I'm a retired Border Patrol Agent, a union representative for Border Patrol employees, and - yes - one of your "anti-immigrationists", I guess, since I'm opposed to illegal immigration and the present high rates of legal immigration. I agree that some of Asa Hutchinson's statements were "extraordinary". But in spite of what Hutchinson says, we have laws regarding immigration and most Americans want them enforced. The fact that they're not enforced can be traced to big money and politics, not a lack of national "will". We're not going to remove all illegals, but that's where the national debate should focus - who stays and who goes - because some will stay and some must go. I'm "pilloring" (sic) Hutchinson not because of his anti-enforcement views but because of his position. He's supposed to supervise the enforcement of the immigration laws, not dismantle them. If he doesn't wish to perform the duties of his position, he should find employment more in keeping with his views. But, finally, I was stunned by your comment that we "anti-immigrationists" propose "a Gestapo state where the undocumented would be shot on sight". I have often differed with the views of ILW.COM, but they at least seemed rational. That wasn't.
Other Patrol Agents and I apprehended thousands of illegal aliens. Some were set up for deportation, some allowed to return voluntarily to Mexico, some released on their own recognizance, etc., but none were "shot on sight". We tried our best to enforce the immigration laws in spite of the obstacles. Your use of the terms "Gestapo state" and "shot on sight" is every bit as inflammatory as the rhetoric used by the extreme "right". Any claim by you to the "moral high-ground" is questionable.
John H. Frecker
Share this page
Bookmark this page
The leading immigration law publisher - over 50000 pages of free information!
© Copyright 1995- American Immigration LLC, ILW.COM