Dobbs: Big media hides truth about immigration

By Lou Dobbs
CNN

Editor’s note: Lou Dobbs’ commentary appears weekly on CNN.com.

NEW YORK (CNN) — The Bush administration and the leadership of the Democratic Party are preparing to take another legislative leap at imposing a massive illegal alien amnesty on American citizens.

And the mainstream media is complicit in advancing this thinly veiled blanket amnesty. Instead of asking and answering important questions about why our immigration laws aren’t being enforced and why we’re permitting pervasive document fraud, the national media seems hell-bent on trying to obfuscate the issue, shamelessly playing with language, equating legal immigration with illegal immigration while obviously trying to preserve the illusion of objectivity.

Too often, the language of the national media describes illegal immigration as “migration” and illegal aliens as “undocumented immigrants,” even though many of them have lots of documents, most of which are fraudulent or stolen. Some media outlets have taken to calling illegal aliens “entrants.” Whether such language is meant to engender sympathy or to intentionally blur the distinction between legal and illegal, the mainstream media is taking sides in this debate.

The Arizona Republic, for example, used “undocumented immigrant” more than 80 times in 36 separate stories in the past month alone; the term appeared as many as 12 times in one article on “migration,” according to our Lexis-Nexis search. At the same time, “illegal alien” appeared a total of only nine times during that span, with seven of the references coming from readers’ opinions, one from a quotation and one from an editorial.

The mainstream media reports as if America would no longer be a welcoming nation if we stopped illegal immigration. Nothing could be further from the truth. Why does the national media conveniently and routinely neglect to report that the United States brings in more lawful immigrants than the countries of the rest of the world combined? Each year, we accept 2 million immigrants legally. We give a million legal immigrants permanent residency every year. We bestow citizenship on 700,000 people a year and provide almost half a million work-related visas a year.

Illegal immigration, in fact, has the potential to change the course of American history: Demographers at the Brookings Institution and the Population Reference Bureau paint a troubling picture of the future of our democracy. As more illegal aliens cross our borders and settle in large states like California, Texas and Florida, congressional seats will be redistributed to these bigger states following each decennial Census. States with low levels of immigration will ultimately lose seats as a result. Unfortunately for American citizens, this seismic shift in political representation will be decided by noncitizens that cannot vote.

Congress will soon take up so-called comprehensive immigration reform, and a bipartisan House bill would probably admit 400,000 guest workers a year. And since any plan calling for eventual legalization would include family members who live outside the United States, the legislation would open our borders to tens of millions of people. The Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector estimated that the 2006 version of the McCain-Kennedy bill would have added an additional 66 million immigrants over the next 20 years. The bill may change, but that estimate has yet to be refuted.

There’s no question this type of mass immigration would have a calamitous effect on working citizens and their families. Professor Carol Swain, professor of law and political science at Vanderbilt University and author of “Debating Immigration,” would like to see more people speak up for the sectors of society most affected by illegal immigration.

“How many African-American leaders have you seen come out and address the impact that high levels of illegal immigration [are] having in the communities when it comes to jobs, when it comes to education, when it comes to health care?” she asked. “And often, these low-skilled, low-wage workers compete in the same sectors for jobs.”

Let’s have a vigorous open debate on illegal immigration in this country, and let’s begin with the facts. Estimates of illegal aliens in this country range from 12 million to 20 million people. Why doesn’t our government know how many there are?

Shouldn’t this Congress and this president at least recognize that the industries in which illegal aliens are employed in the greatest percentages also are suffering the largest wage declines? And shouldn’t there be an economic impact statement researched and delivered to this Congress, this president and the rest of us before any legislation granting amnesty is even considered?

Shouldn’t we first bring the facts of illegal immigration out of the shadows?

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer.

Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/24/Dobbs.April25

April 25, 2007

DIS Update: Rally was a great success in DC!

Folks:

I am happy to report that the Dustin Inman Society rally in Washington, DC was a tremendous success! The rally, organized, sponsored and funded by D.A. King of the Dustin Inman Society, was held in Lafayette Park, directly across the street from the White House.

D.A. King is unpacking and recovering. But in the meantime, please take a look at these photos and videos of the rally on the Dustin Inman Society website! The speakers were incredibly motivating. More photos and videos are being added as this is posted.

Thanks, everyone, for your ongoing support of immigration sanity in these United States of America.

_________________________

Fred Elbel
The Dustin Inman Society
www.TheDustinInmanSociety.org

Click here to see the big bald ugly guy close out the rally…more to come when we unpack and get some sleep. Thanks to YOUTUBE.com

No clue who has tape of the opening remarks….hmmm.

This is just sad…but amusing! Click here to see flyer from the not so smart far left kiddies…but future newspaper editors. Maybe one of them will even win a pulitzer someday!

Read it and weep.

From various sources:

“The ultimate goal of any White House policy ought to be a North American economic and political alliance similar in scope and ambition to the European Union,” opined an Atlanta Journal-Constitution editorial on September 7, 2001. “Unlike the varied landscapes and cultures of European Union members, the United States, Canada and Mexico already share a great deal in common, and language is not as great a barrier. President Bush, for example, is quite comfortable with the blended Mexican-Anglo culture forged in the border states of Texas, California and Arizona.”

In an interview on ABC’s “This Week,” Mexican President-elect Vicente Fox predicted a future in which people will move freely across the 2,100-mile border between Mexico and the United States by 2010. Baltimore Sun, July, 2000.

A 2005 Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) document, called “Building a North American Community,” asserts that George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin “committed their governments” to this goal when they met at Bush’s ranch and at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America” and assigned “working groups” to fill in the details.

It was at this meeting, grandly called the North American Summit that President Bush referred to the volunteers guarding our Arizona border as “vigilantes”.

“What we need to do now is forge a North American Community” Robert Pastor, architect of the Security and Prosperity Partnership ( SPP) of North America and author of the pre-9/11 book, Toward A North American Community”…to a June 9, 2005 U.S. Senate U.S. Foreign Relations Committee (Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere)

“There Shall be Open Borders”…a recurring 1984 Headline in the Wall Street Journal in its recommendation for a five word amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Americans with the temerity to speak up in objection to Mexican customs inspection offices in Kansas City, the “Amero” replacing the dollar and a North American Union by 2010 should prepare for a battery of invectives containing “phobes,” “ists” and “isims.”
“The more politically correct may want to practice repeating,” ‘I pledge allegiance to the Continent and to the Commerce for which it stands. Suggestions for a possible new flag, anyone?” D.A. King in the AJC, June, 2006

The excerpts on the two following pages come from the U.S. Senate’s 2006 Comprehensive Immigration Act.( s 2611) and this year’s Flake Gutierrez House bill,(the Security Through Regularized Immigration and a Vibrant Economy (STRIVE) Act – HR 1645.

Note: the Judicial Watch FOIA obtained SPP organizational chart contains members from many U.S. official governmental departments, including the State Department.

S.2611
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by Senate)
________________________________________
SEC. 113. REPORTS ON IMPROVING THE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION ON NORTH AMERICAN SECURITY.
a) Requirement for Reports- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Secretary and the heads of other appropriate Federal agencies, shall submit to Congress a report on improving the exchange of information related to the security of North America.

3) VISA POLICY COORDINATION AND IMMIGRATION SECURITY– The progress made by Canada, Mexico, and the United States to enhance the security of North America by cooperating on visa policy and identifying best practices regarding immigration security, including the progress made–
(A) in enhancing consultation among officials who issue visas at the consulates or embassies of Canada, Mexico, or the United States throughout the world to share information, trends, and best practices on visa flows;
(B) in comparing the procedures and policies of Canada and the United States related to visitor visa processing, including–
(i) application process;
(ii) interview policy;
(iii) general screening procedures;
(iv) visa validity;
(v) quality control measures; and
(vi) access to appeal or review;
(C) in exploring methods for Canada, Mexico, and the United States to waive visa requirements for nationals and citizens of the same foreign countries;
(D) in providing technical assistance for the development and maintenance of a national database built upon identified best practices for biometrics associated with immigration violators;
(E) in developing and implementing an immigration security strategy for North America that works toward the development of a common security perimeter by enhancing technical assistance for programs and systems to support advance automated reporting and risk targeting of international passengers;programs and systems to support advance automated reporting and risk targeting of international passengers;

SEC. 114. IMPROVING THE SECURITY OF MEXICO’S SOUTHERN BORDER.
H.R.1645

STRIVE Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)
________________________________________
SEC. 113. REPORTS ON IMPROVING THE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION ON NORTH AMERICAN SECURITY.a) Requirement for Reports- Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Secretary and the heads of other appropriate Federal agencies, shall submit to Congress a report on improving the exchange of information related to the security of North America.
3) VISA POLICY COORDINATION AND IMMIGRATION SECURITY- The progress made by Canada, Mexico, and the United States to enhance the security of North America by cooperating on visa policy and identifying best practices regarding immigration security, including the progress made–
(A) in enhancing consultation among officials who issue visas at the consulates or embassies of Canada, Mexico, or the United States throughout the world to share information, trends, and best practices on visa flows;
(B) in comparing the procedures and policies of Canada and the United States related to visitor visa processing, including–
(i) application process;
(ii) interview policy;
(iii) general screening procedures;
(iv) visa validity;
(v) quality control measures; and
(vi) access to appeal or review;
(C) in exploring methods for Canada, Mexico, and the United States to waive visa requirements for nationals and citizens of the same foreign countries;(D) in providing technical assistance for the development and maintenance of a national database built upon identified best practices for biometrics associated with immigration violators;
(E) in developing and implementing an immigration security strategy for North America that works toward the development of a common security perimeter by enhancing technical assistance for programs and systems to support advance automated reporting and risk targeting of international passengers;

Subtitle C–Southern Border Security
SEC. 121. IMPROVING THE SECURITY OF MEXICO’S SOUTHERN BORDER.

We are off to Washington for the Dustin Inman Society rally against amnesty.

Wish us luck! I will try to post from there.

From Newsday:

EU Official Criticizes U.S.-Mexico Wall…WHAT WALL?

EU Official Criticizes U.S.-Mexico Wall

By Associated Press

April 18, 2007, 12:13 AM EDT

MEXICO CITY — European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana on Tuesday criticized U.S. plans to extend barriers along its border with Mexico, saying immigrants should not be treated like criminals.

“A wall that separates one country from another is not something that I like or that the European Union members like,” Solana said at a news conference in Mexico City. “We don’t think walls are reasonable instruments to stop people from crossing into a country.”

The EU believes immigrants should be treated “like people, not like criminals,” he said.

In October, President Bush signed a bill calling for 680 miles of new fencing to be built along the border, despite objections from the Mexican government.

Mexico has lobbied for comprehensive immigration reform that would let more migrants enter the United States legally.

More than 11 million Mexicans live in the United States, most illegally.
Copyright 2007 Newsday Inc.

Limited college classroom seats going to illegal aliens while Americans pay more for tuition.

A Georgia college student writes about justice, instate tuition and that pesky law.

My name is Jan Gonzales. I am a full time student at Dalton State College, pursuing a Bachelors Degree in Business Administration. I am neither a racist nor xenophobic. I am opposed to granting in-state tuition or any other benefit to illegal aliens.

I moved to Dalton in May 2006. I tried to register for the fall session, but because CA lost my GED records, I had to retake the GED test in Georgia. I had to wait until I received the official word from CA that no records
existed of my GED diploma in any agency in CA before Georgia would allow me to retake the GED. That took 4 months. I received my GED diploma from Georgia in January and began classes the following day.

Because I have not lived in Georgia for a full year, I paid out-of-state tuition in the amount of $3206 for this semester. In-state tuition is $794. I paid my tuition with a Pell Grant and Stafford Student Loans. They were
also going to charge me out-of-state tuition for the summer semester because classes would begin 6 days before I had lived in Georgia a full year.

On February 9, 2007 Dr. Burran President of Dalton State College was quoted in the Dalton newspaper saying that he had granted in-state tuition to approximately 40 illegal aliens.
United States Code Title 8, Chapter Chapter 14, Section 1623 states

“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien who is not
lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the
basis of residence within a State (or a political subdivision) for
any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of
the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an
amount, duration, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen
or national is such a resident.
(b) Effective date
This section shall apply to benefits provided on or after July 1,
1998.”

Based on this law, I wrote to the college and asked for them to refund the difference between the proper charge of in-state tuition, and the overcharged out of state tuition. They denied my request, stating that they
had given the tuition waivers to others, and that they were compliant with the Board of Regents policy.

They totally disregarded the Federal law.

When I wrote to the Board of Regents, Student Affairs office appealing their decision, their response was that they would be holding public meetings to discuss the issue this spring. Never in my life have I ever heard of a state agency saying that they were going to hold public discussions to determine if they will comply with a federal law. In fact, the college quotes the federal laws quite often when they are explaining this policy or that policy.

I’m angry. I’m angry because I am not being afforded the equal protection under the law that the Constitution of the United States says I am entitled to. I’m angry because I, too, have a limited income, work hard, and am only trying to better my situation – yet those who break the law are given preferential treatment.

I’ve tried to see the other side of the coin. I have heard the stories of the children who were brought here illegally by their parents. In 1982, in the Plyer vs Doe case – ironically brought under the equal protection clause – the Supreme Court decided in a 5-4 decision that the children of illegal aliens were entitled to an elementary education. The court stated that education was not a “fundamental right”, but that the children had no control over their parent’s choices.

But as adults, those children of illegal aliens do have choices. Many of us have had to overcome poor choices that our parents made. If I robbed a bank, my children would not be able to keep the proceeds of that robbery
even if though they are bright, hard working people. The consequences of the crime are the deterring factor. If my children were able to reap the rewards of my crime, I would be more willing to commit it. Providing
in-state tuition to illegal aliens encourages illegal aliens to come to Georgia.

It is a crime to come into the United States without the proper documentation. It is a crime to hire a person who does not have authorization to be in the United States. It is a crime to aid and abet illegal aliens.

One argument in support of in-state tuition for illegal aliens is that if an illegal alien graduated from a Georgia High School, they should be encouraged to attend college. Generally the illegal aliens are low-income students who could not afford to attend college at the out of state tuition rates. They state that without a college education that they will be forever assigned to menial, low-paying jobs. But the cost of college is a
factor for most people, including United States citizens.

I could not afford to attend college without obtaining loans. I am a low-income student.

I graduated from high school in Georgia. Why can’t I be treated at the very least equally? Why do I have to compete with an adult who isn’t supposed to be in the country in the first place?

They claim that the illegal aliens sign a promise to obtain legal status as soon as possible. They don’t allow a person to sign a promise to obtain a high school diploma before enrolling. The documents must be in place priorto enrollment for everyone except illegal aliens.

They claim, “They say y’all and like the Braves”. But my experience both in town and on campus is that they don’t say y’all, they speak Spanish, like soccer, and fly the Mexican flag.

Georgia has seen a huge rise in the illegal immigrant population in the last several years. They come here for jobs. Some of Georgia’s employers have decided that they are willing to risk hiring illegal aliens. Any fines that
may have been assessed were considered a cost of doing business and they continue their illegal practices. But the citizens of our state and the nation are rising up and speaking out. To the citizens and legal
immigrants, the benefits do not outweigh the costs.

Illegal aliens have a large lobby. If an illegal alien were charged four times what an American was charged for the same thing, it would be on the 5 o’clock news, complete with legal representation. But just who is it that is speaking for the citizens of Georgia who are faced with that circumstance?

Where do we go for equal protection? Who defends the citizens and legal immigrants who are being deprived of their rights?

Educating Georgia is an important goal. It is the future of our state! But illegal aliens cannot legally work in Georgia, let alone the United States.

Our class sizes are limited; our budget is limited. The funds need to be targeted to where Georgia can legally benefit from it. Providing in-state tuition to illegal aliens is not a fiscally responsible policy.

Because the Board of Regents has allowed in-state tuition for illegal aliens, all United States citizens are also entitled to in-state tuition. That includes me. It’s the law. I want the $2,512 that I was overcharged
refunded.

Theodore Roosevelt said “No man is above the law and no one is below it, nor do we ask any man’s permission when we ask him to obey it”.

That sums up my feelings quite well.

Jan Gonzales is a mother of 2 and grandmother of 5 who is enrolled full time at
Dalton State College. She is employed at a local retail store and lives in
Dalton, Ga.
She can be contacted through the Dustin Inman Society

Dustin Inman Society in the Washington Times

Immigration reformists tip support to a Norwood ally
By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
April 17, 2007

One of the Republicans campaigning to fill the House seat of Rep. Charlie Norwood, a staunch immigration reform advocate who died in February, has won the endorsement of two of Georgia’s most prominent proponents of immigration control and border security.
D.A. King and Phil Kent — both outspoken opponents of amnesty for illegal aliens — formally endorsed Georgia state Sen. Jim Whitehead during a press conference last week on the steps of the Georgia Capitol in Atlanta.
“This is a pivotal issue for the future of America,” said Mr. Whitehead. “We have to have the intestinal fortitude to protect all Americans. If we are to remain a nation of laws, we must stand firm against any form of amnesty for those who are here illegally.
“If we start vigorously enforcing the law, we can gradually reduce the number of illegal immigrants without either amnesty or mass deportation,” he said.
Mr. King, president of the Dustin Inman Society, said “the very large shoes left by Charlie Norwood” were best filled by Mr. Whitehead because he understands that “this crisis did not come about overnight and that amnesty is something that will keep this problem from ever coming under control. The solution is attrition through enforcement.”
Mr. Kent, national spokesman for Americans for Immigration Control (AIC), described Mr. Whitehead as a longtime friend and a strict constitutionalist, “especially when it comes to illegal immigration, and I’m happy to endorse him.”
AIC itself does not make endorsements because of its status as a nonprofit organization.
Considered the early front-runner in the race, Mr. Whitehead is one of at least a dozen candidates who have mentioned running for the position, which became vacant when Mr. Norwood died in February. State election officials have said that candidate qualifying will begin April 24 and the special election will be held June 19.
Mr. Norwood was a vocal critic of President Bush’s immigration policies and called on the administration to deploy 50,000 U.S. troops to guard America’s southern and northern borders.
Mr. Norwood unsuccessfully sought the passage of legislation to give 600,000 state, local and tribal police officers authority to enforce federal immigration laws and said the Minuteman Project’s civilian border patrols proved that illegal aliens can be kept out with an adequate show of manpower.
“The American people want the borders secured,” Mr. Norwood told The Washington Times in November. “They want existing laws vigorously enforced against criminal aliens, illegal immigrants and their employers. Then they are willing to discuss what to do about illegal aliens already in the country.”
Mr. Whitehead, 65, was first elected to the Georgia Senate in 2004 and re-elected in 2006. He currently serves as chairman of the Senate Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security, vice chairman of the Transportation Committee, a member of the Economic Development and Natural Resources committees, and deputy whip for Senate Republicans.

Full story here.

Come to the Dustin Inman Society rally in Washington Sunday…but please obey the rules.

All rally info here.

I am very encouraged at the huge response to the Dustin Inman Society’s rally coming up on Sunday, April 22 at 3:30 PM in Lafayette Park across the street from the White House.

For those of you who have asked…no, I don’t have a clue where to park and as far as directions, again, the rally is across the street from the White House.

Last year we all watched as illegal aliens marched fearlessly in various cities around our country defiantly demanding amnesty (again), American citizenship and “dignity” while screaming “we are America”. They are not…as Americans, we are America.

At the rally Sunday, we must show the world as much in a way in which we can all be proud.

We all owe FAIR and Mr. Roger Hedgecock a huge debt of gratitude for the HOLD THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE event that will follow our rally. Americans from all over the nation will converge on Washington to do some grassroots lobbying in Congress. More than 30 radio talk show hosts will be broadcasting from Capitol Hill most of next week

We expect a lot of media coverage, and to that end, we all need to be on the same page about the rules involved. Please know how grateful and proud I am to get the many e-mails from all over the U.S. that mostly go something like: “Thank you for giving us a chance to present the American side of the illegal immigration story…we are coming to your rally”, or “…we are not the rallying type, but we will be there”.

The effort is to get our message out and be regarded as rational citizens demanding justice…and the dignity we deserve in our own nation.

The National Park Police will be everywhere Sunday doing their job. Help them, please.

Please read the rules for the rally on the bottom of this post from the National Park Service, which operates and protects our National Parks.

But first, as I have given my word and signed the permit holding me responsible for this badly needed event, I have several rules of my own for the rally:

*If you have issues with the color of people’s skin…we do not want you.

*No flags other than the Stars and Stripes, Old Glory – the American flag will be allowed. There will be no exceptions.

*The message on attendees signs/placards must conform to our stated agenda…it is best to simply bring an American flag if you have any doubts. I request that everyone brings a flag only unless we have already agreed on your message.

*No bullhorns or sound amplification devices.

* No tripods!

*In addition to secure borders, no repeat of any path to citizenship – amnesty for illegal aliens, and codifying into law English as the common and official language of our very diverse nation, we are holding this rally to demand equal application of the laws of the United States – even for illegal aliens and criminal employers.

And elected officials.

*In that endeavor, all in attendance must be polite and respectful of the rule of law and the National Park Police officers who will be on duty at Lafayette Park protecting us… or we will have them removed

We will best make our point by being polite but firm and clear but respectful.

*Anyone with a different agenda, message or behavior is not welcome and will not be tolerated. I have had several conversations with National Park Police and the understanding is that anyone who is deemed to be unrepresentative of our stated agenda and goals, or in violation of any of the rules, will be removed by the police.

I am grateful for that understanding.

To simplify the rules below, think about it this way: Nothing except your shoes should touch the ground with the single exception of a sign that is within three feet of your person. Please do not bring anything in a box, as empty or full, boxes are not feet and will not be allowed to touch mother earth (Yes, Sunday is Earth Day, don’t get me started on illegal immigration and the “environmentalists” who ignore what is happening to the Sonoran Desert because of drug smuggling and illegal border crossings.)

*NO TRIPODS, NO BOXES, NO CHAIRS, OR BALLOONS. Please, DO NOT GET MORE THAN THREE FEET AWAY FROM YOUR SIGN IF YOU PUT IT DOWN…nothing but feet on the ground with determined Americans demanding secure borders and a return to the rule of law attached.

I realize that it is a lot of rules…but again, I gave my word we would follow them.

PLEASE PASS THEM ON.

I look forward to seeing everyone on Sunday…thank you all so much for your help and support. We still need a lot of help with expenses.

Respectfully,
D.A. King

Some National Park Service Rules extracted from my permit below:
United States Department of the Interior
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
National Capital Region
1100 Ohio Drive, SW
Washington, DC 20242

PUBLIC GATHERING PERMIT

In accordance with Park Regulations as contained in C.F.R., Title 36, Chapter 1, Section 7.96, permission is granted to conduct a public gather to the following:

Person (s) and/or Organizations (s): THE DUSTIN INMAN SOCIETY

Purpose (s): RALLY TO DEMAND SECURE BORDERS AND EQUAL APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAWS

This permit is granted subject to the following conditions:

1. Permittee and all participants authorized therein must comply with all of the conditions of this permit and with all reasonable directions of the United States Park Police.
2. All side walks, walkways, and roadways must remain unobstructed to allow for the reasonable use of these areas by pedestrians, vehicles and other park visitors.

PERMITTEE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR READING AND ADHERING TO THE ATTACHED ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS

Specific Conditions for Lafayette Park

A. Participants will use the east side of Lafayette Park for a demonstration rally, “to demand secure borders and equal application of existing laws” through speeches, free literature distribution, and singing in Lafayette Park. Permittee states participants will carry signs and banners. Platform (stage) must be at least 18 inches off the ground and three of four sides must be kept open for viewing at all times for security purposes.

B. NPS regulations for Lafayette Park generally prohibits the erection, placement or use of structure of any kind except for the following: ( Note from D.A – everything is a “structure” except people)

• Structures that are being hand carried are allowed.
• When 100 or more persons are participating in a demonstration in the Park, a temporary speaker’s platform as is reasonably required to serve the demonstration participants is allowed as long as such platform is being erected, dismantled or used, provided that only one speaker’s platform is allowed per demonstrating group, and provided further that such speaker’s platform is authorized by a permit issued pursuant to paragraph (g) of 36CRF.
• For the purpose of this section, the term “structure” includes props and displays, such as coffins, crates, crosses, theaters, cages, and statues; furniture and furnishings, such as desks, chairs, tables, bookcases, cabinets, platforms, podiums, and lecterns; shelters, such as tents, boxes, and other enclosures, wagons and carts; and all other similar types of property which might tent to harm park resources including aesthetic interests (Note from D.A. – told you!). Provided however that the term “structure” does not include signs; bicycles, baby carriages an baby strollers lawfully in the park that are temporarily placed in, or are being moved across the Park, and that are attended at all times while in the park (the term “attended” is defined as an individual being within (3) feet of his or her bicycle, baby carriage or baby stroller); an wheelchairs, and other devices for the handicapped in use by a handicapped person.
• Hand carried signs are allowed regardless of size.

C. Pursuant to NPS regulations, sound amplification equipment may not be used on the White House sidewalk other that hand portable sound amplification equipment which can be used for crowd control purposes only.

D. Balloons are prohibited on park land.

E. All vehicles must park in designated, available public spaces.

F. No attachments to trees, plantings, structures, etc.

G. Upon arrival onsite, person in charge is responsible for checking with Park Ranger and/or U.S. Park Police personnel onsite for coordination and/or additional instructions concerning this permit.

H. No camping or camping equipment is allowed.

I. In the event media covers the event, all equipment must be hand held and any cables must be covered so as not to present a tripping hazard. Parking of satellite/microwave trucks must be coordinated with Metropolitan Police Department for the use of H Street curb lane.

J. No fee may be collected, donations solicited, or commercial activity conducted.

K. The area should be left in substantially the same condition as it was prior to the activities authorized herein, and all litter shall be placed in the trash containers provided.

L. All stage sound amplification equipment shall be limited so that it will not unreasonably disturb nonparticipating persons in, or in the vicinity of, the area.

M. The National Park Service reserves the right to immediately revoke this permit at any time should it reasonably appear that the public gathering presents a clear and present danger to the public safety, good order or health, or if any conditions of the permit are violated. ( Note from D.A. – we do not want that)