Calling 911, by Andrew Joppa

Calling 911

By Andy Joppa

 

Mike frantically called 911. The officious voice of the 911 operator came on the line, “911, what is your emergency?”  Mike yelled, “Someone has broken into my house!” “Sir” came back her condescending voice, “…you must calm down…after all they’ve only broken into your house.” Taken back by her comment he said, “Only? …but…but…they’re all over my home…they’re destroying what I’ve built…they’ve…” “Sir…you must calm down…they’re probably very nice people who are just hungry and need a place to stay.”  Mike could hear crashing and screaming.  His fear level grew in response. He made another attempt to get help from 911, “Listen to me…they’ve broken into my home…my family is in danger.”

 

The 911 voice became scornful, “Sir…it is clear that you are biased against those that have sought refuge in your home and your anger tells me I must send out the police to protect those guests that are now sheltered in what you refer to as your home.”   Mike’s exasperation grew to where it became difficult for him to speak but he made one last pessimistic attempt at getting help, “I’m scared for my family…anyone who would break into my home is more likely to hurt my family, steal my property or engage in other criminal activities.” He had managed to get out this thought without losing control. “Please…can I expect any help?”  He then heard the phone hang up and the dial tone came on.  In a few moments Mike saw the flashing lights of a police vehicle that he knew was coming for him.

 

As he was being led away Mike saw others coming into his home through his wide-open front door.  Everyone smiled and waved toward him mockingly as he was put in the back seat of the patrol car. As the car drove away, he looked back and saw his American flag being torn down from where it had hung for many years.  A tear rolled down his cheek as he recognized that had lost his home. He asked, “Where’s my family?”  “Keep your mouth shut…you’re nothing but a bigot and a trouble-maker.”

 

All too often the case that is made against illegal aliens is based on a desperate attempt to prove the obvious.  That is… that illegal aliens, as a percentage of population, commit more crime than American citizens or, for that matter, any others that are here legally.  This focus suggests that if they have committed no subsequent crime that there would be no problem at all. In fact, as my fictitious conversation above tries to illustrate, the problem is the illegal entry itself.  Everything else is a logical progression from that starting point.  The criminal level does not need documentation. Only the entry status is necessary to determine that a dangerous problem exists.

 

With that in mind let’s deal with the concept of the use of the word immigration. This word is often used in deliberately confusing and conflicting ways.  In popular usage, an “immigrant” is generally understood to be a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence.  Under this definition an “immigrant” is a person admitted to the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident.   The emphasis in this definition is upon the presumptions that (1) the immigrant followed U.S. laws and procedures in establishing residence in our country; (2) he or she wishes to reside here permanently; and (3) he or she swears allegiance to our country or at least solemnly affirms that he/she will observe and respect our laws and our Constitution.

 

By contrast, an “alien” is generally understood to be a foreigner — a person who comes from a foreign country — who does not owe allegiance to our country. An “illegal alien” is a foreigner who (1) does not owe allegiance to our country; and (2) who has violated our laws and customs in establishing residence in our country.  (3) He or she is therefore a criminal under applicable U.S. laws.

 

The term “undocumented immigrant” is an oxymoron (the parts conflict). An immigrant is synonymous with a “permanent legal resident.” The proper terms are “illegal alien” or “undocumented alien” but not “undocumented immigrant.” The term “undocumented immigrant” is used by those who believe in “open borders”, i.e., non-regulation of foreigners entering into and assuming residence in the U.S., including even those foreigners who owe allegiance to a foreign government and/or who may intend harm to America.

 

We have entered the age of Orwellian Newspeak.  Newspeak is the fictional language in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, written by George Orwell. It is a controlled language created by the totalitarian state Oceania as a tool to limit freedom of thought, and concepts that pose a threat to the regime such as freedom, self-expression, individuality, and peace. Any form of thought alternative to the party’s construct is classified as a “thought crime”.  Keep in mind that whoever controls the language controls the debate… and, more importantly, its outcome. Can anyone deny that the insight of Orwell has become manifest in 21st century America?

 

In keeping with their normal destructive absurdity, the Biden Administration has ordered U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to stop using some words and ordered them to replace them with other words.

 

The administration has changed the vocabulary used by ICE and CBP, mandating that they adopt language that reflects more positively on people who illegally break into the United States.

 

The following words are now forbidden:

 

“Illegal Alien”

“Undocumented Alien”

“Alien”

“Alienage”

“Unaccompanied alien children”

“Assimilation,”

“Immigrant Assimilation”

 

Instead, ICE and CBP must say:

 

“Undocumented Noncitizen,”

“Undocumented Individual” or “Undocumented Migrant,”

“Non citizenship,”

“Noncitizen Unaccompanied Children”

“Integration” or “Civil Integration,”

“Immigrant Integration”

 

Liberals have long referred to illegal aliens as “undocumented aliens” – but now, they’re not even “aliens,” they’re “noncitizens.”

 

Likewise, the new terms suggest that, instead of expecting illegal aliens to “assimilate” to U.S. laws and culture, American society must change in order to “integrate” and accommodate the newcomers.

 

All of this is but a prelude to turning these criminals into voting citizens. As with, Mike, the fictitious character in my story above…I couldn’t care less why they broke our laws and invaded our country. As far as those claiming refuge status…that’s pure nonsense. You’re not a refuge if your country is poorly run, you don’t have a job, your broke, and your neighbors are criminals.  You are a refuge if your government has acted in a way to uniquely deprive you of your freedom because of some characteristic that isn’t found to be desirable.  Your being miserable is not a refuge status.  For those who want to come to America to improve their lives or that of their families…get in line.  We can’t let you in illegally and have you destroy the values that you theoretically are here to experience.

 

If this is allowed persist unabated, Republicans will never again win any national or statewide elections.  These illegals are already being strategically positioned in Red and Purple states. With HR1 still a potential and, if not, the states still retaining voting methods that ensure illegality…it’s over.

Check Also

The Male Warrior, by Andrew Joppa

The Male Warrior by Andy Joppa   I wrote extensively on my Vietnam experience, especially the …