Category Archives: IMMIGRATION

UPDATED: A South African Or A Somali? Who To ‘Naturalize’?

Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Multiculturalism, Nationhood, Racism, South-Africa, Terrorism

The arrest of 19-year-old Mohamed Osman Mohamud, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Somalia, for planning to set off a bomb in Portland, Oregon, smacks of FBI entrapment; the FBI is notorious for the wickedly smart traps it lays for slow youth (such as the Miami Seven).

Even if the FBI has narrowly avoided the legal definition of entrapment in MOM’s case, it is rather ludicrous to hear media megaphones mouthing the mantra about this arrest providing proof, once again, that “they are out to get us.” Yes, it proves your government is out to get you—with its immigration policies.

Who let this guy in?

No one is saying—and the matter will remain submerged. Not even Google will give up MOM’s “immigration success story,” but you and I know that his folks are not plucky H-1B or O-1 visa holders. They’re probably visa lottery winners or refugees.

I had just blogged about the revocation of Brandon Huntley’s refugee status by the Canadian Court, which was “guided” by the Canadian Immigration Department, which, in turn, took orders from South Africa’s ANC goons. The latter oleaginous officials were backed by legions of house-trained liberals. “133 academics from 13 South African and 6 overseas universities,” all united to rob a man of a bit of luck; of some mercy.

What cowards!

Huntley is a South African (of the WASP variety).

In the Comments Section, another white South African gloated. Huntley had it coming. He isn’t a very nice guy. This is indeed the liberal mindset. The white, liberal man (even when he calls himself a “conservative”) is a deracinated creature, completely without the ability to see the bigger picture that is the South African reality.

It was argued that the Canadian government would have been “deluged by South African asylum seekers jumping at the chance to get into a country they wouldn’t otherwise have a prayer of getting into.”

Our reader never asks himself why it is that Canada and the US routinely reject (even deport) South African WASP immigrants, who are known for their wicked work ethic, happen to share the same ancestors and faith, and do not harbor Jihadi ambitions.

You are more likely to come upon a Mohamed Osman Mohamud in an American suburb than bump into a van der Merwe, in other words, a South African homie. But the liberal mindset (prevalent among most conservatives) forbids such inquisitiveness. Doesn’t occur …

Yes, Brandon Huntley was denied that meager thing called mercy because he acted like a bit of a blowhard, says one white bloke.

Yes, if Brandon had only been sepia tinged and harbored ambitions to blow things up, he’d have been a citizen of Canada or the USA already.

UPDATE: HORRIBLE HABITS (MORE LIKE TRADITIONS). It’s hard to make out if VDARE or someone else is the origin of the following: “Somalis are singularly unfit for life in North America, even if they remain (more or less) non-violent.” The hyperlinks lead here: “Somali Mom Asphyxiates Two Kids in Closet.”

And HERE: “Green Bay’s Dis-Americanization Proceeding Nicely.”

And HERE: Somalis “are unassimilated Muslims who follow violent sharia law, practice polygamy and slice off the private parts of their little girls (aka FGM, with a prevalence of 98% in Somalia).”

[SNIP]

So why are 85,000 Somali immigrants a good thing, but a “deluge” of WASP South Africans cannot be countenanced or coped with? Afraid the latter will work too hard for their money? Don’t we need more productive individuals in order to support all those Somalis?

UPDATED: Rationing Mercy For South Africans Refugees

Affirmative Action, Canada, IMMIGRATION, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Propaganda, South-Africa

In my forthcoming book, Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons For America From Post-Apartheid South Africa, I wrote the following:

To Canada—not to the US—is owed the distinction of granting refugee status to the first white South African victim of hate crimes. Thirty-one-year old Brandon Huntley of Cape Town had survived several run-of-the-mill assaults which saw him savagely stabbed and sworn at by his African assailants for being a “white dog” and a “settler.” The cruel and craven ANC protested Canada’s show of mercy. The idea that Africans would “persecute” Huntley was racist in itself, South Africa’s ruling Solons announced. Huntley has certainly been luckier than thousands of his countrymen, whose numbers continue to dwindle.

Yesterday, the New York Times reported that a Canadian Federal Court overturned the Immigration and Refugee Board’s decision to grant refugee status to Huntley:

The Federal Court of Canada overturned the refugee status granted to a white South African who said that he faced persecution, discrimination and possibly death because of his race if he returned home. The decision, which was released on Wednesday, ordered a new hearing by the Immigration and Refugee Board for the South African, Brandon Huntley. His initial success with the board was controversial in Canada, and the South African government filed a formal protest. The court acknowledged that violence and crime were widespread in South Africa, but it found that Mr. Huntley did not demonstrate that previous attacks against him were racially motivated.

Indeed, the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (RPD) found for Huntley. Certainly no citizen of Canada objected to granting this poor man asylum. Yet the Minister Of Citizenship And Immigration chose to exercise his powers to set the RPD’s decision aside. He denies that this decision was made pursuant to political pressure from the ANC, although he does concede the following:

The government of South Africa did not like the RPD Decision and asked the government of Canada to have it appealed to the Federal Court.

One of the listed errors in judgment the Court has leveled at the RPD is the equation of “random acts of violence and criminality with persecution due to the Respondent’s race.” The Court asserts that “the black majority in South Africa is at least equally victimized by criminals.” This is incorrect. Again: Into the Cannibal’s Pot provides the statistical evidence to the contrary.

I refute most of the stock, fatuous “arguments” the Canadian Federal Court advances against this brute fact: the white minority is indeed targeted disproportionately to its numbers in the population.

The same goes for the rest of the Court’s case against granting refugee status to Brandon Huntley. For instance, the idea that BEE (Black Economic Empowerment) doesn’t marginalize whites in the workforce is nonsense on stilts. I excerpt and analyze the statute itself, and quote a wide range of experts, including Americans who love the ANC (and live at the Wall Street Journal).

It is clear to me that Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons For America From Post-Apartheid South Africa might have helped Huntley and his lawyer to make their case. It still could:

THIS COURT HAS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that “The application for judicial review is allowed. The Decision is set aside and the matter is returned for reconsideration by a differently constituted RPD.”

The Minister denies that he has come under political pressure from the ANC, concerned with its image abroad. Fine. But why bring the power of the Canadian state against one man who has suffered so—even if you think he hasn’t suffered sufficiently?

My father, Rabbi Ben Isaacson, used to say that G-d is full of mercy, which is why there is so little left in the world. Yes, like many Jews, Dad always questioned, and wrestled with, G-d.

I contend that people, being irrational beings, are in the habit of misplacing compassion.

UPDATE: From the Federal Court Decision discussed here, it transpires that the Court, having been petitioned by Canada’s Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, ruled to set aside the Refugee Board’s finding for Huntley. A good section of the Honorable Mr. Justice Russell’s ruling, handed down on November 24, 2010, is devoted to the “alleged chilling and coercive attempts by the South African authorities to assert political and diplomatic pressure to subvert the rule of law in Canada.”

Justice Russell states at once that “the government of South Africa did not like the [Refugee Board’s] Decision and asked the government of Canada to have it appealed to the Federal Court,” and that, around the same time, “the Minister decided to proceed with judicial review.” Oddly enough, Justice Russell, presiding over the Federal Court, found no connection between the ANC’s strong-arming tactics and the Canadian government’s decision to succumb.

Arizona Attrition?

Conservatism, IMMIGRATION, Labor, Law, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim

So the Arizona immigration-enforcement law, SB 1070, may be working: “A new study suggests there may be 100,000 fewer Hispanics in Arizona than there were before the debate over the state’s tough new immigration law earlier this year.”

“BBVA Bancomer Research, which did the study, worked with figures from the U.S. Current Population Survey. The study says the decline could be due to the law known as SB1070, which partly entered into effect in July, or to Arizona’s difficult economic situation.” [TIME]

The bigger issue is one I reminded readers of in “Mass Immigration ‘End Of Days’ Scenario” still looms. Mark Krikorian does the dues too:

“[C]ontinued mass immigration guarantees the doom of conservatism (as I spell out in detail in my Encounter Broadside on the subject). The cause of limited government cannot succeed in the long term, even if the GOP does somewhat better among Hispanic voters, so long as the federal immigration program continues to admit a million-plus newcomers a year. And the overwhelming Hispanic preference for Democrats is not something that can be addressed with tweaks to immigration policy — even if such tweaks would do any good, which evidence suggests they wouldn’t.”

The fact is that mass immigration is inevitably made up of the relatively poor, who in a modern society will make disproportionate use of taxpayer-funded services (the majority of families headed by a Mexican immigrant, for instance, use at least one welfare program, even though the overwhelming majority have at least one worker in them). Therefore, the conservative message of smaller government is simply not going to resonate with a large share of immigrant voters, and may, in fact, repel them. What’s more, the huge majority of immigrants, not just Hispanics, are eligible for affirmative-action quotas as soon as they set foot in the United States, making it harder for them to embrace the party opposed to such benefits. On top of that, Hispanic immigrants, and even more their children, are more likely to have children out of wedlock than native-born Americans, another factor drawing them away from the Right and toward the Left.”

Mass Immigration ‘End Of Days’ Scenario

IMMIGRATION, Israel, Multiculturalism, Nationhood, Natural Law

The following is from my new WND column, “Mass Immigration ‘End Of Days’ Scenario”:

“Toward the conclusion of my pleasant stay at the national, WorldNetDaily, ‘Taking America Back’ conference (some images are here), I was asked by the especially able organizer, Albert Thompson, to take part in a panel discussion on illegal immigration. The thinking was that, as an immigrant, I’d be able to speak to the topic with added force.

Unfortunately—or fortunately for the audience and the organizer—previous panels were running late, and I was forced to depart for Miami International to catch one of two flights back to the Pacific Northwest.

In any event, I did not get to say my piece. As I take my duty to do the job Americans won’t do very seriously (to use Peter Brimelow’s refrain), I’ll say it now.

The problem with the immigration master narrative is this: The scope of the discussion is limited to illegal immigration only, and is framed as follows: Follow our laws and we’ll welcome you into out country; break the law, and out you go.

This politically permissible position against illegal immigration, moreover, relies for its justification on the law. But argument from the positive law is usually flawed. The state’s laws—most of which do not comport with natural law—are an unreliable gauge of right and wrong.

What Americans ought to be discussing, and are not, is mass immigration (which subsumes illegal immigration). And, in particular, the radical transforming of America, through state-engineered immigration policies.” …

Read the complete column, “Mass Immigration ‘End Of Days’ Scenario,” now on WND.COM.

Read my libertarian manifesto, Broad Sides: One Woman’s Clash With A Corrupt Society.

The Second Edition features bonus material and reviews. Get your copy (or copies) now!