Illegal Immigration/Aliens

The US immigration system is so broken that it threatens the integrity and resilience of our democratic republic. What's more, the US government is the primary culprit in this debacle.

Let's keep these concepts in mind as we focus on resolving immigration's core issues:

• First, if you are in the US illegally, you are not an immigrant - you are an illegal alien. Immigrants intend to come to America to be Americans. Aliens intentions are to "cut in line" ahead of those seeking legal immigration status. This takes up social services and other opportunities that would otherwise go to legal immigrants and natural citizens.


• 12 million illegal aliens – the number most frequently bandied about – is equivalent to 10% of Mexico's population (15% of the Mexican workforce) living illegally in the United States. There is no way US taxpayers can or should sustain this burden.


• By a large and increasing percentage, Mexico is operated by illegal drug cartels. If this seems incredible, just hide and watch - or research news stories from the past several years. War-like conditions inevitably crop up in Mexican border towns every time there is a shake up in the Mexican drug hierarchy and law enforcement seems powerless to stop it.


• Drug cartels in Mexico and other South American nations are expanding their wealth and power by letting terrorist and other illegal smuggling operations capitalize on established drug distribution routes and networks in Mexico and the US. See here: http://www.house.gov/mccaul/pdf/Investigaions-Border-Report.pdf


• Although it seems counterintuitive - assuming a reinvigorated government effort to secure US borders since 9/11 - illegal entry into the US has actually increased by 40% since 9/11. Based on demographic statistics of those who are caught, an estimated 6% of this illicit traffic is from "countries of interest" – terrorist or terror-sponsoring nations. See here: http://www.house.gov/mccaul/pdf/Investigaions-Border-Report.pdf


• Illegal aliens are responsible for siphoning approximately $24 billion in cash each year off the US economy by wiring money outside the US. This money is gone; it does not get recirculated here from one retail merchant to another. In some Mexican states, these funds comprise a top economic resource, right up there with US tourism. What's worse, the federal banking system offers a special program to help non-english speaking people wire money to Mexico. “Directo a México” is a service mark of the Federal Reserve Banks in the United States and of the Banco de México. See here: http://www.frbservices.org/Retail/pdf/FedACHiMxManual.pdf


• By the way - when illegal aliens earn wages, what happens to tax withholding?


• If the worker is paid completely under the table (no withholding), that is tax evasion on the part of the worker and the employer - isn't it?


• If an employer withholds taxes, but pockets the cash, isn't that fraud, theft, or graft?


• If an employer withholds taxes and submits the funds to the Treasury Dept. - which has no valid account against which to apply the credit - and does not prosecute and seek to arrest the worker, isn't that fraud and governmental collusion in harboring illegal aliens?


• And, since we are in a "war on terror," and we are convinced that 6% of illegal aliens are from terrorist nations, isn't anyone who aids an illegal alien in entering or hiding in the US potentially guilty of treason?

Enough about the problems ...

Here's how to fix the broken US immigration system:

• Secure the US border. (Duh!) If we can't control our borders we will inevitably lose them, if only by the process of natural selection. It is incomprehensible that so many who have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution could so completely fail in what must be one of the top three priorities of any sovereign nation – securing the borders.
  
  This means all points of entry into the US - especially airports. Immigration officers have suggested that relatively few aliens cross a desert into the US compared with professed Disneyland visitors who obviously don't have the price of admission who then disappear into the streets permanently.



• Limit immigration visas into the US to 200,000 people per year. Yes, things are very bad for the working class in Mexico. Things are very bad in very many other places around the globe. Conditions in some countries are much worse than in Mexico. No matter how super his power, Uncle Sam cannot help everyone in the world who needs help; it is a mathematical impossibility. We used to grant about 178,000 immigrants entry into the US each year, plus a relatively low number of asylum seekers. In 1965, Congress inadvertently changed the law so that now about 1,000,000 people a year come into this country, changing our society's future dramatically and for the worse. See here:http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4094926727128068265&q=roy+beck&hl=en



• Decriminalize drugs in the US. To address the root of the US illegal immigration problem, we must eviscerate the power of the drug cartels in Mexico by decriminalizing drugs in their biggest market - the United States. This approach also features the virtue of elevating our own social consciousness. We must stop overflowing our prisons with troubled souls who self medicate while sustaining a lucrative market for the social predators who prey on addicts. The consequences of substance abuse will be most effectively handled where we treat drug abuse as a medical and educational issue.



• Revamp the immigration process to make it practical and accessible. By limiting immigration numbers to 200,000 people each year we can contain immigration to a manageable level. This protects a sustainable quality of life for all Americans - now and for generations to come.



• Make illegal immigration a felony offense. Currently, illegal entry into the US is a misdemeanor offense, carrying only minor penalties, although it often is the basis for deportation for people who are caught. A felony conviction carries substantial monetary penalties and can result in jail time. Also, a felony conviction can ban a person from future attempts to enter the U.S. See here: http://www.workpermit.com/



• Amend the Constitution to modernize the 14th Amendment. In part, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution says:
  

  All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

  This language was adopted at the end of the Civil War and should be updated so that citizenship is only conferred upon people born in the US if at least one of the baby's parents is already a US citizen or at least in the country legally.



• Enforce US laws. Those who say it is impossible to evict 12 million illegal aliens are about 20% correct.
  
  The other 80% of illegal aliens will leave the US on their own and at their own expense if we simply upgrade and enforce our laws, denying illegal aliens the lifestyle that attracted them to flee the drug cartels that are running the show in Mexico. We should penalize those who employ illegal aliens, starting with the largest offenders and progressively prosecuting anyone who aids and assists in the commission of this crime. This will quickly eliminate the condition that gave rise to our immigration problems and the problem will largely reverse itself.

The result of these edicts for the US will be:

• A lower crime rate, making our communities safer by dramatically reducing the number of terrorists and criminals who invade our society


• General economic improvement for all Americans will prevail through better wage distribution. When 8 million or more workers become unavailable for labor positions, people who perform demanding physical work will be offered better wages.


• Broadly reduced stress levels from eliminating a hugely divisive issue from public discourse

Two Ways To Defeat Militant Islam

In the mid-to-late 1900's, America's awareness of terrorism was largely restricted to reports of attacks by groups like Sinn Fein, whose object was to unite Ireland and Northern Ireland by force of violence. Under the terms of the Belfast Agreement of April 10, 1998, all parties involved committed to "exclusively peaceful and democratic means" to determine the future of Northern Ireland.

Good thing, too. Imagine what life would be like on the Emerald Isle today if the Irish Republican Army had remained committed to constant escalation of violence unto eternity or until the advent of the British crown's retreat.

Practitioner's of terrorism today want much more than political control over a few thousand square miles of territory. Furthermore, the prospect of nuclear weaponry becoming available to terrorists and terror-sponsoring nations becomes increasingly, alarmingly more likely as nuclear warheads evaporate from the control of former-Soviet nations and nuclear technology proliferates in the hands of political forces who have sworn to annihilate the US, Israel, and its allies.

Consequently, there is much more at risk today and far greater threat posed to the rest of the globe by the threat of Islamic terrorism than ever existed prior to the Belfast Agreement.

What's the problem?

Since militant Muslims cannot agree among themselves what they want, it's hard to nail down the limits of the threat of Islamic terrorism:

• Some want infidels out of the Holy Land. Even the term "infidel" is subjective. Literally, "non-believers," this could mean atheists or non-Muslims; it depends who you ask.


• Some militant Islamic activists seek the overthrow of Israel and the return of the Holy Land to the province of the Palestinian state.


• Other jihadists seek to do the will of Allah by bringing the entire globe under Islamic law ("sharia") by placing the Taliban in charge of the entire world.


• Still others want Sunni Muslims to annihilate Shia Muslims, or vice-versa.

So it's tough to get a handle on exactly how much of a problem militant Islam really is, but if it can be said that militant Islam collectively seeks any one thing, it is a return to the glory days of the 7th century - the period between the years 620 and 720 of the Common Era.

In that period, Muhammad established Islam and, over the next 100 years, his successors spread his political and spiritual messages. By 720, the Caliphate, a loose affiliation of sultanates forming an Islamic theocracy, had displaced the Greek-speaking Roman Empire which had previously engulfed the entire Mediterranean. In this period, the Byzantine Empire's boundaries were moved mostly to the North of the Mediterranean, while the Caliphate expanded from a single-community cult in the Arabian Peninsula to an empire stretching from what is today Lisbon Spain, across North Africa to India.

In that age of religious conquest (both Islamic and Christian), violent clashes of men were mostly a hand-to-hand affair, with state-of-the-art combat restricted to swords, spears, arrows, and the occasional catapult. Today's warfare technology features detached devastation on massive scales: rocket propelled, delayed ignition weapons and remote-controlled bombs ranging from improvised explosives devices to intercontinental nuclear warheads. So, today, military technology allows a very few hands to exact extensive death, injury and damage. Overwhelming manpower no longer guarantees military success and minority numbers are no longer a harbinger of defeat.

Now let's suppose one's religious beliefs confer earthly high regard and heavenly rewards in the afterlife on those who martyr themselves or slaughter unbelievers. With that dynamic thrown in, suddenly the threat becomes even more formidable because the shared mutual fear of death - or the desire to avoid it – among opposing forces is not only removed but reversed. If only a marginally well-equipped enemy is willing to sacrifice its own members (men and women in bomb vests; children clearing mine fields), or vanquish the enemy along with non-combatants, how does one negotiate diplomatically with such a value system?

In World War II, the concept of diplomacy with Kamikaze ("divine wind") pilots was unheard of, and for good reason. There is no known way to mediate peace with armed religious zealots who fervently believe in the rewards of martyrdom and the slaughter of infidels.

It seems unlikely that Islamic terrorism will suddenly lose its attraction for the jihadists. So it becomes incumbent on the rest of us to somehow persuade militant Islam permanently into the diplomatic arena under something equivalent to the Belfast Agreement. And the clock is ticking.

For a basic understanding of Islam and its more enraged factions, see: http://militantislam101.blogspot.com/

What's to be done?

Pragmaticite's royal prediction is that the era we live in today in will soon be seen as a major historical milestone - one way or the other – because there are only two ways to defeat Militant Islam. One is peaceful, but improbable. The other is impossible - under western culture's modern rules of engagement - but could be inevitable.

Assuming fate will not eventually find us all living under the global authority of the Taliban, one of two things must happen to end Islamic terrorism:

Method A. - Internal resolution.

Muslim leaders must denounce terrorism and repudiate those who seek to further their ideology by inflicting violence on innocent civilians.

So far, this approach has not enjoyed sufficient practice by Islamic leaders with any credibility among militant Islamic terrorists. Today it remains much easier to find film clips of organized mobs waving weapons over their heads, chanting "death to America!" than it is to find clips of Muslim peace marches denouncing terrorism.

Method B. - External resolution.

Historically, we cannot expect militant Islamic terrorists to agree to binding, strictly diplomatic negotiations toward an enduring peace (compromise with Satan is forbidden). Consequently, absent successful employment of Method A., forces in opposition to terrorism must adopt a more brutal and compelling strategy that will force terrorists to abandon their tactics. World War II rules of engagement, featuring massive bombing strikes and profound collateral damage could - at horrible human cost - possibly dissuade militant Muslims from their ambitions of terrorism for the glory of Allah.

If there is another attack in America on the order of the events of September 11, 2001, or if there is a nuclear terrorist event anywhere in the world, we may expect rapid, dramatic changes in the military rules of engagement in the "war on terror."

Anyone who desires to live a peaceful life independent of Islamic militants should press and hope for Muslim leaders to take a more assertive role in distinguishing themselves from those who subvert the Islamic faith to advance political agendas of global dominion.

To avoid the devolution of US military policy (and you thought that wasn't possible!) into a "fight fire with fire" or "let God sort 'em out" approach, your "Method A" task assignment is shown below. (Method B is an failsafe position involving lots of Tomhawk missles. It will kick in automatically if Method A becomes obviously ineffective.)

Contact all the Muslim leaders you can find and repeatedly urge them to conduct public peace demonstrations and denounce terrorism.