The primary version of this blog is HERE. The Blogroll. My Home Page. Email John Ray here. Other mirror sites: Political Correctness Watch, Dissecting Leftism, Greenie Watch, Australian Politics, Socialized Medicine, Tongue Tied, Food & Health Skeptic, Education Watch and Gun Watch. For a list of backups viewable in China, see here. (Click "Refresh" on your browser if background colour is missing). The archive for this mirror site is here or here.
****************************************************************************************



31 July, 2007

When illegal migrants flood a city

A judge tells one city to let the feds handle immigration. But where are the feds when you need them?

A telling irony shines through last week's ruling by a federal judge that found only Congress can set immigration law. The judge knew full well that half the plaintiffs in the case were in the US illegally. But he let them challenge a city ordinance on immigration anyway - and anonymously. And so it's been in America for too long: Turn a blind eye to the massive lawbreaking of an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants.

Imagine if a scofflaw wanted by the FBI had sued a city for enacting a criminal law tougher than a federal law. Would that person also be given a day in court? No way. The difference, of course, is that FBI agents are vigilant in catching suspects. But federal immigration agents? Well, they do their best whenever Congress or the White House gives them a clear green light and enough resources. After all, for politicians, those millions of illegal immigrants are potential voters for whichever party gets the credit in winning them amnesty someday.

But back to the court decision itself: Should state and local governments be allowed to enact laws that penalize landlords or companies that do business with illegal immigrants and fail to check their US residency status? In a 1986 law, Congress clearly said no, despite a long precedent in the 19th century of states regulating immigrants coming into the US. The Pennsylvania city of Hazelton, however, passed such a law and then lost the first round in the courtroom of US District Judge James Munley. The judge even postulated that perhaps the federal government does not seek "the removal of all aliens who lack legal status."

The city plans to appeal. The case, or one like it, will make an interesting Supreme Court decision in a year or so. Last April, for instance, the high court did allow states to exceed federal rules on greenhouse gases.

For now, this lower-court ruling does not apply in most of the country. That's just as well because as many as 100 other cities and towns have similar measures cracking down on illegal migrants - all because the federal government is falling down on the job. Hazelton, for instance, has seen its population balloon with immigrants since 2001, straining schools and other resources. By some estimates, a quarter of the 30,000 residents are now illegal. The city, like many in the US, suddenly became a magnet for migrants drawn to cheap housing and low-wage jobs.

Strangely, Hazelton officials didn't get to face their accusers in court during this trial because they were allowed to remain nameless - nor did federal immigration agents show up to arrest the plaintiffs.

Another critical court case may be the legal challenge to an Arizona law, due to take effect Jan. 1, that sanctions employers who hire illegal aliens. Courts tend to give states more leeway than cities or towns to one-up federal law.

In the meantime, many cities are taking another route: training police to alert federal agents whenever they detain suspects for a local crime who can't prove their legal status. All this shows the urgency for Congress to beef up immigration enforcement. The Hazeltons of the US can't wait.

Source



NYT illogic on Immigration

Post lifted from Keith Burgess Jackson. See the original for links

What is it with progressives? Why must they demonize everyone who doesn't share their values? Read this [editorial in the NYT]. For a while, it looks as though the editorial board of The New York Times is going to stay focused on the arguments for and against enforcing immigration laws. But then, near the end of the opinion, comes the P-word. The mayor of the town in question is said to be "prejudiced" against immigrants. Two things.

First, no evidence is supplied that the man is prejudiced. It's simply assumed that he is. That's the opposite of charity. It's indecency. Second, even if he were prejudiced, it would have no bearing on the merits of his argument for enforcing the immigration laws. As a philosopher, this shift from reasons to motives-from the grounds of belief to the causes of action-is dismaying, to say the least. I would like to think that every philosopher, including those of a progressive persuasion, would condemn this fallacious maneuver. That they don't do so shows that they are progressives first and philosophers second. If you're a student of philosophy, take note.

The opinion as a whole is filled with vicious, manipulative rhetoric. The mayor is said to be a "vigilante" and to be "cruel." Those who support enforcement of the law are said to be "harsh" and "inhumane"-and to want to "dehumanize" people. You know the Times is losing the argument when it resorts to abuse.



New Haven Issues Phony ID Cards to Illegal Aliens

If you are a naturalized citizen you have papers. If you are here as a resident alien, you have papers. If you are here illegally, you don't have papers.

So, the only people that need phony ID's issued by the city of New Haven, or Senator Gil Cedillo's drivers license bill for illegal aliens, is illegal aliens.

In other words Cedillo, and New Haven are willing to provide documentation to folks who are here illegally. Do you see something wrong with that?

Since New Haven has issued phony ID's to illegal aliens, you would think that ICE would demand those records, then find those using the phony ID's...they have not.

Wonder why the U.S. Attorney has not stopped the issuance of the phony ID's? Actually, since everyone knows those using these IDs are illegal aliens, employers being shown the cards should know they would be violating the law to hire the card holder.

Source





30 July, 2007

Leftists try to shut down anti-immigration rally in Morristown, NJ

About 500 people gathered here Saturday to rally for and against immigrants' rights, in a town that earlier this year applied for entry into a federal program that would give its police officers authority to enforce immigration laws. The rally was organized by anti-immigration groups who say federal authorities have been lax in using immigration laws to curb illegal entries into the country and in finding and deporting people who are here illegally.

Launching into fiery speeches from a stage, anti-immigration protesters blamed illegal immigrants for drug smuggling, taking jobs from U.S. citizens, murders and diluting American culture. "I will never accept English as a second language," said Daniel Smeriglio, from Voice of the People USA, a Pennsylvania activist group. "You disgrace us."

Across the street, about 150 people gathered in support of immigrants _ shouting, chanting and holding signs saying "Working people have no borders" and "Immigrants are not criminals."

A team of 140 state, county and local officers wearing riot gear with helmets, batons and pepper spray were on hand. They arrested a man and woman for storming a stage and trying to destroy amplifiers as well as several others for fighting, Police Chief Pete Demnitz said.

Morristown, a suburban town about 30 miles west of Manhattan, would be the first New Jersey municipality in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement program if accepted. It would give city officers authority to check the immigration status of people and the power to bring civil immigration charges that are handled in federal immigration court. The 2000 Census found that nearly one-third of the town's 18,544 residents were born in other countries, but does not give a figure of how many may be illegal.

Source



Sweden tightens the rules

Changes to immigration rules that make it more difficult for refugees to bring their families to Sweden have been criticized by the Swedish Board of Migration and the Red Cross. Previously people who have qualified as 'quota refugees' have been able to bring their families to Sweden under the quota refugee scheme. But under new changes introduced by the government, families do not qualify as quota refugees, according to Sveriges Radio. The changes mean that families have to apply separately for visas to Sweden once their relative has been accepted as a quota refugee.

Officials at the Migration Board say that this can often lead to women and children being left alone and vulnerable in their home countries. It is often impractical for them to seek visas in Sweden, particularly if they live in countries without Swedish embassies. A Red Cross spokeswoman told Sveriges Radio that worry over relatives left behind was making it more difficult for refugees in Sweden to integrate.

Source





29 July, 2007

Congress must do much more to fix immigration

Comment from Arizona: Kyl's amendment is one step toward a comprehensive solution of border problems

The Senate's passage Thursday of the Border Security First Act must be the first step in a series of acts that eventually reform the nation's immigration system comprehensively. The legislation, an amendment to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security appropriations package, would allocate $3 billion to fund more Border Patrol officers, fencing, unmanned aerial vehicles and other mechanisms that would help plug the porous U.S.-Mexico border. The measure is similar to the security-only portion of the comprehensive immigration-reform package that died earlier this summer.

Thursday evening, Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., who championed the failed comprehensive plan and the new security act, got the Senate to add $60 million to the amendment for improvements to the Basic Pilot Program, the federal database of those able to work in the country legally. Kyl said Thursday that he has not given up on the comprehensive approach, but it will be hard to accomplish this session. Thus, he said, he "took advantage of an opportunity on the Homeland Security appropriation bill to send a strong message that we're serious about enforcement." Kyl said the public is reluctant to accept reform until there is action on enforcement.

Without question, security must be part of immigration reform. The Star's long-held position is that immigration reform must be comprehensive and include security, as well as a guest-worker program, workplace controls and an equitable system for dealing with the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants working in our country and contributing to its economy.

Kyl told us he hopes enforcement funding will encourage people to look toward other areas of reform. We hope he's right and that the security boost placates the enforcement-only factions and that other aspects of immigration reform will be able to move forward. The $60 million boost for the Basic Pilot Program should help Arizona employers smacked by a draconian state law that requires verification of new employees' legal status using the iffy system. Under the ill-conceived employer-sanctions law, a business' license could be suspended and the workplace shut down — leaving all employees out of work — if the business knowingly hires an undocumented worker.

The law was a knee-jerk response by a frustrated Arizona Legislature to Congress' inaction in solving the illegal-immigration problem. The law penalizes businesses and gives them responsibility for immigration enforcement without giving them adequate tools to meet the task. The unintended consequences of the law may be that U.S. citizens and folks legitimately in the country are denied employment because of an inaccurate database. This is a civil rights lawsuit against the state waiting to happen. The law goes into effect Jan. 1.

If the security amendment gets congressional approval and the president's signature, it must be a beginning to solutions on illegal immigration. It will not end the problem.

Source



Immigration of the illegal sort: when the numbers don't add up

Comment from Colorado

My local newspaper editor ran a piece the other day titled "D.R.: Immigration's a numbers game" In it he wrote that "America gives out thousands of work visas, but we have millions and millions of jobs that our own natives have proven they can't fill."

And to him I respectfully respond:

I too have friends who complain bitterly about illegal immigrants and want them gone yesterday, and say build that wall now. And these friends of mine don't hire workers without a second thought as is sometimes proclaimed. When these friends of mine hire new employees, they run the employees work eligibility information through the federal program titled Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements or "SAVE."

The use of the Basic Pilot Program is free for employers, it is successful and it is utilized by those who do uphold the laws in our country based on Rule of the Law. As far as the border goes, we say build the fence as was already promised to the American people. Doing that in and of itself sends a strong psychological message. Much, in fact most, of this battle is mental, not physical.

The illegal alien issue breaks down to simple math but adding 1 plus 1 does not equal 2 as editor Rogers writes, not for lawful American families anyway. Enforce the law and the problem would self-resolve. "Do as I say and Not as I do" resolves nothing but doing as Aspen Police Department did of late does add up.

When ICE was notified that a self-proclaimed illegal alien was not only illegal in our country but had cocaine in his wallet and ICE refused to take him into custody, Aspen PD responded not with a wink and a nod, but instead with "We didn't feel comfortable to let him go" so (Aspen) police took Orellana into custody.

Let me remind you, the man had cocaine in his wallet. It is a felony to possess cocaine in the amount of more than one gram. It is also against the law, criminal in fact, to enter America illegally under 1911 8 U.S.C.  1325 -- Unlawful Entry.

Here is one for dear editor Rogers, friend of mine. You ask, "Why do illegals risk life and limb to come?" And the answer is "Because." Because we lay out the Welcome Mat with many rewards and little repercussions.

Here are some simple numbers to factor in the mathematics game. The average illegal alien household pays $16 billion in taxes. But they use $26.3 billion dollars a year in welfare services! John Q Public provides that for them. We are John Q. Public folks. We taxpayers fund these welfare programs.

This so-called Cheap Labor doesn't come cheap; it carries a costly Behind the Scenes price tag. Multiply this by the millions and the numbers compound. Middle-class America is strained almost to our breaking point.

Our own Congress reports the following in regards to immigrants living in America and welfare support provided by the taxpayers.

"It continues to be the immigration policy of the United States that aliens within the Nation's borders not depend on public resources to meet their needs but rather rely on their own capabilities" and yet "despite the principle of self-sufficiency" aliens have been applying for and receiving public benefits from Federal, State, and local governments at increasing rates.

Our American ideals are best served by "balancing the work papers with the number of jobs that need doing, including in this valley" writes my editor pal. Yep. But he omits the following. Each low-skill illegal alien household will cost U.S. taxpayers $1.1 million dollars over their lifetime per the Heritage Foundation on a study of welfare programs available in America, April 2007. And what happens when a `local' hears the following, as I did, broadcast on National Public Radio with our own Eagle County Commissioner Menconi as an honored guest?

Well, I write about what I hear. John Burnett, NPR News closed his talk show with this statement; "American employers are hooked on cheap immigrant labor, both legal and illegal, but a longtime housekeeping supervisor in Vail offers a cautionary word to the backers of a new guest worker program. She says back in 1986 when immigration reform granted amnesty to more than two million undocumented immigrants, guess what was the first thing her Mexican hotel maids did when they got their papers? Many quit their jobs and looked for better ones. And what did the employer do? Rather than raise salaries, she replaced them with new immigrants who were, as she said, hungrier for the work."

And do note dear reading public, the "1986 immigration reform" was for agricultural workers. Not hotel maids.

America does give out thousands of work visas. In fact, talking in blunt numbers here, we give out more guest-worker visas than anyone in the world. The 35.2 million immigrants (legal and illegal) here in March of 2005 is the highest ever recorded - two and a half times the 13.5 million during the peak of the last great immigration wave in 1910 per the Center for Immigration Studies. These are indisputable facts.

To me, the mathematical solution is simple. Until our local, state and federal agencies can tell Americans exactly the numbers we have residing here and of those people, who is entitled to walk on our streets and who is not and what will be done with those illegal aliens who are intercepted one way or the other during the course of everyday activities, until then, no amnesty, no new guest-worker plan, no additional guest-worker visas.

I will agree with Editor Roger's final comment of the majority of Big Business and government having a "Don't ask, don't tell" attitude, but I will end my paragraph with a different statement. Remove the enticements and rewards of illegal residency. We, the United States of America, are a nation founded under the Rule of the Law. So we might want to start asking when it was that our country's leaders forgot about that part. Because in doing so they also forgot about the lawful residents living here.

Source





28 July, 2007

After A Good Night's Sleep, Harry Reid Now Believes Border Security Is Germane To Homeland Security.

Political reality trumps Leftist ego. Post below lifted from Hugh Hewitt. See the original for links

Not 24 hours ago, Senate majority leader Harry Reid threw a tantrum and arm twisted the rest of the Senate Democrats, most notably Barack Obama, into throwing out a border security amendment offered by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham as being not germane to the homeland security appropriations bill. Last night, $3 billion dollars of funding for Border Patrol agents, 700 miles of fencing, 300 miles of vehicle barriers, all of the recommended steps to regain control of our Southern border, that, to Democrats, was not germane to homeland security. Fortunately for America, Harry Reid slept on it. He arose this morning refreshed, with a more clear head, and took to the Senate floor this morning. This is what he had to say.

I say to my friend from Texas, what a difference a night makes. As you know, as some know, not very many, Senator Cornyn and I, Senator Graham and a few others, we were trying to work something out on this border security, and Senator Cornyn and I were the last two to speak on this issue. And like a lot of things around here, if you don't get your way, you kind of throw a tantrum a lot of times. And I didn't get my way, so I thought I would throw just a little tantrum. And the evening has brought to my attention that I was wrong, Senator Cornyn was right. I hate to acknowledge that, but that's basically valid. And so having said that, Mr. President, and swallowing a bit of pride that I shouldn't have had, I now ask unanimous consent that when the Senate resumes consideration of HR2638 today, which will be just in a few mintues, that the time until 11:35 be for debate with respect to the Graham-Pryor border security amendment. And that has Senator from Texas language in there.

Yes, Harry Reid threw a little tantrum. If you want to hear it, you can go here. Reid got caught off-guard yesterday by a Republican amendment to the homeland security appropriations bill, an amendment that would have embarrassed Reid two ways. It would have cut the legs out from under Ted Kennedy in that the amendment virtually ignored all of the liberal provisions written by Kennedy that caused so many conservatives to abandon support and openly revolt against the comprehensive immigration bill earlier this summer. This amendment focuses on an increase in funding for many of the security first provisions conservatives have been looking for. It's not enough, but it's a good start. The other embarrassment to Reid would be that the Republicans hijacked the floor agenda yet again, showing that Reid's management skills as majority leader were questionable at best.

So in order to prevent being embarrassed, Reid put Barack Obama on the spot, for no other reason than he happened to have presiding officer duty at the time, having him rule that border security not be germane to homeland security. The Senate voted largely along partisan lines to support that ruling.

Today, Reid realized that was probably not the smartest move he's made this year, which considering the Iraq and immigration gaffes he's made in the last seven months is saying something, and reversed himself. After eating crow on the Senate floor, and an hour or so of debate, the Senate voted 89-1 to approve the Graham amendment, attaching it to the homeland security bill, meaning that in a less than one day span, about 40 Democratic Senators reversed themselves.

Barack Obama abstained from voting, which coming on the heels of walking the plank yesterday, adds to the doubt as to whether the first term Illinois Senator has the political acumen required for the presidency. If he would flipped a coin to decide how to proceed on these two votes, yesterday and today, the odds are he would have at least gotten one right, instead of making an error yesterday, and not even bothering to take the opportunity to correct the mistake today.

It's good to know, however, that the Senate Democrats can get something right when it comes to national security.provided their leadership can sleep on it and have a second shot at it the next day.



7-Eleven fires Colorado clerk over immigration views

His favourite hat seems to have a lot to do with it



Bruno Kirchenwitz was fired Monday from his job at the Basalt 7-Eleven. The firing came nearly two weeks after Kirchenwitz may have been the target of a person or persons who fired five shots from a rifle into the store. Kirchenwitz said a 7-Eleven official who called to inform him of his dismissal claimed it was unrelated to the shooting incident.

He isn't buying it. Kirchenwitz believes he was fired because his presence as a clerk at the store could be bad for business. He is an outspoken critic of illegal immigration. "Freedom of speech takes a back seat to profits," he said.

Margaret Chabris, a 7-Eleven spokeswoman, declined comment Monday because it is a personnel issue, citing corporate policy. In general, she said, employees can be terminated after an investigation explores their relations with customers and fellow workers.

Kirchenwitz was on duty as a cashier June 26 when two Latino men entered the store and asked if he is the man who wears a "U.S. Border Patrol" baseball hat. He acknowledged he was, although he wasn't wearing it at the time. He said he wears the hat to and from work but never on the job. The men threatened to show him what they thought about the hat. "I smiled and laughed and made jokes, then shooed them out the door," Kirchenwitz said. The men said they would wait for him outside to get off work. They left a short time later, at about 6:30 p.m.

Kirchenwitz got off duty at 10 p.m. and left the store to catch a bus about 15 minutes later. The shots blasted through a front plate glass window in front of the cashier's station at about 11:10 p.m. Another cashier and four customers, including a family with a baby, escaped injury. Basalt Police Chief Keith Ikeda said it was fortunate no one was killed or hurt.

Kirchenwitz was placed on paid leave shortly after the incident while 7-Eleven officials were in town investigating the shooting. He was told late Monday afternoon he was being let go because of a customer service incident that allegedly occurred on June 9.

Kirchenwitz said someone apparently lodged a complaint about an incident with him after it was publicized that he was placed on leave. He said he remembered no altercation with a customer and that the official who fired him was vague on details.

Kirchenwitz started as a cashier with 7-Eleven on April 18. He said he never received a written or verbal reprimand and was complimented for his performance by the Basalt store's manager. The firing didn't surprise him. "In the back of my mind, it was expected," he said. On one hand, it makes sense, he said. About 75 percent of 7-Eleven's customers in Basalt are Latino, he said, so his presence could be bad for business, at least among anyone in the country illegally. But Kirchenwitz was angry that 7-Eleven wouldn't admit what he believes is the obvious reason for his firing. "That sucks canal water," he said.

When asked if he would appeal within 7-Eleven's system or discuss his firing with the American Civil Liberties Union, Kirchenwitz said he would like to seek help from a different source - conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

Kirchenwitz, an outspoken critic of President Bush, said illegal immigration is about the only issue where he sees eye-to-eye with conservatives. If he got a chance to speak to Limbaugh, he said, he would sum up his situation as: "Poor white boy get shot at then gets fired."

Source





27 July, 2007

Hazleton loses first round in court

A politically predictable judgment

A federal judge today blocked a local law designed to deter illegal immigration in a decision that is likely to affect dozens of other communities around the country that have passed similar measures or are considering them. Federal District Judge James Munley said the town of Hazleton in northeastern Pennsylvania had acted unconstitutionally when it passed its Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance under which businesses would be penalized for hiring illegal aliens and landlords would be fined for renting rooms to them. The ordinance, first passed by the Hazleton City Council in July 2006, also established English as the town’s official language.

Backers of the law, led by Mayor Louis J. Barletta, argued that illegal immigration, largely from Mexico and Central America, was overburdening local schools, hospitals and social services in this town of about 30,000. They also argued that an influx of undocumented workers was also driving up crime.

“Federal law prohibits Hazleton from enforcing any of the provisions in its ordinances,” Judge Munley wrote in an eagerly awaited 206-page opinion. “Thus, we will issue a permanent injunction enjoining their enforcement.”

Judge Munley’s ruling follows a federal trial in which the City of Hazleton was sued by civil-rights groups including the American Civil Liberties Union who claimed that the law was unconstitutional.

The civil liberties union said after the ruling that as many as 100 other towns had passed similar measures, though nearly all were waiting on the ruling before starting to enforce the rules. The judge also sided with plaintiffs’ arguments that local authorities such as Hazleton are not entitled to make laws on immigration, because that is the responsibility of the federal government. “The ordinances disrupt a well-established federal scheme for regulating the presence and employment of immigrants in the U.S.,” Judge Munley wrote, adding that such ordinances violate the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

At the federal level, lawmakers failed this summer to pass a comprehensive immigration bill backed by the Bush administration which would have strengthened border controls while opening up a path to citizenship for the estimated 12 million immigrants living illegally in the U.S.

Hazleton Mayor Louis J. Barletta, who led the campaign for the Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance, said the case would be appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Philadelphia. He vowed to take the fight to the Supreme Court if necessary. “This fight is far from over,” Mr. Barletta said at a news conference on the steps of Hazleton City Hall. “Hazleton isn’t going to back down.”

Mr. Barletta, a Republican, said he had received renewed offers of support from around the country in the wake of the decision, and he pledged to defend the ordinance in the wake of federal lawmakers’ recent failure to agree a comprehensive immigration reform package that would have addressed the issues raised by an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. “I will do everything that I can to make Hazleton the toughest city in America for illegal immigrants,” he said. “I will not sit back because the federal government has refused to do its job.” Mr. Barletta rejected a suggestion that the ordinance was driven by racism, saying, “This isn’t about ethnicity, it’s about legality.”

Source



Canadian government changes ignorant policy on common surname

By the same reasoning, the names "Smith" and "Jones" would have to be banned too

The Canadian government has reversed a decade-old policy that forced Indians with the last name Singh or Kaur to change their surnames when applying to immigrate to Canada.

For the past 10 years, the Canadian High Commission in New Delhi told Indians wishing to immigrate to Canada that the religious Sikh surnames were too common to process quickly and that a name change would be required. Sikhs typically give baptized males the name Singh and females the name Kaur.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada said Wendesday it was canceling the policy, after The World Sikh Organization raised the issue Tuesday. Immigration authorities said the policy was a misunderstanding based on a "poorly worded" letter.

Tarvinder Kaur, a Calgary woman waiting for her husband, Jaspal Singh, to arrive in Canada, told reporters that her husband's permanent residency application had been delayed for over a month because of his last name.

A national Canadian news organization posted the letter to Kaur from the Canadian High Commission in New Delhi on its Web site. The letter, dated May 17 and addressed to Jaspal Singh, said: "Please note that your surname must be endorsed on your passport. The names Kaur and Singh do not qualify for the purpose of immigration to Canada."

Source





26 July, 2007

Big Macs ferried in after rioting inmates run amok in British immigration detention centre

Rioting foreign criminals and failed asylum seekers were fed McDonald's takeaway meals by prison staff during a œ60million orgy of destruction which wrecked an immigration detention centre. Fearful that the human rights of inmates would be breached, staff ferried sackfuls of Big Mac meals with fries and soft drinks from a nearby branch of the fast-food chain. The revelation came in a damning official report into the riot at Harmondsworth Immigration Removal Centre near Heathrow Airport last November. More than 500 inmates awaiting deportation wrecked and burned down much of the site, and it took riot squads almost two days to regain control. The report also reveals:

* Walls and doors in the centre were so flimsy that inmates kicked them down with ease, especially after they were soaked by the sprinkler system;

* The fire brigade got lost because there were no signposts to the centre;

* CCTV cameras were easy for rioters to destroy - meaning control room staff had no idea what was going on;

* Increasingly desperate calls to the Prison Service headquarters begging for help were ignored for an hour.

The official Home Office investigation blames the riot partly on the huge pressure on the centre after last summer's foreign prisoners scandal. Hundreds of foreign national criminals were rounded up after being released from Britain's jails without being considered for deportation. Of the 501 men in the detention centre at the time 177 were foreign prisoners awaiting deportation - a volatile group who had 'nothing to lose'. The riot was triggered by inmates watching a TV news bulletin reporting criticisms of Harmondsworth from prison watchdogs. Fires were started and inmates began smashing CCTV cameras and attacking staff, who were unable to contain the violence.

As control room managers lost their grip, staff were ordered to retreat and seal the gates, as police arrived to guard the perimeter. Thirteen riot squads entered the centre next morning but took more than 24 hours to regain control.

During the day a row broke out between senior officials over whether to send food in for rioters. Those who favoured starving inmates into submission were overruled, as managers ordered that 'minimum needs of food and drink' must be supplied. "In the early stages food came from McDonald's," according to the report by senior civil servant Robert Whalley. Yesterday the Daily Mail tracked down a worker at the West Drayton branch of McDonald's who recalled Harmondsworth staff placing a huge order for 3.59 burger meals. He said: "I remember prison officers turning up and ordering around 100 Big Mac meals with fries and fizzy drinks. For a couple of hours they kept turning up with big bags, filling them up with meals and then ferrying them off in Securicor vans and then they'd return for more."

The Home Office was last night unable to provide details of the cost of the emergency supplies. The cost of dealing with the riot and rebuilding large parts of Harmondsworth is expected to top 65million pounds.

Tory immigration spokesman Damian Green said: "This situation required a fast response, and all they got was fast food. "We now know that this dangerous incident happened because the Government was forced to mix foreign prisoners with failed asylum seekers. Because of prison overcrowding, this is still going on."

Lin Homer, chief executive of the Border and Immigration Agency, said work was under way to 'expand and strengthen' removal centres. The Home Office said that five detainees had been charged and remanded in custody in connection with the riot.

Source



U.S. Immigration bureaucrats want a new computer system

What a disaster that will be! If new government computer systems ever work at all, it takes years before they can be got to work properly. Britain has just spent 12 billion (Yes: Billion) pounds on a new computer system for its hospitals and it is still not working properly

The Homeland Security Department's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division issued a pre-solicitation notice July 24 requesting project management support services for the Office of Detention and Removal (DRO). ICE Chief Information Officer Luke McCormack said the current DRO system is 20 years old. The office is responsible for enforcing U.S. immigration laws requiring "removable aliens" to leave the United States.

The notice states that the Detention and Removals System Branch, responsible for providing information technology support services for agency applications, has identified a need for assistance in the management and administration of the DRO program. "We are just in the beginning stages of modernization," McCormack said at a conference on law enforcement IT sponsored by AFCEA International's Bethesda, Md., chapter. "ICE is currently securing the funds for a 2008 rollout. The business plan was just put together."

Source





25 July, 2007

Canada relaxes student and family rules

They want smart Indians

In a bid to attract more foreign students Canada announced new rules that make it easier for them to work while studying in the country and also relaxed the entry for parents and grandparents of immigrants. Announcing the new measures here Monday, Joe Volpe, minister of citizenship and immigration, said: "International students who choose to stay in Canada after they graduate greatly contribute to our labour market. "It is important that they be exposed to the Canadian work force at an early stage to increase their chances of success following graduation."

The announcement of relaxed immigration rules to Canada comes at a time when several European countries are trying to corner foreign students even as the US is concerned it is losing some bright incoming researchers. "We are certain that these initiatives will help increase the global competitiveness of Canada by attracting and retaining more international students to our schools," said Volpe.

Volpe also announced measures to speed up the processing of sponsorship applications for parents and grandparents coming to Canada as family class immigrants. India is a major source country for immigrants coming here. With these new measures in place, it is expected that in both 2005 and 2006, the number of parents and grandparents immigrating to Canada will increase by an additional 12,000 each year. This triples the original 6,000 forecasted for 2005.

Volpe also announced that Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) will be more flexible in issuing multiple-entry visitor visas to parents and grandparents. This will allow them to visit their families in Canada while their sponsorship applications are in process, as long as they are able to prove that they are visiting temporarily. Regular security and health screening will still apply and some parents and grandparents may require health coverage to be admissible to Canada.

Canada has had over one million permanent residents since 2000. However, the number of sponsorship applications for parents and grandparents is growing and more applications are received each day than CIC can process, the agency admitted. "To address this concern, the government of Canada is investing $36 million a year over two years to increase processing of parent and grandparent applications and to cover integration costs once they arrive in Canada. Additional processing will begin immediately. In the coming weeks, CIC will add temporary duty officers and support staff at visa offices with the largest number of applications."

The new initiatives in the area of foreign students include:

1. Allowing international students at public post-secondary institutions to work off-campus while completing their studies and

2. Allowing students to work for two years, rather than one year, after their graduation.

This second initiative will apply outside Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver to possibly spread immigrants more widely rather than their current concentration in the above-named cities. Canada is investing $10 million a year for five years to support this announcement, the CIC said. The agency also announced other adjustments to its international study programme. For example, post-secondary international students can now transfer between programmes of study and institutions without applying for a change to the conditions of their study permit. Secondary-level international students can now obtain longer high-school study permits.

As of May 16, 2005, international students who meet the eligibility criteria for a second year of post-graduation employment will be issued a two-year work permit. For these students, the two-year work permit will only be valid for one year since they will have already completed their first year of post-graduate work. As with existing pilot projects, the off-campus work initiative will be implemented bilaterally in each province and territory, following agreements with CIC. The measures include an investment of $69 million over two years to restore, by 2007-2008, processing times to an average of 12 months for a grant of citizenship and four months for a proof of citizenship.

CIC is also exempting citizenship applicants from undergoing language ability and knowledge-of-Canada tests at 55 rather than 60 years of age. But the CIC said that in no way would the rigorous security screening requirements that all applicants for Canadian citizenship must go through before becoming citizens of Canada, be relaxed.

Source



Mosque leader accused of immigration fraud

Imam's arrest sparks protest outside court

The spiritual leader of a mosque in Sharon was arrested yesterday on federal immigration fraud charges, sparking a protest outside the courthouse in Boston by a group of religious leaders and civil rights advocates who called the case a witch hunt. Muhammad Masood, 49, imam of the 1,500 member Islamic Center of New England, is accused of lying repeatedly to federal immigration officials between 2002 and 2006 in a bid to obtain a green card and ultimately become a US citizen.

The criminal charges follow administrative charges brought by immigration officials last year. That case also drew wide protest from local Muslim leaders, who have accused authorities of ignoring efforts to smooth relations with members of various cultures. A detailed affidavit filed in federal court alleges that Masood told authorities that after attending a master's degree program in economics at Boston University in the early 1990s, he returned to his native Pakistan for two years, as required by law, before returning to the United States in 1993 and later applying for residency. But, the affidavit says, Masood never left Boston, and records show that he continued to live in Boston University housing with his wife and children, even though he was no longer a student. He was cited for a couple of traffic violations and was present when his fifth child was born in Boston in 1992, the affidavit indicates.

Authorities also allege that Masood did not disclose that he had collected state health benefits from 1997 to 2005 and initially denied ever being charged with any crimes, although he later acknowledged that he had been arrested for shoplifting in Norwood in 2000. The charge was later dismissed.

"This is an apparent witch hunt," said Bilal Kaleem, executive director of the Boston chapter of the Muslim American Society, who stood outside the federal courthouse yesterday with about 40 other supporters during a press conference denouncing Masood's arrest. Kaleem said that Masood had been interrogated by the US attorney's office for six hours last week and was threatened with jail and "humiliation," unless he cooperated by providing incriminating information against mainstream Muslim leaders in the Boston area. Kaleem described Masood as an upstanding man of high integrity who was charged with criminal violations after he insisted he had no incriminating information to offer.

In response to the allegations, the office of US Attorney Michael J. Sullivan released a statement saying: "The characterization of this as a government witch hunt is regrettable, as the detailed allegations contained in the complaint affidavit demonstrate there is a clear factual basis for the charges against Mr. Masood." US Magistrate Judge Joyce London Alexander released Masood on a $10,000 unsecured bond and scheduled a hearing Aug. 9 on the charges. Boston lawyer Norman Zalkind, who represents Masood, said his client surrendered yesterday after learning that the criminal complaint had been issued and will plead not guilty at his arraignment.

Masood's supporters criticized federal prosecutors for seeking criminal charges since he had already been arrested last November on immigration violations that were being handled administratively through the federal immigration court. In November, Masood and his 24-year-old son, Hassan, were arrested along with 31 others by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in a nationwide crackdown on an alleged scheme to provide religious worker visas to immigrants who were supposed to be working full-time secular jobs but were not. The immigration fraud charge brought against Masood last fall was dropped, but he is facing a hearing Oct. 11 on charges that he overstayed his visa in the 1990s.

Kaleem said the arrest of Masood on criminal charges damages an initiative launched two years ago to bring law enforcement officials and the members of the Muslim, Arab and Sikh communities together.

Source





24 July, 2007

Immigration into Britain so high that BritGov has lost count

The clues are there if you know where to find them. Walk around Slough's estates and look in the back gardens. There are buildings here you are unlikely to see anywhere else in the country. These are Slough's 'sheds with beds'. In some areas, row upon row of them. Lines of small houses tucked away behind the main homes. And inside them are the people who are transforming this place. A new workforce. So many that these illegally rented out sheds and garages are needed to house them all. They have been swept here by border changes across Europe and are now testing how we deal with mass immigration.

Slough is a success story. A manufacturing town with a booming economy. Positioned just outside London and down the M4 from Heathrow. It's factories and production plants have always attracted a large number of immigrant workers. "I came here in 1948. I wanted to work in Britain, and I got a job in the brickworks," said Fred Szymaczack, a Pole who says things were very different when he came to Slough. "When I arrived it was much stricter. The government knew how many people were coming to work here. Now, there's too many. The town can't cope."

The expansion of the European Union in 2004 has had an enormous effect here as it has across Britain. Local Polish community leaders say as many as 10,000 Poles have arrived in Slough in three years. Walk down the High Street and you can literally hear the languages and accents that are changing the make up of this town.

The problem is there is no accurate way of recording that change. When it comes to migrants arriving in our towns, it seems we've lost the ability to count. The government's estimates show Slough's population is decreasing, while the council in Slough reckons it is growing so fast that about one in ten people here are simply missing from the books, not accounted for. And that has a direct consequence for everyone living here. That is because the government uses the population figure to decide how much money it gives the local council every year. That money funds three quarters of the services provided by the council. If the population estimate is not accurate, then neither is the pay-out.

Andrew Blake-Herbert, director of finance for Slough council said: "Over the last three years, we've already lost 5 million pounds worth of funding and if the inaccurate population statistics aren't corrected before the next census, we stand to lose up to 15 million worth of funding" Of course, most of the migrants are working and paying tax but all that money goes to the exchequer, it does not come to Slough. All that does comes here is an increased pressure on services. So, that means the Council Tax in the town is as high as it can be. Cuts are on the cards and people are not happy.

But there is a bigger danger. This is a town that has known decades of tolerance. New communities have always been accepted but now some of the older migrants are saying things have to change. I went for a walk through Chalvey, an area of Slough that has become home to hundreds of new arrivals. One resident, Mohammed Choudary Sr told me if more money does not come from the government, the council has to get tough. "Chuck them out. It's simple. Just don't let them come in. Don't give them housing. Tell them to go to other places".

The stakes are high and the government accepts there is a problem. The Immigration Minister, Liam Byrne issued this statement to Panorama.

"We think it's utterly important that the wider - often social impacts - are taken into account before decisions are made. Next year we're introducing an Australian style points system which has worked well there. Before we decide how many points would-be immigrants need to come to Britain, we'll be looking at independent evidence from the Migration Impacts Forum on these wider impacts. Migration is important to the British business community, but businesses shouldn't be the only voice in the debates. Communities count too."

Of course, any points based system would not apply to migrants from Europe, like Slough's Poles. The current flawed system means people living here, hear the government say the town's population is falling while all around - from housing and packed schools, through to increased refuse collection and rising crime rates - the signs are it is on the up. And what is happening in Slough is being repeated across the country. In towns and cities across the land we simply do not know how many migrants are arriving. For more and more communities the numbers no longer add up.

Source



Obama "Walks the Walk" on Supporting Illegal Immigration

Appearing in Miami before La Raza, the largest Hispanic lobbying group in the country, Senator Barak Obama touted his credentials as a supporter of illegal immigration:

Sen. Barack Obama told the nation's largest Hispanic advocacy group yesterday that he earned their support for his presidential campaign by marching in last year's May 1 immigrant rallies and challenged them to learn whether others met that standard.

"Find out how many senators appeared before an immigration rally last year. Who was talking the talk, and who walked the walk — because I walked," Mr. Obama said at the National Council of La Raza's annual convention in Miami Beach. "I didn't run away from the issue, and I didn't just talk about it in front of Latino audiences."

The Illinois Democrat said the recent Senate immigration debate "was both ugly and racist in a way we haven't see since the struggle for civil rights."

Those rallies were clearly hijacked by the open borders lobby and sought to legitimize the lawbreaking done by illegal immigrants by agitating for amnesty. And the strategy of tarring their political opponents as "racist" for supporting measures that would keep the border from becoming a crossing point for terrorists as well as standing up for the rule of law is outrageous. Even pandering to increase his share of the Hispanic vote is no excuse for that kind of insulting rhetoric.

The intent. of course, is to cut off further debate on the issue - something the open borders crowd would dearly love since most Americans oppose their suicidal ideas about immigration. Obama may raise his standing among Hispanics with that kind of rhetoric. But it won't help him in many other areas of the country. And given that he is so far behind Hillary Clinton in the national polls, it may not be good politics to get so many so mad at you.

Source



American towns targeting illegal immigrants

Against a backdrop of perceived federal inaction, a growing number of cities, counties and states are taking matters into their own hands when it comes to trying to reverse the trend of illegal immigration. From the smallest town to an entire state -- Arizona -- governments are passing laws that target illegal immigrants in such indirect ways as preventing them from parking their cars to forcing city workers to decide who's legal and who isn't before someone can rent a home, use the library or get a job.

State attempts at targeting undocumented foreigners are nothing new and have raised constitutional questions for more than a decade. California's ill-fated Proposition 187, passed by voters in 1994, was one of the early attempts that sought to require health workers and teachers to card people. But legal skirmishes are expected with greater frequency after the U.S. Senate's failure this summer to enact immigration revisions. The void has only emboldened opponents of illegal immigration whose stridency seems unlikely to fade. "There's a great likelihood of mischief and trouble when local places get involved in immigration laws," said Kevin Johnson, a law professor at the University of California, Davis.

In Arizona, Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano reluctantly signed legislation on July 2 requiring all employers in the state to run new hires through a federal database operated by the Department of Homeland Security. Although Napolitano said she generally does not agree with local and state governments regulating immigration -- which falls under federal jurisdiction -- she signed the law because Congress failed to take action. The Senate bill would have legalized millions of illegal immigrants but also increased enforcement measures and ordered American employers to use Homeland Security's federal database.

Activists such as Marie Waldron, a City Council member in Escondido, about 30 miles north of San Diego, actually sought to topple the Senate bill, believing it treated illegal immigration too gently. Waldron once led a failed attempt to create a California state border police. She also was the architect of a local law that would have made it illegal to rent housing to any illegal immigrants. The housing law cost the city $200,000 to defend in court, money that Waldron believes was well spent, even though the law ended up being scuttled last December. "I wanted to see this all the way through court," Waldron said. "I was opposed to the city withdrawing from it. I also very much support training local police to be immigration officers."

Despite the setbacks, as long as the federal government fails to enforce current laws to their satisfaction, local officials say they're going to do it themselves -- using local power. Waldron said she's now pursuing an indirect method to drive out illegal immigrants, whom she blames for degrading Escondido's quality of life. She wants to outlaw overnight parking on residential streets unless people can prove they live there and have valid California driver's licenses.

Before the Escondido City Council decided to abandon the legal battle to defend Waldron's housing ordinance, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order against it, citing "serious questions" of due process and other constitutional issues. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF, sued Escondido, as did a landlord. The civil rights groups continue to sue or try to persuade other cities that similar laws will end up struck down.

In addition to unlawfully assuming federal power, civil rights attorneys argue, ad hoc local immigration policing leads to discrimination and abuse, while raising the specter of vigilantism. Even attorneys who support local efforts to crack down on illegal immigrants warn that laws have to be crafted carefully. Statutes that call for businesses or city workers to check someone's legal status have to be applied across the board, said Sharma Hammond, an attorney with the Washington, D.C.-based Immigration Reform Law Institute.

More here





23 July, 2007

The mechanical harvesting alternative to illegals

Australia has practically no illegals but all the crops get harvested and Australia is a major food exporter. Mechanical harvesting is instrumental in that. Now it is coming to America

Surrounded by shiny new tractors, Carl Capps spends most days talking about horsepower, hydraulics and transmissions. In the past he paid little attention to anti- and pro-immigrant activists marching at the state Capitol.

Then the immigration debate came to him last fall, after he sold a quarter-million-dollar machine that harvests wine grapes - the first in the Willamette Valley. The New Holland Braud grape harvester can do the work of 40 handpickers in a fraction of the time.

Suddenly, vineyard owners were calling Capps to schedule demonstrations, saying they couldn't cope with worsening worker shortages - or immigration raids. Their concerns were heightened after a U.S. Senate immigration bill that would have offered legal status for up to 900,000 undocumented agricultural workers failed, and immigration officers detained nearly 200 workers at a Portland produce processing plant.

Oregonians for Immigration Reform, a restrictionist group, touted the European machine as a beacon of a future without illegal labor. "As soon as word about this got out, the immigration issue was the first thing that came up," Capps said. "The bloggers are all over it. They're saying, 'Finally, see? We told you that you could get by without all this immigration.'"

The harvester is a powerful and controversial symbol as Oregon and the nation struggle with the economic realities of immigration. As public pressure drives a border crackdown and increased enforcement, farmers nationwide face labor shortages as high as 30 percent to 50 percent during harvest. Further complicating matters, large numbers of former migrant laborers have switched to construction jobs for the higher pay and year-round stability.

The high-tech machine - which uses "shaker rod" technology to coax grapes off the vine into molded silicon rubber collection baskets - may herald a future of all-mechanized agriculture. "Oregon doesn't have the scale or the research to make an immediate leap," said Brent Searle, special assistant to the director of the Oregon Department of Agriculture. "But in farming, it's always taken a crisis to make big changes. "Necessity is the mother of invention."

More here



Immigration 'fuelling housing shortage' in Australia

Getting rid of Greenie-inspired red tape and restrictions would soon get more houses built but given the existing regulations, housing prices will be pushed up by immigration -- as they are in Britain and the USA

Rising numbers of overseas workers could significantly increase the pressure on Australian housing stocks, according to a new report out today. As many as 170,000 new homes would need to be built around Australia this financial year in order to satisfy underlying demand. But industry forecaster BIS Shrapnel predicts actual housing starts will slip a further 1 per cent to just 148,000.

In its latest publication of long-term building forecasts, the firm says that would be the fourth consecutive year in which demand outstrips supply. Part of that demand is being fuelled by immigration as Australia's employment boom and skills shortage attracts temporary workers from offshore. But BIS Shrapnel says many cities will struggle to accommodate them over the next few years. It says the nationwide shortage of housing is now translating into rapid rent rises.

Last week, the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling and the Housing Industry Association (HIA) predicted the number of households suffering rent stress would jump to 750,000 by the end of the decade.

Source





22 July, 2007

Irish trying to kick out gypsies

Immigration papers have been served on the Roma family who are camped at the M50 roundabout in Dublin's Ballymun. Members of the Garda National Immigration Bureau, under the direction of the Superintendent at Santry, served the documents in the early hours of this morning. Similar documents were also served at a derelict house on the Old Swords Road. A total of 86 persons were presented with these documents, in accordance with immigration law. No arrests were made during the operation.

As the family are Romanian nationals, they can legally reside here, but not work without a permit. The documents state the intention of the Justice Minister Brian Lenihan to serve a removal order under EU law on them, on public health and financial grounds. They have 15 days to make representations to him on the issue.

Source



Sheriff unveils migrant hotline

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Friday launched a hotline for Valley residents to report information about undocumented immigrants. Details of exactly how the hotline will work and which tips will merit further investigation have not been ironed out. Officials say they aren't sure how many and what types of calls will come in. Still, Arpaio said deputies would investigate people only if they had "probable cause." "We want evidence," Arpaio said. "We're not going to go on a street corner and round up a group of people because they look like they're from a foreign country."

The hotline is part of an expanded immigration enforcement plan Arpaio unveiled. In another part, about 160 sheriff's deputies, cross-trained to enforce immigration law, will saturate Valley cities and roadways to find and arrest those who are here illegally, the sheriff said. The deputies now have broad powers not only to question people about their immigration status during traffic stops, but also if they commit even a minor infraction, such as littering. Arpaio stressed that people would only be questioned if deputies came across them "in the course of our duties."

The efforts come as Arizona officials have been trying to crack down on illegal immigration and on the heels of a new state law that would fine and threaten the licenses of businesses that knowingly employ undocumented workers. Experts say the federal government's failure to pass immigration reform is spurring more local governments to act on their own. Payson's Town Council, for example, passed an ordinance in April that requires all its businesses to sign an affidavit stating that all employees are legal residents. Business owners who refuse to sign the affidavit won't receive a license, said Payson Mayor Bob Edwards.

In the Valley, members of the Phoenix Police Department and the Arizona Department of Public Safety also have completed Immigration and Customs Enforcement training and can act as federal officers. But those agencies say the intent is to break up human- and drug-smuggling rings and other border-related crime groups.

Arpaio began arresting undocumented immigrants in March 2006, targeting them under a controversial interpretation of the state's anti-human-smuggling laws. Since then, Arpaio has been expanding his efforts to turn the Sheriff's Office into "a full-fledged anti-immigration agency." On Monday, 64 ICE agents will be deputized. "We want to go further," Arpaio said. "It's important to put the resources into this fight if you're serious about it."

The hotline is believed to be the first of its kind in the country, and some say it is troubling. Although the hotline is supposed to field calls about criminal activity, like loads of immigrants being smuggled into the Valley, some critics said Friday they fear it opens the possibility that neighbors, former lovers and others also could turn each other in. Critics also wondered if it could lead to racial profiling. "It makes every citizen, by proxy, an immigration cop," said Muzaffar Chishti, director of the Migration Policy Institute's Office at New York University School of Law. "This hard-line (plan) is a direct line on vigilantism," he said.

Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox said she approves of Arpaio's enforcement plan, but not the hotline. "I think a lot of innocent people will get caught up in this, just because their skin's brown," Wilcox said. "We just need to make sure we're not violating people's civil rights, or get into racial profiling. The county may open itself up to a lot of liabilities."

Arpaio insisted deputies would not engage in racial profiling but would target those contacted during routine patrols and investigations. He said he isn't encouraging people to turn in their neighbor's nanny, although he said, "Neighbors should be calling in when they see a crime." The line is an effort to get residents "to join the fight," he said. "We can't do it by ourselves." County Supervisor Don Stapley said Arpaio's plan is necessary to help reduce the flow of undocumented immigrants and the costs on local governments. The plan, he said, could become a model for other counties. "More power to him, I hope it helps," Stapley said.

Source





21 July, 2007

ICE arrests more than 270 in Dallas-Fort Worth area this week

Federal agents arrested 274 illegal immigrants over five days during raids in Dallas, Fort Worth and surrounding suburbs, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced Friday. Authorities took into custody 233 men, 28 women and 13 children, said ICE spokesman Carl Rusnok.

The operation, which began Monday and ended Friday, yielded illegal immigrants, people wanted by immigration authorities and immigrants with criminal records. Of the 274 arrested, 99 had criminal convictions, ICE said. "These operations are a critical element in removing threats to public safety," said Nuria T. Prendes, field office director for ICE's Office of Detention and Removal Operations.

Most of the arrests happened at homes. Some of those taken into custody weren't the targets of the operation but they were in the homes and were found to be in the country illegally, Prendes said. "Many of these individuals are in the wrong place at the wrong time, many live together," she said.

Police in Dallas, Irving, Fort Worth, Arlington, Farmers Branch, Carrollton and Blue Mound along with the Dallas County constable, helped agents in the operation, according to an ICE statement. Authorities detained people from Colombia, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nigeria, Romania and South Korea. Half of the 274 arrested have already been returned to Mexico, and the others were awaiting deportation proceedings, ICE said.

The minors taken into custody could have left voluntarily if they were from Mexico or released to a guardian, ICE officials said. Unaccompanied minors would be turned over to the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement. ICE has two fugitive apprehension teams in the area that regularly target people who can be deported, officials said.

Source



Cuban emigration held up by Cuba

Don't blame the United States for slowing down the processing of U.S. visas for Cubans. Cuba could easily speed things up if it stops blocking the U.S. Interests Section in Havana from getting the resources it needs, says the Miami Herald. Cuba also complains that the United States risks violating the 1994 U.S.-Cuba migration accords which oblige the United States to grant Cubans at least 20,000 U.S. visas a year. In reality:

* The United States acknowledges that it won't meet the 20,000 target, but the problem is that Cuba has blocked the U.S. Interests Section from bringing in personnel and materials for upgrading visa facilities.

* Cuba also refuses to allow the section to hire local replacements for 47 open positions.

This isn't the first time the Interests Section has fallen behind:

* In 1999 only 14,000 visas were issued; almost 28,000 visas issued in 2001 made up for the shortfall.

* Meanwhile, Cuba violates the accords all the time -- it does so by denying exit permits to hundreds of Cubans granted U.S. visas.

* Moreover, since 1998 Cuba has refused to allow the Interests Section to seek new applicants via a lottery; this means the section wastes time on outdated petitions, blocking necessary personnel is another violation.

But ultimately it is in the best interests of both countries to uphold the accords, says the Herald:

* For the United States, it is imperative to encourage orderly immigration and discourage dangerous sea crossings that have taken so many lives.

* Cuba benefits by having an escape valve for large numbers of disaffected Cubans who might otherwise stir social unrest.

* Those Cubans have been waiting for signs of positive change for a year since Fidel Castro became ill; under the current government, there is little hope that change will come.

Source





20 July, 2007

Governor Napolitano signs employer sanctions bill

If she wanted any political future in Arizona, she had to. She has already started to undercut it, though

Governor Janet Napolitano (D-Ariz) has signed the Legal Arizona Workers Act (HB 2779), a new law that imposes penalties on employers who hire illegal immigrants. At the same time, Napolitano announced she is willing to call for a special session of the Arizona State Legislature to repair defects in the bill.

In a written statement accompanying the bill, the Governor, who signed the bill on July 2, 2007, said she took the tandem action because Congress had failed miserably. She wrote, "Immigration is a federal responsibility, but I signed HB 2779 because it is now abundantly clear that Congress finds itself incapable of coping with the comprehensive immigration reforms our country needs. I signed it, too, out of the realization that the flow of illegal immigration into our state is due to the constant demand of some employers for cheap, undocumented labor."

According to the statement, HB 2779 takes the most aggressive action in the country against employers who knowingly or intentionally hire undocumented workers. The law requires employers to verify that the individuals they employ are present in the country legally. Knowing or intentional failure to do so will cause the employer's business licenses to be suspended. A second offense can result in the "business death penalty" - permanent revocation of an employer's licenses to do business in Arizona.

Yet, said Napolitano, the bill also contains flaws that must be addressed: (1) the bill does not adequately protect critical infrastructure, like hospitals, nursing homes and power plants, if they are shut down because of a single wrongful employment decision; (2) the revocation provision is overbroad, causing a business with multiple locations to face shutdown of its entire operation based on an infraction that occurred at only one location; (3) the bill is underfunded (only $100,000 has been appropriated by the Attorney General's office for an entirely new database to investigate complaints statewide and only $70,000 has been appropriated to notify employers of the change in the law); (4) there is no express provision protecting Arizona citizens or legal residents from discrimination under the terms of the bill; and (5) the bill cites the wrong portion of a federal law.

The bill's provisions do not take effect until January of 2008, allowing ample time for the state legislature to pass the necessary improvements to the law. Governor Napolitano is willing to call for the special session to occur sometime in the fall, but did not set the specific date until she has had the opportunity to consult with legislative leaders. The purpose of the special session will be clear: to correct and clarify the law, not to undercut it.

Along with signing HB 2779, the Governor also sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev), and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal). In it, she asks for improvements to the federal government's Basic Pilot program, which helps employers verify new employees' work eligibility. Napolitano has also directed her own Departments of Homeland Security and Public Safety to intensify efforts related to intercepting fraudulent documents used in the business of illegal immigration and to conduct training with businesses to aid them in detecting fraudulent documents.

Finally, in a letter to the Special Agent in Charge for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Arizona, the Governor asked that the state be notified when ICE officers encounter evidence of employers knowingly or intentionally employing illegal immigrants.

Source



British Labor Party politician speaks for his voters

And gets condemned for it

A MERSEYSIDE Labour MP has broken ranks by becoming the first in the country to blame the failed bomb attacks in London and Glasgow on rising immigration into Britain. Outspoken Birkenhead member Frank Field said his constituents were angry when the Government told them to be "vigilant" following last month's aborted terror scares. He said the reality was that ministers had failed to be vigilant by letting in so many immigrants, some of whom had turned to terrorism,

The manager of Liverpool's Asylum Link charity last night branded Mr Field's comments as irresponsible and potentially dangerous, as did Adam Kelwick, a Muslim-based chaplain in Wavertree. And the head of Merseyside police's community relations team said multi-ethnic and faith groups across the region had been overwhelmingly receptive to pleas for vigilance.

Superintendent Rowland Moore described any comments which undermined public reassurance in the wake of the failed London and Glasgow attacks as "not helpful". During a Commons debate, Mr Field said: "In the statements of relief that the last bombing episode had not wrought the evil on innocent people that had been intended, Cabinet ministers told us to be vigilant. "The report back from my constituents in Birkenhead market was: `What a damned cheek that they should lecture us on vigilance!' "If the political class had been a little more vigilant in the past, and responded to their regular doubts and worries about the level of immigration, we might not, they said, be listening to such statements."

Some of the suspects arrested after bombs failed to go off in London city centre and at Glasgow Airport grew up in Iraq, Jordan, India and elsewhere. During the debate on immigration, Mr Field went on to say that the Home Secretary's failure to track people leaving Britain to go to terror camps abroad would "haunt her as time goes on". And he attacked the decision to grant free movement to workers from the poorer countries of Eastern Europe, when their living standards were so much lower. He warned: "The future of the European Union is an unsure one if we continue blindly to turn our eyes away from what is now a mass movement of people within Europe."

In response, immigration minister Liam Byrne accepted there was a "social impact" as well as an economic one and pointed to the new points-based work permit system that was being brought in. He also highlighted new government systems that he said would track the majority of migrants by 2009.

Last night, Adam Kelwick, a Muslim chaplain based in Wavertree, said: "To use this kind of language is irresponsible. "He's obviously got an agenda to push, targeting asylum-seekers and immigrants who themselves are extremely vulnerable. "They would far rather live in their own countries, if there was no interference with their daily lives.

Superintendent Rowland Moore, who heads Merseyside police's community relations team, said in response to Mr Field's recounting of his constituents' views: "That may be what he's being told, but that is certainly not what we have been hearing on the ground. "The community has been very receptive to the message of vigilance - and that includes the white population of the city." Ewan Roberts, centre manager of Liverpool's Asylum Link charity, said: "I'd criticise anyone who uses emotive language and makes sweeping statements like this. "It is irresponsible and it could be dangerous."

Source





19 July, 2007

Waukegan shows the way with immigrant lawbreakers

Waukegan is in the Chicago area

Some Waukegan residents fear a controversial immigration program that is moving forward will erode trust in police and result in racial profiling. On Monday night, the Waukegan City Council voted to move forward with a controversial immigration program that gives police more teeth when it comes to enforcing the law. As CBS 2's Kristyn Hartman reports, despite the emotion of the evening, Waukegan aldermen in an 8 to 2 vote decided not to reconsider a decision in June to go forward with an application with a special program that would train police officers to enforce immigration law.

The program, known as 287 (g), has caused so much controversy in Waukegan that police with riot gear were ready to manage a crowd of hundreds. Many of them were protesters trying to convince the council to see things their way - both for and against. The population of Waukegan is 44 percent Latino.

Once trained, officers could identify, process and detain immigration offenders they come across on the job. Waukegan police say if they are selected, this program will give them the power to get rid of rapists and murderers who are living in their community illegally. But hundreds of protesters fear that power will be abused.

"I don't think they should have done this because there's a lot of families here that have been here for a while and they have not done no harm," said Elizabeth Gonzales, who opposes the program. But others said those who break the law should be held accountable, and the new law could ensure that happens. "The people that are here illegally committing crimes should be deported," said Alice Berczy. "At the bare minimum we need to be able to deport people who've committed crimes," said Brian Jacobsen, who favors 287 (g). "If the argument is that we don't want to deport rapists and murderers that is crazy to me."

A news conference, prayer vigil and rally before the vote drew hundreds of people opposed to Waukegan joining the federal program. About 50 supporters of the measure -- some singing songs like "God Bless America" through bullhorns -- demonstrated across the street.

Police Chief William Biang said being part of the program would streamline the deportation process and cut down on bureaucratic hurdles. "It has nothing to do with race," Biang said. "This has to do with getting criminals out of Waukegan."...

There was also strong debate in the City Council meeting. "I am opposed to 287 (g)," said Waukegan Alderman Tony Figueroa. That remark generated applause, which he asked spectators to stop. But Ald. John Balen said, "If we don't obey the law, then we really don't have a country."

Waukegan Mayor Richard Hyde and other officials have said the program would allow officers to start deportation proceedings for both legal and illegal immigrants convicted of crimes such as murder, rape and drug-related felonies. Hyde has said the city won't participate in raids on employers or community groups, but that the deportation procedures would apply to offenders police encounter on the job. If the federal government approves the application, two officers would get the special immigration training. ICE currently has such agreements with law enforcement agencies across the country, including the Alabama Department of Public Safety/State Police and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. About 75 applications from law enforcement agencies are pending, an immigration spokesman has said.

Source



If you can't do the time, don't do the crime

The heading above is an old motto among British criminals that criminals of immigrant origin in America may now be learning. I think that most Americans would see the deportation of 600,000 criminals as one of the few bright spots in immigration law enforcement

U.S. laws that order the deportation of legal immigrants found guilty of a criminal offense are a violation of human rights and have resulted in thousands of families being separated, New York-based Human Rights Watch said on Wednesday. Following changes to U.S. immigration law in 1996 authorities have deported more than 670,000 immigrants from the United States for criminal offenses, leaving behind an estimated 1.6 million spouses and children, the report said.

The study said deportees included immigrants who had come to the United States as children and who had committed crimes such as narcotics possession and petty shoplifting. "It may be reasonable, for example, to deport a newcomer to the U.S. who engages in terrible crimes after he has served his sentence. But many immigrants who are being deported from the United States are a far cry from the worst and most violent offenders," the report said.

The 88-page report said that almost two thirds of the deportees were sent home following conviction for non-violent offenses, the remainder were expelled after being found guilty of violent and other unspecified crimes. Among those deported was a 52-year-old U.S. military veteran convicted of possessing narcotics, who had lived in the United States for four decades and raised four sons. Other cases included a father of three U.S.-born children convicted of breaking into a car and stealing a bottle of eye drops from a drug store.

The study said mandatory deportations contradicted human rights law which requires a fair hearing in which family ties and other connections to an immigrant's host country are weighed against a country's interest in deporting him. "Unfortunately, that is precisely what U.S. immigration law fails to do -- it gives no opportunity to immigration judges to balance the individual's crime against his or her family relationships, other connections to the U.S. such as military service or economic ties, or fear of persecution in the country of origin," the report said. Prior to 1997, immigrants who committed a crime were allowed to go before an immigration judge who could exercise discretion in imposing penalties.

Source





18 July, 2007

New Zealand: Study finds Maori views on immigration hardening

Maori attitudes towards immigrants have hardened in recent years while New Zealanders generally are ambivalent about the impact of immigration, according to a just-published report. The study saw 750 people questioned last year and 1100 questioned in 2003, on a wide range of issues relating to immigration. It provides an overview of attitude trends, says one of its authors Sociology Professor Paul Spoonley. Although there was no dramatic change in results between the 2003 and 2006 reports, the most significant shift was a hardening of Maori attitudes regarding immigration over the three-year period.

This reflected Maori perceptions that New Zealand culture was being eroded by the effects of immigration, says Professor Spoonley, Regional Director and Research Director College of Humanities and Social Sciences at Massey in Auckland. "Maori are more likely to agree than non-Maori that Chinese, other Asians and Pacific peoples take jobs away from people who were born in New Zealand," the report says. Maori attitudes were consistent with their "protection of interests in maintaining a bicultural society, and the assertion of their rights under the Treaty of Waitangi; and their recognition of employment opportunities that might be compromised by ongoing migration". Interestingly, Maori were much less likely than non-Maori to agree that Chinese, other Asian or Pacific peoples increase crime rates, the survey found.

But New Zealanders generally were "still quite ambivalent about immigrants", says Professor Spoonley. "We like the (diverse) food and we like what they're doing to our economy by contributing skills and capital. "But New Zealanders also see immigrants as sticking together rather than integrating, and that is seen as a negative thing."

Aucklanders, young people and those without tertiary qualifications tended to be less positive towards immigrants, the report also said. "Attitudes to immigrants and various aspects of immigration are usually (but not always) more negative among Aucklanders than among other New Zealanders, though perhaps less so than might be expected given the greater impact immigration has had on Auckland compared to the rest of the country," the report says.

The 2006 census showed that Asians were the fastest-growing ethnic group - up 9.2 per cent to 354,552 since the 2001 census. Two-thirds of the Asian population live in Auckland, where almost one in five people identify with one or more Asian ethnic groups, the highest proportion nationally. More than a third of people living in Auckland were born overseas, compared with Southland, where around one in 13 people were born overseas. More New Zealanders in 2006 than 2003 saw value in having immigrants fill job shortages, but they also wanted more government consultation with the public on immigration matters, the report says.

Source



A faint twitch of decency and rationality from the constipated U.S. immigration bureaucracy

The immigration agency announced Tuesday that public opinion had caused it to reverse an earlier government decision that prevented thousands of legal immigrants from obtaining work-based permanent visas. On June 12, the State Department encouraged highly skilled immigrants here on temporary employment visas to apply for permanent employment visas, known as green cards, to become permanent residents. The department said the visas would be available starting July 2. But on that date, the department announced that all available employment-based visas had been distributed for the year.

On Tuesday, however, the immigration agency, Citizenship and Immigration Services, said it would accept applications for these visas if they were filed by Aug. 17. "The public reaction to the July 2 announcement made it clear that the federal government's management of this process needs further review," Emilio T. Gonzalez, the agency's director, said in a statement. "I am committed to working with Congress and the State Department to implement a more efficient system in line with public expectations."

State Department officials have said the alert in June was meant to speed visa processing, to make sure no visas went unused. Both agencies have tried to reduce green-card application backlogs. Applicants for these employment visas are required to submit certified documents, among them employer sponsorship forms and federal certification that no American workers are available for their jobs, and must also undergo medical examinations. Many of them have a long work history in the United States.

The American Immigration Law Foundation, a group that advocates for immigrants' legal rights, said in a statement that it had prepared, and had been poised to file, a class-action lawsuit to oppose the government's July 2 decision. Bill Wright, a spokesman for the immigration agency, would not comment on whether the threat of litigation had prompted the agency's reversal.

Source



Australia: Visa laws 'unfair' to Muslims

The poor little precious petals are being asked to name their families. What an outrage!

NEW laws that demand Arabs seeking visa entry into Australia provide the names of their parents and grandfather hint at racial and religious profiling, according to a leading Islamic group. "It would be pretty naive to think there is no religious profiling going on (with visa applicants), even if it's not officially recognised," said the Islamic Council of Victoria's spokesman, Waleed Aly.

Australian security agencies had asked for the new regulations that require extra personal information from Arabic visa applicants to include the names of their parents and grandfather. Other visa applicants, including those from China and Russia, are also being required to provide additional information about the spelling of names and ancestral names before being granted entry to Australia.

The Federal Government has insisted there is no racial or religious profiling in Australia's immigration programs. Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews' spokeswoman said the changes would help in the proper identification of applicants and their character. "The question that has been included in the new form (about Arabic grandfathers) is designed to enable more accurate and higher-quality identification of visa applicants," she said.

But Mr Aly said his own experiences had shown him racial and religious characteristics were focused on by border officials. Mr Aly said despite random searches being conducted at Australian airports, he had become used to always being stopped and questioned, and that many Australian Muslims knew that they would come under special attention, especially at airports. "They disproportionately focus on people who are Muslim or who appear to be Muslim," he said.

All visa applicants aged 16 and older wanting to visit Australia must fill out a character assessment form, which identifies their siblings and parents. But regulations brought in this year require Arabic, Chinese and Russian visa applicants to provide extra detail. For Russian citizens they must include their patronymic or ancestral name, and Chinese applicants must provide their name in commercial code numbers, which relates to Chinese characters, and in English

Source





17 July, 2007

Australian immigration law used to detain suspect Muslim doctor

The Australian government said Monday it would detain a doctor accused of supporting the foiled car bomb attacks in London and Glasgow on immigration violations, overriding a magistrate's order granting him bail. Mohamed Haneef's work visa was canceled because the Indian doctor had "failed the character test," and he would be taken into immigration custody if he meets his bail conditions, Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews said. "I reasonably suspect that he has, or has had, an association with persons engaged in criminal activity, namely terrorism, in the U.K.," Andrews told reporters in Canberra, the national capital. "That's the basis on which I have made this decision."

Hours earlier, Queensland state Magistrate Jacqui Payne granted Haneef bail, saying there was no clear evidence he was involved in the car bomb plot. Police, acting on information from British investigators in the attack plot, arrested Haneef on July 2 as he tried to board a flight from the eastern city of Brisbane to India. Haneef, 27, was charged Saturday with providing support to a terrorist organization by giving his mobile phone SIM card to British suspects Sabeel and Kafeel Ahmed when he moved to Australia in July 2006. Haneef is a distant cousin of the Ahmed brothers and he shared a house with them in Liverpool before moving to Australia for a job at a hospital on Queensland state's Gold Coast.

Haneef's lawyer Stephen Keim has slammed the government's case as "extremely weak," saying his client only left the SIM card so his cousin could take advantage of a special deal on his mobile phone plan. Under Australian law, the government can withdraw a person's visa for a variety of reasons, including if the minister judges a person is not of good character. Magistrate Jacqui Payne set the bail for Haneef with several conditions, including staying away from international ports, checking in with police three times a week and putting up an $8,700 bond. Andrews said that if Haneef meets the bail conditions, immigration officials would step in before he can be freed and bring him to a detention facility in Sydney.

Haneef's lawyer Peter Russo said he would appeal the government's decision. "We will start the next battle. If that's the way they want to do it - bring it on," he told reporters outside the Brisbane jailhouse where Haneef has been held for two weeks. The move was criticized by Cameron Murphy, the secretary of the Australian Council for Civil Liberties. "The reason we have an independent court system is so these incredibly important decisions are made for the right reasons, and aren't subject to political interference," Murphy said. "It is not appropriate for the government to just keep him incarcerated because they don't like the decision of the magistrates court." Haneef's wife has maintained her husband is innocent and pleaded with authorities to help free him, Indian media reported Sunday.

Source



Attempt to stretch immigration law fails in NY

The husbands of women forced to abort a pregnancy, undergo involuntary sterilization or face persecution under China's coercive population control program do not automatically qualify for asylum in the United States, a federal appeals court ruled Monday. Judge Guido Calabresi said the ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan conflicts with a dozen other federal appeals courts, as well as the findings of the Board of Immigration Appeals and 10 years of decisions in immigration cases.

A law adopted in 1996 broadened the definition of a refugee eligible for asylum by including anyone who has resisted a coercive population-control program, or who has been forced to abort a pregnancy or undergo involuntary sterilization, or who was persecuted for failing to undergo those procedures.

In 1997 the Board of Immigration Appeals ruled that past persecution of a husband could be established for asylum purposes if his wife had been forced to have an abortion or undergo sterilization. In the majority opinion written by Judge Barrington Parker said the immigration board "lacks authority to adopt a policy that presumes that every person whose spouse was subjected to a forced abortion or sterilization has himself experienced persecution based on political opinion."

Source



Some comments from Muslim liberals on Muslim immigration

Kurdish Journalist Tariq Hemo: The Western Countries Are Reaping the Harvest of Overly Liberal Immigration Policies

In a July 5 article on the liberal Elaph website, Tariq Hemo, a Kurdish journalist living in Germany, criticized Europe's immigration policies for being too liberal: ".The Western countries are currently reaping, in these terrorists, what they sowed when they flung their doors open wide to every malevolent fundamentalist and failed in putting in place a mechanism for managing and controlling immigration in an appropriate manner.

"The West's generosity in allowing the organizations of political Islam to penetrate into Islamic societies [in Europe], spread among their youth, and enlist them in order to achieve their own ends and realize their agendas, was a mistake, and was the prelude that led to the appearance of these disastrous consequences now. He who sows the wind reaps the storm.

"The forces of political Islam that were chased out of the East. have control over a wide swath of Islamic societies in Europe. Things that are forbidden and are lines that cannot be crossed in Arab countries, and lead to the one who says them. being [kicked out] way beyond the sun, are permitted here in the West: fiery sermons and takfiri pamphlets, meetings that openly discuss overturning governments and hanging the rulers, the conditions of carrying out the death penalty against an apostate, and imposing the jizya [poll-tax] on the dhimmis.

"[Religious] reform and putting things right is a great and serious task, and the Arabs and Muslims cannot undertake this alone. It is necessary that help be given to all of the liberal reformist forces in the Arab and Islamic worlds in order for this project to succeed."

Khudayr Taher: Europe and America Should Deport All Muslims - Including Myself

Khudayr Taher, an Iraqi Shi'ite writer living in the U.S. and a regular contributor to the liberal Elaph website, had a quite illiberal suggestion - he asked why Europe and America shouldn't deport their Muslim populations. He wrote: "Countries have the right to defend themselves and assure their citizens' safety from terrorism. Likewise, it is clear that the source of the terrorist crimes in Europe and America is the Muslims who live in these countries.

"The security services cannot know people's intentions and sort out who is the noble immigrant and who is a terrorist criminal. [But] wherever there are Muslims, their presence has produced crimes of terrorism and murder. "Among those Muslims in Europe and America who do not practice terrorism, most of them do not have loyalty and sincere attachment to these countries that have offered them all of the means of life in dignity - housing, studies, work, and citizenship.

"The legitimate question is this: Since the security services cannot sort out the good immigrant from the bad terrorist. why don't these countries deport all Muslims, of all races, from Europe and America, and [thus] find rest from the danger of terrorism, and protect their peoples? "I, as an Arab Muslim immigrant, sincerely call on the countries of Europe and America to deport all Muslims from their territories - including myself, despite my love and my sincere attachment to the U.S."

Source





16 July, 2007

Britain's terrorist immigrants

The government faces new embarrassment over Britain’s porous borders with the revelation that one in four terrorist suspects arrested in Britain is an asylum seeker. Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, there have been more than 1,100 arrests under antiterrorism legislation. While some of the most serious threats come from Al-Qaeda supporters born in the UK, there is new evidence of many suspects exploiting loopholes in the country’s immigration laws. It was confirmed last week that Muktar Said Ibrahim, one of the bombers involved in the failed suicide attacks of July 21, 2005, was given a passport even though he had convictions for indecent assault and robbery. Gordon Brown has said an applicant in similar circumstances would not now be granted citizenship.

A Home Office analysis of those arrested under antiterrorism laws from 2001 to 2005 found that almost a quarter – 24%, or 232 out of 963 – had previously applied for asylum. This figure includes failed asylum seekers who should have been removed from the country.

Omar Altimimi, 37, who was jailed for nine years this month at Manchester Crown Court for hoarding computer files on jihadi terrors, illustrates the ease with which Al-Qaeda supporters have been able to remain in the country and fund their activities using Britain’s often chaotic asylum system. Altimimi, a father of three who settled in Bolton, Greater Manchester, used the name Abou Hawas when he first arrived in the country, claiming he was an Iraqi fleeing persecution. In reality, he had come from the Netherlands where he had shared a flat with other extremists. When Altimimi’s asylum application was rejected, he should have been removed from the country. Instead he simply adopted another name. Over a six-year period he was given pay-outs from the National Asylum Support Service and other agencies of more than 100,000 pounds. This income helped support him as he spent hours at his computer, collating material on bomb making and identifying possible targets.

Susan Williams, the leader of Trafford council in Manchester and prospective Conservative candidate for Bolton West, said: “How many more terror sleepers are the British taxpayer funding? It is time we had a full, independent investigation into this appalling situation.”

The estimated backlog of 400,000 failed asylum seekers who have not been removed from the country is said by opposition MPs to be one in a series of systemic failings that undermine the security of Britain’s borders. They complain that while Tony Blair and now Gordon Brown have pledged tough action, not enough has been done. There is still no comprehensive system for checking the identities of people leaving the country. The lax regime was highlighted when Hussain Osman, one of the July 21 bombers, left the country undetected after the failed attacks.

The government has trumpeted the forthcoming introduction of a new electronic system– e-borders – to log all entries and exits. But the programme has been hampered by technical difficulties and it is unlikely to be fully running until 2014.

David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said that while he would welcome any “calm and effective” measures to improve border controls, the government should have acted more quickly to monitor and check people entering and leaving the country. “Our porous borders have got worse under this government,” he said. “It is a straightforward matter for people with criminal or terrorist intent to cross our borders in both directions with almost no control on them.”

Source



Do immigration amnesties work?

A reasonably informative comment from the BBC

A think-tank is calling for an amnesty on illegal immigrants in the UK - with claims that it would bring in 1bn pounds in tax revenue. But what's the record of places where an amnesty has been attempted?

Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal and Holland are among the European countries that have had amnesties in recent years - but the experiences of 20 such "regularisation" exercises have raised as many questions as they have answered. In Spain, there have been five separate amnesties since 1991 - in successive attempts to tax and control the large numbers of illegal workers that have entered the country from North Africa and South America. The initial ruling gave the right to stay to 135,000 illegal residents - but since then a further 1.2m people have been allowed to stay in subsequent amnesties. To be given a legal right to remain, these illegal immigrants had to show that they had lived in the country for more than six months, could support themselves in work and had no criminal records.

Italy has allowed more than 1.5m illegal workers to stay since the 1980s. In its most recent amnesty, in 2006, it gave permits to a further 180,000 people - but the number of applicants was more than 500,000, with no sign that the illegal economy was coming under control. In the United States, longstanding plans to grant legal status to illegal workers have been derailed - leaving 12m people in the shadows. In Malaysia, there was a recent amnesty of sorts, allowing illegal workers to leave the country without punishment - after which anyone remaining could face imprisonment.

From the European experience, the figures suggest that granting an amnesty - or not granting an amnesty - seem to make little difference to the pattern of migrants seeking work, legal or otherwise. What it does reveal is how difficult it is for a modern, globalised economy to put a fence around itself - when there is a highly-mobile workforce and demand for cheap labour.

There might be political pressure for clampdowns on illegal immigration, but putting it into practice is less than straightforward. The IPPR think-tank, which has suggested a amnesty, says it would take three decades to process the deportation of the UK's estimated 500,000 illegal workers - at a cost of 11,000 pounds per person. Such a huge operation - removing almost one in a hundred of the population - is not feasible, says the think-tank. Instead these workers should be taxed - and in return receive the right to remain and the protection of safer working conditions.

But opponents, such as campaign group Migrationwatch, argue that amnesties provide an incentive for further illegal immigration. "It is wrong in principle to reward illegal behaviour," says Migrationwatch. It also argues that "the problems surrounding social housing would be massively exacerbated if the government were to give an amnesty to illegal immigrants".

Both the Labour government and Conservative opposition are unsympathetic to amnesties - arguing they could provide an incentive for further waves of migrants. But there are MPs in both parties that have pushed for a legal status for such "irregular migrants". Labour deputy leadership contender Jon Cruddas and Conservative MP John Bercow both signed a recent early day motion in the House of Commons calling for a two-year work permit for people who had already been working in the UK for four years or more.

The Strangers into Citizens campaign, supported by trade unions and churches, wants to create a "pathway" for illegal immigrants to gain citizenship - giving workers a more dignified and secure future. Trade union leader Jack Dromey argued in a recent speech that there was growing support for a more pragmatic approach to resolving the large numbers of well-established workers who remained illegal. "The people of middle England will listen to new thinking on migration, they do understand that the current approach is failing and that the human costs are horrendous. They understand that the economic and moral case for an 'earned amnesty' for migrants is overwhelming," said Mr Dromey.

But there are deep political tensions over any attempt to resolve the situation of immigrants working illegally - with pressures over public services, housing and the possibility of attracting further illegal migrants.

Source





15 July, 2007

The NYT has found the boogeyman

The defeat of the amnesty bill was the result of a broad-based protest but Leftists like to find an evil boogeyman behind everything that thwarts them so the report from the NYT below focusing on just one group is the usual prescription

When a comprehensive immigration bill collapsed last month on the Senate floor, it was a victory for a small group that had been lobbying Congress for a decade to reduce the number of immigrants — legal and illegal — in the United States. The group, Numbers USA, tracked every twist and turn of the bill. Its members flooded the Senate with more than a million faxes, sent through the organization’s Web site. It supplied arguments and information to senators opposing the bill. “It was a David-and-Goliath struggle,” said Roy H. Beck, the president of Numbers USA, who had been preparing for this moment since 1996, when he wrote a book titled “The Case Against Immigration.”

Supporters of the bill included President Bush, the United States Chamber of Commerce, the high-tech industry, the Roman Catholic Church, many Hispanic organizations, farmers, restaurants, hotels and the construction industry. “The bill had support from the opinion elite in this country,” Mr. Beck said. “But we built a grass-roots army, consumed with passion for a cause, and used the power of the Internet to go around the elites and defeat a disastrous amnesty bill.”...

“Numbers USA initiated and turbocharged the populist revolt against the immigration reform package,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigrant advocacy group. “Roy Beck takes people who are upset about illegal immigration for different reasons, including hostility to Latino immigrants, and disciplines them so their message is based on policy rather than race-based arguments or xenophobia.” Representative Brian P. Bilbray, Republican of California and chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus, said, “We’re involved in weekly discussions with Numbers USA and other immigration-control groups as part of a team effort.”

Numbers USA had fewer than 50,000 members at the end of 2004, but now counts more than 447,000, with an increase of 83 percent since January alone. Turning to the next phase of the debate, those members will push for enforcement of existing laws and new measures to curb the employment of illegal immigrants. “Our No. 1 legislative goal is to begin a system of mandatory workplace verification, to confirm that every employee is a United States citizen or an alien authorized to work in this country,” said Rosemary E. Jenks, director of government relations at Numbers USA.

The organization wants to reduce immigration — as Mr. Beck says in the subtitle of his book — for “moral, economic, social and environmental reasons.” He contends that immigrants and their children are driving population growth, which he says is gobbling up open space, causing urban sprawl and creating more traffic congestion. Moreover, Mr. Beck asserts that immigrants and temporary workers, by increasing the supply of labor, have depressed wages in industries from meatpacking to information technology. Numbers USA has worked most closely with conservative Republicans, but in recent weeks has built alliances with Democrats who share the concern.

Numbers USA keeps a scorecard showing every vote by every member of Congress on immigration-related issues since 1989. The group assigns a letter grade to each member. Lawmakers who received an A-plus were all Republicans and included Representatives J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois and Tom Tancredo of Colorado, a presidential candidate. The lowest grades — F-minuses — went to Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Representative Joe Baca of California, chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

Numbers USA objects to proposals that increase the number of legal or illegal immigrants. It steers clear of debates over the allocation of visas. “It does not matter to us whether a visa goes to a high-tech worker, a farm worker or the sibling of a U.S. citizen,” Mr. Beck said. Numbers USA is one of many organizations fostered by John H. Tanton, an ophthalmologist from Michigan who has also championed efforts to protect the environment, limit population growth [A Greenie!] and promote English as an official language....

Mr. Beck said Numbers USA had been independent of Dr. Tanton since 2002. On the group’s Web site, Mr. Beck cautions against “immigrant bashing” and says, “Even illegal aliens deserve humane treatment as they are detected, detained and deported.” In the fight over the Senate bill, Numbers USA had daily conference calls with conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation and the Eagle Forum.

For tax purposes, Numbers USA has two arms, an educational foundation and an advocacy group that lobbies Congress. Together, Mr. Beck said, they have a budget of $3 million this year, but will probably raise and spend $4.5 million. Mr. Beck said that in the past the group received about two-thirds of its money from foundations like the Colcom Foundation of Pittsburgh and the Weeden Foundation in New York. Many of these foundations have an interest in conservation.

Numbers USA has raised the rest of its money from individual contributors over the Internet. The group collects detailed information on its members — their ethnic background, politics, religious affiliations, occupations and concerns — so it can choose the most effective advocates on any particular issue. In a survey question on religion, the group said the information would be useful because many lawmakers were likely to respond better to people with “a very similar religious worldview.” “This is our citizen army,” Mr. Beck said, pointing to a map that showed members of his group in every Congressional district.

Source



Israel: Sheetrit eyes Law of Return

I hear that there are now Russian Orthodox churches in Israel so the minister has some grounds for believing that the system is being abused

Israel's new interior minister urged a major reform of immigration law. Meir Sheetrit, who took over the Interior Ministry this month as part of a Cabinet reshuffle by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said in a weekend newspaper interview that current Israeli immigration policies are too porous and thus threaten the country's Jewish majority.

"In the area of immigration, I will lead a revolution. We have reached the point of no return," Sheetrit told Yediot Acharonot. "I recommend that we hold a debate on the Law of Return and see what can be done with it. Today the law grants any grandchild of a Jew, even if he or she is not Jewish, the right to immigrate. We should give that some thought."

Sheetrit complained that the "great majority" of recent immigrants from the former Soviet Union are not Jewish under Orthodox law, and lay part of the blame at the feet of the government for ceding responsibility for aliya to semi-autonomous and pro-active groups like the Jewish Agency for Israel. "The starting position has to be not what these groups want, but what is right for the state," he said.

Sheetrit called for aspiring Israeli citizens to be screened for criminal records and said they should be required to demonstrate knowledge about the Jewish state. He also suggested that Israel stop working so hard to bring in immigrants. "If we build up the quality of life here, even Jews from wealthy nations will immigrate. I want to make Israel a country that it is good to live in, on whose doors many Jews will knock. We should not be pressuring Jews into coming," he said.

Source



Turks protest new German immigration law

Germany is cracking down on "family reunions". It is rather refreshing to see a polite protest coming from a Muslim nation. A letter from the President of Iran would no doubt have called Germany a "tumour" or some such

In letter to Berlin, President Sezer condemns new German immigration law. While Hurriyet's description of the new Germany Integration Policy as `racist' is receiving wide coverage in the German press, Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer has sent a letter to German President Koehler in which he says that the law "infringes on human rights." Hurriyet has obtained a copy of the letter, dated 12th July 2007.

"Your Excellency,

Nearly 3 million Turks currently live in your country. These people immigrated to Germany on the German Federal Republic's request. Their effort and determination throughout 40 years have made Germany what it is today. When we take a look, we can see that they have achieved important success in many areas in today's Germany.

The new immigration law infringes one of the most fundamental human rights, the right to have a family.... We are saddened by the fact that this law will especially affect migrants from Turkey. As many experts working in this field in Germany have also stated, the restrictive amendments made to the existing immigration law `are against civil rights'. We cannot cause these people, assets to both Germany and Turkey, to relinquish their hopes about the future.

I wholly believe you will reconsider the matters that have rightly caused scepticism and uneasiness within the Turkish community. The Republic of Turkey is ready to make the necessary contribution in the case of a reconsidering of the law.

My deepest respect,

Ahmet Necdet Sezer, President"

Source





14 July, 2007

The latest from CIS

1. 'Give Me the Tools': They have them -- so use them

EXCERPT: Unfortunately, instead of making the United States a less appealing destination for would-be illegal immigrants, the administration often seems to be offering enticements. For instance, the Treasury Department formally told banks in 2002 that they could accept for the purposes of opening accounts the Mexican government's ID for its nationals living outside of Mexico -- the matricula consular -- thus helping illegal aliens embed themselves in American society. Reversing this decision would be a simple technical matter, but it requires leadership.

That is the core of the problem. The Silent Amnesty is not a function of the impossibility of enforcement, or the overwhelming size of the problem, or the lack of needed tools. The Silent Amnesty is a choice made by the Bush administration, part of a strategy to make a formal amnesty inevitable by creating what the Israeli settler movement called ''facts on the ground.''

********

2. Picking up the pieces: Immigration reform failed -- now what?

EXCERPT: Using these and other methods, the president could set in motion a policy of attrition that over time would persuade a large part of the illegal population that it is time to leave. But there is little chance of this president doing anything of the kind; his chief immigration enforcement officer, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, signaled very clearly in the wake of the defeat of the Senate bill that the silent amnesty would continue: "We're going to say to the members of Congress who think they have a better way that they should produce legislation and pass legislation, which they have not done for the past two years."

But the ball is not in Congress' court. Most of the needed laws already exist - it's up to the president to start enforcing them.

********

3. International Students and Visiting Scholars: Trends, Barriers, and Implications for American Universities and U.S. Foreign Policy

EXCERPT: The latest statistics suggest that foreign student enrollment and exchange program participation remains very strong after a slight drop-off in recent years. However, the government agencies administering student and exchange visas still lack robust information and compliance systems that would help ensure program integrity, minimize the contribution to illegal immigration, and prevent the entry of terrorists, all of which are still severe problems. The exchange visitor programs represent an important form of public diplomacy that could play a key role in improving America's image worldwide and fostering greater international understanding of American values and institutions. They must be reoriented toward academic exchanges and public diplomacy goals rather than continue as de facto work programs that now serve mainly the narrow interests of program sponsors, decrease opportunities for American workers, and often spoil rather than enhance the view young foreign visitors have of America.

********

4. Immigration, Social Security, and the Labor Market

EXCERPT: Even the relatively tiny positive effect they currently have on SS and Medicare is partly due their inability to collect benefits. If legalized, they would represent a long-term drain because illegals overwhelming have little education, and thus have l