Should we grant amnesty to illegals?

I think we should deport them all regardless of how long they have lived here.  I also believe that if an illegal alien has a baby while in the country the baby is a U.S. citizen however, the parents are not and should be deported.  Now they can choose to take the child with them when they are deported or they can leave the child here to be a ward of the state until the child is age 18 and able to take care of himself.  If the parents take the child with them the child can legally move back to the U.S. at age 18 as an American citizen.

It doesn't matter either way rigel.  Companies are already circumventing the entire process by flying in hundreds of thousands of "temporary" workers from other countries.  They will house up to 10 people in a two bedroom apartment to work in their company for dirt cheap and then ship them back home.  They rotate different workers like this all of the time.  Minimum wage and sometimes even less legally can make someone from another country an upper class citizen when they go back home.

I remember when I was naive enough to believe that at least the service oriented businesses couldn't be outsourced to other countries.  How wrong I was!

Newt has the most coherent policy on this issue.  The last general amnesty was in 1986 with Ronald Reagan and his GOP Senate.  Some people have been here illegally now 25 years.  They probably have American children and American grandchildren. Unlike Newt, I don't care what church they belong to.

The most recent kerfuffle with this issue began eight years ago when Bush announced that he wanted immigration reform.  The GOP has never shown any interest in penalizing employers that hire undocumented workers.

We can thank NAFTA for the failure to curb illegal immigration. It 's intentions were not to promote rising living standards, health care , address evironmental issues, and workers rights of Mexicans. It was not an attempt to lift up the living conditions or bring democracy to Mexico, but, instead, NAFTA was a plan for government-sanctioned corporate plunder benefiting elites on both sides of the border.

Heavily subsidized US corn and other ag products flooded Mexican markets so depressing prices there and forcing millions of small farmers to leave and search for work either in the "maquiladoras" sweatshops of the US corporations or cross the border to feed their families.

When US corproations found even cheaper labor in Asia and China, they abandoned Mexico. This has created massive unemployment and extreme abject poverty. I have personally been to the border town of Acuna and seen the cardboard "houses" , no sewers, and practically starving people begging on the streets. I have talked to people there who have been over here and worked and also worked in a maquiladora. The wages he said he was paid were 450 pesos/week=$39.00US/week. This young man was working in a bar I frequented (I knew the owner). He was laid off when the Sunbeam sweatshop closed. I asked him why he did immigrate to the US and he said he could make more money on tips from tourists than in the US.

The massive tide of illegal immigration from Mexico is merely one symptom of an economic arrangement where human needs -- not maximum profits-- are not the ultimate goal but a subject of neglect. Neither a massive, shameful barrier at the border nor a disposable guest-worker program will address the problems ignited by NAFTA.

Yet another example of the devastation caused by corporate /government collusion.

The Gingrich Red Card plan is nowhere near coherent.  It creates a permanent, legal 2nd class of citizens* (using citizens loosely here, as its part of a phrase).

Yes and no.  There are probably hundreds of thousands who work for cash under the table.  I have known many over the years.  It's usually temporary though until they can get a regular job.  So you don't neccesarily need illegals to do those jobs once enough American citizens are out of a job.

As long as the lowest wage paying job in the US is far higher than the highest average worker compensation in Mexico, there will be immigrants flooding the US.  NAFTA is killing the opportunities for the average Mexican. It needs to be repealed!

What it has created is investment opportunities in  land and manufacutring , and finance to the south and spreading the third world northward because US corporate investment helps the 1% of Mexico while exploiting the poor. Just like in the good ole USofA!

This has ALWAYS been the case.  We didn't have illegal aliens from Mexico in Minneapolis 30 years ago.  What changed?

Its really easy to bash poor people who are just trying to subsist instead of having a rational discussion about the root causes and possible humane responses.  By looking at the historical record its easy to make certain correlations regarding undocumented immigrants.  For instance there is a direct correlation between NAFTA and immigration and there is a distinct correlation between the fact that the U.S. floods Mexico with cheap corn and the migration of people who once relied on subsistence farming. 

This conversation is only adding to the conservative tactic of demonizing undocumented people to distract from the wider issues and to keep an already insecure population extremely anxious so that they are all the more easily exploitable.  I would hope that when people discuss "illiegals" that they remember that these are not donkeys or wild dogs but human beings just like you and me who felt that they had no other option but to risk a dangerous endeavor in order to continue subsisting. And the reason they came here is because there are plenty of employers who are perfectly willing to knowingly employ undocumented workers in order to exploit the fact that undocumented workers must accept low wages and harsh working conditions. 

The argument by rigel is fallacious.  No serious politicians are talking about "amnesty".  Honest politicians are discussing a "pathway" to legalization because they understand the nature, magnitude and logistics of the overall problem.  There is certainly not going to be a sudden and dramatic change in the cost of hiring migrant labor, that's just more fear-mongering and hyperole.

But conservatives would rather demagogue the issue so that they can make political hay while at the same time insuring that the undocumented population remains in a (completely unnecessay) state of extreme anxiety so that they are more and more vulnerable to exploitation.  

Chili-"This has ALWAYS been the case. We didn't have illegal aliens from Mexico in Minneapolis 30 years ago. What changed?"

You can thank NAFTA and the subsequent flooding of Mexico with US corn and other ag products that displaces millions of small farmers by destroying their markets. And then when US corporations closed their maquiladoras laying off millions more of Mexican workers because they had discovered even cheaper labor in Asia and China. Those  people had nowhere to go but to the US tio feed their families.Remember Clinton rammed NAFTA through in 1994 I believe.

And for all the political lies and rhetoric about closing the border between us and Mexico is bullshit to feed the sheeple. As I wrote ealier here I have been to Mexico many times over the years and got to know some of the merchants and people there. They are very hospitable and nice people.

If the border was completely sealed and the daily traffic across the border were stopped the economies of every Texas town along that border would die!

Raise the fines for being an illegal employer from $500 to $50000, & deport the illegal employer. And enforce the laws. There is no job an American won't do, for a decent wage. 20 years ago, I worked through college doing drywall work; 5 years ago, few Anglos were. Take down illegal employers, shutdown the market for illegal workers, and suddenly the problem are solved.

You're right! 

NAFTA is to blame for the amnesty of 1986?

And there was plenty of illegal immigration from 1987 to 1994.

Since NAFTA was signed into law, illegal immigrants in the U.S. has increased to 12 million today from 3.9 million in 1993, accounting for an overall increase of over 300 percent. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, 57 percent of those entering the country illegally are from Mexico.

There are other types of people in the US illegally and some of them are not here to just work and provide for their families. Lets look at them.

If you close the border between Mexico and the US you will KILL the economies of every US town along the border.

I know that this creates a huge delimma. But deporting all of them and sealing the borders is not the answer nor is it even possible.

Or they canexport the jobs to Asia or China. Yeah.

After 40 years of Liberalism and Political Correctness, I would say it is currently very unfair to place the blame on American employers.

For starters there is a massive industry in fraudulent Social Security numbers and identity theft which grants illegals the ability to apply for jobs which satisfy the I-9 requirements. There is reason that there are commercials on Thoms show and many others on talk radio feature services such as "Lifelock" et al.

http://nycimmigrationlawyers.blogspot.com/2010/01/what-questions-regardi...

Once the illegal immigrant has applied for the job with a their fake ID and fake SS number the government made it ILLEGAL for the employer to even ASK or actively find out if the applicant is in the country lawfully.

http://www.uiowa.edu/~nrcfcp/latino/documents/ProvingworkauthorizationNI...

http://www.sandiegoemploymentlawattorney.com/2010/09/3-questions-you-sho...

Refresh my memory......How many years did your party of cheap labor have to fix this problem you wingnuts like to whine about? If you go after the employers of illegals and fine their asses off the problem of illegals will take care of itself. They won't stay where there are no jobs and where they are not wanted. That's basic common sense 101.

If we assume there were no illegal aliens in 1986, and there were 3.9 million in 1993, that is an increase of 550k per annum (and 1990-1992 was a pretty bad recession in California.)  To get from 3.9 million in 1993 to 12 million in 2011 is 450k per annum. So the rate of increase has actually slowed since NAFTA.

I don't agree with my own analysis.  No one knows how many illegal aliens were here in 1993 or today. That 12 million number has been thrown around by PHC since 2004.  And no one knows what percent of everyone entering the country illegally is from Mexico or Taiwan or Russia or wherever.  PHC is an advocacy group, and that's fine. 

I would suspect you are probably right, chilidog. But I can say that I have seen the closed down maquiladoras and the cardboard housing of people that were laid off or left the family farm to try and find work in the Mexican cities. If they can't find work, a lot of young men have resorted to joining a drug gang. The American corporations and multi-nationals have not helped the situation there. If anything, the have made it much worse.

Just as here in the US,  the country's income is very unevenly distributed. Fully 60% of the people of Mexico live in abject poverty, way beyond anything we see here. There are no saftey nets.

I know it is a delimma both morally and economically as to what to do with illegals from Mexico. They use our emergency rooms for free medical care, our free public  education,(although Mexico does have pretty much free education, it is mostly utilized by the small middleclass, as the rich send their kids to private schools) and probably do take some jobs from needing Americans.

There has been a lot of speculation of NAFTA being the first step in forming a North American Union, much like the EU. Where Mexico, Canada and the US economies merge and a new currency (the Amero) would be established. However, I can't see Canada as being much in favor of this, as they have taken measures in recent years to eliminate much of their debt and their economy is growing quite healthily. We should follow their lead.

Are we getting it now ?

What do you think goes on at BILDERBERG meetings ?

Exactly how to undermine America and turn it into a 3rd world hell-hole.

Imperial Unity

British Consulate
New York City
June 10, 1919

"The Right Honorable David Lloyd George,

Sir:

I was highly honored by your personal letter of May 24 last (written same week as Paris meeting), and wish to thank you for the cordial expression of approval of my work which it contained. You were very good enough to require from me a frank and confidential account of the campaign conducted under my direction in this country, together with such suggestions as might further help to lead it speedily to a successful conclusion. As the campaign had been under way for a considerable time before you were called to direct the destinies of England, I shall review it from its commencement, and, emboldened by your sanction, I shall freely make whatever suggestions seem to me good.

From the moment of my arrival here, it was evident to me that such an Anglo-American alliance as would ultimately result in the peaceful return of the American Colonies to the dominion of the Crown could be brought about only with the consent of the dominant group of the controlling clans.

For those who can afford the universities, we are, as I have already mentioned, plentifully supplying British-born or trained professors, lecturers, and presidents. A Canadian-born admiral now heads the United States Naval College. We are arranging for a greater interchange of professors between the two countries. The student interchange could be much improved. The Rhodes scholarships are inadequate in number. I would suggest that the Carnegie trustees be approached to extend to American students the benefits of the scheme by which Scottish students are subsidised at Scottish universities. If necessary, a grant from the treasury should be obtained for this excellent work, which however, should remain for the present -- at least outwardly -- private enterprise...

Through the Red Cross, the Scout movement, the YMC, the church, and other humane, religious, and quasi-religious organizations, we have created an atmosphere of international effort which strengthens the idea of unity of the English-speaking world. In the co-ordination of this work, Mr. Raymond Fosdick, formerly of the Rockefeller Foundation, has been especially conspicuous. I would also like to mention President Nicholas Murray Butler of Columbia University, who has eloquently advocated this form of internationalism and carefully emphasize its distinction from the false internationalism which is infecting the proletariat.

The Overseas Club in this country now contains nearly hundred thousand pledged members with a Journal of their own. Our thanks are due to Lord St. George's, St. David's, St. Andrew's, and Pilgrim Clubs, together with the Daughters of the Empire. the Prince of Wales Fund, and the other association and guilds connected with our multitudinous war charities enable us to pervade all sections and classes of the country, and provide us with a force of empire builders whose loyalty an services are both invaluable to us and highly appreciated by the native colonists.

The censorship, together with our monopoly of cables and our passport control of passengers, enables us to hold all American newspapers as isolated from the non-American world as if they had been in another planet instead of in another hemisphere The realization of this by the Associated Press and the other universal news gatherers -- except Hearst -- was most helpful in bringing only our point of view to the papers they served.

British-born editors and reporters now create imperial sentiment in most American newspapers. As their identity and origins are not usually known, they can talk and write for us as Americans to Americans.

Below that level, imperial unity cannot be securely established upon the debris of the Constitution here. We will not passively permit this unity to be now menaced when it is all but perfect. Has not America, while still maintaining an outward show of independence, yielded to our wishes in the Panama Canal tolls and Canadian fisheries' disputes, as was fitting and filial? Was not America happy to fight our war in Europe? Was not America, like Canada, willing not only to pay her own war expenses but also to loan us money for ours? Was not America, like Canada, content to seek nothing in return for her war duty, so long as the motherland was completely indemnified in Egypt and the rest of Africa, in Persia, Mesopotamia, Syria, and elsewhere? Was not America as proud to be honored by knighthood and lesser titulary distinctions, as Canada was, or, rather, more proud?

Has not President Wilson cancelled the big Navy program and dutifully conceded to us the command of the seas, confident that we shall defend America against all future foes that may threaten our supremacy, just as we defended America and Canada against Germany? In matters lingual, legal and financial, fiscal, commercial, social evangelical, administrative, martial, naval, educational -- are not in all these matters the established relations of America to England, in kind -- if not precisely in degree -- identical with the relations of the other colonies and dominions to the Crown? Indeed, I might justifiably sustain the thesis that so-distant American Republic is now more happily and more closely bound to the Empire than are, for example, the ungrateful and insolent colonies which lately were the Boer Republics.

As long as President Wilson, with our Canadian-born Secretary of the Interior, Mr. Franklin Lane, with our Scotch-born Secretary of Labor, Mr. W. B. Wilson, and with our London-born Mr. Samuel Gompers, -- now controls the administration, imperial unity will daily grow more intimate and more perfect. But I regret to inform you that our committee on American Elections has reported (Appendix 38) that no matter how lavishly we finance the next election, the Wilson administration will pass, and with it, perchance, that absolute administrative control over the Legislature, which has meant so much to us. Willful, wanton, and wicked men will unite in the next election with labor and those industrialists whose profit-patriotism ratio has been allowed to fall below the threshold of loyalty to imperial unity. These combined forces of disorder will seek to elect a legislature which will attempt to make the administration responsible to it, instead of to us and our auxiliaries, and will strive to rend the bonds which bind this colony to the motherland, for the sole, selfish, and seditious purpose of erecting a separate, national, economic unit independent of us -- and even perhaps, competing with us. We must, therefore, hasten to remove from this legislature, with the aid of our supporters here, such of its powers as could be used against imperial unity.

J. P. MORGAN & CO. ARE BRITISH AGENTS

In the financial world the Anglo-American alliance is a well-established fact. And as the consortium for China, and the security company for Mexico show, our brokers and their aids have become the unchallenged financiers of the world. We have been particularly fortunate in our fiscal agents here, Messrs Pierpont Morgan & Company. The commissions they charged, both as our brokers and purchasing agents no doubt were high enough to warrant their summary treatment at the hands of Mr. Balfour during his visit here. But they advantageously placed our many bond issues and every American holder of these bonds having now a stake in the Empire is a defender of its integrity and a potential supporter of its extension over here. Their services in putting this country into the war have not been altruistic, but they were nonetheless effective. They contributed liberally to our Americanization campaign. They ousted Miss Boardman, and through Messrs. Taft and H. P. Davidson they nationalized and directed the American Red Cross, and then internationalized it under the direction of Mr. H. P. Davison Through Mr. Thomas Lamont they purchased Harpers Magazine and the New York Evening Post. Through advertisers they control, they have exerted widespread influence on newspaper policy. Messrs. Lamont and Davidson gave you valuable aid at the peace conference. They loaned $200,000,000 to Japan that our ally might build a fleet to compete with America on the Pacific carrying routes. Their attempts to retain for us control of the international mercantile marine are well known to you. And I would he amiss if I did not remind you that they relieved the government of considerable embarrassment by pensioning worthily the widow of our late Ambassador Sir Cecil Spring-Rice, at a time when the antagonism of Lord Northcliffe made it impossible for us officially to do so. As the greater part of their capital is invested within the Empire. the Government of His Majesty will doubtless have opportunity to appreciate the value of the services of Messrs. Pierpont Morgan & Company.

BRITISH DUPLICITY
Through our fiscal agents here and our aids who act for other Allied countries, as Sir Clifford Sifton acts for Rumania, we have become the world's purchasers. Moreover, the war has made us the custodian of the greater part of the world's raw materials. With moneys lent to us by the American Government for war purposes, we have. acting through quasi-American companies by the aid of Mr. Connor Guthrie, obtained control of the large oil fields in California and in Costa Rica. And through the nationalization of His Majesty's Government of the Cowdray, Pearson, and Royal Dutch Shell interests in Mexico, we having become masters of the Mexican, Canadian, Rumanian, Armenian. Persian, and lessor oil fields, now largely control the oil fields of the world and thereby the world's transportation and industry. We have not yet succeeded in controlling the pipe lines owned by the Standard Oil Company, and its subsidiaries, for those companies have long been established. But, although uncontrolled companies may continue to get their oil to the seaboard, the proposed system of preferential treatment at our universal oiling stations for ships supplied at the port of departures with British oil (Appendix 37) will prevent the use of any oil but ours on the high seas.

This control would enable us to exert such pressure as would make American industrial interests amenable to His Majesty's pleasure. But it would be unwise to make disciplinary use of our fuel power before we secure remission of our $4,000,000,000 debt. Otherwise, the American industrial interests might retaliate by forcing the United States Government to exact from us the agreed interest, to maintain tariff barriers against our merchandise, and to withdraw support from the rate of exchange. Which make our labor and resources for years pay tribute to this country an unnatural, unfilial, and unthinkable proceeding. We are conducting a vigorous campaign for the cancellation of this war debt, on the grounds (a) that we fought America's fight for her for 2 years, while she was prospering in cowardice and (b) that at least the material burdens should be distributed justly, if the world is to be made safe for democracy. . Synchronously with this agitation for the remission of our debt, we are agitating for further loans of American money to rebuild our markets in Europe. There is no possibility of these two agitations endangering their mutual success, for we have repeatedly proved beyond question that the American mind cannot synchronously fix and correlate facts, with two cognate items on the statements to be judged each on its merits. Hence, we are able in a cloud of candor to state the merit of the loan -- viz, that unless the money be lent to us we cannot pay the interest on it. in these agitations we are receiving valuable, if not wholly disinterested, aid from our financial auxiliaries and fiscal agents (J. P. Morgan & Co.)

In Mexico our friends made a tentative adventure with the gallant Blanquet, but it miscarried, perhaps owing to a slight misunderstanding between the bond interests and the industrial interests. However, we are quietly continuing our work in Mexico until the United States Government shall be put in a position to take it over. An American war with Mexico would cost us nothing; it would satisfy certain American industrial interests; it would guarantee out title to the Mexican oil fields; it would humble, by impoverishing, this purse-proud people; it would give us an opportunity to show the American that he isolated in the world needs our protection against our ally, Japan; and while America was busy warring we would enjoy a clear field in the European, African, and Asiatic trade, together with the monopoly of the markets of a South America hostile to the Monroe Doctrinaries of democracy. For these reasons our press is fully reporting Mexican outrages, but a strange apathy seems to have fallen on the people, an apathy from which only border raids or special atrocities will arouse them. . .

LEAGUE OF NATIONS
In other words, we must quickly act to transfer its dangerous sovereignty from this colony to the custody of the Crown. We must, in short, now bring America with in the Empire. God helping us, we can do no other. The first visible step in this direction has been taken; President Wilson has accepted and sponsored the plan for a League of Nations which we prepared for him. We have wrapped this plan in the peace treaty so that the world must accept from us the League or a continuance of the war. The League is in substance the Empire with America admitted on the same basis as our other colonies.

The effectiveness of the League will depend upon the power with which it can be endowed, and that will hinge upon the skill with which the cardinal functions of the American legislature are transferred to the executive Council of the League. Any abrupt change may startle the ignorant American masses and rouse them to action against it. And us. Our best policy, therefore, would be to appoint President Wilson first president of the League. When the fourteen points seemed to our Government twice seven daily sins, I analyzed with care his diverse and numerous notes and discourses and divided them into their two parts: One, the Wilson creed, "I believe in open covenants and in the freedom of the seas," etc.; and two, the Wilson commandments, "Might shall not prevail over right, the strong shall not oppress the weak," etc. From the "too proud to fight" and "he kept us out of war" episodes, I ventured to deduce (September 29, 1918, Appendix 36) that he would at the appropriate moment oblige us by transferring the "not" from his commandments to his creed without as much as a "may I not," and in such a way that his people will be none the wiser.

The plain people of this country are inveterate and incurable hero worshipers. They are, however, sincere in sentiment; and for a hero to become established in the public shrine, he must first succeed in getting his name associated with the phrases and slogans that seem to reflect the undefined aspirations of the average inhabitant. When this has been accomplished the allegiance is at once transferred from the sentiment to the sentimentalist, from the ideal to the maker of the longed-for phrase. No one understands this peculiarity of the native behavior better than Mr. Wilson, which accounts largely for his exceptional usefulness to us. He knows that Americans will not scrutinise any performance too closely, provided their faith in the performer has been adequately established. Mr. Wilson has since made the transfer amid American acclamation. In the same way he will now be able to satisfy them that far from surrendering their independence to the League they are actually extending their sovereignty by it. He alone can satisfy them on this. He alone can father an anti-Bolshevik act which judicially interpreted -- will enable appropriate punitive measures to be applied to any American who may be unwise enough to assert that America must again declare her independence. And he alone, therefore, is qualified to act for us as first president of the League.

I confess I am a little uneasy lest in the exigencies of diplomatic combat, Mr. Wilson may not have found the joy he anticipated from matching his wits against the best brains of Europe. He is easily slighted and remarkably vindictive. It is the highest degree desirable that any traces of resentment his mind may be harboring against us should be radically removed before he returns. I would, therefore, suggest that the work of adulation planned in Appendix 32 should be instructed to consult the inventories I have prepared (appendixes 45-83), which show that he is now surfeited with diamond stomachers, brooches, and bracelets, Gobelin tapestries, mosaics, and vases, gold caskets, and plates.

The program we arranged for his visit to England (appendix 33) including a royal reception at Buckingham Palace, with which the President was well pleased. The fruitful visit of the President to the King should be returned as early as possible. I would suggest that as soon as the President is settled once more in the White House, the visit should be returned by His Royal Highness, the Prince of Wales, who would be an admirable representative of His Royal Sire, and would satisfy President Wilson's sense of fitness. It is perhaps unfortunate that there is not a Presidential daughter of the Prince's age, for such a union would have greatly advanced our purpose not only with the American people, but also with a President who feels that lese majeste should be punishable with 20 years' imprisonment, and who acts as if he considered his son-in-law, Mr. McAdoo, as his heir apparent.

PRESIDENT WILSON'S PECULIARITIES
Too great attention cannot be given at this time to the Presidential peculiarities, for his devotion to our purpose will depend upon our ability to pander to them. I would suggest that the new ambassador to Washington should be chosen only after the most careful thought. He should not be too clever, lest Mr. Wilson shun him. He should be able to evince hilarity at the most venerable jest, no matter how often he may have to suffer it. This qualification is vitally important whether Mr. Wilson's "humor" is merely assumed to perpetuate the "human" tradition established for Presidents by Lincoln, or whether it is studied descent from Jovelike isolation to Jovelike jest. The ambassador should be a Wilson worshiper. I enclose (appendix 34) resumes of the methods of worship practiced by various members of his inner circle. The appointee would do well to familiarize himself with them, and my services are at his disposal should be desire more extended information on the method of worship he selects. He should of course be a commoner, that we may not lose democratic favor -- preferably a professor -- and sufficiently subsidized to be able to entertain regally. If a list were submitted to Mr. Wilson he might be prepared to indicate all of whom he did not approve, and the one against whom he expressed no prejudices should be appointed. The pressing need of our embassy at Washington is not so much an ambassador as a gentleman in waiting to the President.

I would suggest that his powers as President of the League of Nations be left undefined for the present. He may be trusted to assume what power he can and to use it in the interests of the Crown.

A grant of a privy purse of $100,000,000 would prove most acceptable to him and would be useful for private espionage, private wars, Siberian railroads, etc. His appointment should be for life, and you might definitely promise him that any instructions he may care to convey concerning his successor will receive the most careful attention of His Majesty's Government.

Nevertheless, it would be well quickly to reinforce him in the presidency of the League of Nations by staging the first session of the League in Washington. This will convince these simple people that they are the League and its power resides in them. Their pride in this power should be exalted. Perhaps you, yourself, might condescend to visit this country. Or, if that be impracticable, you might send such noble statesmen, and stately noblemen, as will suffice to make of the first League session a spectacle of unsurpassed brilliance. Indeed, it would be well to commence at an early date a series of spectacles by which the mob may be diverted from any attempt to think too much of matters beyond their province. The success of the Joffre, Vivianti Balfour, and other missions in amusing the people while the country was quietly put into the war shows that similar missions would likewise amuse the people -- while the country was quietly put into the League. I would suggest that missions of thanksgiving to America be organized, and that His Majesty the King of the Belgians, Cardinal Mercier, Field Marshal Foch, Venizelos, and an eminent Italian or two be sent seriatim.

PROPAGANDA
While awaiting these diversions for the vulgar, we are incessantly instructing them in the wonders of the League. Its praises are thundered by our press, decreed by our college presidents, and professed by our professors. Our authors, writers. and lecturers are analyzing its selected virtues for whomsoever will read or listen. As will be seen from appendix 39, circulars issued by the League of Nations committee, we have enlisted 8,000 pulpiteers or propagandists for the League. We have organized international and national synods, consistories, committees, conferences, convocations, conventions, councils, congresses, and assemblies, as well as their State, municipal, and district equivalents, to herald the birth of the League as the dawn of universal peace. A special Sunday will be observed as League Sunday in all churches. In this connection, may I remark that the appointment of Mr. Raymond Fosdick to the Secretariat of the League, has pleased not only the Rockefeller interests but also the less disingenuous uplifters, for it stamps the League as an endowed organization for promiscuous uplifting, under the triple crown of religion, respectability, and finance. Agriculturalists, bankers, brokers, chartered accounts, chemists, and all other functional groups capable of exerting organized professional, business, financial, or social pressure are meeting to endorse the League in the name of peace, progress, and prosperity.

The World's Peace Foundation has issued for us a series of League of Nations pamphlets, which, with our other literature, tax the mails to the limit of their capacity. Our film concerns are preparing an epoch-making picture entitled "The League of Nations." In brief, our entire system of thought control is working ceaselessly, tirelessly, ruthlessly, to insure the adoption of the League. And it will be adopted, for business wants peace, the righteous cannot resist a covenant, and the politicians, after shadow-boxing for patronage purposes, will yield valiantly lest the fate of the wanton and wilful pursue them.

By these means we hope smoothly to overcome all effective opposition on the on the part of our colony America to entering the League -- that is, the Empire. As soon as the League is functioning properly, His Majesty in response to loyal and repeated solicitation, might graciously be pleased to consent to restore to this people their ancient right to petition at the foot of the throne; to confer the ancient rank and style of governor general upon our Ambassador, that this colony may enjoy a status inferior to no other colony's; to establish the primacy of the Metropolitan See, with the Right Reverend Dr. Manning as first primate; to appoint Mr. Elihu Root lord chief justice of the colony, and to nominate Messrs. W. H. Taft, Nicholas Murray Butler, J. P. Morgan, Elizabeth Marbury, Adolph Ochs, and Thomas Lamont to the colonial privity council; as a special mark of royal and imperial condescension, to rename the Federal Capital of the Colony Georgetown, and lest section jealousy be thereby excited, to grant royal charters to the cities of Boston and Chicago entitling them thereafter to style themselves, respectively, Kingston and Guelf -- concisely to bestow in time and in measure such tokens of the bounty of the Crown as the fealty of the colonists merit.

BRITISH-AMERICAN UNION URGED
Since that memorable day, September 19, 1877, on which the late Cecil Rhodes devised by will a fund "to and for the establishment, promotion, and development of a secret society -- the true aim of which and object of which shall be the extension of British rule throughout the world, and especially the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire" -- the energy and intelligence of England has not been spent in vain. It would perhaps be presumptuous of me to refer here to the admirable services rendered not only by LORD NORTHCLlFFE (the probable author of the report) and the corps of 12,000 trained workers whom he introduced here during the year as purchasing agents under the direction of Sir Campbell Stuart, but also the right Honorable Arthur J. Balfour, and by Lord Reading. But my report would be incomplete without a reference to Mr. Andrew Carnegie, of Skibo Castle, Sutherlandshire, and New York City. He unobtrusively assumed the mantle of the late Mr. Cecil Rhodes. Through the Carnegie Foundation, he obtained such control over the professorate of this country that even President Wilson was a suppliant for a Carnegie pension before this people and allied gratitude placed him beyond prospective want.

The Carnegie League to Enforce Peace and its affiliate League of Small Nations are even now leading the van in our fight. In the North American Review, June 1893, Mr. Carnegie wrote: "Let men say what they will, I say that as surely as the sun in the heavens once shone upon Britain and America united, so surely is it one morning to rise, to shine upon, to greet again, the reunited state -- the British-American union."

The object of Cecil Rhodes is almost attained. The day prophesied by Mr. Carnegie is near at hand, the day when the American Colonies will be in all things one with the motherland, one and indivisible. Only the last great battle remains to be. fought -- the battle to compel her acceptance of the terms of the League of Nations."

Colonel House

Like grandma used to say, "Everyone and their ancestors who arrived here after the Birth of Christ should  go home." She wanted her economic/social democracy back. If that's the only way to get one, maybe she was right.

If our oligarchs keep imitating Mexico's oligarchs...what will the Canadian response be to U.S. illegals crossing their border to avoid starvation for themselves and their families?

We should probably think carefully before setting precedents.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"