Image 01 Image 03

Political takeover of language nears completion — AP bans “illegal immigrants”

Political takeover of language nears completion — AP bans “illegal immigrants”

There has been a political push to remove words like “illegal alien” or “illegal immigrant” from usage as part of political messaging by amnesty/open borders advocates.

The preferred term is “undocumented,” as if it’s just a question of paperwork.  Once the language is redefined, it becomes a much easier sell to treat the breaking of our immigration laws as just a formality.

Not only that, “illegal alien” supposedly is racist, as if illegal alien were a race, as I posted in What race is an illegal alien?

This is all a charade.  It’s the typical Color of Change race card shakedown.

The advocates of eliminating the term “illegal” want to alter immigration policies.  They can’t win on the merits of open borders, so they smear others as racist.

It’s just a dishonest word game using false accusations of racism as a political lever.

Back to the subversive question:  What race is an illegal alien?

Today a major victory was achieved for those seeking political control of the language as AP removed the term “illegal immigrant” from its style book, ‘Illegal immigrant’ no more:

The Stylebook no longer sanctions the term “illegal immigrant” or the use of “illegal” to describe a person. Instead, it tells users that “illegal” should describe only an action, such as living in or immigrating to a country illegally.

AP has no term to replace “illegal immigrant.”  Instead of the accurate term, we’re going to get explanations:

illegal immigration Entering or residing in a country in violation of civil or criminal law. Except in direct quotes essential to the story, use illegal only to refer to an action, not a person: illegal immigration, but not illegal immigrant. Acceptable variations include living in or entering a country illegally or without legal permission.

Except in direct quotations, do not use the terms illegal alien, an illegal, illegals or undocumented.

Do not describe people as violating immigration laws without attribution.

Specify wherever possible how someone entered the country illegally and from where. Crossed the border? Overstayed a visa? What nationality?

People who were brought into the country as children should not be described as having immigrated illegally. For people granted a temporary right to remain in the U.S. under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, use temporary resident status, with details on the program lower in the story.

This is just another step towards linguistically enforced progressive politics.

More mocking tweets at Hot Air and Twitchy.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


More Orwell than Huxley. Case closed.

Howz’ about Carteler’s ? Sounds rather elegant to me.

Entering a country without that country’s permission = invader.

nordic_prince | April 2, 2013 at 4:31 pm

Hey, AP:

Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien – Illegal Alien!

There, I said it. Doing the job you refuse to do. So sue me ~

It’s chilling, sometimes, to understand that there are so many folks who’s reaction to reading 1984 must have went something like: “That is an AWESOME idea”

I just can’t buy the noble fool arguement anymore. The approach is too focused and systematic.

The “undocumented” label hides the displacement of American citizens, and provides cover for causal factors which motivated their emigration, including: criminal cartels, corrupt government, and fanatical environmentalists.

It seems that neither the illegal aliens nor their domestic patrons care about the circumstances of Americans or the aliens’ countrymen.

It’s also interesting to note that the same people who complained about overpopulation, who previously supported eugenics, and today support elective abortion or choice, do not seem to comprehend why and how overpopulation causes problems in a human society and the environment.

Anyway, I think both the illegal aliens and their domestic patrons have ulterior motives which bear little correlation with promoting the general Welfare, either in America or the aliens’ home nation.

    HarrietHT in reply to n.n. | April 2, 2013 at 7:47 pm

    I agree with you entirely and especially regarding the ulterior motives of the open-border’s lobby: it becomes more clear with every passing day that their goal is to displace white Europeans who founded this country, and along with it whatever remains of Western Civilization. They wish to balkanize us and ensure in perpetuity a victim class whose grievances require government “help” in the form of taxing producers to support layabouts and which simultaneously supply their cronies with bags of boodle. It’s a scam, perpetrated on the law-abiding and patriotic citizens of America — the other than the 47% who are FREELOADERS.

      When I speak of “citizens”, I am referring to all legal citizens. My only hope is that American citizens, whether native or naturalized, will not seek to corrupt America to mirror the nations from which they emigrated. Surely there was a reason for their departure and it was not to exploit others and spread the misery.

      The imperative here is assimilation of American culture and norms, as described in our national charter, The Declaration of Independence, and our organizing document, The Constitution, as well as supporting traditions and customs.

      Americans recognize individual dignity. Americans recognize the sanctity of human life from “creation”. Americans compromise to promote the general Welfare. Americans favor voluntary exploitation. That is economic exchange and charity. Americans are capable of self-moderating behavior, which grants them the privilege of responsible liberty.

      Americans should foster these principles in their neighbors. Not sponsor a progressive corruption in domestic and foreign affairs.

1. More mocking tweets at Hot Air and Twitchy.

Haven’t read ’em, but I tend to agree that ‘illegal alien’ is outdated and should be replaced. A better name is ‘invader’. Just noticed baboyako’s comment.

2. A term for people who support illegal immigration is ‘collaborator’, but I can think of harsher words that are appropriate.

3. Those collaborators include not just vote-hungry Democrats, but agribusiness barons with their hooks into the Republican Party. The AP is in their ranks. Not to omit a President who said Family values don’t stop at the Rio Grande.

4. To repeat one of my LI mantras: A country that refuses to control its borders does not deserve to survive, and won’t. Sooner or later its luck, like the dodo’s, will run out.

The next semantic game: involuntary exploitation becomes redistributive change becomes social justice… for the political, economic, and social profit of a select minority.

    n.n in reply to n.n. | April 2, 2013 at 6:01 pm

    More semantic games: replace undocumented resident with burglar, reproductive rights with elective abortion, population control with murder, redistributive change with theft, social justice with fraud, affirmative action with institutional discrimination, etc.

    Why should only the politicians, journalists, and activists enjoy the fine art of semantic distortions. Everyone can suggest word associations, but not everyone has the leverage or unearned credibility to cause mass manipulation of perception. It’s good to be the king, his henchmen, and cronies.

Drop the “I” word? Somebody tell Obama!

Can we also drop the “h” word – homophobic?
And the ‘r’ word – racist?

With what is AP replacing “illegal immigrant”? Answer: “unavailable for comment alien”

Never liked the term “illegal alien”, “illegal immigrant” or “undocumented laborer” … the term I prefer is “unorganized invader” – not to be confused with a “disorganized invader” who is one who simply can’t get his “stuff” together.
… and what better defense against an unorganized invader than an unorganized militia?

How ’bout, “Here, sorta without status determined by a deportation adjudication”…???

“Instead, it tells users that “illegal” should describe only an action, such as living in or immigrating to a country illegally.”

Which neatly describes ILLEGAL ALIENS, who are ALIEN to the United States, and here…wait for it…ILLEGALLY.

And THAT required an ACTION…either by themselves or someone acting in loco parentis. There ain’t no other way, folks.

I hope everyone with a working brain will make it a point to use the REALITY-based term…ILLEGAL ALIEN.

She won’t say what she wants. She won’t allow herself to be ‘outed’ on English speaking television. It’s too early to give the end game away. It’s coming soon but not yet.

Make no mistake, at a private Spanish speaking event she would readily admit what she wants to see.

Henry Hawkins | April 2, 2013 at 5:05 pm


“There has been a political push to remove words like “illegal alien” or “illegal immigrant” from usage as part of political messaging by amnesty/open borders advocates.”

Fine… Then I call these “advocates” criminals in that they support law breakers.

When are we going to wake up to what’s happening and the loss of the rule of law???

I am done playing around.
new word is target.

‘Associated Press No Longer Using Term “Illegal Immigrant”‘
…I’m guessing they won’t TELL THE TRUTH and now identify them as “undocumented d-cRAT socialist welfare leeches.”

    Socialism is their compensation for doing the work that Americans do not want and refuse to do. The greater problem is that they would conspire with domestic interests to displace Americans and obfuscate the cause for their emigration. They demonstrate a willful contempt for both Americans and their former countrymen. This is a proven recipe for progressive corruption.

Okay. Fine. I will use “illegal resident”. It’s just not particularly productive to have to go off on a tangent about how someone became an illegal resident.

Uninvited Guest!

Okay, fine, “no person is illegal”.

For people who came here illegally of their own volition, how about “criminal non-citizens”?

Sure, maybe the “non-citizen” part is a little vague, since presumably they’re citizens somewhere, but I think US citizenship is implied.

The legal term for their status is “illegal alien”. Anything else is a euphemism.

When was the last time you heard the word ‘alien’ on tv in reference to an illegal alien?

The Left knows how to win the language game and how to use those victories to gain support for their agenda.

“We’re here to talk about the I-word.”

Not on your life, honey. The word is “illegal.” As in “illegal alien” which describes a foreigner who is on American shores without permission or due process.

That poor girl was a mess. She’s been taught one set of talking points and it’s all she knows.

AP doesn’t have reporters anymore, they have “undocumented propagandists”.

NavyMustang | April 3, 2013 at 4:44 am

Bill said (and I paraphrase): “You haven’t thought this through!”

I beg to disagree, Mr O’Reilly. They have definitely thought through the immigration issue. They just don’t want to admit what that policy is on national TV. Silly Bill!

How about “The Things That Wouldn’t Leave”??