greenspun.com : LUSENET : Grassroots Information Coordination Center (GICC) : One Thread

For educational purposes only


Guest column by "Mark Andrew Dwyer" of California:


Since the U.S.-Mexican Treaty of Peace, Friendship, Limits and Settlement, commonly known as the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, signed by both nations on the 2nd of February, 1848, the relations between the two countries have hardly been balanced and symmetric. Over hundred and fifty years, U.S. offered Mexico peace and friendship, from forcing out French army that occupied it in 1962-67 to the passage of NAFTA in 1994, augmented with the multi-billion dollar bailout of Mexican falling economy in 1995. On the other hand, Mexico's attitude over that period may be characterized as hostile (Gen. Villa's raids on U.S. territories in 1916, and recurring attacks of Mexican armed forces on U.S. Border Patrol agents in recent years), or self-serving (expropriation of American oil companies in 1917, and refusal to vote against OPEC's oil price hikes in 1973) at the best. Over the last two decades, most what we got in lieu of gratitude from our Southern neighbors for our patience, benevolence, and charity was a huge supply of narcotics, a flood of illegal immigrants, and, most recently, threats of lawsuits and retaliation for enforcing of the U.S. immigration laws. Now, the Mexican leaders say they are no longer satisfied with the status quo and are not going to take it anymore. Armed with country's rapidly growing population that doubles every 24 years, and strengthened recently by overwhelming popularity of the newly elected charismatic president, they skillfully maneuver the nation to a position from which to launch a demographic war against the U.S. The multi-million army of colonists, euphemistically referred to as "undocumented migrants", is pouring into the U.S., with a great help and support from Mexicans who have entrenched themselves here already, Latino fifth-column organizations, and all those mercurial "Americans" who in a way characteristic to traitors put the commerce before the country. And, as a matter of fact, some battles are just about to begin as Mexican nationalists struggle to infuse their men into American government and to strengthen control over their strongholds. For example, Los Angeles is beginning to look like a battlefield of a well orchestrated ethnic assault that Latinos are about to launch against other constituencies in order to win this year's mayoral race. The pre-war rhetoric intensifies as the Mexican leaders get more self-confident and assertive. Mexican Embassy's NAFTA office issued a statement that they "expect the U.S. to comply" with decision to allow free access of Mexican trucks to American roads in spite of the serious hazard poorly maintained trucks not complying with the U.S. safety standards pose to American public. Mexican Foreign Minister, Jorge Castaneda, in a way that brings to mind German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop, has presented a list of demands regarding 18 millions of Mexican minorities living in the U.S., about one third of them illegally, including the demand that American authorities respect their "human rights". He said, recently, "We are not scared of engaging the U.S. anymore". And the Fuehrer himself (Fox) pointed out: "We will not tolerate any kind of abuse". They both vowed to defend Mexicans "without legal papers" and demanded that America gives them the "education and health benefits they deserve". They charged Mexican consulates with a duty to provide a free legal defense to Mexicans prosecuted in the U.S. or subjected to deportation proceedings. And the word "deserve" was repeated by other Mexican officials like a proof for the entitlement they hold against the U.S. Although Fox offered Bush his country's "genuine friendship", in the context of escalating Mexican demands such an offer looks more like a crocodile sincerity. He demanded that Mexico be treated as U.S.'s peer and vowed to forge a "more equal relationship" with the U.S. on the subjects of illegal immigration and drug smuggling, as if Americans were flooding Mexico with drugs and illegal aliens. His political refrain of opening the U.S.-Mexican border is an unsophisticated plot that one must be blind not to see, a push for a solution that would allow his "undocumented migrant" army's unobstructed raids into American territory. And he warned (some used the word "blackmailed") Americans that the "immigrants" will keep coming illegally if the U.S. does not comply with his demand. (Those who believe that the mere fact that Fox has been democratically elected a president will end hostility towards "Gringos" that Mexican nation exhibited over most of its history may wish to recall that so was Adolf Hitler.) On the fifth-column front, escalation of pressure is visible with a naked eye. Despite the fact that Mexico benefited more from American liberal immigration policy and economic strength than any other Third World country, and despite a free ride that that nation got on American cutting edge technology, both Mexican authorities and their accomplices in the U.S. threaten a retaliation if America continues enforcing her borders. They claim that the measures undertaken to deter illegal border crossings endanger the lives of the perpetrators, whom they describe as "threatened by the U.S. Border Patrol", and call on U.N. to deploy troops that would protect "immigrants" rights while invading the U.S. territory. Encouraged in part by their skyrocketing population growth and in part by a call of a Fox'es aid, Juan Hernandez, to speak up, Latinos loudly demand an amnesty and voting rights for illegal aliens, protest against deportations of criminals who are illegally in the U.S., and threaten to sue local authorities if police is allowed to enforce the U.S. immigration laws or refuses issuing driver's licenses to illegal aliens. And our "American" mainstream media act as if all these didn't happen or openly side with the invaders. It is downright astounding what our American government is doing on the eve of the outbreak of this demographic war. Texas legislature conducted recently an entire session in Spanish. Several U.S. Senators (Phill Gramm) and Congressmen (Luis Gutierrez) do the best they can to pass an amnesty-type legislation that would keep the army of Mexican "migrants" pouring into the U.S. and prevent deportation of those who already jumped the American border. Secretary of State Collin Powell did not sound like a retired general at all when he said to Casteneda: "Our common border is no longer a line that divide us". And Bush'es "Hispanic" outreach and low profile on immigration issues during the presidential race, his praising of immigrants for their making "our country more, not less, American", his conciliatory style of ruling, and his prompt post-election trip to visit Fox in Mexico this week, makes me wonder if he has enough guts to say "No" to Mexican reconquistadors. So, please, call President Bush (202) 456-1414 and encourage him to reject Mexican demands before it's too late.

-- K. (infosurf@yahoo.com), February 12, 2001


Immigrant plan hits resistance

Many in unions resist hiring of immigrants By JONATHAN ROOS Register Staff Writer 02/11/2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- The opposition of most Iowans to an immigrant recruitment campaign could spell trouble for Gov. Tom Vilsack and one of his strategies to help Iowa grow.

Some of the strongest opposition comes from union households, a core Democratic constituency that helped elect him in 1998.

The latest Iowa Poll, sponsored by The Des Moines Register, shows 64 percent of Iowans from union households oppose having the state recruit skilled immigrant workers. The level of opposition among all Iowans is 54 percent.

Some blue-collar workers and labor leaders worry that bringing more immigrants to Iowa will drive down wages.

"When I get in front of my own labor friends at a labor meeting, I hear comments like, 'What's wrong with the governor.' 'Gee, what's he thinking,' " said Rep. Bill Dotzler of Waterloo, a machinist and labor union representative who supports Vilsack's initiative.

Mark Smith, president of the Iowa Federation of Labor, said recruiting immigrants "is not necessarily a bad idea. But there's potential in it to be a bad idea."

"We have real concerns about bringing in very low-wage people, unskilled people that are going to end up flooding the low end of the wage market, becoming a basic burden on society," Smith said.

Vilsack tried to ease those worries when he addressed a labor convention in Des Moines last week.

"My goal is to take the stress and tension out of this process and create an inviting community," Vilsack told members of the Iowa State Building and Construction Trades Council.

Others wonder whether Iowa is receptive to Vilsack's welcoming message.

Susan Althomsons, a West Des Moines resident who came to this country from India 30 years ago, said she gave up a 20-year nursing career because she was mistreated by co-workers. It saddens her because nurses are in short supply.

Althomsons said other workers called her names like "bonehead" and "foreigner." They mocked her accent. They shunned her and used other tactics to get her to quit. Another nurse even tried to choke her.

"If they are treating immigrants like this, why do they want to bring them to Iowa?" she asked. "If I am janitor and cleaning the toilets, then there wouldn't be any problem. That's the only thing they want the foreigners to do."

Vilsack found himself in an awkward position last month because of his involvement in a labor dispute involving Bosnian strike replacement workers at Des Moines' Titan Tire plant. Female Bosnian workers demanded an apology from the governor after he reported a sexual exploitation rumor to their boss in a letter made public by a union leader.

Vilsack said he acted in good faith and didn't intend to have the letter released.

Republicans pounced on the controversy. "It was a black eye for the governor. On the one hand he says come to Iowa and on the other hand he uses these women for political fodder as a payback to the unions," said state GOP Chairman Chuck Larson, a Cedar Rapids lawmaker.

Opinions are mixed on whether the governor's immigration strategy will succeed. Political observers note that Vilsack has been trying to educate Iowans on the need for more immigrants and has taken some steps to make the settlement of "new Iowans" go as smoothly as possible.

"I'd give him an 'A' for effort but it's too early to say a 'C' for accomplishment because it's a long-term kind of thing. He's been in office two years and he's not going to solve this problem in the next two years," said Dennis Goldford, chairman of the Department of Politics and International Relations at Drake University.

"The difficulty of integrating people of different cultures into what is a fairly homogeneous state shouldn't be underestimated. . . . You're talking about what is the third or the fourth whitest state in the nation."

Arthur Miller, director of the Iowa Social Science Institute, said Vilsack has little to show for his efforts so far, which isn't surprising since immigration is regulated by the federal government.

"As far as I can tell, it's basically lip service. If the public is not buying into his lip service, that is not smart politics," said Miller, a political science professor at the University of Iowa.

Vilsack says he is laying the groundwork by opening welcome centers for new residents and having three cities serve as "model communities" for the planned settlement of immigrants.

He is focusing on skilled immigrant workers already living in the United States. His administration dropped an idea to get Iowa an exemption from federal immigration caps.

Former Gov. Robert Ray, who took responsibility for the resettlement of 1,200 Tai Dam refugees during his administration in 1975, said he appreciates what Vilsack is trying to do. But Ray, a Republican, also believes Vilsack has a tougher sales job, partly because some Iowa communities had trouble coping with the arrival of workers from Mexico who took meatpacking jobs.

Rep. Dotzler, a Democrat, praised Vilsack for taking on the hot- button issue, but said winning the battle of public opinion won't be easy.

"I think the misconception is that, all of a sudden, a load of buses is going to pull into your town and they're just going to be full of immigrants. It's in a lot of people's minds and there's a lot of fear," Dotzler said.

The State Building and Construction Trades Council is trying to tackle the issue head on. Its convention included sessions on immigration trends and getting immigrants to join unions.

"We're going to basically welcome them, and if they are in our field of work, we want them to join us," said Eugene Rome of Bettendorf, the group's secretary-treasurer and a retired painters union business manager. "That way we can bring their wages and living conditions and standards up to ours, rather than shun them."


-- Martin Thompson (mthom1927@aol.com), February 12, 2001.

Hmmmm, somebody doesn't like Mexico..

First thought is - we took California and Texas away from Mexico. Many of our large pharmaceutical and other such corporations have set up down there -- to give Mexican laborers a few CENTS and DOUBLE the price of our medications, drugs, etc.

Last report (USA Today) said that Mexicans trying to cross the border was down by 23%. The new Mexican President is making it seem more hopeful to stay there. ALSO, our economic situation isn't as inviting to them now.

Never reported facts are that - a big percent of our crops, etc. would be lost without Mexican labor. We won't get into household help. More or less, we let them in (pretending a little fuss at the border) and pay them pennies on the dollar (Americans won't work that cheap). Mostly, those without greencards do not get schooling or medical and live in very poor conditions here.

Colin Powell just announced a few days ago that he is in FAVOR of opening the U.S./Mexican border and giving Work Permits to Mexicans. Yep - very poorly paid slaves. No school/no medical.

SO much for Bush being 'good friends' with Pres. Vincente Fox.

-- Sammy Ross (lcross@quicktel.com), February 12, 2001.

This had nothing to do with "liking" someone. NAFTA led to substandard conditions for Mexican workers. The Globalist are keeping this quiet. Mexico is a beautiful country with extreme immigration laws of it's own. It is very hard on Central Americans who enter Mexico illegally. The Mexican government recently seized the Mexican homes of many American citizens living there and forced them out. The majority of these people were Americans of Mexican descent. They lost everything, but our press won't cover this story, and our government does nothing to help it's own citizens.

-- K (infosurf@yahoo.com), February 13, 2001.

Sammy Ross, you response is very assertive. I am sometimes bewildered about the reactionary views that are posted here. One would think that those attitudes would only be found in the history books. Sadly they are very much alive in the new millennium.


-- Sol (levitacion@hotmail.com), February 13, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ