web analytics
April 21, 2014 / 21 Nisan, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘illegal immigrants’

‘Nation’ Blog Fabricates Facts to Attack Israeli ‘Racism’

Monday, December 23rd, 2013

A blog posting on The Nation website on Monday incorrectly quoted an 18-month-old poll to call Israel “racist” over the issue of how to deal with illegal African infiltrators.

“Here’s a shocking fact from a poll conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute…: fully one-third of Israelis say that unlawful, vigilante violence against non-Jewish African immigrants is fine with them,” wrote Bob Dreyfuss.

After correctly stating that the poll showed that a large majority of Likud and Shas party voters view the presence of the infiltrators as a “cancer,” he added that the report states there is a “national consensus” of an overwhelming majority of 83% of the Jews expressing support for demonstrations against the flood of illegal Africans seeking a higher standard of living. Most of them are not refugees.

Dreyfuss did not quote any source that Israelis “say that unlawful, vigilante violence against non-Jewish African immigrants is fine with them.” He apparently equated “demonstrations” with violence.”

The Jewish Press checked the poll. It was dated May 2012, and the reference to violence concerned violent protests in south Tel Aviv at a time when many illegal African infiltrators were involved in rapes, murders and daily thefts.

“Very surprisingly, considering that most people do not tend to openly report sympathy for acts that are broadly condemned by society, 33.5% of the Jews said they could identify with the use of violence (62% could not),” the Israel Democracy Report’s “Peace Index” poll stated.

It continued, “A segmentation by Knesset voting for the Jewish sample indicated that the only party for which a majority of voters identified with the violent acts was Shas. A segmentation by religiosity revealed that only a minority in all groups identified with the violence.”

The blogger had to dig out an 18-month-old poll, which was taken when tensions were high because of rape, murder and daily theft by many illegal infiltrators, in order to bring out the “shocking fact,” which is fiction, that most Israelis think “violence is fine.”

Dreyfuss’ case was so weak that he had to quote Haaretz’s Gideon Levy, one of the most anti-religious and anti-Zionist journalists in Israel.

The blogger quoted Levy as having written – apparently more than year ago since Levy refers to a Knesset Member who no longer is in the legislature – that “it’s Israel that made the African migrants a problem” because of “incitement” by those against keeping the infiltrators in the country.

Levy was quoted by Dreyfuss as suggesting that “the state should allow those already here to work, to rebuild their lives, and offer them the prospect of becoming citizens through a gradual, careful process. That’s how it’s done in normal countries. Israel is too small, too weak to do this? Nonsense, merely too racist.”

Would Levy say the same thing about the United States?

Results this week from a new Rasmussen poll  stated that 60 percent of Americans said the federal government is not aggressive enough in deporting immigrants living illegally in the United States. Only 29 percent of the respondents said the United States should stop deporting immigrants until Congress comes up with a new immigration reform policy.

Only 19 percent said that illegal immigrants should be granted immediate legal status.

Is the United States “too small, too weak to offer them the prospect of becoming citizens through a gradual, careful process. to do this?” Or is this “nonsense, [and] merely too racist.”?

Illegal African Infiltrators March for Refugee Status

Monday, December 16th, 2013

Hundreds of illegal infiltrators from Africa fled from their detention facility in metropolitan Tel Aviv Sunday night and marched on a highway in southern Israel on Monday in a demonstration to demand refugee status.

The illegal immigrants are allowed to leave the detention center in the day and return at night. Instead of going back to the center Sunday night, they traveled south to Be’er Sheva, camped out at the bus station and starting marching north towards Jerusalem in the morning.

They are protesting last week’s law passed by the Knesset that allows them to be held in a detention facility for one year without trial. The Supreme Court recently struck down legislation that they could be held for administrative detention for three years, but the judges suggested they might agree to a shorter term.

If the government wants, it could take advantage of their violating conditions of detention as cause to try to deport them after having determined that they came into Israel looking for a better life and not to escape conditions where their human  rights were being violated.

Netanyahu Moves to Step Up Legal Deportation of Illegal Migrants

Thursday, October 17th, 2013

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is moving ahead with policy of keeping infiltration of Africans at zero and to move ahead with a rapid deportation of those who cannot remain in Israel legally.

He told a meeting on illegal migrants Thursday, “The number [of infiltrators] is zero and it will continue, but this is only the first mission. The second mission is to continue repatriations, including the repatriation of those illegal migrants who have already entered Israel. We want to achieve both of these things, of course by legal and accepted methods, and thus we are holding this discussion.”

A recent Supreme Court decision ruled that Israel must end the administrative detention of African infiltrators who have been held up to three years without formal charges. The government must review each case and decide whether the immigrants can remain in Israel as those seeking asylum or are have no such legal status.

Interior Minister Gideon Saar said, “The High Court of Justice ruling has created a new situation that we must deal with….  We cannot remain without tools at a time when we know that Israel is the only Western country that borders Africa. … We must change the existing situation, which is unacceptable, in which tens of thousands of illegal migrants are in Israel.”

Amnesty: The Road to Nowhere

Wednesday, May 8th, 2013

The Heritage Institute report estimates that under amnesty the average legalized illegal household will take in $43,900 in benefits while paying a little over a third of that in taxes. Those numbers are grim from the standpoint of a tottering economy being asked to take on an even bigger pile of debt and they reveal an even grimmer view of the future.

Set aside the political debates, the tensions over multiculturalism, entitlements and the great political divide and those numbers reek of a country whose only future is poverty.

Subsidized poverty, even if we had the ability to continue subsidizing it forever, is still poverty. A Food Stamp Nation made up of slums full of bodegas and check cashing places does not offer any kind of future. Its only growth industries are in expensive government jobs or cheap service jobs leading to an economy of two tiers; one for workers and another for political workers.

“A report came out recently which showed what most Mexicans had long suspected – there is almost no social mobility in the country whatsoever. If you are born into poverty the chances are very high that you will die poor too,” a BBC report from Mexico concludes.

Now substitute America for Mexico. Imagine a society sharply divided between the working class and the government class where political connections mean more than any single other factor.

The report begins with the daughter of the Federal Attorney General for Consumer Protection shutting down a restaurant because they wouldn’t give her a seat and ends with two wealthy women abusing a police officer by calling him “asalariado” or “wage earner.”

Asalariado is becoming an insult in the United States. And the irony is that amnesty for illegal aliens may complete the process through which the people who came here looking to find opportunities that didn’t exist in Mexico will turn America into Mexico.

America hardly had any class issues because both the rich and the poor worked. A Carnegie or a Rockefeller might be able to buy and sell a thousand ordinary men, but still started out at the bottom of the ladder and never stopped working. To have proper class issues, you need a permanent leisure class to create that gap between those who work and those who do nothing.

In a dynamic economy, a leisure class is largely unsustainable. Inheriting a pile of money and then doing nothing is not likely to end well. But a dynamic economy depends on social mobility. An oligarchy regulates the economy into an impoverished predictability in which there is hardly any social mobility and a permanent leisure class. Its permanence depends not on the economy, but on its control.

Or to put it another way, suppose you have X millions of dollars to invest. Do you look for undervalued companies with a future or companies with political connections? In a dynamic economy, you invest based on merit. In an oligarchy, you invest based on political connections because the idea or the model are mostly worthless. The economy is divided up into spheres of influence carved out by interests and guilds.

In the age of Obama, a smart strategy is to invest in politically connected companies with bad business models and then get out before they go down. Nothing of worth or value will be created. Instead the wealth will circulate within the oligarchy and pay out profits with money harvested from the Asalariados, the suckers still trying to claw their way up instead of phlegmatically accepting their plight and cashing their government checks.

Eventually either the checks will get smaller or the price of milk will get higher. The Asalariados may look like suckers in the short term, but they’re still getting ahead in the long term. The grasshopper may shop for groceries without checking prices while the ant grits his teeth at the cash register, but when the economic freeze comes, it’s the ant who has the skills to survive.

But the oligarchy is designed to keep the ant from climbing too high. The last time the ants climbed too high, feudalism collapsed and gave way to the free enterprise economy, and most of the thinkers of Europe spent centuries trying to figure out how to put everything back into a neatly controllable natural order with lots of farms and lots of cheerful people working on them without complaint.

African Immigrant Knocks Kippa Off Head of MK Stern

Monday, April 22nd, 2013

Police have arrested an African immigrant who charged at Knesset Member Elazar Stern in Tel Aviv Sunday night, hit him, knocked his kippa off his head and then stepped on the kippa several times.

MK Stern is a product of a national religious yeshiva, former head of the IDF Manpower Department and now presents Tzipi Livni’s “HaTnua” party in the Knesset.

The unidentified immigrant, who was shirtless at the time despite unseasonably cool weather, waved a cross he was wearing and shouted at Stern. The MK ignored him, apparently angering the immigrant even more.

MK Stern was visiting the neighborhood along with other MKs who had been invited by a local committee to see the problem first-hand.

The low-income area of southern Tel Aviv has attracted thousands of illegal immigrants, causing fear among long-time residents who have been victims of rape and murder and daily theft.

Stop Labeling Judea and Samaria Residents ‘Illegal’

Thursday, April 4th, 2013

The Associated Press, one of the largest news agencies in the world, will no longer use the term “illegal immigrant” to describe those who migrate to a country in violation of their immigration laws, their Executive Vice President announced on Tuesday.

Their style guide will no longer permit the term ‘illegal immigrant’ or the use of ‘illegal’ to describe a person.  It will now only use of the word “illegal” to describe an action, such as “living in or migrating to a country illegally.”

It is believed that most of the 1400 U.S. newspapers which use A.P. will likely follow their decision on the use of such a loaded term and will, for instance, stop referring to the millions of unauthorized Latino migrants to the U.S. as “illegal”.

ABC reported the following:

…most of America’s top college newspapers and major TV networks, including ABC, NBC and CNN, have vowed to stop using the term. Nearly half of Latino voters polled last year in a Fox News Latino survey said that they find the term “illegal immigrant” offensive. A coalition of linguists also came together last year to pressure media companies to drop “illegal immigrant,” calling it “neither neutral nor accurate.”

Whilst many Americans are applauding the decision by A.P. as a victory for accuracy and diversity, we can only wonder whether serious news organizations – and the Guardian – will similarly drop the loaded and value-laden term “illegal settler” to characterize Jews who, consistent with the parameters of the Mandate for Palestine, live beyond the 1949 armistice lines (in Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem).

A quick search of the Guardian’s site shows a few references to such ‘illegal’ Israelis.Guardian film critic Philip French wrote the following in his Oct. 21, 2012 review of the documentary ’5 Broken Cameras’:

Behind this pair, but no less endangered, is Emad, recording some of the fiercest footage of assaults and atrocities on the West Bank that I’ve ever seen, as well as the arson wreaked on Palestinian olive groves by illegal Jewish settlers.

A July 24, 2012 story by Phoebe Greenwood on Palestinians facing eviction from ‘unauthorized’ homes in the southern Hebron hills included this variation of the charge:

Hila Gurani, the state’s attorney, wrote that the second intifada and the second Lebanon war exposed gaps in IDF preparation that requires more extensive training in firing zones, which the illegal Hebron residents are preventing

And, a report by Nicholas Watt about the call by some within the U.K. Labor Party to label products which are produced in Judea and Samaria included this passage:

Labour is opposed to boycotting Israeli goods but [Yvette] Cooper believes consumers should be informed whether products are produced by illegal settlers.

Moreover, a Google search using the words “illegal Israeli settlers” turns up 727,000 hits, and included references to the proscribed Jew in many “mainstream” publications. (Obviously, another variation of these specific words, in a different order, would likely produce further examples).

The greater implications of the A.P.’s decision are even more fascinating. If, for instance, we use A.P.’s logic as a guide, and only use the term “illegal” to describe an action, shouldn’t the Guardian and other sites stop referring to Jewish communities and homes in places like Ariel, Ma’ale Adumim and eastern Jerusalem as “illegal”?  If so, we might one day look back at the ubiquitous use of such subjective terminology (there were more than 5,000 references to “illegal settlements” at the Guardian’s site) as an embarrassing chapter in their paper’s history.

Whatever the Guardian editorial position on the desirability of a future Palestinian state which may include most of Judea and Samaria, we can hope that they’ll catch up with the times, heed their liberal calling and stop labeling – in one manner or another – hundreds of thousands of Jews residing within the boundaries of their historic homeland as “illegal.”

Visit CifWatch.com.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/cifwatch/stop-labeling-judea-and-samaria-residents-illegal/2013/04/04/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: