The Illogic Of The American Immigration-Industrial-Complex

Ilana Mercer

From her bright eyes and big smile to her sun-kissed, luscious locks, Kathryn Steinle was the consummate California girl. The 32-year-old was shot dead by a proxy of the American Immigration-Industrial-Complex.

ICE, the federal wing of The Complex, was quick to blame its local branch: the City of San Francisco. San Francisco is the sanctuary city that unleashed confessed killer Francisco Sanchez. As a matter of policy, sanctuary cities commit to protecting their illegal population as they would their endangered species.

Yes, San Francisco provided sanctuary not for Kathryn Steinle, but for the likes of Francisco Sanchez. Alas, this criminal alien had accessories to the crime. The murder of Ms. Steinle was a murder-by-proxy. For regularly unleashing predators on people they swore to protect, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement is just as culpable as the sanctuary cities. Last year, reports CNSNews, ICE alone loosed approximately 30,000 convicted criminal aliens, “including those convicted of sex crimes, homicide, drunk driving, kidnapping and robbery.” Recidivism among them is proving rife.

Francisco Sanchez is the face of successive American administrations—lawmakers and enforcers; city, state and federal—who’ve refused to uphold negative rights; who’ve rejected a duty that falls perfectly within the purview of the “night-watchman state of classical-liberal theory.” And well within the ambit of the U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 4:

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Ms. Steinle joins a litany of lives lost. Criminal aliens commit crimes all the time. However, until the rise of The Donald and The Coulter duo, a few weeks back—those who determine the “conversation” du jour had been otherwise occupied in northern New York State. For three weeks, they followed a manhunt for local killers escaped.

Criminals of the Richard Matt and David Sweat caliber (or potential) cross the country’s Southwest, wide-open border almost daily. They go on to integrate into drug cartels (yes, I’m pro-legalization; always have been), as drunk drivers and as petty and not-so-petty criminals. Nobody stops them. No one is allowed to so much as ask about their pedigree.

The same sort of offenders sprang into action the day after Ms. Steinle’s murder. On that Thursday, by Ann Coulter’s telling, “two people, Traci Lynn Lemley and Jeremy Carrico,” were killed by “members of the Mexican mafia.” Another couple, “Michael Careccia and his wife, Tina, were dug out of the Arizona desert,” having been placed there, allegedly, by one Jose Valenzuela. There was a child rape, courtesy of a Haitian voodoo priest. In my sanctuary state of Washington a hit-and-run took place. In response, Washingtonians took to the streets of Seattle in solidarity with … victims of the shooting at the First AME Church in Charleston.

Remember the 2007, execution-style shooting of four young black college students in Newark? That was the doing of a gang of MS-13-tied illegal aliens.

Remember Josie Bluhm, age 4, killed in May of 2009? Behind the wheel on that fateful day was killer Eleazar Rangel-Ochoa.

Dearly departed is Arizona Rancher Robert Krentz. A pillar of the Cochise County community, Krentz had for decades raised cattle along the Arizona-Mexico border. The cruel marauder who shot Krentz and his canine companion on his land, in 2010, beat a retreat to Mexico.

In 2012, a man named Ramon Hernandez took the tiniest of victims. Dimitri Smith was killed in-utero by this recipient of the Drunk-Driver Immigration Visa. You can see the deceased preemie, as he is cradled by young mother Aileen Smith, before being laid to rest.

One of the stupidest men on TV, Geraldo Rivera, is fond of countering the carnage with this claim: The overall probability of being victimized by a Hispanic is negligibly low.

However low, that probability is still greater than the likelihood of one being killed by a soldier of ISIS. Yet some American crazies (like Chucky Krauthammer) are demanding that the U.S. occupy the Middle East so as to militate against those miniscule probabilities.

Besides, how would La Raza or Obama or Rivera know that Hispanic crime rates are likely comparable to white crime rates, given the obfuscating effects of the “Hispanic Effect”? To wit, as criminologists have long complained, “FBI and Bureau of Justice crime statistics fail to distinguish between Hispanic and non-Hispanic white criminals.”

The upshot: White criminality is inflated; Latino lawlessness remains in the shadows.

More critically: What do Geraldo, La Raza and the rest of America’s Immigration-Industrial-Complex mean when they assert that the threat posed to natives by imported Latino criminals is significantly lower, or the same, as the danger to you and me from our own, local trailer trash?

Is the Latino Lobby implying that had they not been murdered by imported criminals—Steinle, Bluhm, baby Smith; Krentz, Jamiel Shaw, Jr., and Grant Ronnebeck would have, nevertheless, been killed by native criminals?

Ridiculous! I know not if this illogic—this inescapable deduction—is a case of a categorical confusion or a category mistake. All I know is that, logically, at least, propensities for crime are irrelevant in a discussion about the murder of Ms. Steinle and all other victims of criminals who should not be in the U.S.

For these deaths have nothing to do with aggregate crime rates; they’re about individuals who should be alive: a baby that should have been born, a girl who should be among the living, young men and women who should not be dead.

To justify the crime-probabilities line-of-inquiry in the context of Sanchez’ presence that day on the SF pier, you would need to show that had Sanchez been deported or jailed or turned back at the border—his victim, Ms. Steinle, would nevertheless have suffered the same fate at the hands of a native murderer. The same eventuality would need to be demonstrated with respect to each individual victim of a criminal alien. The implication is crushingly stupid, even by Geraldo Rivera’s standards.


ILANA Mercer is a paleolibertarian writer based in the United States. She pens WND’s longest-standing, exclusive paleolibertarian column, “Return to Reason.” Ilana’s latest book is “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons For America From Post-Apartheid South Africa.” Her website is She blogs at


  1. It is the same situation all over the formerly white, western world. Criminality trends, particularly in certain types of crime, are up thanks to immigration. The rates of attacks, much like in America, seem to show that an immigrant (particularly non-white) is much more likely to violently attack or even kill an indigenous citizen than visa-versa.

    Pickpocketing, fraud, voting fraud, insurance/crash for cash, heroin dealing, identity theft, FGM, people trafficking, modern day slavery, organised rape/paedophile “grooming” gangs, dog-fighting, shooting, stabbing, gang based violence and indeed a higher risk of terrorism – amongst other niche areas that have changed society for the worse – are attributable to Britain’s “industrial immigration complex”.

    Of course, there are many criminals of our own to contend with – but we did not need to add more problems to our shores and we did not need to actually start importing criminals and crime syndicates from around the world to set up base here. (We have enough international criminals in the banking system, who make shop looting or pickpocketing look positively innocent in comparison).

    It has recently been reported that some criminal gangs even come “on holiday” here to commit crimes before heading back out again on a plane.

    We have seen terrorists being given protection, whilst war criminals and ‘war lords’ from Africa – have been found packing peas for Tesco, whilst living in large houses that we, the taxpayers, subsidise.

    The indigenous people are getting their wages lowered, their living spaces transformed, their taxes increased to cover the chaos, their quality of life reduced, being subjected to attacks, rapes, stabbings, shootings, looting, home-invasions, seeing parts of their cities set on fire, being curtailed in speech, being curtailed in their freedoms, being put at risk from madmen, savages, mentally disturbed former child soldiers who consider life to be cheap, religious fanatics.

    They are so much on the “losing end” in all manners of ways, including the obliteration of their collective futures, that is hard to comprehend how the madness is allowed to continue.

    Yet – Yet – take a seriously dim view of immigration or make some minor sleight against the products of the Immigration Industrial Complex (who are often making some insolent and rude noise about their host society and how not enough is being done to do away with themlseves), and it is the hosting society who are made to feel dirty, sullied, disgusting.

    In terms of America, I think I read recently that the D.O.J has started to break down the figures into Hispanic/Mexican/Latino sub groups instead of lumping them all in with the Caucasian category.

    Was it Denmark who deported vast numbers of African and Middle Eastern criminals and subsequently saw their national crime rates drop significantly?….

    Personally, I don’t agree with any kind of large scale immigration – even law abiding peoples. But if I were to ignore that, I would at least expect there to be a ban on known criminals and peoples who are a threat and a danger to the hosting populace. It ought to be the first and foremost duty of any government to protect their own citizens from known and identifiable threats of this kind.

    Yet, it seems to be a complete free-for all. It is completely mad. The train came off the rails decades ago and it has been and continues to be in free-fall.

    David Cameron mouths off about possibilities of fighting, say, ISIS abroad, to “keep this country safe” – whilst he (and former governments) is still letting all and sundry in from all over the world – people who could be violent, killers, fanatics, rapists. It is completely incoherent and I fail to take any of it seriously as a result.

  2. Did anyone see the Ross Kemp, Extreme World; Calais, programme? Talk about serious, gut wrenching propaganda. It really made you feel compassion for ‘the Camp of the Saints’ and bad for opposing the current situation.

  3. Thanks for the marvelous posting! I certainly enjoyed reading it, you could be a great author. I will make sure to bookmark your blog and may come back later on. I want to encourage you to definitely continue your great writing, have a nice evening!

  4. Ilana,

    Wonderfully written article. I might add that your writings on this matter are sufficient for bringing a cause of action by every victim of illegal alien crime against every city that has provided sanctuary. If San Francisco can be sued for millions because of the unlawful death of a motorist killed by a city lamppost, then surely the family of Kathryn Steinle can recover damages from San Francisco.

    Sanctuary cities under common law tort precedent are all liable for damages caused by their policies if unlawful, negligence in executive action, dereliction of duty, or failure in fiduciary duty. San Francisco like all other sanctuary cities have unlawfully provided sanctuary to illegal aliens and thus are complicit in aiding and abetting every single act of criminality done by said illegals.

    The total amount of damages caused by Sanctuary Cities is in the trillions of dollars. This includes damages caused by illegal aliens in driving all the way up to criminality. Damages can be properly shown to have derived from increased insurance caused by illegal aliens cost to actual tables. Illegal aliens are not in the shadows. However, if the Sanctuary Cities would like to enable us to collect damages against them by all means continue to grant documentation to Illegal aliens.

    In summary, Sanctuary Cities have failed in the fiduciary duty, have been derelict in the duty to protect, have been negligent in faithfully executing the laws, and above all of engaged in unlawful and criminal behavior by protecting illegal aliens. Consequently, there is sufficient damages out there as a result of Sanctuary Cities to cause a bonanza of litigation for the Bar Association and to utterly bankrupt the Big City Progressive Ruling class into destitution. I say full speed ahead in litigating the unlawful death of Kathryn Steinle and others like her.

    Reginald De Chantillon

Leave a Reply