The front-page photo featured a lone toddler wandering a cruel Mexican street — say, shouldn’t that child have a parent nearby? Or do the family values of diverse [...]]]>
The front-page photo featured a lone toddler wandering a cruel Mexican street — say, shouldn’t that child have a parent nearby? Or do the family values of diverse foreigners not extend to minding the kiddies?
After noting the “sick or despondent” children in the camp of 1600 asylum seekers, the Post blamed the Trump administration’s policies for the suffering.
For some reason, millions in the Third World regard the United States as their personal rescue service, despite America’s primary responsibility to its own citizens. And if the whole family gaggle can’t get accepted in the US, then “concerned” moms send the kids over the border alone — as if raising abandoned foreign children is the American taxpayers’ job.
Fortunately, some help is on the way. As Breitbart reported a few days ago (U.S. Creates Sanctuaries for Migrants in Latin American Countries):
A new regulation will allow U.S. border officers to send asylum seekers to several Latin American countries instead of being released into the United States.
Similarly, the Associated Press wrote: Tougher US asylum policy follows in Europe’s footsteps. No surprise there — Europe has been inundated also. The First World cannot rescue the billions of poor Third Worlders through squishy immigration.
The deal isn’t exactly new news, since President Trump has been working out arrangements with a few Latin American countries including Mexico to accept some of their region’s wanna-be illegal aliens to the United States.
It would be better to end the asylum/refugee scam altogether, since it helps only a tiny fraction of poor people in the Third World. If there were no possibility of rescue in the First World, then millions would demand reform in their home nations which could lead to a better outcome for more people.
But that’s not the political choice being made. In fact, the point of the Post article is that foreign parents are dumping their sick children onto the US taxpayer for expensive healthcare. Many citizens would prefer to see down-on-their-luck Americans get better treatment.
It’s interesting that the most common health problems named were respiratory illnesses — perhaps due to being dragged from Central America to the US border?
The Post story was reprinted by MSN, linked below:
]]>In squalid Mexico tent city, asylum seekers are growing so desperate they’re sending their children over the border alone, By Kevin Sieff, Washington Post, November 22, 2019
MATAMOROS, Mexico — In the middle of the largest refugee camp on the U.S. border — close enough to Texas that migrants can see an American flag hovering across the Rio Grande — Marili’s children had fallen ill.
Josue was 5. Madeline was 3. The small family was huddled together in a nylon camping tent with two blankets last week when the temperature sank to 37 degrees. The children started coughing, Marili said. Then their fingers and toes turned bright red. The camp’s doctor had begun to see cases of frostbite.
Like most of the roughly 1,600 asylum seekers at the informal camp, Marili and her children had crossed the border into the United States this summer only to be sent back to Mexico to await their asylum cases — part of a year-old U.S. policy called the Migrant Protection Protocols.
In recent weeks, dozens of parents have watched as their children, sleeping outside in the cold, have become sick or despondent. Many decided to get them help the only way they knew how — sending them across the border alone. As Josue and Madeline grew sicker, it was Marili’s turn to make a decision.
These cases illustrate the the Trump administration’s policy and suggest the United States, Mexico and the United Nations were unprepared to handle many of the unforeseen consequences.
Marili, fleeing gang violence in Honduras, knew that unaccompanied children were admitted into the United States without enduring the MPP bureaucracy and the months-long wait. The 29-year-old mother — who, like others here, asked not to be identified by her last name, for fear it could affect her asylum case — believed that returning home would be suicide. So she bundled up her children in all of their donated winter clothes and scrawled a letter to U.S. immigration officials on a torn piece of paper.
“My children are very sick and exposed to many risks in Mexico,” she wrote. “I don’t have any other way to get them to safety.”
She pressed the letter into Josue’s hand, she said, and pointed the children to three U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents in the middle of the Gateway International Bridge, the span across the Rio Grande that connects Matamoros to Brownsville, Tex.
“Josue told me, ‘Please don’t send us,’ ” Marili said, crying at the memory. “But as a mother, I knew it was the best decision for them.”
Then she sprinted to the bottom of the bridge and watched through the fence as her children turned themselves in, weeping and wondering when she would see them again, hoping they would find their way to her husband. He had entered the United States and applied for asylum before MPP was implemented. He was allowed to stay. [. . .]
Global Response Management, the Florida-based nonprofit that runs the small medical clinic under the blue tarp, saw a surge in patients, most of them children. The most common cases were respiratory illnesses, said Megan Algeo, the doctor on call at the time. In one case, Algeo said, she persuaded U.S. immigration agents to admit a child for emergency care.
In particular, we hear from foreigners complaining at length about their treatment in rough shelters when they apparently thought they would get deluxe accommodations. [...]]]>
In particular, we hear from foreigners complaining at length about their treatment in rough shelters when they apparently thought they would get deluxe accommodations. Where would they have gotten that idea?? Perhaps from the cartels that charged them thousands of dollars for a trip north?
Alien-smuggling is big business for the criminals — as detailed by The Federalist in Report: Illegal Immigration Is Earning Billions For Smugglers
Earlier generations of Latin Americans fought revolutions against oppression for reform and a “better life,” but today’s young men are satisfied to steal US jobs from citizens and mooch benefits from taxpayers. Perhaps the omnipresent homeland flags one sees carried by caravansters show a tiny bit of guilt — or a promise to send home lots of remittances. The foreign flags certainly do not indicate a plan to assimilate to American values.
Below, invasive foreigners carry the Honduran flag to America — in hopes of conquering the welfare office?
But today, the dreams of grabbing jobs, welfare, education and assorted free stuff from America have faded for some who are packing up to head home.
They should put some of that energy for a better life into fixing their own countries because the United States can’t be the World’s Welfare Office on a planet of nearly eight billion residents.
]]>Central American migrants are giving up on asylum; returning home, San Diego Union-Tribune, August 4, 2019
30 year-old Nery Hernandez, left, and another Central American migrant who had decided to abandon their quest for asylum in to the U.S. negotiated a price for bus tickets to return them to Honduras from Tijuana where they had been staying in the Agape Mission Mundial shelter in Tijuana. They left for the trip home later in the afternoon on Wednesday, July 24, 2019 in Tijuana, B.C. Mexico.(John Gibbins/The San Diego Union-Tribune)
Tijuana, Baja California — Danny Mejia was wiping the tears from his eyes by the time he arrived at the El Chaparral port in Tijuana, just on the other side of San Ysidro, California.
It wasn’t the scorching heat or the way journalists buzzed around him or the mistreatment he said his 8-year-old son endured during their eight-day stint in U.S. custody that finally broke him.
“My dream is gone,” said the 35-year-old Honduran, as his wife and son collected water and snacks under a tent set up by volunteers outside the San Ysidro pedestrian border crossing. “I have to go back to Honduras.”
Mejia said he didn’t know how he was going to get home or where he and his family were going to sleep for the night. He was handed over to Mexican immigration officials in Tijuana at the El Chaparral border crossing on July 22 without any money, food or even a phone number of someone he could call in Tijuana.
“We don’t know anyone. We don’t have any money. We don’t have a place to sleep. The only thing we can do is go back to our country from Tijuana,” said Mejia, whose first appearance in immigration court was set for October 28.
If the Trump administration’s goal with its new immigration policy, Migrant Protection Protocols, is to encourage large numbers of migrants to abandon their asylum claims and return home, it appears to be working.
[. . .]
Honduran farmworker Edin Santos Martinez, 38, and his 15 year-old son came north to join his brother in Los Angeles, who had managed to cross the border illegally only a few months ago.
Santos Martinez and his son were kidnapped twice along the way: In the southern state of Veracruz, where they were held for three days until they paid $6,000 and again on the border in Tamaulipas where they were held for a week until they paid $8,500. That’s in addition to the $10,000 Santos Martinez paid smugglers.
“If anything happens to us over here, it’s the responsibility of the government over there,” he said, pointing to the U.S. from the border in Nuevo Laredo. “What else can we do?”
After five months of the Migrant Protection Protocols program, not a single asylum seeker has been granted refuge in the United States, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), which tracks immigration court records.
Researchers found that of the 1,155 cases under the Migrant Protection Protocols program that have been decided, only 14 of them had legal representation — that is just 1.2 percent.
The message is being heard loud and clear.
“We don’t have a chance,” said a 41-year-old Honduran in Tijuana.
Alexander Hernandez said he came to the U.S.-Mexico border mostly looking for economic opportunities to support his three children and wife back in Honduras. He said U.S. border agents told him his chances of being granted U.S. asylum were close to zero.
Hernandez plans to return home on Wednesday with a group of 19 people.
[. . .]
Single mom Elisa Reyes fled Honduras with her 14-year-old daughter and 8-year-old son to join family in Los Angeles, but after spending 10 days watching her children vomit and shiver in Border Patrol detention and a day in Nuevo Laredo without food, she was leaving on a bus for Chiapas headed for home.
She called the U.S. immigration system “a deception.” “They treat us worse than animals,” she said.
Alexander Hernandez, who plans to leave Tijuana on Wednesday, said some things were better in Honduras, after he said he witnessed U.S. border agents grab migrants’ hands to force them to sign their immigration paperwork.
“In my country, sure, it’s a very violent country, but not like that. They wouldn’t treat you like a dog,” he said.
Below, highlighting a [...]]]>
Below, highlighting a Guatemalan moocher family was more important to the New York Times than honoring American military patriots lost in war defending this nation on the day remembering them.
And yes, foreign kiddies are arriving by the thousands, who will strain local schools with their inability to speak English, health concerns and needs for special treatment. Local communities will be forced to either raise taxes or cut services to citizen students.
Actually, the family profiled by the Times should complain that they had to ride the bus: the Associated Press reported that DHS has been flying aliens to various American cities.
Who knew open borders now include transport unblocked by the US government into the interior? This is not how I imagined the Trump Presidency.
The Times story was reprinted elsewhere, linked below:
]]>1,600 miles, 85 hours: A migrant family takes a Greyhound across America, by Miriam Jordan, New York Times, May 27, 2019
DALLAS — By the time it pulled into Dallas, the bus from Arizona was two hours and 47 minutes late. It had left Phoenix overbooked, turned away passengers with tickets in Tucson, rolled through El Paso at 2am and finally disgorged its human cargo — a busload of exhausted migrants, mostly from Central America — shortly before dusk the next day.
A sign in the Greyhound bus terminal listed the ongoing routes that were already facing delayed departures: San Antonio, Los Angeles, Houston, Detroit, Atlanta, Brownsville. All of them would be late; most of them were full. Those who had missed their connections would need to wait in line, an agent announced, as the disembarking passengers — many of them with no food, no money and no possessions beyond what was in their slim backpacks — listened in stunned silence.
“My God, we are going to have to spend two nights here,” Zuleima Lopez, recently arrived from Guatemala with her husband and three children, murmured as she surveyed the ragged tableau inside the terminal. Refuse had long before overfilled the available trash bins, and a rank odour wafted out from the restrooms. Mothers, fathers and children huddled together on scraps of cardboard, atop tattered blankets and splayed jackets. Feverish babies with runny noses fussed in their mothers’ arms.
At one end of the station, several passengers jostled for $7.50 meal vouchers — 19 cents less than the cheapest cheeseburger combo — until, halfway through the line, the agent announced that there were no more vouchers.
A Greyhound road trip across the country has long been a hallmark of the American experience, a “leave the driving to us” way for those who couldn’t afford airfare or a car to come home from college, start new jobs, get to the coast, leave problematic situations behind.
But along the border and deep into parts of the nation’s interior, the Greyhound buses plying the interstate highway system have become an essential element in an extraordinary new migration.
Entering the country at a rate of more than 5,000 each day, new arrivals from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador are departing border towns by the busload. While President Donald Trump has made a point of threatening to send migrants from the border to inland sanctuary cities that oppose his immigration policies, it is an empty threat: Migrants are already travelling by the thousands every day to cities across the country — to Atlanta, Chattanooga, Orlando, Richmond, as well as to sanctuary cities, like New York, Los Angeles and Seattle.
After an initial 72 hours or so at Customs and Border Protection processing centres along the border, the vast majority of those entering the country now are released to nonprofit respite centres, where they are fed and clothed. From there, they are booked on Greyhound buses to destinations where they may have friends, family or the hope of a job. They pay top dollar, often $250 to $300 each, usually advanced by family members in the United States.
Long lines and bedraggled migrant travellers have become fixtures at bus stations across the Southwest — and a source of substantial new revenue for Greyhound, a company that had been struggling for footing in an era of cheap airfares and stiff competition on shorter-haul routes from companies like Megabus.
Currently owned by the British transport conglomerate FirstGroup, Greyhound filed for bankruptcy twice in the 1990s. More recently, the company introduced Bolt Bus express service, Wi-Fi access and other innovations, but falling fuel prices and the convenience of car and air travel continued to limit its ability to attract well-heeled customers.
Then came the crisis on the southwest border.
The Greyhound station in Dallas, the company’s headquarters, has been transformed by default into a temporary migrant shelter.
A similar scene has been playing out in cities across the Southwest. In McAllen, hundreds of migrants pack the station daily, lining up to board buses. In El Paso, hundreds at once have shown up at the terminal without warning, trying to find their way. In Phoenix, a swell in drop-offs by immigration authorities led Greyhound to restrict station access to those holding tickets, exposing families left outside to the rain.
Zuleima Lopez and her family had ridden a bus much of the way from Guatemala through Mexico, crossing into the United States with the help of a smuggler, but nothing prepared them for this new journey they would take through Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Arkansas and Tennessee on a large, crowded bus. (Continues)
Regarding the latter, it is routinely overlooked in the current media coverage of the thousands [...]]]>
Regarding the latter, it is routinely overlooked in the current media coverage of the thousands of illegal aliens crossing America’s open border daily. We hear some about the pull factor of US jobs and free stuff, but the push factor of basic poverty combined with huge population growth looms large: for example, backward Honduras has quadrupled its human numbers since 1960.
Plus, automation upsetting fragile developing economies in the Third World only worsens the other stresses. The World Bank warned in 2017 that smart machines will likely slash employment and increase instability in developing countries. Certainly, automation-caused job loss increases the desire of residents to migrate to the nearest industrialized nation to grab any available employment.
Indeed, an Al-Jazeera article headlined last fall: Undeterred caravan migrants: ‘All of Honduras wants to come here’
Below, Honduran caravan invaders carry their flag to show their allegiance.
The United States has a decent jobs economy now which is attractive to the masses from down south, but we can expect a rapid rollout of robots when the next downturn occurs, as has happened before.
So Americans won’t need newbie workers from Central America whose skills are more appropriate for an earlier century.
Below is the BBC report. It also includes a 53-minute audio documentary located at this link.
]]>Will AI kill developing world growth?, BBC News, April 18, 2019
Artificial intelligence (AI) could displace millions of jobs in the future, damaging growth in developing regions such as Africa, says Ian Goldin, professor of globalisation and development at Oxford University.
I have spent my career in international development, and in recent years have established a research group at Oxford University looking at the impact of disruptive technologies on developing economies.
Perhaps the most important question we have looked at is whether AI will pose a threat – or provide new opportunities – for developing regions such as Africa.
Optimists say that such places could use rapidly advancing AI systems to boost productivity and leapfrog ahead.
But I am becoming increasingly concerned that AI will, in fact, block the traditional growth path by replacing low-wage jobs with robots.
As Kai-Fu Lee, a Beijing-based venture capitalist who invests in artificial intelligence, tells us, AI is potentially the most revolutionary technology to emerge this century. It is also, along with the associated technologies of machine learning and robotics, advancing at breakneck speed.
Already AI has the capacity to replace many work tasks that are rules-based and repetitive, and which do not require great dexterity or empathy.
In developed economies, for instance, robots have replaced well over half of the jobs in the car and related industries in recent decades.
Automated systems are already getting higher customer satisfaction ratings than people in call centres, threatening a key source of jobs in many countries.
Similarly, AI enabled systems are leading to significant job losses in back-office administrative functions in banking, health, insurance and accounting. These are roles that had in recent years been outsourced to developing countries such as India, Vietnam, South Africa and Morocco.
Jobs at risk?
According to our research at Oxford, about 40% of jobs in Europe are vulnerable to AI over the coming decades, almost half of jobs in the USA, and an even greater share in developing countries.
Some argue that AI will create as many new jobs as those lost to robots, and that we shouldn’t worry too much. But I believe that those new jobs will be concentrated in certain parts of the developed world, and that the developing world will miss out. (Continues)
In particular, extreme population growth fueled by foreigners (what’s [...]]]>
In particular, extreme population growth fueled by foreigners (what’s happening now) will change the culture, since the newbies come only for the dollars, not to become Americans.
Assimilation is generally expected by citizens of new residents, but the topic is little discussed by the current crop of Democrats vying for a White House slot. In fact some, like Julian Castro, embrace invasion via open borders even though traditional citizens once took pride in America as a “nation of laws.” Now, the left demands Diversity above all else, more than any other value.
The United States used to value educated immigrants who could help with the work that needed done. Instead, we are now helpless to stop a million uneducated Hondurans and other Central Americans from illegally entering the country this year. They will supply cheap, simple labor for a while to insatiable business owners, but that will end soon when the smart machines take their jobs, as described on this blog for years and observed by Tucker in his remarks.
Experts agree: fundamental technological change is coming to all sorts of workplaces, and official Washington would be wise to pay attention.
You could slide over to 3:05 minutes in the video below to avoid a couple nonsense clips from AOC delivered from the floor for some odd reason:
Spare Audio:
]]>TUCKER CARLSON (3:05): Negativity. That’s what the activist left now calls disagreement. They are not interested at all in what anyone outside their tiny little world has to say. Every day, you see Democratic presidential candidates endorsing some new policy that has pretty much zero public support, but it sounds like something woke baristas in Brooklyn would be excited about.
Banning ICE, ignoring federal immigration law, giving amnesty to millions. Decriminalizing illegal border crossings which is to say totally open borders. Anyone can come. When they get here, give them free stuff. Nobody really wants any of this even most of the people saying know, it wouldn’t work.
The public would revolt if you tried it. If half of Guatemala moved here tomorrow, which is exactly what would happen, it wouldn’t help anyone. This is all fantasy.
Countries have borders. That’s what makes them countries. Someday, the AOC moment will pass. It’s too stupid to continue. And at that point, sober Democrats will wake up and rejoin the adult conversation and progress. What do we want from our immigration system?
Well, here are some of the questions they should have to answer when that happens. First and most obvious, how many immigrants should we admit every year? What’s the ideal number? We currently take a little over a million every year, legally. Should we double that to over two million? How about 10 million immigrants a year? How about 20 million? Is there any number that’s too high? And if so, why?
While we are at it, what’s the ideal population of the United States? Immigration effects population size more than any other factor. We’re at about 325 million people in the United States today and that’s a lot.
Our highways are crumbling, many of our cities are painfully overcrowded. How big should we get? Four hundred million? Six hundred million? A billion people? And if you are pushing to increase the size of our population and they are, what’s your plan for keeping our natural environment pristine?
Crowded countries are polluted. Every single one of them. Tell us why we should want that here? What sort of skills and education should we look for in immigrants? Not all immigrants are the same? Some start wildly successful companies. Many others go on food stamps. They are not interchangeable widgets, they are human beings. Who should we prefer? What’s the ideal level of education an immigrant to this country should have?
Big business doesn’t want you to ask this question, they like their immigrants low-skilled and cheap. Ocasio-Cortez does, too. But what happens when technology kills their jobs? And it will. All the major Democrats running for president take money from the technology barons, many of them support self-driving cars. So what do you do with hundreds of thousands of unemployment immigrant cab drivers? Do they all go on welfare?
And speaking of, what sort of government services are immigrants entitled to exactly? Democrats promise universal healthcare. Do immigrants get that, too? Who pays for it? How many immigrants can our system support? Do we have enough doctors and nurses and hospitals to treat the number of immigrants we want to admit? Same question for schools.
The real answer is, of course, nobody knows. Because as of today, we have no idea how many immigrants live illegally in the United States. Shouldn’t we find out before we make more plans? And once we do find out, what do we do with them? Who gets deported? Anyone? Or do all of them get to stay? What if the real number of people living here illegally is north of 25 million? And that’s entirely possible. That’s bigger than the population of 48 out of 50 states. It’s enough to change this country completely and forever.
Do all of them get citizenship and voting rights? What about gun rights? And do they immediately start paying into the Reparations for Slavery Fund that Democrats are now promoting? How do you explain that to them? Can we watch that conversation?
And finally what about America’s ideals? Democrats are always talking about values when the subject of immigration comes up. They quote from the poem on the Statue of Liberty and tell you about their grandparents.
Well, previous waves of immigrants were asked to buy into this country’s most basic ideals — religious pluralism, free speech, political freedom, equality under the law. Our schools made them learn English and tried to instill patriotism. We called it assimilation. We thought it was critical to our social cohesion. Are we still for that? Do we still think we have values to impart or do we imagine that huge groups of people with nothing in common can share the same country without fighting each other?
It’s an important question — maybe the most important question of all. We never hear anyone ask it. Anyone who dares ask it is banned from Twitter. Instead, you hear the endless drone of self-righteous children barking about racism. That’s not enough. The decisions we make today about immigration are irreversible. It will help determine the health of the country we leave to our grandchildren. We should be a lot more serious than we are.
One of the clips shown as evidence was of an illegal [...]]]>
One of the clips shown as evidence was of an illegal alien man who brought his kid along to assure his entrance to stupid-generous America — he will be rewarded financially for imperiling his boy when he should be prosecuted for child endangerment.
How backwards can government get? The United States is supposed to be the nation by and for American citizens; it is not the World Welfare Office for the moochers of the planet. When foreigners carry their homeland flags as they assault the American border, it is Invasion, not “migration.”
Below, Hondurans carry their national flag as the approach the US border, invasion style.
On Wednesday, Congressman David Schweikart (R-AZ) remarked in an interview with Stuart Varney, “If you’re from Phoenix, we’ve had almost 20,000 individuals dropped off at night in the center of our city — that’s a crisis.”
This morning, I joined @FoxBusiness to discuss the crisis we are facing at our Southern Border and how communities across Arizona are being impacted by the increase of migrants being released. Watch here
pic.twitter.com/eTrzsndeBn
— Rep David Schweikert (@RepDavid) April 3, 2019
Democrats and some Republicans are willing to put the future of this nation at risk for short term political or financial gain. President Trump has gone over to the dark side of increasing legal immigration even while automation is replacing more humans in low-skilled jobs every day. Does he really think his base will turn out to vote for him in 2020?
Here’s Tucker:
Spare Audio:
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: Good evening and welcome to “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” Donald Trump ran on the promise that he would secure our southern border when he ran in 2016. He ran on other things, too — trade, Obamacare and ending the Iran deal, but it was immigration that resonated. No other candidate was saying anything like it. Voters loved it — that’s why they yelled, “Build that wall” at his rallies.
More than two years later, we have less control though over immigration into this country than we did the day Trump launched his campaign. Entire populations from Latin American are moving north. In February, authorities apprehended 76,000 illegal arrivals at the Mexican border, but last month that number had ballooned to 100,000.
They are coming because they know that they can come. Our current system can’t stop them. If illegal immigrants show up here with children, they are almost certain to be released into the United States. They will never be deported.
Close to 100 percent of children and families detained at the border last year are still here. It’s a scam. Before 2013, only one percent of aliens arriving at the U.S. border sought asylum based on credible fear in their home countries. Now, more than 10 percent do. They know the script. Even CNN can’t lie about it anymore.
Yesterday, to his credit, one of their anchors went to the border and talked to people trying to cross illegally into the U.S. Watch this conversation. It is the most honest thing that has run on CNN in a long time.
CNN ANCHOR CHRIS CUOMO: Why did he take his kid with him to come here if it’s just to work.
ILLEGAL ALIEN: [Speaking SPANISH].
TRANSLATOR: As what you and I were talking about, he says that if he comes here with his son, then he is allowed to stay. He thinks he is allowed to stay.
CUOMO: He think he is allowed. . . He says it is word of mouth.
TRANSLATOR: Coyotes, smugglers, word of mouth.
CUOMO: The smugglers are telling him, you bring your kid, you can get in.
CARLSON: If he comes here with his son, then he is allowed to stay. Our current political class has spent years pretending that is not true. In villages across Central America, they know it is true. Come to America and bring your kids, free schools, free healthcare, higher wages. They can’t kick you out.
If you lived in Honduras, you would come here, too. We are begging them to come here. No wonder immigration is out of control. They know that we are happy to give our country away as we are.
Our lawmakers are allowing this to happen. They could close the loopholes that allow it in about an hour, but they haven’t done that. They likely won’t do it. They show no interest in the effects this invasion is having on normal Americans — the suppressed wages, the stolen identities, the clogged emergency rooms and failing public schools, the fentanyl crisis. They don’t care.
The Chamber of Commerce tells us that everything is fine. Just yesterday, they attacked the White House for even suggesting we might have to shut down the border to protect the country. Guacamole prices might rise. Democrats, meanwhile, rejoice in the scale of this disaster. More illegal immigration means more power for them. They are actively for it.
Everyone running for the Democratic nomination agrees on this.
MSNBC ANCHOR CHRIS HAYES: If you could, would you take the wall down now here?
BETO O’ROURKE: Yes.
HAYES: Like you have a wall.
O’ROURKE: Absolutely.
HAYES: You’ll knock it down.
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN: Offer a home to refugees. That is who we are. That is our values. That’s part of what we do.
JULIAN CASTRO: So, instead of building a wall or closing the border, we should choose compassion instead of cruelty.
SEN. KAMALA HARRIS: We welcome refugees and bring people out of the shadows.
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: Spending as a down payment $5.7 billion on a wall is not an effective use of tax dollars when we talk about border security. There are better ways to do it.
SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND: Immigration is not a security issue. It is an economic and a humanitarian and family issue. There is no such thing as an illegal human.
CARLSON: There is no such thing as an illegal human says the sitting United States Senator. So no, Congress is not going to fix this. Our big cities won’t help. They are all sanctuaries for illegals now. The Courts aren’t helping, it’s not their job to protect the border anyway, it’s the job of the Executive Branch, it always has been. So how are they going to fix this?
JEH JOHNSON: When I was in office in Kirsten Nielsen’s job at her desk, I’d get to work around 6:30 in the morning and there’d be my intelligence book sitting on my desk, the PDB, and also the apprehension numbers from the day before, and I’d look at them every morning.
It would be the first thing I’d look at, and I probably got too close to the problem, and my staff will tell you — if it was under 1,000 apprehensions the day before, that was a relatively good number, and if it was about 1,000 a relatively bad number and I was going to be in a bad mood the whole day. On Tuesday there were 4,000 apprehensions.
I know that a thousand overwhelms the system. I cannot begin to imagine what 4,000 a day looks like, so we are truly in a crisis.
Still, they keep coming because they can. President Trump continues to insist he’s building the wall, but that won’t stop the thousands of illegal aliens from claiming asylum at the front door, which is what they do after they get here from Honduras and beyond.
Meanwhile the Third World population keeps growing, so millions more want to come to America for the jobs and free stuff.
In earlier mass intrusions, such as during Obama’s big welcome, there were news stories about the financial and other burdens on local [...]]]>
In earlier mass intrusions, such as during Obama’s big welcome, there were news stories about the financial and other burdens on local citizens which was reported here: Lynn, Massachusetts, ‘On the Brink’ from Dumped Illegal Alien Kid Costs and Chelsea Massachusetts Provides Preview of School Strains for Dumped Alien Kids, plus Illegal Alien Kids Stress New York City Schools to show it wasn’t just Massachusetts getting hit in 2014.
Here is a little detail about the costs from that time:
Educating backward children from the Third World is an expensive project. One example is Lynn Massachusetts, where the mayor had to rejigger the entire budget by reducing funds to city departments to pay for the extra costs of 600 illegal kids. Those needs include free food, tutors, Spanish-speaking teachers, psychological counseling and healthcare. Some of the little aliens don’t even understand Spanish but were raised speaking indigenous languages like Kanjobal or Ixil. Some have never attended school at all.
And remember — either taxes are increased to support the needy non-English speakers or government services for citizens are cut.
Back to news coverage, illegal alien cost stories are curiously rare compared to a few years ago. Is the press reticent because its pals the Democrats support the open borders funneling in thousands of illegal kiddies? It is odd.
Here’s a story from Long Island, far from the border. (Video does not work on all browsers).
]]>7 On Your Side Investigates: Long Island district struggles to serve surge in migrant students, ABC7 New York, March 29, 2019
RIVERHEAD, Long Island (WABC) — For Mrs. Pamela Joyce, a school counselor in the Riverhead Central School District, each day brings more to do than she could ever fit into 24 hours.
She describes working weekends, staying late, and coming to school early, in the hopes of reaching the hundreds of kids she serves between the district’s high school and middle school.
Joyce is the district’s only bilingual school counselor for the high school and middle school. She’s also the only counselor the district has added in the last decade despite a quickly climbing student population.
She splits her time between both campuses and often encounters kids with little to no understanding of the U.S. education system.
“To be the kid in the foreign country who didn’t have shoes, who moved here and their life is so different, every day there is something to catch up on,” Joyce said.
Joyce serves students considered English language learners.
Eyewitness News attended a group session as Joyce prepared 8th graders for high school.
Joyce said there are many kids she just can’t reach because she doesn’t have the time.
“I actually have four new students to schedule this week,” Joyce said, “so they don’t stop coming.”
“We have not kept up,” added Superintendent Dr. Aurelia Henriquez who said hospitalizations for mental health issues and other behavioral concerns have climbed as the district struggles to reach its kids.
“We can’t implement the programs and the staff that we know our children and our district needs,” Henriquez said.
The district has one of the highest rates of agricultural migrant students in New York.
In Riverhead, the number of kids who don’t have a good grasp of English has more than doubled over the past five years, outpacing the state and county averages according to New York State Education Department enrollment data.
However, state funding hasn’t kept up with the district’s increasing needs.
Instead, the state has shortchanged Riverhead by nearly $25 million in funding known as Foundation Aid in an effort to save money.
The New York legislature created the Foundation Aid formula over a decade ago in an effort to increase equity in schools across New York by sending more money to needy districts, but it has repeatedly failed to entirely follow that formula or fully fund it in an effort to save money, leaving many districts with a fraction of their needs. (Continues)
Unlike illegal immigration in decades past when mostly [...]]]>
Unlike illegal immigration in decades past when mostly men came, the invaders are now dragging along their kids to guarantee entrance. But we see precious little reporting about the crushing burden on local jurisdictions, particularly schools.
When education’s limited budgets are squeezed by special programs for non-English-speaker students, citizen kids get less. Some tribal aliens from Latin America don’t even speak Spanish.
A bad situation is growing worse, and there are still millions more in Central America with a hankering for yankee dollars and a boatload of free stuff from the generous US government.
]]>BILL HEMMER: Startling new information from Border Patrol — more than 3700 illegals apprehended in one day, that’s the largest daily number in more than a decade. William La Jeunesse has been on the border quite a bit and is live in LA from our bureau today.
WILLIAM LA JEUNESSE: Right now you have a perfect storm of factors coming together. Many in Congress and the media are in denial saying the numbers are fake news and there’s no deterrent, no consequence. There’s no jail, no fine, no deportation. There’s also an unlimited supply of Central Americans making $5 a day when they could make $15 an hour here. Last week agents released a thousand migrants in San Antonio, 2200 in McAllen, two thousand in El Paso.
BORDER PATROL AGENT JOE ROMERO: The moment they crossed the center of the Rio Grande, they violated our law and entered the country illegally. We have an obligation to interdict anybody that crosses outside of port of entry.
LA JEUNESSE: So Monday, agents dropped 800 migrants on the side of the road, forced by court orders and after 20 days in custody or eight hours in a bus, they must be released. So add this up — officials expect a hundred thousand apprehensions in March alone. That’s like filling a football stadium, so you can multiply that by twelve over a year — that’s a million apprehensions, larger than the population of San Francisco.
Most arrive destitute. Their children will attend school and receive free breakfast and lunch, and in many states qualify for subsidies, lawyers, healthcare, childcare, food stamps, housing and cash. Still many in Congress oppose prioritizing defense money to improving border security.
REP. ADAM SMITH (D-WA): The comment that funding a border wall out of the Department of Defense is also unbelievably irresponsible, and I won’t even get into the debate here about the wisdom of that border wall.
LA JEUNESSE: Secretary Nielsen is in Central America today trying to hammer out a deal. There’s a new caravan, 2500, coming north, they’re in Chiapas now. Unless Congress acts, which is unlikely, it’s going to get worse before it gets better.
Unfortunately, the explosive population growth of Latin America and elsewhere in the Third World is rarely mentioned as a [...]]]>
Unfortunately, the explosive population growth of Latin America and elsewhere in the Third World is rarely mentioned as a major push factor for illegal immigration. For example, the number of Hondurans has quadrupled since 1960, which is not a plus in a backward country where 40 percent of the population works in agriculture.
The Gallup pollsters wrote last fall that:
In Gallup’s most recent global estimate, between 2015 and 2017, 15% of the world’s adults — more than 750 million people — said they would like to move to another country permanently if they could. In Central America, this percentage is one in three (33%), or about 10 million adults.
Three percent of the world’s adults — or nearly 160 million people — say they would like to move to the U.S. This includes 16% of adults from Honduras, Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador, Panama and Costa Rica, which translates into nearly 5 million people.
World population growth should be a major part of the immigration debate, but it is rarely even mentioned.
Tucker noted the many lies from Democrats about border security: like other servants of the globalist elites, they really prefer open borders to keep those future voters and cheap workers coming.
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: So, what exactly is the Democratic Border Security proposal? Would it actually secure the border? Well we had some time today, so we checked. And in a word, no, it would not.
The Democratic bill, in the Senate that Ed was just telling you about, simply restores previous funding levels for the Border Patrol and other existing programs. So, you have to ask yourself, when you consider that, was the border secure in December before the shutdown?
Well, no, it wasn’t. And that’s why we’re having this debate right now. Then, how would it be more secure after a bill that doesn’t change anything passes? Well, it wouldn’t be more secure, and that’s the point of the legislation, to maintain the broken status quo, let’s be honest about that.
Meanwhile, in the House, Homeland Security Committee Chairman, Bennie Thompson says he plans to introduce a bill that contains billions for border security, but nothing for a wall.
Thompson has a brand-new idea, he’s telling us. He says he can secure the border with the marvels of technology. He recently told PBS that cutting-edge machines can help us, quote, identify those vulnerabilities on the border.
Thompson’s plan can expect enthusiastic support from the Congresswoman from Tech-Land, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. Here’s her most recent suggestion for the border. Watch.
SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI: The positive, shall we say, almost technological wall that can be built is what we should be doing.
Technology to scan the cars coming through the ports of entry, and that is to detect guns. It’s like an electronic dog almost to detect drugs, guns and other contraband.
CARLSON: It’s really like an electronic dog that can detect contraband. On one level, that’s hilarious. We’ve laughed about it before. But it’s also patronizing, really. You’d have to be totally ignorant of what’s happening on our southern border to believe that more surveillance is going to solve the problem.
We have an awful lot of surveillance technology there already. We’ve got drones, cameras, sensors, radar, dirigibles. We have it there, in part, because the Bush Administration put it there. That administration spent more than a billion dollars on something called the Secure Border Initiative Network.
They use technology to watch about 50 miles of our Southern border. Congressman Bennie Thompson himself called that program “Grave and expensive disappointment.” Well Thompson was right about that.
What’s changed is that Democrats now support grave and expensive disappointments. They specialize in grave and expensive disappointments. They’re pushing one now. And that’s short-sighted.
Leaving the politics aside, it’s not a good idea because our southern border is one of America’s most dangerous vulnerabilities. That’s not a talking point. It’s literally true, and here’s why.
As of tonight, Mexico is an intact country. Will it remain an intact country? Maybe but maybe not. Mexico is a deeply unstable place, not an attack on the Mexican people. It’s an acknowledgment of what anyone who knows anything about the country will tell you.
The national murder rate in Mexico is five times ours. Since 2006, more than 250,000, a quarter million people have been murdered in Mexico. That includes hundreds of politicians and judges. There is a war going on there, and it’s spurred by drug cartels that reach into the highest levels of the Mexican government, not an exaggeration.
The Attorney General of an entire Mexican state recently pleaded guilty to drug trafficking charges. The governor of a state on the U.S. border took bribes to let cartels operate freely, which they did.
And then, just the other day, Mexico’s previous President was credibly accused at trial in court by a witness of taking a $100 million bribe from “El Chapo” Guzman. In effect, Mexico has become a narco-state.
But it’s not even the most volatile country in the region. Nicaragua is in severe turmoil right now. That gets no coverage but it’s real. Parts of El Salvador are largely controlled by gangs. Venezuela, meanwhile, is literally falling apart.
A recent Brookings Institution report predicted that a total collapse of Venezuela, which could happen any day, might create eight million refugees. For perspective, that’s more refugees than fled the entire Syrian Civil War. And keep in mind that that flood of humanity upended all of Europe.
Something similar could easily happen here, to us, and it likely will, if we ignore the problem, which we are doing. And yet, the position of Democrats in the Congress is that everything is fine, and you’re nuts if you disagree. Nothing needs to be done.
Well that’s the definition of recklessness. In fact, it’s worse than recklessness. It’s like letting your kids play in traffic. You wouldn’t do that to people you cared about. You prevent it from happening.
Democrats have become extremists on the question of borders. But you never know that from watching television or reading the paper. The media won’t say it, and nor will most Republicans, by the way.
Even in the Trump Administration, some officials seem intent on making Nancy Pelosi’s case for her. The Republicans are the real extremists here.
Here’s what Commerce Secretary, Wilbur Ross said today when he was asked about workers who aren’t being paid during the shutdown.
SECRETARY WILBUR ROSS: The people might have to pay a little bit of interest, but the idea that it’s paycheck or zero is not a really valid idea.
There have been ads run by a number of the public-sector credit unions.
Those have announced very, very low interest-rate loans to bridge people over the gap.
CARLSON: So, more debt, more interest payments, that’s the solution? No, it’s not. Those are the last things that most Americans need. That was an idiotic thing to say. Look for Wilbur Ross’ words to be aired every day for the next three years on CNN. They know a propaganda win when they see one, and it’s a shame.
And it’s also a distraction because it doesn’t change the nature, the fundamental nature of this crisis.
Our borders remain vulnerable, and the stakes are higher than they have ever been, thanks to the chaos just south of them. Leaders who cared about this country would be staying up late, trying to fix that problem. Democratic leaders are trying to make it worse. That’s the bottom line truth.