Israel to deport 100s of children (what say open-border neocons?)

on 132 Comments

Israel announced plans to deport 400 children of migrant workers, born in Israel, speaking Hebrew, the children of people came legally to do work that Israelis don’t want to do and Palestinians aren’t allowed to do.

It’s an ugly business, but, as Benjamin Netanyahu succinctly put it, there are “Zionist considerations” which trump any humanitarian ones.

The deportations must pose quite a dilemma for open borders advocates such as those at the Wall Street Journal.

On the one hand, the Journal’s editors believe that open borders are good—that the US should have not only legal immigrants but illegal ones as well. On the other hand, they believe that Israel is always right. Roughly the same goes for Commentary and the Weekly Standard, which have long smeared the most moderate of American immigration restrictionists as bigots and nativists.

I used to travel in these circles, and never once came across an immigration restrictionist who advocated the repatriation of the children of LEGAL immigrants. I can’t even imagine it. (Though of course I’m sure you can find some neo Nazis who take that position.) But when Netanyahu does it, will the Wall Street Journal praise, or condemn? The ideological contradictions are surging way over the red line.

About Scott McConnell

Scott McConnell is a founding editor of the American Conservative. The former editorial page editor of The New York Post, he has written for Fortune, The New Criterion, National Review, Commentary and many other publications.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

132 Responses

  1. Leper Colonialist
    August 2, 2010, 12:13 pm

    No, it would pose ideological contradictions ONLY if the parties so named were ideologically and politically honest.

    The WSJ and the Neo-cons are neither.

    If it’s good enough for Bibi, it’s good enough for them.

  2. homingpigeon
    August 2, 2010, 12:24 pm

    I wonder how Israelis would react if these immigrants claimed to be descendants of the original occupants of the land, if these immigrants were growing in number to about one third of the population, and if their declared intent was to establish a state for themselves at the expense of the Israelis. Actually, I don’t wonder.

    • radii
      August 3, 2010, 12:35 am

      where are the New Canaanites anyway?

      the “we were here first” and “god gave it to us” arguments would be interesting to see used as propaganda weapons on both sides

  3. Sin Nombre
    August 2, 2010, 12:35 pm

    Geez, I dunno that one can even say this is a “Zionist” thing as distinct from a “jewish” thing, can you? I mean … in the end it’s not about preserving any Zion but preserving as much of an exclusively *jewish* Zion as possible.

    In any event you gotta believe at least some of the major jewish organizations in this country are going to criticize this. They’re already getting killed by the line that diaspora jews seem wont to advocate the exact same kinds of measures in gentile societies that they either help oppose or don’t object to in Israel because those same things are seen as threatening to that society.

    • Citizen
      August 2, 2010, 2:31 pm

      “They’re already getting killed by the line that diaspora jews seem wont to advocate the exact same kinds of measures in gentile societies that they either help oppose or don’t object to in Israel because those same things are seen as threatening to that society.”

      Well, yes; that’s the irony in a nutshell. But they are not “getting killed by their line;” it’s just a continuation of why they backed the changes in the 1965 Immigration Act. Read the Legislative Record on that Act, the footnotes which show which organizations supported it (with the dumbest Kennedy brother as their figurehead). We’ve come a long way here in the USA since 1965. It’s all about demographics, both here and in Israel. The key is to ask that age old insular question. The rest follows. Arizona is expendable, same as Gaza.

      • Citizen
        August 2, 2010, 2:33 pm

        All the prophecies of those few who fought the 1965 US Immigration Act have come true. Maybe the USA should not have borders? After all who needs them? Israel is a full-fledged member of the UN and it does not have defined borders.

      • Citizen
        August 2, 2010, 3:28 pm

        Not until the Heritage Foundation’s John Rector published a paper showing it [Bush’s bill] would increase America’s population by one-third did the Senate quickly pass an amendment reducing the guest-worker program. The amendment amnesties 12 million illegal aliens, an act that simply ignores history — the amnesty offered by the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act increased illegal immigration five-fold. link to

  4. Berthe
    August 2, 2010, 12:39 pm

    I read something recently and – this is like so much – I do not know if it is true or not but if it is true it is very important. The mainstream media is so darned dishonest about illegal immigration, always pushing the idea that “racism” and “bigotry” are the reasons for opposition, that I suspect this is most likely true: The majority of illegal immigrants are children, non-working mothers and elderly.

    If that information is true, it changes everything, in my opinion. It means that non-enforcement of the immigration laws and efforts to allow amnesty (a “path to citizenship”) are purely subsidies to employers from the taxpayers who are forced to pay for the services that children, non-working mothers and elderly people surely utilize in disproportion to working people. Immigration “reform” bills and non-enforcement are just a way to put money in the pockets of employers who get to pay low wages and the politicians don’t give a hoot that the services cost money because the politicians are fine with borrowing the money.

    These migrant workers in Israel and their children are a whole different kettle of fish. Deporting them is just Jewish/Zionist racism. (I always wonder about the idea of Jewishness as a “race.” Is it a race? My immediate neighbors are Jewish and I don’t think they’re a different race from me. I don’t think they’re religious at all, either.)

    • Mooser
      August 2, 2010, 2:28 pm

      And what if it was “race”. WHat does “race” mean to you, besides skin color?

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 2:33 pm

        See, what nobody wants to acknowledge is the plain genetic fact that Jews are an exact genetic match-up with blacks from Africa, except for the curly hair gene and the black skin gene. You have no idea how hard it is for me to resist the temptation to run out and buy all kinds of gansta-rap CDs. And dress in custom-made sweat-suits with all kinds bling! But they get one clue, and they’ll find out the rest, and then we’re sunk! They will figure out who we really are!

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 2:44 pm

        Dont forget the brain gene, Mooser.

      • Citizen
        August 2, 2010, 2:44 pm

        Cheer up. Some acknowledge that chimps and humans have virtually 95% of their DNA in common–I’m not sure how close the match up is with moose and other antlered species.
        link to

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 4:24 pm

        No, the brain gene is precisely the same. What else could account for Al Jolson and Mezz Mezzrow? Jews are simply somewhat paler Africans. Article next month in Scientific Mayven magazine.

      • Citizen
        August 2, 2010, 4:41 pm

        Oh, yeah, come to think of it, I read that in Wigger Magazine.

      • Taxi
        August 2, 2010, 5:14 pm

        And the cherry tomato gene – never forget THAT bit of chosen-nessssssss!

      • Citizen
        August 2, 2010, 2:38 pm

        Mooser, why are you asking Berthe? Berthe merely is stating that those advocating open borders defend their stance by saying those who oppose it are motivated by “racism” or “bigotry.” Shouldn’t you be asking the advocates of amnesty for illegals (yet once more) that question?

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 4:29 pm

        I have always had an unfair prejudice in favor of Mexicans. And a natural empathy for those who are illegal. Actually, I’m in favor of illegal immigration, that’s how I got here.

      • Citizen
        August 2, 2010, 4:45 pm

        Nothing better than some stolen hot chili. Crackers on the side or mixed in?

      • Mooser
        August 3, 2010, 11:08 am

        Those people are the best thing that could possibly happen to the US.

    • MRW
      August 2, 2010, 2:40 pm


      Your information is wrong. The majority of illegal immigrants are NOT children, non-working mothers and elderly. I dont have the link at hand and am not willing to waste one of my two links on it. The facts come from Social Security which gets $9 billion a year in FICA payments that go into a suspended fund because the SSN are wrong. The Social Security dept says that their records show the elderly go home at the end of their work life to be with family, knowing they will never collect SS.

      Furthermore, a highly detailed anthropological and epidemiological study at UCLA involving millions of Latinos in place since 1979 (and tracing the longevity of even a 100-year-old) shows that Latinos, as a group, are 40% genetically less likely to get strokes and 30% less likely to get heart attacks. (Maybe the 30 and 40 are reversed, can’t remember.) It aired on Public Radio Aug 18, 2009. The point was made that if a public health care program were initiated that Latinos (from Puerto Ricans to immigrant Mexicans & Latin Americans) would pay into the system but rarely need that level of care, which contributes the lion’s share of medical health care costs. There was also a third disease that they had low rates of that I can’t remember. Immigrant Latinos, as a group, have significantly lower levels of drug and alcohol abuse this epidemiological study showed, because of their family/cultural structure. Americanized Latinos engaged in more drug and alcohol abuse than recent immigrants.

      Illegal Latinos, in the main, dont go to hospitals for the obvious reason of being identified as illegal. They go to neighborhood Latino clinics or local Latino.

      Well, I didn’t use up my two links. I was going to locate the TX Comptroller Strayhorn’s study and audit that she did in 2006 for the previous years, the only state to do an official study. It showed that illegal immigrants brought $17.2 billion into the state coffers in 2005 (taxes, sales tax) but used only a small portion of that in actual services.

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 2:59 pm

        I dont have the link. I just have a copy of the study> From the intro:

        Much has been written in recent months about the costs and economic benefits associated with the rising number of undocumented immigrants in Texas and the U.S. as a whole. Most reports tie the costs of the undocumented population to education, medical expenses, incarceration and the effects of low-paid workers on the salaries of legal residents. Revenue gains to governments resulting from undocumented immigrants consist primarily of taxes that cannot be avoided, such as sales taxes, various fees and user taxes on items such as gasoline and motor vehicle inspections.

        This financial report focuses on the costs to the state of Texas; that is, services paid for with state revenue, including education, healthcare and incarceration. What government-sponsored services are available to undocumented immigrants is often determined by federal restrictions on spending (Exhibit 1). The report also identifies areas of costs to local governments and hospitals. Finally, it analyzes the $17.7 billion impact on the state’s economy as well as state revenues generated by undocumented immigrants.

        The Comptroller’s report estimates that undocumented immigrants in Texas generate more taxes and other revenue than the state spends on them. This finding is contrary to two recent reports, FAIR’s, “The Cost of Illegal Immigration to Texans” and the Bell Policy Center’s “Costs of Federally Mandated Services to Undocumented Immigrants in Colorado”, both of which identified costs exceeding revenue.

        The report is called Special Report: Undocumented Immigrants in Texas • December 2006

      • Citizen
        August 2, 2010, 3:09 pm

        In 2008, it was estimated that about $9 billion dollars worth of tax was paid by illegals. This is despite the fact that they are not eligible for tax credits or Social Security benefits. The amount is substantial enough to merit a large contribution from the often maligned minority group in the country. Of course not all illegals pay taxes, but for those who do, the contribution is substantial enough to add funds to Medicare and Social Security, which benefit Americans more than the illegal aliens. OTH, in California alone illegal immigrants cost the state 10.5 billion per year.
        link to

        The Center for Immigration Studies approximated in 1995 that immigration costs Americans a net $29 billion a year. That exceeded the combined budgets of the Departments of State, Justice and Interior.
        Illegal immigration has increased substantially since 1995.

      • Citizen
        August 2, 2010, 3:13 pm

        A big chunk of the cost of illegal immigration is education; here’s a state-by-state list of that cost alone:
        link to

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 3:31 pm

        This link link to
        cites the FAIR report which Republican Comptroller Strayhorn tore apart in her report for sloppiness and inaccurate reporting, at least on her state.

        I haven’t seen the CIS study but it is a private organization, virulently anti-immigration, and I wouldn’t trust it as far as I could throw it for accurate info. It is another John Tanton org (he was the covert founder of it) out to create fear of The Other. It is no mistake that we have an Israeli-style fence on the southern border; they helped design it. And isn’t it convenient that Americans are increasingly thinking about Mexicans as Israelis think about Palestinians.

        I would like a link to that CIS study that lists the $29 billion/yr cost. I want to see what they contributed as well. And every illegal alien pays tax of some sort, Citizen, as Strayhorn found out:

        Texas has no income tax and relies heavily on consumption taxes at the state and local levels. Texas is more likely to capture tax revenue from workers who do not report income. [That was $17.7 billion] Whereas income taxes will miss much activity in an underground economy, a sales tax will more likely be collected no matter how one earns an income.

        Consumption taxes make up a greater percentage of total state revenue in Texas than in most other states. Since undocumented immigrants are more likely to work in the underground economy from which income taxes may not get collected, the Texas tax system, compared to other states, may capture a greater percentage of all the taxes that should be paid from the economic activity of undocumented immigrants.

      • Citizen
        August 2, 2010, 3:45 pm

        The influx of refugees and of millions of illegal immigrants over many decades now have certainly contributed to the United States’ profound demographic transformation. But the chief driver of this change remains the system of family-based immigration put in place in 1965. At the time Johnson actually said, while signing the legislation, that there’d be little change. At the time most Americans did not favor the legislation. Over time, in a process critics call “chain migration,” entire families have re-established themselves in the United States. Historian Otis Graham wrote that the policy has been a terrible mistake:

        “Family reunification puts the decision of who comes to America in the hands of foreigners,” Graham said. “Those decisions are out of the hand of the Congress — they just set up a formula and its kinship. Frankly, it could be called nepotism.”

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 3:48 pm

        My main bitch with the anti-immigration campaign is that not only does it smack of wildly propagandistic rhetoric driven by those groups who fear Latinos will threaten Jewish clout, but it completely misses the real threat to the economy: outsourcing of highly paid engineering and scientific research jobs to India and China. I mean, Jesus Christ those Arizona farts are bitching and moaning about being overrun with brown-skinned people and the so-called loss of jobs — it ain’t crime* because according to the FBI and the real county sheriffs apart from the Maricopa crazy, crime is lower than it was ten years ago, including drugs — and have so little understanding of what drives an economy that they fail to understand the effect of GATT (now WTO) on what the global economy is going through. This is bitching about pennies while someone is stealing the vault. I swear this anti-immigration thing has been cooked up to divert everyone’s attention from the real cause.

        You want a sense of just how dangerous GATT/WTO is to our way of life? Listen to this interview of Sir James Goldsmith and Charlie Rose from Nov 1994. Too bad he died. He was 1000% prescient. PROPHETIC. Sit through it, Citizen, and listen to Clinton’s fucking stupid economic-something-or-other defending her position. Off-the-wall stupid. And everyone’s panties are in a bunch about gardeners and maids?
        link to
        * link to

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 3:50 pm

        Bullshit. Listen to Goldsmith. Link below.

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 3:55 pm

        My bullshit comment was in response to Citizen @ August 2, 2010 at 3:45 pm.

      • Shmuel
        August 2, 2010, 4:08 pm

        I swear this anti-immigration thing has been cooked up to divert everyone’s attention from the real cause.

        Amen, MRW. The WTO is also a major causes of immigration in the first place. So immigrants get screwed, citizens of host countries get screwed, and while we’re busy fighting each other, somebody’s making off with the loot (as planned).

      • Chu
        August 2, 2010, 4:10 pm

        divide and conquer. works like a charm.

      • Shmuel
        August 2, 2010, 4:30 pm

        In Italy, it’s called guerra tra poveri – war among the poor – used to great effect by the current government. Security, immigrants, crime, jobs, terrorism, clash of civilisations, welfare, communists, state of emergency, Muslims, Africans, Romanians, Gypsies, Chinese, local culture, our way of life, their fault, we’ll protect you. “I’m not a racist or anything, but these people … I saw it on TV.”

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 4:38 pm

        “Over time, in a process critics call “chain migration,” entire families have re-established themselves in the United States.”

        Yup, I’m pretty sure that’s how I got here. Of course, we used a very, well, flexible definition of who was “family”.

      • Chu
        August 2, 2010, 4:41 pm

        Politicians look down at the game board and know how to manipulate society. It’s why they’re so loved by all.
        Then they pretend to be part of the fold when it’s reelection time; kissing babies and chopping wood. it’s a good show.

      • Keith
        August 2, 2010, 4:44 pm

        MRW, SHMUEL, CHU- You are, of course, quite correct in your assessment of the situation. We live in a capitalist world run by business/ financial elites. The only thing I would add is that since the legal basis for worldwide economic control (WTO, etc) has met with popular resistance, the elites have shifted emphasis to de facto control via economic coercion by the big Wall Street investment banks such as Goldman Sachs, J P Morgan, etc, aided and abetted by the World Bank and IMF. Iceland and Greece are the initial casualties of what appears to be a financial blitzkrieg to destroy and control the weaker nation states, as well as to weaken the Euro as a potential rival reserve currency. Neo-liberal globalization forms the basis for the emerging corporate/financial empire, held together by corporate/financial control of trade dependent interdependencies. No need to send in armies, just cut off their credit and watch them starve.

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 4:48 pm

        Every person that wants to sit in a school room should be educated for free. And for children, it should be, within reason, compulsory. And they’ll need a couple good meals everyday, and school is also a good place to catch health concerns.
        Jesus Christ, Citizen, where are the US soldiers of tomorrow going to come from? You want a bunch of illiterate toothless guys with chronic health concerns defending our country.

        Face it, Citizen, the white race in America is shot. We better get some new blood and smarts in here, quick, and I for one, don’t mind paying a little bit for the privilege. And I would never deny anyone an education not the basic literacy and numeracy needed to function. You want them ending up like me?

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 4:50 pm


        At the end of that Goldsmith/Rose video, Goldsmith — who makes no apologies for his life as a ruthless corporate raider, bon vivant, and famous womanizer — says this:

        What is this nonsense? Everything is based in our modern society on improving an economic index. How do we get greater economic growth? How do we grow GNP? … And the result is we’re destroying the stability of our societies because we are worshiping the wrong god, the god of economic index. The economy, like everything else, is a tool that should be subject to the true and fundamental requirements of society. […]

        In every developing nation you have the same pattern. You have a handful of people who control everything, the oligarchs.

        Let me just make it clear. The people who are going to lose here in the developed countries are not people like you or me. It’s going to be people who lose their jobs out there, it is the poor in the rich countries who are going to be subsidizing the rich in the poor countries.

        If you have the time, Shmuel, this is a great video.

      • Bumblebye
        August 2, 2010, 4:54 pm

        And so it came to pass. The stability, such as existed, is disappearing. Is that the fear that drives warmongering? The attempt to export the instability?

      • Citizen
        August 2, 2010, 4:54 pm

        Funny, the proponents of the 1965 Act figured they’d get more
        Germans for science and technology–they never imagined all those Chinese and Indian engineers and technicians coming over and doing the chain-migration tango. Those who fear Latino clout as bad for the Jews favored the 1965 Act back then–to dilute the whites thought to always harbor anti-semitism. Gotta keep readjusting Never Again… Funny, as an Indian or Chinese immigrant you can take full advantage of the federal programs to help small business for people “of colour,” minority contractors and entrepreneurs. OK, I soon will listen to your recommended video & read your recommended article.

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 4:55 pm

        The fact — the fact — is that the US has the lowest immigration rate in the world: 1% of the world’s immigration. Wish I had a link, I copied the damn thing, can’t find where I parked it. Came out a few days ago. Bloomberg? Forbes?

      • Shmuel
        August 2, 2010, 4:58 pm

        Thanks, Keith. A friend who is an expert in the field of financial risk was telling me the same thing the other day, i.e. that the WTO has been supplanted by far more “effective” mechanisms.

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 5:05 pm

        Keith and Shmuel, you know what Goldman Sachs did with their TARP money? They spent it in China. That produced their record profits.

        And…and…and…courtesy of the Bush 2002 tax cut for offshore investments and operations down to 2%, I think, the profit is all gravy.

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 5:06 pm


        OK, I soon will listen to your recommended video & read your recommended article. Good. Then I can calm down. ;-)

      • Berthe
        August 2, 2010, 5:56 pm

        Thank you for the information but what does it prove? I still don’t know the total amount spent on services to illegal immigrants and that is the important figure. Education and health care are very expensive and could easily be higher than $9 billion/year for 12 – 20 million illegal immigrants. If it isn’t the majority, what percentage of illegal immigrants are children, non-working mothers or elderly?

        The UCLA study on Latinos and health – still doesn’t say what the costs are, just that by some calculation, Latinos are “less likely” to have some diseases. I don’t know what to make of that since some very serious illnesses are random incidence, according to the current science.

        As to “scapegoating” – illegal immigration, GATT/WTO and outsourcing are probably all hurting American workers.

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 6:01 pm

        Berthe, here’s the podcast interview.
        link to

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 6:03 pm

        Berthe, illegal immigrants are 12 million. 6.75 from Mexico and Central/ Latin America. 5.25 million from other countries.

        20 million is Lou Dobbs-creep. ;-)

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 6:24 pm


        Then search for government records:
        Here’s the audit. The benefits section is at the end:
        link to

        There’s also this: <blockquote.

        Just a small fraction of America’s health care spending is used to provide publicly supported care to the nation’s undocumented immigrants, according to a RAND Corporation study issued today.

        Overall, immigrants to the United States use relatively few health services, primarily because they are generally healthier than their American-born counterparts, according to the study by the nonprofit research organization.

        The report – which appears in the November edition of the journal Health Affairs – estimates that in the United States about $1.1 billion in federal, state and local government funds are spent annually on health care for undocumented immigrants aged 18 to 64. That amounts to an average of $11 in taxes for each U.S. household.

        In contrast, a total of $88 billion in government funds were spent on health care for all non-elderly adults in 2000.

        “Our findings show a relatively small amount of tax money is spent on health services provided to undocumented immigrants,” said James P. Smith, the RAND chair in Labor Market and Demographic Studies and an author of the report. “Costs will be much higher for educating the children of undocumented immigrants, so that’s where debate should center, not on these relatively small health care costs.”

        The other authors of the new report are: Dana Goldman, chair and director of health economics at RAND; and Neeraj Sood, an associate economist at RAND.

        Smith also was an author of the often-cited National Academy of Science publication on immigration titled “The New Americans.”
        link to

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 6:28 pm


        This government doc has an extensive bibliography, but I would only use it for government studies:
        link to

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 6:37 pm


        This is a NYT series on it:
        link to

      • Berthe
        August 2, 2010, 7:38 pm

        HOW would you know its 12 million? A number like that amounts to “Who knows?” Who is making these number? Probably they are getting the number from some kind of survey or poll and its a matter of methodology in the survey.

      • Berthe
        August 2, 2010, 7:54 pm

        I note caveats in the Texas report, like:

        “Estimating state government revenue attributable to undocumented immigrants is a difficult undertaking because any calculations must be based both on limited data and a number of significant assumptions about spending behavior.” Since Texas doesn’t have an income tax, and the only revenue they’re getting is sales tax, thats a pretty big caveat.

        Also, it seems that the estimate of costs is for costs to the state and not costs to local governments, hospitals, special districts. I don’t know how Texas finances education, whether the state pays most all of it or local districts.

        Finally, is Texas representative of my state (New Jersey) or, say, California? Texas is a low social services, low tax state.

        Another cost is if illegal immigrants cause unemployment and the unemployed legal people are getting income supplements/aid payments/unemployment payments from government. Was there any calculation for that?

      • Berthe
        August 2, 2010, 8:05 pm

        I read the first few paragraphs and the New York Times article is, again, very snide towards Americans who are upset about illegal immigration. Its like the author thinks they are just fools. I don’t have much first hand experience with illegal immigration and probably the author doesn’t either! But a lot of people do, ordinary people in their daily lives, and they are upset about it. I’m not going to say they are just fruitcakes because thats not my experience of ordinary people. And this is supposed to be a democracy.

        What bothers me is the non-enforcement of the law at the will of the politicians. For me, its like when Obama decided he wouldn’t investigate or prosecute the torture that went on in the Bush administration. He took an oath to enforce the law but because he sees a political benefit to himself for not enforcing it, he does whats good for him.

        What is our democracy worth if the people effectively have no say? They cannot change these laws because the public wants these laws and even stronger laws, so the politicians just don’t enforce the laws.

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 11:25 pm

        Gov’t. reports. Google it.

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 11:37 pm

        Since Texas doesn’t have an income tax, and the only revenue they’re getting is sales tax, thats a pretty big caveat.

        So, the revenue would be higher if there was state tax, no? I thought Strayhorn’s point was that they were able to measure specific illegal immigrant tax/licensing/fees payments because there is no income tax.

        Another cost is if illegal immigrants cause unemployment and the unemployed legal people are getting income supplements/aid payments/unemployment payments from government. Was there any calculation for that?

        It’s not monolithic. Which jobs are you talking about? Which industries? You telling me in Jersey that the immigrants are taking gardening jobs from citizens? Or maid jobs? And rendering Jerseyians (!?) unemployed? A major job loss in Jersey has been in the tech areas; those jobs went to India.

        I’d rather have an immigrant in my community, getting paid in my community, taking his family out to eat in my community, paying property and sales tax in my community, and buying his kids clothes in my community than paying money for someone to do that job in India and not one red cent enriches my community after hours. Did you watch that Goldsmith video. Do!

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 11:49 pm

        HOW would you know its 12 million?

        I’m the nerd who reads government reports, and not just one source for one fact; I quadruple-check it all. Check the bibliographies and google the names. Settle in for a few months’ reading. I spent four years pouring over them. There’s a lot of disinfo in that report I pointed out (and a lot of good sources too); there were instances where the cbo used reports and studies where ALL immigrants, legal and illegal, were lumped in as undocumented to suit someone’s agenda.

        For example, there were roughly 31 million foreign-born in 2005 in the country, but this includes legal and illegal…however, this is the figure that Lou Dobbs used disingenuously as the number of illegal immigrants to rile up the nation. He didn’t tell the fucking truth, and he used this number from one of the those anti-immigration groups to substantiate a lot of BS.

        It’s a minefield. If you want an answer to something, phrase it as an actual question in Google and don’t forget the “?” at the end and Google will do a different kind of search. Skip any website that has words like “illegals” or “numbers” in the URL. They’re slanted. Look for the government studies.

      • Mooser
        August 3, 2010, 11:15 am

        I’d rather have an immigrant in my community….

        I’m with you, all the way, MRW. Plus, the ambiguous legal staus of the immigrants make them almost proof against fascism.
        We need them. For many, many reasons.

      • Berthe
        August 3, 2010, 1:56 pm

        So, the revenue would be higher if there was state tax, no? I thought Strayhorn’s point was that they were able to measure specific illegal immigrant tax/licensing/fees payments because there is no income tax.

        Not the point. The point is that the report itself says estimating revenue is difficult and depends on significant assumptions. That amounts to somebody saying this is what he thinks immigrants buy, how much they spend, etc. Well, you may be the nerd that reads government reports but I am the news consumer who (as I said back in my original post) has been seeing dishonesty and manipulation in government reports, news reports, you name it. Giving someone the ability to dream up his own assumptions — why am I wary of that?

        You telling me in Jersey that the immigrants are taking gardening jobs from citizens? Or maid jobs? And rendering Jerseyians (!?) unemployed?

        This is one of those areas where “ordinary” people know things and I trust them because its firsthand. I actually have an example. I went through Home Depot to get my house’s exterior painted a couple of years ago. They have a system of contracting out where you wonder if the guy at the end who actually does the work is making any money at all. Anyway, the guy who actually painted my house (with his brother) told me that the second tier contractor who gave him the job got it because it was a Home Depot job and Home Depot stays on top of them, does follow-up, calls while they’re on the job, does a survey at the end and doesn’t pay that contractor until the customer is satisfied. And the contractor is afraid of losing Home Depot work. Otherwise, he would not have gotten the job because that subcontractor has illegal immigrant crews for most of his work.

        Maybe you don’t want to paint houses (I would make such a mess) but that painter and his brother are nice people and they both had a little families, a wife and child each.

    • MRW
      August 2, 2010, 2:49 pm


      Did you ever read this? Steinlight raised the flag and Haim Mr. My Only Issue is Israel Saban ran out and bought the Spanish network, Univision a few months later. Steinlight is with the Center for Immigration Studies, Lou Dobbs’ constant source, and one of the 13 anti-immigration groups founded and/or funded by John Tanton.

      Open Borders Threaten Jewish Clout
      By Stephen Steinlight
      Published June 16, 2006, issue of June 16, 2006.
      link to

      • Berthe
        August 2, 2010, 8:08 pm

        You know what? The Israel Lobby would just buy off the Latino politicians and leaders! And then all of the politicians would vote another round of loot to Israel to pay off the money that had to go to the new Latino political clout.

    • aban
      August 2, 2010, 4:19 pm

      Whoever said Jews are a race? They are a nation, because they say so. It’s called self-determination.

      Regarding the topic, I would like to know: Is there any country in the world where a migrant worker can come, stay as long as he/she likes, and the state has no say about it?

      • potsherd
        August 2, 2010, 4:31 pm

        OK, New Zionist, define “nation”.

        In most civilized countries, when a person is born in a state, that person has citizenship there. In many uncivilized countries, this is not the case.

        But this is really a problem of Israel’s own making. If they would return to the values of the early Zionists, get their lazy subsidized asses out to the land and into the factories to do the sweat labor themselves, they wouldn’t need migrant workers. Send the yeshiva parasites out to work. Solve the Israeli unemployment problem in the same swell foop.

      • wondering jew
        August 2, 2010, 4:45 pm

        potsherd- According to your definition France before WWII would not have been considered civilized because those born there were considered citizens of their fathers’ countries rather than citizens of France.

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 4:52 pm

        “According to your definition France before WWII would not have been considered civilized….”

        Wondering Jew, now c’mon. Nobody is gonna have a hissy fit if the Jewish Israelis want to style themselves “a nation”. Whatever gets your ziocaine flowing, whatever lights you Hanukkah candles, it’s alright by me. But why do you want to push it out into the realms of the farcical? I mean, “civilised”?
        Man, give ’em an inch….

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 4:34 pm

        aban, I didn’t say Jews were a race, I said they were the exact same race as Africans, except we have straighter hair (in general) and less of that melon-stuff in our skin (the stuff that makes skin dark) melatonin? Which makes us somewhat lighter, in general. But all the rest, well, me and, say Barry White could be brothers.
        But I’m sure you know this.

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 4:36 pm

        “Is there any country in the world where a migrant worker can come, stay as long as he/she likes, and the state has no say about it?”

        America, if they would listen to me!

      • Shmuel
        August 2, 2010, 4:39 pm


        Call yourself the tooth fairy for all I care. The problem starts when others get hurt by it.

        As for your question, democracies have immigration and naturalisation policies that are far less racist than Israel’s. In Europe or the US, most of these migrants would have been legal residents (with family unification rights) or naturalised citizens by now – regardless of their religion. “Aliyah absorption” does not count as immigration policy.

      • Shmuel
        August 2, 2010, 4:42 pm

        BTW, the OECD decided to accept Israel (a political decision) despite its blatantly racist immigration policies, completely out of phase with other OECD countries.

      • Bumblebye
        August 2, 2010, 4:46 pm

        And according to one of Seham’s links today, is a member of the EU in all but name.

      • wondering jew
        August 2, 2010, 7:03 pm

        What is Japan’s policy on immigration?

      • Shingo
        August 2, 2010, 8:29 pm

        Hey WJ,

        Who is Japan occupying, how many homes did they demolish last year, how many countries did they attack, what percentage of their popualtion are denied equal rights, is and who are they blockading?

      • potsherd
        August 2, 2010, 9:27 pm

        What is Japan’s policy? Racist.

      • RoHa
        August 2, 2010, 9:32 pm

        So this is the “Japan’s policy is just as bad as Israel’s, so why are you attacking Israel” tactic.

        We are attacking Israel because it is yet another bad thing about Israel.

        Maybe each of Israel’s faults is shared by other countries, but not many countries have all of them, and boast about how moral they are to boot.

      • wondering jew
        August 2, 2010, 9:45 pm

        I happen to favor unlimited immigration to Israel from Thailand and the Philipines and all non Muslim countries of the far east and I would grant the immigrants citizenship. Guess why? My bleeding heart? No, because I doubt there will be a two state solution and if there is a one state solution those immigrants will side with the Jews in the Knesset.
        But spare me the- all democratic countries have open door policies. It’s just not true.

      • thankgodimatheist
        August 2, 2010, 10:05 pm

        “because I doubt there will be a two state solution and if there is a one state solution those immigrants will side with the Jews in the Knesset.”

        Thanks for the honesty.. What I find amazing is that you don’t even realise the evil this view makes you out to espouse..Better import a Philipino or a Thai to outnumber the native and dis-empower them..Anything but the natives..

      • thankgodimatheist
        August 2, 2010, 10:08 pm

        And that’s why, considering your views, I should be in favor of you getting the f…out of Palestine altogether..

      • thankgodimatheist
        August 2, 2010, 10:16 pm

        Now I understand why Mooser gives it to you the way he does. Because he saw in you what I failed to (or didn’t want to see)..Your true self and nature..

      • Schwartzman
        August 2, 2010, 10:25 pm

        In 2010 over 4,000,000 Israeli Jews (70%) were Sabras, with an even greater percentage of Israeli Jewish youths falling into this category.

        What about that native population?

      • wondering jew
        August 2, 2010, 10:25 pm

        TGIA- thanks for helping the dialogue. You see a one state solution happening how soon? And you think it will happen without bloodshed? There won’t be a one state solution happening any time soon and my musings about importing a million Filipinos are musings, but I’m glad you’ve given Mooser a vote of confidence, because god forbid somebody should be honest here.

      • Schwartzman
        August 2, 2010, 10:29 pm

        Mooser would give it to just about anything….

      • thankgodimatheist
        August 2, 2010, 10:37 pm

        To have someone telling you he’d rather import a Philipino than have a Palestinian in his own land says a lot about the type of people you are. I’m making NO mistake..I just got it in explicit words….

      • thankgodimatheist
        August 2, 2010, 10:39 pm

        “Mooser would give it to just about anything…”

        Because he knows that you deserve it. He’s more perspicacious than I’ve been. That’s all.

      • thankgodimatheist
        August 2, 2010, 10:40 pm

        “my musings about importing a million Filipinos are musings,”

        So they’re “musings” now!

      • thankgodimatheist
        August 2, 2010, 10:42 pm

        Well better be careful with those musings in the future, they can say more than you want them to say..

      • thankgodimatheist
        August 2, 2010, 10:49 pm

        It takes more than 60 years to make a native swhartwsms..

      • wondering jew
        August 2, 2010, 10:57 pm

        TGIA- How many Palestinians and Jewish Israelis and Lebanese will die in the next 20 years in the wars that will be fought? If there is a war against Iran, how many people will die in that war? While you’re sitting safe (where are you sitting safe, btw?) I listen to Iran threatening to burn Tel Aviv, so spare me your righteous indignation at my theory of depriving the palestinians of their ability to vote in a right of return after they’ve been granted the vote in Israeli one state elections through the means of a million Thais and Filipinos.

      • Schwartzman
        August 2, 2010, 11:11 pm

        So what do you call native born Israelis then atheist?

      • thankgodimatheist
        August 2, 2010, 11:13 pm


      • bigbill
        August 2, 2010, 11:19 pm

        Sure enough. Likewise if y’all can just overwhelm the WASPS in America with Third Worlders you can rest assured that the new immigrants you smuggle in will vote straight party-line Democratic, follow your lead and you will be safe in America, too. Safe from the Evil American Anglos. Play your cards right with Immanuel Cellar’s New Americans you might get a fourth Jewish Supreme Court Justice, who knows. Sort of a compromise candidate: what with the Chinese and Pakistanis and Indians and Mexicans all fighting for their USSC slot, y’all will be the ones they all can trust. Tikkun olam and all that.

      • bigbill
        August 2, 2010, 11:25 pm

        Schwartzmann, I wouldn’t call those Haredi Jews with their 8-10 kids per woman “Sabras”. The Sabras are dying out: failure to reproduce, just like in America. Go look at the various demographic reports the ministry puts out in Israel. It ain’t pretty. TRick question: how do you get a college educated Jewish girl to make babies. Solve that and you may have a chance at survival. And you best solve it quick because they are damn close to passing a conversion law that labels you a mamser and unfit to breed with pureblooded Jews. The clock is ticking.

      • potsherd
        August 2, 2010, 11:50 pm

        I was born in the US, my family has been in the US since the 17th century, and I would never call myself a “native American”

      • potsherd
        August 2, 2010, 11:50 pm

        Sabras wear khaki shorts. It’s in the manual.

      • MRW
        August 2, 2010, 11:52 pm

        Bigbill, most immigrants I know vote Republican. Or did. Chinese, Mexican.

      • Schwartzman
        August 3, 2010, 12:06 am

        Well at least the lines are drawn. have fun being on the losing side for another 63 years.


      • MRW
        August 3, 2010, 12:23 am

        I listen to Iran threatening to burn Tel Aviv.

        Oh. Please. Please.

        We have our resident Israeli readers here — Shmuel, Avi — who would tell us in a Japanese minute if that was what was on the burner in Israeli newspapers. We can read salient Israeli papers translated at coteret. Spare us this melodramatic bullshit. Iran isn’t threatening Israel and you damn well know it. It’s the other way around.

        Israel is pissed that Russia went in behind Israel in 2007 when Israel had, or thought it had, that natural gas multi-trillion pipeline deal with American and Turkish partners in the breakaway Russian republics to ship natural gas to Europe, which is addicted to the stuff. Russia got wind of it. Gazprom, headed by Alexei Miller, slipped in and offered full retail for the gas and blocked Israel out of the deal and left it with billions invested, and no way to recoup it. The only place where they could the natural gas in the amount it needs to sell to Europe is Iran, and it wants to break up the country, carve it up to get it. Israel feels like a freier.

      • wondering jew
        August 3, 2010, 12:31 am

        mrw- your resident israelis don’t live in israel.

      • tree
        August 3, 2010, 1:04 am

        Why do you believe that mostly Catholic Filipinos and Buddhist Thais would support the Jewish Israelis who have exploited them? Why would they support a Jewish right of “return”?

        One of the scenarios I’ve envisioned COULD happen in Israel is that, in a frenzied but successful attempt to prevent the Palestinians from ever achieving equality in Israel, the Israeli government will flood the country with non-Arabs who will also turn out to be non-Jewish as well, and thus lose for “winning”. They’ve already began the process with the earlier mass influx of Russians.

      • thankgodimatheist
        August 3, 2010, 2:33 am

        “mrw- your resident israelis don’t live in israel.”

        You should ask them why.. Maybe they got sick of something, who knows? The prevalent hysteria, the fabricated paranoia (not to talk about the rest) can take its toll on a normal, well adjusted human being….If there’s any chance of Arabs and Jews living together in a bi-national state one day, it’s with people like Shmuel, Avi and Danaa ..not with the ethnocentric, hysterical Jews uber alles volk..

      • Shmuel
        August 3, 2010, 2:53 am

        But spare me the- all democratic countries have open door policies. It’s just not true.


        I don’t think anyone was saying that. The expression I used was “far less racist”. You are right that Japan is an exception, but Israeli immigration policies are certainly far worse than those of EU countries, US/Canada/Australia/NZ, and all the other countries Israel generally likes to compare itself to – for the precise reasons stated by Netanyahu (“Zionist considerations”).

        In European terms, Israeli policy (not the druthers of some fringe group) is worse than the platforms of most European anti-immigrant parties, which are willing to accept a certain level of legal “non-European” immigration, permanent residency (with at least minimal family reunification) and even naturalisation. Israeli policy recognises only individual, temporary – job-specific permits, without family reunification and with no possibility of naturalisation. Israel thus has no stable immigrant communities, because even the “legal” migrants cannot have or bring families, and they are in constant danger of deportation, and are unable to obtain any form of permanent residency.

        Your views on immigration are both admirable and repugnant at the same time. I am in favour of completely unrestricted immigration (at least as long as the movement of capital and certain categories of people remains unrestricted). Your reasoning however, takes the “demographic threat” school of democracy a step further, abandoning even the racist rationale of preserving the “Jewish character” of the state, in favour of a policy designed only to disenfranchise Palestinians.

      • thankgodimatheist
        August 3, 2010, 2:53 am

        “I listen to Iran threatening to burn Tel Aviv”

        Maybe you should have listened to Hanna Arendt then! She warned you that it was a very bad idea to force yourself in a region where you are unlikely to be welcomed …That you’d be opposed and you’ll have to live in an endless conflict and war because it’s the natural thing peoples do when faced with colonisers and invaders..
        Talk about being smart!!
        In any case.. I can’t believe you bought that “Iran threatening to burn Tel Aviv” thing..Many Israeli leaders said many times that Iran is not a threat.. you only like the idea because it gives that adrenalin rush to go forward into another one of your countless perpetual wars..

      • aban
        August 3, 2010, 4:27 am

        bigbill you are misinformed. Israeli Jews have the highest fertility rate in the developed world, and it’s still climbing. Look it up.

      • potsherd
        August 3, 2010, 4:40 am

        “Israeli Jews” do indeed have a high fertility rate, but this is because of the Haredim, whom no one in the right mind would call “sabras.”

      • Mooser
        August 3, 2010, 11:22 am

        TGIA, I must admit, should the opportunity arise, the temptation to give it to Schwartzman it would be very hard to resist.
        But honestly, if I were to come in contact with him, bring a stopwatch, I will lower the record for the out-of-earshot dash, and continue for an attempt on the mile.

      • potsherd
        August 3, 2010, 11:54 am

        WJ, you’re not “listening to Iran threatening to burn Tel Aviv,” you’re listening to warmongers setting up a hit on Iran.

        Does Iran not have the right to defend itself? Does it not have the right to retaliate against an act of war?

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 4:42 pm

        “They are a nation, because they say so”

        Wow, it’s just like magic! Listen abba, if the Jews in Israel want to call themselves a “nation”, no one is going to stop them. I really wouldn’t worry about it. They can call themselves whatever the hell they want. You okay with that, boychik? They can call themselves kings and sit on thrones if they want.

      • aban
        August 2, 2010, 5:26 pm

        Wow, I’m glad you agree, because it’s really as simple as that.

      • potsherd
        August 2, 2010, 6:51 pm

        But what does it mean?

        If words have no meaning, of course you can call yourself anything you want. What is a nation, such that the Jews are one?

      • aban
        August 3, 2010, 12:54 am

        “What is a nation, such that the Jews are one?”

        It’s what the Germans, Palestinians, Irish, Tamil, Japanese, Czech, Russians, Chinese, Tibetans etc. call themselves.

        Lots of variations there, but that’s the point: Like another term “family”, definitions can be attempted but would miss the point: It means whatever members want it to mean.

      • RoHa
        August 3, 2010, 2:56 am

        That doesn’t help at all. None of the groups you mentioned are nations in the way I use the term.

        Germany is a nation, and Germans are citizens of Germany. Ireland is a nation, and the Irish are citizens of Ireland. Nations are political arrangements. Australia is a nation, and the Australians are citizens of Australia. (That is why my passport says “Nationality: Australian”.)

        Groups of people are not nations, and Jews are clearly no a nation. If you want, you can call them “gnations”.

        But you will have to tell us what entitles a group to call itself a gnation. If a group calls itself a gnation simply because it feels like it (“self-determignation”) there is no reason why stamp collectors, or we poor, persecuted, misunderstood, dirty old men can call themselves “gnations”.

        And why is it important? What moral or political implications arise from a group being classed as a “gantion“?

      • aban
        August 3, 2010, 4:16 am

        RoHa: This is confusing nations with states, and moreover begging the question of why most states came into being in the first place. The Irish live in Eire and Northern Ireland (UK). Some Irish in NI want to secede to Eire, and some don’t, but both kinds are called Irish. The Czech live now live in the Czech Republic because they did not believe that they are “Czechoslovaks” when Czechoslovakia existed. etc. etc.

        The question is not important. I denied Jews were a race and said they were a nation instead, and then I was questioned about what that means, but it really does not matter here.

      • potsherd
        August 3, 2010, 4:37 am

        A word that can mean whatever people want it to mean, means nothing. And more importantly, it implies nothing. It particularly implies nothing like “self-determination.”

        I belong to the Woodstock Nation, but that doesn’t mean we get to gather at Woodstock, kick out the residents and build a wall to keep out anyone but ourselves, so they won’t take away our weed.

      • RoHa
        August 3, 2010, 8:29 am

        If a nation is different from a state, what is the difference? Australia is a state, and we claim it is a nation. How can the Jews , collectively, be anything like Australia?

        And if you can’t say what a nation is, then your claim that Jews are a nation looks to be meaningless.

        (The citizens of the Irish republic are called Irish. The U.K. citizens from Northern Ireland are called Northern Irish. )

      • potsherd
        August 3, 2010, 9:09 am

        See, if something is a nation, they get to form a national state. More sneaky Zionist semantics.

        But the trick requires more of a definition than aban is willing or able to give.

        There is also the problem that Jewishness in Israel is not simply a matter of people declaring, hey, we’re all a Jewish nation together. The aytollahs running the place have increasingly strict religious requirements for declaring someone a Jew.

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 4:54 pm

        : “Is there any country in the world where a migrant worker can come, stay as long as he/she likes, and the state has no say about it?”

        Heck, you’re still squatting here and people are putting up with it. But you’ll push your luck, you guys always do.

      • aban
        August 2, 2010, 5:27 pm

        Where is “here”?

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 5:32 pm

        aban, you didn’t let me finish. I said they can call themselves whatever they want, but they’ll still be the same murderous lying bunch of colonialists they always were. But if you wanna get in a circle, jiggle around in shorts and sandals (I’ve seen it aban, so don’t try and deny it) and sing “Ccch…schw..czhh, we’re a nation, whoopee do” I won’t make any objection. In fact, almost nobody here will! Isn’t that lovely, boychik?

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 5:35 pm

        “Where is “here”?

        Well, ABBA, I’ll give you a clue! It’s not the King David Hotel in British Mandate Palestine! Are you getting warmer now, champ?

      • aban
        August 2, 2010, 5:39 pm

        “Isn’t that lovely, boychik?”

        Mooser, bigotry is seldom lovely, but whatever turns you on.

      • Mooser
        August 2, 2010, 5:39 pm

        Anyway, aban, let me get right down to it. Must you people be so goddam irritating? Huh? Is there some law over there that requires it? You’re never happy unless you barge in and chafe my synapses until they’re going off like a string of Black Cats, is that it? I hope you get a big pimple in your belly-button.

      • Mooser
        August 3, 2010, 11:28 am

        Aban, boychij is what my father called me, when he was feeling indulgent, the rest of the time he just called me closest target. What’s bigotted about it?

        And I don’t want to shock you, but there are at least seven other people in the world who don’t like (poo,poo,poo) “folk dancing”.

      • Bumblebye
        August 3, 2010, 11:41 am

        He should be thankful it wasn’t Morris Dancing he inherited!

      • aban
        August 3, 2010, 11:56 am

        Mooser: The bigotry was in the rest of your post. “Boychik” is patronizing. Got it, Gramps?

      • RoHa
        August 2, 2010, 7:31 pm

        If Jews are a nation, then no Jews should be permitted to be Members of Parliament in Australia. Australian Federal Law states that MP’s may only have Australian nationality and must renounce all other nationalities. You happy with that?

        When Zionists talk of “self-determination”, it seems to mean “Jews can do whatever they want, and the rest of the world can go and fnck itself.”

      • aban
        August 3, 2010, 1:06 am


        Identification with the Jewish nation is not forced on Jews. Each makes up his own mind. That applies to Australian parliamentarians too.

        But to take your case elsewhere: How do you view Arab-Israeli members of Knesset who say they are Palestinian nationals?

      • RoHa
        August 3, 2010, 2:41 am

        So Jews, collectively, are a nation, but one can be a Jew without being a member of the nation? How does that work?

        And if a Palestinian MK claims to be a member of the Palestinian “nation”, then s/he is mistaken. There is no Palestinian nation.

  5. hayate
    August 2, 2010, 1:14 pm

    This sounds like stories from the american slavocracy where children of slaves were sometimes sold off to other plantations.

    • Chu
      August 2, 2010, 1:20 pm

      in the least, they weren’t sold to the highest bidder in the sex slave industry. that is compassionate Zionist consideration in action.

    • lysias
      August 2, 2010, 1:22 pm

      When New York State voted to end slavery, there was some delay before the end came into effect. During the interval, a lot of New York slaveholders sold their slaves down South.

  6. Hu Bris
    August 2, 2010, 1:31 pm

    It’s an ugly business, but, as Benjamin Netanyahu succinctly put it, there are “Zionist considerations” which trump any humanitarian ones.

    Well it’s not like anyone but a Zio-Loon was ever going to make the mistake of thinking that ‘Zionism’ and ‘humanitarian’ were in anyway familiar with each other

    • Mooser
      August 2, 2010, 5:33 pm

      Hu Bris, huh? Now, that’s an Internet handle! In case it is your real name (believe me, I know about unusual names), I love it!

  7. eljay
    August 2, 2010, 3:05 pm

    Byahu: “We feel and understand the hearts of children. Unfortunately, neither the children nor their hearts are Jewish, so fuck ’em. After all, there are Zionist considerations at stake.

    Reporter: “What does ‘Zionist considerations’ mean?”

    Byahu: “Why do you hate Jews?”

  8. MRW
    August 2, 2010, 3:58 pm

    Israel announced plans to deport 400 children of migrant workers, born in Israel, speaking Hebrew, the children of people came legally to do work that Israelis don’t want to do and Palestinians aren’t allowed to do.

    And AZ Senator John Kyl just advocated the same thing here?

    You dont have to be a rocket scientist to figure this one out.

  9. kapok
    August 2, 2010, 5:26 pm

    Oh, and who says they’re illegal? The US and Israel. Well, excuuuuuuuuse me while I genuflect.

Leave a Reply