NOVANEWS

Capitalist politicians, far-right organizations and media pundits base their anti-immigrant arguments on the claim that undocumented workers—whom they call “illegal aliens” – have broken the law. They fail to mention that the law has changed, sometimes quite radically, to suit the needs of the capitalist system and in response to political struggles waged by U.S. workers, citizens and non-citizens.

Immigration and citizenship law is not a fixed standard. It has always functioned both as a product of and a producer of institutional racism. It is a way to stigmatize a certain population as “socially undesirable” while at the same time satisfy big business’ need for cheap labor.

Racism and citizenship

The first U.S. citizenship regulation was the 1790 Nationality Act. It gave citizenship to “free white persons” who had resided in the country for two continuous years. Because indentured servants and the propertyless of European descent were not considered “free,” citizenship was highly limited—even for white people. Universal white male suffrage was only won on a state-by-state basis in the early-19th century. White women did not win the right to vote until 1920.

When the United States was formed, people of African descent had been brutally enslaved for over a century. Regardless of their status, freed or slave, they had no citizenship rights.

This policy was upheld by the 1857 Dred Scott Supreme Court decision, which ruled that all people of African descent, free or enslaved, were “beings of an inferior order” and were barred from ever becoming citizens.

The Fourteenth Amendment, passed after the Civil War, formally expanded the right of citizenship to freed slaves and all people born on U.S. soil. In 1870, the Nationality Act expanded this right to include “persons of African nativity or descent.”

Still, African-Americans did not truly win the rights spelled out in the Fourteenth Amendment until the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.

Meanwhile, throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, Native Americans fought a determined struggle for sovereignty and survival against the expansionist U.S. government’s wars of extermination. The citizenship rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment did not include Native Americans born on tribal lands.

Another significant population was the Mexican people, who were forcibly incorporated into the country by the U.S. war of aggression that stole half of Mexico. In the Mexican-American War of 1846 to 1848, U.S. forces conquered a wide expanse of Mexican territory, including the present U.S. states of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, Wyoming, California, Nevada and Utah.

The Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, which formally ended the war, stipulated that Mexicans who remained in those areas for the next year would automatically become citizens of the United States. The U.S. government systematically violated this right, however.

Early 20th century Mexican immigration

Mexican immigration was numerically insignificant from 1900 to 1909, representing only 0.6 percent of the total immigration into the United States. That number increased slightly to 3.8 percent of total immigration in the following decade.

Mexican laborers primarily took agricultural jobs in the Southwest. Despite the anti-immigrant lobby, growers and industrialists – who extracted super-profits from the Mexicans’ cheap, unskilled labor – testified before Congress of the value of Mexican workers, successfully stalling restrictive legislation.

In part due to this capitalist lobby, the 1924 Immigration Act did not set quotas for immigrants from the Western Hemisphere.

The return of U.S. soldiers from World War I, however, had eliminated the country’s labor shortage, and a 1921 recession exacerbated competition between white and nonwhite workers.

Around this time, press and politicians began to whip up anti-Mexican sentiments. Congress put the “Mexican problem” on the agenda. Every year from 1926 to 1930, Congressmen proposed bills expanding the quotas to the nations of the Western Hemisphere, clearly with Mexico in mind.

The anti-immigration and capitalist pro-immigration lobby employed similar racist stereotypes to make their arguments. Both considered Mexicans a biologically inferior race, with natural tendencies towards docility and ignorance.

The anti-immigration lobby argued that these biological characteristics made Mexicans unfit for U.S. citizenship. Racist sectors of the labor movement claimed these supposed traits were “ruinous” to the U.S. standard of labor. The pro-immigration lobby argued that these very characteristics made Mexican immigrants “harmless” to U.S. society. Furthermore, they argued, Mexicans “did jobs that no one else would take.”

The fact that Mexicans could be naturalized under the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo posed a problem to the evolving standard of white-only citizenship. On one hand, Mexicans were portrayed as biologically inferior. On the other hand, the mass naturalization of the conquered Mexican population made it impossible to bar Mexicans from citizenship on a legal basis of racial ineligibility.

Faced with these contradictions in their own system, the U.S. capitalist class found common ground with the racist, anti-immigrant lobby. Mexican immigration was driven underground but in practice tolerated.

‘Illegal’ immigration and the Border Patrol

From the late 19th century through the first two decades of the 20th, the Immigration Bureau ignored Mexicans crossing in and out of the Southwestern United States. A pattern of seasonal agricultural employment developed favoring businesses. Immigration inspectors were careful to not disturb this pattern.

At that time, the Southwest was even regarded as the “natural habitat” of the Mexican population. During World War I—again under conditions of a labor shortage – the U.S. Labor Department exempted Mexicans from mandatory taxes and literacy tests. This exemption was lifted in 1919, after the war.

From the end of World War I through the 1920s, U.S. immigration-enforcement policies shifted dramatically. Despite the declaration of “illegal” immigrant populations with the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act and the introduction of deportations in 1891, few people were actually deported until 1917.

Horrified by the 1917 Russian Revolution, the U.S. capitalist class broadcast the image of the foreign, wild-eyed revolutionary agitator invading U.S. borders to destabilize the nation from within. Congress increased funds for deportation and immigration enforcement. These new restrictions were applied first and foremost to foreign-born communists and anarchists. During the Red Scare of 1919, the U.S. government arrested tens of thousands of radicals. Up to 500 people were deported in that witch-hunt.

This anti-communist campaign was strengthened by the 1921 and 1924 quotas. For the first time, the quotas implied that “illegal” immigration was a danger to national security. The statute of limitations for unlawful entry was lifted entirely.

In 1925, the Immigration Bureau began actively deporting undocumented immigrants. The “illegal” designation was broadly and retroactively applied to all immigrants who had come without documents – even if they came before it was illegal to come without documents.

The U.S. government began to use its administrative apparatus to discourage legal Mexican immigration. The informal, fluid migration that characterized the earlier period was replaced by one in which Mexicans not only took literacy tests and paid a head tax, but also were subjected to humiliating public medical examinations, which included bathing and hair removal. Such procedures were banned with European immigrants.

Legal Mexican immigration dropped from almost 60,000 in 1925 to a little over 3,000 in 1931. By 1929, the U.S. government was deporting 15,000 Mexicans a year. The Border Patrol, made up of Ku Klux Klan members and rancher vigilantes who styled themselves after the Texas Rangers, institutionalized the threat of violence against those who tried to bypass the legal restrictions on immigration.

But this is only half the story.

Deportation as a tactic

Growers still relied on Mexican laborers brought across the border on temporary work visas—similar to the latter-day guest worker programs. Mexicans were brought into the workforce, but not into the citizenry. This immigration policy opened the door to branding the entire community – whether legal or not—with the racist image of the “illegal alien.”

Whereas earlier, passage across the border was routine, now overstaying a 6-month work visa made a Mexican laborer a criminal. This anti-Mexican hysteria culminated in mass deportations during the 1930s. In the midst of the widespread unemployment of the Depression, the U.S. government deported over 400,000 Mexicans and Mexican-Americans—what they called a “voluntary” repatriation program.

Over half of those deported were U.S. citizens.

In 1954, in the midst of an economic boom and the Bracero program—which brought millions of Mexicans into the country as “guest workers” from 1942 to 1964—the U.S. government organized the racist “Operation Wetback,” a massive deportation campaign that expelled over 1 million undocumented immigrants.

Since the 1920s, capitalist politicians have attempted to manipulate the immigration pool, in particular from Mexico, in order to meet the imperialist system’s economic and political needs. They use the tactic of deportation to terrorize the Mexican community and strip it of political and labor rights, and whip up racism to stigmatize Mexicans as an “illegal” people.

Unlike other immigrant groups that came under U.S. rule as a result of imperial conquest, the Mexican community has been systematically and consistently denied political rights around which it could struggle for better working conditions and equality. One grower put it plainly in 1930: “The American negro, the Porto Rican negro [sic], and the Filipinos cannot be deported if they prove later to be a crime menace. The Mexican can be.”

The mass immigrant rights movement that emerged in 2006 is an exciting development in this historic battle for workers’ rights. Experiencing a century of discriminatory, racist immigration policy, millions of immigrants—the Mexican community in particular—have taken to the streets and demanded the full rights they have long been owed.

CANADIAN OUTLAWS: Truth, Christians and Charter of Rights fall prey to Zionist misfeasance 

By Arthur Topham

March 3, 2013

The recent, decision handed down on Wednesday, February 27, 2013 by six of Canada’s Supreme Court justices, in the Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v Whatcott case, was indeed a ‘supreme’ blow to Christians, to freedom of religion and to every individual’s right to freedom of speech in Canada. At the same time, it also was a remarkably clandestine victory for the foreign Zionist-Jew lobby groups such as B’nai Brith Canada, the Canadian Jewish Congress, and the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy (CIJA); all of whom reflect, represent and condone, in unabashed fashion, the principles and policies of the Zionist state of Israel, over and above the traditional rule of law that has been the hallmark of Canadian jurisprudence from its earliest beginnings.

On top of this victorious legal coup that the vast majority of Canadians remain either ignorant of or in denial of, there are the added collaborating players in this long-range agenda to subvert and mould Canada’s judiciary into a type more in keeping with that of the U.S.A’s; one which, in recent years, has become permeated by their Jewish lobby groups to such an extent that they’ve effectively emasculated the US legal system by introducing their own brand of Jewish Noahide laws into American jurisprudence. These Noahide laws are, in fact, ones that stem from the ancient writings of the Jewish Talmud; a horrendously hoary and convoluted compilation of endless sophistry and intellectual meanderings that attempt to cover the full gamut of possible mental masterbation on any conceivable topic capable of debate, all of which boggles the mind and taxes the heart and soul of anyone who is able to locate and delve into the bottomless pit of arcane, abstruse, macabre deliberations found therein.

It is my contention, based upon all recent research and extrapolation, that this same clandestine, Fifth Column Zionist-instigated seditious process is, and has been, occurring here in Canada since the inception of our nation’s “hate speech laws” that, coincidentally, began to gain ascendency in Canada’s house of justice back in the late 1960′s when the major Jewish lobby groups first began to amalgamate and initiate this calculated, step by step, surreptitious program of incremental changes to Canada’s legal system; one that would eventually see the switch over from former Christian democratic principles of freedom of speech to those of the Talmudic Jewish Noahide laws under which Jewry has operated over the past two millennia.  It is also my added contention that these subtle changes have been, and are being, spearheaded by those very justices of the Supreme Court of Canada who hold duel citizenship with the state of Israel and whose ultimate allegiance, I strongly allege, is first and foremost to that foreign nation.

Compounding and exacerbating this traitorous intent to corrupt and debase Canada’s legal system via “hate crime legislation” is the growing realization by many Canadians that our so-called “independent” media is, in fact, totally controlled, editorially and otherwise, by this same self-serving Zionist Jew consortium and that these media monopolists, along with their line of sycophantic, sayanim journalists and talking heads, are the major propaganda force behind this plot to subvert the Canadian justice system.

Most Canadians who have not been asleep at the wheel politically are now fully cognizant of the fact that the Harper Conservative government is the key to the success of these Zionist “hate crime” operatives and their eventual triumph in binding the mouths and minds of Canadians so that any and all criticism of their planned take-over of the country will not be openly discussed, either in the print media, television or on the Internet. Their arsenal of epithets stands ready 24/7 to support any smear & fear campaign necessary to belittle and slander and denigrate those who show any indication of not bowing down in obeisance to their treasonous scheme to dismantle and re-create our former legal system so as to have it fit harmoniously with all the other nations that have also been infiltrated by these same self-chosen zealots.

The whole of the homosexual agenda is but one of the ruses that these lobbyists use in order to divide, confuse and conquer their opponents and justify, via their human rights commissions, tribunals and their Supreme Court double-agents, the introduction of more and more repressive anti-democratic “hate speech” laws. These tactics, for those who have studied the Zionist’s modus operandi to any degree, are par for the course. The crucial thing for them is to use others rather than come straight out and say we’re bringing in all these repressive, Orwellian laws because we don’t want Canadians discussing and debating our ideology, our motives or our agenda; one that includes enslaving and punishing anyone who steps out of line and beyond that the total destruction of the Christian religion as we now know it.

There is, on top of all these seemingly inexplicable occurrences, a vital question that needs to asked and addressed with respect to the inordinate number of Zionist, duel-citizenship Jewish justices who have somehow wended their way upwards to the apex of Canada’s judicial system and are now literally in positions of supreme power and control with respect to influencing both our Constitution and our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Given that Canada is noted world wide for being a proactive, multicultural nation; one that welcomes immigrants from around the world to its shores and touts itself as being an open, free and culturally diverse society, the blatant imbalance that we are witnessing today in the ethnic composition of our Supreme Court justices is beyond question a problem in dire need of explanation.

Were we, as a nation, to give equal opportunity and consideration to the various visible minorities that make up our country’s population then this ought to be reflected in the composition of those who sit in judgement at the top of our federal judicial system.

Knowing that our First Nations population is the largest minority group in Canada it behooves all Canadians to ask the obvious: why do we not have a First Nations justice sitting in on our supreme court? Given that this nation was formed, literally, from the soil of the original people’s land and also given that the First Nations people constitute the largest group in the Canadian population matrix does it not make sense that when it comes to representing their interests that someone from their ranks ought to be a member of this august group of supreme court justices?

Next in line is our Chinese-Canadian population topping the list as the largest visible minority in Canada and again the obvious question is: why do we not have a Chinese-Canadian justice sitting in the SCC?

Next in line we have a very large South Asian population followed by an equally large black population. Where are the South Asian and the Black supreme court justices?

Finally, getting to the crux of this perplexing situation, as we go down the scale of relative population demographics  we come to the ethnic Jewish population in Canada which, according to the Jewish Virtual Library, in 2010 numbered 375,000 in population, ranking somewhere in the neighbourhood of 25th in terms of group size and comprising, out of a total population of 33,890,000 Canadians, 1.1% of Canada’s total population. Yet, for their relatively small numbers in terms of percentages they now hold 4 out of 9 positions on Canada’s Supreme Court. That works out to 44.4% of Canada’s supreme court justices somehow stemming from 1.1 % of the country’s total population. If common sense cannot tell people that there is a glaring discrepancy here then something surely is wrong in the way that Canadians view the make-up of their nation’s highest court.  No amount of intellectual verbiage can explain why this is so without getting into the fundamental question of what the real reasons are for this most obvious of imbalances wherein we have a preponderance of duel-citizen Jewish justices sitting and deliberating the vital questions currently being discussed in this brief essay.

Of course the immediate reaction from the Zionist lobbies is to reach up their proverbial sleeve and pull out their “anti-Semitic” and “hate speech” cards and flash them across the nation via their controlled media in typical fashion whenever their power base is questioned or threatened. Then will follow their sophistry and rhetoric emanating from the academics and talking heads arguing that this blatant discrepancy is simply due to the fact that Jewish lawyers are the most intelligent, experienced and therefore qualified of all of Canada’s lawyers and, like the cream atop the cow’s milk, they naturally rise up to those positions of eminence and power.

As the kids would say, “Yah, sure.”

To conclude, it cannot be stressed or repeated enough that we either have free speech or we have controlled speech where Big Brother takes control of our conscience and our mind and leaves us as automatons and slaves to do their bidding and those who now sit in judgement over our collective rights , due to their recent actions in the Whatcott case, must be treated with the utmost suspicion and their motives fully analyzed.

The time to act on these concerns is yesterday. Tomorrow may be too late.

The SCC Puppets

I present below the figures of the three Ashkenazi Zionists who have, along with their controllers in Tel Aviv and elsewhere, and the other three Shabbez Goi justices, perpetrated this seditious act of attempting to twist the truth and our human right to freedom of speech into some form of kosher, Zionist fritter all the better to fragment and confuse the people of Canada so as to lure our nation further astray into the nightmare that awaits the world should Zionism ever gain full control over independent nation states.

It must also be adamantly born in mind as well that the fact that I am presenting and focusing on these three individuals is absolutely not to be misconstrued as having excused the other three protagonists in this deceptive legal drama. The primary purpose here is accent the Jewish lobby in Canad and its unsavory effect upon Canada’s legal system. It goes without saying that the other three justices have, for whatever reasons, also consented to this agenda and ought to be removed from their positions along with the three Zionist duel-citizen justices in question here.

With respect to Canada’s current Madam Chief Justice McLachlin it is also relevant and fitting that the following quote by Jason Moscovitz of the CBC be mentioned here as it is most relevant to an understanding of the mindset of these six judicial side-kicks when it comes to our right to freedom of speech.  Jason Moscovitz states: “Of all the attributes she brings to the high court, there is one that sticks out. Many legal experts say she does not consider the Charter of Rights to be necessarily sacred.” [Jason Moscovitz CBC Date: 991103 Time: 22:00:00 ET - 22:26:00 ET]

While still in her twenties SCC Abella was appointed a member of the Human Rights Commission of Ontario. Her husband, Irving Abella, is the J. Richard Shiff Professor of Canadian Jewish Studies at York University in Toronto and a past president of the Canadian Jewish Congress, one of the leading “hate speech law” lobby groups in Canada.

SCC Justice Abella is on the International Board of the Hebrew University, a member of the United States Holocaust Museum’s Committee on Conscience (again, pushing the 6 million lies of the Zionists that have become since WWII one of the principal pillars supporting all of their criminal actions since that time).

The president (Canadian Section) of the International Commission of Jurists, cited her as one whose “entire life has revolved around the cause of human rights… She has shaped Canadian policy in equality rights, and…has also had a profound impact on human rights law and policy outside Canada.” The precise manner in HOW SCC has “shaped Canadian policy in equality rights” is now fairly apparent given her complicity in this recent and deplorable attack upon Canada’s unquestionable right to freedom of speech.

SCC Justice Abella also served as a commissioner on the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Again, those who have been complicit in the actions of the human “rights” commissions here in Canada have revealed their motives clearly enough over the past decade and longer and have lost credibility in the eyes of the rest of the 98% of Canada who do not want to have their rights tampered with to satisfy the spurious and fraudulent false front arguments of special minority groups.

True to his name there’s definitely something “fishy” about this lastest SCC decision.

SCC Justice Rothstein has served as an adjudicator under the Manitoba Human Rights Act from 1978 to 1983 and as a member of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal from 1986 to 1992. He has also held many other offices or appointments connected to the ManitobaHuman Rights Act and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.

So what have people like Marshall Rothstein learned from all of their involvement in harassing and vilifying and criminalizing Canadians for having exercised their God-given right to freedom of expression and speech? By all appearances he’s learned that the manipulation of the law,when it is being supported by a Fifth Column media and a host of complicit, compromised politicians under the sway of the Zionist lobby, is relatively easy to accomplish and virtually a fait accompli.