← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Fernando Wood
Thread ID: 14170 | Posts: 10 | Started: 2004-06-14
2004-06-14 01:06 | User Profile
[I]This isn't what Vdare.com means by "immigration reform". Instead, it means corporate America calling for more cheap labor. Remember, in the words of the Aon Corp. VP, "Immigration is not a social issue, but it is a very important economic issue". Huh?! [/I]
[url]http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-0406110199jun11,1,6391425.story[/url]
Panel urges immigration reform Newcomers are called key to future
By Oscar Avila Tribune staff reporter
June 11, 2004
Taking a run at fixing an immigration system nearly everybody agrees is broken, a high-profile panel urged the federal government Thursday to legalize most of the 9 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S.
The bipartisan panel, headed by former Illinois Gov. Jim Edgar, also called for a plan to help industries bring in foreign workers on a temporary basis if they lack U.S.-born employees.
The task force, convened by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, said the reforms are necessary to keep business humming while dismantling an underground economy of illegal immigrants.
Task force members also said the United States needed to screen potential terrorists more effectively while helping law-abiding immigrants assimilate into U.S. society .
"When you're talking about immigration, you're talking about our future in this nation and particularly in the Midwest," said Edgar, one of the task force's co-chairs. "The status quo is not working."
The group, which included former Illinois Atty. Gen. Roland Burris, Episcopal Bishop William Persell and former Bank One Chairman Verne Istock, focused on the Midwest. Immigrant populations in nine of the region's 12 states grew more quickly than the national average in the 1990s.
The Midwest's growing stature as an immigrant gateway will be highlighted next week when Mexican President Vicente Fox visits Chicago, Detroit and Minneapolis-St. Paul.
Illinois has the nation's fifth-largest immigrant population, about 1.5 million residents, according to the 2000 census. Immigration authorities estimate that 400,000 undocumented immigrants live in the state.
In recent years, corporate interests such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have forged an unlikely alliance with labor unions and liberal immigrant advocacy groups, all of whom have a stake in an efficient flow of immigrant workers.
"Immigration is not a social issue, but it is a very important economic issue," said D. Cameron Findlay, executive vice president and general counsel for Aon Corp., one of several business executives on the panel.
Panelists heard from activists critical of a 1986 amnesty for many undocumented immigrants, which they said only encouraged more foreigners to enter the country illegally.
Task force members acknowledged the concern that a new wave of legalization would create the same problem. But the panelists concluded that stricter enforcement of immigration law after the proposed legalization, including penalties against employers who hire undocumented workers, would reduce illegal immigration in the future.
"There needs to be a stick with the carrot when people try to cut corners," said co-chair Doris Meissner, former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
The task force said immigration enforcement has become more difficult after the 2001 terrorist attacks, noting that "security risks at U.S. borders cannot be completely eliminated without causing significant damage to vital interests and values."
Panelists said U.S. authorities were not true to the nation's values when they targeted immigrants based on national origin. They criticized the "special registration" program that required men from 24 predominantly Muslim countries and North Korea to be photographed, fingerprinted and questioned at U.S. government offices.
Surveys show that most Americans favor reduced immigration, with some critics saying there is a disconnect between the political establishment that favors immigration and the average U.S. citizen who must cope with the social needs created by the newcomers.
Edgar acknowledged that the topic is such a divisive one that any major immigration reform must wait until after this fall's election. He said the report is intended to help establish a consensus that the system is broken.
"Politically, this is not going to be an easy issue," said Edgar, a Republican. "But for those who think immigration is a dangerous thing for our nation, I think they are sorely mistaken."
Copyright é 2004, Chicago Tribune </>
2004-06-14 01:22 | User Profile
'The Council's goal is to further awareness and broaden understanding of international relations and foreign policy as well as promote Chicago's status as an important international center.'
Given this goal, what other conclusion would the Council's panel reach? Could anything be vaguer than 'broaden understanding of international relations'--when non-academic programs talk like this, it is just a way of saying, 'We'd like to help foreign interests rule America.'
And, of coure, immigration will certainly promote Chicago's status as an 'international' center.
Whites who live in Chicago are mostly pretty much reconciled to living with non-whites. And the non-whites rarely give a shit. Thus a panel representing Chicago is hardly going to be anti-immigration. The cores of most of our major urban areas have to written off in the immigration fight. The suburbs--that's a different story.
2004-06-14 01:34 | User Profile
[QUOTE=darkstar]Whites who live in Chicago are mostly pretty much reconciled to living with non-whites. And the non-whites rarely give a shit. Thus a panel representing Chicago is hardly going to be anti-immigration. The cores of most of our major urban areas have to written off in the immigration fight. The suburbs--that's a different story.[/QUOTE]
I agree that, for the present and forseeable future, most urban areas can be considered a lost cause. But, while the African and Hispanic leadership present a united front in blaming (and despoiling) whites, the rank-and-file blacks and Mexicans, for the most part, distrust and despise each other.
2004-06-14 03:07 | User Profile
That's like closing the barn doors after the horses have escaped.
All you can do now is to control it and make it work in you favor by using them.
And once again, don't blame the Mexicans for wanting a better life in the USA, if you want to blame (once again) those responsible for the situation then you must direct you attention to the head of the US government.
PS: I blame them myself.
2004-06-14 04:02 | User Profile
I don't blame Mexicans for wanting a better life. I blame them for failing to control their [I]disgusting[/I] breeding habits. In this day and age of affordable birth control, there is no excuse for having kids you can't afford.
I also blame the Mexican government for lobbying for more immigration to the US. And I blame Mexican activists who actively talk of killing whites and reclaiming the Southwest.
Yes, of course I blame Jorge too.
[QUOTE=Ponce]That's like closing the barn doors after the horses have escaped.
All you can do now is to control it and make it work in you favor by using them.
And once again, don't blame the Mexicans for wanting a better life in the USA, if you want to blame (once again) those responsible for the situation then you must direct you attention to the head of the US government.
PS: I blame them myself.[/QUOTE]
2004-06-15 02:55 | User Profile
s[QUOTE=darkstar]I don't blame Mexicans for wanting a better life. I blame them for failing to control their [I]disgusting[/I] breeding habits. In this day and age of affordable birth control, there is no excuse for having kids you can't afford.
I also blame the Mexican government for lobbying for more immigration to the US. And I blame Mexican activists who actively talk of killing whites and reclaiming the Southwest.
Yes, of course I blame Jorge too.[/QUOTE]
The "breeding" habits of other nations began when they had to much land and needed more workers (more kids)
In places like in India where there is no Social Security the kids are the future in order for the old people to survive,,,,,,
Also in the old days 7 out of 10 kids were dying at an early age, so by producing more kids more would survive.
There is also religion, in some religions more kids were call for in order to fight their holy wars.
By the way, in the old days even in the US couples used to have many kids, specially in the West.
Those are "some" of the reasons as to why many families from third worlds have many kids then and now.
You should educate yourself about other races ,and situations, in order to understand the cause and affects of what is going on in the US.
As long as you don't understand other races you will be "The Ugly American".
2004-06-15 03:17 | User Profile
Oh, I understand the nature of other races quite well. I understand, for example, that you are a non-white attempting to smear any white as 'ignorant' who is not sufficiently accepting of non-white immorality, stupidity, and racial will to power.
I make no general condemnation of 'having a lot of kids,' as you imply. I am far more familiar with world history, and, in particular the history of the West, than a barely literate Cuban such as yourself could ever be. (know what I mean,,,,,,,,,,,?) I am happy to see whites have many children who white families can afford-- as was usually the case in Western Europe, outside of Ireland and the Great Depression (an unforseen factor for families, as it was).
Be that as it may, [I]we are no longer 'in the old days.' [/I] If we were, we would not be seeing the massive population explosion in the 3rd world that we in fact are. Why do 3rd worlders not change with the times? In general: because they are too intellectually lazy to do so. They condemn 'Western rationality' as they mire themselves in irrationality, all the while asking to come to the West, and for a little extra aid money, and maybe forgive some debts--and maybe the Westerns could kiss the ass of some non-Western intellectuals a bit more, while they are at it.
Your point that the kids might need to fight in holy wars I found particularly laughable--indeed, what hideous breeding habits. But, of course, I--a lowly white person transfixed by the barbarity of the 3rd world--need you to explain these sociological factors to me. Gracias, amigo.
[QUOTE=Ponce]
The "breeding" habits of other nations began when they had to much land and needed more workers (more kids)
In places like in India where there is no Social Security the kids are the future in order for the old people to survive,,,,,,
Also in the old days 7 out of 10 kids were dying at an early age, so by producing more kids more would survive.
There is also religion, in some religions more kids were call for in order to fight their holy wars.
By the way, in the old days even in the US couples used to have many kids, specially in the West.
Those are "some" of the reasons as to why many families from third worlds have many kids then and now.
You should educate yourself about other races ,and situations, in order to understand the cause and affects of what is going on in the US.
As long as you don't understand other races you will be "The Ugly American".[/QUOTE]
2004-06-15 04:25 | User Profile
Well Darkstar, I don't claim to be smart, as a matter of fact I only went to the 10th grade but thanks to one of my invention I did pretty good and retired 8 years ago.
By the way, this dumb Cuban is a blond with green eyes, both grandfathers are also blond and I am an Irish Spanish product.
In some parts of the world time has stopped, Mexico being one of them, therefore they are having kids like in the old days.
About kids for war,,,,,,,,, read some of the holy books and you will see what I mean.
And what you call "aid money"? I call it blackmail money, that's the only way that the USA are able to have "friends".......stop giving aid to the Zionist state of Israel and see what happens.
"To be smart is not to know a lot, but to know how to use what you know",,,,Ponce
2004-06-15 05:16 | User Profile
Yes, I am sure you are a regular Aryan. As to your totaly specious claims about Mexico: non, amigo, the infant mortality rate there is nothing like it was a century ago, and is improving all the time. Even the burning hell-hole of AIDS-infest sub-Sahara Africa has seen a massive 'improvement' in the infant mortality rate.
2004-06-16 20:35 | User Profile
[QUOTE=darkstar]Yes, I am sure you are a regular Aryan. As to your totaly specious claims about Mexico: non, amigo, the infant mortality rate there is nothing like it was a century ago, and is improving all the time. Even the burning hell-hole of AIDS-infest sub-Sahara Africa has seen a massive 'improvement' in the infant mortality rate.[/QUOTE]
You and your people are the ones to claim to be "proud" Aryan,,,,,,,me? I am just a dumb Cuban refugee : ) ,,,,,,,,it so happens that I am blond with green eyes by accident and not by design. I know, I know "A rose by any other name is still a rose" and to that I say,,,,,, You can dress a monkey in a tux but he will still be a monkey,,,,, Ponce <----- happy monkey swinging from tree to tree : )))))))