Operation Wetback: Use military to deport 1.3M Mexicans ~ Q:was this said in the Oval Office?
In 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower launched Operation Wetback, a shameful initiative to remove (often violently) thousands of undocumented workers–mostly Mexican nationals. In what has been described as a “quasi-military operation”, border patrol agents, along with state and local law enforcement methodically targeted Mexican-Americans. The result was widespread fear and abuse.
It is estimated that 4,800 people were apprehended on the first day of the military operation. In the end, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) claimed as many as 1,300,000 were deported–many on their own out of fear. There were reports of beatings. Hundreds of families were torn apart. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Source: Fox News latino.foxnews.com OpEd , Mar 29, 2013
Fact Check: Operation Wetback deported 2.1Million Mexicans, not 13Million A heavily-circulated email states:
“What did Hoover, Truman, and Eisenhower have in common? Hoover ordered the deportation of ALL illegal aliens in order to make jobs available to American citizens; Truman deported over two million Illegals after WWII to create jobs for returning veterans; then Eisenhower deported 13 million Mexican Nationals!”
Is it true? This distortion of history but has picked up momentum as the immigration debate has heated up again. This e-mail’s message is bogus for all three presidents. Details:
Eisenhower did not deport 13 million Mexicans. Only 1/10 that number was ever claimed by the federal officials in charge of “Operation Wetback,” and even that figure is criticized as inflated by guesswork. Officially, just over 2.1 million were recorded as having been deported or having departed under threat of deportation. None of these presidents presided over any general deportation campaign.
Source: FactCheck 2010: “Hoover, Truman & Ike: Mass Deporters?” , Jul 9, 2010
1955: Mexican border “secured” after Operation Wetback . Truman’s successor pushed harder than Truman did, presiding over what was officially called “Operation Wetback,” a vigorous, federally led effort to remove illegal Mexican immigrants from the Southwest. (The term “wetback” is a disparaging term applied to Mexicans who swam or waded across the Rio Grande River–and today is considered an ethnic slur.)
“Operation Wetback” lasted only a few months, deporting about 2.1 million Mexicans. It was announced June 9, 1954. It encompassed “mopping up” activities in northern cities as well, which removed 20,174 illegal Mexican aliens from industrial jobs.
The INS reported by 1955: “The so-called ‘wetback’ problem no longer exists. This is no longer, as in the past, a problem in border control. The border has been secured.” More than half a century later, history has shown that official claim to be a fantasy.
Source: FactCheck 2010: “Hoover, Truman & Ike: Mass Deporters?” , Jul 9, 2010
Op Ed: Treated Mexican border crossings as act of war In 1954, when Eisenhower discovered a million Mexicans here who did not belong, without apology he ordered them sent home in “Operation Wetback.” They went. Had Vicente Fox’s regime colluded in an invasion of the US, as it has for the last 6 years, those presidents would have regarded and treated it as an act of war.
What explains the paralysis of the present White House? George Bush has taken an oath to see to it that the laws of the US are faithfully executed. The immigration laws are clear.
Source: State of Emergency, by Pat Buchanan, p. 17 , Oct 2, 2007
Change immigration quotas to be less discriminatory. There is one sphere in which civil rights are inevitably involved in Federal legislation. This is the sphere of immigration.
It is a manifest right of our Government to limit the number of immigrants our Nation can absorb. It is also a manifest right of our Government to set reasonable requirements on the character and the numbers of the people who come to share our land and our freedom. It is well for us, however, to remind ourselves occasionally of an equally manifest fact: we are–one and all– immigrants or sons and daughters of immigrants.
Existing legislation contains injustices. It does, in fact, discriminate. I am informed that it was realized, at the time of its enactment, that future study of the basis of determining quotas would be necessary.
I am therefore requesting the Congress to review this legislation and to enact a statute that will at one and the same time guard our legitimate national interests and be faithful to our basic ideas of freedom and fairness to all.
Please don’t allow this administration to roll back American Values ! and FYI there are European illegals here as well
Two weavers are approached by a vain, pompous Emperor who desires the finest and most luxurious clothes in all the land for himself – clothes which are befitting of his supreme status. The two weavers promise him just such a set of clothes, so fine and wonderful that they will only be for the eyes of the great and good in society; indeed, they will be quite invisible to anyone who is stupid, incompetent or unworthy of their position in society. What’s more, the clothes will be made of a material so fine (‘as light as a spider web‘) that they will not weigh down the wearer, so fine, the wearer will not even be aware of them draped over his body. Such a set of clothes would be perfect for a great Emperor. They would suit his sense of his own importance, and their magical properties of invisibility to the unworthy would enable him to find out which of his ministers were unfit for their jobs (‘and I could tell the wise men from the fools‘).
Of course, the weavers are nothing more than a pair of con-men – swindlers who have no intention of creating a fine set of clothes. They have heard of the Emperor’s vanity and they believe they can turn his failings to their own advantage. So they decide to go to the pretense of making this set of fine clothes. Of course, when the Emperor goes to visit the weavers at their work and they make a show of enthusing over the cloth and the clothes they are making, he cannot see anything at all. But he is too proud to admit that he cannot see the clothes. To do so, would be to label himself as stupid and unfit to be Emperor. And of course, when his courtiers and ministers visit the weavers, they also cannot see these clothes, but they also pretend that they can – because if they say anything different, they will be admitting their own incompetence and unworthiness. (‘Can it be that I’m a fool? It would never do to let on that I can’t see the cloth‘). What’s more, if any of them did have their suspicions about the existence of the clothes, well to voice their doubts would be to imply that the Emperor himself was stupid enough and gullible enough to be taken in by this foolery.
When the Emperor finally walks out among his subjects in his non-existent finery, the crowds watch eagerly. They all want to see which of their friends or neighbours are so stupid that they cannot see the clothes. What actually happens, of course, is that none of them see any clothes. But no one says anything. Perhaps some are embarrassed, to tell the truth, because they think that they themselves must be too stupid to see the cloth. Perhaps others believe that to say anything derogatory would be to draw attention to the truth of the Emperor’s own stupidity. Perhaps others simply do not wish to be the first to speak out with a contrary voice. Only one small child who is far too innocent of all this pretension and social convention shouts out ‘But he hasn’t got anything on!’ At first, the little boy’s father tries to correct the boy, but gradually the news breaks out and so everyone finally realizes they are not alone in their inability to see the clothes. And now everybody begins to find the strength in numbers to admit there is nothing to see, and they begin to laugh.
The Emperor cringes, but continues with the procession because to turn back now would be to admit his own gullibility. Better by far to carry on in the pretense that he is the only one who has the wisdom to see the clothes. His courtiers likewise feel they have to continue to live the lie, and dutifully follow their leader.