April 3, 2006, - 9:45 am

Memo To the Wall St. Journal: The INS is Gone . . .

By Debbie Schlussel
The Wall Street Journal is typical when it comes to the sob story coverage of Illegal Aliens by the Mainstream Media.
For a newspaper that claims to know so much about what is the best immigration policy for America, the Journal betrays itself as completely clueless on the issue.
The pro-”guest workers” paper is so much a hostage of big business looking for cheap labor that its editorial writers apparently missed the memo: There isn’t an INS anymore and hasn’t been for years.
In an editorial on Friday’s Taste Page, the Journal emphatically stated its opposition to House language in the immigration bill that makes it a felony for anyone–including religious workers–to help illegal aliens. Here’s part of what the Journal wrote:

It is not the job of ordinary citizens to act as INS agents. More to the point here, though, it should not be the job of INS agents to arrest human-rights workers dispensing water and other basic aid.

icebadge.jpg

ICE Replaced INS, Sort Of

Beside the fact that this absurd statement sounds like many American Muslims who say it’s “not their job” to tip off the government about potential terrorists, it’s hard to take the Journal seriously on immigration when it’s no-one’s job to act as “INS agents” because the agency was eliminated under the 2002 Homeland Security Act and hasn’t been in existence since about early 2003. The portion of the INS made up of investigative agents merged with the investigative office of the U.S. Customs Service to become ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (INS and Customs inspectors went to Customs and Border Protection–CBP). The latest unqualified ICE chief, Julie L. Myers a/k/a “The ICE Princess” must be very upset the Wall Street Journal doesn’t even know she–or her agency–exists. (With all of her phony dramatics in press conferences about child porn tape owners, it’s easy to forget she’s supposed to be–but hardly is–pursuing illegal aliens.)
If the paper–one of the most important in the nation–hasn’t noticed this news in three years, can we really believe they’ve taken notice of the immigration problems that have hemorrhaged in the same time period?
Then there’s the crux of the Journal’s editorial. The paper is mad that soup kitchens and priests might evoke scrutiny for helping illegals. The paper thinks, for some reason, that religious-affiliated parties should be exempt from abiding by immigration laws.
And, of course, the Journal cites the more palatable Red Cross and a Catholic Cardinal. It pointedly only decries government encroachment upon rabbis, priests, and pastors. But, what about mosques?
We know that a Brooklyn mosque– not far from the Wall Street Journal’s offices–the Alkifah Refugee Center not only aided and abetted Muslim illegal aliens entering the country, but it was the mosque where Al-Qaeda terrorists prayed and plotted the 1993 World Trade Center bombings.
In an Associated Press story on immigration, running today, Jamal Badawi, an Islam expert at St. Mary’s University says that “Islam emphasizes a moral duty toward immigrants” above U.S. immigration laws. “The Quran also speaks of a Muslim obligation toward anyone seeking a haven.”
Given this, is it really a good idea to exempt religious groups from following the law? Why not also allow religious figures to evade other laws, too, like robbery, rape, murder, etc.? Why is illegal immigration any different? Why should conspiracy to help in this crime be permissible?
The Journal is–shocked, shocked!–that government would insert itself “directly into the affairs and faith-based prerogatives of churches.” But isn’t this the same Wall Street Journal that on a different day, in a different editorial endorsed government doing exactly that . . . with faith-based funding of billions of our tax dollars? Why, yes it is. Where’s the consistency?
The Journal goes on to complain that “technically, even soccer moms picking up their Mexican baby sitter at a bus stop could get five years.” But isn’t it illegal to have an illegal alien baby-sitter? Didn’t several parties in the administrations of Bush the father, Clinton, and Bush the son, lose out on prospective judicial and cabinet positions for hiring undocumented workers and not paying social security taxes? Yes. So why the contradiction to protect soccer moms who break the law and won’t hire an American baby-sitter?
Finally, back to the religious groups. The Wall Street Journal thinks House legislation prosecuting anyone helping illegal aliens, including religious groups, is new. It isn’t. The House language would not “change decades of law with respect to religious organizations” and illegal aliens, says Rep. Tom Tancredo in a USA Today op-ed. “From 1986 until this year, no organization was allowed to conceal, harbor or shield an alien from law enforcement.” Religious groups were not exempted and not one was shut down, not even the Alkifah Refugee Center.
We can’t expect the Journal editorial writers to know this because, hey, they don’t even know the INS is gone. But yet they know what’s best for the country: dangerous, unfettered immigration that has already overtaken our country beyond the point of invasion.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

14 Responses

I post that criticizes the WSJ for its fact-checking should be more careful about its own fact-checking. You wrote:
“INS merged with the U.S. Customs Service to become ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement.”
Uh, not really. INS didn’t merge with Customs per se. The interior enforcement parts of INS merged with the interior enforcement parts of Customs to form ICE. And the border control parts of INS merged with the border control parts of Customs to form CBP. The net effect was more a confusing restructuring than a merger.
YOU’RE CORRECT THAT THE INSPECTORS, ETC. WENT TO CBP. BUT THE WALL ST. JOURNAL ARTICLE SPECIFICALLY SAID, “INS AGENTS.” ALL INS “AGENTS” (WHO COMPRISED THE INS OFFICE OF INVESTIGATION) WENT TO ICE. I WILL, HOWEVER, AMEND WHAT I WROTE SO THERE IS NO MISTAKE. (Caps for differentiation purposes only.)
DEBBIE SCHLUSSEL

fpc on April 3, 2006 at 10:52 am

This is the second blog I have you noticed in which you state the Julie Meyers should be more concerned with illegal immigrants than people downloading videos and images of children being abused. Am I the only one seeing a problem with this?
So she should be holding press conference dealing with how we are going to stop illegal aliens but shouldn’t be discussing how to stop individuals from downloading child porn. Interesting.
Maybe if Congress passed some legislation allowing ICE to do their jobs i.e. letting them hit employers who hire undocumented workers it would be easier for Meyers to have a press conference or two regarding some ICE success in the war on illegal immigration. Why blame her? She is merely a mouthpiece for Chertoff and the Bush administration. Their ineptitude is merely flowing downstream. Until you get a leader in office with the balls to go up against big business, and say we are going to sacrifice the hiring of cheap undocumented labor in order to gain some security over our borders, the situation will not change.
I AM NOT IN DISAGREEMENT WITH YOU, EXCEPT ON JULIE MYERS. IF YOU ARE ONE OF THE ICE AGENTS INVESTIGATING CHILD PORN–AND I THINK YOU ARE–YOU’RE TO BE COMMENDED FOR YOUR WORK. AND I’M SORRY IF YOU ARE INSULTED OR THINK I AM DENIGRATING YOUR WORK. I’M NOT.
IT’S JUST THAT THE WHOLE DHS CREATION AND USCS/INS REORGANIZATION WAS DONE IN RESPONSE TO 9/11, NOT A KIDDIE PORN/SEX TOURISM & SLAVERY CRISIS.
I JUST THINK THAT THE EMPHASIS IS NOW TOO MUCH ON THE PORN AND NOT ENOUGH ON THE IMMIGRATION. I’M TOLD BY LEGACY-CUSTOMS AND LEGACY-INS AGENTS THAT ICE IS PUTTING A LOT OF THE NEW AGENTS INTO THE SEX TOURISM, SEX SLAVE, AND KIDDIE PORN IMPORT TAPES, AND LESS INTO IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE THE SEX/PORN STUFF GETS MORE HEADLINES AND IT DOESN’T CONFLICT WITH THE PRESIDENT’S PRO-VICENTE FOX IMMIGRATION VIEWS IN NOT SENDING THE “GUESTS” HOME.
AS FOR JULIE MYERS, I KNOW OF INSTANCES–AND HAVE REPORTED THEM ON THIS SITE–IN WHICH THE ICE PRINCESS (MYERS) PERSONALLY ORDERED AGENTS TO FREE ILLEGAL ALIEN WORKERS, NOT EVEN ALLOWING THE AGENTS TO FINGERPRINT THE ALIENS OR CHECK THEIR IDS TO MAKE SURE THEY EVEN KNEW WHO THE ILLEGALS REALLY WERE.
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/01/ice_princess_or.html
SHE HAD THE POWER TO ALLOW THEM TO DO THEIR JOB WITH THE ILLEGALS BUT ORDERED THEM NOT TO DO THAT JOB. THESE PEOPLE COULD HAVE BEEN TERRORISTS OR OTHER CRIMINALS, BUT WE’LL NEVER KNOW. CONGRESS ALREADY REQUIRED THAT THEY BE CHECKED AND FINGERPRINTED, BUT SHE CHOSE TO FLOUT CONGRESS.
AS FOR THE EMPLOYERS, ALTHOUGH IT IS A MATTER OF DEBATE, TOM TANCREDO AND SOME OTHERS SAY THAT ICE DOES, INDEED, ALREADY HAVE THE POWER TO GO AFTER EMPLOYERS. AND IN A SCANT FEW CASES, THAT HAS HAPPENED. IT’S THE REASON WAL-MART PAID A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR FINE FOR THE ILLEGAL JANITORIAL CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES. WE’D LIKE TO SEE MORE OF THOSE FINES, BUT DON’T. WHILE YOU ARE RIGHT THAT SHE’S JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS, SO WHAT? THAT’S NO EXCUSE FOR FLOUTING THE LAW AND ALLOWING AN UNFETTERED INVASION OF THE COUNTRY. NOT HAVING PRINCIPLES WASN’T A REQUIREMENT FOR THE JOB; IT’S JUST THE MOST PROMINENT ACCESSORY (BESIDES NO LAW ENFORCEMENT OR MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE) THAT SHE BROUGHT TO THE JOB.
IN ANY EVENT, I DO THANK YOU FOR THIS WELL-WRITTEN, THOUGHT-PROVOKING COMMENT, WHICH DISAGREES IN PART WITH MY VIEWS AND MAKES GOOD POINTS. (Caps for differentiation purposes only.)
DEBBIE SCHLUSSEL

ICEAGENT on April 3, 2006 at 9:48 pm

Julie Myers is unqualified for the job and is little more than a puppet for El Presidente Boosh. Remember, these aren’t merely undocumented visitors they’re illegal, law-breaking invaders.

DeBodine on April 5, 2006 at 10:06 am

As far as I can tell by the picture of the bright, shiny, new Badge shown above, ICE was formed as an excuse to issue bright, shiny, new Badges. To paraphrase a famous movie line, “We don’t need no stinking Badges”, we need enforcement of the immigration laws. There has been an idea about an expensive and ugly Wall along the US-Mexican border. A more practical solution & possible boon to our economy which could also double as a barrier to Illegals would be construction of a new 4-6 lane Interstate Highway (I-5) hugging as closely as topography would allow to the US-Mexico border from metro Port Isabel-Brownsville TX to border towns: Laredo, Eagle Pass, Del Rio, Amistad, Big Bend Natl. Park, Presidio, then merging w/I-10 and looping/cutting thru south El Paso. West of El Paso, I-5 would go due west along the New Mexico,US-Mexico border to Meadow Vista, Columbus into AZ- Douglas, Paul Spur, Naco, Coronado Natl. Monument, Nogales, Sasabe, Papago Indian Res., Lukewille, Organ Pipe Cactus Natl. Park, San Luis, Gadsden, Somerton, W.Yuma, into CA- Yuma Indian Res., along south of the All-American Canal to Calexico, Jacumba, Campo, Potrero, terminating at Imperial Beach, CA. All the barriers, walls, bridges, fences, drainage, 4-6 lanes would be an integral part of the I-5 engineering necessary for the Highway and could be designed to double as barriers to Illegals crossing the border. We may have to relocate and/or reimburse a few citizens for eminent domain uses. Whatever US desert land south of the new I-5, could be ceded to Mexico, with our west wishes.

enemaofthestatusquo on April 5, 2006 at 10:22 am

The actual border towns listed in my previous post would be the only ports of entry for Mexican or other souhtern immigrants.

enemaofthestatusquo on April 5, 2006 at 10:28 am

what’s most disturbing is that even though 70+% of the US population wants a stop to illegal immigration, not a single major newspaper on the right or the left,or major TV /radio/media outlet wants any changes to our current situation. The government won’t stop it,local or national. When the regular folks speak up in the form of the Minutemen, the government and media investigate THEM.The left seems to believe that there is a “right” to immigration, as well as endorsing a complete cultural change effected by mass illegal immigration. The right (ie libertarian) view is that getting cheap labor is somehow the only value to be considered, no matter whether national sovereignty is compromised, what minimum wage laws are broken,with the resulting non hiring of Americans who WILL do the work, not just for NOTHING. If big changes don’t take place soon, we are in big trouble.

tsnamm1 on April 5, 2006 at 12:11 pm

I am sick of hearing the phrase ‘There are just some jobs Americans won’t do’. We did do them, and we would do them, if the Federal Government would shut off the flow of slave labor into the country. We all need to keep reminding our beloved government a goodly percentage of illegal aliens no longer settle for the jobs Americans supposedly won’t do. They have moved on in droves to our building trades. The immigration issue would be vastly less important if we were importing future patriotic Americans rather than a Fifth Column of potential soldiers for every Leftist, Socialist, Terrorist, and Communist group here and abroad (they don’t wave foreign flags, and wear ‘Che’ T-shirts because they wish to be assimilated into America). We citizens must watch as 500,000 foreign nationals burn our flag on the streets of our own country in quiet rage, with nothing to placate us but our own uncomprehending anger. I consider every news outlet and politician advocating amnesty, guest worker crapola, and overlooking the actions of foreign gangs on our streets as traitors (including the WSJ). If our kids can confront the enemy in Afghanistan and Iraq, we can confront the conglomerate of media-politico’s trying to sell out the sovereignty of the United States on a daily basis.

Bernard on April 5, 2006 at 2:26 pm

I have said it before, and will continue to do so…those jobs that “Americans don’t want to do” should be required duty for our welfare recipients…perhaps if they were a bit tired after a hard day’s work, some of the drug use and drive-by shootings etc. that take place in the neighborhoods with large populations of unemployed would disappear. And, as those of us who have been gainfully employed know, self respect is one of the best rewards we receive for our efforts.
Our country was built by immigrants…however, that does not make it okay for illegals to just come whenever they please rather than enter in a lawful manner. And no one should be allowed to harbor illegals!

JASCC on April 5, 2006 at 4:06 pm

At the end of the day, it’s the legit Mexican workers who are getting screwed over by three groups:
1) Mexican Marxists who used the Union scam to set up operations on this side of the border and complicate their lives. It used to be about making money and taking it home to their families … now they, the poorest element, pay into a union that is Marxist … what a scam.
2) The companies that love the boom in illegals who can be worked for far less than legit workers. Except, of course, this undocumented money goes right into the same organizations who import these people and take a cut of every penny they earn.
3) the politicians in BOTH parties who are bought and paid for by the business interests in (2) above, or the Marxists in (1) above.
Despite the political rhetoric from both sides of the isle, this is all about ‘slave labor’. And, yes, ‘corporate slavery’ qualifies.
Ultimately this translates into a crime wave that targets illegals every bit as much as it targets us, and we also get the bonus of a Marxist network embraced by the DNC.
I’ve talked to plenty of Catholics who are here illegally … and they are very concerned about the Marxists. I say keep the Catholics, and deport the Marxists … it will be very easy to find the Marxists, just ask the Catholics.
And, let’s be very realistic … the Marxists wouldn’t hesitate to facilitate the Jihadists, now would they?

Athling on April 6, 2006 at 3:17 am

The government must always investigate THEM, because THEM stands for Theocractic Hegemonic Ethnocentric Militants- THEM are always a danger to extant government. These being just slightly less dangerous then THEY, yes, the Theocractic Hegemonic Ethnocentric Yeomanry. —-My previous post above, about an interstate highway hugging the US-Mexican border as a barrier/wall with an internal economic purpose would also require an new interstate from either Houston, TX, or at the least an extension to I-37 from Corpus Christi south along the Texas Gulf of Mexico coast to the Brownsville-Port Isabel Metro area. We would keep the Rio Grande River as a natural boundary and water source, but west of El Paso, TX, we would cede land more than a 1/4 mile south of the Highway-Wall-Barrier & border patrol road, back to Mexico.

enemaofthestatusquo on April 7, 2006 at 11:51 am

Please comment about the Interstate highway as a border wall idea, you know it is the only way a real border lenght barrier is practical.

enemaofthestatusquo on April 7, 2006 at 11:59 am

From the air, especially in a helicopter, the Mexican border is blatantly obvious. Sand on one side … green on our side.
From the air, ground movement is obvious. You don’t need a whole army … just reaction teams.
From the air, even tunnels are obvious … sorry, that’s classified … but nothing moves down there that isn’t easily seen and can’t be readily dealt with, day or night.
The plain, simple fact is that OUR government is engaging in a farce that is going to have very nasty political fallout before 2008. The political charge from the Right has already started.
My direct ancestors formed the colonies … and the other ancestors showed up later .. legally. I love the fact that our nation is the magnet for the most dynamic people around the planet. But there is a ‘right way’ and a ‘wrong way’.
If the politicians won’t even respect our laws, why should the illegals?
A law is something derived from the People, by the People, for the People … when politicans disrespect that, then we are headed for a crisis.
Not to worry folks … the Marines will keep order.

Athling on April 7, 2006 at 11:35 pm

Speaking of deporting the Marxists, we have a few too many Marxists who reside here legally. They are enemies of all freedom-loving people. It would be a good thing to deport them, too. Unfortunately, we cannot do that for reasons that I won’t go into here.
I remember that the Catholic Church aided some illegal Marxist “refugees” from Central America during the Reagan Administration. Were they ever prosecuted? The Church claimed that those “refugees” were persecuted by “right-wingers” in their home country/countries. I didn’t believe them or in aiding them then, and I don’t believe in aiding them now.

Loser on April 10, 2006 at 8:09 pm

Those very pious Nuns were fronts for a marxist smuggling ring … guns, drugs, dope, prostitution, you name it.
Frankly, the Catholic Church has had a difficult time outing the Marxists hiding inside the church preaching their own vile gospel … but it is happening, and the Marxists, along with all the other neo-pagans are getting out … except for the ‘Heart of Darkness’ residing in California.
Personally, I think that one is going to take an exorcism.

Athling on April 12, 2006 at 8:54 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field