Immigration and Terrorism

For a while now I have meant to write a post on immigration and terrorism, specifically to refute the argument made by anti-immigration folks that cracking down on immigration is an important part of the war on terror.  Now, I tend to agree that we are too slow in kicking out visitors who commit crimes.  I've always thought in fact that if Mexico found itself send millions of productive workers to the US only to get back a stream of the small percentage who were thugs and criminals they might finally address the root causes of why their own country can't offer productive people any opportunity.

But the guard-the-border folks go further than this, arguing we must stop all immigration with troops and "minutemen" at the border as part of the effort to defend ourselves from terrorism.  I've always thought that this was a fabricated argument, since its so easy to prove that fear of terrorism is not their real motive for troops at the border (if it were, then why are all the troops going to the Mexican border - shouldn't the long stretches of empty land on the Canadian border be just as vulnerable to terrorists?  In fact, it is Canada and not Mexico where Islamic terrorist cells have been found in the last month).

Open and legal immigration would make finding illegal entry of terrorists much easier.  Right now, by pushing Mexican immigrants out into desert, rather than marked border crossings, one gives terrorists a very large haystack to hide in.  Terrorists with violent intent must somehow be sorted out from millions of perfectly peaceful immigrants looking for work.  Arizona Watch quotes James Valliant:

If every person who wanted into America in order to find work was legally
permitted into America, I'll bet they'd be happy to stop by the front gate, show
some i.d., get checked against a terrorist watch-list, etc. Only those with
criminal records, or reasons to flee justice, those with contagious diseases,
and, well"¦ terrorists would have any reason to "jump the gate" at all.

This would concentrate our resources on those who actually posed a threat to
the country. Thousands of border patrol agents would, then, not be going after
thousands "“ ultimately, accumulated millions "“ of people everyday, but just a
few hundred "“ ultimately, a few thousands. I, personally, prefer those odds when
it comes to catching terrorists and mass-murders.

  • Robin

    A Personal Letter

    How can an entire world allow a ruler to govern when that ruler is, and has been proven time and again to be, a liar? Surely if a lie is told that leads to the deaths of innocent civilians and solders, that lie must taken responsibility for, it is murder isn’t it? Bush is responsible and yet nobody is willing to enforce the law that would impeach this killer.

    The President of the United States is, among his other crimes, guilty of multiple murders all around the world, yet you, the people of the world, are so afraid of his power that you tolerate this criminal and allow him to continue on his murderous rampage unopposed.

    Have you forgotten that a liar is determined to maintain his lies, he lies to frighten you, he will say anything to keep you paralyzed with fear and thus maintain his control over you.

    To the peoples of other nations, do you really think that Bush is just the leader of the American people, he and his people live so far away from most of you, you seem to think that he is not your problem, think again. The President of the United States is your problem; he has defied your international agreements, murdered your people, stolen you natural resources and forced you into an illegal, immoral war.

    Through his deceitful lies, Bush has taken away your power and if you think he won’t enforce his stolen authority think about this again as well. You live on this globe as well, there is no where to run, Bush is a complete nut, he actually believes that the world was created in 7 days, he reads the bible as though he were still a child in Sunday School.

    The really scary thing that is never spoken of is that Bush wants to end your world and bring about the end of time, the fairy tale as it is written in the book of Revelations. He believes his version of Christianity is the only true religion and he is determined to prove that he is right.

    Bush doesn’t care how many children have to live in pain and disability, or die needlessly at the point of a gun. He will gleefully order their deaths to further his own evil ends, and your opinion is, to him, irrelevant. He doesn’t care about the misery and bloodshed, he wants it, he said as much when he came before the world and said to the terrorists “Bring it on”. Is that the diplomatic verbiage of a President or the shear stupidity of a mindless, immature, child?

    Look at his record thus far, Bush hasn’t been right about much of impotance and yet you, the people of planet earth, allow him ultimate power over life and death. The Earth is living on borrowed time and the way things are going, your children will suffer the consequence of shame as the try to repair the mess you leave for them. They will remember our time as we remember the time of the Nazis, we don’t ask, why did our parents allow Hitler to cause such misery, because we know that, at the time, they did not know, however the same is not true now, now we have the Internet, satellite television, cell phones, we have such technology in our time that it is virtually impossible to hide the terror of Bush. We are not like our parents, we know and we do nothing to stop the monster. We are either compliant murders along with Bush and his cronies or else we are not, and we speak out, how will your children remember you?

    I am already full of shame, I ran when I first realized the danger Bush posed even within the US. I will not deny the truth anymore though; I no longer care what happens to me, there is no point to the world if it is in darkness and unhappy. I simply do not want to leave this world knowing that I could, at least, have told the truth.

    Robin
    linksmasta@gmail.com

  • Frank Ch. Eigler

    Full and open immigration is a concept just as unlikely to be realized as an illegal alien voluntarily paying income taxes. So you might as well compare the more realistic notions of some *added* security on your southern and/or northern border versus *no* added security.

  • Rob

    I agree with the premise of the theory, but it might be too idealistic.
    While this can control the flow of people, it doesn't control the flow of ideas.
    Don't we face a change in our culture, as well? This could be good or bad.

    Obviously this country was built on the mixing of cultures, so there is good
    that comes. The people that came, came for the opportunity to be successful.
    But, with the good can come bad. Bad ideology in mass quantities
    could have a devastating effect on our culture. We wouldn't want tons
    of people coming here which are lazy. This is 180degrees different from the
    roots of our culture. For example, many European
    countries ban 'offensive' speech, which our 1st amendment protects.
    If enough immigrants came here, they can one day have enough votes to get
    a new amendment changing our law and values held as a society.

    Also, I fail to see the correlation between Robin's post and the topic at hand !?!?
    Find another forum where that post makes more sense to actually post.
    I'm not going to post a thesis about why I don't like chocolate chip cookies...

  • Robin

    I'm sorry, I'm not really clear on where my post would fit - by all means remove it if it offends you, that was never my intention...

    R

  • Erik

    Hey Robin Spam-A-Lot... Don't apologize if you don't mean it. It's not like you accidentally typed your huge essay and hit POST. If you have something you think is interesting, post it on your own blog and see if others read it. Most people who read this blog are independent thinkers and all you are doing is spreading meaningless tripe. So go run your mouth on your own site. Geez.

    If Bush is the Anti-Christ, he's sure doing a bang-up job of it with his 35% popularity ratings here and much much lower in the rest of the world, huh?
    Put some critical thought into your beliefs and you will see they are foolish. People thought the same thing about Clinton, that was ridiculous too, but he was actually popular and had a decent world-wide influence.
    I don't know what to think about the Anti-Christ, but I do know he is supposed to deceive and bring all people together... oh yeah... that sounds like Bush to me!
    Go hang out with your nutty friends, build us some tinfoil hats, we'll need them when Bush reaches his full power and takes over our brains! (If he hasn't already...)

  • Robin

    It is clear that you have a problem that is way too much for me to deal with so I’ll not bother you again. I would like you and your visitor to know that I sincerely am sorry if my post offends you however I cannot prove that to you.

    You seem to be self destructive, you get off on insulting others needlessly, a similar psychology to Bush, it seems to be the new American sickness. Your self destructiveness is evident in that you have succeeded in creating a vision of yourself as someone I will defiantly avoid in future, so, to me you only used to exist.

    You might try opening your mind to see that the past is repeating itself now, when a great civilization such as America (and I do believe that America is still great) is seldom overtaken from without until it has destroyed itself from within. Bush will see to that, I just wish he could confine his disparaging ways to America, where they seem to be acceptable.

    Self destructive people lose their sense of care for others, and so their devastation pervades everything they touch. How truly sad!

    I have deleted your blog from my favorites... I will not trouble you again…

    Good bye

    R

    PS I think there is an option to read posts before they are posted you may want to use this option if it is available in the blog you use.

  • Max Lybbert

    Robin, while I don't have any more authority on the matter than the next anonymous Internet poster, we don't want to run you out of town. I disagree with your original comment, but I don't feel a need to insulate myself from everybody I disagree with.

    /* PS I think there is an option to read posts before they are posted you may want to use this option if it is available in the blog you use.
    */

    If you were adressing our gracious host, you may be interested that he decided against this recently http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2006/05/comment_changes.html ).

  • Robin

    I do not normally continue an interaction with a poster who criticizes attacks or insult me. I must have been mistaken when I read “Robin Spam-A-Lot...”? Normally I would not expect this kind of talk between strangers, were this conducted between intimates it could possibly, at an extreme stretch, be passed off as, humor however I don’t know you from Adam and so you might understand my desire to terminate our association, I am not a masochist.

    You also said, “Don't apologize if you don't mean it.” Why on earth would I? I don’t hold out much hope for your having any depth of communication if you are under the false assumption that you can read a strangers motives. Believe me when I say, that in my case, your attempt failed you, I never waste words making statements I do not mean, what benefit would there be for anyone in that except of course to harm the other. There is enough pain in the world already without my adding to the pot.

    Then there was, “Most people who read this blog are independent thinkers and all you are doing is spreading meaningless tripe.” Is it your opinion that only some posts have value? Are all long posts “meaningless tripe” and how on earth do you justify your statement as anything but an attack on me?

    ”So go run your mouth on your own site. Geez.” This isn’t an attempt to convince me that in your opinion I am unwelcome here? It sure feels that way to me. Your post goes on to put me down etc. etc. but I am willing to be completely wrong about my assessment. After all you are the only one in the universe who can ever really know what your intent was when you wrote your reply.

    I would just say to you though, that, you did not give me any reason to want further contact with you, in fact I interpreted your recent postings as hostile and you either wanted me off the site, or you were looking for a conflict as do a lot of posters on the blog circuit.
    You might try looking for what is good and worthwhile about those you meet online, text is a flimsy means of communication at the best of times, it is never truly representative of the real person’s character and if the persons creative spirit is more abstract, unless he is educated in the skill of writing, it has been my experience that these people find it difficult to share through the more concrete medium of text. I guess I’m saying, give people a break before you lunge in with ambiguous statements, you might find you make a lot more real friends.

    R

  • Max Lybbert

    Robin, while I'm not the person who originally responded to your post on President Bush, I must admit that I easily could have written several of those responses, because I had similar thoughts (although I do try to be more civil).

    /* I must have been mistaken when I read “Robin Spam-A-Lot...”?
    */

    I understood this to be a reference to the fact that your original comment was off-topic. There's no denying that the comment was off-topic. I don't want to run you out of town, although I think we can have a better discussion if we stay on topic. That is, I am very interested in your opinions on immigration and terrorism, but I'm not so interested in reading a pages long essay on why President Bush is the worst President ever.

    /* ”So go run your mouth on your own site. Geez.” This isn’t an attempt to convince me that in your opinion I am unwelcome here?
    */

    This is actually one of the benefits of easy access to blogs (although the wording could have been improved). If you believe you have enough to say about President Bush's shortcomings, sign up for a free blog at blogger or typepad and start writing it. You'll magically attract people interested in your opinions of President Bush, and you'll be very happy.

    Then, stop by here, and when you read a post like this one, you can lay out your opinion regarding President Bush's handling of the border and also say, "Oh, I wrote more about this at my own blob [link]," linking to an article about President Bush's position on immigration.

    /* Then there was, “Most people who read this blog are independent thinkers and all you are doing is spreading meaningless tripe.” Is it your opinion that only some posts have value? Are all long posts “meaningless tripe” and how on earth do you justify your statement as anything but an attack on me?
    */

    I understood this comment to mean "simply accusing Bush of terrible things, and comparing him to Hitler ( http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/legends/godwin/ ) won't go very far around here." It may go farther with a different audience.

  • Robin

    Max, I am not trying to defend myself or my post I was simply trying to explain why I felt attacked by Erik's comments and use of language.

    I still feel the same and I am not going to interrupt the flow here any further attempting to make a point that no-body agrees with.

    Thank you for your attention... I am not angry or depressed; I simply believe that there is a level of communication that can be reached online that supersedes the topic.

    It requires complete respect for each other, and using terms that are generally seen as insulting is no way to get there.

    Forgive me for interrupting your flow; I know it was thoughtless of me...

    R

  • Max Lybbert

    /* Max, I am not trying to defend myself or my post I was simply trying to explain why I felt attacked by Erik's comments and use of language.
    */

    I can understand that. Erik's language could have been more diplomatic. I believe even he would admit that.

    /* I still feel the same and I am not going to interrupt the flow here any further attempting to make a point that no-body agrees with.
    */

    We're free thinkers. It's not so much an issue of whether anyone agrees or disagrees (judging by comments to previous articles on immigration, I believe the audience here strongly disagrees with our host on immigration). It's not even completely interrupting the flow.

    It's more about using Bush to interrupt the flow (and, no, I don't think the audience here really loves Bush, http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2006/05/lol.html ). It's just that Bush is such a lightening rod that simply throwing out accusations about him (or DeLay, or Cunningham, or Hillary Clinton, or Bill Clinton, or Al Franken, ...) just isn't going to go anywhere with this audience.

    /* It requires complete respect for each other, and using terms that are generally seen as insulting is no way to get there.
    */

    I agree.

  • skh

    By definition, a cut-and-paste job *is* spam, and that is exactly what you did, Robin. You are so proud of your inane, leftard rant that you posted it both here and on Mother Jones. You'll probably want to spread the "love" around a bit more, since the audience for conspiracy-laden hatred like yours seems to be concentrated elsewhere. I'd suggest DU and Kos, to start.