ICE feints on Sunday

The nationwide sweep of illegals that was announced to begin on Sunday did not begin on Sunday because it was announced. Arrests were few and far between, according to the media I checked. The targets went to the mattresses. 

Philadelphia was not one of the chosen cities, maybe because the local ICE office already is the most aggressive in the nation. 

In the weekend runup, all media outlets I checked ran the story of the impending “raids” (a loaded word, rather than “arrests,” but OK), and many indicated that the 2,000 targets already had due process — judicial hearings in which they were ordered to leave the country, and they simply refused.

So-called “immigrant advocates” rallied to their side, pledging to protect them.

A quick question — who rallies to your side when you go to court, lose and refuse to obey a court order? 

(I can actually think of some cases. Reporters who refuse to name their confidential sources or surrender their notes. You know what happens, usually? They go to jail.)

In its Monday coverage, the New York Times characterized those threatened by ICE as “undocumented migrant parents,” which may be true, and that they vaguely  “are not eligible to remain in the country,” but the Times neglected to explicitly state why.  

By my count, the story runs 34 paragraphs. You have to go two-thirds of the way down to find a quote from the government side, after drowning in quotes from supposed “victims” (actually law breakers) and from the “advocates.”

Trump critics say the president talked up the ICE raids specifically to create fear in immigrant communities. 

Actually, the fear exists among illegals, because legal immigrants have nothing to fear. If they actually are fearful, chalk that up to the advocates who never distinguish between legal and illegal. They are all just “immigrants” now. 

Trump may be employing psychological warfare to keep his opponents off balance, although I don’t credit him with being a strategic thinker like Carl von Clausewitz.

I may be wrong and ICE may pounce later in the week. The media will be filled with heart-rending  tales of the deported, while ignoring that their own illegal actions got them into the soup.

“Fight back,” the targeted shout. Against what? American law? 

Way back in 2010 I noted that “illegal” was the unspoken word in our national debate, and in the years following, terms such as “illegal alien,” used for many decades, were prohibited by most media outlets, following the AP Style Book. AP gave a lofty explanation that smelled like bull. It was a triumph of the PC Police. 

Style, shmyle. It was just an attempt to obfuscate.

Oh — if you are offended by the word “illegal,” there will be no apology. “No person is illegal,” I hear them bleat (looking at you Kirsten Gillibrand, among others), to which I ask, “Is any person a criminal?”

To them, such words are “dehumanizing.” To me, they are harsh — and apt. 

If you abuse immigrants, Elizabeth Warren said the other day, “you break a law of the United States.” I agree. And there should be consequences. How about when you break an immigration law of the United States? 

Hel-lo?

Let’s be clear on a few points:

1- No one has a “right” to be in the United States without permission, under U.S. law.

2- Any person who enters without permission is subject to removal.

3- ICE enforces U.S. law approved by Congress. So when some in Congress attack ICE for enforcing the laws Congress itself wrote, is that hypocrisy, political posturing or stupidity?

4- Polls with good reputations show a large majority of Americans oppose two things: deportation of millions of long-here illegals who have clean records.  They also oppose Sanctuary Cities.

If you support those who defy legitimate court orders, you are lining up with the anarchists. 

If you are a Sanctuary Citidiot, you implicitly are for Open Borders.

“No I am not,” they tell me.

If you believe anyone who gets in here is home free, and can’t be deported, that is Open Borders. How can you not see that? 

You think Open Borders is a good idea, warm and fuzzy? Gallup reports 750 million people would like to relocate and the U.S. is the top pick.

You think we could survive the arrival of 300-400 million people? Think of jobs, housing, schooling, medical care — even if they came from Norway, Trump’s most favored nation, they would swamp us.

C’mon, man, as Joe Biden might say. 

As is, the U.S. accepts close to 1 million immigrants each year, almost as much as the rest of the world combined. So our door is open. Almost 90 percent of new Americans are nonwhite. So we are not bigots.

I am 110 percent for legal immigration and I’ve been writing about this for at least a decade. I have come up with a five-point plan that would seal the border, install a statute of limitations, jail employers who hire illegals, and give those people a path to legality — but not citizenship. I offer no rewards for breaking our laws.

To me, it is fair, just and humane. If you agree, talk it up. If not, we are still friends.