From: Nancy Harkey, Ph.D. and Professor Emeritus [e-mail her]
On August 13th the Los Angeles Times ran a lengthy story on the re-emergence of the common bedbug—Cimex Lectularius. [Bed bugs Tuck Into Southland, By Leslie Earnest, Los Angeles Times, August 13, 2007]
Similar stories have been reported widely across the country.
However, the Southern California report seems to be the most extreme. One local pest control company says that seven years ago they averaged one or two calls a year about bedbug infestations; now they get 50 or more per week.
Another company was reported to have about 1000 inspections per month, up 700 percent from last year.
The bedbug plague was virtually conquered in the 1940s with the use of DDT, and exterminators suggest that restrictions on DDT use are one cause for the resurgence. Greatly increased world travel is given as a second causal factor, and the Times is careful to note that bed bugs are not strictly a lower socioeconomic problem.
However, proper control to combat bed bugs is expensive and most effective with multiple home visits by pest control services. Often, the recommendation is that furniture, clothing and even books be destroyed—something that would happen far less frequently in poorer homes. And, if there is infestation, the bugs can travel on virtually anything you take with you including your clothes.
So, I would suggest that it is not a coincidence that bed bugs have returned with a vengeance in Southern California, with its millions of poor immigrants, living sometimes three or four families to a dwelling and going out daily to clean our hotels, and motels and our wealthier private homes.
Reconquista by Cimex Lectularius is one more reason to think twice about mass immigration.
Harkey's mother emigrated from Scotland and her father from Norway. Her specialty at California State University at Pomona was biological psychology. Harkey describes herself as "a political conservative on most issues with first hand experience in how painful that can be in the academic setting."
From: Matthew Slater
Brenda Walker's Blog: Illegal Irish Revisited
In her blog, Walker complains: "Illegal Irish think they are special".
Apparently the author would put Irish in the same immigration category as Mexicans. But the Irish are Europeans who can readily be assimilated.
If U.S. heritage is a composite formed of all European nations, what is there not to like about Irish immigration?
Walker is influenced by PC rhetoric on race. Americans are not permitted nowadays to talk about immigration in terms of maintaining, much less enhancing, the European population that constitutes the historic American nation.
If Walker were to argue that America would benefit from mass immigration only if the immigrants were from European nations, she would promptly be condemned as " racist".
Accordingly, Walker is reduced to arguing that European immigration is as bad as Mexican immigration. But the Immigration Act of 1924 was designed to keep America European.
No non-white nation goes out of its way to encourage the immigration of the least assimilable groups.
One can argue that "illegals are illegal", wherever they come from. But Americans need to get beyond this nonsense of who is legal or not and start to discuss how to maintain America.
In other words, one million Irish illegals have to be better than one million legal immigrants from Mexico. Since the Irish are already English-speaking Europeans, they will assimilate in a generation.
The Irish already share much with America. In some ways—-race and culture—-they have merely moved from one European country to another.
The negative consequences of immigration that VDARE.COM dwells on—-depressed wages, crime, disease and failure to assimilate—- are not consequences of immigration as such but of immigration from non-European nations.
Walker is doing the race hustlers' job for them by opposing immigration from European countries.
The conclusion I draw from Walker is that she would be able to sleep better at night if her neighborhood filled up with legal immigrants from Mexico, Africa and Asia because there would be no illegal immigrants in her community.
Brenda Walker replies:
My argument with the illegal Irish is their hubris in the assumption that their cultural similarity to us relieves them of the requirement to wait their turn in the normal process of legal immigration. Their arrogance is over the top, and their worship of Teddy Kennedy is not endearing either.
I'm surprised that Slater cares so little about law, sovereignty and basic fairness. In my humble corner of Western Civilization, we value those things.
If we must have further immigration at all (America is full up by any environmental measure), then of course persons who share our language and values should be given preference. I have condemned multiculturalism many times as psychologically aberrant and destructive to the national community. I have criticized the cultures of "model immigrants" like Chinese and Indians as being a bad fit for our particular society.
And Mexicans? No one has accused me before of cutting the narco-invaders any slack. My VDARE.COM article Top Ten Reasons Why the US Should Not Marry Mexico was recognized by a leftist churchy group as containing one of the "Top 10 Most Offensive Quotes"
From: Ryan Kennedy (e-mail him)
In her blog, Walker indicts the illegal Irish but I think she misses a facet of their grievance.
Irish resent being lumped in with Latin American peasants and other non-white immigrants lapping upon our shores. And they may be right.
The Irish see themselves as productive citizens trying to succeed in the U.S. but resent the inconveniences and hoops they have to jump through to make it possible.
The Irish case speaks to VDARE.COM's point about how current immigration trends (legal and illegal) have cut off legitimate immigration from European countries.
But in fairness to Walker, I agree that the Irish are going about it the wrong way by demanding amnesty.
They should take a more subtle approach and lament about what good Americans they will become as opposed to other ethnic groups, mainly from Mexico, that are arriving in large numbers.
Asking for special consideration under those terms might make a better argument.
You know the old saw: you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar—and all that.
In case you were wondering, despite my Irish name I have not a drop of Irish blood.
Our name is Scottish. Please don't include me among those who boast of Irish blood when his ancestors have been in the US for over one hundred years.
Read Kennedy's previous letters here.
According to information provided to us from friends in the fight against illegal immigration and collected from the Congressional Research Service and the non-profit, civil rights organization Ohio Jobs and Justice PAC, the following represents a partial list of U. S. sanctuary cities through August 9, 2007.
We are sure that the list is much longer. Many more cities grant sanctuary than most people realize.
In one case, the entire state of Maine has been given sanctuary status.
We have noted in parenthesis disputes made by certain municipalities.
Alaska: Anchorage, Fairbanks (Note: the Mayor of Fairbanks disputes the listing.)
Arizona: Chandler, Phoenix
California: Bell Gardens, City of Industry, City of Commerce, Cypress, Davis, Diamond Bar, (Disputed), Downey, Fresno, Lakewood, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Lynwood, Maywood, Montebello, National City, Norwalk, Paramount, Pico Rivera, South Gate, San Bernardino, San Diego, Santa Cruz, San Francisco, San Jose, Sonoma County, Vernon, Watsonville, Wilmington,
Colorado: Aurora, Commerce City, Denver, Durango, Federal Heights, Fort Collins, Lafayette, Thornton, Westminster,
Connecticut: New Haven, (City council voted 25-1 to issue ID cards to illegals), Springfield (Disputed)
Florida: De Leon Springs, Deltona, Miami, Sanford, (disputed)
Georgia: Dalton. (disputed)
Illinois: Aurora, Chicago, Cicero, Elgin, Evanston,
Massachusetts: Cambridge, Orleans
Maine: Governor John Baldacci (D) signed an executive order making Maine the first state to give sanctuary to all illegal aliens
Maryland: Baltimore, Gaithersburg, Takoma Park,
Michigan: Ann Arbor, Detroit,
Minnesota: Minneapolis, St. Paul, Worthington,
New Jersey: Bogota, Bridgeton, Camden, Fort Lee, Hightstown, Jersey City, Lakewood, Newark, North Bergen, Plainfield, Princeton, Red Bank, Trenton, Union City, West New York
New Mexico: Albuquerque, Rio Arriba County, Santa Fe,
New York: Bay Shore, Brentwood, Central Islip, Farmingville, New York City, Peekskill, (Disputed), Riverhead, Mastic, Spring Valley Village, Uniondale, Westbury,
North Carolina : Charlotte, Durham, Raleigh, Winston-Salem
Ohio: Columbus, Painesville, [Disputed by Painesville's City Manager.]
Oklahoma: Oklahoma City, Tulsa
Oregon: Ashland, Gaston, Portland
Texas: Austin, Brownsville, Channelview, Denton, Dallas, El Cenizo, Ft. Worth, Houston, Laredo, Mc Allen, Port Arthur, San Antonio, (Disputed)
Utah: Provo, Salt Lake City,
Virginia: Fairfax County, Virginia Beach
Wyoming: Jackson Hole
Nixon and Leighton are part of Arizonans for Immigration Control in Tucson. For more information, contact them at their e-mail addresses.
From: An Unhappy American (e-mail him)
Re: Dave Gorak's Blog: Chicago Tribune's Erik Zorn: No Friend Of The Rule Of Law
As an American taxpaying citizen I demand to know why a known felon, a fugitive from justice, Elvira Arellano, living in a store front church in downtown Chicago since August 15, 2006 has not been put in prison.
Arellano came illegally, was deported, somewhere in between had a kid (an American anchor baby citizen!), re-entered, and then was arrested in 2002 at O'Hare Airport and was later convicted of working under a false Social Security number.
She was ordered to report for deportation August 15, 2006 but made the decision to defy the law to take refuge at her church. No federal, state or local law enforcement agency will pick this criminal up.
This is what it has come to: a felon publicly laughing at U.S. immigration law. And now Arellano is about to go to Washington D.C. to continue mocking America,
What will it take to get law and restored in this once-great nation?
From: Fred Porter (e-mail him)
Re: Rob Sanchez's Column: The Pearl Street Scam—-Or How To Displace American Workers Without Quite Breaking The Law
Thirty-five years ago my wife and I decided to have only three children since we felt that three would be all that we could raise and give a good education. And we wanted to keep America's population stable.
But what is the U.S. doing now? We are bringing in massive numbers of legal immigrants and allowing the illegal invasion to take over our country as the American politicians and people stand by and let it happen.
I don't know where loyalty has gone with our politicians and elected officials.But as for me, I have allegiance to only America.
From: Henry Mc Culloch (e-mail him)
Re: Joe Guzzardi's Column: Abolishing America (cont.): BBC Hypes Reconquista With "¿Hablas español?" Series
I read Guzzardi's column about the BBC's propaganda tour of America. It's impertinent of them to advocate destroying the character of the American nation, but not surprising. The BBC has been advocating the destruction of Great Britain for decades.
I wish those Mundo journalists had asked me if I "¿Hablas español?"
My answer, in English: would have been:
"Yes, I speak Spanish, and if we met in Mexico or Spain I would be happy to speak Spanish with you all day long. But I am an American, in America. Our national language is English, and that's the language I do my business in at home. If you can convince me you are a legitimate tourist visiting America who needs some help and really doesn't speak English, then I'll help you in Spanish. But making a TV program is not tourism – if you have any other questions, ask in English and I'll reply in English."
I used to speak Spanish in America at every opportunity, both for the practice and because I thought I was being hospitable.
Once I began to realize what mass immigration is doing to my country, I stopped.
Call me inhospitable, I guess.
McCulloch's VDARE.COM columns are here.