- The Washington Times - Sunday, March 17, 2002

A disgraceful immigration bill

Before congressional leaders express too much outrage as justifiable as it may be over the news that exactly six months after the attacks, a Florida flight school received paperwork from the Immigration and Naturalization Service that said visas had been approved for Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi two of the terrorists aboard flights that struck and felled the World Trade Center towers consider that on the same day the House of Representatives passed a bill to grant amnesty to hundreds of thousands of aliens who illegally entered the United States or overstayed their visas.

While we are busy confiscating medals and nail files from war heroes and old ladies at airports, we are rewarding lawbreakers among whose number may be more Mohamed Attas. A recent analysis of U.S. Census data revealed that among the more than 8 million illegal aliens who resided here in 2000 were at least 58,000 Middle Eastern men from countries other than Israel. There are potentially thousands of terrorist "sleepers" in our midst.

A spokesman for the INS admits that there are more than 250,000 illegal aliens in the United States who have already been ordered deported by an immigration judge but who remain in the United States anyway because of lax enforcement by the federal government. They should be found and deported immediately.

Unless we regain control of our borders, we will never win the war on terrorism, and that includes both legal and illegal entry into the United States.

We simply cannot seal off every water supply, air vent, food supply and crop duster from now till the end of time. We cannot search every truck, every passenger, every shopper, every subway, every person entering every building every American every day.

But we can monitor every person who comes here, how long they stay, where they go and what they are doing. Living in the United States is a privilege, not a right for noncitizens.

Law-abiding aliens would have nothing to fear. The rest should be kicked out. Our lives may depend on it.


DANIEL JOHN SOBIESKI

Chicago

A not-so-intelligent design

Sen. Rick Santorum's Commentary column ("Illiberal education in Ohio schools," March 14) errs fundamentally by confusing a genuine scientific theory, biological evolution, with a nonscientific idea, intelligent design. He suggests that the "theoretical and scientific evidence" is increasing in support of intelligent design.

Nonsense. If that were the case, scientists would be racing to publish their results supporting intelligent design as an alternative to the current theories relating to evolution in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. In fact, in the scientific world, intelligent design doesn't make the first cut.

Instead, the idea of intelligent design is being promoted to school boards as a question of intellectual tolerance or fairness, or even as a response to public opinion. Mr. Santorum, a Pennsylvania Republican, cites "… a recent poll that shows overwhelming support" for teaching intelligent design in science classes.

The notion of fairness is deeply embedded in Americans, which is a good thing. But would it be a good idea to teach that the Earth is 6,000 years old despite the overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, just because a vocal group of people demands equal time for its idea in the classroom? Should geography teachers place Chicago outside the state of Illinois because polls show that many high schoolers think that is the case?

Intelligent design doesn't pass muster scientifically, so, instead, its supporters are seeking to use the iron fist of the law to push it in through the back door. Intelligent design advocates want the Ohio Legislature and the Ohio Board of Education to create by government fiat the stamp of scientific respectability where none exists.

If Mr. Santorum has his way, students will get, instead, a lesson in political strong-arming, a contorted view of intellectual freedom, and, worst of all, a confused understanding of what constitutes a scientific theory.

Our children and the parents who learn from them deserve better.


FRED SPILHAUS JR.

Executive director

American Geophysical Union

Washington

Pickering critics should be ashamed

Critics actually told a partial truth about the appeals court nomination of Mississippi District Court Judge Charles W. Pickering Sr. when they said that the reason for his rejection was his record on civil rights.

His real record on civil rights is exactly what the liberals oppose, for two reasons. One, approving a Republican-appointed judge who had stood up to the Ku Klux Klan in the 1960s (while they have made a former KKK recruiter the president pro tempore) would diminish their "ownership" of the race issue; and two, liberals cannot afford to achieve their goals. If we ever achieve a truly color-blind, equal-opportunity society, there will be no job for liberals and no one for them to exploit to maintain power. Then what will they do? They cannot function in real jobs.

If Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi had any guts, he would call for a floor vote. There are three Democrats who said they would vote for Judge Pickering. Presumably, they would also vote to bring up his nomination.

Mr. Lott is a gutless wonder, like all the other Republican leaders. It is time decent Americans stood up to the liberals. They must be stopped from smearing any more good people like Robert Bork and Judge Pickering.


TIM PHARES

Laurel

Crackdown in Fairfax County

This is in regard to "Police target speeders on U.S. 1" (March 5). The article describes a Fairfax County police "crackdown" on "speeders" and "reckless drivers" on the portion of U.S. 1 in Fairfax County. This extra police enforcement is made to look like something good. We are supposedly made safer and better off because of it. You can just stay off U.S. 1 for the next 45 days if you don't like it.

I have another, entirely different perspective on the matter. I am one of those people who live on U.S. 1 in Fairfax County. Any time I want to go anywhere, I have to use U.S. 1. The only way I can avoid using U.S. 1 is to take a long vacation. This is not practical.

The users of U.S. 1 are going to get "speeding" tickets. Since I have to use U.S. 1, I am directly threatened by this police action. The law is supposed to be applied equally to all citizens. That's what the rule of law is supposed to be about. This police action applies the law unfairly to the people who live along U.S. 1.

You could say don't drive too fast, and you will not get a ticket. In fact, it's nearly impossible for the defendant to win a case in traffic court, regardless of the facts in the case. The mere fact that you received a ticket at all is basically enough to convict you, and there is almost nothing you can do about it. If there is a cop around and he wants to give out more tickets, everyone in the vicinity is threatened, regardless of speed.

I already submitted a formal complaint about this to the Fairfax County police. They had an officer call me to "explain" the "crackdown." We discussed the matter for a few minutes. He made it clear nothing was going to change as a result of my complaint. I hung up when he resorted to name calling.

This enforcement action is harmful to the rule of law and blatantly unfair to anyone who lives along U.S. 1. For everyone else, stay off U.S. 1, if you can. Forewarned is forearmed.


SETH ALLEN

Alexandria


Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

 

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide