Customs and Border Patrol was able to capture more than 556,000 aliens entering the United States illegally in Fiscal Year 2009 HERE

(Exact number according to the Customs and Border Patrol: 556,041)

Apprehensions have always been the best indicator and informational tool used to estimate the real number of unauthorized border crossings. Border Patrol estimates are that they are able to catch one out of every three or four illegal crossers. I have had convsersations with Border Patrol Agents on the line who, when their supervisors were not around, have told me that the real ratio is closer to “one in eight or ten.”

Either way…do the math on the 516,000 figure. No matter what Obama, Napolitano, the media, La Raza or little Jerry Gonzalez try to tell you, American borders are not secure. While enforcement actions that have been advanced by the individual states have served as a serious deterent to illegal immigration in those respective states, the main reason that illegal immigration numbers are down for now is that the job market is so depressed. ( Some illegal aliens are receiveing money sent FROM Mexico TO the U.S.)

What we are proving – over and over again – without any doubt is that if there are no jobs for illegal aliens, many potential illegal aliens won’t come to America. ( Duh…)

Absent any intention of the Obama administration to enthusiastically and equally enforce American immigration or employment laws and while we continue to address illegal immigration on the state and local level, now is the time to create and implement a verifiable, fraud proof and secure federal biometric workplace verification ID .

Don’t hold your breath.

Much more reliable information HERE

‘Hate Groups, Nativists, and Vigilantes’: Lou Dobbs and the pro-amnesty crowd’s campaign of vilificationBy Mark Krikorian

November 2009

Op-eds and Magazine Articles

National Review Online, November 13, 2009

It’s not clear why Lou Dobbs resigned from CNN Wednesday. Fox said he’s not headed there, and from his comments it sounds to me like he’s going to run for office in New Jersey (though Bob Menendez’s seat, the next Senate opening, isn’t up until 2012).

Be that as it may, it’s likely that part of the reason was the vilification campaign against Dobbs by pro-amnesty groups, part of a broader jihad against any public expression of skepticism about amnesty and open borders.

After the June 2007 collapse of the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty push in the Senate, a demoralized Frank Sharry, one of the top left-wing amnesty advocates, summed up the lesson he’d learned: “We thought we were in a policy debate . . . And in fact we were in a cultural war.”

Later that year, the open-borders crowd decided to change tactics based on this insight. The public, in their estimation, was open to legalizing the illegal population and further increasing immigration, in exchange for promises of future enforcement, but was being duped by evil-mongers stirring up atavistic fears. So, presaging Obama’s jihads against Limbaugh and Fox News, they shifted from arguing how wonderful amnesty would be to viciously attacking the malefactors who were publicly arguing for attrition of the illegal population through enforcement.

In December 2007, as part of that strategy, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) was assigned to designate the oldest restrictionist organization, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a “hate group.” The National Council of La Raza’s contribution was to start a campaign entitled We Can Stop the Hate, decrying the mainstream opposition to amnesty as a “surge of hate and violence” caused by “code words of hate” peddled by “hate groups, nativists, and vigilantes.” And a new hard-left group, America’s Voice, was founded as a war room for the pro-amnesty faction; among other things, they hosted an online election for the “Top Anti-Immigrant Wolf” (and included me among the nominees, though I haven’t been informed if I’ve won).

But the Emmanuel Goldstein of this drive to demonize amnesty opponents is Lou Dobbs. The Drop Dobbs campaign is sponsored by La Raza, the SPLC, Media Matters, LULAC (the League of United Latin American Citizens), et al. In October they arranged a series of protests by open-borders groups in cities around the country demanding Dobbs’s head. At the New York protest, a pastor from Spanish Harlem told the left-wing New America Media, “Lou Dobbs is a terrorist. He is encouraging the American people to hate Latinos. It is not only a human-rights abuse, but it is a form of terrorism against us.”

The day after the protests, frequent Dobbs critic Geraldo Rivera (who, unlike Dobbs, is not married to a Hispanic woman) said in a speech that the opponents of amnesty have been “reckless beyond imagining” and that Dobbs in particular “is almost singlehandedly responsible for creating, for being the architect of the young-Latino-as-scapegoat for everything that ails this country.”

Along these same lines is Basta Dobbs, whose founder describes its target as “The Most Dangerous Man for Latinos in America.” So We Might See, a “national interfaith coalition for media justice,” joined with the National Hispanic Media Coalition to fight Dobbs’s “anti-immigrant hate speech,” not because it’s factually incorrect but because it’s a form of “media violence.” And the SPLC’s Mark Potok and others claim (here, for instance) that Dobbs is directly responsible for an increase in “hate crimes” against Hispanics (the rate of such crimes actually went down, as FAIR points out in its debunking of the SPLC’s smears — but facts aren’t the point here).

It’s important to note that this campaign goes beyond mere name-calling. This isn’t Obama as the Joker or Dick Cheney as the Prince of Darkness, Van Jones calling Republicans a**holes or Rep. Joe Wilson’s “You lie!” Those are all simply part of a boisterous, if indecorous, politics.

The pro-amnesty crowd’s demonization efforts, on the other hand, are clear incitements to violence. They can’t claim that Lou Dobbs is a “terrorist” and that FAIR is responsible for people being killed in “hate crimes” and then be surprised when one of their followers acts in perceived self-defense.

Lou Dobbs last month described a shooting at his home, which came after weeks of threatening phone calls. He prematurely suggested (and I prematurely echoed his suggestion) that this was a result of the hate campaign directed against him. That may well turn out to be the case, but police said it could have been a stray hunter’s bullet (though at the time it wasn’t rifle season for deer, only squirrels and other small game). Nonetheless, given what happened to Pim Fortuyn after a similar vilification campaign, Dobbs is wise to have a bodyguard.

Of course, there are voices inciting violence on the pro-enforcement side too. But they’re kooks on the fringe, and going after them is pointless precisely because they’re so irrelevant. The mainstream figures, the targets of the amnesty crowd’s vilification, have always gone out of their way to avoid this sort of thing. Dobbs’s wife is Mexican-American, and he’s not even a restrictionist, just an “illegal/bad, legal/good” kind of guy. For over a quarter-century FAIR has been leery of organizing local chapters because of the stray hater who might be attracted along with the normal concerned citizens. For more than a decade Numbers USA, a restrictionist group, has had a button on its home page titled “‘No’ to Immigrant Bashing.” And the whole thesis of my book is that the difference in immigration today is not that today’s immigrants are somehow inferior to those of a century ago, but that we have changed and outgrown immigration.

But if I might put myself in their heads for a moment, this kind of caution is irrelevant to the organizers of the hate campaign against amnesty opponents. And it’s not because La Raza and the rest are cynically trying to taint pro-enforcement voices. On the contrary, they sincerely believe that support for any kind of immigration enforcement or limit on immigration is, by definition, hateful and an incitement to violence. Despite occasional pious acknowledgments that a nation has a right to control its borders, open-borders groups (on both the left and right) oppose all existing immigration-control measures and any prospective ones. This is because they reject the moral legitimacy of immigration controls, borders, sovereignty, and nationhood itself. Thus, unyielding opposition to amnesty and illegal immigration — however measured the tone, however sober the argument — is necessarily the equivalent of an act of violence in their eyes. And so they perceive their vilification campaign simply as a matter of self-defense, a response to our provocation.

When, despite Dobbs’s departure from CNN, the push for amnesty fails next year, as it inevitably will, it will be interesting to see how they deal with yet another defeat. They can hardly escalate their rhetoric further. HERE

Mr King, I am an african-american male from Kentucky, and I have been admiring your anti-illegal immigration activities for some years. I have great respect for you, and have always wished your endeavor would bring you to my hometown (Lexington); we have a very difficult problem dealing with our ever-expanding illegal alien population. I joined a group of citizens who have been trying for years to stop illegal immigration to our city and state. However, our efforts have been largely ignored; local city officials and police have been recalcitrant, and in fact part of the problem.

Our city is now an unofficial sanctuary city, and every month I see more and more hispanics with out-of- town license plates on their vehicles – we feel powerless! I guess the point I want make, in light of the southern poverty law center’s suspicion of you, is in spite of the attacks on your character, please realize that there are people, of all races, around this country, like myself, who feel powerless in regard to stopping illegal immigration who agree with you, and support your efforts. Thank you for all you do!

Aaron
KY

Town Hall in Gwinnett County on Racial Profiling
Written by ABLE

Event Date: 2009-12-05
Event Time: 1:00 PM – 3:00 PM

Contact Information
Contact Name: see below
Contact Telephone: see below
Contact Email: see below

Location

St. Lawrence Catholic Church
319 Grayson Hwy
Lawrenceville, GA 30046

Event Description

Have you ever been a victim of racial, ethnic or religious profiling?
Do you want to hear about what others have faced because of their background?
Interested in learning what your rights are when encountering law enforcement?

If so, join us for an:
ABLE
Atlantans Building Leadership for Empowerment
&

ACLU of GA

Tell Your Story/Know Your Rights
Racial Profiling Forum

Saturday, December 5th, 2009
1pm-3pm
at
St. Lawrence Catholic Church
319 Grayson Hwy
Lawrenceville, GA 30046

FREE AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
ALL FAITHS AND RACES ARE ENCOURAGED TO ATTEND AND TELL THEIR STORIES

For more information please contact:
Jose Perez (678) 592-5927

¿Ha sido usted víctima de discriminación racial?
¿Le gustaría escuchar los testimonios de otras personas que han sido víctimas de discriminación?
¿Está usted interesado en aprender sobre sus derechos legales?

ABLE
Atlantans Building Leadership for Empowerment
&

ACLU of GA

COMPARTA SU HISTORIA/
CONOZCA SUS DERECHOS

Un foro acerca de la discriminación racial
se llevará a cabo el

Sábado, 5 de Diciembre del 2009
1pm-3pm
at
Iglesia Católica de San Lorenzo
319 Grayson Hwy
Lawrenceville GA 30046

GRATIS
INVITAMOS A PERSONAS DE TODAS LAS CULTURAS Y CREENCIAS A COMPARTIR

Para más información comuníquese con: Jose Perez (678) 592-5927 HERE

D.A. –

Subject: Geraldo Rivera and Jorge Ramos

I have a question for my friends out there. Does anybody wonder why the racist TV anchor Hispanics like Jorge Ramos from Univision and Geraldo Rivera have so much resentment towards our country,and spread such negativity about the white American people. When those were the same people that they used along the way to get to where they are. Jorge Ramos from Univision, when listening to him, if a white person would dare say what he says, all hell break lose. But since he is in Spanish TV he can get away with spreading hate towards Americans. He seems to be obsessed with his people, all he constantly talks about is for “his people” for the “Hispanics” and is completely obsessed with illegal immigration, wanting amnesty for all “his people”, “his race”.

This man doesn’t seem to realize that this is a country for all people of all races. He doesn’t speak like he cares one bit about our country, he seems to have contempt and is completely anti American. He applauds the growing numbers of Hispanics in America. I have no idea why because the more of “his people” coming in through the borders the more likely this country will become the same as the country his parents fled from. His interests are in the Mexican people and Mexico, and I have no idea why he can’t have the same passion to help his own country because his heart is definitely not in the USA.

I would love for people who can understand the Spanish language to expose his racist agenda. It seems to me that in this country there is a double standard, when it comes to Lou Dobbs, Glenn Beck and others they are constantly being watched for any comments against Latinos, but when it comes to Spanish television they are free to say anything they feel like saying against white and black Americans. Which creates racism against Americans. If they really cared about their people they would educate instead of spreading more hate and gaining more ratings.

Now about Geraldo Rivera: How come Geraldo Rivera never married a Puerto Rican? or a Hispanic like they like to say. I will answer that question myself, because Geraldo Rivera is a manipulating, hypocrite who used American white women for his own benefit, and to move up the ladder, so in my book Geraldo Rivera is no different than the illegal aliens from Latin American countries. “birds of a feather, flock together”. No wonder he defends illegal aliens. He talks about racism but he doesn’t look in the mirror for one of the biggest racists Puerto Ricans living in America is him. I also wonder how come he never acknowledges his Jewish side?

I would wish that someday he would move to Puerto Rico.

(This is from an American citizen of Hispanic heritage – who asked that I reemove her full name and hometown to protect her from backlash in her community – dak) C.M

CM
New Jersey

“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”strong>
– Barack Obama, election eve, 2008

HERE

Tom Tancredo — WorldNetDaily.com

Secretary Napolitano’s nose is growing

A few days ago, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that the Obama administration plans to push amnesty legislation early in 2010. That Obama and Napolitano want amnesty for 15 to 20 million illegal aliens is not news. What was noteworthy about Napolitano’s “announcement” was the reason she gave for moving ahead on the amnesty plan in 2010…

HERE

Gainesville Times

US senators decry illegal immigrants’ citizenship ‘pathway’

By Ashley Fielding

Nov. 21, 2009

Georgia’s U.S. senators are publicly criticizing recent comments made by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano that legalizing millions of illegal immigrants would benefit the country’s struggling economy.

Sens. Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss, both Republicans, sent a letter Friday to Napolitano and a number of other senators, expressing their disappointment at comments Napolitano made at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think-tank.

Napolitano said that along with shoring up the United States’ borders with Mexico, lawmakers will have to overhaul immigration laws to create a “tough pathway” to citizenship for immigrants who are already living in the country illegally.

HERE

Georgia Senators Isakson & Chambliss criticize Obama administration for nonsense premise that amnesty would help American workers or the American economy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Friday, November 20, 2009

Isakson, Chambliss Criticize Administration’s Comments Favoring Legalization Program for Undocumented Workers

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., and Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., today, along with 10 other senators, sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano strongly criticizing her recent comments that legalizing millions of undocumented individuals would be a benefit to the American economy.

The full text of the letter to Napolitano is below:

Dear Secretary Napolitano:

We write to express disappointment about recent statements you made regarding comprehensive immigration reform, particularly comments made at the Center for American Progress on the Obama Administration’s desire to enact a legalization program.

Specifically, we take exception to your argument that legalizing millions of undocumented individuals would be a benefit to our economy. You said, “Requiring illegal immigrants to register to earn legal status…will strengthen our economy as these immigrants become full ‐ paying taxpayers. As labor leaders have made clear to me, immigration reform will be a boon to American workers. Think about it: unions will never achieve the best terms for workers when a large part of the workforce is illegal and operates in a shadow economy. By contrast, the status quo not only hurts American workers, it also stifles potential opportunities to grow our economy.”

With all due respect, legalizing those who have no legal right to be in the United States will not be a “boon” to American workers. Rather, it would only exacerbate the unfair competition American workers currently face as they struggle to find jobs. Last month, the number of unemployed persons in the U.S. increased by 558,000 to 15.7 million. The unemployment rate rose to 10.2 percent, the highest rate since April 1983. Americans want to work; rewarding illegal aliens with the right to hold jobs will not improve the chances Americans have of finding jobs, paying their mortgages, and feeding their families. Therefore, we strongly encourage you to cease any discussion about enacting a legalization program that will only hurt U.S. workers and make it harder for law abiding citizens to weather this economic downturn.

In that same speech, you also stated that “Americans need to know that their government is committed to enforcing the law and securing the border – and that it takes this responsibility seriously.” Unfortunately, we have seen a dilution of enforcement initiatives in the last several months that make us question your commitment to this endeavor. For instance, the Obama Administration has rescinded the “no-match” rule that clarified employers’ legal obligation to conduct due diligence when they are confronted with evidence that a significant number of their employees may have used false or stolen Social Security numbers to obtain work. The Administration repeatedly delayed and then finally weakened the rule requiring contractors of the Federal government to use E-Verify. The 287(g) program that allows local law enforcement to arrest and detain illegal aliens has been changed dramatically to reduce its effectiveness in many communities. The worksite enforcement strategy of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which claims to target employers rather than individual illegal aliens, has replaced worksite enforcement with the Clinton-era policies of administrative paperwork audits, and has led to a dramatic reduction in arrests and deportation of those who are working illegally in this country. Interestingly, the Department’s boasts about a renewed emphasis on enforcement against employers are not matched by actual prosecutions of such employers. Instead, prosecutions of employers have fallen dramatically.

We applaud the Administration for improving U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service’s website, and for continuing the expansion of E-Verify. We also recognize the attention given to the Bush Administration’s Secure Communities Initiative, and appreciate the Department’s willingness to expend dollars provided by Congress for increased drug interdiction at the border.

However, we believe a commitment to the law must start at the top, and that enforcement of our laws should not be undermined by policies that tie the hands of law enforcement officials across the country. We hope you’ll find renewed energy to hold employers accountable, ensure that undocumented workers are not taking jobs from Americans, and enforcement of our laws is being aggressively pursued in the interior and at the border.

###

E-mail: http://isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfm

HERE

Steven Malanga — Real Clear Politics

And Now, On to Immigration Reform

“Even with everything else on its agenda, the Obama administration has declared itself ready to plunge forward on an issue likely to be as contentious and exhausting to the nation as health care reform, namely a new effort to restructure our immigration laws. Last Friday, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano laid the groundwork… “

…”Meanwhile, many other developed countries were moving in another direction. Countries like Australia, Ireland and Canada recognized that most immigrants in the modern world hadn’t been forcibly separated from their relatives but had migrated by choice, and so a visa policy based on the idea that countries should be allowing families to ‘reunite’ was misleading.

Instead, these countries tilted their policies toward focusing on those with skills and talents most likely to succeed in and contribute to a late 20th century developed economy. Some, like Australia, went so far as to create extensive lists of the jobs their economies needed filled and placed a premium on granting visas to people who could do those jobs. Others, like Canada, enacted broader criteria that rewarded visa applicants with points based on their education levels or their ability to speak and read the native language.

In less than 15 years Australia completely flipped the ratio of its immigrant visas: whereas in 1993, 70 percent of those arriving were granted family visas, by 2006, 70 of Australia’s immigrants had been admitted based on skills criteria. The newly arriving immigrants performed far better. A 2006 study concluded that the average immigrant to Australia gained income parity with native-born Australians just five years after arriving. By contrast similar studies in the United States suggest that many immigrants today start out far behind average native-born workers in pay and make little progress over their lifetime because they lack the education levels or skills to advance.

Several far-reaching examinations of American policy concluded that we should head in the same direction as other countries. The Jordan Commission, chaired by former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan in the early 1990s, employed some of the country’s leading economists to study U.S. immigration and produced a series of striking reports that can still be obtained through the National Academies. The Jordan Commission observed that the family preferences policy had inadvertently tipped much of U.S. immigration toward visas for unskilled migrants and that we should shift to a skills-based system. Politicians in both parties initially accepted the recommendations of the commission, then headed for the hills when a backlash against the report erupted among those who saw it as ‘anti-family…”

HERE