Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission seems a little biased
Posted Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 4:54 am
The Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (link) held a "special meeting" in Hazleton to discuss illegal immigration. The guest list was highly biased; so too are the report by Kent Jackson and so too is at least the head of the Commission:
2. I'm pretty sure the Chairperson's statistics are wrong.
3. One wonders how far we've fallen when a government official is promoting the idea that it's somehow acceptable for the government to profit from illegal activity. Since most people and organizations try to maximize their profits, should the government encourage even more illegal activity, so as to increase their take?
At a guest posting at the ACLU of PA's blog, Glassman says "[a]s a law enforcement agency, the Commission does not, of course, condone or support illegal immigration." Of course, the rest of his post does in effect support illegal immigration, as do his comments above.
And, here's another quote:
* Dr. Agapito Lopez of the Governor's Advisory Commission on Latino Affairs (an earlier quote from him: "We will acculturate, we will adapt to your rules, we will follow your laws, but we will never assimilate.")
Robert Nix of Phoenix Strategies in Philadelphia ("We need immigrants for our future. It seems communities taking immigration into their own hands are barking up the wrong tree.") However, what the article fails to note is that Nix is or was on the board of the Hispanic Bar Association of Pennsylvania (link).
Another guest made some "interesting" comments; I'll leave it to someone else to search for his name in order to discover a possible reason why.
And, rounding out the roster was someone from the National Immigration Law Center.
...Since 1991, the commission has opposed English-only laws, Chairman Stephen Glassman said.1. Kent may have committed a cardinal sin; Glassman apparently prefers "Chairperson" to "Chairman".
Glassman said Hazleton enacted its law under the perception that illegal immigration fuels crime and adds to the cost of running city government, but those perceptions are unsupported by data, he said.
Immigrants, regardless of their legal status, might contribute more to government than the government spends to serve them, he said...
2. I'm pretty sure the Chairperson's statistics are wrong.
3. One wonders how far we've fallen when a government official is promoting the idea that it's somehow acceptable for the government to profit from illegal activity. Since most people and organizations try to maximize their profits, should the government encourage even more illegal activity, so as to increase their take?
At a guest posting at the ACLU of PA's blog, Glassman says "[a]s a law enforcement agency, the Commission does not, of course, condone or support illegal immigration." Of course, the rest of his post does in effect support illegal immigration, as do his comments above.
And, here's another quote:
"Even though this may not have been the intent of Geno's, the presence of the sign harkens back to a time when signs stating, 'no colored allowed,' 'Whites only,' 'no Jews,' or 'no Italians or Irish need apply,' often greeted patrons of public places."The other guests included:
* Dr. Agapito Lopez of the Governor's Advisory Commission on Latino Affairs (an earlier quote from him: "We will acculturate, we will adapt to your rules, we will follow your laws, but we will never assimilate.")
Robert Nix of Phoenix Strategies in Philadelphia ("We need immigrants for our future. It seems communities taking immigration into their own hands are barking up the wrong tree.") However, what the article fails to note is that Nix is or was on the board of the Hispanic Bar Association of Pennsylvania (link).
Another guest made some "interesting" comments; I'll leave it to someone else to search for his name in order to discover a possible reason why.
And, rounding out the roster was someone from the National Immigration Law Center.