Definition: the act of coming to live permanently in a foreign country.

The present controversy about “immigration” has, like so many other public debates, been defined for us by the media in a most spurious way.

The idea that there are groups of Americans “for immigration” and those that “oppose immigration” is not only misleading, it is absolutely false.

Immigration is what America has been built on.  For the greater part, save those few Native Americans who are left, all Americans are immigrants or the descendants of immigrants.

There are volumes and volumes of laws that not only define the requirements of immigration in general, but further define the immigration policies of the United States of America concerning every other country in the world.

The State Department has thousands of employees involved in the execution of these laws, both within the United States and abroad.

When someone from another country decides to “immigrate” to the United States the procedures and requirements are spelled out in no uncertain terms.

So what is the problem?

Since most citizens of the United States, both pro and con concerning the present debate, have accepted that we are having a debate about “immigration” it might be helpful to make some comparisons.

Take shopping for example.  All of us go shopping from time to time.  There are a number of ways you can shop.  You can window shop which is “just looking.”  You can actually go to the store and buy something – what we call shopping.  The final way you can shop is to shoplift.  These are not equal activities, they are not the same.  The first two are legal ways to shop.  The last one, “shoplifting” is not legal.  It is against the law.  If you “shoplift” and you are caught then you will face criminal charges.  You might have to pay a fine, or in some cases spend some time in jail.  These events will permanently go on your public record.  You are now a criminal.

Consuming alcohol is similar.  There are a number of ways an individual can indulge oneself.  You can buy alcohol and consume it in your home.  You can get as drunk as you want and no one will say anything about it.  You can go to an establishment that sells alcohol and consume it there.  You can consume alcohol in some public venues, in some places you can walk down a public street and consume alcohol.  However, if you get drunk in one of these places you might be arrested and charged with “public drunkenness.” You can buy alcohol and consume it in your vehicle as you drive down the street.  However, if you get caught doing that you will be charged with a crime!  If you are underage according to the laws of the state you reside in, then you can be charged with the crime of underage drinking and underage possession of alcohol.  If you sell or procure alcohol for a minor you can be charged with “contributing to the delinquency of a minor.”  In the first three instances you are doing nothing wrong – you are consuming alcohol within the confines of the law.  In the rest of the examples you are engaged in a criminal activity and you can be arrested and prosecuted for doing so.

Why?  Because there are laws that govern these activities.  In fact, there are laws that govern all kinds of activities.  When you break the law you are subject to arrest and the possible punishments of breaking the law.

So how does it work with “immigration.”  Since immigration into the United States is governed by laws, clearly stated laws, laws against entering the United States without following the proper procedures – then anyone entering the United States contrary to those laws is considered a criminal.  If you are caught in the United States and you do not have the proper documentation or have not followed the proper procedures for being here, then you have broken the law.

You are not an “immigrant” – you are a criminal plain and simple.  Just as plain and simple as a shoplifter or drunk or a myriad of other actions make you a criminal.

The present debate is not about “immigration.”  If it were, then the debate would be taking place within the government – specifically the Congress where laws are initiated and confirmed. 

No, the present debate is about allowing criminals to enter the United States and whether or not it is proper to give those criminals priority over all the other peoples of the world who are “immigrating” into the United States. In fact, it is a debate on whether or not it is proper to give these criminals priority over the citizens of the United States themselves, those who are here as descendants of actual immigrants or those who have legally immigrated to the US.

There is a very important point to consider here.  That is that the present influx of criminals coming across our border, particularly our border with Mexico, are also illegally in Mexico.  The Mexican government is harsh on immigration violations – but they have extended an open door to those coming from other countries with the intention of illegally entering the United States.

As always, with laws – there is a loophole that is being used to justify the actions taking place towards thousands and thousands of criminal entries into the United States.  Amnesty.

The law states that if children can be proven to be at risk for persecution in the countries that they have come from – then they have a right to a day in court.  The present influx of children really has nothing to do with that.  It is instead a flood of illegal and criminal entries into the United States that is being orchestrated and has a specific agenda – an agenda being championed by the likes of Nancy Pelosi.

You say, “how cruel” to turn children away.  You might want to reconsider.  If these thousands and thousands of children will be given residency and even citizenship into the United States, that sets the precedent for giving the same consideration to all of those other criminals who have entered the United States illegally.

They are not immigrants, they are criminals who have broken the law and should be treated as such.

The President of the United States has the responsibility to ensure that the laws of the United States are upheld.  In the current situation the current President has not only turned a blind eye towards this river of criminal entries into the country, but according to many sources has aided and abetted the criminals who are doing so.

If the President was providing alcohol to a minor, or encouraging a child to shoplift he would be a criminal too, if he were caught doing so.

He has already been caught doing so in the present circumstance.  You might want to consider that if the President of the United States no longer has to answer to the laws of the land, then who does?

Certainly not the criminals entering our country.

But “immigration” is the short end of the criminal activities that are now being carried out on a daily basis by our elected officials.  You only have to list the names or places of the ongoing infractions – and this should alarm every citizen in the country.

Benghazi is a good starter.  Lybia and the murder of Moammer Ghadaffi, Osama Bin Ladens execution and burial at sea, IRS targets Tea Party, Fast and Furious gun running to Mexican Cartels, Veterans Affairs, “I’ll pass my own laws!”, turning a blind eye to the criminal invasion of Gaza by the IDF, and on and on the list goes.

If any one of these were simple violations of laws such as the laws governing alcohol and shoplifting there would be no question.  People would be arrested and prosecuted.  How in Heaven’s Name can heinous crimes be committed by people in high offices and no one ever has to fear prosecution? No, instead those in fear and those being harassed are those who dare to stand up for the upholding of the existing law.




News Articles