Via Brenda Walker’s blog at Lmitstogrowth.org, I see that Daniel Pipes has an article in the New York Sun on the world wide immigration crisis.

Ever resourceful, migrants repaired farther south, now to Senegal. The Canaries run takes less than a day from Morocco but three days from Mauritania and seven to 10 days from Senegal. Notoriously rough seas off West Africa can easily overwhelm the open wooden fishing boats and their single outboard engines as they cover the 900 miles.

The Spanish ambassador-at-large for humanitarian issues, Manuel Pombo, has reported that up to 40% of those attempting to reach the Canaries die en route. The head of the Red Crescent in Mauritania, Ahmedou Ould Haye, has called it “collective suicide.” Another observer sadly predicted, “Three months or so later, some of these sorry vessels may creep into the Caribbean – as ghost ships, or worse.”[New Route to the West, May 30, 2006]

Of course, this is exactly what Jean Raspail predicted in Camp of the Saints , and the question continues to be: will the West fight back? In the Canary Islands, the answer is no. Pipes reports that “the waves of immigration keep growing, in large part because once they land on Spanish territory, their reception is so accommodating and few illegals are ever deported.”

That’s a story that Americans are becoming more and more familiar with.

Academia Semillas del Pueblo charter school (see earlier blog entry) has decided to respond to accusations of racism…they conveniently do not mention the assault on a KABC reporter earlier this morning in front of their school.

They do not mention confiscating his tapes either…but they do blab on about Aztecan culture an awful lot.

Press Release here. [PDF here.]

California public schools…gotta love em!

Don’t forget!! Tonight, VDARE.com takes a closer look at the curriculum and faculty of this La Raza associate/taxpayer-funded school.

The San Francisco Chronicle is definitely not where one would expect to find a powerful and incisive column promoting the immigration skeptic cause. Yet this is what appeared yesterday. [Listening to Legal Immigrants – Cinnamon Stillwell - Wednesday May 31 2006]

Discussing the “hundreds of e mail” she received following an acidic column denouncing the anti-white, leftist and revanchist tendencies of the pro- Amnesty demonstrations culminating in the May Day “Day without Immigrants”, Stilwell is mainly interested that so many document the fury felt by large numbers of legal immigrants at the arrogant claim to privilege they saw on the streets:

Manny Madriaga of San Jose was not moved by the boycott, either:
I am a small businessman and a naturalized citizen. I immigrated to the U.S. because it is a nation of laws and it has a vibrant democracy. Any group that shoves signs in our collective faces that they are above the law [does] not have a place in the United States of America.

Most of her reported correspondents are ordinary members of the public, but she does draw attention to the redoubtable Yeh Ling Ling, a prize exhibit for the argument that immigrants can indeed add value to their host countries.

In fact, immigrant skepticism of immigration goes far beyond simple resentment that others get easier access. Immigrants frequently bear the brunt of the damage done to wage rates, education services and healthcare by further floods of newcomers. Sometimes they are from a different ethnic group or social class than those coming later. And many, like Mr. Madriaga quoted above, came here as the result of a calculated, harsh decision – that America was in some sense, superior to their native land. They do not want the faults of the “Old Country” following them.

The story is being followed by several people including Michelle Malkin and WorldNetDaily.

Here’s the breakdown:

There is a La Raza sponsored, MeCHA-esque charter school (a public school funded by taxpayers) in Los Angeles causing an awful lot of controversy as of late. From a Reconquista radical, racist Principal (Marcos Aguilar) to an appalling curriculum (think Aztec Dancing and Tai Chi) this school is a nightmare!

In fact, my column tonight takes a closer look the curriculum, faculty and academic objectives of Academia Semillas del Pueblo.

HOWEVER…the story this afternoon is about a reporter for KABC who was assaulted this morning while trying to interview the Principal among others at the school.

You won’t believe this…or maybe you will.

WorldNetDaily just released the latest details of this terrifying and still unfolding story:

Reporter claims assault at ‘racist’ public school; Principal allegedly gave orders to ‘thug’ who drove on curb, tackled radio man by Art Moore 6/01/06]

If you’re as appalled as we are by the behavior of this public school, check back in this evening for more background on Academia Semillas.

The despicable British MP George Galloway recently said that it would be “morally justified” for some random Jihadi to blow up the Prime Minister of England. Jay Nordlinger in National Review Online has a question that I think is fairly clueless:

Who keeps electing Galloway to office, by the way? He doesn’t live in a police state. He doesn’t shoot himself in. It’s British people—which is vexing, indeed.Jay Nordlinger, National Review Online, June 1, 2006

Er, no. Not exactly British people, as such.

Galloway represents Bethnal Green and Bow, a constituency dominated electorally by its 45,000 Muslims. To give you an idea, the Conservative candidate was Shahagir Bakth Faruk.

Galloway ran for the British parliament, in effect, not by running against Tony Blair’s policy, which would be legitimate, but by running against Britain. He won. Britain lost.

His successful and bitter single-issue campaign to oust Oona King from one of the most Muslim seats in the country has secured his place in British political history.[BBC NEWS | Politics | Election 2005 | Galloway's East End street fight]

So, “British people” didn’t vote for Galloway. What happened is that large districts of Britain are dominated by Muslims. That’s vexing. It was preventable, too.

Ted Kennedy, the man who gave us the 1965 Immigration act, has done it again.

When one of Juan Mann’s whistleblowers wrote this, recently:

There is even a provision to allow affidavits from day labor centers (what’s next—affidavits for tamale vendors and popsicle vendors?) to “prove” employment; fines of up to $10K for immigration officers who dare to use evidence that aliens have committed fraud in immigration applications to disbar them from citizenship;

we weren’t sure what section he meant, or if it was in the public text of the bill.

However, there’s a story in the Washington Times about an interview with the Cuban-born head of the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services Emilio Gonzalez, who said

On the issue of information sharing and confidentiality of applications, Mr. Gonzalez said the law usually allows his agency to share information when its employees come across an application that raises questions. But he said the 1986 amnesty included confidentiality provisions that prohibited sharing information from those applications, and he said the Senate bill makes the same mistake.

“We ought not to be kept from using that information,” he said.

The issue has already been fought out in the Senate, when Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, offered an amendment to change the confidentiality requirements. His amendment failed on a tie vote, 49-49.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat and a key backer of the Senate bill, fought Mr. Cornyn’s amendment. He said the underlying bill struck a balance that still allows law enforcement to go after cheaters, while at the same time not discouraging illegal aliens from coming forward. [Immigration agency head slams Senate's alien bill The Washington Times, June 1, 2006]

This is the provision that says that if the aliens commit fraud during the interview, that can’t be used against them, and also, what concerns Mr. Gonzalez, that if they let slip, somehow, that they’re terrorists, that can’t be used against them either.

S. 2611 has the following provision, and this version may include some of the language that was removed by Kennedy.

`SEC. 245B (e) Confidentiality of Information-

`(1) IN GENERAL- Except as otherwise provided in this section, no Federal agency or bureau, nor any officer or employee of such agency or bureau, may–

`(A) use the information furnished by the applicant pursuant to an application filed under paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a) for any purpose other than to make a determination on the application;

`(B) make any publication through which the information furnished by any particular applicant can be identified; or

`(C) permit anyone other than the sworn officers and employees of such agency, bureau, or approved entity, as approved by the Secretary of Homeland Security, to examine individual applications that have been filed.

`(2) REQUIRED DISCLOSURES- The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State shall provide the information furnished pursuant to an application filed under paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a), and any other information derived from such furnished information, to a duly recognized law enforcement entity in connection with a criminal investigation or prosecution or a national security investigation or prosecution, in each instance about an individual suspect or group of suspects, when such information is requested in writing by such entity.

`(3) CRIMINAL PENALTY- Any person who knowingly uses, publishes, or permits information to be examined in violation of this subsection shall be fined not more than $10,000.

Ted Kennedy was apparently worried that “sharing information would discourage some aliens from coming forward because they would fear making an innocent mistake that would hurt them later. “

You can see some the results of the 1986 amnesty “Red Cover” confidentiality provisions here and here.

UPDATE: Note: Remember, Juan Mann wrote that

scandalously, no copy of the final bill is as yet available to the public.

So I can’t confirm what my correspondent tells me was in the
early versions—and it’s quite possible that it will all be law beforeAmericans know anything about it.