Newsday`s Bart Jones And Mae Cheng Win Third Annual VDARE.COM Worst Immigration Coverage Award!


[Earlier
awards:


One of Those Grateful Refugees—Pacific News Service`s
Andrew Lam
and

LA Times` Hiltzik Wins Second Annual VDARE.COM Worst
Immigration Coverage Award!
]

The Third Annual VDARE.COM
"Worst Immigration Coverage Award"
is given, after

much soul-searching
, to Newsday`s

Bart Jones
and

Mae Cheng
who co-author the newspaper`s regular
feature,

"Immigration Q & A."

Jones and Cheng have been reporters
for the

Long Island, New York
daily for several years and
also

write tendentious immigration stories
.

Based on their collective body of
work,

Jones
and

Cheng
take this year`s prize hands down.

For those of you out there that
still may think that illegal immigration problems start
at our

border with Mexico
, I encourage you to read their
"Immigration Q & A.”

Therein you will find multiple
examples of

visa overstayers
and
family reunification
scamsters exploiting the
loopholes in our immigration law.

"Immigration Q & A" may
appear innocuous to the uninformed because it frequently
deals with questions that involve administrative paperwork muck ups.

But the column`s sub-rosa reason
for being is, quite obviously, to help illegal
immigrants gain legal status.

To my eye, "Immigration Q & A"
has problems aplenty:

  • Neither Jones nor

    Cheng
    is a lawyer. If they were, their biography
    box would say so. And they would be practicing the
    lucrative trade of

    immigration law
    and not churning out

    unprofessional
    news stories for Newsday.

  • Newsday does not
    provide a disclaimer alerting readers that Jones and
    Cheng are

    not lawyers.

  • In their columns, Jones and
    Cheng use the questionable technique of paraphrasing
    the legal advice given to them by their sources. For
    a complex subject like

    immigration
    , plenty of information—transmitted
    either from or to the reporter—could fall into the
    cracks.

Mind you, the cabal of lawyers
tapped into by Jones/Cheng no doubt gives advice that is
technically accurate.

But other lawyers who see
immigration from a different perspective would have
dissimilar but equally legal responses.

Of course, Jones/Cheng never
contact them.

Among those lawyers whose responses
should be, in the interest of fairness, included in
Jones/Cheng`s column, are:

Consider this recent—and
scandalous— example from Cheng`s November 20, 2005
column.

“Q: My former wife, my
children and I came to the United States on tourist
visas applied for political asylum. We received a second
notice to appear in an Orlando court in November 2006. I
am now living with a woman who is an American citizen. I
want to know if we can get married and if I can apply to
adjust my status to that of a permanent resident due to
our marriage? Can I include my children in this
application? Is it worth continuing the asylum
application or should I be pursuing both at the same
time?

“A: Since you have a notice
to appear in court, it sounds like you have been put in

deportations proceedings
while you are waiting a
final decision on your asylum application, said

Cyrus Mehta
, a Manhattan immigration attorney who is
Chairman of the board of trustees with the American
Immigration Law Foundation based in Washington, D.C.

“If that is the case, as
long as the deportation proceedings are not completed,
you can have your new wife petition you to become a
permanent resident since you came to the country legally
and since she is an American citizen, Metha said.

“You should know though
that if you are in deportation proceedings, immigration
officials will look even more closely at your new
marriage to make sure it is bona fide and not one of
convenience or a

sham marriage
to get legal status to stay in the
U.S., Metha said.

“As for your

children
, your new wife could petition them
separately as her step-children, as long as the kids are
not older than 18, according to Metha.

“And you can continue to
simultaneously pursue both your asylum application and
your application to adjust your status to that of a
permanent resident, Metha said."

Summarizing Cheng/Metha`s advice: you`re in a jam. But if you are quick
on your feet and your pliant American citizen girlfriend will help, you should be able to become a
permanent resident… with the help of a savvy immigration
lawyer.

Now, for comparison, let`s see how our own Juan Mann sees the case:

"First of all,
this lying, cheating opportunist committed fraud in his
B-1/B-2 tourist visa application before U.S. consular
officers abroad. He stated that he intended to RETURN to
his country within a specified period of time. If he
didn`t state an intention to return, he would not have
been given the visa in the first place.

“Now, he is using the EOIR
Immigration Court process—a system that was supposedly
set-up to

DEPORT
visa overstayers like him and his family—in
order to adjust status and emerge with legal status in
the U.S. What a farce!

“Also, the alien asks: `Is
it worth continuing the asylum application?`

“Well, if this alien really
and truly suffered

past persecution`
or has a `well-founded fear of
future persecution` in his native country, he would NOT
EVEN THINK TO ASK SUCH A QUESTION . . . because his
claim would be TRUTHFUL!

“The cavalier attitude he
displays concerning this throw-away political asylum
application—by even asking the question — betrays his
guilty knowledge that the application is a complete
fraud.

“Rather than `fear` of
`persecution` . . . it`s just another way to beat the
system. Since his application is already filed—and if
the alien has knowingly made a frivolous application for
asylum—the federal government has seen fit to bar such
liars from ever receiving any benefits under the
Immigration Act—INA Section 208(d)(6) and 8 C.F.R.
section 208.20—including adjustment of status through an
`immigration-love` marriage to a U.S. citizen.

“So since the damage is
done and the asylum application is already signed under
penalty of perjury and filed, this alien and his whole
lying, cheating clan had better leave now . . . before
it`s too late! How about by sundown?

“Moral of story: No visa
jumping!…No In-Country asylum processing!"

(Read, and forward to your Congressman, Juan`s "absolutely
definitive essay
"
which describes what Mann refers to as around-the-clock
abuse of immigration law caused by
"too many
lawyers and too much litigation.")

"Immigration Q & A"
isn`t an innocuous


"Hints from Heloise."
 It`s
dangerous. Using their weekly column, Jones and Cheng
encourage

more immigration
and outline ways in which illegal
residents can

beat the system.

The
Journalist`s Creed
, written 100 years ago by the
first dean of the University of Missouri Journalism
School, should bind Newsday, Jones and Cheng.

Wrote Dean Walter Williams:

"I believe that
advertising, news and editorial columns should alike
serve the best interests of readers; that a single
standard of helpful truth and cleanness should prevail
for all; that the supreme test of good journalism is the
measure of its public service."

Instead of
“public service,”
Jones
(e-mail
him
)
and
Cheng
(e-mail
her
) have opted to be a mouthpiece of the

Treason Lobby
in its quest to

abolish America
.

Joe Guzzardi [email
him], an instructor in English at the Lodi
Adult School, has been writing a weekly newspaper column
since 1988. This column is exclusive to VDARE.COM.