I'm surprised there wasn't a thread on this earlier.


http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/05/01/immigr ... index.html
Story Highlights
• Protests accompanied by lobbying on Capitol Hill
• Organizers admit that last year's huge turnouts not likely this year
• Proposals on immigration reform have become more conservative
• Los Angeles mayor urges students not to skip school
LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- Thousands of demonstrators demanding a path to citizenship for an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants took to U.S. streets Tuesday while others lobbied Congress for action.

Melissa Woo, a 22-year-old American citizen who immigrated from South Korea, carried a Korean flag over her shoulder joined a Chicago crowd estimated by police at 20,000 in as she criticized politicians for "buckling at the knees."

"Us immigrants aren't pieces of trash, we're human beings," she said. "To be treated as less than human is a travesty."

Thousands of protesters were reported at rallies from Orlando to Denver, but organizers conceded that a replay of last year's huge turnout -- an estimated 1 million nationwide -- was unlikely.

Still, organizers said the demonstrations reflect a robust movement for citizenship rights for illegal immigrants.

"There was a sort of energy last year," said Gordon Mayer, a vice president of the Community Media Workshop, which helped groups organize the Chicago march. "This year that boulder has split up into a lot of smaller rocks."

In Washington, D.C., about 400 members of Asian groups from across the country were set to lobby lawmakers. Two large demonstrations were planned in Los Angeles County -- home to an estimated 1 million illegal immigrants.

While last year's May 1 boycott brought out more than a million protesters, later rallies failed to produce large turnouts, as legislation stalled in Congress and bipartisan proposals for illegal immigrants to gain citizenship have become more conservative.

The developments have disheartened many would-be marchers, but organizers said the frustration with Congress also brought out new supporters.

"It used to be that Hispanic immigrants, those who came legally, were more conservative on the issue," said Joe Garcia, a Cuban-American who heads the Democratic Party's Miami-Dade County chapter.

"But now it's become so wrapped up with issues of racism and identity, even Puerto Ricans and Cubans care about immigration," he said.

Yet stepped-up raids in recent months have left many immigrants afraid to speak out in public -- a major change over rallies in 2006 when some illegal immigrants wore T-shirts saying "I'm illegal. So what?"

"The raids are intended to terrorize people and make President Bush look tough," said Joshua Hoyt, executive director of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. "But they are not a solution."

Thomas Rodriguez, of Aurora, Illinois, stood in Chicago's Union Park wearing a shirt that said: "We are hard workers. We're not criminals."

The 38-year-old has had no legal status since he came to the United States from Mexico in 1989 and is an employee at a Japanese restaurant in Chicago.

"Recent raids have worried me," he said. "We worry deportations are leaving too many young people without parents."

In southwest Detroit, which has a large Hispanic population, hundreds of people wore red and white, and carried American flags to a rally.

"Most of the undocumented people come here as a necessity of survival," said Rosendo Delgado, of Latinos United, one of the groups organizing the march. "For them, it's the only choice."

A mariachi band played in Phoenix, Arizona, as marchers walked from the fairgrounds toward the state Capitol.

"We want just reform," said Mayela Ruiz, an illegal immigrant. "I've been here 15 years. I've worked hard, paid my taxes. I've had no problems with the law and I'm afraid to leave my house. I want a law that would allow me to work and live in freedom but not like a slave."

Some Los Angeles area groups called for an economic boycott and hoped for a repeat of last year, when thousands of immigrants and students stayed away from work and school in a sign of solidarity.

Others have rejected the boycott, arguing that it puts immigrants' livelihoods at risk and deprives children of valuable classroom time. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Cardinal Roger Mahony, head of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles, urged students to stay in school.

In Los Angeles, marches were set to include demands for a legalization program, a stop to the raids and an anti-Iraq war message. City and transportation officials were planning for as many as 500,000 people in downtown, believing it could be the largest in the city so far this year.

"This is a very decentralized and organic movement, so in all different cities people will be doing what they feel is important in their area," said Eliseo Medina, executive vice president of the Service Employees International Union, a major organizer of rallies.

In New York, groups planned an "American Family Tree" rally, where immigrants would pin paper leaves on a large painting of a tree to symbolize the separation of families because of strict immigration laws.

The event is a response to a White House immigration reform proposal in March, said Chung-Wha Hong, executive director of the New York Immigration Coalition.

That plan would grant illegal immigrants three-year work visas for $3,500 but also require them to return home to apply for U.S. residency and pay a $10,000 fine. It has been roundly criticized by immigrant groups.


___________________________________________________________

I'm really not sure what your point was based on the passages you highlighted.

And why don't we just drag one large net across them and dump them back across the border?

You're a racist prick, you know that?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/05/01/navarrette/index.html

Commentary: Fear of foreigners drives immigration debate
By Ruben Navarrette Jr.

SAN DIEGO, California (CNN) -- This week marks the first anniversary of a series of major demonstrations over immigration reform. And while an entire year has gone by, Americans really haven't learned that much about the subject matter.

For instance, some immigration restrictionists are still playing pretend. They are still insisting that the only thing that people are concerned about is illegal immigration and that, with regard to legal immigration, America is as welcoming as ever.

What? Maybe that's true ... if we agree that -- despite the brochure -- America has never really welcomed immigrants, even the legal kind.

Those who insist otherwise point out that the United States takes in about 2 million legal immigrants annually.

Big deal. In a country of 300 million people that bills itself as the land of immigrants, taking in less than 1 percent of your population in legal immigrants is nothing to brag about.

Besides, the history is clear. In the late 1700's, Benjamin Franklin fretted over Pennsylvania becoming "a colony of aliens" thanks to German immigrants. In the mid-1800's, concerned that immigrants from the Far East wouldn't assimilate, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act to keep out ... guess who. And in the early 1900's, Congress targeted Italians, Jews and Greeks by creating quotas that limited immigration by country of origin.

In each of those cases, those who tried to shut the door didn't care a whit that the people they were keeping out were coming legally. All they cared about was that the immigrants on the other side of that door were foreigners with weird languages, strange religions, and peculiar customs.

Not much has changed. Much of what's driving the current debate is the same fear of foreigners and the changes they bring.

Some groups pushing the restrictionist agenda -- such as NUMBERS USA, the Federation for American Immigration Reform and the Center for Immigration Studies, all of them started with the help of nativist John Tanton -- want to limit legal immigration as well. And Congress can't seem to debate immigration reform without declaring English the national language, even though one has nothing to do with the other.

In public opinion polls, a majority of Americans now say they want to limit all immigration, including the legal kind.

Some pundits claim that legal immigration leads to illegal immigration because, once people come to the United States legally, their relatives will follow even if it means coming illegally. On the flip side, there are those who oppose offering illegal immigrants a path to legal residency because it could make it easier for millions of additional immigrants to come into the country legally through policies that push family unification.

Others insist that the cultural concerns that come with having too much immigration -- people not learning English, changing neighborhoods, etc. -- don't go away when the immigrants in question come legally.

So let's stop pretending that it's only illegal immigration that has Americans worked up. It's immigration -- period. Along the way, we should have at least learned that much.

This is perfectly logical. By the very definition of making some immigration legal and some illegal you are making restrictions or placing limits on immigration. So I think the poll is trying to say that the majority of people are in favor of placing more restrictions on legal immigration. I don't see any problem with this.

The US of today is not the US of 200 years ago so let's drop the crap about the US was built by immigrants. Every country was built by immigrants at one point or another.

This could be about trying to mange change. Giving both the immigrants and America time to adapt to demographic, social and cultural changes.

It's all bullshit, it's racisms that's STILL the problem. I'm a white immigrant and have DEFINITELY felt i get preferential treatment whenever i enter an immigration office. I've had opportunities to skip lines just because i'm white. This country is disgusting.

That's just not true. The US is virtually unique in the way that it is a nation of immigrants. Canada is similar, but until recently most of their immigrants were from one country. Same thing with Latin America, except that there the immigrants inter-married with the native people rather than killing or ghettoizing them. In the Old World, there is nothing that even compares.

The United States has always been a changing, dynamic culture of different immigrant groups. The difference now is that the groups are from a wider variety of places in the world, and the "majority" group is much smaller comparatively than it has ever been before. Therefore, quite simply, white people are scared. And they aren't going to be any less scared if the Mexicans come here through legal channels. If every one of the 12 million illegal immigrants in America had a visa and green card, white America would still be scared.

It's not about them "takin ur jerbs". It's about them bringing their langauge and culture. That's the truth.

So it's about the pace of change. If pace of change is a fear then restricting legal immigration and cracking down on illegal immigration makes sense.

If pace of change is negatively affecting the economy, crime, etc., then restricting immigration may make sense. If it's just based on FEAR of that change, I don't consider it legitimate.

It's not a race issue. It's a legal issue.

Honestly, I was in a huge rush and skimmed the article quickly. Mostly poor highlighting, I admit.

This is just utter nonsense and I firmly believe that you've lost your mind with the illegal immigrant debate.

What part of "illegal" do you not understand? To me it seems that you are so concerned with giving these people the rights they deserve in this country without factoring in their "illegal" status. I want you, more than anyone else here, to realize how much of a crisis this is before it hits you in the face and it's too late.

There is no doubt in my mind that our border patrol is a fucking joke. If you are an illegal immigrant, I will do everything within my power to deport your ass back to wherever and wait in line just like everyone else.

illegal immigration ... who cares . We have bigger problems , such as illegal government.

you forgot australia

wasnt australia built on the backs of convicts?


and its not a fear of their culture and language being brought forth, its the fact that they cost paying taxpayers money by applying and receiving benefits

Well, so far you've done NOTHING to demonstrate that this "crisis" even exists, even though I've asked you repeatedly to show me, even anecdotally, how it affects you.

I have no respect for "illegal" as an argument. Pot is illegal, but it doesn't make it a problem, and that seems to be the extent of your argument thusfar. Show me why you think it's different, and then our conversation can BEGIN.

This doesn't actually happen. Don't believe the lies.

really, really dumb post