ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers

Home Page

Advanced search


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

Chinese Immig. Daily

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily

 

Chinese Immig. Daily



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free
information!

Copyright
©1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here:



< Back to current issue of Immigration Daily < Back to current issue of Immigrant's Weekly

Dear Editor:
Your obtuse editorial of Oct. 20th begins with the familiar, faulty premise of labelling those against loosely or uncontrolled immigration as "anti-immigrationists" where they are merely immigration restrictionists as my previous analogies of restrictive speed limits and of hot water when showering logically described. Even a position of an immigration time out is not an anti-entry position, but only a reasonable policy to temporarily address excessive past migration and with respect to 9/11 concerns which your editorial gives shortshrift. To say that "the role of immigration in such national security is miniscule...." is like saying that the role of the male in the birth of a child is of no consequence. While the time involved may be brief, the result is profound with a direct link. What "No sensible person..." can deny is that we have had and still do have unsecured borders and lax immigration policies that result numerous problems and threats to our security, from large to small. To applaud Congress for the ill-advised proposals of disguised amnesty that we have seen to date is similar to endorsing their frequent overspending and subsequent "solution" of printing up more money and raising the debt limit. Having failed in both allowing too much immigration and spending, their stopgap "solutions" does nothing to resolve the basic problems. Why would a more vigorous effort in the deportation of illegals "require us to become a Gestapo state and inevitably lead to the destruction of the liberties" any more than any other area of law enforcement? It is untrue for anyone to say that efforts to secure the border and control entry have failed as serious efforts have not been applied. Yes, restrictionists are "insisting that Congress address the undocumented problem, and that our government agencies pursue a national security agenda", but not by eliminating the liberties of citizens and by making airports or America a police state. If there is any "worst enemy", it is the failure of elected leaders in their mandates of securing our land (not foreign ones). Citizens will and are demanding that proper solutions be found to address these problems, not stop-gap measures that only make problems worse, as the following articles attest: http://bigjweb.com/artman/publish/article_1316.shtml http://www.vdare.com/misc/yeagley_deport.htm.

R. L. Ranger



Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here: