On this day of remembrance of the first attack upon our soil in almost
two hundred years, we should expect that Americans would be more secure
now with the lessons of two years ago.
Despite the fact that lax immigration policies were a contributing
factor in the WTC tragedy,
borders are still unsecured and routinely violated, visa violations and
other "lawful" programs are taken advantage of and the massive entry by
foreigners continues. Some politicians call for amnesties outright or
disguised as guest worker programs which would defy the rule of law,
encourage millions of others to migrate and would be an insult to those
who wait their turn legally. State and local policies hinder attempts
at national security. See:
The statistics in the NIF press release of 9/11 are a testament to the
result of excessive entry policies and mentions none of the numerous
negative effects with the WTC disaster being only the most dramatic.
Millions of others are affected and victims as well. The Statue of Liberty was not intended to be an invitation for the world
to come to US, but as an example and beacon of the ideal of liberty
which is not fostered with massive immigration.
David Murray's response to Elise Hines is right on the money as
expectation of foreigners that any can come here and become citizens
without limitation and thumbing their noses at our sovereignty is not
realistic. Limited, controlled and allocated immigration has the potential to be
beneficial and to achieve all or most of the positives that open border
advocates erroneously attribute to the mass invasion we presently have.
I don't believe that millions of Mexicans sneaking across our borders or
other similar arrogant violations are what Emma Lazarus had in mind and
cannot be justified with present security and societal needs.
R. L. Ranger
Share this page
Bookmark this page
The leading immigration law publisher - over 50000 pages of free information!
© Copyright 1995- American Immigration LLC, ILW.COM