An enormous Trojan Horse that had been forced past U.S. authorities and enemies from within America was attacking : LUSENET : Grassroots Information Coordination Center (GICC) : One Thread

My sister-in-law is from China. She married an American. Her kids are Eurasian. These kids are typical American kids, so she has assimulated. I don't agree with all the writer's comments, but the numbers are interesting.

For educational purposes only

Redefining America By E. Ralph Hostetter Commentary October 09, 2001

Probably never before in history has a great nation had such a precisely defined moment of reference about the monumental task of redefining itself.

That moment occurred at 8:42 a.m. on September 11, 2001 when a U.S. passenger plane was deliberately flown by terrorists into the north tower of the World Trade Center in New York City.

Stunned at first, the American public reacted with justifiable rage that converted almost immediately into a wave of patriotism not seen in sixty years. More than three decades of intimidation with respect to showing our love and admiration for America were shed. Flag flying was in - flag burning was out!

Americans were thinking about America again.

Attention turned almost immediately to our policies on immigration.

The Twin Tower terrorists for the most part were admitted to the United States legally, becoming illegal aliens only on the expiration of their visas. The U.S. had no follow-up policy to check on expiring visas. It is estimated some 6 million illegal aliens reside in the United States today. Some 500,000 of these could be considered unfriendly, to say the least.

America had become an immigration sieve.

An enormous Trojan Horse that had been forced past U.S. authorities and enemies from within America was attacking.

No longer could Americans expect to have an enemy knock down the front door to gain entrance. America discovered the enemy was already in the house.

America's real immigration problems began with the passage of the 1965 Immigration Act sponsored and floor managed by Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts. In spite of Senator Kennedy's assurances that immigration levels would remain the same and the ethnic mix in America would be unchanged, the reverse is true.

Senator Robert Kennedy of New York, at a Senate hearing on the immigration bill, delivered this assessment: the Asian immigration figure "would be approximately 5,000...after which immigration from that source would virtually disappear."

He was horribly wrong.

Critics of the Immigration Act of 1965, as usual, were dismissed as racists and we can expect today to be labeled as racist for reporting as we are.

The highly respected National Geographic magazine, in its September 2001 issue, reveals the startling figure that in 1998, 660,477 immigrants to the United States were given U.S. citizenship.

Of those, 158,118 were Asian; 219,922, Hispanic. From the former Soviet Union, there were 27,466; Canada was limited to 10,190, and the United Kingdom, our most steadfast ally, was limited to a pitiful 9,018. Nigeria trailed with 4,831. The remaining immigrants were from 191 other nations.

In the 1951-1960 period, Asians immigrating to the United States numbered 153,249. By comparison, in the 1981-1990 period, the number had increased to 2,738,157.

In the 139-year period from 1821 to 1960, a total of 1,275,185 Asians were naturalized. In just 34 years, 1961 to 1995, an astounding total of 6,326,253 Asians were naturalized, an increase of 500 percent.

National Geographic reports that a full third of our population growth today are immigrants, principally Asians and Hispanics, and by the year 2050, the percentage of white population, as they designate it, will be reduced from today's 68 percent to 52 percent of the total population. Hispanics will constitute the larger portion of the minority population.

It is predicted by other sources that the white population will be a minority well before 2075.

If America as we know it is to survive for our children and grandchildren, it must be redefined.

As a start, drastic measures will have to be taken to correct the dramatic imbalance that is developing as a result of our immigration policies.

Such measures have been taken in past years.

Scientific American reports "from the founding of the Republic to the mid-1920s (1924 to be exact), U.S. immigration was largely unrestricted, but shortly thereafter Congress passed legislation severely limiting entry from regions except northwestern Europe." Restrictions in the Immigration Act of 1924 included the provisions that 50 percent of those admitted to citizenship were required to have advanced degrees and the balance needed to possess skills. This legislation held practically intact until the floodgates of legal and illegal immigration were opened by the Immigration Act of 1965. In 1995, 82 percent of legal immigrants were admitted simply because they had a relative in America. Less than four percent of those admitted were skilled.

None other than former Senator Eugene McCarthy wrote the forward to the book The Immigration Invasion by Wayne Lutton and John Tanton. This book proclaims among other things that "the Third World influx (of immigrants) offers to swamp out not just the United States but Europe as well."

A changed immigration policy is paramount.

The opportunity for another rebirth of patriotism may not happen in time to redefine America as we have known it.

History tells us that a nation ruled by two equally dominant influences, the culture of Eastern civilization and the culture of Western civilization will be a house divided.

America will crumble into civil war without the presence of western civilization and American culture firmly at the helm.

This first century of the 2000 millenium could end with a separation of peoples into nothing more than warring tribes and dictatorships with the resulting destruction of lives, properties and liberties.

We need only look to Central and South America, Africa and Asia. If we go their way, then multi-culturalism will have prevailed.

-- K (, October 11, 2001


Xenophobia Rules, and everybody seems to already be on the bandwagon. If this crap gets a hold of US policy, it's even worse than American culture of the President getting a blow job in the White House.

-- zee (, October 11, 2001.

It's easier to accuse people of racism than to deal with this logically. "Xenophobia Rules" was the standard response from the Clinton administration. Look where it got us.

My family discusses these issues logically as members of a multi- racial, multi-cultural family. People of all ethnic backgrounds have been hurt by these terriorist attacks. Sound bite answers with no intelligent thought behind them have no place in today's America. This article should be discussed for it's valid points.

-- K (, October 11, 2001.

Lets not confuse Xenophobia with the need to enforce, even tighten, immigration laws. We need to know who is coming in, where they are if their visa expires, and get those here illegally OUT!

489 MILLION -- nearly double the US population -- cross our borders each year.

We are fighting for our lives here, something people seem to forget.


-- Jackson Brown (, October 11, 2001.

Yes, illegal immigration is a problem. Just ask the Cherokee, Senecas, Cheyenne, Navajo, etc. for their perspective. They know about smallpox as a tool of biological warfare. (It's disgraceful that the US $20 bill has Andrew Jackson on it, who orchestrated the "Trail of Tears," which deported thousands of Cherokee from their lands, killing many of them.)

-- mark (, October 11, 2001.

Mr. Robinowitz --

Instead of looking back 170 years just to continue to muddy the waters where you have nothing else to offer -- might I suggest you look in your own back yard, and the parent "Org" of your outfit, IGC:

I'm talking about The Tides Foundation, Highwater, Inc., and Drummond Pike, head honcho of both.

They have a lot to answer for -- including -- the scuttling all efforts to save all that low income housing that was torn down...all so Tides, Highwater, and Pike could develop the Presidio National Park (where your main offices are...NOW).

The "community based" groups that tried to save all those low income people from getting booted out didn't understand why they didn't get a lot of help from you guys -- when they asked -- did they?

Also, you might look at Tides' investment portfolio -- and those of their biggest "client" -- the Pew foundation...where some of the world's biggest polluters are represented very well, indeed.

Does IGC marshal the "troops" when those companies are involved??


-- Jackson Brown (, October 12, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ