More Misinformation from the Media:
We still talk about American fascism as a looming threat, something that could happen if we’re not vigilant. But for undocumented immigrants, it’s already here. . . . On Monday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions decreed that most people fleeing domestic abuse or gang violence would no longer be eligible for asylum. . . .– First They Came for the Migrants, Michelle Goldberg, The New York Times, 6/11/18 [Link]
Fact Check: This writer seems to think it is “fascism” when our immigration laws are enforced. But when one considers how often illegal aliens successfully skirt those laws, one must conclude that this “fascism” is pretty mild. One example in recent years is the amnesty scam. With the advice and encouragement of their American enablers, they have increasingly managed get into the United States with bogus asylum claims.
The purpose of asylum and the related category of refugee status—long understood in international law—is to allow admission of individuals who face persecution in their home countries on such grounds as political beliefs, ethnicity, and religion. Illegal aliens game the system by petitioning for asylum when they cross our border, even though they don’t qualify for it by any of the aforementioned standards. After being released with the promise to show up for an asylum hearing, they vanish—never to be seen again—into the American population.
Under the traditional understanding of asylum the person fleeing persecution would apply for that status in the first safe country he enters after leaving his homeland. Many of the applicants at our border are non-Mexicans who have traveled through Mexico to reach our border. If what they really want is a haven from persecution, the obvious question is why don’t they apply for asylum in Mexico? The pretty obvious answer is that they are seeking, first and foremost, the economic benefits of living in the United States.
Lacking a desired income is not a legitimate reason for seeking asylum, but many migration advocates seem to think that it should be. In the meantime, they have tried to expand the qualifications as much as possible. Examples are domestic abuse and gang violence. Was the decision of Attorney General Sessions to terminate these categories really an act of “fascism.”
The attorney general argues quite well to the contrary. He affirmed that “the mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes—such as domestic violence or gang violence—or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim. . . . [A]sylum was never intended to alleviate all problems—even all serious problems—that people face every day all over the world.”
It is simply insane to believe that our country can offer the haven of asylum to every dissatisfied person in the world. Almost as crazy is the hysteria of so-called mainstream media who depict reasonable steps to control immigration in the most hysterical terms. Controlling our border and imposing reasonable limits on immigration does not make us a second edition of the Third Reich.