Center for Immigration Studies

Illegal Immigration needs to be stamped out now. Repatriation of illegals to their country of ORIGEN needs to happen now. Support Chris Simcox and the Minutemen Projects coming to a border state near you.

also ... This is our payback for listening to the governmental WHORES who said that NAFTA/WTO/GATT were 'good' for America and Jobs. All there has been is a GIANT SUCKING SOUND of Jobs leaving this country. This spot is to recognize the companies that are traitors to the US economy and the traitors in Government that have allowed this to happen
pokerkid
Site Admin
Posts: 7781

Center for Immigration Studies

Post#1 » Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:05 pm

1. Backgrounder: “The Weaponization of Immigration”
2. Op-ed: “What Happened to Immigration? Reports of the issue’s demise are greatly exaggerated.”
3. Op-ed: Los Angeles Times Debate on Immigration
4. Announcement: “Immigration Enforcement Disrupts Criminal Gangs in Virginia”
5. Op-ed: “Mexico First? McCain has embraced a Vicente Fox aide as his own”
6. Op-ed: “John McCain, Multiculturalist: Immigration is just one problem”
7. Op-ed: “Would tighter security curb illegal immigration? Yes.”
8. Op-ed: “Jewish Establishment Off-Key In Immigration Debate”
9. Op-ed: “Amnesty John: If this is straight talk, who needs lies?”
10. Op-ed: Economist Magazine Debate on Foreign Students

-- Mark Krikorian
Support the Center for Immigration Studies by donating on line here: http://www.cis.org/support.html


1.
The Weaponization of Immigration
By Cato
Center for Immigration Studies, February 2008
http://www.cis.org/articles/2008/back108.html

EXCERPT: . . . America’s support for policies that offer citizenship to deserving persons and safeguard its borders are as essential to liberty as its brave men and women at arms. A wise and implacable urgency should inform our actions as a nation and a people. Nothing less than the survival of America is at stake. The outcome of this conflict will indeed be 'fundamental and astounding.'

Return to Top


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

2.
What Happened to Immigration? Reports of the issue’s demise are greatly exaggerated.
By Mark Krikorian
National Review Online, February 7, 2008
http://www.cis.org/articles/2008/mskoped020708.html

EXCERPT: McCain’s move to the right on immigration (at least rhetorically) since the failure of his amnesty bill provides further evidence of the sustained significance of immigration, a move that is manifested by his pledge to secure the borders “first” (though the corollary is that he would then have an amnesty, something people often don’t hear). As John O’Sullivan notes, “one of the endearing things about McCain is his inability to pander in a convincing way,” so many people don’t believe his claims to have “seen the light” on immigration. On the other hand, many do. For instance, the California exit polls showed that 29 percent of those who favored mass deportation of illegals as the solution to illegal immigration voted for McCain. (Deportation supporters made up a plurality — 38 percent — of California Republican primary voters.) With most people completely unaware of McCain’s deeply held ideological multiculturalism, it’s no surprise that voters tuning into the race only a few days before the contest could be taken in by McCain’s pretense.

The rest of the Republican field further bolsters the claim that the immigration issue resonates with voters. Initially, Reps. Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter seemed the only hawkish candidates on immigration; however, the rest of the candidates quickly followed suit. Romney, after seeming open to amnesty in 2005, came out against it and repeatedly attacked Giuliani for presiding over a sanctuary city while mayor of New York. Giuliani saw that he needed to sound tough, so he came out against the Senate amnesty bill last summer and told audiences, “I could end illegal immigration in three years.” Mike Huckabee’s comments as Arkansas governor in support of illegal immigrants led many to think that he would clone McCain on the issue — but instead he modeled his immigration platform on an article I’d written for National Review. Fred Thompson explicitly promoted “attrition through enforcement” and, along with Huckabee, actually proposed significant reductions in legal immigration, marking the first time in generations that such has happened in a presidential campaign.

Return to Top


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

3.
Los Angeles Times Debate on Immigration
Mark Krikorian v. Tomas Jimenez
Los Angeles Times, February 4-8, 2008
http://www.cis.org/articles/2008/latdebate.html

EXCERPT from Mark Krikorian: Illegal aliens are people too.

And precisely because they are people like any others, they respond to incentives just like anyone else. What we've seen over the past year or so is that when government changes the incentives that illegal immigrants face, they change their behavior.

In other words, immigration enforcement is working . . .

Return to Top


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

4.
Immigration Enforcement Disrupts Criminal Gangs in Virginia:
State Should Expand Involvement of Local LEAs
By Jessica M. Vaughan
Center for Immigration Studies, January 2008
http://www.cis.org/articles/2008/gangrelease.html

EXCERPT: Immigration law enforcement has been a key ingredient in the success of criminal gang suppression efforts in Virginia, says a new report by the Center for Immigration Studies. As state lawmakers consider steps to address the illegal immigration problem this session, they should give high priority to institutionalizing partnerships between state and local law enforcement agencies (LEAs) and federal immigration authorities (ICE), as well as to immigration’s fiscal costs. A large share of those involved with the immigrant gangs active in Virginia, such as MS-13, Surenos, and 18th Street, are illegal aliens. Their illegal status means they are especially vulnerable to law enforcement, and local authorities should take advantage of the immigration tools available in order to disrupt criminal gang activity, remove gang members from the streets, and better protect the public. Once explained, these measures are generally supported in communities around the state, including immigrant communities where much of the immigrant gang violence and crime occurs. Among the findings . . .

Return to Top


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

5.
Mexico First? McCain has embraced a Vicente Fox aide as his own
By Mark Krikorian
National Review Online, January 28, 2008
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Ym ... JiY2EwZTg=

EXCERPT: The contempt for American citizenship that McCain has shown by naming this political bigamist to a post in his campaign isn’t even the whole problem. One might also ask how McCain could even consult with a person of such extreme views, let alone name him Hispanic outreach director. McCain’s support for amnesty and accelerated mass immigration is bad enough, but you can, at least in theory, be for those things and still support firm borders and patriotic assimilation.

But McCain’s Hispanic outreach director is a man who has spent years opposing the very legitimacy of America’s borders and Americanization in the most public way possible. The man has been on every TV-news show in creation rejecting as passé the very idea of sovereign borders and patriotic assimilation into the American mainstream.

Return to Top


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

6.
John McCain, Multiculturalist: Immigration is just one problem
By Mark Krikorian
National Review Online, January 24, 2008
http://www.cis.org/articles/2008/mskoped012408.html

EXCERPT: We all know John McCain is terrible on immigration. For years he held America’s sovereignty and security hostage to amnesty and increased immigration, and his newfound support for “enforcement first” is so insubstantial and transparently insincere that it insults our intelligence. He’s so bad that Americans for Better Immigration ranks his performance in office as the worst of all the presidential candidates — including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. And as Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation has pointed out, passage of McCain’s bill “would represent the largest expansion of the welfare state in 30 years.”

But his support for de facto open borders is merely one manifestation of a larger problem — John McCain is a multiculturalist.

I don’t mean he eats tacos at the Cinco de Mayo parade (nothing wrong with that!) — I mean he’s an ideological multiculturalist. Francis Fukuyama has described (PDF) the ideology of multiculturalism this way: “not just as tolerance of cultural diversity in de facto multicultural societies but as the demand for legal recognition of the rights of ethnic, racial, religious, or cultural groups.” At almost every turn over his entire public career, John McCain has supported the pluribus over the unum.

Return to Top


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

7.
Would tighter security curb illegal immigration? Yes.
By Mark Krikorian
Congressional Quarterly Researcher, January 23, 2008
http://www.cis.org/articles/2008/mskoped012308.html

EXCERPT: Border security is one piece of the very large controlling-immigration puzzle. But policing borders, including the use of physical barriers where necessary, has been integral to the preservation of national sovereignty for centuries. In our country, some two-thirds of the illegal population has snuck across the border with Mexico; the rest entered legally — as tourists, students, etc. — and never left.

Return to Top


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

8.
Jewish Establishment Off-Key In Immigration Debate
By Stephen Steinlight
The Jewish Week, January 16, 2008
http://www.cis.org/articles/2008/steinl ... 11608.html

EXCERPT: Finally, as George Orwell perhaps understood best, the corruption of politics and of language are interconnected. Besser uses the terms “liberal” and “progressive” to describe supporters of “comprehensive immigration reform.” One wonders what sort of “progressive” would endorse a scheme concocted by President Bush, boosted by the Wall Street Journal and the nation’s most exploitative industries to create a permanent underclass of impoverished immigrants, thus reducing wages and worsening working conditions for America’s most vulnerable?

If you support a sordid scheme that devastates America’s working class and working poor, puts at risk our national security, environment and social safety net and surrenders national sovereignty, find another label for your beliefs.

Return to Top


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

9.
Amnesty John: If this is straight talk, who needs lies?
By Mark Krikorian
National Review Online, January 7, 2008
http://www.cis.org/articles/2008/mskoped010708.html

EXCERPT: As with the terminological issue, the most disturbing aspect of the Social-Security-for-illegal-aliens discussion is not so much the content of McCain’s policy prescriptions (which we should be happy to debate), but his brazen dishonesty, making “Straight Talk” not just a joke but an Orwellian portent. Real Straight Talk would be to say “Sure, it’s an amnesty, but we don’t really have any choice” or “Of course, I support Social Security for today’s illegal immigrants as part of my amnesty plan.” But to get the nomination, McCain has thrown Straight Talk off the bus.

Return to Top


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

10.
Economist Debate on Foreign Students
Proposition: Governments and universities everywhere should compete to attract qualified students, regardless of nationality or residence.

Speaking Against the Motion: Jessica M. Vaughan

Speaking For the Motion: Frances Cairncross

Economist.com, December 19, 2007
http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/jmvoped121907.html

EXCERPT from Jessica M Vaughan: What’s the downside? There isn’t one, say representatives of the higher education industry. The Institute for International Education claims that foreign students and their families contribute about $13 billion annually to the U.S. economy. But this analysis is too simplistic, relying on generalizations about the actual tuition paid by foreign students and ignoring the cost of government subsidies that go to all students in public and private schools. IIE’s own data show that 11 percent of foreign undergraduate students and 47 percent of foreign graduate students are supported “primarily” by the host college or university with scholarships, tuition waivers, employment, or fellowships. No student, foreign or local, pays enough in tuition to cover the actual cost of the education -- all college and university students are subsidized by taxpayers. Harvard University economist George Borjas reports that the average per-student subsidy may reach $6,400 in private universities and $9,200 in public universities, totaling several billion dollars per year.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests