Sunday, May 02, 2010

USA: Immigrant Workers’ Struggle Not Over

Written by Socialist Appeal
Thursday, 29 April 2010

At the forefront of the workers’ movement in the last few years have been undocumented immigrants, most of them from Latin America. In the Spring of 2006, they poured onto the streets by the millions, as decades of discrimination and exploitation boiled to the surface. The traditional non-profits, labor leaders, and “progressives” in general were unable to control the movement when it first erupted. Lacking confidence in or an understanding of how the working class moves, they were taken completely by surprise.

Read the rest here



SecondComingOfBast said...

Wow! Just legalize every damn one of them, huh? Just like that. If that happens, at least two thirds of them will register as Democrats. That old "graveyard of progressive ideals" will get about sixteen million fresh corpses to rot in it. It would serve the Democrats right if they were to register under some kind of socialist or workers or communist party. Of course if they did that the Dems would change their tunes real quick.

Palin-Arapaio 2012

The Sentinel said...

I love how Orwellian terms such as ‘undocumented immigrants’ are used to sully the fact they are undocumented because they are illegal and they are illegal because they have no respect for the laws of the US and they are not immigrants at all but invaders.

It is completely surreal that anyone would think acting this way would bring anything other then ‘discrimination’ and ‘exploitation’ and quite clearly despite these claims they still think they are better off living illegally in someone else’s country then legally in their own - which in itself tells you what will become of large swathes of the US when its demographics begin to fully resemble the places these people move away from in the first place.

It is even more surreal that they feel they have the right to ‘pour onto the streets’ in their ‘millions’ in protest of the fact that because they have chosen to break the law and processes of the US they are not reaping the same benefits as those who not only abide by that law, but are part of a generational chain that has built America.

These protests are not really about ‘rights’ (clearly if they wanted rights in the US they would have obtained them legally) but often very vocal and aggressive threats and provocations of “this is our continent not yours!” and the like, which clearly is not going to go well for Americans in the future as more numbers join their ranks, and is completely erroneous anyway as ‘La Raza’ are a top heavy mixture of Hispanics with Nahuas and the other indigenous peoples.

SecondComingOfBast said...

This issue is the main reason people are not now referring to President McCain. Not that Obama was any better on the issue, but no one expected any better from a Democrat. When McCain promoted his and Kennedy's amnesty bill, it had the effect of insuring that a large percentage of Republican voters stayed away from the polls after he got the GOP nomination. There were plenty of other reasons, to be sure, but that was certainly a major factor. The only reason I voted for McCain was I was hoping if he won the old bastard would drop dead within a week or two and Palin would take his place.

roman said...

What is it that the writers of the "Socialist Appeal" are looking to accomplish with this curious pronouncement.."And of course, nothing would be done to address the economic and social crisis in Latin America which forces immigration in the first place."

Would it be presumptious of me to conclude that what is called for here is that there should be some kind of monetary aid transfer from the USA to Latin America? As if that would somehow "solve" the immigration problem.
I could get better problem-solving reasoning from a third grader with a failing grade.
Also, last I checked, there is an actual "social and economic" crisis right here in the good old USA. Once we take care of Numero Uno, we can start taking care of the rest. Until that time, we need to concentrate on strenghtening our economy. The way we do that is to make sure that our immigration laws are enforced 100%. I am pretty sure that if they are not, we will become just like those poor unfortunate illegal aliens desperately seeking work just to survive.

Nevin said...

All Americans are IMMIGRANTS! Every single person who stepped their foot on the soil of North America, including the Native Americans are immigrants. They have migrated from another land, far far away.... It makes me laugh how most Americans forget that simple fact....

Clearly, in the past and obviously in the present, every single time a new wave of migration takes place, the settled migrants react with much anger and disdain towards the new comers. It was the same when Jews, Irish, eastern Europeans came in waves... and now we see is for the people of Latin background....

This is an old story, which is being repeated over and over again....

I would also like to add one more comment.... if USA didn't sign the NAFTA agreement with Mexico and various other South American nations, perhaps we wouldn't see such large waves of people looking for work.... If Mexican markets were not flooded with cheap and genetically engineered corn, perhaps we wouldn't see families desperately looking for work....

Perhaps we must look at our own policies before taking it out on the weakest and the poorest!

The Sentinel said...


The major difference is that all Americans, by definition, are legal immigrants; the waves of people you mention ‘the Jews, Irish, eastern Europeans’ overwhelmingly came legally, they didn’t just completely disregard the laws and processes of the US. They underwent due process and become entitled to be Americans.

This is a different scenario altogether, and these people are not immigrants as immigration is a legal process, these people are invaders and invaders by the million.

I think it is somewhat flimsy to say that cheap corn has spurned this enormous invasion, Mexico and the Latin countries have always fallen far behind the western nations, one failed state after another.

If there is any aid to give, then surely it must be at source in the countries of the peoples now flocking virtually unchecked into the US. Or else taken to its logical conclusion on that emotive narrative, the whole of Mexico, Guatemala etc will move to the US and would be ‘entitled’ to.

Of course this scenario is untenable. The most obvious outcome is that the US, or large swathes of it will merely resemble the places these people want to leave and it will benefit no one.

When I visit the US, I, like everyone else have to undergo a fairly lengthy and sometimes costly procedure including criminal checks; permanent migrants have to undergo background, health and financial checks etc and this is done, quite obviously, to protect the whole country and its interests.

Why should I or anyone else even bother to do this if the message is that the US is fair game for all; open doors no questions asked?

A country that cannot protect its own borders is no longer a country at all.

Frank Partisan said...

I'll reply tonight.

SecondComingOfBast said...


"A country that cannot protect its own borders is no longer a country at all"

It's not a matter of CANNOT it's a matter of WILL NOT. The US has ceased being a constitutional republic for quite some time now. It's now all about two parties, both bought and paid for, jostling for power and influence while the real power brokers hedge their bets.

The Marxist site was correct in some ways. The immigrants are nothing but pawns.

Nevin said...

the sentinel:

Let me clarify some of my points....

When Jews, Irish or Eastern Europeans were "invading" (your word), there were no laws during that time, as we know it today. For example, the recent law that was past in Arizona where if you look like a "Latino", you can be stopped at any time and ask for documentation... it's like having invisible "check points" everywhere...

What is going on lately is nothing more then “non-whites” invading our land. If it was not Mexicans or Guatemalans who were coming in waves, but Swedish or Danish, you can bet your dollar that no-one would be bothered or be angry about the “Invaders”…. so there is something deeply racist going on here…. Even the word “invader” is a loaded word….

When the Irish came, they were utterly rejected by society. They were seen as poor and uneducated. There were signs that was posted as “no Irish”, or people wouldn’t rent their apartments if you were of Irish decent… In short, racism is racism…

Of course every country has the right to protect their border. I do not disagree with you there… but it’s the way that is being done is bothering me a lot. The racist attitude of the majority is a little discomforting… Especially you as a European should know with your bloody wars for centuries that rejecting the other or kicking the other out was always painful and bloody. Let me clarify again!

I am not saying there shouldn’t be proper immigration laws and regulations. There should be, and the new comers should be properly taken care of… With housing, educating and jobs. They should be slowly but surely be part of the American psyche just like many Americans.

As it stands, they are nothing more then slaves. It is ok for Mexicans to come and work as day laborers for pennies but it is not ok if they want to stay for the night. They must be invisible and quite. They must shut up and put up… Give me a break! We are living in 2010…. We must treat each other with more respect…

As for the cheap and genetically engineered corn, I didn’t say that was the only reason, but it is such policies that keep third world countries in “third world”. It is such behavior by the rich nations that keep the poor nations in it’s place… it’s the system…. And the corn issue or the NAFTA agreement is just an example. I am not saying Mexican government is not responsible for being poor: corruption and dishonesty run a-muck in the upper management within their government… So their own government is part of the problem. After all they are the ones that sign agreements such as NAFTA....

We cannot simplify a very complicated problem… that is all I am saying...

The Sentinel said...


You are, of course, right.

The same situation is happening everywhere in the western world.

My country is an island for Christ sakes but still they invade in their hundreds of thousands.

But one former government advisors cleared it all up for us; biazzarly Liebour were claiming incompetence when the real reasons were thus:

“Andrew Neather said the mass influx of migrant workers seen in recent years was not the result of a mistake or miscalculation but rather a policy the party preferred not to reveal to its core voters…

"Mass migration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural," he wrote in in the London Evening Standard.

"I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended - even if it wasn't its main purpose - to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date."

So they deliberately opened the borders without any mandate, didn’t tell the people they were doing it because they knew it would be voricosuly opposed and lied about what was happening when challenged.

And not for the much touted ‘economic’ reason, but purely to forever change the demographics of the UK and rub their political opponent’s nose in it (what do you rub a dogs nose in?)

Of course, it is just a happy coincidence that these people will also vote for them too.

But as I said, this is happening all over the western world as we speak and is an integral part of the ‘globalsisation’ process that will make slaves of us all.

The Sentinel said...


Let me clarify:

I didn’t use the word 'invader' in relation to ‘Jews, Irish or Eastern Europeans’ so that is a complete misrepresentation.

I used it in relation to the millions upon millions of people from south of the border who totally and contemptuously ignore US law, processes and borders and smuggle themselves into the US bypassing all immigration channels; as I noted, immigration is a legal process and these people are not illegal immigrants but invaders.

You are wrong that there were no laws during the time of the mass emigrations into the US of ‘Jews, Irish or Eastern Europeans’ because there were.

In fact the US had long took an interest in who was coming into their country; from 1820 the federal government began formally documenting immigrants; In 1848, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, concluding the Mexican War, extended U.S. citizenship to approximately 60,000 Mexican residents of the New Mexico Territory and 4,000 living in California and the first formal immigration law was passed in 1875 by the Page Act.

But either ways there are most certainly clear cut laws now, where we are today.

The recent law in Arizona does not allow for the situation you describe “where if you look like a "Latino", you can be stopped at any time and ask for documentation” - that is a hysterical leftist invention; it only allows officers to check the status of people they already have detained for suspicion of violating the law irregardless of ethnicity.

As for if it were it “Swedish or Danish” coming to the US waves “you can bet your dollar that no-one would be bothered or be angry” two things on that:

One, there have already been waves of Swedes and Danes to the US, but they did it legally and followed due process and are not known for forming extremely violent criminal gangs, for instance; Federal authorities now place gang membership at 1,000,000 members and as responsible for 80% of all crime in the US; in 1999 47% of all gang members were reported to be Hispanic and since 2005, during the period of this great invasion of the US, the Federal Government report another 200,000 new gang members.

Secondly you claim that no-one would be bothered about the former immigration and that would be for the reasons above I would suggest, as well as the fact that they have totally assimilated into the US; but surely if your statement is true then, being a democracy, the will of the people is supreme anyway?

When the Irish came they were mostly ‘poor and uneducated’, that is why they came, but they were also hard working and quickly found employment in the docks, construction and notably the police service. But you make the frequent (and frequently deliberate) mistake of the hard left in equating all tensions to ‘racism’ when in reality the Irish are pretty much racially the same as the rest of the British and North Europeans (R1b.) So perhaps you mean xenophobic.

I understand that you are a European too (Turkish I believe so, according to the EU if not geography) and in that case you would also know about the bloody conflicts throughout Europe borne out by irreconcilable differences, such as the still ongoing and age old animosity between the Turks and Greeks that has so often spilled into violence (the genocide of the Armenian Christians would be another salient example) and the more recent violent explosions in places like Bosnia and Kosovo. These conflicts only ended when the vying groups were separated.

The Sentinel said...

Perhaps you know something of the situation in places like Scandinavia and France where social cohesion has rapidly deteriorated in recent times due to the tensions brought about by the sudden mass immigration of alien and diametrically opposed cultures?

The French police describe it as akin to a civil war in many areas of France and the Scandinavians are struggling to control the issue; indeed there was more rioting in Sweden’s Malmö over the weekend, where firemen now have to wear bullet proof jackets and special Kevlar helmets and the police need contracted security to guard their stations and cannot patrol with less then two cars.

All over Scandinavia crime has soared, most especially rape with the new arrivals dominating the new increased rape rate not only in massive disproportion to their numbers but in actuality. If you doubt any of this (and I have been through this in detail on this blog in the past) we can certainly discuss it further and I can provide the evidence.

The point being that serious problems do not usually occur within homogenous or well assimilated countries; Sweden was once one of the safest countries in the world, for instance, but now heads the rape rate in Europe.

You say:

“As it stands, they are nothing more then slaves. It is ok for Mexicans to come and work as day laborers for pennies but it is not ok if they want to stay for the night”

But again, two things on that:

First, it is not OK; they have entered the country illegally.

Secondly, do you really think that the ordinary Joe would employ them for the regular rate when they can pay them next to nothing? And whose fault is it that they are in that situation?

This invasion has only been semi-tolerated by the masses purely because it offered cheap labour with unconditional employment; when that situation ends, the work will dry up and all that will happen is that US workers will have millions more in competition, and competition that is willing to work very cheaply and under poor conditions.

Of course it is not just cheap corn that affects the Latin countries but a series of undermining actions, but you have hit the nail on the head that it is ultimately the fault of their own governments as it could not happen without their consent, mostly obtained through corruption and so the people must change their reality.

All in all, if you seriously believe that the illegal invaders in the US have some sort of right to be there on the emotive basis you proscribe, then like I said, surely that must extend to the whole of Latin America? Why allow millions the opportunity you seem to believe they are entitled to but deny it to millions of others?

And what will happen to the US if entire swathes of it resemble the demographics of Mexico etc? Do you really not believe that it will then become exactly like Mexico etc?

And if not, why not?

You are right: This is a very complicated problem with serious long term implications.

Nevin said...

You have said your point and I have said mine.... I will respectfully agree to disagree with you on every point you make....

The Sentinel said...


No worries and it is, of course, your absolute right to disagree with me on principle.

But I would respectfully ask how you can possibly disagree with facts such as the history of US immigration control, the Fourth Amendment preventing searches based solely on racial profiling, Hispanic gangs in the US and their massive impact on crime, age old Turkish / Greek hatred, violence and division, the exponontional rise in rape in Scandinavian states and cities with the recent non-western immigrants being responsible for it the vast majority of it, French police considering that many parts of France are akin to a state of civil war, people being incapable of being racist towards people of the same race, democracy being the will of the majority, and ‘illegal workers’ quite naturally attracting a lower pay rate and unconditional employment…

I also thought that these were very simple questions:

And what will happen to the US if entire swathes of it resemble the demographics of Mexico etc? Do you really not believe that it will then become exactly like Mexico etc?

And if not, why not?

But of course, again it is your absolute right not to answer them and I respect that too.

I was just debating with you.

SecondComingOfBast said...

I think the problem with the Irish was an anti-Catholic thang. And of course, there have always been immigration laws in the US. It's just been convenient to ignore them in the US when it comes to Mexican immigration because of the need (actually the desire) for cheap labor and the fact that the US is loathe to put troops on their border (in fact there's a law against it which should be repealed), and finally they're too cheap to put that much money and resources into immigration enforcement, which should be funded at the expense, if necessary, of the same social service resources that are being drained by illegal aliens (and others).

I'm surprised at you, Ren, no fortieth anniversary post about the Kent State "Massacre"? I'm going to be doing one defending the National Guard. I wouldn't want a bunch of thugs throwing rocks at me either.

The Sentinel said...


“I think the problem with the Irish was an anti-Catholic thang.”

Yes, of course it was.

And going all the way back to 1840’s too with the Nativist / Know Nothing movement and the subsequent formation of the American Republican Party.

The movement and party were opposed to Catholic immigration (primarily Irish and German at the time) because they regarded Catholicism as hostile to American values and also as being controlled by the Pope in Rome.

It had nothing to do with race and in any case, as already mentioned, these groups were racially akin to the majority of Americans in that era in any case.

Frank Partisan said...

Nevin: I think my blog is more popular with the right, than the left. Atleast you're thick skinned enough to comment here.

You're correct to acknowledge, there is a point when arguments become circular.

I agree with the thrust of what you're saying. NAFTA has much to do with the immigration situation. Since the US economy tanked, several people are returning to Mexico.

Pagan: I think Obama, McCain and Bush43 are on the same page on immigration.

Ideas like opening the borders, or the bigger idea of a federation of American states, from Canada to Brazil aren't raised to be part of immediate legislation. That doesn't mean they don't have impact. When Chavez came to power, he talked about gentler capitalism. Ideas like expropriations of the commanding heights of the economy and worker's control, was the impact of spreading advance ideas.

Except for fringe Tea Party types, even Republicans overwhelmingly support some immigration reform.

Obama and the reformists, lower the bar all the time, just like on healthcare.

Immigrants have been so beaten down, they are desperate even for crumbs.

I don't forward to circular arguments about Kent State.

Roman: I think if Obrador becomes Mexico's next president, the situation would be better.

I assume as long as their capitalism, there will be guest worker programs.

I believe this crisis, is more severe than being portrayed. All governments are going to be cutting back. It's a crisis of over accumulation. The US will become more protectionist in the next period.

Sentinel: There is unity in opposites. In the US, wealthy, white, Suburban teens listen to Afro-American hip hop. Black teens go to Disney movies.

The gangs are lumpen elements, not welcome in any country. That is not what the discussion is about. The immigrant rights movement is a working class movement, with church and union support.

I want to go on to another topic. OK to get last words in.

SecondComingOfBast said...

I'm all for immigration reform. I just want the borders secured first. That's what most people want. Secure the borders, then we'll talk about it. If the borders aren't secure, we have nothing to discuss.

Larry Gambone said...

Nothing would make me happier than Mexicans re-occupying the territories stolen from them in the Mexican War. Bring em on! Also like Pagan points out, when "legalized" these immigrants will not vote for the Repuglies, many indeed, might consider parties on the left, not necessarily the Dems. All in all it means the end of the old, white, rich, (or wannabee) reactionary, racist, male domination. A victory for everyone, world wide, except the aforementioned. Sometimes life IS good!

The Sentinel said...


So that’s how you see this then: As an invasion to ‘re-occupy territories’ formerly of Mexico? If so, then what right do they have to go outside these states?

And you don’t think the American people have any right to take objection to that? Its “racist” if they do?

Especially considering that they built it into what it is today, over the barren wasteland it was when the Mexicans had it?

And what do you think will happen when the demographics resemble Mexico once more?

It will turn back into Mexico and the crappy, backward, corrupt hell hole that all these people are fleeing. Where should they invade next to get away from that failure, Larry? Hopefully somewhere you actually live and can experience this ‘enrichment’ firsthand rather then leering at the prospect of it from afar.

How about European nationalists ‘re-occupying the territories stolen from them’ by the un-mandated mass immigration fostered upon them by corrupt, treasonous far left elites?

In the UK certainly not only has there never been a mandate for it and the massive changes it has brought (like suicide bombings in my capital for one) but these treasonous thieves of Liebour actually secretly organised mass immigration solely to change the demographics of the UK and blatantly gerrymander, knowing that the vast majority of Britons would not have allowed it – and claimed incompetence was to blame when the situation become all to apparent!

I’ll bet you have a different take on that ‘re-occupying of ‘stolen territories.’ A very different take indeed.

You are right when you say:

“All in all it means the end of the old, white, rich, (or wannabee) reactionary, racist, male”

Putting aside the fact that the vast majority of white males are neither rich, old or racist, but you couldn’t be more wrong when you say it will be a:

“A victory for everyone”

It will be a disaster for everyone in that region: The whole place will pass from the first world to the third world in the blink of an eye and the very conditions these people wanted to escape will become an all too familiar reality for them once more.

It already is in large swathes of LA, San Diego, El Paso etc etc

Larry Gambone said...

No Sentinel, I am referring not to all white males, but only those who are reactionary, racist and well-off, which generally means, the older generation of that group. (The group that Micheal Moore wrote about in "Stupid White Men.") I am obviously not referring to socialist, anarchist, progressive or trade union white males.

As for your analogy with European immigration, your immigrants have not seized the vast majority of the country, shunted you into a corner and treated Europeans with racist contempt like what happened to the inhabitants of what once was the northern part of Mexico.

Larry Gambone said...

And we do have immigrants from Latin America here in Canada and I have yet to hear anyone say a bad thing about them as a group. Generally, they are welcomed and accepted here. But then Vancouver is the most multicultural city on Earth, (with Toronto a close second) and it is a matter of pride with us Canucks. Indeed, even 10 years ago, 40% couples under 30 years of age in Vancouver were of mixed race. Must be even higher now. (And Vancouver has been voted time and again one of the best cities to live in in the world.)

SecondComingOfBast said...


I don't know that much about Canada, but I have a sneaking suspicion that most of your Latin American immigrants, probably almost all of them, immigrated to Canada legally, and were legally documented and registered. The US has more than ten million illegals and we don't know who, what, or exactly where they are or what they are doing. That's just the difference.

The border towns have become pure hell holes, with drug gangs, murders, kidnappings, extortion, and general all around chaos. In some areas its literally a war zone. We have entire sections of major American cities in the west that have become havens for illegals, and they too are sliding into near anarchy (and I don't mean anarchy in a benign way).

It's not only Mexicans. They also come from Honduras, Guatamala, and El Salvador.

Gloat all you want. Just be aware that if the US goes to hell, Canada damn sure isn't going to be too far behind, I promise you that. Luckily, the US might be able to pull itself together over time. It's not a sure bet, but its slightly possible, depending on how far we are willing to go to do it. I think by that time the word progressive will be a pretty dirty word everywhere, maybe even in Boston and San Francisco. It hasn't been that long ago that California and Massachusetts helped re-elect Ronald Reagan, you know.

One thing I can guarantee you is the US, if we do survive and pull ourselves together aren't going to be too quick to be the big brother protector of the rest of the world, and that will include Canada every bit as much as the other ingrates of the world.

We might "need" others. That's arguable. What is beyond dispute is that the rest of the world just can't get alone without us, it seems. Well, the time might be coming when they all have to sink or swim. Don't look for a lifeline when you start to sink the next time.

The Sentinel said...


I’m not sure how most of that directly relates to the situation in the US, but no worries.

As much of it is anecdotal, I could relate my anecdotal views too, having been based in Canada for some time in the past, as you know, but I always think it is better to stick to the facts.

A couple of other observations first though:

Although you have always seemed to be somewhat conflicted in your political direction, alluding to Socialism with total state control one hand to the diametrically opposed Anarchism with none on the other, you now seem to have added ardent nationalist to the list, and ardent ethno-nationalism at that. Curious.

You also seem to be advocating sweeping racial generalisations too – well at least of whites, or as you refer to it: “that group.” Perhaps you could name some of the people or organisations “of that group” to clarify it, Larry.

And the truth is Larry, I doubt very much you have ever seen anarchy in practice, you know first hand (and a patient you have had to clean up after with severe diarrhoea and projectile vomiting doesn’t count.)

Onto Europe though and my ‘analogy’ and your claim that “immigrants have not seized the vast majority of the country.” Lets look at the UK, say its capital city London where less then 22% of school children are now white; less then 12% in Newham, which borders Barking and Dagenham (and is now, unsurprisingly, a BNP a stronghold) and UK’s second city, Birmingham, where indigenous Britons are already a minority and I think we can see where your claims are heading in reality.

And lets stick with the UK for your second claim along the lines of “treated Europeans with racist contempt” (although I could really start anywhere, like Scandinavia and its 20 fold rape increase since non-western immigration began 20 years ago – six fold for the rape of children – and not only the disproportionate domination of that crime by non-western immigrants but also the actuality along with its majority of indigenous victims) and cite just a couple of examples:

Lets start with one just yesterday when a white dad taking his 5 year old child for walk wandered into the ‘wrong’ park in the ‘wrong’ part of town and quickly got surrounded, beaten and slashed by 20 Asians purely for being white:

Or maybe the day before that when a white reporter wondered into the ‘wrong’ part of another town investigating the rampant Third World style electoral fraud taking place there and was promptly surrounded and beaten by around 8 Asians (apparently acting on behalf of an Asian local election candidate) fearing for his life until some brave man passing in a car pitched in to help.

The Sentinel said...

Or lets get to some more serious incidents like the tragic youngster 15 year old Kris Donaldson - barely heard of in the UK - who for the crime of being a "white boy from the McCulloch Street area" was picked up by an Asian gang, driven to a deserted spot, held down and stabbed 13 times. He sustained internal injuries to three arteries, one of his lungs, his liver and a kidney. He was castrated, had his tongue cut out, was doused in petrol, set on fire and left to die.

Or what about 17 years old Ross Parker, attacked by a gang of Asian Muslim youths, some wearing balaclavas, who that evening had planned "to find a white male to attack simply because he was white" They warned Parker he had "better start running" and quickly sprayed him in the face with CS gas. He was punched in the stomach, repeatedly kicked and stamped upon, struck with a hammer, and then stabbed three times through the throat and chest with a foot-long hunting knife The knife penetrated right through his body on two occasions and as a result Parker bled to death. After the murder, Awan, brandishing the bloodied knife, exclaimed "cherish the blood".

Or maybe this:

“A hidden world in which Asian men “groom” young white girls for sex has been exposed with the jailing yesterday of two men for child-abuse offences…

The trial came amid growing concern at the attitudes of some Asian men towards white girls which campaigners for women claim few people wish to address.

Parents have complained that in parts of the country with large Asian communities white girls as young as 12 are being targeted for sex by older Asian men yet the authorities are unwilling to act because of fears of being labelled racist.

Ann Cryer, a Labour member of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, has been at the forefront of attempting to tackle the problem after receiving complaints from mothers in her constituency about young Asian men targeting their under-age daughters.

Although campaigners claim that hundreds of young girls are already being passed around men within the Asian community for sex, she said that attempts to raise the problem with community leaders had met with little success, with most of them being in a state of denial about it…

Parents claim that criminal networks are able to prey on young girls because the authorities are reluctant to tackle the issue for fear of upsetting race relations in areas of the North West with large ethnic minority communities.

However, Ms Cryer added: “I think there is a problem with the view Asian men generally have about white women. Their view about white women is generally fairly low. They do not seem to understand that there are white girls as moral and as good as Asian girls.”

So you see Larry, your claims don’t hold water in reality.

The Sentinel said...

But anyway, back to Canada, Latin Americans account for less then 1% of the Canadian population according to the 2006 census and only 1.4% of Vancouver and as Pagan said it is safe to say that they came legally; but anyhow, given the demographics you describe it is hardly surprising to find that beneath the artificial gloss, Vancouver has the highest rate of gun crime in Canada and is described by Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan as being “Canada's gang capital” – still pretty lame at the moment though with just 55 murders in 2007-2008.

Compare that to 30% Latinos and 386 reported murders in LA. Or the 1000000 gang members US wide authorities say are responsible for 80% of all crime, of which 47% were Latino in 1999. With another 200000 added since 2005 that figure will much higher now.

None of this is a very exiting prospect for the ordinary Joe, I would say Larry; you know, the ones who just want to enjoy life in a country that resembles their culture and values and without a political axe to grind. Or “that group” as you euphemise.

Simple question again Larry:

What will happen to the US if entire swathes of it resemble the demographics of Mexico etc? Do you really not believe that it will then become exactly like Mexico etc?

And if not, why not?

Larry Gambone said...

Virtually all the crime that Pagan refers to is artificial in nature. It exists because drug addiction is treated as a crime and not as a medical problem. Decriminalize it and all that crime disappears. There is always a certain amount of crime associated with immigration - look at my own people, the Italians. But the vast majority of immigrants, today, like yesterday are law -abiding and hard working.

SecondComingOfBast said...

Whatever, Gambone. I'll repeat my main point and leave it at that. I'm fine with comprehensive immigration reform, as long as the borders are secured first and foremost. Do that, and we can talk. Don't secure the borders, and there is nothing to discuss. It's just that simple. I'm the same way when it comes to people from Canada. Or from Europe. White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Europeans, that is. Limited, legal, documented immigration or none at all. Period!

The Sentinel said...


I see you have brushed over the serious flaws in your previous comments and also chosen not answer a simple question. No worries Larry. That is your right. I respect that. I just thought this was a debate.

But moreover I am just glad to know that you are a Nationalist, and an Ethno-Nationalist at that, Larry. Well done on your 'awakening.'

But I think we all know that the crime coming with this current US invasion is unprecedented, the facts we do have are these:

‘There are around 1000000 gang members which US wide authorities say are responsible for 80% of all crime, and of which 47% were Latino in 1999. With another 200000 added since 2005 that figure will much higher now.’

So it is quite fair to assume that these Latinos were responsible for around 40% of all crime in the US using those figures and it is quite fair to assume that the true figure will now be higher, given that the numbers have increased by a fifth.

Out of curiosity though Larry, why is no one here able to answer these very simple questions:

What will happen to the US if entire swathes of it resemble the demographics of Mexico etc? Do you really not believe that it will then become exactly like Mexico etc?

And if not, why not?

Larry Gambone said...

I just haven't had time Sentinel. I had to have breakfast first.

Anyway, there is nothing inconsistent in my beliefs. Socialism is not reduced to state socialism. There have always been anti-statist socialisms based on the concept of the workers coop etc. Chaos and violence are not anarchism, rather what we anarchists propose is minimizing coercive, top-down authority. I am not a nationalist, but maybe a bit of a patriot in George Orwell's concept of it. But one with open eyes. Canada has its list of crimes too. If I favour Canada over the US, it is because we are freer and better off than the USians and the US has sought to impose itself upon us almost from the beginning of its existence.

Where am I an ethno-nationalist? Other than a tinge of First Nations ancestry (a great, great grandmother) I am one of those old white guys too. I have nothing against North Americans of European ancestry, being one of them, and only abhor those who are reactionary, racist, religious fanatic, war-mongering dolts.

Larry Gambone said...

One other thing, the comparison that you seem to be making between Europe and the North American situation is not really apt. North America, other than its aboriginal people, is composed of immigrants. Furthermore, the land was stolen from the Aboriginals, and in the case of the US from Mexico as well. You Europeans, you are the aboriginal people of Europe, so to speak. You have little history of overseas immigration and your countries are crowded with people to boot.While I do not share your anti-immigrant views, I can certainly understand why they exist. However, for a Canadian or American to be opposed to immigrants is to be a hypocrite.

Your statistics about crime and gangs in the US don't prove anything, since the same could have been made with the Italians and the Irish previously. Indeed, the Irish made the Latino gangs look tame. For a number of reason that time won't permit, immigration brings a certain amount of crime with it among the second generation males.

The number of school children in London? Immigrants always crowd into the large cities. Same is true in Canada. The important point is what percent of your overall population consists of immigrants. And by the way, Sentinel, when you write of immigrants you aren't referring to French, Dutch or Polish immigrants are you? You mean non-white immigrants.

Anyway I have to shut down my computer for a while, so that's it for now.

The Sentinel said...


Aside from the fact that you reinforce your Ethno-Nationalist credentials with each comment, I think the whole point about this situation is that it is not ‘immigration’ at all as immigration is a legal process; these people are not even attempting to immigrate into the US, they are blatantly invading it as you yourself acknowledge.

They are wilfully and illegally bypassing all the sensible checks that immigration processes provide such as criminal, background, health, financial and skills. These checks are done not for the sake of it, but to protect the people of the country and the countries interests and prevent the situation with the Latino gangs ever being allowed to develop in the first place.

And when you add the provocations I relayed about such the oft seen “this is our continent not yours” that seems to make you salivate then you have an extremely untenable position.

You say ‘my’ crime and gang statistics (they are official statistics not mine) ‘don't prove anything’ but of course they do, Larry; they prove everything I said in relation to the unprecedented crime that these Latinos are bringing; the rest of your comment on this is purely opinion without fact; I have given you the facts, give me the facts if you want your opinion to actually count. I don’t believe that the Irish or Italians ever accounted for 80% of total US crimes and I don’t believe the ‘Irish made the Latino gangs look tame’ – give us facts Larry not more unsubstantiated opinion.

“The important point is what percent of your overall population consists of immigrants."

Not true.

But I am not surprised you are not aware of the realities of mass immigration into my country Larry (or Europe) but it has long been known that at the current rates of ingress and births, the indigenous population of the UK will be a minority within a few generations.

Even the hard left Guardian predicted it would happen before the turn of the century:

But that was before the full scope of Liebours secret treachery in flooding the UK for selfish political reasons was fully known. Now most predictions place the event occurring between 2030 and 2040.

Quite obviously aside from the demographic projections, a natural barometer is the numbers of indigenous school children in the UK’s two major cities so that is perfectly valid, Larry.

Guess how the fastest growing group in the UK are? That’s right, Muslims. 10 times faster then any other group.

So when people are fearful for the future of the UK and of the future of the UK including it being an Islamic republic, they have ever right.

Lastly, I have mentioned white immigration above in relation to Nevin’s point about ‘Jews, Irish or Eastern Europeans’ but here is something else you might like to learn Larry: Even though I am opposed to all immigration into the UK (expect for very skilled short term) on the grounds that we are completely full up, we couldn’t stop the” French, Dutch or Polish immigrants” you refer to because under this treasonous government and the last few, they are perfectly entitled to enter the UK under EU rules and it is not classed as immigration. We can, however, still stop the rest.

In fact due to these treasonous governments of ours, the general election here in the UK today is little more then a charade as 85% of all our laws are made by foreigners anyway.

Again, out of curiosity though Larry, why is no one here able to answer these very simple questions:

What will happen to the US if entire swathes of it resemble the demographics of Mexico etc? Do you really not believe that it will then become exactly like Mexico etc?

And if not, why not?

Larry Gambone said...

Computer back up again. 1. Where exactly am I an ethno-nationalist?
2. If you read US history you will find the Irish were regarded just as the Mexicans are now and their gangs were a serious criminal problem - whole areas of New York City were no go areas for the authorities and the Draft Riots of 1862 were like a civil war within the Civil War. But 140 years later who fears the Irish? 3. The RCMP claims that 80% of crime is illegal drug related. Change drug policies and the crime goes with it. The gangs melt away. 4. As before mentioned I understand your fears, I just don't believe these things will happen. It is usually a mistake to extrapolate from existing data, since the future is never fixed. Furthermore, European culture is a lot stronger than you give it credit for. Islamic Fundamentalism is a reaction to it's strength. Next generation their kids will rock n roll like all other kids. Treat them with hostility and they will remain in their Fundi mental ghettos. 5. The Guardian is a moderate liberal paper - even endorses the Dem Libs! I am hard left.) 6. As for your last question, I don't think so, unless the Mexican ruling class migrates with them. As poor as American democracy is, it is Switzerland along side Mexico's narco-terrorist government. Mexican immigrants will use their democratic rights and push for reforms in the US, perhaps even helping to form Ren's Labor Party. You make the problems of Mexico out to be an innate racial thing of Mexicans. It is not and relates to the savagery of its ruling class and the continual reactionary pressure from US imperialism.

The Sentinel said...


The numbered approach eh? OK.

1)“Nothing would make me happier than Mexicans re-occupying the territories stolen from them in the Mexican War” -

- means that you believe that the Mexican people are entitled to the get back the borders that represented their country – their nation called Mexico - prior to them losing that war (even though they signed a treaty) and consequently you fundamentally believe in nations, the right of people to assert the boundaries of their nation, the right of people to exist as a sovereign and unified identity under one flag and one nation and the right to cede areas back to a nation. In short you are a nationalist.

“All in all it means the end of the old, white, rich, (or wannabee) reactionary, racist, male…” –

Means that you recognize the Mexican people have an ethnic identity that is unique to them and makes them Mexicans and welcome not only nationalist ‘re-occupation’ of ‘taken territories’ but also the ethnic resettlement and ‘take back’ of ‘their land’ – their national land.

2) I know history very well Larry, but I asked you for facts not more unsubstantiated opinion; I don’t believe your analysis or conclusions so if you want them to stand as point, prove it.

3) Really? The gangs will just melt away and get regular $10 ph jobs and never look back!

Or maybe they would just focus on drugs that were still illegal or offer legal ones cheaper then government authorised ones as they do in Holland; or expand their extortion, prostitutions, fraud, theft, people smuggling etc etc etc operations instead, Larry, and stay exactly where they were before.

4) Well Larry, they are already happening, as just a handful of events shows you above; I have plenty more where that came from.

And the four suicide bomber Muslims who blew themselves up on London’s underground in the first suicide bombing ever in the UK and out of pure and unadulterated hate for the British people were in fact second and third generation immigrants and Muslims, born and raised in the UK so there’s another theory of your right down the pan.

5) Not from the point of view of pretty much everyone else in the UK; and you seem more confused then hard about anything, Larry.

6) Well that is odd because Mexico doesn’t have a ‘ruling class’ – care to name them Larry?

They have a very corrupt form of democracy, but democracy of sorts nonetheless and choose their own leaders. The problem is there is not too much to choose from. It the culture; the tradition; the way of life.

Entire areas of the US already DO resemble Mexico Larry because that is exactly how these invaders want it: They don’t want to learn English, they don’t want to assimilate, they don’t want be Americans, it is, as you say Larry the ethos that they are ‘taking back their territories.’

And when they do vote, as we now know, they vote along ethnic lines. Locally that is Latino representations, nationally that is for Obama.

But at the end of the day, Larry, and this shouldn’t really come as a surprise to you:
Mexico is Mexico because it is a product of its people, as all countries are. Every Anglo-Saxon country has been a success and is considered to be first world (Australia achieved that in a few generations) whereas every Hispanic country has been pretty much an unmitigated disaster and ranges from second to third world. That is the reality of this world Larry and no amount of anti-human and anti-reality ideology and hysteria is going to change that.

When one place resembles the demographics of another place, it becomes a reflection of that other place.

Larry Gambone said...

1. I am not supporting Mexican nationalism, only justice. And I would prefer these areas remain as part of the US since they would then become a force for reform in the US, as I previously stated. 2. Illegal drugs such as cocaine, heroin and meth are very lucrative and are also a fundamental part of street prostitution. Take away the possibility for making money through these drugs and the possibility for gangs also decreases. At one time gambling and alcohol were the major sources of gang revenue. Since they were legalized, the criminals shifted to drugs. Of course, some crime will remain with protection rackets and such but it will decline. 3, And how long have you had large numbers of Muslims in the UK? Islamic Fundamentalism in a Western country is both a reaction to modernity and a reaction to perceived hostility. (This is a whole area of discussion in and of itself.) 4. Mexico with no ruling class, come off it Sentinel, now we have to go off on a tangent about the nature of classes? Every capitalist economy has a ruling class. 5. "They don’t want to learn English, they don’t want to assimilate, they don’t want be Americans" Can you back that up with some surveys or polls please? 6. On the nature of Latin American countries. In order to deal with this question, other than racially as you prefer, you would have to also examine the nature of the Spanish Conquest and its empire, the formation of the Criollo states and then their relationship to British and then American Imperialism. Then you would have to examine the British Empire and the formation of settler states and the rise of US Imperialism. Let's just say there are good historical and economic reasons for the plight of Latin America. A good start would be for you to read Galleano's "Open Veins of Latin America"

The Sentinel said...


1) You are supporting nationalism and ethno-nationalism for the reasons I already cited and you were openly gloating over it just a few comments back and claiming that the Mexicans were 'taking back what was there’s.'

2) Drugs are just one area for gangsters. For many years the Mafia never touched it and executed any made member who dealt it; over time they dealt it covertly and then openly but the fact remains that for quite some time the Mafia not only didn’t need it, they didn’t want it.

There are hundreds of areas for gangsters to break the law and make money; they wont go away because drugs are legalized.

3) Long enough ,Larry, to have second and third generation Muslims who blow themselves up on London’s tube in order to kill as many British people as they can, because they have nothing but hate for them.

4) We could do that Larry, or you could just name who they are instead introducing a hidden hand conspiracy element.

5) Well now Larry, you seem to be starting to back peddle from your goading triumphalist first comment:

“Nothing would make me happier than Mexicans re-occupying the territories stolen from them in the Mexican War. Bring em on!... All in all it means the end of the old, white, rich, (or wannabee) reactionary, racist, male…”

Not one thing in there suggests anything over then an invasion, a take-over, revenge – the complete opposite to assimilation and harmony. Are you now saying that your first comment was completely wrong?

But any heck Larry, just a minutes search reveals that there are 79 millions Spanish speakers in the US with only half able to speak “English really well” – and I can tell you have never been to LA or in fact any of the border towns as you would quickly learn that if you don’t speak Spanish, you don’t get about easy.

Here is Obama’s take on it: Every American school child should learn Spanish!

6) Yeah, we could do all of that Larry, or we could just face the facts, you know the reality that every Anglo-Saxon country has been a success and is considered to be first world whereas every Hispanic country has been pretty much an unmitigated disaster and ranges from second to third world.

Which ever convoluted way you try to excuse it, this is where we are.

Larry Gambone said...

1.I am not back peddling. I stand by what I said. And what I did say was “Mexicans” not “Mexico.” The whole point of my “gloating” is that it will lead to reform in the US. This would not happen if these territories returned to Mexico. 2. There is nothing that could replace drugs – all other illegal activities would be much less lucrative. 4. Classes are not a conspiracy – please go Google “class analysis, Mexico” if you want to learn about this. As for Mexican immigrants not wanting to be Americans, the fact that only half of the speak English well, proves nothing. Look , most “regular” Americans don't speak English well! (And seriously, this language problem has always existed among first generation immigrants.)

I think I well leave it here as we are starting to go in circles.

The reason we never seem to get anywhere in our debates is that our fundamental principles are completely different. Your viewpoint is based upon what one might call an “essentialist” position – cultures, ethnic groups and races have certain determining and almost immutable aspects. My view is structuralist, as are socialist and anarchist analyses generally. I see humans as largely mutable and their behavior mainly influenced by the economic and political systems they live under. For me, your view mistakes effects for causes. For you, my view is a tangential argument which misses the fundamental point.

Any way a good go - without a single hostile word!

The Sentinel said...


No worries Larry. I will leave here too; we have debated the points now and learned a bit more.

As for hostility, I never see or feel the need for it; certainly I never initiate it – what a complete and utter waste of time it is trading inane insults back and forth over a public forum to people you don’t know and will never meet. How absurd, how embarrassing, really.

A debate shouldn’t include any personally hostile elements or it ceases to become a debate and blogs and sites in the public forum such as these ostensibly only exist for debate, or else why bother? This one in particular is unique, I find, amongst the left, especially the hard left in that it not allows open debate but it encourages it; much credit to the host.

It is never my intention to change yours or anyone else’s mind; I am genuinely interested in the counter points, especially as it has been my long experience that the truth is the enemy of the left who then have to come up with very lengthy verbose convoluted, well, essentially excuses to gloss over the truths and realties. But as long as these are presented with some semblance of honesty and genuineness then I might (do!) disagree but that’s life.

The more frequent, in fact prevalent response though is just hysterical abuse, threats and accusations all following the same boring pattern and conclusions.

People that cannot handle any dissent or criticism of their position do not really believe in it the first place.

I respect just about any and all beliefs provided they are genuinely held and the person is willingly to debate their beliefs.

Conversely I have no respect whatsoever for those who claim to have a position and a belief but cannot debate it, instead resorting to the hysterical abuse and idiotic underhanded games so often found in these comment boxes all over the ‘net.

It reveals that not only does the protagonist not actually have any beliefs or positions beyond absurd pompous posturing and a vague conception of being anti anything perceived as a threat to them personally on an emotive, and usually sheep like basis but it also reveals a profoundly undemocratic, uncivilised and antisocial nature: A true fascist seeking to impose their will upon others by varying degrees of violence.

I am a great believer in democracy, and despite the faults of the system in the UK, and there are many (so-called postal voters, at least 50 election frauds being investigated etc etc) it is still a broad reflection of the will of the people.

As much as I might disagree with their choices in the main, I respect their right to make those choices.

That is what debate is all about. Respecting each others right to hold different views.

Till the next time Larry…

dinoibo said...

Really trustworthy blog. Please keep updating with great posts like this one. I have booked marked your site and am about to email it to a few friends of mine that I know would enjoy reading
Sesli sohbet Sesli chat
Seslisohbet Seslichat
Sesli sohbet siteleri Sesli chat siteleri
Sesli Chat
Sohbet Sesli siteler
Sohbet siteleri Chat siteleri
Sohbet merkezi chat merkezi
Sesli merkezi sesli Sohbet merkezi
Sesli chat merkezi Sohbetmerkezi
Sesli Sohbet Sesli Chat
SesliSohbet Sesli chat siteleri
Sesli sohbet siteleri SesliChat
Sesli Sesli siteler
Seslimuhabbet sesli muhabbet
sesli sohbet sesli chat siteleri
sesli sohbet siteleri sesli chat
seslisohbet seslichat
seslikent sesli kent
sesli sohbet sesli sohbet siteleri
sesli chat sesli chat siteleri
seslisohbet seslichat