultural apparatus, which is being crush – imo, intentionally.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
____________
“High-quality emergent cultural apparatus,” of course, being code for “white superiority.”
July 10th, 2009 at 1:59 pmTo justlivin:
Actually, no, I don’t see. Most of the refugee/asylee influx is fraudulent. Why take at face value claims that “this group is different”? You believe the State Department? Foggy Bottom is famous for having gone native.
And while I’m at it, justlivin, let’s see your analysis of these statements further up the thread:
“Their culture evolved in Palestine, and to deny them access to their ancestral land is equivalent to genocide.”
==
“Krikorian’s one big ideas [sic] is to make life so miserable for migrants they leave on their own. It is basically a policy of terrorism. Forget racism. Mark Krikorian is a terrorist.”
July 10th, 2009 at 2:00 pmThis is a great article-it’s important that people understand the racism behind the anti-immigrant movement as well as its basis on complete falsities. It’s just unbelievable that Krikorian doesn’t understand the moral imperative to take in people who have had to flee their homeland because of American projects (Iraq, Israel). Go Andrea!
July 10th, 2009 at 2:01 pmPaul Says:
Actually, no, I don’t see. Most of the refugee/asylee influx is fraudulent. Why take at face value claims that “this group is different”?
July 10th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
____________
I refuse to take at face value your claim that “most of the refugee/asylee influx is fraudulent.” Please provide a reliable study from a reputable organization that provides any evidence of this. And no, the Geert Wilders Fansite you linked to earlier does not count.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:05 pmjustlivin, are you arguing with the 95% number?
If you do accept the 95% number, than “odds are” is a perfectly reasonable shortcut for: “Given that 95% of asylum cases are fraudulent, assuming a random distribution of fraudulence between origins, 95% of cases from a given source are fraudulent”
Now, that might not be a very useful statistic, but the problem with it isn’t the “odds are” part”
July 10th, 2009 at 2:06 pmRight toasterhead. I’m the white supremacist you’ve never met.
And you’re not at all afraid to engage in a debate on the merits.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:08 pmAttrition through enforcement is a fail all around.
Not only does it not solve the real problem (that our immigration system is totally messed up), but it makes live miserable for countless American citizens in the process.
Good thing nativists aren’t winning any elections.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:09 pmjdavenport Says:
And you’re not at all afraid to engage in a debate on the merits.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
______________
I’m not.
Do let me know when you get some merits and I’ll happily debate you on them.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:12 pmHussein Toasterhead, While I think your goofy name is pretty funny, you can’t make the rules. For example – you’re allowed to make sweeping generalizations based on your obviously limited experience:
“In my experience, no people who want to have a “frank discussion about immigration” or a “frank discussion about Islam” are anything other than xenophobes and Islamophobes. ”
Yet you demand this from anyone who doesn’t agree with you:
” Please provide a reliable study from a reputable organization that provides any evidence of this.”
Sorry, won’t play your little game.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:15 pmPaul –
ok – i agree. that mark krikorian is a terrorist or the comment about genocide are opinions and not facts. but you see, they are opinions – not facts.
CIS takes half baked hunches, “odds are,” despair over having to press 1 for English and fears of immigrant cooties (they have leprosy!) and labels them as facts. Then you hear those “facts” on Lou Dobbs, coming into Congress as angry faxes and Mark Krikorian is on CNN as an immigration expert. These refugees are people who “danced in the streets at the destruction of the Twin Towers”?
The fact is that Krikorian is no immigration expert. We all can come up with our own opinions abut what he might actually be.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:15 pmDo you think an emergent view of culture is reasonable, toaster?
Do you believe that cultural imperialism is a real phenomenon?
Do you think that a cultural apparatus should be allowed to defend itself?
July 10th, 2009 at 2:19 pmClearly Krikorian and his ilk at the Center for Immigration Studies are not credible sources on anything. This specific situation just proves it.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:21 pmKyledeb, you start off saying “I cannot believe..blah blah blah..” and irrationally, and stupidly, conclude “Mark Krikorian is a terrorist.”
July 10th, 2009 at 2:30 pmPlease tell me you’re a girl. Because while drama queens in general are insufferable, a male one is simply intolerable.
jdavenport Says:
Do you think an emergent view of culture is reasonable, toaster?
Do you believe that cultural imperialism is a real phenomenon?
Do you think that a cultural apparatus should be allowed to defend itself?
July 10th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
____________
I think “emergent view of culture” is a ridiculous juxtaposition of words designed to make you look as if you have the foggiest idea what you’re talking about. It didn’t work.
Now, I do believe cultural imperialism is a real thing – it’s on display right now in Xinjiang and Tibet, where the PRC government is actively working to impose Han culture on ethnic minorities. I do believe cultures should defend themselves against imperialism of this type by maintaining their traditions and languages. Not through racism and bigotry.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:31 pmCarolynM Says:
Sorry, won’t play your little game.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
____________
In other words, you can’t point to a single instance of someone wanting a “frank discussion of immigration” that isn’t somehow motivated by xenophobia.
Thank you for playing! :)
July 10th, 2009 at 2:34 pmTo justlivin (and with a nod to ErinR):
If Krikorian isn’t an immigration expert, then nobody in the world is.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:45 pmSeriously?
Ummmmm….
July 10th, 2009 at 2:49 pmWell, I appreciate the response.
An emergent model of a cultural apparatus is the dominant model, from what I’ve read. I’m just using a term from higher math. The wiki page on “emergence” sums it up nicely. I like the term because it crosses disciplines.
I agree with your examples of cultural imperialism.
Now, before I ask my question, let me state flat out that I think one can distinguish between Racism and Bigotry on the one hand, and defense of tradition on the other.
By what rules are you placing me in the Racism and Bigotry category? How are you distinguishing me as a xenophobe from someone promoting the protection of traditions?
July 10th, 2009 at 2:53 pmjdavenport Says:
By what rules are you placing me in the Racism and Bigotry category? How are you distinguishing me as a xenophobe from someone promoting the protection of traditions?
July 10th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
____________
By your usage of “protecting traditions” as a rationale for opposing immigration, as if the presence of 1,350 Palestinian refugees somehow presents a danger to white American culture.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:58 pmCarolynM Says:
Kyledeb, you start off saying “I cannot believe..blah blah blah..” and irrationally, and stupidly, conclude “Mark Krikorian is a terrorist.”
Please tell me you’re a girl. Because while drama queens in general are insufferable, a male one is simply intolerable.
_______________
Really, how is my claim irrational? That’s exactly what “attrition through enforcement” is. If you can’t prove otherwise, please refrain from the name calling. I think it’s pretty clear throughout this entire thread that those supporting Mark Krikorian have no real facts or arguments on their side. You just have a lot of time to be spreading your misinformation.
July 10th, 2009 at 3:04 pmStevenR Says:
What we as a country should be concerned about is our lack of attention to the mass migration of people worldwide, directly affected by military and economic policies promoted by the U.S.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
______________
Nail on head. Thank you.
July 10th, 2009 at 3:08 pmThank you for the reply. I think I’ve argued myself into my position, and when other’s tell me that the dominant force behind my argument is my inherent racism, it tend to be reactive – as do most people.
I never said I had a problem with 1300 palestinian refugees. I have a problem with unfettered mass immigration. I think important structural components of the US that allowed rapid integration (or a melting pot, if you will) during previous mass immigrations are now missing.
Also, I think the imperial engine of the United States – and the West in General – is largely being fueled by a combination of outsourcing production and in-sourcing cheap labor. This has allowed a hidden socialization of costs (which is now emerging).
But back to the cultural imperialism. We can argue about numbers, but in my opinion over 20 million illegal aliens, mostly from Mexico, were present in the US during the peak (under Bush). And their distribution was not random.
I live in a town of 8,000 people in New Hampshire. The cultural apparatus I live in has been largely unchanged – adapting, but maintaining its original flavor – for 400 years. That is, while technology and times have changed, and inputs have been adopted by the apparatus, its still small town. We don’t shit on our neighbors, etc.
And I know a bunch of laborers out of work because california based construction companies are coming in paying illegal immigrants illegal wages under the table. And as a group, those laborers don’t give a damn about the town I live in. Culturally, they’re Mexican. Politically, they’re La Raza.
Our political system is driving a big wheel, where the labor comes in from the south, and capital flows out the top into Mexico, which doesn’t have the institutions to stand up to the scale of these entities. Its the classic trans-national corporation problem.
I’m sick of it.
Regards
July 10th, 2009 at 3:24 pmkyledeb says:
July 10th, 2009 at 3:43 pmIf you can’t prove otherwise, please refrain from the name calling.
Only if you say pretty please….
For someone who is so sensitive to a little innocuous name calling, you are certainly quick to call someone a terrorist. If, as you say, Mark Krikorian says “attrition through enforcement” how in the world do you feel that the logical progression is that he is a terrorist? “Attrition through enforcement” simply means enforcing our laws. Unless you equate enforcing our laws as morally equivalent to, say, the Mumbai shootings, or flying a plane into a building, or decapitating civilians…
CarolynM Says:
kyledeb says:
If you can’t prove otherwise, please refrain from the name calling.
Only if you say pretty please….
For someone who is so sensitive to a little innocuous name calling, you are certainly quick to call someone a terrorist. If, as you say, Mark Krikorian says “attrition through enforcement” how in the world do you feel that the logical progression is that he is a terrorist? “Attrition through enforcement” simply means enforcing our laws. Unless you equate enforcing our laws as morally equivalent to, say, the Mumbai shootings, or flying a plane into a building, or decapitating civilians…
I’m not sensitive to it, I just think name calling shouldn’t take the place of rational argument. Actually, “attrition through enforcement” is not about enforcing laws. The whole point of it is actually that there are too many unauthorized migrants to have the law enforced so the only way to force them is to make them so miserable they leave on their own.
I don’t call people names lightly, and I don’t see any other word for that than terrorism. If making millions of people more miserable that the majority world conditions their fleeing from are better than living in the United States is the only solution people like Krikorian have, then they are loony as are the people that defend them.
July 10th, 2009 at 3:58 pmkyledeb, this is the completely disingenuous.
You can’t call someone a terrorist for agreeing with the “attrition through enforcement” position and then turn around and complain about name calling. It’s ridiculous.
July 10th, 2009 at 4:07 pmkyledeb, this is the completely disingenuous.
You can’t call someone a terrorist for agreeing with the “attrition through enforcement” position and then turn around and complain about name calling. It’s ridiculous.
Fine. I’m not completely hard headed. I’ll agree I can’t complain about the name calling. Still, though, I stand behind my position that “attrition through enforcement” is the equivalent of terrorism. It’s also the nativist solution to everything. Anyone that has just one solution to something as complex as migration flows should be looked upon with skepticism.
July 10th, 2009 at 4:17 pmTakes someone with person integrity to admit when they’re wrong.
For me, the reason I’m for enforcement first is because I don’t think the left has any leverage over the State to prevent the Complex (and it is a complex – a federal government and big business confuence) from doing the same thing again, and I don’t think the right has any leverage of big business to prevent it from doing the same thing again.
From reading him for a while (I am a conservative), I think Krikorkian believes the same thing.
Personally, I think we need to repeal the 17th. Ever since we changed how we elect senators, the Federal Power head and the Corporate Power head have repeatedly climbed into bed together. It happened right after passage in 1912 – and we got world war one. Then the roaring twenties and a crash – the new deal – and shortly afterwards the international system went haywire – war. All semi-fascist or third way socialist power confluences.
Forget the nativist shit. We are talking about balance of power between Nation-States , and what happens when they get all entangled. Mark Steyn is correct, also, btw, in that massive changes in population distributions are going to wreak havoc on the system.
Regards
July 10th, 2009 at 4:45 pmjtdavenport:
I’m glad you’re not like the hard headed nativists I usually deal with online. It’s hard to tell the difference sometimes. I know you probably don’t believe it but NumbersUSA, ALIPAC, CIS, and FAIR have a team of commenters that just go around the internet spreading the same old lies without having a real debate.
Here’s the thing most people don’t realize about the U.s. migration debate. In reality there’s nothing that can be done locally about migration enforcement. The only real solution to the migration debate is to give people opportunities in the countries they’re fleeing from. Until then, I believe we have to act as humane as possible to the migrants that are already in the U.S. If you’re for enforcement first like you say, it’s not only bad for migrants, it’s bad for all U.s. citizens to enshrine a system of inequality where two groups of people have very different rights.
I won’t even mention all of the horrific things unauthorized migrants have to deal with in the U.S., like getting ripped apart from their families, getting preyed upon by criminals who know they’re vulnerable and won’t go to police, dying in detention centers from lack of medical attention. This is the side affect of an enforcement first policy, and yes I do believe it amounts to terrorizing a population of millions.
We probably won’t agree on everything, but I hope we can at least agree on the fact that the only real solution to this problem, is remedying the global inequity that forces people to migrate in the first place.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:07 pmkyledeb wrote, addressing jtdavenport, “I hope we can at least agree on the fact that the only real solution to this problem, is remedying the global inequity that forces people to migrate in the first place.”
I, in turn, hope jtdavenport won’t sign on to that old chestnut of a proposition. Other countries have to fix their own problems — you can’t do other peoples’ development for them. Plus, the U.S. has its hands full with just our own problems.
Talking about “global [in]equity” or the oft-cited “international community” is escapism. Absent extra-terrestrial threats, we’ll never be “one united people,” as the phrase goes. (And if we were, what would happen to the diversity that the left so trumpets and claims that it craves?)
As George Kennan pointed out best, we can’t save the world by letting people immigrate here, but we can ruin our own country by trying (such ruination already being in progress):
“What we shall then have accomplished is not to have appreciably improved conditions in the Third World (for even the maximum numbers we could conceivably take would be only a drop from the bucket of the planet’s overpopulation) but to make this country itself a part of the Third World (as certain parts of it already are), thus depriving the planet of one of the few great regions that might have continued, as it now does, to be helpful to much of the remainder of the world by its relatively high standard of civilization, by its quality as example, by its ability to shed insight on the problems of the others and to help them find their answers to their own problems.”
July 10th, 2009 at 6:09 pmkyledeb: “I know you probably don’t believe it but NumbersUSA, ALIPAC, CIS, and FAIR have a team of commenters that just go around the internet spreading the same old lies without having a real debate.”
Oh, I have no doubt. They’re pacts, essentially. In case you didn’t notice, btw, Soros is funding Acorn style groups. Of course, many of the restrictionists are actual grass roots. The response against the senate amnesty under Bush (which he pushed, standing next to Kennedy) was legitimately ground up, and one of the only times I’ve ever seen high power lose.
kyledeb: The only real solution to the migration debate is to give people opportunities in the countries they’re fleeing from.
I agree completely, although as a conservative, I would say “enable people to generate and take advantage of opportunities.”
kyledeb: Until then, I believe we have to act as humane as possible to the migrants that are already in the U.S.
I will not allow my general good will toward people to cloud my judgement on this issue (which is not to say I can’t be persuaded). This is not a matter of keeping people from gas chambers or political persecution. This is a matter of ethnic Mexican nationals taking the assets they have accumulated – moving those assets to a liquid form, and taking it back to their own damn country.
I do COMPLETELY agree about the two tier problem. We should not have a massive worker program. We cannot have second class citizens.
I am NOT a protectionist, however, I don’t think NAFTA is a free trade agreement. I am for liberal trade policies. But the THREAT of protectionism is what keeps our business and political class from using the dynamics of international trade against The People, regardless of the country they live in. I would like to see NAFTA repealed and a return of the tariff “port” system. Tariffs act kind of like a valve or regulator. Or, if you like, an Active Transport mechanism in a cell membrane – creating a dynamic equilibrium with their neighbors.
This could mitigate the draft over Mexico which is preventing her from getting her bearings, and open the possibility of reforming the internal Mexican structure (by her own citizens.)
I think the immigration issue has the potential to change our trade policy. The HB1 visas are totally being abused also, imo.
kyledeb: We probably won’t agree on everything, but I hope we can at least agree on the fact that the only real solution to this problem, is remedying the global inequity that forces people to migrate in the first place.
Yes. But I don’t think that the wealth of the United States is primarily stolen. I think it is the result of a brilliant constitutional structure. And I think most of her sins are the result of instances where we have distorted that structure.
I think her imperial tendencies are due both to poor modifications of the original design and that she is so extraordinarily successful at creating wealth compared to other models that her mere shadow is imperialistic compared the competition.
I think that rapidly cutting her down to size will unleash a world of power plays that will do more damage than good. And I think that allowing twenty million Mexicans who maintain loyalty to the Nation-State on our southern border has a very good chance of destroying her.
And I have argued myself into all those positions.
The discourse has been enjoyable. Enjoy the weekend.
Josh Davenport
July 10th, 2009 at 6:33 pmI see that Refugee Resettlement Watch was mentioned above by Paul. Here is the link to my post on the original Palestinian story, one we have followed for months. Included is my comment to your discussion.
http://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/2009/07/09/it-is-confirmed-1350-iraqi-palestinians-coming-to-the-us/
July 10th, 2009 at 8:24 pmIr has been enjoyable, Josh Davenport. Don’t hesitate to get in touch with me if you’d like to talk further.
July 11th, 2009 at 12:01 am@CarolynM
Kyledeb is correct in stating Mark Krikorian is a terrorist. Perhaps the better term or description would be “domestic terrorist”.
It’s a given that mainstream America is not quite ready to admit that people like Mark Krikorian and his ilk are indeed domestic terrorists. History will not judge Krikorian, John Tanton and Roy Beck kindly, they are indeed little more than terrorists. If you want proof, simply take a look at the recent upsurge in hate crimes and right-wing extremism.
How many hate crimes have been perpetrated against immigrants since the anti-immigrant messaging of FAIR, CIS, Social Contract Press and NumberUSA has been picked up by mainstream media.
The fact is that such anti-immigrant messaging appeals to white supremacist groups. These extremist groups have been linked to individuals such as alleged double murderer Shawna Forde, who along with accomplices posed as law enforcement officials, raided a home in Arizona and killed 9 year old Briseña Flores as well as her father.
Forde was not only affiliated with various Minutemen groups, but also actually represented FAIR on a PBS show which discussed illegal immigration. Shawna Forde appears on the immigration panel and is introduced by the shows moderator as a Representative of FAIR. The PBS show aired in 2006 and was held in Yakima, Washington. An excerpt of the show can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErqCmLiWQj8
July 13th, 2009 at 2:45 pmRe: Krikorian as ‘terrorist’ for wanting to make illegal immigrants lives ‘miserable.’
I was an illegal alien once– I entered the UK on a tourist visa (which I thought was good for 6 months entry-exit without condition) I really had plans to stay longer — I just thought I’d sort out the paperwork –I had the right to a longer term visa — eventually . Well, traveling back and forth into and out of this European country several times aroused the suspicion of the border guard as I was going from Brussels to London one day. I was grilled as to what I was doing in the UK, my income source, where and in what type of housing I lived etc. Eventually given a reprieve at the last moment to catch the train. But the guard put some sort of code in my passport, took my details and made me promise to sort out the paperwork — which I traveled back to the US to do. In other words, he made me miserable and he made me spend a lot of cash.
You know what, far from being a ‘terrorist’, the official was correct to hassle me. Even though I wasn’t employed in the UK (I worked freelance for US companies) , wasn’t burdening their health system (no right to services), their welfare system(ditto) or school-system (no children with me), and thus must have been a net ‘plus’ in terms of taxes ( like 17% VAT) etc., I had no right to be in the UK, to congest their transport and parks, to place additional demand on the housing stock, and so forth. So I didn’t whine (or whinge) about the treatment, I just did the right thing and sorting my paperwork back in the USA. And had I not been eligible for a longer-term visa, I would have accepted that to.
The countries which send the most legal and illegal immigrants are not particularly poor — Mexico is a middle-income country. Having to return to Mexico is not being sent to the Gulag. And, as we are constantly hearing how hard-working immigrants are, maybe large-scale return of its citizens would do its economy and political system good.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:16 pmI suggest banning the song ‘My Country ‘Tis of Thee’. First it is a rip-off of God Save the Queen. More importantly, the verse below awful
Land where my Fathers Died
Aside from the sexist language, it is a clearly nativist statement. If the fathers (meaning the whole patriarchy: father, grandfather, great-grandfather etc ) died in ‘the Land’ the singer clearly is not an immigrant. This is nativism of the highest order. What about all those folks whose fathers died in China, Mexico, India, etc?
July 15th, 2009 at 12:24 pm