Sanchez vs. Immigration Attorney Siskind

Date: Monday, June 23, 2003 1:21 AM

JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER

www.ZaZona.com

Greg Siskind is a prominent and very rich immigration attorney. His
website can be found at: http://www.visalaw.com/

We had an email debate, which you can read below. It's also posted on
his website.

Siskind immediately objected to my characterization of him as a rich
lawyer. It's still not clear to me why he wants to deny the obvious.

Speaking of denying the obvious, Siskind didn't make a distinction
between "immigrant" and "nonimmigrant". That's a surprising blunder for
an immigration lawyer that makes big bucks by helping foreigners to
obtain visas. His leaps of logic stretched even thinner when he said,
"immigration restrictionists like yourself" were partly to blame for
the Holocaust because we didn't allow Jewish families to escape the
Nazis. Siskind's transparent attempt to out-victimize me is a typical
lawyer trick that shouldn't fool anyone.

We all know that lawyers can't write in plain English, and now Siskind
proves that they can't read it either. He accused me of not
understanding Libertarianism, and then repeated my statement with
slightly different wording. Read these two statements and see if you
can guess why Siskind thinks he understands Libertarianism better than
I:

Siskind: Libertarians almost uniformly favor open immigration

Me: In a true libertarian society, there would be free flows of people
in and out of the country.

Siskind's argument from the Talmud that immigration is "welcoming the
stranger" is very popular among Jewish immigration lawyers. If Siskind
wants to use religion to justify his actions, he should explain why he
thinks the Talmud supports holding the "stranger" as a slave and paying
him slave wages. Moses objected to this behavior when he said, "Let my
people go".

Siskind might be surprised to know that the Jewish religion condemns
exploitation and slavery:

http://info.jpost.com/C001/Supplements/RoshHashana/day.html
Much of the Torah's social legislation is based on our
slavery-deliverance experience.

There are many additional items in Siskind's rebuttal that merit
discussion but I can't let his biggest faux pas go without challenge.
Siskind wrote the following:

I have yet to hear a protest from an American Jew
complaining about these "foreigners" coming in to
take jobs away a US worker.

If Siskind can't find Jewish people that oppose H-1B then he isn't
looking hard enough. Here are some of them he should know:

Dr. Norman Matloff
Mark Mendlovitz
Eric Weinstein
Michael Teitelbaum
Many of the board members of FAIR
Several people in the AFL-CIO Dept. of Professional Employees
George Fishman, chief counsel of the House Immigration Subcommittee

under Lamar Smith

If Siskind cares as much about the Jewish people as he claims, then I
suggest that he give pro-bono legal help to unemployed Jewish tech
workers. He will have long lines of clients waiting at his office door,
eager for his help to sue companies that replaced them with the cheap
young blood of nonimmigrant visa holders.

http://www.visalaw.com/03jun1/12jun103.html

Point Counterpoint: Greg Siskind v. Rob Sanchez On The Immigration
Debate

Last week in my Openers I said we would print a letter exchange that
resulted from recent comments I made criticizing an unbalanced CNN
report on the H-1B cap debate. Below you will find my correspondence
with Rob Sanchez, the publisher of the anti-H-1B visa website
www.ZaZona.com. There is no censorship here and Mr. Sanchez's letter is
printed in its entirety. My letter appears first, followed by a
transcription of Mr. Sanchezs message.

* for the purpose of this newsletter, the transcription will be
delineated with the brackets []

June 6, 2003

Dear Rob -

Not surprisingly, I disagree with nearly everything you have to say
(with a couple of minor exceptions that I discuss below). I'll address
your points one by one:

[I'm not sure why you think I discredited you by describing you as a
rich immigration lawyer. Being rich is admirable but of course only if
the wealth was obtained by noble means. You made your wealth aiding
companies to replace American workers with the cheap young blood of
indentured foreign labor. You and the rest of your AILA ilk are sorry
examples of how to get rich. I hope your kids don't emulate you.]

You have no idea what I charge for my services or at what income level
I am. Perhaps it would surprise you if I told you that I am making a
financial sacrifice practicing immigration law. I graduated from the
University of Chicago Law School 13 years ago. Since this is one of the
top law schools in the country, it should not surprise you that many of
my classmates are partners at some of the most prestigious law firms in
the country earning enormous salaries. Most of the immigration lawyers
I know are in this practice area because they want to help people and
find the work interesting. I started my practice working with a large
law firm handling mergers and acquisitions. I left a secure practice
and opened up a solo immigration practice after just four years because
I felt immigration law was my calling. I believe immigrants make a net
positive contribution to the economy and felt that working in this area
was serving the country. I also have specific religious and cultural
reasons for doing what I do (more on that below). My passion for this
practice area is why I remain a lawyer today. I won't hide that I am
interested in making a good living and I'm proud to be an entrepreneur
thriving under our free market system.

As for my kids, I'm proud of what I do and would be thrilled if my
children one day went into this same profession. One of the biggest
thrills I had this year was having the opportunity to go to my child's
school and talk to her class about my job.

[Your contention that I'm hostile to capitalism illustrates your
confusion about the rules of capitalism. The formation of the
corporation or company is a right given to individuals by governments.
Governments have an inherent right to control the conduct of those
businesses. Companies are required to have a "license" to do business
in the USA, which is granted, by an individual state. Conducting
business without a license is illegal or unlawful behavior and is
banned behavior. Businesses are not free in any nation in the world to
do whatever conduct it wants without accountability to the government
entity."]

Actually, you are the one confused about capitalism and liberty.

Capitalism's one basic rule is that market forces rule. Every time a
government imposes limits on the free market, they are diluting
capitalism. Libertarianism represents one end of the spectrum.
Socialism is at the other. The more governments interfere in free
markets, the further you move along the spectrum toward socialism.
Certain limits are imposed on the market (even under libertarianism)
such as regulating pollution or barring the export of weapons to
terrorists. But what you advocate is protectionism for US labor
markets. As a libertarian, I find this abhorrent. There is no national
security justification for imposing domestic content rules in the labor
market. We have been moving away from such rules for decades in terms
of the amount of American-made content in goods produced in this
country. Labor is another component of production just like raw
materials.

By the way, licensing businesses is done in order to tax businesses. I
personally think we should keep taxes and the regulation of business by
the government to a minimum. You apparently think businesses are there
to be punished.

America has the world's most successful economy because our markets are
freer than in any other country. Just compare it to the economies of
Europe. European companies are much more regulated than their American
counterparts. And their historical rates of unemployment and their
costs of living are much higher than in the US. Any economist worth
their salt will confirm that freer economies thrive and overregulated
economies lag. The goal of your organization is to protect American
workers. But your willingness to impose more limits on American
companies will only result in higher overall unemployment. You are
cutting off your nose to spite your face.

[Capitalism doesn't give you a license to get rich. Laissez-faire
capitalism without restraints from national governments was severely
discredited long ago as being brutal, inhumane, and immoral by major
religions such as your own Jewish faith. Without restraints from nation
states, economic systems are almost entirely outside democratic
control, meaning that most people end up having almost no
self-determination, vulnerable to the whims of the tiny few in the
world who hold the power and the money. Capitalism and free-market
systems have been wonderful advances for human kind, but only when they
are fettered by democratic control by the people of nations.]

Actually, capitalism does give you a "license" to get rich. The dream
of getting wealthy is what is at the heart of being an entrepreneur in
this country. When a government takes away the incentive of getting
rich, economies spiral downward. That is the reason why the Soviet
Union fell. It is the reason why the entire country of North Korea is
starving.

As for my Jewish faith, I am offended by your lecturing me on this
subject and would suggest you stick to what you know. Immigration
restrictionists like yourself had the influence to get this country to
shut down its border in the 1920s. And that is why dozens of my family
members and my wife's family members were unable to escape murder by
the Nazis during the Holocaust simply because they were Jewish.

My great-grandparents were fortunate enough to escape the oppression of
the czars and come to this country with the dream of living in freedom
and providing a refuge from generations of poverty. They came to
America because they wanted good jobs in a free country. Their siblings
who decided to stay on and care for older relatives or simply to wait
to earn more money lost their lives when it was too late to get a visa
to come to this country after the Nazis came to power.

My wife's father and grandparents came to this country as refugees
immediately after the war. In fact, they entered as some of the first
refugees under the UN Refugee Convention which was passed in order to
ensure that the world would never again close its borders like they did
during the Holocaust. I consider my work to be important in order to
ensure that we never go back to those awful days when we slammed our
doors on those seeking the refuge of our shores or simply a better life
in this country.

My family and I attend an Orthodox synagogue, we keep Kosher, my
children attend a Jewish day school, and I am on the board of our
community's Jewish Family Service as well as my synagogue. I don't need
you lecturing me about being Jewish and being pro-immigration. My rabbi
made a point of telling our synagogue's congregants from the alter
during my wedding ceremony that he considered my work to be one of the
most important jobs a Jew could have. The Torah tells us to "welcome
the stranger" and most clergymen - Jewish or not - recognize this as
G-d's commanding us to not only be tolerant toward immigration, but to
aid people who have immigrated.

And, aside from the Holocaust, the Jewish people have suffered for
thousands of years because of restrictions on their ability to live in
peace where they liked. The exile in Egypt, the destruction of the
First Temple and the scattering of the 12 Tribes of Israel, the rescue
of the Jewish refugees in Babylonia by Queen Esther and the expulsion
of the Jews of Spain are only a few examples of the wanderings of my
people. We have survived as a people because whenever we have been
expelled from a nation, another nation has opened its doors. Today, the
country of Israel embodies this history. It has a Ministry of
Absorption whose mission it is to ensure that new immigrants to the
Jewish state are met with a hearty welcome and are given the support
necessary to get off to a good start in their new country. Not exactly
what we see in this country. Over the last twelve years, Israel has
welcomed one million new immigrants. That is equivalent to our
admitting 60 million people - roughly the population of France or the
United Kingdom. In Israel, this is celebrated. You would never see
groups advocating for lesser immigration. That would be a "shanda" - an
embarrassment - to our people.

On a more contemporary note, the work visas you condemn are used by my
childrens Jewish day school to bring in Hebrew and Judaic teachers
from Israel. You may be surprised that this greedy lawyer handles these
cases without charge. And I have yet to hear a protest from an American
Jew complaining about these "foreigners" coming in to take jobs away a
US worker.

You are also wrong in saying that Judaism is somehow hostile to the
concept of free markets. Quite the opposite is true. A typical Jewish
child will be taught that going into business is something of which he
or she can be proud. And that same child will be taught that they have
a personal obligation to ensure the welfare of those in their local and
extended communities. This is borne out by the American Jewish
historical experience. Jews disproportionately played a role in
establishing this country's largest companies. And as a group, Jews
donate more to charity than just about any other ethnic community in
this country.

The lessen here is that rather than shutting down the country's borders
to protect the economic well-being of the few, we should take
responsibility as members of the community to help people in need. I
mentioned above that I am on the board of my community's Jewish Family
Service. One of the functions of our JFS is to assist people in need to
obtain job training and to aid them in finding work. Members of our
board get on the phone and call around to help people find jobs.
Members of our community often hire someone referred by JFS hire even
before there is a real need for a particular worker because helping
someone in need is a "mitzvah" - a good deed.

President Bush has said - and I believe - that the answer to every
social problem in this country is not always more government. Private
charities can solve many problems and should be encouraged in doing so.
Helping displaced H-1B workers is one more example where that is the
case.

["H-1B and other NIVs are a socialist programs that attempt to equalize
white-collar wages with that of the third world. The U.S. government
allows immigration lawyers to import workers in order to artificially
manipulate the supply, and therefore the price of workers. Don't fool
yourself; you have learned to milk the cow of corporate socialism. You
would probably be a web-based quickie-divorce attorney if it wasn't for
the H-1B cash cow."]

I actually agree with you that H-1Bs and other work visas are socialist
programs. I would be happy to hang a "going out of business" sign in
exchange for our country liberalizing our immigration laws. I think any
limits on a company's ability to hire the workers of its choice are
wrong. But if there are to be such rules - and, let's be honest in
recognizing that they are not going anywhere - then I can at least play
a useful role in helping companies navigate this highly regulated
minefield. Unlike you and your "ilk" - you seem to like that term - I'm
not afraid of open competition. I consider myself smart enough and
resourceful enough to thrive in a free economy. Go ahead and put me out
business by opening up immigration. I'll be the first to congratulate
you on a job well done.

By the way, I'm surprised you would be against "web-based
quickie-divorce attorneys." They are actually making life tough for the
rich divorce attorneys out there "milking the divorce cash cow."

["Milton Friedman, the high priest of libertarianism, said that H-1B is
a corporate subsidy. Friedman would probably say that you are a
hypocrite instead of a libertarian. In a true libertarian society,
there would be free flows of people in and out of the country, and thus
no need for immigration lawyers. The more complex immigration law is
the more un-libertarian it is, and the more money you make.
Libertarians are your worse enemy so be very careful about adopting
them to your cause."]

Maybe you should do some more research on libertarianism. Libertarians
almost uniformly favor open immigration - certainly more so than
Democrats or Republicans. Check out the Libertarian Party's platform
from the 2000 Presidential election which states the following:

"We welcome all refugees to our country. Furthermore, immigration must
not be restricted for reasons of race, religion, political creed, age,
or sexual preference. We therefore call for the elimination of all
restrictions on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and
Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full
amnesty for all people who have entered the country illegally."

(http://www.issues2000.org/Celeb/Libertarian_Party_Immigration.htm)

On the Libertarian Party's web site you can also find the definitive
text explaining why Libertarians favor open immigration. Go to
http://www.lp.org/issues/immigration.html to read more.

I tend to agree with Milton Friedman on most matters and when I
researched his opinion recently on immigration I found I don't really
disagree with him on this subject either (By the way, Friedman is a
fellow University of Chicago graduate and I have admired his views
since I attended U of C).

You are really taking him out of context. He is concerned about
immigration because he is against the Welfare state and does not want
immigrants to have access to such benefits. In a recent VDARE.com
interview, he's quoted as saying "As long as you have a welfare state,
I do not believe you can have a unilateral open immigration. I would
like to see a world in which you could have open immigration." I
personally would favor seeing immigrants restricted further from
receiving welfare benefits (which, by the way, is consistent with the
Libertarian Party's position). I think few people would be negatively
affected by this and it might put to rest the false notion that
immigrants come to the US to collect welfare (How ironic it is that the
same people who complain about immigrants coming to collect Welfare
will then complain that immigrants are coming to take jobs away from
Americans!). Mr. Friedman also is unhappy with the H-1B program
precisely because there are limits on visa numbers and he believes that
the companies that get access to H-1B workers are getting an unfair
subsidy since not all companies have such access. Get rid of the H-1B
quota altogether and then ask Mr. Friedman what he thinks. I suspect
his views will change.

I would also call your attention to someone who actually plays a more
important role these days in ensuring that America thrives - Mr. Alan
Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. Greenspan not only
states that immigration is good for our economy. He goes so far as
saying that immigration will be vital to our long term economic success
as our population ages. Specifically, Greenspan told Congress recently

"Our open labor markets can adapt to the differing needs and abilities
of our older population. Our capital markets can allow for the creation
and rapid adoption of new labor-saving technologies, and our open
society has been receptive to immigrants. All these factors put us in a
good position to adjust to the [impacts] of an aging population."

Hardly an endorsement for shutting down immigration to this country.

Finally, I absolutely agree with you that it is hypocritical to argue
in favor of capitalism and also favor complex immigration laws. That's
why I don't. You will never see me argue that we need complex
immigration laws for their own sake. I just think that they are a
better alternative to no immigration at all. But given a choice, I
would dramatically simplify the immigration system and open it up
widely. I would simply impose background checks to keep out certain
undesirables - terrorists, people with highly contagious dangerous
diseases, hardened criminals, etc. Beyond that, the government should
stay out. I'll find new work if need be and not blame the government or
foreign workers for my troubles.

I tend to believe that by the time people get to the point of
supporting an organization like yours, their opinions are already
hardened, and I harbor no illusions that I will change any of your
readers' minds. But I do at least want to explain that there are other
ways to view the immigration question. I appreciate the opportunity to
express the pro-immigration viewpoint - which is all I wanted CNN to do
in the report that prompted this exchange. Open discussion should
always be welcome in a free society!

Kind regards,

Greg Siskind

May 29, 2003

Mr. Greg Siskind,

You are correct that we value your opinion on nonimmigrant visas. Your
website is a valuable resource to learn how lawyers exploit the
immigration system. I use some of your research on my own website and I
get a lot of traffic from your website link from people who want to
know the truth. I'm sure you get traffic from foreigners that
accidentally wander into my site so it's a fair trade. You labeled my
website "anti-H-1B" but that's a misnomer. I have nothing against H-1B
visa holders, it's the program itself that I want abolished. You may
want to update your page because my website is now called the "N.I.V.
Information Center".

I think it's a good idea to know what the enemy is up to, so put me on
your mailing list.

I'm not sure why you think I discredited you by describing you as a
rich immigration lawyer. Being rich is admirable but of course only if
the wealth was obtained by noble means. You made your wealth aiding
companies to replace American workers with the cheap young blood of
indentured foreign labor. You and the rest of your AILA ilk are sorry
examples of how to get rich. I hope your kids don't emulate you.

Your contention that I'm hostile to capitalism illustrates your
confusion about the rules of capitalism. The formation of the
corporation or company is a right given to individuals by governments.
Governments have an inherent right to control the conduct of those
businesses. Companies are required to have a "license" to do business
in the USA, which is granted, by an individual state. Conducting
business without a license is illegal or unlawful behavior and is
banned behavior.

Businesses are not free in any nation in the world to do whatever
conduct it wants without accountability to the government entity.

Capitalism doesn't give you a license to get rich. Laissez-faire
capitalism without restraints from national governments was severely
discredited long ago as being brutal, inhumane, and immoral by major
religions such as your own Jewish faith. Without restraints from nation
states, economic systems are almost entirely outside democratic
control, meaning that most people end up having almost no
self-determination, vulnerable to the whims of the tiny few in the
world who hold the power and the money. Capitalism and free-market
systems have been wonderful advances for human kind, but only when they
are fettered by democratic control by the people of nations.

H-1B and other NIVs are a socialist programs that attempt to equalize
white-collar wages with that of the third world. The U.S. government
allows immigration lawyers to import workers in order to artificially
manipulate the supply, and therefore the price of workers. Don't fool
yourself; you have learned to milk the cow of corporate socialism. You
would probably be a web-based quickie-divorce attorney if it wasn't for
the H-1B cash cow.

Milton Friedman, the high priest of libertarianism, said that H-1B is a
corporate subsidy. Friedman would probably say that you are a hypocrite
instead of a libertarian. In a true libertarian society, there would be
free flows of people in and out of the country, and thus no need for
immigration lawyers. The more complex immigration law is the more
un-libertarian it is, and the more money you make. Libertarians are
your worse enemy so be very careful about adopting them to your cause.

Greg, you are getting very rich, but don't kid yourself. You are not a
capitalist or a libertarian. You are a crafty attorney that learned how
to exploit a corrupt socialist immigration system for your own
enrichment.

Rob Sanchez

www.ZaZona.com

P.S. - I would like to use your comments in my next newsletter, with
your permission of course. Their are several H-1Bs on my mailing list
that might need your services once we get the yearly limit down to
65,000.

May 28, 2003

Wow, I'm honored that the anti-immigrant sites think my opinion is
important enough to mention.

I got into business immigration law because I am a libertarian at
heart. I don't think the government should tell American companies who
they should hire, where they can locate, what goods and components they
have to buy, etc. We're not like France where employers are told what
to do by their government in just about every aspect of their business.
We did not win the Cold War only to mimic the communist systems which
ensured that everyone had a job (and everyone also starved).
Fortunately, President Bush seems to agree.

By the way, the fact that Mr. Sanchez would seek to discredit me by
saying I'm "rich" (how does he know what I earn?) is revealing. It is
consistent with the anti-H-1B zealots general hostility to capitalism.
I'd really like to hear more about how one can reconcile being for a
free market system and also for telling employers which workers they
have to hire.

Regards,

Greg Siskind

May 28, 2003

Mr Siskind:

Do you support abuse to the holder of H1-B or L1 visas.

Do you support making H1-B or L1 visa holders indent servants

Do you knowily [sic] support clients who lie about information needed
to bring H1-B or L1 visa people into the US.

As an officer of the court, if you know of such issues it job to advice
the court of such actions. If you are not aware of such action, I can
provide you with hard proof of such actions, so you are aware of them
and take legal steps to correct such action and protect the right of
H1-B and L1 visa holder and put and end to such abuse.

I can go with more.

If the answer is no to any of the above, I need your help on stopping
abuse, the practise [sic] of indent servants and lying on Federal
forms.

Thank You

[Name Deleted]

JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER

www.ZaZona.com

Siskind is a prominent, and very rich, immigration attorney.
http://www.visalaw.com/

Siskind takes pot shots at Lou Dobbs and FAIR in his latest bulletin.
He whines that CNN didn't interview a shills to explain the virtues of
H-1B. Perhaps Dobbs should give Siskind a chance to speak so the
American public can see one of these rich immigration attorneys in
action. I don't think he will fool anyone.

Help to Keep ZaZona.com Online

Donate to the Cause at
http://www.zazona.com/Donations.htm
To Subscribe or Unsubscribe send an email to

Back to archives