My, How Times Change
It’s interesting how one’s convictions can change so dramatically.
You may recall an October 5, 2001 editorial by The New York Times entitled “Terrorism and Immigration,” written less than a month after 9/11. It opined that “The best way to preserve the American people’s commitment to keeping their doors open to the world is to crack down on lax enforcement of the immigration laws, with a sense of urgency.” And further noted that, “the ease with which the hijackers took advantage of this country’s lax enforcement of immigration laws is indeed alarming.”
So my question to The New York Times, "What has changed?"
In its June 3 editorial, “The Great Immigration Panic,” the same newspaper decried the country’s “war on illegal immigration.” It referred to recent immigration enforcement as “an escalating campaign of raids in homes and workplaces,” that have “spread indiscriminate terror among millions of people…”
What would The New York Times have us do? Revert back to a pre-9/11 approach of enforcing our nation’s immigration laws on an ad hoc basis? Or continue to strategically investigate and arrest people who are blatantly abusing the system and breaking the law?
The clear answer for me and the rest of the men and women at DHS is to enforce the law. While it has been more than six years since the 9/11 attacks, it’s inconceivable to suggest that it would be acceptable to now ignore our sworn duty.
Furthermore, far from “languish[ing] without lawyers and decent medical care,” as The New York Times would have its readers believe, those who are arrested on immigration charges have access to legal representation and medical care.
The unfortunate truth is that our nation’s immigration system is indeed broken, and it can only be fixed by repairing decades of failed policies and neglect. Ignoring the problem by disregarding the rule of law will not get us any closer to a solution. We must continue to uphold our nation’s laws and work with Congress, the business community, and stakeholders at every level to solve this dilemma.
While The New York Times flip flops on this issue, you can count on the men and women of DHS to carry out their duties in a manner in which the American people can be proud.
Thanks for reading.
Stewart Baker
Assistant Secretary for Policy
Labels: immigration enforcement
posted by DHS at
12:37 PM
14 Comments:
I think we already know how broken the system is, so no point of beating the dead horse, why don't you tell us positive changes since 911? people who are arrested on immigration charges have access to legal representation and medical care? really? what about Lillendahl who was interrogated at JFK airport for 2 days? during which she was not allowed to call relatives. She said she was denied food and drink for part of the time, and was photographed and fingerprinted.
Let's not forget Maher Arar. A Canadian citizen born in Syria, Arar was returning home to Montreal from Zurich on September 26, 2002, when he stopped at New York's JFK airport to change planes. As he passed through immigration, solely for the purpose of reaching his connecting flight, authorities pulled him aside, denied his requests for a lawyer, interrogated him at length and ultimately accused him, on secret evidence, of being a member of a terrorist organization.
Arar then asked to be deported to Canada, where he had been heading anyway, and where he'd been a citizen for sixteen years. But federal authorities refused and instead put him on a government jet to Jordan, where he was immediately transported to Syria. He spent ten months incarcerated there without charges, much of it in solitary confinement in a three-by-six-foot cell that Arar describes as a "grave."
Explain that and admit your wrong doing! people talk and report for a reason.
By
Anonymous, At
June 9, 2008 2:00 PM
As a U.C citizen, I have not grown complacent since 9/11 nor have any of my friends or relatives.
We want all the laws enforced. We want you to do what ever you have to do to correct the overrun of illegal aliens we have inside this country.
Strong enforcement at all ports, borders and airports is a start. We also want strong interior enforcement and the training of local laws enforcement to help. I know that is begining to be the case in many states. Kudos.
I think we, the United States, should advertise using the media more, to put the message out that we are just not going to put up with illegal immigration any more, and all our laws against illegal immigration WILL BE enforced, at our borders and in the interior.
By
Anonymous, At
June 9, 2008 3:20 PM
There is a lesson to be learned:
If you are going to travel to foreign countries.........have the PROPER IDENIFICATION THAT THE COUNTRY REQUIRES FOR TRAVEL.
That's should be common sense for most people.
By
Anonymous, At
June 9, 2008 3:24 PM
My parents...most of my family came to the USA around the turn of the century from Russia, Lithuania, etc...around 1900...they came at ages ranging from 6 months to elders . They all went thru the legal procedures. I thank God I was born in NY to naturalized (and proud) Americans instead of in Europe or I would be smoke in some chimney. I am pro-immigration but CONTROLLED immigration. Yes, It must be reformed. But we are at war and borders MUST be controlled. Instead of "just" a few smugglers and a "few" criminals getting thru, we may have terrorists possibly getting thru with the potential of horror thru weapons of mass destruction. The border must be their stopping point. Unfortunately the public connects immigration and border security as the same emotional issue. Until the public is educated differently, nothing can be done. Most of the undocumented are here to improve their lot in life, I feel sorry for them, but as a matter of security, the borders must b protected.
By
Anonymous, At
June 9, 2008 7:55 PM
A couple of points. First, it is highly disingenuous to suggest that work site raids have anything to do with thwarting terrorists. The Times was talking in 2001 about the failure to conduct security clearances on F-1 students before they were issued, something that was highlighted in the 9/11 report.
But for the sake of discussion, let's concede the point that DHS is charged with enforcing the law and the agency is simply doing its job. Fair enough.
The last commentator's post highlights the real problem, however. The American public assumes that employers and the immigrants they are hiring are just bypassing legal avenues available to them and the problem is a law enforcement one. Unfortunately, there are no legal channels available to the vast majority of employers so the choice is between illegal immigration or no immigration. Despite the uptick in unemployment of late, the country is completely dependent on the labor of illegal workers. That won't change anytime soon.
By
Greg Siskind, At
June 10, 2008 3:29 PM
Illegal aliens have killed and wounded more Americans than the 9-11 hijackers. I call this a security issue. How about the drunk illegal drivers that have ruined many American lives because they cannot work anymore due to a car accident with a drunk illegal alien driver? Giving them licenses would not prevent this. They have a very different culture from ours and have no intention of assimilating. Our immigration system is not broken. It is not enforced. Teenagers cannot get jobs because they don't speak spanish. Not only are we not more secure since 9-11, but we no longer have borders and it seems the only laws that are enforced are the tax laws.
By
Anonymous, At
June 10, 2008 4:57 PM
What is the DHS obsession with the NY Times and other new agencies? You seem incapable of accepting the critical value of a free press to our nation - which is enshined in our Bill of Rights.
When the Times, the Washington Post, 60 Minutes, or others outline egregious behavior of DHS employees, cruel treatment of detainees, or just the genuine lack of management competence at the agency - we never get an admission that DHS has done anything wrong. Instead, we get yet another waiving of the bloody shirt of 9/11, an expectation that we should sit down and let Big Brother take care of everything, and we should despise those disloyal news agencies for ever, ever questioning DHS's actions.
I agree that Homeland Security is critical, and yes, efforts to thwart terrorise are critical. But that's a straw man argument - who doesn't agree with that?
The bigger problem is that DHS's various agencies (ICE, USCIS, CBP) are using their resources not to target terrorists, but to harrass and intimidate legal immigrants and visitors to the US. Persons here illegally are rounded up and treated like cattle (quite literally in Waterloo, Iowa, where the District Court held expedited criminal trials at the Cattle Congress), and those people unfortunate enough to be in ICE custody seem to at risk of life as well as liberty, given the failures and cost-cutting ethos of the medical system for detainees.
Just once, I wish one of the DHS "leaders" would acknowledge DHS has problems, and that the agency is taking actions to fix these problems. Bluster and straw man attacks on the press do not prove anything more than DHS reads the news. Do you learn anything from it?
By
Anonymous, At
June 10, 2008 8:19 PM
That's "leadership"? Playing "gotcha" with the NY Times? And to think, my taxes pay for this.
By
Anonymous, At
June 11, 2008 12:03 AM
The NY Times is a well know liberal rag. No one with any brains reads that old rag any more.............they have no credibility.
Please continue to enforce all the laws! We want to see a big reduction in the amount of illegal aliens in our country. Attrition through enforcement is the best remedy to this problem and evidence shows that it’s working!
GO ICE!
By
Anonymous, At
June 13, 2008 7:05 PM
If there are no illegal aliens.........there would be no dependency on illegal labor.
Employers would have no choice than to hire LEGAL workers at a decent wage; and that is proving to be the case in many states already.
No illegal aliens; equals no illegal labor.
And that equals a happy America.
By
Anonymous, At
June 13, 2008 7:10 PM
Actually, more employers could choose to ship their operations overseas, or at least down south or up north. If that wasn't possible, then you'd see prices go up to pay for those "decent wages" (and benefits and whatever else they'd have to offer to get legal workers to do the work that illegal immigrants did on the cheap) you talk about. Nothing happens in a vaccuum. Be careful what you wish for.
By
Anonymous, At
June 18, 2008 9:36 AM
"Actually, more employers could choose to ship their operations overseas, or at least down south or up north. If that wasn't possible, then you'd see prices go up to pay for those "decent wages" (and benefits and whatever else they'd have to offer to get legal workers to do the work that illegal immigrants did on the cheap) you talk about. Nothing happens in a vaccuum. Be careful what you wish for."
How about this: maybe we should start seriously penalizing employers who hire illegal immigrants over legal citizens with hefty fines, jail time, and tax breaks for companies that only hire legal citizens and stay domestic. Illegals will keep coming here as long as they know someone is going to pay them, no matter what we do with border fences or other forms of immigration enforcement that targets illegals and not their employers. I'm sure many people wouldn't mind paying a few extra dollars in their taxes and at the cash register as long as they know that their money is going to support hard-working, legal American workers. Of course, if people gripe about that and employers continue to line their own pockets by using cheap, illegal labor, then we get the chronically broken immigration system we deserve.
By
Anonymous, At
June 20, 2008 11:35 AM
"I'm sure many people wouldn't mind paying a few extra dollars in their taxes and at the cash register as long as they know that their money is going to support hard-working, legal American workers."
The irony, of course, is that the same people who are most up in arms about illegal immigration are the same ones who are deadset against raising taxes.
You are right, though, that if we really want to stamp out illegal immigration (or cut down on it considerably), we need to go after the people who do the hiring. (Either that or find some way to boost the economies of the countries where these illegal immigrants are coming from, so they don't feel the need to look elsewhere for work.) It's supply and demand, pure and simple.
By
Anonymous, At
June 23, 2008 12:24 PM
Great Job!
I dont think nothing can be change with 24 hours !
So far so Good!
By
Frank, At
July 9, 2008 2:28 PM
Post a Comment
Create a Link
<< Home