Immigration News

[Soldier4Christ]

Oklahoma

Denied unemployment benefits to illegal immigrants.

Pennsylvania

Prohibited use of illegal immigrants on state projects.

Rhode Island

Effective Jan. 1, children who are not U.S. citizens will not be added to the state's health care program for the poor, even if they are in the USA legally. Children who enroll by Dec. 31 will keep their benefits.

South Dakota

• Required passport or another government-issued identification card when voting.

• Pledged to send troops to the Mexico border.

Tennessee

• Barred state contracts for a year from businesses that knowingly employ illegal immigrants.

• Pledged to send troops to the Mexico border.

Texas

• Prohibited businesses from deducting the costs of salaries and benefits for undocumented workers from their taxable revenue.

• Spent $20 million to expand Operation Rio Grande, a border security initiative.

• Will spend $5 million to put hundreds of surveillance cameras along the border at hot spots for criminal activity and routes frequently used to enter the USA.

Virginia

Pledged to send troops to the Mexico border.

Wisconsin

Pledged to send troops to the Mexico border.

Wyoming

Barred non-citizens from certain state-funded scholarships.

[Soldier4Christ]

Two Border Patrol agents plead guilty to helping smugglers

 Two former US Border Patrol agents have pleaded guilty here to helping illegal immigrants cross into the United States in return for bribes from smugglers, US authorities confirmed.

Mario Alvarez, 45, and Samuel McLaren, 44, were veteran agents who operated out of El Centro in the US state of California, across the border from the Mexican city of Mexicali. They acknowledged receiving a total of 186,000 dollars in bribes from smuggling groups ferrying illegal immigrants into US territory, authorities and local media reported.

 "These are Border Patrol agents who smuggled illegal aliens. It doesn't get much worse than that," said US Attorney Carol Lam during the court proceeding last Friday.

In return for the guilty pleas, prosecutors dropped other charges including conspiracy to commit bribery and conspiracy to bring in aliens for financial gain, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.

The two, who reportedly abruptly resigned their positions in June, are to be sentenced on September 29 and face up to 18 years in prison.

[Soldier4Christ]

Trans-Texas Corridor paved
with campaign contributions?
San Antonio construction company, capital consortium from Spain stand to gain


The contractors building the Trans-Texas Corridor – a massive statewide transportation network critics claim is an important part of the controversial proposed integration of the U.S. and Mexico – have made large contributions to the campaigns of Texas politicians, including Republican Gov. Rick Perry.

As WND has reported, opposition is mounting to the little-publicized efforts by the Bush administration, aided by corporate and political elites of the U.S., Mexico and Canada, including the Council on Foreign Relations, to push North America into a European Union-style merger. Critics of the Trans-Texas Corridor see the massive project – ironically funded by Spain – as part of this movement to integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

Terri Hall, director of a taxpayers' group called the San Antonio Toll Party, told WND, "there is not a single politician in our entire Bear County delegation that has not taken money form H. B. Zachry, Jr." Zachry Construction Corporation, headquartered in San Antonio, has entered into a limited partnership with Cintra, a capital consortium based in Spain to undertake the TTC construction.

"Zachry owns San Antonio," Hall told WND, "and he has spread his money inside and outside Bexar County [where San Antonio is the county seat] to make sure he drives the highway lobby." The San Antonio Toll Party is grass roots movement and political action committee opposed to the Trans-Texas Corridor.

Although WND could not confirm Hall's charge that every local politician has accepted money from Zachry, she and others are naming quite a few names.

"The politicians in Austin are listening to the highway lobby rather that the citizens who put them in office," Hall told WND, adding, "you will not understand the politics of the TTC until you track down Zachry who has a long and distinguished money trail to offices of our state politicians."

The non-partisan Institute on Money in State Politics provides data that support Hall's contention. Analyzing 39 records of campaign contributions made by H.B. Zachry, Jr., the Institute concludes Zachry contributed $112,112 in campaign contributions – 92.2 percent to Republican candidates. The largest of these contributions went to Gov. Perry, two contributions totaling $35,000.

Perry is currently running for re-election against Democratic challenger Chris Bell, a former congressman from Houston, and two independent candidates.

When WND contacted Perry's campaign organization for comment on campaign contributions by Zachry and other contractors who stand to benefit from TTC construction, Perry's campaign spokesman Robert Black said: "Gov. Perry got lots of campaign contributions from contractors who got nothing in the TTC bidding. If a contributor was giving money to Gov. Perry for any other reason than that Gov. Perry's policies are best for Texas," Black emphasized, "then they should keep their money."

Another group opposing TTC construction, Campaigns for People, a 501(c)(3) organization in Austin, argues that between Jan. 1, 2001, and Dec. 31, 2004, the Texas Department of Transportation, or TxDOT, awarded over $14.3 billion in contracts to build and maintain roads in the state. More than 40 percent of this total – over $6 billion – went to the "Top 10" TxDOT contractors, who gave $1.1 million in political contributions.

In 2003, House Bill 3588 in the Texas Legislature amended the Texas Transportation code to give the state the broad, new powers needed to build the Trans-Texas Corridor. According to Campaigns for People, top contractors who sought to benefit from the TTC construction contributed heavily to the campaign to pass House Bill 3588:

    The TxDOT Top 10 and TTC Bidders gave generously to legislators who ultimately had a say over the content and passage of HB3588. These interests made over $2.7 million in campaign contributions from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2004. These special interests steered more than half of this money to elected officials who either held statewide leadership positions in 2003 or who sat on key House or Senate Transportation committees.

Simply stated, according to Campaigns for People, contractors who sought to benefit when TTC was built contributed to the political campaigns to achieve their objective.

    It's to be built with extremely limited public oversight. Except for the corridor east and roughly parallel to Interstate 35 (TTC-35), it's a road system most Texans can hardly imagine will ever be built. But road builders and toll bond financers from around the world are lining up to participate. These interests contributed $166,000 to amend Texas' Constitution and more than $2.7 million in Texas' last two elections to turn the nation's largest toll road project into a reality.

Black resists any insinuation of collusion. "The TxDOT contracts were awarded on an open bid process," Perry’s campaign spokesman told WND. "These TTC opposition groups are typically 'conspiracy theorists' who think we're giving Texas land away to Spain. The State of Texas will still own TTC highways, even if Cintra has the right to lease them and collect tolls."

WND could find no reference on the websites of either the San Antonio Toll Party or Campaigns for People that TTC highways were going to be ceded to Spain.

Today, there are some 50,000 miles of interstate highway in the U.S., yet TxDOT has proposed building 4,000 miles of Trans-Texas Corridor superhighways in Texas over the next 50 years. The TTC project at full development will involve the removal of as much as 584,000 acres of productive Texas farm and ranchland from the tax rolls permanently, while displacing upwards of 1 million people from their current residences.

"We may not need to build all 4,000 miles," Black asserted. "But the population of Texas is going to double in the next 40 years and our Texas interstates are already strained. The days of building a 50-year old Eisenhower interstate system are over. TTC is a new model for America."

A close reading of the 4,000-page Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS, posted on the Trans-Texas Corridor website reveals on page 3 the NAFTA purpose of the TTC-35 project, which generally runs parallel to Interstate-35. Under the subtitle "enhance economic vitality," the EIS notes that "approximately 75 percent of America's commerce with Mexico travels through Texas. Increased access and mobility within the study area would improve the movement of people, goods, and services and potentially lead to new employment and business opportunities." This, contend critics, makes clear that the TTC-35 project is not "just a highway needed for anticipated Texas growth," but rather a NAFTA-inspired highway, intended to grow Texas by vastly increasing NAFTA commerce with Mexico.

The 11 separate corridors planned will permanently cut across some 1,200 Texas roads, with crossover unlikely for much of the nearly quarter-mile-wide corridor planned to be built. Dozens of small towns in Texas will be virtually obliterated in the path of the advancing Trans-Texas Corridor behemoth. While supporters, like Perry's administration, call it a necessity, critics says the TTC appears to be the test case for future development of a NAFTA superhighway that would extend north through Oklahoma City, Kansas City and Duluth into Canada, largely parallel to I-35.

"I don’t know if the TTC is going to extend to Oklahoma," Black commented. "I can only speak for Texas."

Nor does Black have any insight into the plans of investment bankers and international capital funds that are unlikely to allow a four-football-fields-wide highway just end at the Texas border, without first approaching Oklahoma, and the other states on the anticipated I-35 path north, to consider accepting their capital to extend the road.

Posted on TxDOT’s Trans-Texas Corridor website are contracts signed by TxDOT that indicate Cintra has paid over $1 billion for the right to negotiate a final construction contract with the state. Cintra Concessions de Infraestructuras de Transporte, S.A. of Spain plans to recover through tolls an investment that is estimated to exceed $180 billion for the full 50-year build-out of the TTC 4,000-mile network.

Cintra won the contract with TxDOT as a result of a competitive bid, said Black. "Cintra promised the State of Texas the best bang for the buck. Besides, they threw in to the deal over $1 billion that the State of Texas could use however we want to." WND can find no description of the competitive bid process on the Trans-Texas Corridor website, nor any identification of the losing bidders.

Last month, the Cintra-Zachry limited partnership stepped in to provide the $1.3 billion TxDOT needed to complete a toll segment of TX-130. In return, Cintra-Zachry obtained the concession to operate the toll segment of TX-130 for over 50 years.

Even though large segments of the Cintra-Zachry contracts have been archived on TxDOT websites, TxDOT has withheld key sections have from the public. TxDOT argues that revealing all details of the TTC transaction would compromise the release of information proprietary to Cintra-Zachry.

[Soldier4Christ]

Cornyn wants U.S. taxpayers
to fund Mexican development
'North American Investment Fund' billed as answer to illegal alien influx

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has quietly introduced a bill to create a "North American Investment Fund" that would tap U.S. and Canadian taxpayers for the development of public works projects in Mexico.

Despite assurances this week from White House press secretary Tony Snow that President Bush opposes the idea of a European Union superstate for North America, the effort, by one of the president's loyal supporters in the Senate, is sure to spark new questions about negotiations between the leaders of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico on issues ranging from security to the economy.

"Currently, a significant development gap exists between Mexico and the United States and Canada," Cornyn said. "I believe it is in our best interests to find creative ways to bridge this development gap."

Cornyn introduced the bill just before the July 4 holiday – admitting in his introductory comments that Congress is not likely to adopt his plan quickly. In fact, Cornyn previously attempted to create the new international fund in legislation he introduced in 1994. It soon thereafter died in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where the latest version is headed.

Senate Bill 3622, co-sponsored by Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., specifically authorizes the president to "negotiate the creation of a North American Investment Fund between the governments of Canada, of Mexico, and of the U.S. to increase the economic competitiveness of North America in a global economy."

The fund, if it is ever created, won't just cost U.S. and Candian taxpayers more, it will also cost Mexican taxpayers a lot more.

Cornyn's bill requires the government of Mexico to raise tax revenue to 18 percent of the gross national product. The current tax rate is approximately 9 percent.

"The purpose of this fund is to reinforce efforts already underway in Mexico to ensure their (sic) own economic development," Cornyn said. "The funding would make grants available for projects to construct roads in Mexico, to facilitate trade, to develop and expand their education programs, to build infrastructure for the deployment of communications services and to improve job training and workforce development for high-growth industries."

As WND reported recently, opposition is mounting to similar programs, including President Bush's North American Security and Prosperity Partnership.

Plans by government agencies and private foundations alike promoting deeper cooperation between the three countries – including even a plan for a common currency called the "amero" – are getting more scrutiny in the media, by activists and by public officials.

Lou Dobbs of CNN – a frequent critic of Bush's immigration policies – has been most outspoken.

"A regional prosperity and security program?" he asked rhetorically in a recent cablecast. "This is absolute ignorance. And the fact that we are – we reported this, we should point out, when it was signed. But, as we watch this thing progress, these working groups are continuing. They're intensifying. What in the world are these people thinking about? You know, I was asked the other day about whether or not I really thought the American people had the stomach to stand up and stop this nonsense, this direction from a group of elites, an absolute contravention of our law, of our Constitution, every national value. And I hope, I pray that I'm right when I said yes. But this is – I mean, this is beyond belief."

Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., the chairman of the House Immigration Reform Caucus as well as author of the new book, "In Mortal Danger," may be the only elected official to challenge openly the plans for the new superstate.

Responding to a WorldNetDaily report, Tancredo is demanding the Bush administration fully disclose the activities of the government office implementing the trilateral agreement that has no authorization from Congress.

Tancredo wants to know the membership of the Security and Prosperity Partnership groups along with their various trilateral memoranda of understanding and other agreements reached with counterparts in Mexico and Canada.

Jim Gilchrist, co-founder of the Minutemen, welcomed Tancredo's efforts.

"It's time for the Bush administration to come clean," Gilchrist said. "If President Bush's agenda is to establish a new North American union government to supersede the sovereignty of the United States, then the president has an obligation to tell this to the American people directly. The American public has a right to know."

Geri Word, who heads the SPP office, told WND the work had not been disclosed because, "We did not want to get the contact people of the working groups distracted by calls from the public."

WND can find no specific congressional legislation authorizing the SPP working groups nor any congressional committees taking charge of oversight.

Many SPP working groups appear to be working toward achieving specific objectives as defined by a May 2005 Council on Foreign Relations task force report, which presented a blueprint for expanding the SPP agreement into a North American union that would merge the U.S., Canada and Mexico into a new governmental form.

But presidential spokesman Snow ruled out any consideration of a North American superstate a la the European Union.

WND White House correspondent Les Kinsolving asked if the president would categorically deny any interest in building a European Union-style superstate in North America.

"Of course, no," said Snow. "We're not interested. There is not going to be an EU in the U.S."

[Soldier4Christ]

CFR's solution to illegal immigration
Grandiose Council on Foreign Relations' plan barely mentions alien invasion of U.S.

Editor's note: With scarcely a mention of the horrendous illegal immigration problem plaguing America, the Council on Foreign Relations – which some call America's "shadow government" – has laid out a comprehensive plan to essentially merge the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one entity with an outer security perimeter. Following are selected excerpts of the 59-page document, titled "Building a North American Community."

Building a North American Community: Report of an Independent Task Force, Sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales – May 2005

The security and well-being of its citizens are at the pinnacle of any government’s responsibilities. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the futures of Canada, Mexico, and the United States are shared as never before. As a result, all three countries face a historic challenge: Do they continue on the path of cooperation in promoting more secure and more prosperous North American societies, or do they pursue divergent and ultimately less secure and less prosperous courses?

To ask the question is to answer it; and yet, if important decisions are not pursued and implemented, the three countries may well find themselves on divergent paths. Such a development would be a tragic mistake, one that can be readily avoided if they stay the course and pursue a series of deliberate and cooperative steps that will enhance both the security and prosperity of their citizens. …

In March 2005, the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States adopted a Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), establishing ministerial-level working groups to address key security and economic issues facing North America and setting a short deadline for reporting progress back to their governments. President Bush described the significance of the SPP as putting forward a common commitment "to markets and democracy, freedom and trade, and mutual prosperity and security."

The policy framework articulated by the three leaders is a significant commitment that will benefit from broad discussion and advice. The Task Force is pleased to provide specific advice on how the partnership can be pursued and realized. To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary." Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly, and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.

The CFR report identifies several "common challenges" facing the three North American countries, including "Shared challenge of uneven economic development," which it explains this way:

A fast lane to development is crucial for Mexico to contribute to the security of the entire region. Mexico’s development has failed to prevent deep disparities between different regions of the country, and particularly between remote regions and those better connected to international markets. Northern states have grown ten times faster than those in the center and south of the country. Lack of economic opportunity encourages unauthorized migration and has been found to be associated with corruption, drug trafficking, violence, and human suffering.

Improvements in human capital and physical infrastructure in Mexico, particularly in the center and south of the country, would knit these regions more firmly into the North American economy and are in the economic and security interest of all three countries.

Translated, that means the U.S. needs to send money to Mexico.

One of the CFR report's key focal points is security. Under the heading, "Making North America Safer," it says:

The threat of international terrorism originates for the most part outside North America. Our external borders are a critical line of defense against this threat. Any weakness in controlling access to North America from abroad reduces the security of the continent as a whole and exacerbates the pressure to intensify controls on intra-continental movement and traffic, which increases the transaction costs associated with trade and travel within North America. …

Among the report's security recommendations:

    * Establish a common security perimeter by 2010. The governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States should articulate as their long-term goal a common security perimeter for North America. In particular, the three governments should strive toward a situation in which a terrorist trying to penetrate our borders will have an equally hard time doing so, no matter which country he elects to enter first. We believe that these measures should be extended to include a commitment to common approaches toward international negotiations on the global movement of people, cargo, and vessels. Like free trade a decade ago, a common security perimeter for North America is an ambitious but achievable goal that will require specific policy, statutory, and procedural changes in all three nations.

    * Develop a North American Border Pass. The three countries should develop a secure North American Border Pass with biometric identifiers. This document would allow its bearers expedited passage through customs, immigration, and airport security throughout the region. The program would be modeled on the U.S.-Canadian "NEXUS" and the U.S.-Mexican "SENTRI" programs, which provide "smart cards" to allow swifter passage to those who pose no risk. Only those who voluntarily seek, receive, and pay the costs for a security clearance would obtain a Border Pass. The pass would be accepted at all border points within North America as a complement to, but not a replacement for, national identity documents or passports.

While polls show a majority of Americans favor a physical wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, the CFR report is advocating exactly the opposite:

    * Lay the groundwork for the freer flow of people within North America. The three governments should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the governments’ physical control of cross-border traffic, travel, and trade within North America. A long-term goal for a North American border action plan should be joint screening of travelers from third countries at their first point of entry into North America and the elimination of most controls over the temporary movement of these travelers within North America.

Law Enforcement and Military Cooperation

Security cooperation among the three countries should also extend to cooperation on counterterrorism and law enforcement, which would include the establishment of a trinational threat intelligence center, the development of trinational ballistics and explosives registration, and joint training for law enforcement officials.

As founding members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Canada and the United States are close military allies. When Canadian troops hunt terrorists and support democracy in Afghanistan, or when Canadian ships lead patrols in the Persian Gulf, they engage in the "forward defense" of North America by attacking the bases of support for international terrorism around the world. Although Mexico is not a NATO member and does not share the same history of military cooperation, it has recently begun to consider closer collaboration on disaster relief and information-sharing about external threats. Defense cooperation, therefore, must proceed at two speeds toward a common goal. We propose that Mexico begin with confidence-building dialogue and information exchanges, moving gradually to further North American cooperation on issues such as joint threat assessment, peacekeeping operations, and eventually, a broader defense structure for the continent. …

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

Under the heading "Creating a North American Economic Space," the report advocates, among other innovations, the creation of a new North American tribunal to settle disputes.

To create a North American economic space that provides new opportunities for individuals in all three countries, the Task Force makes the following recommendations aimed at establishing a seamless North American market, adopting a North American approach to regulation, increasing labor mobility, and enhancing support for North American education programs.

    * Establish a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution. The current NAFTA dispute-resolution process is founded on ad hoc panels that are not capable of building institutional memory or establishing precedent, may be subject to conflicts of interest, and are appointed by authorities who may have an incentive to delay a given proceeding. As demonstrated by the efficiency of the World Trade Organization (WTO) appeal process, a permanent tribunal would likely encourage faster, more consistent, and more predictable resolution of disputes. In addition, there is a need to review the workings of NAFTA’s dispute-settlement mechanism to make it more efficient, transparent, and effective. …

While America is being transformed demographically, and in particular the U.S. Southwest targeted for takeover by militant illegal immigrant groups, the CFR recommends "increased labor mobility" between Mexico and the U.S.

Increase Labor Mobility within North America

People are North America’s greatest asset. Goods and services cross borders easily; ensuring the legal transit of North American workers has been more difficult. Experience with the NAFTA visa system suggests that its procedures need to be simplified, and such visas should be made available to a wider range of occupations and to additional categories of individuals such as students, professors, bona fide frequent visitors, and retirees.

To make the most of the impressive pool of skill and talent within North America, the three countries should look beyond the NAFTA visa system. The large volume of undocumented migrants from Mexico within the United States is an urgent matter for those two countries to address. A long-term goal should be to create a "North American Preference" – new rules that would make it much easier for employees to move and for employers to recruit across national boundaries within the continent. This would enhance North American competitiveness, increase productivity, contribute to Mexico’s development, and address one of the main outstanding issues on the Mexican-U.S. bilateral agenda.

Canada and the United States should consider eliminating restrictions on labor mobility altogether and work toward solutions that, in the long run, could enable the extension of full labor mobility to Mexico as well. …

There is even a plan to open up Social Security to Mexicans:

    * Implement the Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico. This agreement would recognize payroll contributions to each other’s systems, thus preventing double taxation. …

Conclusion

The global challenges faced by North America cannot be met solely through unilateral or bilateral efforts or existing patterns of cooperation. They require deepened cooperation based on the principle, affirmed in the March 2005 joint statement by Canada, Mexico, and the United States, that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary."

Establishment by 2010 of a security and economic community for North America is an ambitious but achievable goal that is consistent with this principle and, more important, buttresses the goals and values of the citizens of North America, who share a desire for safe and secure societies, economic opportunity and prosperity, and strong democratic institutions.

[Soldier4Christ]

Agents, Deputies come under fire from Mexico

Border Patrol agents and Hidalgo County Sheriff deputies are pinned down by automatic weapons fire from across the Rio Grande.

Deputies believe Mexican gunmen stormed a ranch house on the Mexican side of the river. Two men fled the invasion by swimming across the river to the U.S. side. When deputies and agents responded to area, they came under fire.

"Our deputies and Border Patrol agents came under fire," said Hidalgo County Sheriff Lupe Trevino. "Under automatic weapons fire from the Mexican side. Our deputies and Border Patrol agents took cover. The firing lasted three or four minutes."

Law enforcement then came under fire from the American side of the river from what they believe were gunman chasing the escapees.

Later on, firing would again come the Mexican side. Deputies believe gunmen from across the river were covering for members of their group which crossed into the United States.

According to agents and deputies, no one was hurt on the American side, and they did not return fire across the river.

The men who escaped say the gunman killed one ranch hand and kidnapped their father, but that has not been authenticated by American law enforcement.

[Soldier4Christ]

DEA Report: Minutemen reduced drug trafficking

The Minuteman Project formed for one purpose: to protect the border, and it has, according to an internal Drug Enforcement Agency report.

The report credits the border watch group with helping to cut down on drug trafficking.

This intelligence report obtained by News 4 says that the Minuteman Project had an impact on drug trafficking in Cochise County in 2005.

DEA officials say bulk loads of marijuana crossing the border dropped siginificantly.

Anthony Coulson, with DEA says, "When you have eyes on the border -- I think any law enforcment will admit this -- you have a great deterrent effect of keeping things away."

The report says that, during April and May 2005, several high-profile operations targeting illegal immigrant smugglng operations may have impacted drug smuggling operations and the usual flow of illegal drugs corss the Arizona and Mexico border.

A graph shows a 20% decrease between 2004 and 2005.

But the Minuteman Project isn't the only reason there was a reduction.

Mexican President Vicente Fox also sent in a significant amount of resources to the area.

Special Agent Coulson says, "Drug organizations didn't want to risk coming up through that area. Things just sat."

Loads of marijuana were warehoused in communities along the Mexican side of the border.

"They just kind of hunkered down, waiting til the Minuteman Project was over and there was a stand-down of the Mexican law enforcement and military presence on the nothern part of their border."

There was also an increased presence of Border Patrol agents during that time, so all that adds up to keeping drugs from coming across.

Minuteman spokesman Al Garza says that's been a mission from the beginning.

"The initial plan was to go after the drug cartels," Garza said. "It's not just about illegal immigration, we are obviously looking into the sealing of the border and we did address the issue of drugs."

He's appreciative that a government organziation would acknowledge the effectiveness of the Minuteman Project.

"We've stood tall, we've meant what we said. We weren't there because we were racists. Just look at the color of my skin. This is not what we're about. Our theme is border security. Been that way all along," Garza explained.

Next year's annual DEA report may give us an idea of what impact the National Guard may have on drug and human smuggling.

[Soldier4Christ]

Cross-border firefight shocks U.S. lawmen
Hundreds of rounds shot from Mexico at local, federal officers in South Texas

Hundreds of rounds of automatic weapons fire rained down on South Texas sheriff's deputies and Border Patrol agents in Hidalgo County last night from the Mexican side of the Rio Grande.

The deputies were answering a call from two U.S. citizens who swam across the river to escape a gunfight at a Mexican ranch, reports the Monitor newspaper of the Rio Grande Valley. The two American brothers are suspects in other criminal investigations, said Hidalgo County Sheriff Lupe Treviño, according to the report.

The brothers reportedly called 911 at 7:45 p.m. saying gunmen burst into their family ranch in Mexico, killed a ranch hand and kidnapped their father. The brothers were able to make it across the river to the U.S. where they continued to attract gunfire – even after law enforcement authorities arrived.

When several deputies and four Border Patrol agents took the two brothers back to the riverbank to see if they might find any evidence or the shooters, they were met with a hail of gunfire – alternating from the south and east, suggesting some of the shots were also fired from U.S. territory.

The fire continued for almost 10 minutes, according to authorities.

Treviño says his deputies have never been shot at from the Mexican side of the river.

"This is one of the reasons that I do not allow my deputies to patrol the riverbanks or levies close to the river," Treviño told the Monitor, "because we do know there are drug gangs and human trafficking gangs that will not hesitate to shoot in our direction to get us out of the area."

[Soldier4Christ]

Central Fla. city's immigrant crackdown could stop Wal-Mart


City leaders are considering revising a proposed ban on assistance to illegal immigrants after learning its broad scope might block the construction of a Wal-Mart.

The ordinance would prohibit companies from getting business permits if they hired or helped illegal immigrants within the past five years. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. paid a record $11 million fine last year in a settlement with the Homeland Security Department over hiring illegal immigrants.

City Attorney Michael Disler said the ordinance is "poorly drafted," unconstitutional and could prevent the world's largest retailer from coming to Avon Park, a city of 9,000 in central Florida. He said he did not participate in drafting it.

Mayor Tom Macklin, who has championed the measure, said the city's "Illegal Immigration Relief Act" was modeled on a similar law from Hazleton, Pa. Hazelton's law, which gained national attention, was set for a final vote Thursday.

Macklin said he would consider removing the language that would make Avon Park's ordinance retroactive.

"I don't believe the intent of this council is to penalize people for actions prior to the adoption of this ordinance," Macklin said. "I think existing businesses and new businesses need to know from this point forward that if they hire an illegal alien, there will be consequences."

Wal-Mart spokesman Eric Brewer said the ordinance would not interfere with the company's plans to build in Avon Park.

"It's broad language," Brewer said. "I supposed it depends on how you define it."

The city, which gave the ordinance preliminary approval in June, is set to vote a final time on July 24.

[Soldier4Christ]

Hispanic group boycotts
Disney 'white supremacists'
Mexica Movement: 'We are radical.
More radical than you can imagine'





A radical Hispanic group is promoting a boycott of the Walt Disney Company because, contends the Mexica Movement, the entertainment giant "has made a habit of hiring talk show hosts who spread the Minutemen white supremacist racist agenda."

The boycott announcement specifically cites radio legend and Presidential Medal of Freedom winner Paul Harvey, as well as popular talker Doug McIntyre. Both Harvey and McIntyre are nationally syndicated by ABC, which is owned by Disney.

McIntyre was instrumental in exposing a taxpayer-funded Los Angeles school backed by radical groups that lay claim to the Southwestern U.S. As WND reported, the principal of the Academia Semillas del Pueblo Charter School, Marcos Aguilar, has said he believes in racial segregation and sees his school as part of a larger cultural "struggle."

Among the school's supporters are the National Council of La Raza Charter School Development Initiative; Raza Development Fund, Inc.; and the Pasadena City College chapter of MeCHA, or Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan.

"La Raza," or "the Race," is a designation by many Mexicans who see themselves as part of a transnational ethnic group they hope will one day reclaim Aztlan, the mythical birthplace of the Aztecs. In Chicano folklore, Aztlan includes California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and parts of Colorado and Texas.

On its website, the Mexica Movement calls for "an immediate international boycott against The Walt Disney Company and all of its holdings. We are asking for this boycott because Disney has made a habit of hiring talk show hosts who spread the Minutemen white supremacist racist agenda against the Mexican and Central American communities in the United States."

The organization will continue calling for the Disney boycott, it says, "until we are assured of the immediate firing of all of Disney’s ABC racist radio terrorists who are spreading racist hate against the Mexican and Central American community by inciting threats of violence against us."

The Mexica Movement calls Harvey and McIntyre "the top racist Nazis in this campaign against our people" who, they say, "are promoting racist hate against our people and they are promoting an atmosphere of fear in our communities."

Saying McIntyre has "incited bomb threats" against the MeCHA-supported school in Los Angeles, and that Harvey – "the other monster" – is "proud of the racist genocide that Europeans committed against the Indigenous people of this continent," Mexica calls the almost universally loved elder statesman of talk radio "the KKK of the radio airwaves."

"Yes, we are radical," says the Mexica Movement on its website. "More radical than you can imagine."

As WND has reported, a website documenting the statements and tactics of Hispanic activists says it is these radical groups themselves that are the ones guilty of racism and hate speech.

WeHateGringos.com begins with a warning that the site "contain graphic examples of hate and racism that has and is occurring in large cities and small towns across America."

States the site: "The website WeHateGringos.com is dedicated to exposing the other side of illegal immigration ... the side our president, many in Congress, the media and especially the racist hate groups do not want us to see."

Indeed, earlier last week top presidential adviser Karl Rove traveled to Los Angeles to speak to La Raza in person. The Bush administration has contributed millions of dollars directly to "La Raza."

WND Editor Joseph Farah wrote of Rove's outreach: "The group sponsors and directs racist schools. It promotes the 'reconquista' movement that claims the American Southwest belongs to Mexico. In fact, its very name – which translates to 'the race' – exposes its agenda. … These people are Mexican Nazis."

And columnist Michelle Malkin reported that La Raza "snapped up $15.2 million in federal grants last year alone and more than $30 million since 1996. Undisclosed amounts went to get-out-the-vote efforts supporting La Raza political positions. The U.S. Department of Education funneled nearly $8 million in taxpayer grants to the group for a nationwide charter-schools initiative."


____________________


This is getting more disgusting by the day. This entire thing is not about racism, it is about what is and is not legal. All these people on both sides need to stop all this hatred and get back on the original topic.

[Soldier4Christ]

Signed – and sued? Barletta signs law targeting illegals; lawsuits promised

Six pens were purchased for the ceremonial signing Friday afternoon.
And Hazleton Mayor Louis Barletta used each one in signing – and putting into law – the city’s new ordinance targeting illegal immigrants. Barletta, with City Council President Joseph Yannuzzi at his side, said the Illegal Immigration Relief Act became law the instant the two leaders signed the document, which City Council approved the night before, on a 4-1 vote.
But he said the city would not begin for 60 days active enforcement of the ordinance that requires prospective – and current – tenants to get an occupancy permit at City Hall.
Landlords that enforcement officials discover are renting to people without such permits face a $1,000-a-day fine.
And employers who hire illegal immigrants could lose their business permits, city contracts or grants for five years on first offense and 10 years on second.
Barletta, in signing the ordinance that’s attracted media attention from across the country, made only one or two strokes with each pen before picking up another.
Yannuzzi signed the ordinance first, then the mayor. A notary public then placed the city’s seal on the document.
The signing ceremony took place moments after the mayor completed what his media consultant said was a “pre-interview” with a producer for CNN anchor Lou Dobbs.
Barletta was scheduled to appear on Dobbs’ show later in the day and make appearances on other shows, including Bill O’Reilly’s program on Fox News.
The mayor, in speaking with reporters after signing the ordinance, defended its legality.
“Our legal opinion is that we have not violated any federal laws,” Barletta said.
But Foster Maer, an attorney with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, disagrees with the mayor.
“We believe the ordinance does violate numerous laws and tries to take over the immigration laws [of the nation],” Maer said.
He said the ordinance “imposes an English-only law that has been found [to be] illegal numerous times. Obviously we disagree with [the mayor’s] assessment.”
Maer said the Legal Defense and Education Fund intends to challenge the ordinance in court.
“We are reviewing that and yes we are planning to go to court,” he said.
Barletta told reporters that he doesn’t believe city taxpayers would be asked to pay for any legal defense of the ordinance. He said he is sure that the city would get such help on a pro bono basis.
The mayor said again that the law does not speak directly to immigration. Instead, it targets the people who “aid and abet” illegal immigrants by housing and hiring them.
He said the often times sharp debate that happened the night before in the council’s chambers was a healthy exchange of opinions.
But he reiterated that by enacting the ordinance he is only doing the job he was elected to perform.
“I took an oath to protect” the city’s citizens, he said.
Hazleton welcomes everyone, but people living in the city legally should not have to foot the bill to fund services used by individuals here illegally, the mayor said.
And Barletta said again that it was the May murder – by an illegal immigrant – of Derek Kichline that forced his hand. He said other recent crimes involving illegal immigrants also led him to draft the law, basing it on a similar act proposed in San Bernardino, Calif.
That city’s effort is hung up in a ballot referendum legal challenge. Other cities, meanwhile, are following Hazleton’s lead.
Barletta and Yannuzzi said it will take two months to train City Hall employees, through the code enforcement department, on enforcing the law. And the mayor said he will consult with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials. There are “multiple ways” in which the ordinance will be enforced, he said.
The mayor said he has not yet talked with CAN DO Inc. or individual employers.
Barletta on Friday again defended the ordinance – just as Councilwoman Evelyn Graham had the night before – as a matter of law and order, not of racism as others have charged.
The ordinance’s English-language requirement is an attempt at bringing people together, not dividing them, the mayor said.
“We’re divided more when we can’t communicate” with each other due to language barriers, he said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Cost of Daily Hiring Jumps
Day laborers in Agoura Hills demand at least $15 an hour. 'We deserve it,' one immigrant says.

The immigrants soliciting work along a dusty roadway in Agoura Hills are taking a chance — one that could significantly boost their pay or cost them jobs.

They are refusing to work for less than $15 an hour, more than double the California minimum wage of $6.75.

 "We deserve it," said Daniel Lopez, 31, who works primarily in construction and landscaping and regularly sends money home to his wife and three children in Mexico. "They are tough jobs."

Several other day laborer sites have set minimum wages of $8 or $10, but the rate in Agoura Hills is believed to be the highest in the nation.

Occasionally, potential employers balk at the idea of paying workers — frequently illegal immigrants who don't speak English — so much money. But many employers, laborers say, agree to the fee.

"Even though we are a little expensive, they still come looking for us," said Santos Ixcoy, 25, a Guatemala native and corner regular since sneaking across the border about three years ago. "They need us, just like we need them."

Pablo Alvarado, head of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, said the minimum wage shows that day laborers are demanding more respect, and more compensation, for their work. At the same time, they also are taking more responsibility for their sites, keeping them clean and orderly. And they are working with businesses and residents to foster better relations.

Alvarado thinks other day laborer centers will follow the lead set by Agoura Hills and raise minimum wages, but maybe not as high as $15. The Agoura Hills site is unique, he said, because the workers are highly skilled and it is about five miles from any other day laborer corner.

The workers at the site have a long history of struggling for their rights. In 1991, the city passed an ordinance banning day laborers from soliciting work along roadways. The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the ordinance in state court but lost.

The Sheriff's Department began arresting the workers en masse, prompting a sharp drop in the number of laborers at the site. About six years ago, the city stopped enforcing the ordinance after a similar one in Los Angeles County was ruled unconstitutional by a federal court, Alvarado said. Workers began coming back to the site, at the corner of Agoura and Kanan roads.

The workers "know what it is to fight," he said. "They have taken ownership. They are going to do whatever it takes to make sure they get good pay."

About three months ago, the Agoura Hills laborers held a town hall meeting at the site and voted 85 to 15 to increase their minimum wage from $12.50 to $15. After the vote, leaders distributed fliers to the workers, urging them to stick to the new wage and warning those who accepted less that they would be monitored. They also handed out fliers to employers, explaining that the increasing cost of living made it "very difficult for a working family to live with dignity."

Since then, some workers say, the number of employers has dropped as word of the new rate spread. For several hours Friday, about 20 workers waited for jobs but no one stopped to hire them.

Nevertheless, Alfredo Marroquin, 45, said he gets work at least a few days a week. When he does, the new wages make it easier for him to support himself here and send money back to Guatemala. He takes a bus nearly every day from Los Angeles to the Agoura Hills site.

"Everything here is expensive," he said. "There are rich people and poor people. For the rich people, $15 isn't a lot. For the poor people, it is."

But not everybody supports the higher rate. Workers said friction has developed between those who will work only for $15 and those who will accept less.

Guatemalan immigrant Martin Gomez, 37, said he thought the rate should depend on the type of job; breaking concrete with a jackhammer should pay more than picking weeds. Gomez added that not all workers are skilled and therefore shouldn't demand such high payment.

Wilmer Lopez, 19, sneaked across the border in April and still owes $3,000 in coyote fees. Lopez said he is willing to take jobs for as little as $10 an hour so he can finish repaying his debt by the end of the year.

"I want to work," said Lopez, also from Guatemala. "If I let the [employers] go, I can't work."

[Soldier4Christ]

On Immigration, Liberalize the Crackdown


The first House "field hearings" on immigration legislation have at times seemed more like talk show free-for-alls than serious contributions to the legislative process. Certainly this was true at the session I attended in Laredo, Tex., where Republicans fanned voters' fears by portraying the border as a "war zone" overrun by terrorists while equally partisan Democrats gleefully bashed the GOP members for indulging in such political theater -- and the audience responded in kind with alternating bursts of cheers and boos. The Senate hearings, in contrast, have been relatively dignified.

Even so, no one would seriously claim that the central issues in the immigration debate -- the critical issues that divide the House and Senate -- are being addressed, at least not yet. Most obviously lost in the shuffle has been any real answer to the central question posed at the first two House hearings: How do we effectively secure our borders against terrorists and other criminals?

The House approach has been to stick to diagnosis -- mostly exaggerated diagnosis of cross-border drug wars, gang violence and al-Qaeda infiltration -- apparently in the hope that a remedy would suggest itself to voters: sealing the border. The Senate, meanwhile, tried to change the subject, focusing -- not wrongly but not quite aptly either -- on the contributions of immigrants to the economy and the U.S. military. If the public didn't know better, voters might think we faced a choice: border security or economic well-being -- with no possibility of both.

But in fact that's not the choice at all: We can -- we must -- have both. And the only way to get there -- the only way to gain control of the border -- is through reform of the kind championed by President Bush and the Senate that liberalizes our immigration law.

Liberalize to get control? No, it doesn't make sense at first blush. But this is the paradox at the heart of immigration reform. Yes, our existing law is inadequately enforced, both on the border and in the workplace. But one of the main reasons for this endemic failure is that the law itself is so unrealistically strict, so out of sync with our labor needs as to be -- like all unrealistic law -- practically unenforceable.

The best analogy is Prohibition: No matter what enforcement resources we threw at that unrealistic ban, we couldn't make it stick. But realistic regulation of alcohol use is another matter entirely -- easily achieved with modest means, such as liquor licenses and import duties.

So, too, with immigration. As the law stands now, we admit only about two-thirds of the labor we need to keep our economy growing, and the additional third -- some 400,000 to 500,000 workers a year -- must get here some other way, illegally. No wonder the Border Patrol is overwhelmed.

The logic behind reform is that if you create a legal way for these now-illegal workers to come into the country you'll take the pressure off the border. After all, once we've filled every available job -- every job for which an employer can't find an American worker -- with an authorized immigrant, there should be little incentive for other foreigners to risk their lives making the trip. The bulk of those now coming illegally would enter lawfully and be processed on the way in, while the illegal traffic would slow to a trickle, far more easily turned back by the Border Patrol.

This isn't a new idea. The president rarely speaks about immigration without talking about "taking the pressure off the border." But nobody at those House hearings has seemed to remember the lesson -- or the security dividend.

The person who first explained that dividend to me was a veteran border agent in Arizona. "What if another 9/11 happens," he asked, "and it happens on my watch? What if the bastards come across here in Arizona and I don't catch them because I'm so busy chasing your next busboy or my next gardener that I don't have time to do my job -- my real job -- catching terrorists? I don't know how I'll live with myself."

The point is obvious enough: We need to take the busboys out of the equation (by means of a temporary worker program) so that Border Patrol can focus on the smugglers and terrorists who pose a genuine threat. And, just as urgent, we need to find a way to bring the 12 million illegal immigrants already in the country onto the right side of the law, creating incentives for them to come forward, then registering, screening and, as long as they stay here, keeping track of them.

The witnesses at the House hearings in Laredo weren't wrong: the criminal "infrastructure" that has grown up to facilitate illegal immigration is undermining our security, both on the border and throughout the country, wherever these unauthorized workers and the forgers who cater to them have settled. But the answer isn't just to crack down harder. It's to make the law more realistic and enforceable by combining new toughness with legalization and more visas for workers -- precisely as the Senate proposes to do.

If only this summer's hearings would point policymakers in that direction -- if only House Republicans would go beyond exaggerated diagnoses to solutions -- the political theater in Laredo and elsewhere might seem in retrospect to have been worthwhile.

[Soldier4Christ]

Drugs seized at Sarita immigration checkpoint

KINGSVILLE — Border Patrol agents assisted by the Texas National Guard seized more than 2 tons of marijuana from a tractor-trailer at an inland immigration checkpoint, U.S. Customs and Border Protection said Friday.

The seizure occurred Thursday at the Sarita checkpoint, after a drug sniffing dog alerted authorities to the tractor-trailer.

Guard members assisted the Border Patrol in finding 4,227 pounds of marijuana valued at $3.4 million in a false compartment under the load of cottonseed hulls and plywood.

The driver, a 36-year-old from Santa Rosa, was arrested.