 |
 |
 |
|
|
Congressman Tom Tancredo Interview From JW’s Television Show, "The Judicial Watch Report" Larry Klayman: When nineteen resident aliens, many in the United States with expired visas, launched an attack to kill nearly 3000 people on September 11th, it should have become a warning sign that something was wrong with America’s immigration policy. So why are some in Congress afraid to tackle the issue? And will the INS ever be held accountable? We are honored to be joined by Colorado Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo to take a hard look at America’s immigration system. Welcome to the Judicial Watch Report. Tom Tancredo: Thank you. It’s a pleasure to be here. You guys do great great work, and I want to tell you that [Judicial Watch] is the only organization outside of my church to which I’ve donated money. Klayman: Well thank you, and we appreciate it because you are a very candid guy. Tell us what your beef is with the Bush administration, if any, over how they are enforcing the immigration laws… Tancredo: They’re not. That’s the problem. To be called a sovereign nation, a nation has to be able to control its own borders. It is controlling your own destiny in a way, and we don’t control our own borders. Right now, as a matter of fact, our borders are a figment of someone’s imagination. Tom Fitton: Well, Congressman, you say greater control. Explain to folks what is not being done. Tancredo: We have about a thousand people on the southern border and fewer than that on the northern border that we call border patrol. They are stationed primarily at ports of entry. There are about 5,000 or 6,000 miles of places along that border where they are not, and it is very easy of course to come across the border illegally. So easy that up to one million people a year do so. We now have about thirteen million people in this country illegally, including 314,000 people who have been ordered to be deported and who have simply walked out of the court and back into society. And remember, to be deported doesn’t mean you simply got a parking ticket. It means you committed a felony. You raped, robbed, or murdered somebody. Everybody agrees that there is a problem and that we should reduce immigration, that we should do better. Fitton: We know that 80 percent of the people agree with our views on these issues. Why don’t the politicians pander? Tancredo: I’ll tell you why. They are pandering, but just to a different sort of clientele. Here’s what I mean. . . You have on the one hand the Democratic Party. They view massive immigration as a massive infusion of potential voters for the Democratic Party, and therefore will do nothing, absolutely nothing to stop that flow of legal or illegal entrance into the country. The Republican Party fears that any reduction in massive immigration will mean fewer people coming into the country that can be hired at low wage rates. The President sees this as a potential way of making in-roads into the Hispanic community for votes and he has a sort of special relationship with [Mexican President] Vincente Fox. Fitton: In fact, the President proposed semi-amnesty, even though he denied it was an amnesty. It was supported by the House, by one vote, and was then later defeated through parliamentary maneuvering. You were highly critical of the President’s plan there. What was your concern about this amnesty program? Tancredo: Amnesty is a terrible policy, and it¹s terrible politics. It’s a terrible policy because you are rewarding people for breaking the law. It’s also telling people, millions of people, that have come into this country legally, gone through the process, filled out the paper work, waited sometimes years and years and years, gotten here and had to learn the language, taken the tests and a variety of things to become a citizen that they’re a sucker. Why don’t you just sneak across the border? Because hang around long enough, stand to the radar, and we¹ll give you amnesty. It’s telling everyone that’s waiting out there, the hundreds of billions of people who are waiting to come into this country" Klayman: And it’s overly broad. Because it’s going to allow the terrorists amnesty. Tancredo: That’s the third part. The guy that blew up the World Trade Towers the first time, he was an amnesty person. Fitton: How did the White House respond to your criticism? Tancredo: Well, they did not respond well, but I went on. It didn’t just end there. I had an editorial board meeting with the Washington Times. I told them that if we didn’t do more to protect our borders, and if we have another event, similar to September 11, then in fact any American citizen who was wounded in the event, would have their blood on this president and this Congress. Klayman: This administration is amazing. The Clintons would commit basic crimes to cover things up. But this one is so scared of accepting responsibility and blame that they¹re paranoid about it. Fitton: Well, what did Karl Rove say in response to your comments? Tancredo: Well, he told me a lot of things. He argued the point as to whether they would be responsible. I said "Now, Carl let’s go through this. If we have another event, and if we have not done more than what we¹ve done so far to protect our borders, then who should people blame?" Who’s responsible? Klayman: You were being kind. Because I’ve said, both the Clinton administration and the Bush administration have responsibility for September 11. You’re not even going that far. You’re saying if it happens again, at least now they have warning.
info@judicialwatch.org • 1-888-JW-ETHIC
Site hosting and technology by Cory Consulting, Inc. © 1997-2004, Judicial Watch, Inc., All rights reserved. |
