Russian Spy Case Shows Danger Of Amnesty for Illegal Aliens

[FrankRep]

Deported Russian spy Vicky Pelaez of Peru reportedly used a false birth certificate to obtain U.S. citizenship fraudulently under the 1986 amnesty for illegal aliens. by William F. Jasper

Russian Spy Case Shows Danger Of Amnesty for Illegal Aliens


William F. Jasper | The New American
Friday, 16 July 2010


It turns out that Vicky Pelaez, the Peruvian journalist expelled from the United States on July 8 along with nine Russians, obtained her U.S. citizenship by taking advantage of the 1986 amnesty for illegal aliens. However, according to a report in El Commercio of Lima, Peru, Pelaez obtained her amnesty fraudulently, using a false birth certificate and falsely claiming she had been residing in the United States during a period when records, apparently, show she was actually residing in Peru.

The story in El Commercio was published in Spanish, but was translated into English and posted online by the National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers (NAFBPO) here.

The NAFBPO translation of the Peruvian newspaper states:

Vicky Pelaez, a Peruvian journalist just sent out of the U.S. to Russia as part of a spy swap, is reported to have two birth certificates. For U.S. officials, her name is Vicky Pelaez, she's 55 years old, and her father is Santiago Pelaez, who in reality ought to be her uncle. However, for Peruvian officials, her name is Virginia Pelaez, she's 58 years old and her father is Horacio Pelaez. Further, she didn't ask for political asylum in the U.S. but instead took advantage of the "great migratory amnesty" of 1986, which worked in favor of millions of illegal aliens in the United States.

However, to be part of this amnesty, immigrants had to demonstrate that they had arrived in the U.S. prior to January 1, 1982, and that they had resided there continuously. Pelaez obtained this benefit by claiming that she had resided in New York since 1981 although she had been a reporter for "Frecuencia Latina" during 1983 and 1984, and for this reason had decided to present a different birth certificate. ("Frecuencia Latina" is a Peruvian TV network.)

When Pelaez applied for United States citizenship in 1997, she presented a marriage certificate in which she claimed to have married Anatonoljevich Vasenkov (Juan Lazaro) in 1993. The truth is that she was married ten years before the date that she claimed to U.S. officials, according to records in the city of Barranco (a suburb of Lima.)​

"This case," says a NAFBPO editorial remark following the translation, "serves to illustrate the fact that mass amnesty for millions of illegal aliens does not, and cannot, really establish when or where such people entered the United States, their background, or even their true identity. Fraudulent foreign documentation is easily obtained, including that relating to past criminal activity. Our leaders can proceed down that path only at the nation's peril."


Related content:

FBI Busts Russian Espionage Network

Why the Rush to Send Russian Agents Back?

Spy Escape in Cyprus Highlights Russia's Growing Clout in Mediterranean


SOURCE:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index...se-shows-danger-of-amnesty-for-illegal-aliens

 

[Zippyjuan]

99% of known terrorists or spies caught in this country entered it legally.

The 1982 amnesty bill was singed by Ronald Reagan.

 

[FrankRep]

The 1982 amnesty bill was singed by Ronald Reagan.

Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Reform_and_Control_Act_of_1986

 

[constituent]

So guess we can mark down William Jasper as one of those who doesn't understand the difference between amnesty and naturalization.

He's with the John Birch Society, right?

 

[constituent]

The 1982 amnesty bill was singed by Ronald Reagan.

thousand bucks to the first guy with the tube ^

I'd love to watch reagan sing the 1982 amnesty bill.

 

[FrankRep]

So guess we can mark down William Jasper as one of those who doesn't understand the difference between amnesty and naturalization

What do you mean? The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 granted Amnesty.

required employers to attest to their employees' immigration status, and granted amnesty to certain illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously​

 

[constituent]

What do you mean?

Pretty cut and dry.

amnesty - : the act of an authority (as a government) by which pardon is granted to a large group of individuals

naturalization - to confer the rights of a national on; especially : to admit to citizenship

 

[FrankRep]

Pretty cut and dry.

amnesty - : the act of an authority (as a government) by which pardon is granted to a large group of individuals

naturalization - to confer the rights of a national on; especially : to admit to citizenship

William F. Jasper used the correct word: amnesty.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Sorry about getting the year wrong. Reagan and Amnesty:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122297,00.html

Reagan also left his mark on America’s immigration policy. The country has spent much of the last week looking back upon Reagan’s two administrations, and it’s worth looking back at what has happened to the nation's immigration policy since the historic immigration reforms Reagan signed into law in 1986. As well-intentioned and rational as they were, the 1986 immigration reforms—and what has happened since they became law—show just how damaging another illegal immigration amnesty (search) would be to our country.

In 1986, there were about 2.5 million illegal aliens in the U.S. who Congress and the Reagan administration regarded as being “safe” – that is, not having committed serious crimes or otherwise being dangerous, and having sufficient ties to American life to be allowed to remain here. Many members of Congress, chiefly Democratic members, regarded the amnesty of these illegal aliens a sine qua non of any attempt to reform our immigration laws. Reagan recognized this, and, being the optimist that he was, saw something humane and profitable in affording this relatively small group of illegal aliens legal status.

In exchange for legal status for the group, Reagan insisted that the magnet attracting illegal aliens to the United States be removed by extinguishing any incentive for U.S. employers to hire illegal aliens. In tandem with the amnesty, Reagan campaigned for employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, sanctions so stringent that many at the time regarded them as draconian.

Reagan reasoned that if an employer were fined for hiring an illegal alien (as much as $1 million in the worst cases), any payroll savings achieved by the hiring would be wiped out by the fine. In effect, it would be more expensive to hire illegal aliens than to hire Americans or lawful permanent residents. The few illegal aliens who continued to take the gamble and cross the border would be intercepted by a robust and more generously funded Border Patrol.

While Reagan’s 1986 immigration reforms (search) can at least be called rational, they were a failure. Today, there are between 8 million and 11 million illegal aliens in the United States. The majority of them crossed our southern border and has found employment — illegal employment, but employment nonetheless. This is attributed to Sen. Ted Kennedy’s eventual gutting of the enforcement mechanism for Reagan's employer sanctions, and successive administrations refusing to give our Border Patrol the resources it needs to achieve its mission.

In 1986, though, President Reagan showed a clear recognition between wrong and right. If U.S. employers were to gain from the employment of people whose very presence in our country was a crime, then they would at least have to pay for it.

The bill did not grant automatic citizenship.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/24/opinion/24meese.html

In the mid-80's, many members of Congress — pushed by the Democratic majority in the House and the Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy — advocated amnesty for long-settled illegal immigrants. President Reagan considered it reasonable to adjust the status of what was then a relatively small population, and I supported his decision.

In exchange for allowing aliens to stay, he decided, border security and enforcement of immigration laws would be greatly strengthened — in particular, through sanctions against employers who hired illegal immigrants. If jobs were the attraction for illegal immigrants, then cutting off that option was crucial.

Beyond this, most illegal immigrants who could establish that they had resided in America continuously for five years would be granted temporary resident status, which could be upgraded to permanent residency after 18 months and, after another five years, to citizenship.

Note that this path to citizenship was not automatic. Indeed, the legislation stipulated several conditions: immigrants had to pay application fees, learn to speak English, understand American civics, pass a medical exam and register for military selective service. Those with convictions for a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible. Sound familiar? These are pretty much the same provisions included in the new Senate proposal and cited by its supporters as proof that they have eschewed amnesty in favor of earned citizenship.

The difference is that President Reagan called this what it was: amnesty. Indeed, look up the term "amnesty" in Black's Law Dictionary, and you'll find it says, "the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act provided amnesty for undocumented aliens already in the country."

Like the amnesty bill of 1986, the current Senate proposal would place those who have resided illegally in the United States on a path to citizenship, provided they meet a similar set of conditions and pay a fine and back taxes. The illegal immigrant does not go to the back of the line but gets immediate legalized status, while law-abiding applicants wait in their home countries for years to even get here. And that's the line that counts. In the end, slight differences in process do not change the overriding fact that the 1986 law and today's bill are both amnesties.

There is a practical problem as well: the 1986 act did not solve our illegal immigration problem. From the start, there was widespread document fraud by applicants. Unsurprisingly, the number of people applying for amnesty far exceeded projections. And there proved to be a failure of political will in enforcing new laws against employers.

After a six-month slowdown that followed passage of the legislation, illegal immigration returned to normal levels and continued unabated. Ultimately, some 2.7 million people were granted amnesty, and many who were not stayed anyway, forming the nucleus of today's unauthorized population.

 

[FrankRep]

Reagan and Amnesty

The difference is that President Reagan called this what it was: amnesty. Indeed, look up the term "amnesty" in Black's Law Dictionary, and you'll find it says, "the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act provided amnesty for undocumented aliens already in the country."​

Yup. Amnesty.

 

[YumYum]

: "there was widespread document fraud by applicants. Unsurprisingly, the number of people applying for amnesty far exceeded projections. And there proved to be a failure of political will in enforcing new laws against employers."

This is important to acknowledge in the debate on immigration reform. The reason there were so many fraudulent documents is that there were thousands of bogus "former employers" who all of a sudden sprang up and charged $300-$500 to the illegal alien for a letter that claimed that the illegal alien had worked for their "company" prior to 1982.

The problem is that the INS did not have the manpower to investigate the legitimacy of these letters to see if the these bogus employers even existed, which in the majority of the applications, they didn't.

Also, they currently estimate that there are 12 million illegals in this country, but there is no way of knowing how many are actually here. Some estimations put the number closer to 30 million.

Our government does not have the man power to thoroughly screen all the applications that they will get bombarded with if there is an amnesty bill. This being the case, spies and terrorist will have a field day entering into this country unnoticed and undetected.

 

[raistlinkishtar]

Our government does not have the man power to thoroughly screen all the applications that they will get bombarded with if there is an amnesty bill. This being the case, spies and terrorist will have a field day entering into this country unnoticed and undetected.

I will myself be applying for a second identity. Very useful to have 2 identities. I will say I am "Manuel Ramerez" and I'm an illegal immigrant from Argentina. Proof of identity? So sorry, I'm an "undocumented worker". I don't have any. I just wrote the top of the train up to Mexico and slipped across the border.

So when do I get my new residency card?

 

[BlackSand]

Youre kind of stupid if you dont think foreign governments need America to grant amnesty to get a spy into the country.

Am I the only one that thing we should let the free market handle immigration? Libertarians dont believe in regulation...except when it comes to immigration. For some reason we have this belief that the free market breaks down when more people come into the country. Despite every economist saying otherwise.

Plus, if enough immigrants come, maybe we could break down the welfare state.

Plus, if we can get Mexicans on our side, the libertarian party will be the ruling party in 50 years.