Speaking of sanctuary, where's ours?

[Snowden]

Speaking of sanctuary, where's ours?
By Mark Steyn

At the funeral of Iofemi Hightower, her classmate Mecca Ali wore a T-shirt with the slogan: "Tell Me Why They Had To Die."

"They" are Miss Hightower, Dashon Harvey and Terrance Aeriel, three young citizens of Newark, New Jersey, lined up against a schoolyard wall, forced to kneel and then shot in the head.

Miss Ali poses an interesting question. No one can say why they "had" to die, but it ought to be possible to advance theories as to what factors make violent death in Newark a more-likely proposition than it should be. That's usually what happens when lurid cases make national headlines: When Matthew Shepard was beaten and hung on a fence in Wyoming, Frank Rich wrote in the New York Times that it was merely the latest stage in a "war" against homosexuals loosed by the forces of intolerance. Mr. Shepard's murder was dramatized in plays and movies and innumerable songs by Melissa Etheridge, Elton John, Peter, Paul and Mary, etc. The fact that this vile crucifixion was a grisly one-off and that American gays have never been less at risk from getting bashed did not deter pundits and politicians and lobby groups galore from arguing that this freak case demonstrated the need for special legislation.

By contrast, there's been a succession of prominent stories with one common feature that the very same pundits, politicians and lobby groups have a curious reluctance to go anywhere near. In a New York Times report headlined "Sorrow And Anger As Newark Buries Slain Youth," the limpidly tasteful Times prose prioritized "sorrow" over "anger," and offered only the following reference to the perpetrators: "The authorities have said robbery appeared to be the motive. Three suspects — two 15-year-olds and a 28-year-old construction worker from Peru — have been arrested."

So, this Peruvian guy was here on a green card? Or did he apply for a temporary construction-work visa from the U.S. Embassy in Lima?

Not exactly. Jose Carranza is an "undocumented" immigrant. His criminal career did not begin with the triple murder he's alleged to have committed, nor with the barroom assault from earlier this year, nor with the 31 counts of aggravated sexual assault relating to the rape of a 5-year-old child, for which Mr. Carranza had been released on bail. (His $50,000 bail on the assault charge and $150,000 bail on the child-rape charges have now been revoked.) No, Mr. Carranza's criminal career in the United States began when he decided to live in this country unlawfully.

Jose Carranza isn't exactly a member of an exclusive club. Violent crime committed by fine upstanding members of the Undocumented-American community is now a routine feature of American life. But who cares? In 2002, as the "Washington Sniper" piled up his body count, "experts" lined up to tell the media that he was most likely an "angry white male," a "macho hunter" or an "icy loner." When the icy loner turned out to be a black Muslim named Muhammad accompanied by an illegal immigrant from Jamaica, the only angry white males around were the lads in America's newsrooms who were noticeably reluctant to abandon their thesis: Early editions of the New York Times speculated that Muhammad and John Lee Malvo were being sought for "possible ties to 'skinhead militia' groups," which seemed a somewhat improbable alliance given the size of Mr. Muhammad's hair in the only available mug shot. As for his illegal sidekick, Malvo was detained and released by the INS in breach of their own procedures.

America has a high murder rate: Murdering people is definitely one of the jobs Americans can do. But that's what ties young Malvo to Jose Carranza: He's just another killer let loose in this country to kill Americans by the bureaucracy's boundless sensitivity toward the "undocumented." Will the Newark murders change anything? Will there be an Ioefemi Hightower Act of Congress like the Matthew Shepard Act passed by the House of Representatives? No. Three thousand people died Sept. 11, 2001, in an act of murder facilitated by the illegal-immigration support structures in this country, and, if that didn't rouse Americans to action, another trio of victims seems unlikely to tip the scales. As Michelle Malkin documented in her book "Invasion," four of the killers boarded the plane with photo ID obtained through the "undocumented worker" network at the 7-Eleven in Falls Church, Va. That's to say, officialdom's tolerance of the illegal immigration shadow-state enabled 9/11. And what did we do? Not only did we not shut it down, we enshrined the shadow-state's charade as part of the new tough post-slaughter security procedures.

Go take a flight from Newark Airport. The TSA guy will ask for your driver's license, glance at the name and picture, and hand it back to you. Feel safer? The terrorists could pass that test, and the morning of 9/11 they did: 19 foreign "visitors" had, between them, 63 valid U.S. driver's licenses. Did government agencies then make it harder to obtain lawful photo ID? No. Since 9/11, the likes of Maryland and New Mexico have joined those states that issue legal driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

Newark is the logical end point of these policies. It is a failed city: 60 percent of its children are being raised in households without fathers. Into that vacuum pour all kinds of alternative authority structures: Mr. Carranza is alleged to have committed his crime with various teenage members of MS-13, a gang with origins in El Salvador's civil war of the 1980s that now operates in some 30 U.S. states. In its toughest redoubts, immigrants don't assimilate with America, America assimilates to the immigrants, and a Fairfax, Va., teenager finds himself getting hacked at by machete wielders.
One could, I suppose, regard this as one of those unforeseen incremental consequences that happens in the darkest shadows of society. But that doesn't extend to Newark's official status as an illegal-immigrant "sanctuary city." Like Los Angeles, New York and untold others, Newark has formally erased the distinction between U.S. citizens and the armies of the undocumented. This is the active collusion by multiple cities and states in the subversion of U.S. sovereignty. In Newark, N.J., it means an illegal-immigrant child rapist is free to murder on a Saturday night. In Somerville, Mass., it means two deaf girls are raped by MS-13 members. And in Falls Church, Va., it means Saudi Wahhabists figuring out that, if the "sanctuary nation" (in Michelle Malkin's phrases) offers such rich pickings to imported killers and imported gangs, why not to jihadists?

"Tell Me Why They Had To Die"? Hard to answer. But tell me why, no matter how many Jose Carranzas it spawns, the nationwide undocumented-immigration protection program erected by this country's political class remains untouchable and ever-expanding.

Mark Steyn

[satin_patriot]

And while you're at it, explain to my little sisters, and all of the other people who are going through the bureaucratic hell of obtaining LEGAL immigration status, why the people who CHOOSE to break the law are being protected to a much higher degree than those who CHOOSE to pursue legal immigration.

[KBay84]

immigrants don't assimilate with America, America assimilates to the immigrants

This is exactly why America is headed for the $hitter, if we allow the feel-good left and the corrupt business owners and politicians on both sides to continue destroying our country.

[cato2]

Funny, I thought we were always a land of immigrants.

What is the tallest gift received by the United States? Located in New York Harbor, the 152-foot Statue of Liberty was a gift of international friendship from the people of France to the people of the United States. An inspiration to millions of immigrants, this statue is a universal symbol of freedom, democracy, and diplomacy.

Freedom Timeline: Statue of Liberty

PBS Documentary:
The Statue of Liberty | PBS

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me

- Emma Lazarus, "The New Colossus," 1883

[KBay84]

Funny, I thought the rest of us came in here through the legal means, as law abiding citizens who know what it means to be an honest American, not an illegal alien who insists on making this couintry bow to their so called "special" needs.

The Statue of Liberty...ah yes, very well-made point.
I'm pretty sure the line goes "...and justice for all", not
"A free ride, brought to you by the taxpayers"

One of my friends has a friend whose family came from Mexico.
One day he asked the father why he hadn't become a citizen.
The answer was simple "If I do that, the checks will stop coming!"

[Betty Boop]

When Edward Winslow, my children's direct descendent entered Plymouth Harbor as the first Colonial Governor of the Plymouth Colony and claimed American soil as England's own, he did not experience Native Americans requesting green cards. But then they did come with a charter from the King of England and so I guess from a British stand point, they didn't need them. Not much different than a Mexican government of today that allows and encourages its less economic desirables to emigrate and enter without concern for the now "native peoples" north of their border.

The only difference I can see is this - When the European influx started, the Native Americans were not prepared for what would happen to their land and livestock but naively believed in a peaceful coexistence. Somethings I guess never change about the "native" American peoples. I can't help but think of the quote/truism in this regard especially: Those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it. This most especially includes the area of immigration.

[Snowden]

Peaceful coexistence? Tell the Iroquois that one! They were and are good human beings, and as such had their warlike members and those who wanted to live in peace. The Indians who greeted the first Europeans were friendly; that was sad in retrospect for them, but it's history. It cannot and will not be changed.

However, that's not the point, is it? We have been here a while, fought our wars and taken the land. Not nice perhaps, but effective. We have created one sovereign nation from ocean to ocean and beyond, and we have a system of laws that were created to make this land the best we can. Among those laws are laws for others who want to join us and live among us and they absolutely must obey those laws or leave.

We punish the citizens who break the law; why should we reward foreign aliens who break it? It's stupid and it has to stop while we have our sovereignty. The government at this time is trying to erase the borders, which means no more illegals -- thieves, murderers and terrorists can all just wander in at random for good or evil. That's not sensible, and if anyone thinks it is I suggest you look at Europe and Britain today and explain how they got the way they now are, when not so long ago they were safe to visit and safe to live in. It's a mess, and most of it has been caused by illegal aliens. Do we want that here? Because we're getting it!