By Jim Kouri
Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton finally agreed to appear on the highly-rated Fox News show The O’Reilly Factor. Her interview, which was taped earlier this
week while she was campaigning in South Bend, Indiana, was broadcast on The Factor over two consecutive nights.
On Thursday night, part two of “Hillary in the No Spin Zone” aired, and she was asked questions on the topics of foreign policy, the War on Terror, and illegal immigration. When Bill O’Reilly turned to the immigration debate, he asked, “Will you shut down sanctuary cities?” Hillary responded, “No, I will not.”
According to a new report from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the illegal immigrant population within the United States currently exceeds 13 million, an estimate that has almost doubled since 2000. Given this increasing trend, Hillary’s response should be frightening to American families, who are forced to live with frequent criminal activity committed by illegals in sanctuary cities. Even during the Senate debate of the Grand Amnesty bill last year, Senator Clinton voted against the Coleman Amendment which would have banned sanctuary cities (Roll Call 177).
“It is an outrage that Hillary Clinton is running to become President of the United States, yet she is openly admitting that she will not enforce America’s laws,” said Eagle Forum Executive Director Jessica Echard.
“Sanctuary city policies put all Americans in danger, and as an elected official, Hillary Clinton is well aware of that fact. Do we really want to elect someone who will enable criminal aliens to roam our streets?” she added
Last August, several African-American college-bound teenagers were brutally murdered while listening to music in a playground in Newark, New Jersey, one of many US sanctuary cities. Although Newark is no stranger to violence, the perpetrator was an illegal alien from Peru, who had been previously charged with raping a 5-year-old girl, but was released despite his obvious illegal presence in this country.
“If Hillary Clinton will not enforce the law against sanctuary cities, why should we believe she will enforce any other immigration laws or build the fence?” stated Echard. “She will simply continue the Bush open border policies which she pretends to condemn and that have allowed our illegal immigration population to nearly double since 2000.”
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt as Immigration, Presidential Race, U.S. Borders Issues at 11:39 PM EDT
No Comments »
By Jim Kouri
Duncan Hunter, R-Calif, author of the fencing provisions of the Secure Fence Act of 2006, has introduced new legislation in the House of Representatives to require the construction of double-layered fencing along the U.S. border with Mexico within six months, according to a memo sent to the National Association of Chiefs of Police.
As previously reported, the language of an amendment submitted by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, into the Fiscal Year 2008 Department of Homeland Security funding bill, H.R. 2638, specifically exempts DHS from having to build any fence at all.
The Hutchison amendment reads, in part, " … nothing in this paragraph shall require the Secretary of Homeland Security to install fencing, physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, and sensors in a particular location along an international border of the United States, if the Secretary determines that the use or placement of such resources is not the most appropriate means to achieve and maintain operational control over the international border at such location."
"While these lawmakers living in their Ivory Towers in Washington continue to play political games with one another and collude with the Mexican government in repeated incidents of violation of US sovereignty by armed Mexicans, the American people are being victimized by illegal aliens some of whom are using fully-automatic assault rifles and other state-of-the-art weaponry, "claims Lieutenant Steven Rogers, a police commander in New Jersey.
Lt. Rogers heads the board of directors of a police-counterterrorism organization called AmeriCop.com. (http://www.AmeriCop.com)
According to a recent report by the Government Accountability Office — an entity that reports to the legislative branch of government rather than the executive and judicial branhes.– the increase in the number of incursions is staggering"
17 documented, illegal border crossings into America by armed Mexican soldiers in 2006
29 documented, illegal border incursions of all kinds by Mexican forces in 2006
253 documented, illegal border crossings by Mexican soldiers and policemen to assist drug and weapons traffickers in the past decade
1000 attacks against US Border Patrol agents in 2007
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt as Immigration, U.S. Borders Issues at 1:08 AM EST
No Comments »
By Christopher Adamo
As the 2008 Campaign Season shifts from jockeying and publicity stunts to actual voting, it is all important to consider what America is likely to actually reap by electing any particular candidate. Honesty being a commodity of ever dwindling supply, it is dangerous to rely solely on the words of many candidates. All is not as it seems once the cameras and spotlights are turned off, or once the primary season is concluded.A couple of glaring recent examples, when considered in comparison to each other, tell the grim story. Washington is not about the business of the American people or, as the Declaration so eloquently puts it, securing the God-given rights of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Rather, it seeks to put a public face of mock concern and "compassion" on its increasingly self-serving endeavors.
Cynical and depressing as such an assessment may sound, the facts nonetheless speak for themselves. Beltway reactions to the ongoing hemorrhage at America’s southern border, when contrasted against the ostensibly monumental subprime mortgage "crisis," provide the necessary evidence for such a claim.
Despite a vast array of excuses and obfuscations intended to convince the American public that the ongoing flood of illegal immigrants is either no real problem, or is simply unfixable, common citizens see their country, its traditions, and its heritage disappearing from before their very eyes. By margins of more than seventy percent, Americans demand action to secure their nation’s border in an effort to curb this invasion.
But what have they gotten in response from Washington? In 2006, after a hard-fought battle in the Congress, a measure was grudgingly passed that assured the construction of 700 miles of border fence. The event was promoted with great fanfare as proof of decisive leadership within a Congress intent on dealing effectively with border security. From the start, the situation lacked credibility, since its principals had been so reluctant to truly confront the border issue. Not surprisingly, things only deteriorated from there.
To begin with, a little elementary math is all it takes to recognize that even if the entire fence were built as promised, more than sixty-five percent of the border would remain open. Does anyone really believe this token effort constitutes border "security"? Moreover, those doubters whose reflexive reaction was to cynically insist that the fence would never be built are being validated daily.
Somehow, according to the way business is conducted inside D.C., the "actual" fence requirement magically diminished from 700 miles down to 370, which would leave 81% of the border unchecked. Yet even that length of fence is an empty promise, with deadlines for construction completely ignored. To date, the government claims that 70 miles of fence has been installed, hardly a "Manhattan Project" to restore our national integrity and sovereignty. But it still gets worse. The actual length may be less than ten miles.
The American people should never forget that, in the beginning, Congress only conceded to the notion of a border fence as a means of throwing a few crumbs to those citizens who otherwise rejected any immigration "reform" measures (read: amnesty) without first securing the border. Apparently, the illegal immigration problem is simply too overwhelming for the U.S. Government to honestly and effectively address it.
So, one might ask, just what are all of those bureaucrats and officials back in Washington paid to accomplish for the American people? The abominable answer can be found in their response to the "subprime mortgage" debacle, a real (we are told) crisis that requires their immediate attention.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt as Economics, Presidential Race, U.S. Borders Issues at 12:44 AM EST
No Comments »
By Alan Caruba
It’s an issue that will dominate the elections in 2008. It is illegal immigration, but there was scarce attention paid during the debates leading up to the Iowa caucuses. The candidate that promises to put a stop to it will be the candidate that wins. The party that temporizes will be the party that fails.
The conflict in Iraq has siphoned the energy to pay attention to Mexico, but as that battlefront recedes, the eyes of voters will be on our southern border. A war is being fought there. Some may argue that no such war has been authorized or declared, but a full-scale invasion has been taking place for years, resulting in an estimated one tenth of all Mexicans presently living in the United States.
They are not pilgrims. They are parasites.
The drain on our economy is something that, while well documented, has not received sufficient attention from the mainstream media. After all, we are “neighbors” with Mexico, so how could they hardly be considered an invading horde costing Americans billions of dollars every year?
Good neighbors don’t do that kind of thing, but Mexico is not a good neighbor.
Mexico is working very hard to provide the seaports for goods shipped more cheaply there than to American ports. They would then be transported via a super highway from the Texas-Mexico border to a Mexico owned and operated customs port in Kansas. Presently, some 40% of all imported goods arrive in the U.S. via the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Putting American dockworkers in the unemployment lines and harming our trucking industry is of little concern to our “neighbor” to the south.
Perhaps, however, the real war receiving scant attention is the one being conducted by Mexican drug lords and their cartels. At present most of the war is being fought in Mexico and, as Terence Jeffrey, the editor-in-chief of CNSnews, recently pointed out, one episode was fought in Cananea. Where’s that? “It is almost in Arizona.” Cananea is about 20 miles south of the U.S. border in Mexico. “The nearest town of any size is Nogales, Arizona and the nearest big city is Tucson. Cananea is a war zone.
How long before that shooting war takes place in the streets of American cities? Not long at all. In June 2007, World Net Daily reported that, “The ultra-violent, U.S.-trained elite, Mexican paramilitary commandos known as the ‘Zetas’, responsible for hundreds of murders along the border this year, have expanded their enforcement efforts on behalf of a drug cartel by setting up trafficking routes in six U.S. states.” Texas law enforcement officials report that the Zetas “have been active in the Dallas area since 2003.”
The war is all about the provision of huge amounts of heroin, cocaine, marijuana, and methamphetamine into the U.S. market.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt as Presidential Race, U.S. Borders Issues at 1:00 AM EST
No Comments »
By Jim Kouri
In the United States, Tuberculosis infection and disease occur most often among people born in areas of the world where TB is common, such as Asia, Africa, and Latin America. In most cases, these foreign-born persons become exposed to and infected in their country of birth and bring the contagious disease into the US.
Of all TB cases reported to the Centers for Disease Control in 1997 — the last year studied — 39% were in foreign-born persons. This is an increase from 1986, when 22% of cases were in foreign-born persons. Tuberculosis case rates were seven times greater in the foreign-born compared with the US-born population.
Also, foreign-born individuals now represent 46 percent of all tuberculosis cases reported in the United States compared to 27 percent of cases eight years ago. The CDC is currently processing new data on the illegal alien-TB connection.
TB cases come from Mexico, Philippines, and Vietnam, by and large. All people who apply for immigration and refugee status are screened for TB disease before coming to the United States. Immigrants with TB disease who are infectious at the time of screening are required to receive treatment before they are allowed entry into the United States.
However, the majority of those entering the US are illegal aliens who undergo no physical exams nor do they undergo treatment for their diseases.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt as Health, Immigration, U.S. Borders Issues at 12:12 AM EST
No Comments »
Senate Slaps American People in the Face—Again by Sher Zieve
The Democrat-run Senate has provided We-the-People with yet another example of its aversion to the will of US citizens. Despite the fact that the American people, in overwhelming numbers, told both Houses of Congress that they did not and do not want any Amnesty Bill for any illegal aliens—the Senate is determined to pass one. Now Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and his pro-illegal-invasion bunch are working diligently to push through the DREAM (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors) Act. This is the same bill that provides the receipt of benefits for illegal aliens’ "children" that are either not provided or are far greater than the benefits provided for US citizens’ children.
Note: It now seems almost impossible to count on our elected officials to actually uphold any laws with which they disagree or those that will not promote their political and personal agenda and ambitions. It is also becoming seemingly hopeless to even remotely believe that either Democrats or RINOs are listening any longer to the majority of the US electorate. This is the same US Congress that still patently refuses to build any fence to protect our US southern borders.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt as Government Corruption, U.S. Borders Issues at 9:06 PM EDT
No Comments »
by Sher Zieve
Just when we thought Congress could not become more demented—it has. As the Democrat-run Senate and House of Representatives are experiencing their lowest approval rating in recent recorded history (Zogby polling ranks said approval at only 14%), with the stroke of 2 pens Democrat leaders have removed provisions from legislation that would have protected US citizens from being sued for reporting potential terrorist activities. This is the latest addition to the ever growing Democrat Death Wish List that its leaders have been preparing since taking Congressional leadership in 2006. In this latest fiasco, leader of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) stripped out the provision that would have allowed limited immunity for reports of witnessed suspicious behavior. Reps. Peter King’s (R-NY) and Steve Pearce (R-NM) had drafted the ‘John Doe Protection Amendment’ after the infamous Flying Imams simulated airline hijacking behaviors.
Now that the Democrats have deleted and destroyed any protections for US citizens who would report potential terrorist activities, the terrorists are free to pursue their evil intent and mission with full support from the Democrat Congress. Suffice it to say, we-the-people had no participation in this suicide pact decision. Congressman Steve Pearce commented that the Democrats had to make a choice as to "whether they are going to side with the American people or with the terrorists" and Rep.
King noted: "This is a slap in the face of good citizens who do their patriotic duty and come forward!–more–>, and it caves in to radical Islamists." And, in true Democrat anti-American/anti-we-the-people fashion Congressional Democrats chose the terrorists’ side. As was to be expected, both the ACLU and CAIR (the pro-Hamas Council on American-Islamic Relations) are thrilled by this patently insane decision.
Note: This is what the 2006 Congressional elections have wrought. Instead of only appeasing our enemies, the MoveOn.org Democrat leaders are now actively working for the Islamist terrorist enemies. House and Senate Democrats have now overtly—and with no apologies to the American people—taken another huge step toward effectively handing the United States of America over to the terrorists. Their suicide treaty is almost complete. Is there anyone out there who still remembers when these sorts of behaviors were considered treason?
With the Democrats’ new absence of fear of anyone stopping their treachery, they have now been unleashed to do whatever it takes to end this country. This is not an exaggeration. In fact, considering the dire consequences of the Democrats’ pro-terrorist vote, it is an understatement. Much the same as our US Border Patrol Agents now fear reprisal for doing their jobs—Agents Ramos and Compean are bearing the brunt of pro-illegals obsessive US Attorney prosecutions—the American people must now face lawsuits or even jail if they report suspicious potential terrorist activity! What in the name of any common sense—at all—is going on with our ostensible ‘leaders’? Have they finally, completely and irrevocably lost their minds? Do they believe they have a God-given right to support the enemies of humanity—whoever and whatever they are? Note: I do not believe God condones anti-human behavior. Or is it that our leaders have sunk into some dark abyss and are forcing the American people to join them and participate in their own self-destruction?
As was the Illegal Immigrant Amnesty bill, the John Doe Protection Amendment is a non-partisan issue. All of us—Republican, Democrat and Independent—are impacted by not being allowed to report probable terrorist activities. If we don’t, we and our loved ones could very likely die. If we do, we are now being told by Congressional leaders that if we do so we could face financial ruin, jail time or both. If this doesn’t make sense to you, contact your Senators and House Representatives and advise them that your life is worth at least as much as are theirs. You might also tell them that if they do not resuscitate the John Doe Amendment and continue to vote against your right to self-protection, they will be voted out of office. By the way, has anyone out there considered using the public’s right to recall rogue elected officials?
This latest insane anti-US citizen protection decision badly and possibly irreversibly impacts the American people—directly. Is this any way to run a county? No. But, it is the most flagrant and definitive pronouncement, yet, to end it.
References:
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/index.php?id=942668
http://www.jihadwatch.org/
http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treason
http://www.freeborderagents.com/
Sher Zieve is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. (www.thenma.org). The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets.
Posted by Walt as Government Corruption, Terrorism, U.S. Borders Issues, U.S. Political Issues at 10:48 PM EDT
No Comments »
by Robert E. Meyer
I recently heard about a statement from a discussion that allegedly occurred between an Islamic student attending an American university, and a traditional America student. The following statement may well be a fictitious conversation based in urban legend, but it is an accurate anecdote of the real threat America faces from the ideology of radical Islamic extremism. The Islamic student apparently stated resolutely, "Because of your Democracy we will invade you. Because of my religion we will dominate you." It rings as almost a parallel to the prophetic proclamation of Nikita Kruschev, who uttered from an Iowa cornfield during his excursion of the U.S., "we will bury you."
Many liberals, as well as certain of my conservative brethren, have sounded the alarm about the perils to freedom that come from surveillance programs initiated or expanded under the Patriot Act by the current administration. Yet, one has to wonder how we could have or will continue to root out existing internal security threats without them? Such regulation occupies a thankless status. I often have said to colleagues in regards to small, consistent pay increases in my profession: "You hardly notice the difference when you get your raises, but you would sure notice if you weren't getting them." I would suggest something similar could be said regarding onerous security measures. You don't notice that they do any good, but I suspect you would notice something bad were they not in place. That sort of condition lends itself to pejorative consideration.
Imagine a different scenario. You pick up a major newspaper on September 12th, 2001. On page A-17 is a short news story about how several small groups of young Saudi males carrying box cutters, were stopped by security at JFK and Logan International Airports.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt as Terrorism, U.S. Borders Issues at 10:47 PM EDT
No Comments »
By Alan Caruba
In a month, August 20 and 21, the leaders of the United States, Canada, and Mexico will sit down together in Montebello, Quebec to discuss making the borders between these three nations disappear. They will discuss progress on a vast highway project passing through America to link Mexico with Canada.
So far, no one has asked the citizens of these three nations whether they want to do this. It is not up for a vote in Congress and, indeed, Congress has no supervision over the gnomes in the U.S. Department of Commerce who are busily “harmonizing” the laws under the auspices of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP).
This, we’re told, is not a treaty so Congress has no constitutional oversight obligation. I guess it’s more like a nice big handshake between the presidents and prime minister of these three nations who, let’s face it, just know better than the rest of us. I mean, do Canadians really think they’re in charge of Canada? Americans should have a say about programs affecting America? Or has anyone asked Mexicans if they want to be part of some “harmonized” configuration not unlike the European Union?
Last time I checked, the European Union lacked a constitution because some of its member states, notably France, had rejected the one that was offered.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt as North American Union, U.S. Borders Issues, U.S. Constitutional Issues at 5:25 AM EDT
No Comments »
By Alan Caruba
Here’s one of those statistics that sums up everything you need to know about America’s immigration crisis. The May 14 edition of US News & World Report had a small item noting that, “Mexico has lost more people to migration to the United States than to death since 2000.”
“An average of 577,000 people moved to the United States annually during the 2000-2005 period, while 495,000 people died in Mexico.” The U.S. agency providing this data estimates that about 11 million Mexicans are living, legally or not, in the United States.
This is not about disliking Mexicans. Many have come here legally, become citizens, and have risen in our society to contribute in business, academics, and government. This is about saving America from a wholesale and entirely illegal invasion, and its consequences.
Mexico has an entirely different view of people who would move there. The Center for Security Policy points out that Mexico prohibits foreigners from owning land within 100 kilometers of the Mexico border and within 50 kilometers of the Mexican coastland, prime real estate. Mexican law permits the government to revoke the naturalized citizenship of anyone who chooses to live in his country of origin more than five years.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt as Immigration, U.S. Borders Issues, U.S. Political Issues at 7:48 PM EDT
No Comments »
