Saturday, April 29, 2006

THIS IS OUR ANTHEM

In response to the "Nuestro Himno" illegal alien anthem nonsense, I thought it would be nice to celebrate the history of our national anthem--instead of rewriting it to pander to ethnic grievance-mongers who don't respect Amerian laws or traditions.

Via Wikipedia, here's a copy of Francis Scott Key's original manuscript of the "Star-Spangled Banner" poem:

fskey.jpg

And here's one of five copies that his brother-in-law printed up as a broadside titled, "Defence of Fort McHenry:"

fskey002.jpg

From the Library of Congress website, here's a copy of the first printed edition of the anthem combining words and music -- one of only ten copies known to exist:

fskey003.jpg

And the text:

(The Defense of Fort McHenry)
September 20, 1814
By Francis Scott Key

Oh, say can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, now conceals, now discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines on the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner! O long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has wiped out their foul footstep's pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the heaven-rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, for our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner forever shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

***

Previous:
The anthem and the White House website
Your new national anthem (full audio of Nuestro Himno linked)
Whose national anthem?
The illegal alien anthem

Technorati tags: ,

Friday, April 28, 2006

EXCLUSIVE ILLEGAL ALIEN DAY PLANNING

Courtesy of an inside tipster at the LA Unified School District, I've obtained documents showing the public school teachers and officials' plans in advance of the Monday illegal alien boycott. (Click on each page for full-size PDF).

The teachers' union (UTLA - United Teachers of Los Angeles) gives out obligatory warnings not to abandon the classroom without a good excuse--wink-wink, nudge-nudge--and then voices its opposition for the Sensenbrenner immigration enforcement bill. The warning wraps up with endorsement of pro-illegal alien activities taking place Monday afternoon.

lausd004.jpg

Excerpt:

utla003.jpg

Meanwhile, the school superintendent begs teachers not to join the walkout...

lausd002.jpg


...and begs parents to try and persuade their children to come to class and express their opinions at school, where "instructional material" have already been prepared. I'm sure they present both sides fairly. So sure.

lausd003.jpg


***

Meanwhile, another tipster sends a bizarre message from the radical ethnic separatists of La Voz de Aztlan. Take a look:

From: la-voz-de-aztlan-admin@aztlan.net To: la-voz-de-aztlan@aztlan.net Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:27:37 -0700 Subject: [La Voz de Aztlan] URGENT ALERT: From The Revolutionary Council and Provisional Government of Aztlan

Dear La Voz de Aztlan Subscribers:

We have received the following communique from the
Minister of Information of the Nation of Aztlan. We rarely
receive any communiques from the "Revolutionary Council
and Provisional Government of Aztlan" so we must assume
that it is of upmost importance. We urge that you carefully
consider the information that it contains. Please pass this
to others in your network!
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

URGENT ALERT: From The Revolutionary Council and
Provisional Government of Aztlan

April 26, 2006

Estimada Raza de Aztlan and Beyond,

Our Director of Special Intelligence Services has brought
to our attention disturbing information that threatens the
safety of our families. This information requires that we
prepare a defense strategy to protect our communities.

Due to the recent large demonstrations of our people in
major cities in occupied Anahuac, extremist European
invaders are preparing violent actions against us.
They are expected to use physical violence in the upcoming
marches and rallies planned for May 1, 2006 and we must
take steps to protect our families.

The Director of Special Intelligence Services has reliable
information that anti-Mexican forces in Aztlan and in
certain other area of Anahuac, are preparing to utilize
explosives and snipers to kill our people. We urge our
community to arm themselves to protect our families. We
are also urging our soldiers presently serving In Iraq,
Afghanistan and other foreign lands to do everything
possible to return home and fight for your own. The
situation here is critical.

In addition, all political prisoners shall be in constant
alert and ready for action. Also, youth groups in our
barrios shall call truces and direct their energies against
the racist enemy that has vowed to annihilate our families.

Our Prime Minister is instructing every able bodied male to
arm himself to protect the women and children in his home.
We can not depend on local White law enforcement
authorities because in many cases they will join the
criminal elements and participate in the slaughter of our
people. Make sure you have weapons and plenty of
ammunition in your homes at the ready.

Criminal racist elements have already made death threats
against certain "occupation administrators" and they will
not stop at killing our civilians. We hope that the
massacres of Mexicans that the White criminals have vowed
to undertake are just the rantings of cowardly insane minds
but we must take these threats seriously.

Cuauhtli
Minister of Information
Nation of Aztlan
La Voz de Aztlan

***

The Spanglish-ized national anthem that I have been blogging about all week got some attention from AP. They contacted me for the story, but I just didn't have time to get back to them yesterday. Mark Krikorian and Bryanna Bevens did a fine job schooling the reporter:

Some Internet bloggers and others are infuriated by the thought of "The Star-Spangled Banner" sung in a language other than English.

"Would the French accept people singing the La Marseillaise in English as a sign of French patriotism? Of course not," said Mark Krikorian, head of the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that supports tighter immigration controls.

The initial version of "Nuestro Himno," or "Our Anthem," comes out Friday and uses lyrics based closely on the English-language original, said Kidron, who heads the record label Urban Box Office.

Pro-immigration protests are planned around the country for Monday, and the record label is urging Hispanic radio stations nationwide to play the cut at 7 p.m. EDT Friday in a sign of solidarity.

A remix to be released in June will contain several lines in English that condemn U.S. immigration laws. Among them: "These kids have no parents, cause all of these mean laws ... let's not start a war with all these hard workers, they can't help where they were born."

Bryanna Bevens of Hanford, Calif., who writes for the immigration- focused Web magazine Vdare.com, said the remix particularly upset her.

"It's very whiny. If you want to say all those things, by all means, put them on your poster board, but don't put them on the national anthem," she said.

You can listen to the new version of our national anthem at Hot Air.

***

Related: Drudge headlined a story out of Sacramento last night noting that the California Senate gave two-thumbs up to the scheduled May 1 "strike" by illegal aliens and their advocates pushing for amnesty.

Via Jason Smith, California Democrats plan to walk out of the Assembly to show solidarity with the illegal alien strike...and they want taxpayers to cover them.


Monday is going to be a very interesting day.

Thursday, April 27, 2006

OPEN-BORDERS BUSH: THE FINAL STRAW?

Not that this is a surprise to anyone who has actually listened to President Bush's open borders-sympathizing over the last five years, but here's the "news" from AP tonight:

Privately, Bush Says He Favors Citizenship

By DAVID ESPO
The Associated Press
Wednesday, April 26, 2006; 7:54 PM

A more accurate headline: Privately, Bush Says He Favors Amnesty

More:

WASHINGTON -- President Bush generally favors plans to give millions of illegal immigrants a chance at U.S. citizenship without leaving the country, but does not want to be more publicly supportive because of opposition among conservative House Republicans, according to senators who attended a recent White House meeting.

Several officials familiar with the meeting also said Democrats protested radio commercials that blamed them for Republican-written legislation that passed the House and would make illegal immigrants vulnerable to felony charges.

Bush said he was unfamiliar with the ads, which were financed by the Republican National Committee, according to officials familiar with the discussions.

At another point, Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada and other members of his party pressed the president about their concern that any Senate-passed bill would be made unpalatable in final talks with the House.

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Democrat, said the lawmaker who would lead House negotiators, House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, had been "intractable" in negotiations on other high-profile bills in the past. Bush did not directly respond to the remark, officials said.

The Republican and Democratic officials who described the conversation did so Wednesday on condition of anonymity, saying they had not been authorized to disclose details.

Bush convened the session to give momentum to the drive for election-year immigration legislation, a contentious issue that has triggered large street demonstrations and produced divisions in both political parties. Senators of both parties emerged from the session praising the president's involvement and said the timetable was achievable.

"Yes, he thinks people should be given a path to citizenship," said Sen. Mel Martinez., R-Fla., a leading supporter of immigration legislation in the Senate.

Martinez said it was implicit in Bush's remarks that many of the immigrants illegally in the U.S. would be permitted to remain during a lengthy wait and application period.

Here's a small sample of the e-mail I'm getting from fed-up conservatives forwarding the messages they've sent to the White House:

From Christopher G.:

No amnesty. No "guest worker" status. No sellout!

Enforce existing law. Deport illegal aliens to their country of origin.
Enforce the border to combat illegal traffic of people, drugs, weapons,
biohazards.

What part of "preserve, protect, and defend" doesn't my President
understand?

As a former military officer, President Bush knows that when given a task,
an officer doesn't get away with telling his commander why it can't be done.
His job is to do as he is ordered, or face the consequences. As President, his job is to enforce the law. He's not allowed to whine about why it can't be done.

The American people have, overwhelmingly, voiced opposition to this
legislative action. We didn't elect President Bush to serve the agenda of Vicente Fox.

Enforce existing law. Deport illegal aliens. NO AMNESTY!!

From a 9/11 family member:

Hello, Mr. President. I am an American citizen represented by the wonderful God-fearing people who brought petitions to the White House yesterday, and were turned away along with 570,000 signatures. Now, I have absolutely no doubt about what this President thinks of me because of the way he treated these fine, humble Americans who were, after all, only asking him to order our immigration laws to be enforced instead of preventing enforcement as he has done.

This President has stated time and again that he wakes up every morning thinking of how to protect the American people, how to keep this country safe. Well, that is a news flash. Because if his White House can turn away family members of 9/11 victims as well as victims of crimes by illegal aliens, then somehow he has forgotten to tell us he doesn't mean THOSE Americans. They are outside the reach of his 'compassionate conservatism.' I wonder which Americans he thinks of protecting. I really do.

Maybe the group he spoke to on Monday gives me a clue. The Orange County Business Council, Big Donors all to the Republican Party, have their privilege of cheap labor protected.

I have a message for the President. The White House is not an Ivory Tower, where you can exercise your power by thumbing your nose at the American people, all the while exclaiming 'Neener, neener, neener.' Every time you fling your fighting words at us, sir, and your smug attitude, it is only inspiration for us to fight for what is right. And we will.

There will be no guest worker amnesty. There will be border security and there will be law enforcement. The people have spoken. Thank you for your time and have a nice day."

Steve J.:

President Bush has the strength of will to pursue the war on terror. It's too bad he does not have that same strength when it comes to enforcing out Immigration Laws.

Anthony B.:

It wasn't surprising that USCIS almost immediately released 1,000 of the 1200 illegal aliens working at IFCO. After all, it would have been expensive to lease 50 Greyhound buses to transport them back to Mexico. This is going to be another "Tyson Two Step" case, where two mid level managers from Tyson Foods were "chosen" to be the sacrificial lambs, with one of them getting a year's probation and a $2.000.00 fine and the other a year's probation and a $3,000.00 fine (I'll be THAT put the fear of God in the Tyson Corporation...NOT). It's also interesting to note that Tyson Foods still employs thousands of illegal aliens at their meat processing plants, but without the "interference" of the USCIS or Border Patrol...thanks to some influential folks in Congress who told them to "lay off" doing any more raids on Tyson facilities. I will guarantee you a $50.00 Steak dinner at the restaurant of your choice if any IFCO executives get any prison time out of this latest scam by the Bush Administration.

From Ted K.:

I am a conservative Republican activist working the last two cycles.

I do not see, for one second, how, since you can’t even enforce the laws as written now, you can ever enforce this boondoggle going through the senate right now.

I do not support this, and may just stay home come November.

Alan B.:

I have been one of President Bush's strongest supporters. But respectfully, he is simply wrong on this issue. Our current immigration policy is fine. We just need to enforce it. After we get control of the borders again, we can tinker at the margins all you want. From a purely pragmatic viewpoint, our ability to continue the majority of the things which matter, such as the War on Terror, is being jeopardized by his refusal to back away from a flawed, open doors policy.

It is truly heartrending to hear my President publicly call those who believe in the rule of law, and the security of our nation, compassionless and unrealistic. Even more frustrating is to hear him using a straw man in saying that mass deportation is impractical. Of course it isn't practical, but it isn't needed! We did not import the illegal aliens en mass, and we don't need to deport them en mass. Just enact the changes necessary to "demagnetize" the United States.

We have instant background checks for guns. The Social Security Administration says something similar could be up and running for verification in less than a year.

Prohibit the issuance of any sort of driving certificates without proof of legal residency or citizenship.

Modify the Simpson-Mazzoli Bill to allow and encourage local law enforcement
agencies to question and apprehend illegal aliens.

Send a few businessmen to prison, and heavily fine the businesses involved.

Change our citizenship rules to be in compliance with most of the other
countries, which require at least one parent to be a citizen of the country
for a child to be a citizen by birth.

Build a meaningful fence or other barrier along our southern border.

Do these few things, and the flow will slow, and eventually reverse itself. Fail to address this issue, and it almost certainly will result in a situation which is beyond repair in the future, and terrible political damage in the present.

Respectfully, the proud son of a naturalized citizen,
Alan [B.]

Jeffrey B.:

Mr. President: I am a member of the Republican Base. I give money and the five members of my family vote in every election. I have supported you through all of your troubles because I always thought you had the Country's best interests at heart. I am so disgusted with the current path that immigration reform is going, that I no longer support you. SECURE THE BORDERS AND NO AMNESTY. My family and I will no longer stand in line to vote for Republicans who act like Democrats.

Much more swamping my e-mail box. And the White House's, I assume.

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

DEMS ALREADY ATACKING TONY SNOW: TALK IS CHEAP

Except if it’s coming from DNC Spokeswoman Karen Finney. Then it’s worthless. Catch this quote from this morning’s DNC press release:

“The American people should get ready for another Snow job from the Bush White House. Tony Snow represents more of the same, not the fresh start the Administration needed,” said Democratic National Committee Communications Director Karen Finney. “This is an interdepartmental move from one part of the conservative infrastructure to another that allows a darling of the right-wing to deliver the same misleading message, cherry-picked information and spin to the American people. Josh Bolten’s plan for re-energizing the White House called for more happy talk and a better PR campaign for the same failed policies. Snow’s track record of delivering misleading rhetoric is a perfect fit for this Administration that refuses to change and has a problem telling the truth.”

[Publisher’s note: It really says something about Tony Snow and the Dems who are perceiving him as such a threat. After all, they’re already publicly attacking him for “misleading rhetoric” before the man has even uttered a word on behalf of the White House. Must be a sign of good things to come.]

In Ms. Finney’s world, Fox News Channel and talk radio are merely the propaganda arm of the Bush administration. Ms. Finney’s quote of “Snow’s track record of delivering misleading rhetoric is a perfect fit for this Administration that refuses to change and has a problem telling the truth” is bizarre. Then the press release notes all the times that Snow’s ‘misled the American people’. Here’s one of the things cited in the DNC’s propaganda sheet:

Snow Falsely Claimed That Intel Committee “Discovered” That Plame Recommended Wilson For The Niger Mission. In his July 15, 2005, column, Snow further claimed that the Senate Intelligence Committee, in its 2004 “Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq,” “discovered that Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame, did indeed recommend him for the trip” to Niger. But the committee did not officially conclude that she had been responsible for Wilson’s assignment.

There isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between what Tony Snow said and what the Committee concluded. It’s just that the DNC wants to plant the seed that Tony Snow is just another Bush shill, something that anyone with a brain knows better than to believe.

Finney was just on Dayside. Finney did everything she could to not call Snow a liar, often saying that “this isn’t about changing flacks. It’s about this administration’s need to change policies.” Of course, she didn’t say which policies needed changing. I’m presuming that she’d change every Bush policy. The reality is that Ms. Finney’s and the DNC’s rhetoric is transparently absurd. It’s typical of their brain-dead propaganda.

At the end of the day, that’s what will drive people into the Republican Party. People that voted against Kerry and Gore hated their talking down to them. This DNC diatribe is just the latest DNC attempt to talk down to the American people.

Insulting the collective American intelligence is a sin that Democrats won’t be forgiven for.

A WHITE HOUSE BETRAYAL


flagdistress.jpg
S.O.S.

Contact the White House. Send a message: No amnesty. Clean our own house first.

The looming White House open-borders deal is the dictionary definition of amnesty.

***

It's here. The bipartisan amnesty disaster is coming, as I have warned many times. I promise you: This is not going to be forgotten (via the Washington Times):

President Bush and a group of senators yesterday reached general agreement on an immigration bill that includes a pathway to citizenship for many illegal aliens.

But left out of the closed-door White House meeting were senators who oppose a path to citizenship. The meeting even snubbed two men who had been considered allies of Mr. Bush on immigration -- Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican and chairman of the immigration subcommittee, and Sen. Jon Kyl, Arizona Republican.

Mr. Bush in brief remarks to the press said there was agreement to get "a bill that does not grant automatic amnesty to people, but a bill that says, somebody who is working here on a legal basis has the right to get in line to become a citizen." But senators, speaking afterward, said Mr. Bush was far more specific in the meeting.

"There was a pretty good consensus that what we have put into the Hagel-Martinez proposal here is the right way to go," said Sen. Mel Martinez, Florida Republican. "I think he was very clear [on] pathway to citizenship, so long as it goes to the back of the line, and he even opened the door here for something we've haggled back and forth on, that you can shrink the time for people to become citizens by simply enlarging the number of green cards."

And Sen. Sam Brownback, Kansas Republican, said Mr. Bush "endorsed the concept of an earned citizenship."

That would represent a substantial change on the part of the Bush administration, which just last year said it opposed a path to citizenship for those currently here illegally.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told the Senate Judiciary Committee in October the administration didn't support "a path through which they can get their permanent residence or citizenship," and Labor Secretary Elaine L. Chao echoed that: "We feel that a pathway to citizenship would reward those who have violated our laws."

Read their lips: No new amnesty. Uh-huh.

The Hagel-Martinez bill would divide illegal aliens into three groups. Most of those who have been in the country for more than five years would be granted access to citizenship, those here more than two years but less than five years would have to go home first but would also be eligible for citizenship, while those here two years or less would not have a path.

Even as Mr. Bush is moving in that direction, the House majority leader yesterday rejected it.

"This idea that was being kicked around the Senate about providing some sort of amnesty for those who have been here five years or more, I just think it was a very big mistake," House Majority Leader John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, said yesterday. "You are just inviting more people to come." Still, the senators in yesterday's meeting were thrilled with where the debate is, and the direction Mr. Bush is headed.

Oh, yes, the bipartisan open-borders collaborators are thrilled:

tednw.jpg

Hee-haw.

***

Who will clean up the mess at DHS?

If you loved the fraud that resulted after the 1986 mass amnesty, wait 'til you see what's coming next.

Monday, April 24, 2006

IMMIGRATION DEBATE: PARTE DOS

Speaking before a throng of illegal immigration supporters, Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) proclaimed that the current immigration debate “goes to the heart of who we are as Americans.” His words were immediately translated into Spanish. No doubt the irony was lost on the senator, as I am certain it is lost on a great many politicians now salivating at the sight of so many potential voters.

The debate is filled with irony. A recent Wall Street Journal editorial described those demanding a no nonsense immigration policy as narrow minded, exclusionary and visionless. A Republican attempt to stem the flow of illegal immigrants is a missed opportunity to curry favor with Latino voters. Mind you, this rather Democratic sounding rebuke came from the right wing. Of course, what one continues to hear from the left is that to demand secure borders is to be racist, xenophobic, and a lot of other bad names one can’t print and shouldn’t say in polite company, which isn’t ironic at all.

The irony of course is borne of obfuscation. We know for instance that the thousands attending rallies around the nation are protesting an immigration bill that would fund the building of a fence across 700 miles of our southern border and make being in the country illegally a felony. But what is it they are advocating? A quick peek:

    * Immediate amnesty for 11.5 million current illegal immigrants

    * Demilitarization of our border

    * Unfettered access to tax-payer funded health care, education and food stamps.

    * An end to sanctions for businesses employing illegal workers

    * No on site enforcement of immigration laws

    * Voting rights

    * Drivers licenses


The irony is that Americans haven’t risen in mass demonstrations. Who is it that is truly narrow-minded, nationalist, and bigoted? Those demanding their representatives protect their property and the sovereignty of their nation or those that march in the streets flying a foreign flag, demanding privileges they have no right to from a people they apparently do not wish to become?

The argument has truly been turned on its head. Witness the now universal usage of the term “undocumented workers” as if it were just a matter of finding time in a hectic schedule to go down to the local post office and fill out the paperwork. Or the manner in which the debate has been framed. Above the din of the thousands chanting at immigration rallies across the nation, one hears the cry that this nation was built on the backs of immigrants, we are a nation of immigrants and soulless without them. Some of the rhetoric is true. America was founded by immigrants and immigrants to this nation - both willing and unwilling - have contributed much to American culture and history. However, the heated debate in which we now find ourselves bears no relation to Ellis Island. We are not discussing absorbing immigrants fleeing oppression or famine, or even whether we are accepting too many immigrants from a particular region. The issue is the right of a sovereign people to decide the manner and place of migration across its borders. Americans are not opposed to immigration. They are opposed to illegal immigration. It was not upon this rock that our nation was built.

The large numbers of Hispanics marching in the streets is sure to make politicians on both sides of the aisle break out in a cold sweat. They must remember, however, that they are not charged with creating an immigration policy to appease Mexicans or even Mexican Americans. As the people’s representatives, they are charged with protecting the liberty and property of this nation’s citizens. Policy that does not seek that end is against the call of government and is a betrayal of the people government is charged with serving.

In Spanish that is: Americanos primero!


J. Phillips: He Talk Like A White BoyJoseph C. Phillips is an accomplished actor and writer, starring in numerous television shows and major motion pictures throughout his career including The Cosby Show, General Hospital, The District and Without A Trace among others and was a three time NAACP Image Award Nominee for his portrayal of Attorney Justus Ward on the Daytime Drama General Hospital.

As a writer Mr. Phillips has had essays published in Newsweek, Los Angeles Daily News, Essence Magazine, Upscale, USA Today, Turning Point, College Digest, BET.com as well as many more, too numerous to list. This author is a Staff Columnist for TheRealityCheck.org. The opinions expressed in this column represent those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, or philosophy of TheRealityCheck.org

THE ANTI-CINDY SHEEHAN

Thursday’s guest on Hannity & Colmes was Laura Youngblood, known as the “anti-Cindy Sheehan” for confronting Sheehan at a TV interview in which Youngblood was a member of the studio audience. Her husband, Navy Corpsman Travis Youngblood, was killed less than a year ago in Iraq. At the time of the meeting, Mrs. Youngblood had one small child and another on the way.

As they conversed, Cindy told Laura, one week before her baby was born and a month and a half after her husband was killed, that “Your children are fatherless for a lie.”

Watch the video (thanks to Expose the Left)

Laura Youngblood

What Mrs. Youngblood didn’t answer well was Alan Colmes’ question, “Can you support the troops and be against this war?”
The answer: NO. Here’s why:

This is a just war. The “just war doctrine” outlined by the Catholic Church is this:

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the “just war” doctrine:

- the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;

- all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;

- there must be serious prospects of success;

- the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

Operation Iraqi Freedom meets all these criteria.

Other reasons given for opposition to the war usually includes that US Soldiers and innocent civilians are dying, that Pres. Bush lied about the premise for war (i.e., Iraq’s objective to obtain uranium from Niger), and that America is an imperialistic empire (when the president is Republican) that Saddam never had WMDs, and that there was no link between al-Qaeda or Osama Bin Laden and Saddam and that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.

These arguments are false. Thanks in large part to the ongoing release of the Saddam Tapes, Iraqi documents and accounts from former Iraqis like GEN Georges Sada and scientist Khidhir Hamza, we have evidence that Saddam was pursuing a WMD program, he was connected with al-Qaeda and that the President did not “lie” when he reported that Saddam pursued uranium.

Still, Cindy Sheehan has said:

“Iraq DID NOT have WMD’s; Iraq WAS NOT linked to Al Qaeda and 9/11; Iraq WAS NOT a threat or danger to America. How can these moms who still support George Bush and his insane war in Iraq want more innocent blood shed just because their sons or daughters have been killed? I am starting to lose a little compassion for them. I know they have been as brainwashed as the rest of America.”

If that were not enough, the troops on the ground support the mission. Soldiers report something very different than those like Sheehan who oppose the war; that is, it is not a quagmire and liberation has come to Iraq. Misinformation and lies perpetuated by media and anti-war activists damage any possibility for there to be honest disagreement.

The premise to argue the legitimacy or illegitimacy of this war would have to be this: Are American lives more valuable than Iraqi lives? Aren’t Iraqis worth saving? Aren’t Americans allowed to freely join the military to defend the less fortunate?

Compare notes on these subjects:

“Bush is a terrorist”

CINDY: “We are not waging a war on terror in this country. We’re waging a war of terror. The biggest terrorist in the world is George W. Bush!”

Osama Bin Laden: “We believe that the biggest thieves in the world are Americans and the biggest terrorists on earth are the Americans.”

“Bush is a liar”

CINDY: “That lying bastard, George Bush, is taking a five-week vacation in time of war.”

Ayman al-Zawahiri: “Bush, the liar, was forced to announce in November 2005 that he would withdraw his troops from Iraq. Since Bush is addicted to lying, he justified his withdrawal by saying that Iraqi forces have become well-trained.”

“Bush spreading freedom and democracy”

CINDY: “If George Bush believes his rhetoric and his bullsh**, that this is a war for freedom and democracy, that he is spreading freedom and democracy, does he think every person he kills makes Iraq more free? If he thinks that it’s so important for Iraq to have a U.S.-imposed sense of freedom and democracy, then he needs to sign up his two little party-animal girls. They need to go to this war.”

Ayman al-Zawahiri: “My Muslim nation, you will not enjoy free elections, protected sanctity, governments which are being called to account by the people and a respectable judiciary unless you are free from the crusader-Zionist occupation and the corrupted governments, and this will not be fulfilled but with Jihad.”

“Bush wants oil”

CINDY: “Are we supporting our troops dying and innocent Iraqi people being killed for oil and greed?”

Aljazeera: “Long before the September 11 attacks, Bush’s administration made plans for oil and war on Iraq. Days after this administration was incepted, a conflict has taken place inside the White House between the neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, on one side, and a combination of “Big Oil” executives and U.S. State Department “pragmatists” on the other.

In his book, “Against all Enemies,” Richard A. Clarke mentions that Bush Senior was always thinking of ways in which he can put a direct hand on Iraqi oil, until Bush Junior holds office and fulfils his father’s dream in 2003.”

“Bush and Zionism”

CINDY: “Am I emotional? Yes, my first born was murdered. Am I angry? Yes, he was killed for lies and for a Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel. My son joined the Army to protect America, not Israel. Am I stupid? No, I know full-well that my son, my family, this nation, and this world were betrayed by George [W.] Bush who was influenced by the neo-con PNAC agenda after 9/11.”

Ayman al-Zawahiri: “O, Bush, the son of Bush, you should know that in spite of you, and even if it means you die of your frustration and lose your mind, removing Israel is an individual duty on every Muslim.

“America is not worth dying for”

CINDY: “America has been killing people on this continent since it was started. This country is not worth dying for…”

Travis YoungbloodAmerica is not worth dying for… Cindy Sheehan, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and terrorist all agree. They throw away Americanism to side with our enemies, almost verbatim. This is why they do not support the troops. Nor do they care about Iraqi civilians. Cindy Sheehan and those who believe like her are rogues.

“Can you support the troops and be against this war?” Not like that. If you don’t think our enemies are listening, think again. They are. The problem is that both Sheehanites and our enemies are on the same sheet of music, endorsing the same anti-American propaganda. Anti-war activism is not a sincere, genuine movement based on fact.

Mrs. Youngblood was right about this: the best way to support the troops is to honor their memory and carry out their wishes. The best way to honor the fallen is not to politicize a legitimate war effort legally carried out by an all volunteer military. It is to support the amazing work these soldiers and our President have done in Iraq to bring freedom to a people who would otherwise still be living under Saddam Hussein.

Thank you, Petty Officer 3rd Class Travis Levy Youngblood, for your service to America and Iraq. We support you.

Sunday, April 23, 2006

IT's THE BORDER, STUPID

That’s the title of Salena Zito’s latest column and the message that Congress needs to hear every day until they take shutting the border down seriously.

Americans sitting in the heartland may not be sweating over border issues but Webb County, Texas, Sheriff Rick Flores thinks they should be. “Any sheriff, whether they are in Dallas, Iowa or even Nebraska, would much prefer that we squash a threat at the border than force them to deal with it after it gets through us,” the sheriff told me in his office here. “Smugglers have a ready-made infrastructure in place…and they are just waiting to substitute terrorists and their cargoes for drugs if the price is right.”

Sheriff Flores’ point can’t be emphasized too often or too vociferously. All the laws on the books are useless if we don’t get this fundamental part right.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who has taken the lead in funding border security, is impressed with the Texas Border Sheriffs Coalition, “first, by how they identified the scope and magnitude of the growing threat…then by how they delivered a coordinated strategy to address those risks and threats.”
It’s intel-led policing at its best. Talk of a terrorist pipeline is not paranoia. If criminals can smuggle drugs, gang members and illegals, what would stop them from importing members of al-Qaida or Hezbollah?


Let’s hope that Congress, the Senate especially, has heard from their constituents in sufficient numbers that they take enforcement more seriously. Forget about the Kennedy-McCain bill’s ‘guest worker’ provisions. Build the wall and increase the patrols and technology first. Then we can talk about normalization. Normalization conversations comes after we’re secured the border.

NOTE TO REPUBLICANS: Get this right and the elections will look alot better. I’d guarantee it. Ignoring the will of the people is the fastest way to become a minority party.

“How can we reasonably say that al-Qaida or Hezbollah has not passed through here?” The problem essentially is that terrorists get into the United States under the guise of being people looking for work,” former CIA Director James Woolsey told me. “For example, in the tri-border area”, where Brazil, Venezuela and Uruguay meet, “Hezbollah has been a major presence for years and many of its people speak Spanish and might seem merely to be people looking for work.”

Are you scared alert yet? If you haven’t, then you’re ignoring reality. This is a ticking time bomb of the worst kind. If we don’t get the border sealed off, the result will be a terrorist attack that might make 9/11 look tame in comparison.

Saturday, April 22, 2006

THE WAR AGAINST U.S. BORDER SECURITY

It certainly comes as no surprise that Mexico’s President Vicente Fox is not in favor of any US-Mexico border protections. He has called such protections “shameless”. Fox and other Mexican presidents have been exporting their impoverished people and criminals to the United States for decades. Two of the “positive” things that these “exportations” have affected for Mexico are billions of dollars sent back to the illegal immigrants’ homeland of Mexico (the 2nd greatest annual income source for that country) and it has offered Mexican leaders a way out of being required to address the serious and growing problems in their own country.

No, Mexico’s export-our-problems policy and its war against US Border protection is not a shock. Neither are the efforts of many of those exports who are now actively and militantly claiming the United States really belongs to Mexico. Two of the militant-revolutionary Hispanic groups, MEChA (which states the US Southwest belongs to their members and should be called “Aztlan”) and the Mexica Movement (which claims that the entire North American continent belongs to it—and should be called the “Anahuac Nation”), are both demanding their “human rights” that include a “reconquista” (or reconquering) of the United States by and for Hispanics.

Note: I don’t remember any first “conquering”—do you?

Due to the relaxed or non-existent US-Mexico border policies, Mexico’s ambitions for the US are neither a surprise nor an unexpected consequence of the US government’s non-action. However, through this continuing debacle, an extraordinary revelation has emerged: US businesses who employ cheap illegal immigrant labor and US Senators who support them have placed said “cheap labor” above national security and the real rights of the US citizenry. And with the Marxist-inspired recent and continuing illegal immigrant marches (demanding “rights” that do not exist—under US law—for those entering our country illegally) “our” Senators (the ones we voted into office—remember?) are siding with the potential-illegals-voting-bloc instead of legal US citizen-voters. Now, THAT is the real bombshell.

In the midst of an environment that includes terrorists who have stated they will destroy us, by whatever means necessary, our elected officials are allowing them—along with any and all illegal entrants from South of the border—to come into our country at will. And they are also allowing illegals to stage massive demonstrations in and on our streets, joined by our leftist-indoctrinated children, to demand rights that don’t exist. Nobody tries to stop them. Our lawmakers and law-enforces ignore their illegal nature. Police have been told they cannot arrest the “protesting illegals”. Further, during the recent illegal immigrants’ demonstrations, Democrats have been caught registering the illegals to vote. US citizens are left with no representation—whatsoever.

Thus far, US lawmakers have refused to support and protect the US citizens and property owners who live along the US-Mexico border region. These citizens contacted the Minuteman Project for help. Chris Simcox, co-founder of the project, has offered his assistance in building a barrier to protect them from the hordes of illegals that cross their lands on a daily basis. Simcox advised, 20 April on Sean Hannity’s Radio program, that he has been “warned” by the US government against building any protective barrier. Some real, legitimate and crucial questions now come to mind. Why is the US government trying to stop the protection of its citizens? Why is the US government patently going against its responsibilities to protect the nation and its citizens (both native and naturalized) from foreign invasion? Are foreign invaders more important to “our” government than are its citizens?

As of this writing, the illegal aliens’ “National Strike Day” is still scheduled for 1 May—the traditional Communist “May Day”. And, as of this writing, a counter-action is still scheduled by US citizens for 5 May. Isn’t it time that we the people US citizens showed our clout, instead of ignoring the dissolution of our country? As just one US citizen, I say it is: http://citizensonstrike.us.

References:
Mexicans Have Plansfor the American Southwest
Mexica-Movement-Liberation

Sher Zieve is a Staff Writer for The New Media Alliance. Columns by this author can be read regularly on TheRealityCheck.org.

MEDIA IGNORE MEXICAN GOV'T BRUTALITY OF CENTRAL AMERICAN IMMIGRANTS

If the news media were truly unbiased in their reportage of Mexican illegal immigration and told the whole story, Americans would be shocked at the degree of Presidente Vicente Fox’s hypocrisy.

For instance, in a recent press release the Mexican government slammed Georgia’s new illegal immigration law saying “it a half-measure that discriminates against Mexicans.”

Ruben Aguilar, spokesman for President Vicente Fox, told reporters Tuesday morning that implementing parts of the Georgia law could result in “acts of discrimination” against Mexicans living in Georgia.

“It’s the position of [Fox] that the half-measures in this law are insufficient to resolve …
the complex phenomenon of immigration between Mexico and the United States,” Aguilar said.

However, Fox and his government appear to be unwilling to acknowledge their own hypocisy in dealing with illegal immigrants who enter Mexico from Central American countries. Considered felons by the Mexican government, these immigrants fear detention, rape and robbery. Police and soldiers hunt them down at railroads, bus stations and fleabag hotels. Sometimes they are deported; more often officers beat them and simply take their money and possessions.

Besides the news media’s overall silence on illegal immigrants being terrorized, robbed and killed by Mexican authorities, the Bush Administration and US lawmakers are equally silent. They allow Fox and his flunkies to denigrate and scold Americans who call for tougher border security and a sane immigration policy while the blood of Central Americans who’ve entered or attempted to enter Mexico across its southern border stains their own hands.

While illegal immigrants in the United States have held huge rallies in recent weeks, the thousands and thousands of undocumented Central Americans in Mexico endure their inhumane treatment in silent fear. In fact, Mexico’s constitution prohibits non-citizens from participating in protests or other public demonstrations against the Mexican government.

And while President Fox demands humane treatment for his countrymen who break US immigration laws to enter and remain in the US, Mexico provides few if any protections for its own illegal immigrant population.

The level of police brutality Central American illegal immigrants endure in Mexico was apparent Monday, when a police raid near a rail yard outside Mexico City ended in the death of an innocent man. Mexican cops shot and killed a local man, because the poor soul’s appearance made officers think he was a immigrant.

According to the Washington Times, undocumented Central Americans complain much more about how they are treated by Mexican officials than about authorities on the US side of the border, where aliens may resent being caught but often praise the professionalism of the agents scouring the desert for their trail.

If an immigrant is carrying any money, Mexican police officers or soldiers take it from the hapless illegal immigrant. And it’s not just local cops: Federal and state police officers are equally corrupt and brutal. There is no such thing as a sanctuary city in Mexico. And the illegal immigrants are lucky if the are confronted by police officers; the soldiers are far worse in their treatment of these foreigners.

While most countries including the United States have some police corruption, the level of corruption in Mexico is shocking. To many, the only difference between Mexican organized crime gangs and the police is that the cops wear uniforms and badges.

While the Bush Administration praises Mexican cooperation with fighting a war on drugs, most law enforcement commanders know better. The Mexican government has been bought and sold by the drug gangs. The only time there is a crackdown on a drug gang is when a rival drug gang “requests” police action in order to eliminate their competition.

Mexico’s President Vicente Fox has called US residents’, who live along the US-Mexico border, plans to build a fence along their properties “shameful”. What’s shameful, Mr. Presidente, is your hypocrisy, lies and corruption.

Read more by this author on our site here. (Scroll down)

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance. He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com. He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc.

Friday, April 21, 2006

DEAN: BORDER TOP PRIORITY IF YOU BELIEVE THIS THEN MAYBE THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS CAN BUILD THE WALL FOR YOU TOO

In a laughable statement, DNC Chairman Howard Dean said that border control is the Dems’ highest priority.

“The first thing we want is tough border control,” he said. “We have to do a much better job on our borders than George Bush has done. And then we can go to the policy disagreements about how to get it done.”

That’s a laughable statement in light of Ted Kennedy’s amnesty legislation and the House Democrats thinking that illegal aliens shouldn’t be charged with felonies. Does that sound like a ‘get tough on illegals’ Democratic Party?

Before Dean got the DNC Chair, I didn’t think it was possible that anyone could make more assinine, bone-headed statements than Terry ‘The Punk’ McAuliffe. I was wrong. It’s like thinking that you’ve seen the ultimate fool only to find that someone’s built an even better fool. You don’t think it’s possible until you see it for yourself.

Republicans reacted with surprise to Mr. Dean’s announcement, which puts the DNC chief’s views at odds with those of many Democrats in Congress. “If Dean means what he says about border enforcement, that would put the Democrats somewhere to the right of President Bush on immigration,” said Rep. Steve King, Iowa Republican.

A spokesman for the Republican National Committee dismissed Mr. Dean’s “newfound commitment to border security” as “not believable.”

If Dean is a big border security advocate, why isn’t he telling Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer to allow debate on the House ‘enforcement only’ bill since it’s closer to his stated beliefs? The answer is simple: Dean shoots from the lip without thinking about the damage he’s doing to his party.

Democrats have suggested that this is their best chance in years to recapture control of Congress. Finessing the immigration issue will require Democrats to walk a tightrope between appealing to Hispanic voters and assuaging the Democrats’ strongest constituency, labor unions, many of whose rank-and-file members view illegal aliens as undermining wages and job security for U.S.-born workers.
“We don’t like guest-worker programs,” said Mr. Dean, a candidate for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination. “I don’t like guest-worker programs. I think the president’s guest-worker program is essentially indentured servitude. It doesn’t help the immigrant, and it threatens wages.”

Ted Kennedy might put Dean in a hammer lock after hearing the part about Democrats not liking “guest-worker programs” since that’s a cornerstone of the McCain-Kennedy bill that was so widely hailed as the key to ending the immigration reform fight.

As for Democrats walking a tightrope between the unions while still appealing to Hispanic voters, good luck. That’s tricky at best for smart people. And the Deaniacs aren’t my idea of smart.

Republican National Committee spokesman Danny Diaz yesterday responded scornfully to Mr. Dean’s immigration rhetoric.
“Someone should remind Howard Dean that it was [Senate Minority Leader] Harry Reid [Nevada Democrat] who obstructed immigration reform, underscoring the fact that Democrats would rather manipulate the issue than reform it,” he said. “President Bush and Republicans in Congress have increased border-security funding by more than 65 percent, expanded the number of border agents by 30 percent and significantly upgraded technology on the border.”

I suspect that Mr. Rove will remind Democrats of that on a daily basis this fall. Democrats want to sound tough to Heartland voters but they won’t dare be tough because they’re worried about the Hispanic vote.

THE GAME OF CATCH AND RELEASE

See, I told you so. This morning I told you that the immigration raid dog-and-pony show would result in most of the illegal aliens arrested being released. The New York Times reports in tomorrow' edition (hat tip Thomas Galvin):

The arrests took place just days before the Senate reconvenes with immigration laws on its agenda. Earlier this month, the Senate faltered in its efforts to develop a proposal that would have given most illegal immigrants a chance to become citizens while intensifying border patrol and deportation efforts. And in recent weeks, hundreds of thousands of immigrants and their supporters have demonstrated in response to a bill passed in the House in December that would speed deportations, tighten border security and criminalize illegal immigrants.

In the action on Wednesday, federal officials detained 1,187 illegal immigrants working in 26 states for IFCO Systems North America, a subsidiary of a company based in the Netherlands that supplies plastic containers and wood pallets used to ship a variety of goods, from fruit to computers.

Of the 1,187 detained workers, 275 have already been deported to Mexico. The rest are being processed for deportation, although many may be released on bond.

Released...never to be seen again.

***

Reader H. reports from Houston:

Local Houston News is reporting that they released the majority of the "undocumented" workers. The ICE agent that was speaking went out of his way to say that the were no politics involved. Heaven forbid they actually show backbone. You were right on the catch and release. Amazingly, these people were told to return to court on a later date based on their, get this, signature.

More from KHOU:

There was a crackdown Wednesday and dozens of illegal immigrants were arrested. Many of those same immigrants were released just hours laterIt was the last thing they, and their families, expected. "They are not criminals. All they're here for is to work for their family," said Mariz Gomez. And that's what they were doing making wooden pallets at two different locations when federal agents swooped in and took nearly 70 suspected undocumented workers to this federal detention center in north Houston.

"Just for them to come in here and to just throw them back to where they go. That's not right for them," said Gomez.

Families 11 News spoke with feared the men mostly from Central American countries would be deported.

But that was hardly the case.

Just five hours later Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents began releasing the undocumented workers.

"I was surprised by the quick release," said a man who asked that his face not be shown. Several others made the same request.

It is not clear why these immigrants were released so quickly but workers say it may be because the 950-bed facility was severely overcrowded.

The workers say they were told the facilities were full. Sources inside the facility say the same thing and that agents have been ordered to release immigrants as soon as possible.

Some of the workers say there were other problems Wednesday.

They said computers went down and agents had to scribble information, in one case, failing to write in a court date altogether.

The men we spoke with promised to show up for their immigration hearings, still finding it hard to believe they were released so soon.

Yup. Happens every day. Told you so.

Thursday, April 20, 2006

A DAY WITHOUT AN AMERICAN

Immigration: No Longer Melting“This flag bows to no earthly king” – U.S. flag bearer at the 1908 Olympic Games

I must ask the pro-immigration activists the following questions:

    * As I see my American flag being flown upside down, burned, or conveniently thrown into trash cans following your demonstrations, am I not supposed to feel insulted?
    * As you hold up banners & wear t-shirts emblazoned with the face of communist revolutionary Che Guevara, am I supposed to believe you want democracy?
    * As I read signs that say, “Whitey go back to Europe” and “We will take back California for Mexico”, am I supposed to feel warm and fuzzy about your hostile intentions?
    * As I read the e-mails of immigration activists conspiring to shut down the Los Angeles International Airport and the Los Angeles Port Authority on May 1st, am I not supposed to see that as an attack upon my country?
    * Why should America grant you amnesty when there is such a pre-disposition on your part to be anti-American?
    * How would you feel if Americans were exhibiting the same outrageous behavior in your native country?

Passing the Kennedy-McCain bill not only grants amnesty to the 11 million illegal aliens currently in this country, it opens the floodgates for their families to immigrate as well. Based upon numbers reported by CNN and Fox News, it is estimated that such a policy of blanket amnesty will result in the immigration of somewhere in the neighborhood of 36 million people. Taking the current US population of 295 million into account, the 26 million family members who will join the 11 million immigrants already residing in this country will add an additional 9% to our population! To make matters worse, the overwhelming majority of these new citizens will not speak English and as a result will live below the poverty level.

According to US census records, approximately 11% of Americans currently live below the poverty level & 21.2% of all Hispanics live below the poverty level. If we apply the 21.2% number to the 36 million citizens that would be granted amnesty under Kennedy-McCain, you have an increase of 7.6 million citizens who will be added to our nations poverty index. The incontrovertible result will be disastrous for the economy, taxes will go through the ceiling to pay for welfare and subsidies, and crime will skyrocket due to the fact that the majority of crime is committed by individuals living below the poverty level.

Americans have an obligation to do what is right for its country, its citizens, and its economy. Americans have the right to dictate its future, not the 11 million illegal immigrants who have slipped across our border in order to demand entitlements. Americans CAN live a day without 11 million illegal aliens, and if challenged to do so, I assure we will not only do so but we will prosper from the experience.

The anti-immigration argument is NOT about racism; it’s about self-determination for America’s future. However, Latino activists are trying to twist the argument into the myth that it’s about self-determination for their future.

Let’s examine one more set of statistics & apply it to a model for self-determination. If there are 11 million illegal immigrants in this country at present, and 74% are of Mexican descent, then 8.14 million of the illegal immigrants are Mexican. If these same 8.14 million people stood in mass outside of the Mexican capitol and demanded democratic change in their government, they would soon be joined by millions more disenfranchised Mexican citizens, and positive changes would absolutely occur in their favor. However, this will not happen, and somehow the immigration advocates see the whole debacle as America’s responsibility to solve.

While immigration advocates expect America to solve its problems, I hear little or nothing from these activists on the subject of the impact of integrating 36 million immigrants with the 284 million legal citizens who already reside here. The issue od such an impact is ignored by immigration advocates because their goal is not about becoming a part of America, it’s about exploiting the benefits that they will receive from enjoying our form of government. The only “correction” in the pro-immigration message I have seen thus far has been a change in their PR strategy. Instead of burning our flags while their own national flag is held in high esteem, suddenly every protester is issued an American flag to wave in front of the liberal media & we are supposed to believe that all of the previous week’s anti-American sentiments have magically melted away.

Shame on Kennedy, McCain and every other politician who is willing to whore out this country by putting the interests of illegal aliens ahead of American citizens in their quest to gain the Hispanic vote. Clearly, our elected officials cannot be trusted on this subject. The overwhelming majority of Americans are adamantly against any variation on amnesty for illegal aliens & our cries of protest have fallen on deaf ears.

In my humble opinion, I feel that the best solution to the whole immigration issue is to have the politicians draft various immigration proposals and hold a special national ballot initiative that allows the American voters choose what they feel is in their best interest. I’m pretty certain most Americans would use their vote to keep their country a place that wraps itself in the flag rather than lighting it on fire.

THE LIMBAUGH LAWS ON IMMIGRATION

The “Limbaugh Laws” for immigration. Be sure to read the whole message, especially the last paragraph. From Rush Limbaugh’s radio show on April 6, 2006.

    I want to call this proposal the Limbaugh Laws.

    If you immigrate to the United States of America, you must speak the native language. You have to be a professional or an investor. We are not going to take unskilled workers. You will not be allowed.*

    There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools, no special ballots for elections, no government business will be conducted in your native language.

    Foreigners will not have the right to vote nor will they ever be allowed to hold political office.

    According to the Limbaugh Laws, if you’re in our country, you cannot be a burden to taxpayers.

    You are not entitled, ever, to welfare, to food stamps, or other government goodies.

    You can come if you invest here, but it must be an amount equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage. If you don’t have that amount of money you have to stay home. If you do come and you want to buy land you will not be allowed to buy waterfront property in the United States. That will be reserved for citizens naturally born in this country. As a foreigner, you must relinquish individual rights to property.

    You don’t have the right to protest when you come here. You’re allowed no demonstrations, you cannot wave a foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his policies or you get sent home.

    You’re a foreigner. You shut your mouth or you get out, and if you come here illegally, you go straight to jail and we’re going to hunt you down ’til we find you.

    These are the Limbaugh Laws.

    I can imagine many of you think that the Limbaugh Laws are pretty harsh. Well, let me tell you this, every one of the laws I just mentioned are actual laws of Mexico, today. I just read you Mexican immigration law. That’s how the Mexican government handles immigrants to their country.

A big hat tip to Steve Frank, who writes:

“The issue is illegal aliens, not immigration. But, what if we treated immigrants and illegal aliens like Mexico does? Why not? Unless you consider Mexico a racist and discriminatory nation.”

More Limbaugh:
If You Don’t Secure the Border, You Don’t Have a Country

RELATED:
Rethinking The Statue of Liberty
Mexicans Make A Run For The Border:
What Will Washington Do About It?

Immigration Protest in LA: Photo Essay
DNC Action Plan: Diversify The “Diversity”

POLITICALLY-TIMED IMMIGRATION RAIDS

I speak regularly with dedicated men and women who work for the Department of Homeland Security, and especially agents from across the country who work for the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

I can tell you based on my reporting over the last five years that the Bush administration's belated efforts to look tough on immigration enforcement at worksites amount to a cynical, politically timed effort to salvage the White House's guest worker program dreams and schemes. I'm referring to this story linked prominently today on Drudge and spread elsewhere:

Federal immigration authorities rounded up more than 1,000 illegal immigrants at dozens of sites and charged nine individuals of the firm that employed them, federal law enforcement officials announced. Seven current and former managers of IFCO Systems, which has offices in several states, were arrested and charged in connection with the employment of illegal immigrants, said U.S. Attorney Glenn Suddaby in Albany, New York.

Suddaby said two lower level employees were also charged in the case.

Wednesday's action against IFCO Systems -- an industry leader in the manufacture of wooden pallets, crates and containers -- came as Homeland Security and Justice Department officials prepared to announce steps to toughen internal enforcement of the nation's immigration laws.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and other Bush administration officials and a federal prosecutor will appear at the agency's Washington headquarters Thursday. They will announce the new strategy aimed at employers and disclose the results of the enforcement actions targeting IFCO Systems.

Customs officials said agents made more than a thousand arrests in nearly 40 locations including Houston, Texas; Cincinnati, Ohio; Phoenix, Arizona; and Albany, New York.

Well, this is all sounds good and tough...until you look at the Bush administration's record for the last several years. Don't be fooled.

For those covering DHS Secretary Chertoff's press conference today, ask him to explain this:

employerstats.jpg
Via Edwin S. Rubenstein. Sources: GAO, "Immigration Enforcement: Weaknesses Hinder Employment Verification and Worksite Enforcement Efforts," August 2005. Figures 3, 4, and 5. (1999-2004.); Dept. of Homeland Security, 2003 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, September 2004. Table 39. (1997-1998); Dept. of Homeland Security, 2001 Statistical Yearbook, Table 61. (1992-1996).

As Rubenstein points out, this means that from 1997 to 2003, worksite arrests under the Bush administration fell by a factor of some 97 percent since 1997--and plunged by another 2/3rds by 2004.

Where have they been all this time?

As for getting tough on employers, Rubenstein also notes these stunning statistics: "[O]f the 3,064 workforce investigations closed [in 2004], fines were imposed in just 3 (three!) of them – one out of one thousand. . By contrast, fines were imposed in about 11 percent of closed investigations in 1997."

Notices of intent to fine employers:

1997: 865
1999: 417
2000: 178
2001: 100
2003: 162
2004: 3

Based on my reporting and interviews with ICE agents, I can also tell you that this week's dog-and-pony show will result in very few of the arrested illegal aliens actually being deported. Despite what the administration claims, "catch and release" is still the order of the day.

Just ask local and federal law enforcement officers in the Galveston, Texas, area, where in January of this year, following a collaborative effort between local police and area ICE agents, some 62 illegal aliens were caught at a day labor site...and released after local open-borders activists from LULAC kicked up a fuss and Washington ordered its local ICE agents to cave in. It happens every day.

More Bush-era catch-and-release background:here and here and here. and here. Must-read from indefatigable deportation analyst Juan Mann here.

You want "comprehensive immigration reform?" Then stop talking about making existing problems worse by piling on a new guest worker/amnesty program.

Clean our own house first.

***

Blogger reax:

La Shawn Barber is "glad to read any story with the words 'illegal immigration' and 'arrest' in it." She links to a justifiably cynical Dan Riehl .

Previous this month:

The mess at DHS

Wednesday, April 19, 2006

AZ GOVERNOR VETOES ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION BILL: THE TWO FACES OF NAPOLITANO

Gov. Janet NapolitanoIllegal Immigration critics are complaining that Arizona’s governor is playing politics when she announced a state of emergency last year in response to illegal aliens and then she vetoes a new bill that would aid law enforcement in curtailing rampant illegal immigration.

Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed a bill that would have made the presence of illegal immigrants in Arizona a felony offense. She claims she was responding to the wishes of local police chiefs and sheriffs who want immigration arrests to remain the responsibility of the federal government.

The new bill would have expanded the state’s trespassing law to let local authorities arrest illegal immigrants anywhere in Arizona, one of the country’s busiest illegal entry point. The legislation passed through the state legislature but was summarily blocked by the Democrat governor.

In a letter to lawmakers, Napolitano said she opposes automatically turning all immigrants who sneaked into the state into criminals and that the bill provided no funding for the new duties. But critics say she’s being disingenuous with her statements. One police commander claims she fails to mention that entering the US illegally is already a crime, albeit a misdemeanor. In addition, reentry into the US once an alien is deported is already a felony in the US.

Besides illegal aliens, the bill would have put more teeth into Arizona law to deal with human smugglers and de facto slave-traders.

“It is unfortunate that the Legislature has once again ignored the officials who are most directly affected by illegal immigration and instead has passed yet another bill that will have no effect on the problem but that will impose an unfunded burden on law enforcement,” Napolitano wrote in a press release yesterday.

However, when she declared a state of emergency in Arizona last year, following the lead of another Democrat governor — Bill Richardson of New Mexico — Gov. Napolitano spent millions on her deployment of National Guard troops on the Mexican border. Political analysts believe she declared the emergency in order to criticize the Bush Administration as did Gov. Richardson.

In fact, Richardson declared a state of emergency and then deployed a whopping 54 New Mexico National Guard soldiers to aid the beleaguered local law enforcement officers. One police chiefs said he’s seen more guardsmen deployed for a snowstorm than for Richardson’ “state of emergency.”

Supporters tough border security said the new bill would have provided Arizona with an opportunity to start gaining control of its vast border problems by providing a second layer of enforcement to catch the tens of thousands of immigrants who slip past federal agents each year.

Republican Sen. Barbara Leff of Paradise Valley, who proposed the bill, said the governor has painted herself as tough on illegal immigration by declaring a state of emergency at Arizona’s border, but has taken little action to back up her rhetoric, according to the Washington Examiner.

“I don’t think the governor wants to do anything about this problem,” Leff said. She said the bill would have been a means to detain illegal immigrants until federal agents can pick them up.

The Democratic governor, accused by her Republican critics of being soft on immigration, has vetoed other immigration bills from the GOP-majority Legislature within the past year, including a proposal to give police the power to enforce federal immigration laws. She’s also provided services for illegal aliens and is a proponent of drivers’ licenses for illegals.

While immigrants provide the economy with cheap labor, Arizona spends tens of millions of dollars each year in health care and education costs for illegal workers and their families. An estimated 500,000 of the state’s population of about 6 million are illegal immigrants.

While defenders of illegal immigrants tell the American people that these unlawful workers pay taxes, some immigration experts say illegal are usually paid off the books by their employers so there are no federal or state tax deductions. And because of tax laws passed to help low-paid workers, they aren’t taxed even is they declare their wages to the Internal Revenue Service.

Up to 28 percent of the work force in the country is paid in cash, meaning as many as one in four don’t have federal and state payroll taxes withheld, which creates the kind of economic unpredictability that potential employers tend to avoid, according to economic experts.

Gov. Janet Napolitano’s veto of the new bill is an about face considering her past speeches in which she told voters she would have two state police squads focus on alien smuggling cases. Both plans offer millions of dollars to communities to thwart illegal entries, and money for combating gang-related border crime.

State police in Arizona already work near the border. An average of 27 state police officers are near the border at any given time, assisting federal authorities in looking for fugitives trying to leave the country and people attempting to bring ill-gotten cash and stolen vehicles into Mexico.

Advocates for state and local action said the idea will not fix Arizona’s vast immigration problems, but would discourage some people from sneaking across the border.

“If the federal government isn’t going to do the job and Arizona is footing billions of dollars a year for illegal aliens, it makes sense for the state to get involved,” said Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which favors limits on immigration.

Meanwhile, opponents of tough border security are already harping on racial profiling saying it would increase if officers unfamiliar with immigration law were to try and enforce it. They also say it could make investigating crime harder in immigrant communities, because fewer aliens would cooperate with police for fear of being sent home.

Whenever cornered during a debate over law enforcement, liberal-left activists will always bring up the “racial profiling” issue whether it’s germane to the discussion or not. It puts the proponents of law enforcement on the defensive since the debate then becomes one in which the debater must prove he or she is against racial profiling.

Meanwhile, the invasion of the United States continues. And Republicans aren’t going to stop it; and the Democrats (and some Republicans) will actually accelerate it.

Read more by this author on our site here. (Scroll down)

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance. He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com. He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc.

RELATED:
Tucson Student Forced to Listen to
Pro-Illegal Immigration Propaganda

TIDE TURNING

Judging by the latest Rasmussen polling, it appears as though the Republican Senate hopes are improving. Let’s get to the improving numbers:

Republican Senator Conrad Burns still struggles below the 50% level of support in the latest Rasmussen Reports election poll. But, he has managed to arrest the steady slide provoked by his connections to indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Burns now leads State Senate President Jon Tester 47% to 44%. A month ago, Burns trailed Tester 46% to 43%. Two weeks ago, Burns had pulled even. Burns now trails State Auditor John Morrison 47% to 45%. That, too, is an improvement for the incumbent. In each of our previous two polls, Burns had trailed Morrison by five points.

I suspect that most of Burn’s improvement is due to the passing Abramoff storm, though part of it might be due to Republicans rallying around him after hoping that Marc Racicot would run instead. Now that that isn’t an option, they’re rallying behind their incumbent.

The latest Rasmussen Reports election poll of Washington state’s Senate race shows Republican Mike McGavick continuing to chip away at the incumbent’s lead. Democratic U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell now leads McGavick 48% to 40%. In March, Cantwell led 49% to 36%. The new poll is the third in a row in which the incumbent has lost a percentage point of support. And it’s the second poll in a row showing her at less than 50% support.

Meanwhile, McGavick, the former Safeco CEO, has made his strongest showing yet, and is firming up support among Republicans (now 86%) and conservatives (79%). This is the first poll showing McGavick within single digits of Cantwell. In each of the previous five Rasmussen Reports surveys, he had trailed by 13-15 percentage points.

That’s hardly a welcome trend to the Democratic faithful. Cantwell is a mediocre senator and an ever worse campaigner. If McGavick is a decent campaigner, I’d be surprised if he didn’t win. Also hurting Cantwell is the ‘Christine Factor’. Democrats are quick to cite the President’s bad poll numbers but Gov. Christine Gregoire’s popularity is as low as President Bush’s. (I suspect that this same thing is worrying Debbie Stabenow in Michigan, where Gov. Granholm’s popularity was tanking even before the auto industry ills were announced.)

The son of former Governor Tom Kean (R) now has a seven percentage point advantage in New Jersey’s U.S. Senate campaign. The latest Rasmussen Reports election poll in the Garden State shows Republican Tom Kean, Jr. leading Senator Robert Menendez (D) 43% to 36%. Seven percent (7%) of voters say that they will vote for some other candidate and 14% remain undecided in this Democratic leaning state. A month ago, Kean held a two-point advantage, 41% to 39%.
Kean has solidified support among Republicans since our last poll while Menendez has lost ground among Democrats.

If this trend continues, I think this is a potentially big pickup for the GOP.

Stay tuned to this website for the polling you won’t find at the Washington Post or NY Times.

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

ROCK THROWING RECONQUISTADORES

From the Santa Barbara News Press, some not-so-peaceful, open borders students wreak havoc on an elderly couple's home:

A peaceful school-sanctioned protest march in support of illegal immigrants turned ugly Monday when students from Santa Barbara High pelted the home of an elderly couple with rocks and eggs.

The incident took place at the home of Joel and Eloise Gomez on East Canon Perdido Street after the couple exchanged words with some of the 300 or so students making their way back to campus, about one block away.

Off-campus student protests against a proposed law that would make felons out of illegal immigrants have taken place across Santa Barbara in recent weeks. But this one, conducted with police escort and with school officials close by, is the first that has involved any report of violence.

Mrs. Gomez, 70, said she and her 74-year-old husband heard the marchers approach, chanting "Sí, se puede" (Yes, we can) and other slogans.

"We were out there and there they come with their shouting and shaking their fists," she said. "We were just saying stay in school, learn English, you know? They didn't like this."

Mr. Gomez said he saw two girls pick up rocks and throw them at the house. One ripped through the screen and hit the front door, he said...

...Fifteen minutes later, said Mrs. Gomez, another group of girls returned.

"They all lined up there and at the command of one of the girls they threw eggs all of a sudden," she said. "They did their damage and ran like rats."

In all, nine eggs were lobbed at the home.

"I was going to go out there," said Mrs. Gomez. "I would have been pelted by eggs. Something told me just stay in."

Once the students had left, she added, two other girls knocked on the door to offer assistance, said Mrs. Gomez. Soon after, the couple called police.

And, again, lest you think the reconquista agenda is relegated to Mexican elites and fringe sympathizers in academia, pay attention to the last sentence:

"This is not just a movement that's happening in Goleta or Santa Barbara," he said. "It's a worldwide uprising of people that are standing up for themselves."

Mayor Marty Blum told the students that she thinks the city will soon vote to oppose any federal legislation that would make being in this country illegally a felony. "City Hall has already heard your voices," she said.

Freshman Jonathan Aguiar said he didn't learn anything from the speakers. "I knew it already."

The 15-year-old added, "It's not fair for the immigrants to be told they're criminals."

Phillip Kuzmanovski, 15, agreed.

"This state used to be Mexico," he said. "We can't make it illegal for them to be here."

Like they say:

this-is-our-continent.jpg

***

Previous:

The signs you didn't see

Viva la Raza in D.C.
Welcome to Reconquista
Another American flag down
The American flag comes second
Free rides for student protesters
How 'bout media guest workers?
Welcome to reconquista
Teddy Kennedy is very happy
Bush's shadow boxing
Minutemen attacked
Bush's open-borders platitudes

THE PLOT TO SHUT DOWN LOS ANGELES

May 1 is the date of the illegal alien boycott. Nationwide planning is underway. A reader sends a mass e-mail from plotters in Los Angeles, who aim to shut down Los Angeles International Airport and the Port of Los Angeles by coordinating a work stoppage of truckers and cab drivers.

Here's the e-mail:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:34:59 -0700
Subject: [nohr4437] Two major May Day boycott/strike actions in LA

The taxi drivers are planning to shut down LAX on May, and the troqueros are planning to close the harbor and rally in Banning Park. There is also a May Day march sponsored by MIWON (Multi-Ethnic Immigrant Workers Organizing Network) on the evening of May 1 starting from Olympic and Broadway. MIWON includes a number of Asian, Mexican and Central American organizations and has marched on May 1 for the past 6 years.--Michael

From:
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 11:22 PM

Cc: layouthcollective@lists.riseup.net; dope_x_resistancela@yahoogroups.com; la-anarchists@lists.mutualaid.org; antiwarsmc@yahoogroups.com; stopcoalition@lists.riseup.net; copwatch@agitatorindex.org; anarchist-poc@yahoogroups.com; a-infos-en@ainfos.ca; socalicollectivenetwork@lists.riseup.net; mujeres_libres@lists.riseup.net; scaf@lists.riseup.net; lalaborcollective@lists.mutualaid.org

Subject: SUPPORT THE TRUCKERS' STRIKE AT THE PORT OF LA, CAB DRIVERS'
STRIKE AT LAX

I'm a member of Southern California Students / Movement for a Democratic
Society (SDS/MDS ) and putting out a call for students, non-students, community members and members of other organizations to support the
truckers at the Port Los Angeles and the cab drivers at LAX who will strike and shut down ( totally shut down ) the Port of Los Angeles and LAX before, on and after May Day.

In 2004, the Truckers shut down the Port of L.A. and can and will do it again !

Both truckers and taxi cab drivers are asking for support for possible rallies, pickets, vigils and leafleting at rail yards, freight depots, the Port , LAX taxi cab holding lot , Metropolitan Detention Center and local campuses around the May Day Strike.

This is a opportunity to support DIRECT ACTION as opposed to symbolic protest and demonstrations/marches.

It's time we move up to a new level!!

Forewarned is forearmed.