Islam + Illegals + Obama = Death to the U.S.A

Has Obama forgotten his oath of office?

APNogales, AZ Police Chief Jeff Kirkham recently announced that his department has been warned by a Mexican drug cartel that his officers will be targeted for murder if they carry out another off-duty drug bust.

In early June, two off-duty Nogales officers riding horseback came upon a smuggling operation, which resulted in the seizure of 400 pounds of marijuana.

Chief Kirkham told reporters: “The warning was … that the officers, if they are off duty, are to look the other way and ignore any drug trafficking loads that are coming across the border, otherwise they will be targeted.”

This was only the latest in a series of outrageous acts taken by the cartels against the U.S., demonstrating the boldness with which they feel will go unanswered by a weak U.S. government.

In April, someone tossed an explosive device onto the grounds of the U.S. consulate in Nuevo Laredo. The bomb broke windows and caused some minor damage, but no injuries were reported.

Nuevo Laredo is just across the river from Laredo, TX.

In March, U.S. consulate employees in Juarez were murdered in targeted attacks, after leaving a child’s birthday party.

On March 13, in two separate attacks, cartel gunmen murdered two Americans attached to the U.S. consulate in Juarez.

Lesley Enriquez Redelfs, a consulate employee, along with her husband, Arthur Redelfs, a detention officer with the El Paso County Sheriff’s Department were gunned down on as they were leaving a child‘s birthday party. The couple was murdered after being chased-down by the hitmen. Their baby daughter who was in the backseat survived the assault.

Also shot to death in the coordinated attacks was the husband of consulate worker, Jorge Salcido Ceniceros, after the gunmen boxed-in his car. His wife, Hilda Antillon, was traveling in the car behind him was uninjured, though the couple’s two children were wounded in the attack.

The hit squads used AK-47s as well as 9mm handguns.

A member of the Mexican drug gang known as the Aztecas has been arrested for the murders.

President Obama failed to respond to either the bombing of our consulate, or to the coordinated murders of U.S. consulate employees. That inaction, combined with his unwillingness to defend the border has undoubtedly sent a message of weakness to the cartels, and will likely result in the deaths of more U.S. law enforcement officers.

Of course, Obama’s predecessor was equally weak on this issue. The threats began in earnest under the Bush administration, as assaults on Border Patrol agents began rising at unprecedented rates. By 2007, assaults (which include shootings) had tripled from 2001, with 987.

In 2007, the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin reported that they had obtained a confidential Department of Homeland Security memo. The function of the document was to issue an Officer Safety alert to U.S. Border Patrol agents that human smugglers were bringing MS-13 gang members into the country for the sole purpose of murdering the agents.

The alert reads: “Unidentified Mexican alien smugglers are angry about the increased security along the U.S./Mexican border and have agreed that the best way to deal with U.S. Border Patrol agents is to hire a group of contract killers.”

A Border Patrol agent speaking on the condition of anonymity said: “It’s not just people coming over here to pick lettuce. These gang members, criminals, are endangering American lives.” He went on: “Our vests won’t stop a rifle bullet, and many of us feel like sitting ducks.”

On August 25, 2008, federal and local law enforcement officials told the Associated Press that Mexican drug cartels are now sending hit men into the U.S.

Officer Chris Mears of the El Paso Police Department told reporters: “We received credible information that drug cartels in Mexico have given permission to hit targets on the U.S. side of the border. One of the first things we did was to notify all officers in our department of the situation.”

In July 2008, police in New Mexico and Texas received a cartel hit list, uncovered by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The list contained the name of at least one New Mexico police officer.

Luna County Sheriff’s Capt. Arturo Baeza told the press: “We have been concerned for quite some time that this thing will spill over here.”

Snipers, who at one time, operated only on the Mexican side of the border, now move about freely. They fire a few shots at agents, then move to cover–only to fire again from another location. The tactics are typical of military sniper training. More than likely, the snipers are creating a diversion so that the smugglers can cross in another location. They know that the U.S. agents cannot pursue them into Mexico, and their own government is seemingly powerless to stop their activities.

In 2005, Border Patrol spokesman Andy Adame said: “We believe the vast majority of these assaults are directly tied to alien and drug smugglers based in Mexico.”

Of course, Mexico´s drug cartels are now operating within the interior of the U.S.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the cartels have set up shop in 231 U.S. cities. Atlanta, for instance, has been transformed into a major hub from which Mexican methamphetamine is distributed throughout the east coast.

With a largely unprotected border, and a President and a Homeland Security chief who seem oblivious to the threat posed to American cities, it is very easy for cartel hit men to cross into the U.S.

If Obama does not begin to take seriously his oath of office, we must install a Congress which vows to impeach the man who seems more concerned with golf than with the safety of U.S. citizens.

Obama’s weakness only encourages the violent cartels, now in control of Mexico

written by Eee Zee

On the day following the holiday weekend on which Americans celebrated their nation’s independence from a foreign country, Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department filed its lawsuit against the State of Arizona for daring to pass a law that protects innocent people from criminal aliens, terrorists and other malefactors who violate U.S. immigration laws and live in Arizona illegally.

However, in spite of White House rhetoric — and euphemisms – and news media spin, most border state Americans know the truth about illegal immigration: That the Mexican government practically exports its poorest citizens to the United States for a number of reasons.

First, it relieves Mexico’s government of the responsibility of providing social and healthcare services for them. Second, it provides that country’s economy with an influx of US cash when these illegal workers send money they earn in the US back home. And third, it defuses problems with far-left groups who are usually successful in using the poor to advance their political agenda.

But there is another benefit to the exportation of Mexicans into the US – President Calderon saves money on his criminal justice system by exporting his criminal population to the United States. Thus, Mexico’s crime problem becomes a U.S. crime problem; Mexico’s prison problem becomes the U.S. taxpayers’ prison problem.

“As it stands today, the United States has become Mexico’s penal colony. While their police and military officers supplement their incomes by providing protection for Mexican organized crime organizations, they actually aid illegal aliens with maps, water and other assistance,” said former NYPD detective and military intelligence officer Sid Franes.

“While President Calderon launched his vitriolic attack on Arizona, his own police routinely check the immigration status of people residing or visiting Mexico, as well,” he added.

It’s difficult to ascertain just how many criminals from Mexico are currently committing their criminal offenses. In fact, the mainstream news media when covering crime cases intentionally neglect to mention that an illegal alien is responsible for a murder or a rape that’s being covered.

You’ll rarely, if ever, read a story in the New York Times about criminal aliens who routinely kill, assault, rape and rob American citizens. And when hundreds of illegal aliens were discovered working at military installations and nuclear power plants, where were the reporters from the wire services?

It is safe to assume, however, based on a number of government reports, that there are upwards of 200,000 criminal aliens residing in the US. That doesn’t include gangbangers such as MS-13, a group boasting as many as 15,000 gang members nationwide.

For example, Border Patrol agents in the Tucson, AZ Sector have apprehended 27,834 illegal aliens with criminal records, 74 of which were for homicide. Last fiscal year, the Tucson Sector apprehended 14,506 illegal aliens with criminal records. These figures do not include the thousands of criminal aliens apprehended by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents or those in other Border Patrol sectors.

SAMPLE APPREHENSIONS

Border Patrol agents of the Tucson Sector apprehended an illegal alien with an outstanding murder warrant for his arrest in New York City. The suspect killed his victim, escaped back into Mexico and then re-entered the US at a later date.

Border Patrol agents from the Casa Grande station apprehended a group of 13 illegal aliens west of Sells, Arizona. All 13 subjects were transported to the Nogales Processing Center where their fingerprints were entered into the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS), for comparison with the FBI fingerprint database.

One of the individuals, Jose Luis Castaneda-Cardenas, a 23-year-old Mexican National, was identified as having an outstanding felony warrant for “Felony Murder” and “Misdemeanor Criminal Possession of a Weapon,” in New York City. The New York City Police Department verified the warrant, and confirmed extradition of Castaneda.

The southern border of the US is a region particularly vulnerable to cross-border criminal organizations and enterprises and the violence associated with them. In recent years, US citizens in the region have witnessed an unprecedented surge in brutality by drug and human smuggling and trafficking organizations along the Southwest border.

Some state and local governments have expressed concerns about the impact that criminal aliens have on already overcrowded prisons and jails and that the federal government reimburses them for only a portion of their costs of incarcerating criminal aliens. Congress requested that the General Accounting Office provide information concerning criminal aliens incarcerated at the federal, state, and local level. For the criminal aliens incarcerated, the state and local governments that received reimbursement only received about 25 percent of the costs
At the federal level, the number of criminal aliens incarcerated increased from about 42,000 at the end of calendar year 2001 to about 49,000 at the end of calendar year 2004 — a 15 percent increase. The percentage of all federal prisoners who are criminal aliens has remained the same over the last 3 years — about 27 percent. The majority of criminal aliens incarcerated at the end of calendar year 2004 were identified as citizens of Mexico.

It is estimated the federal cost of incarcerating criminal aliens – Bureau of Prison’s cost to incarcerate criminals and reimbursements to state and local governments – totaled approximately $5.8 billion for calendar years 2001 through 2004. BOP’s cost to incarcerate criminal aliens rose from about $950 million in 2001 to about $1.2 billion in 2004 – a 14 percent increase. Unfortunately, the BOP does not provide more up-to-date statistics regarding illegal aliens residing in correctional facilities.

written by Eee Zee

On Tuesday, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals against the state of Arizona, alleging that SB1070 violates federal immigration law. The feds are also seeking an injunction to prevent the law from taking effect, as scheduled on July 29.

While the Obama administration claims the lawsuit is necessary because immigration enforcement is solely the domain of the federal government, they have yet to object to the many so-called ‘sanctuary cities’ around the country.

Locally elected officials in these sanctuary cities enact their own policies to protect criminal aliens from deportation, by not allowing police departments to report the illegal immigration status of an arrestee to federal authorities. This policy often shields dangerous criminals and allows them to return to the streets, rather than to their own country of origin.

These local policies violate and interfere with federal law, and undoubtedly lead to more crime and encourage illegal immigration, by laying out the welcome mat to those who choose to sneak into this country.

However, the Justice Department has been strangely silent on the issue of ’sanctuary cities’ and the responsibility they have in this country’s growing illegal alien population.

One such city which seems to take great pride in flaunting U.S. immigration law, while aiding and abetting even the most violent of illegal aliens is San Francisco.

In San Francisco, on June 22, 2008, three members of the Bologna family were gunned down by Salvadoran national and gang member Edwin Ramos. Tony Bologna, 48, and his sons Michael, 20, and Matthew, 16 were shot to death by Ramos as they sat in their car on a crowded street, in the city´s Excelsior District

Ramos who is a member of the notoriously violent drug gang known as MS-13, shot the Bologna family to death because Tony Bologna had temporarily blocked the car in which Ramos was traveling, as the two cars made their way through an intersection. The Bologna men were returning home from a family barbecue.

Though an illegal alien, as a juvenile, Ramos committed felony attempted robbery and assault, but was never deported.

Shortly after the shooting, the San Francisco Chronicle reported, Juvenile Probation Department officials did not report Ramos to federal immigration authorities for possible deportation because of San Francisco´s stated sanctuary policy.

What are we to make of a President who has no problem allowing American families to be gunned down in the streets of their own cities, but goes to court to protect illegal aliens?

Of course, the Obama administration will never take legal action against San Francisco, nor against any other city which gives sanctuary to illegal aliens. Nor does Obama care about the rule of law, the current White House occupant is suing Arizona solely for political reasons.

Of course, Obama is betting not only his own political future, on amnesty, but that of the Democratic Party as well. In this nation’s illegal alien population, he sees millions of new voters.

written by Eee Zee

Obama’s Big Oil Spill Bungle
By Dick Morris

It’s one thing to say that Obama’s administration showed ineptitude and mismanagement in its handling of the Gulf oil spill. It is quite another to grasp the situation up close, as I did during a recent visit to Alabama.

According to state disaster relief officials, Alabama conceived a plan — early on — to erect huge booms offshore to shield the approximately 200 miles of the state’s coastline from oil. Rather than install the relatively light and shallow booms in use elsewhere, the state (with assistance from the Coast Guard) canvassed the world and located enough huge, heavy booms — some weighing tons and seven meters high — to guard their coast.

But … no sooner were the booms in place than the Coast Guard, perhaps under pressure from the public comments of James Carville, uprooted them and moved them to guard the Louisiana coastline instead.

So Alabama decided on a backup plan. It would buy snare booms to catch the oil as it began to wash up on the beaches.

But … the Fish and Wildlife Administration vetoed the plan, saying it would endanger sea turtles that nest on the beaches.

So Alabama — ever resourceful — decided to hire 400 workers to patrol the beaches in person, scooping up oil that had washed ashore.

But … OSHA (the Occupational Safety and Health Administration) refused to allow them to work more than 20 minutes out of every hour and required an hourlong break after 40 minutes of work, so the cleanup proceeded at a very slow pace.

The short answer is that every agency — each with its own particular bureaucratic agenda — was able to veto each aspect of any plan to fight the spill, with the unintended consequence that nothing stopped the oil from destroying hundreds of miles of wetlands, habitats, beaches, fisheries and recreational facilities.

Where was the president? Why did he not intervene in these and countless other bureaucratic controversies to force a focus on the oil, not on the turtles and other incidental concerns?

According to Alabama Gov. Bob Riley, the administration’s “lack of ability has become transparent” in its handling of the oil spill. He notes that one stellar exception has been Obama aide Valerie Jarrett, without whom, he says, nothing whatever would have gotten done.

Eventually, the state stopped listening to federal agencies and just has gone ahead and given funds directly to the local folks fighting the spill rather than paying attention to the directives of the Unified Command. Apparently, there is a world of difference between the competence of the Coast Guard and the superb and efficient regular Navy and military.

Now the greatest crisis of all looms on the horizon as hurricanes sweep into the Gulf. Should one hit offshore, it will destroy all the booms that have been placed to stop the oil from reaching shore. And there are no more booms anywhere in the world, according to Alabama disaster relief officials. “There is no more inventory of booms anywhere on earth,” one told me in despair.

The political impact of this incompetence has only just begun to be felt. While administration operatives are flying high after a week in which the president’s ratings rebounded to 49 percent, per Rasmussen, after his firing of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the oil is still gushing and the situation is about to worsen.
The obvious fact is that Obama has no executive experience, nor do any of his top advisers. Without a clear mandate from the top, needed efforts to salvage the situation are repeatedly stymied by well-meaning bureaucrats strictly following the letter of their agency policy and federal law. The result, ironically, of their determined efforts to protect the environment has been the greatest environmental disaster in history. But some turtles are OK!

written by Eee Zee

written by Eee Zee

Whereas Obama is trying to crush Arizona by suing it into the ground to prevent it from defending itself from illegal immigration, and it is preventing any clean up efforts in Louisiana after 71 days, it has just been learned from one of our contacts in Texas that Obama by way of the EPA has just shut down today 33% of the country’s refining capacity.

While Obama was unsuccessful at putting a moratorium on oil drilling, he was able to accomplish the same thing by putting a stranglehold on oil refining which accomplishes the same thing. With 1/3rd of the country’s oil refining gone what do you think this will do to the economy? This was the inherent threat that Obama had presented for months. Either give him Cap and Trade or we will shut everything down through the EPA.

What do you think this will do to the economy of Texas.

Let’s recap what has happened in the last 90 days.

Obama is going after Arizona and trying to cut off all border security aide while suing the state even though the state of Missouri hashad  the identical Arizona immigration law for the last five years.

He is making no attempt to stop the oil leak in Louisiana. This is now affecting the economies of Louisiana, Texas, Georgia and Florida.

He is going after Texas and with this double whammy of shutting down the refineries and the oil spill the state that was doing the best in the country is now being taken down.

So far Obama has completely trashed five states and is in the process of destroying their economies. What chance do you think there is of a recovery

Hope and change! Totalitarianism is here!

written by Eee Zee

Why has President Obama waited over two months into the BP oil spill crisis before accepting offers of international assistance that were there from the very start, seemingly waiting for hurricanes to hit the region which will only make the crisis worse?

Obama’s acceptance of international help is too little, too late – over two months late to be exact.

We now learn that he is starting the process of allowing international help, a process that will take weeks or months and will likely be strangled and restricted by the EPA anyway.

Foreign ships have been prevented from helping in the clean up process. Every effort has been made to stop outside involvement in the situation and almost everything we learn about the crisis comes directly from BP or the federal government. This strictly enforced cover-up shows that authorities are more concerned about protecting their information lock down than actually cleaning up the spill.

Obama initially blocked international help, citing the Jones Act, which forbids foreign ships from operating between U.S. ports, and thereby preventing the use of sophisticated technology which foreign firms insist could have sealed the leak.

The Jones Act can be waived in in cases of national emergencies or in cases of strategic interest. Belgian company DEME contends that it has the specialist vessels to fix the oil leak within two to four months, technology the U.S. does not have. By taking bids on a contract to fix the oil leak from international companies, Obama could have the problem solved within a matter of weeks, but he immediately refused the help of “thirteen entities that had offered the U.S. oil spill assistance within about two weeks of the Horizon rig explosion.” This is another clear example of the government’s motivation to allow the crisis to drag on indefinitely until they can use it to ram through their carbon tax agenda.

Obama’s two month delay in refusing international help ensured that the window of opportunity was missed to fix the leak before the start of the hurricane season, which will make the crisis immeasurably worse.

“Hurricane Alex, which strengthened overnight from a tropical storm, is heading for the coastline near the Texas-Mexico border and is starting to churn oil from the massive BP spill on to beaches along the Gulf of Mexico,” reports MarketWatch.

Why did Obama reject all the help he could get unless the federal government wants the crisis to get worse so it can exploit the hysteria surrounding the issue to push its ultimate goal of imposing a consumption tax on the American people?

How will imposing a carbon tax fix the oil spill? It won’t, but by exploiting the crisis in the name of ‘reducing our dependence on oil’, the government will seek to raise prices, much to the glee of companies like BP who are founding members of the cap and trade lobby. Reducing your dependence on oil means reducing your ability to fill your tank because it will be so much more expensive once the carbon tax is in place.

Indeed, BP has been a faithful supporter of John Kerry’s climate legislation because the company has “explicitly backed” a “higher gas tax”. If Obama is able to exploit the oil spill to ram through his cap and trade program, BP stands to profit to the tune of billions. Allowing the crisis to worsen in pursuit of this goal is mutually beneficial to both the Obama administration and British Petroleum.

Obama has now indicated that he will push for cap and trade to be added to a weaker energy bill after the mid-term elections in November. Every week that the oil spill crisis drags on, Obama’s political capital for the purpose of pushing a carbon tax increases.

The government has every interest in seeing the crisis worsen, not merely to justify cap and trade but also to mothball plans for new exploratory oil drilling in the Arctic, something to which the administration had never wanted to fully commit. As a result of the oil spill, which every action of the federal government has made worse, that drilling has now been postponed.

As we have documented, every action on behalf of the feds has been about delaying and hampering the response to the oil spill. This, allied to the abundant evidence of deliberate negligence and even sabotage of the oil well, makes it clear to any rational observer that it’s in the best interests of both BP and the federal government to let the crisis roll on indefinitely.

written by Eee Zee

Barack OBAMA, during his Cairo speech, said: “I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of  America’s story.”

Dear Mr. Obama:

Were those Muslims that were in America when the Pilgrims first landed?  Funny, I thought they were Native American Indians.

Were those Muslims that celebrated the first Thanksgiving day?  Sorry again, those were Pilgrims and Native American Indians.

Can you show me one Muslim signature on the United States Constitution?

Declaration of Independence ?

Bill of Rights?

Didn’t think so.

Did Muslims fight for this country’s freedom from England?  No.

Did Muslims fight during the Civil War to free the slaves in America?  No, they did not.  In fact, Muslims to this day are still the largest traffickers in human slavery.  Your own half brother, a devout Muslim, still advocates slavery himself, even though Muslims of Arabic descent refer to black Muslims as “pug nosed slaves.”  Says a lot of what the Muslim world really thinks of your family’s “rich Islamic heritage,” doesn’t it Mr. Obama?

Where were Muslims during the Civil Rights era of this country?  Not present.

There are no pictures or media accounts of Muslims walking side by side with Martin Luther King, Jr. or helping to advance the cause of Civil Rights.

Where were Muslims during this country’s Woman’s Suffrage era?  Again, not present.  In fact, devout Muslims demand that women are subservient to men in the Islamic culture.  So much so, that often they are beaten for not wearing the ‘hajib’ or for talking to a man who is not a direct family member or their husband.  Yep, the Muslims are all for women’s rights, aren’t they?

Where were Muslims during World War II?  They were aligned with Adolf Hitler.  The Muslim grand mufti himself met with Adolf Hitler, reviewed the troops and accepted support from the Nazi’s in killing Jews.

Finally, Mr. Obama, where were Muslims on Sept. 11th, 2001?  If they weren’t flying planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania killing nearly 3,000 people on our own soil, they were rejoicing in the Middle East…  No one can dispute the pictures shown from all parts of the Muslim world celebrating on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and other cable news networks that day.  Strangely, the very “moderate” Muslims who you bent over backwards to kiss in Cairo, Egypt on June 4th were stone cold silent post 9-11.  To many Americans, their silence has meant approval for the acts of that day.

And THAT, Mr. Obama, is the “rich heritage” Muslims have here in America.

Oh, I’m sorry, I forgot to mention the Barbary Pirates.  They were Muslim.

And now we can add November 5, 2009 – the slaughter of American soldiers at Fort Hood by a Muslim major who is a doctor and a psychiatrist who was supposed to be counseling soldiers returning from battle in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That, Mr. Obama is the “Muslim heritage” in America.

written by Eee Zee

KACHA PUKA, Pakistan – Two burqa-clad suicide bombers attacked people who had fled a Pakistani offensive against the Taliban close to the Afghan border, killing 41 as they lined up Saturday to register for food and other relief supplies.

The victims were among around 200,000 people to have left Orakzai since the end of last year, when the Pakistan army began offensive ground and air operations against militants based in the remote, tribally administered region.

The registration point in Kohat region was managed by the local administration, but sometimes used by foreign humanitarian groups, including the World Food Program, to deliver aid. There was no claim of responsibility, which is not unusual when bomb attacks kill ordinary Pakistani citizens.

The United Nations said it was temporarily suspending work helping displaced people in Kohat and neighboring Hangu as a result of the attack.

Al-Qaida and Taliban militants based in the northwest have carried out near-daily attacks over the last 18 months in Pakistan, seeking to overthrow its Western-allied government and stop it from fighting them. The blasts have killed several thousand people, but not deterred the army.

Most of the attacks are directed at security or government installations, but civilian targets have also been hit.

The registration point — essentially a small building in a dusty field — may have been hit to persuade people not to have any contact with the local administration or foreign relief groups.

The bombers were disguised in burqas, the all-encompassing veil worn by conservative Muslim women in parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan, allowing them to get close to the building without arousing suspicion, said police officer Abdullah Khan.

via Pakistan: Bombers kill refugees waiting for food – Yahoo! News.

written by Eee Zee

This is very interesting and we all need to read it from start to finish and send it on to anyone who will read it. Maybe this is why our American Muslims are so quiet and not speaking out about any atrocities. Can a good Muslim be a good American? This question was forwarded to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years. The following is his reply:

Theologically – no … Because his allegiance is to Allah, The moon God of Arabia.

Religiously – no … Because no other religion is accepted by His Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256)

Scripturally – no … Because his allegiance is to the five Pillars of Islam and the Quran.

Geographically – no … Because his allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

Socially – no . . . Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.

Politically – no … Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America, the great Satan.

Domestically – no … Because he is instructed to marry four Women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34).

Intellectually – no … Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically – no … Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.

Spiritually – no … Because when we declare ‘one nation under God,’ the Christian’s God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as Heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran’s 99 excellent names.

Therefore, after much study and deliberation … Perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. They obviously cannot be both “good” Muslims and good Americans. Call it what you wish, it’s still the truth. You had better believe it. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future. The religious war is bigger than we know or understand.

Can a Muslim be a good soldier? Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, opened fire at Ft. Hood and Killed 13. He is a good Muslim!
Footnote: The Muslims have said they will destroy us from within. SO FREEDOM IS NOT FREE. THE MARINES WANT THIS TO ROLL ALL OVER THE U.S. An Unguarded Strength is a double weakness. “Small God – big problems. Big God – small problems”. Greg Laurie “Evil prevails when good men do nothing”. Thoughts?

written by Eee Zee

Changes on the Continent cloud our future “The Europe as you know it from visiting, from your parents or friends is on the verge of collapsing,” Geert Wilders said in a speech in the United States last year.The leader of the Netherlands’ populist Party for Freedom added: “We are now witnessing profound changes that will forever alter Europe’s destiny and might send the Continent in what Ronald Reagan called ‘a thousand years of darkness.’” And not just Europe, but America as well.Been to Europe lately? Thought it was bad? You ain’t seen nothing yet. The passage of the Lisbon Treaty, hailed by President Obama, nailed the coffin shut on national sovereignty in Europe. The people of Europe fought it, but were overwhelmed by their political elites and the lack of American leadership in this age of our rather Marxist, collectivist U.S. president. Come Jan. 1, 2010, a disastrous and suicidal pact called the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (Europe/Mediterranean) goes into effect with little fanfare or examination. It boggles the mind that such a consequential and seismic cultural shift could be mandated and put into play without so much as a murmur from the mainstream media. Why should Americans care about this?

Americans have to care because this global gobbledygook is coming to our shores, thanks to our globalist president. The European human rights group called Stop the Islamization of Europe (SIOE) has been working tirelessly to expose the mass Muslim immigration plan of the Euro-Med Partnership. A statement on the SIOE Web site criticizes the secrecy of the process: “It was shocking to hear about the plans and at the same time knowing that Danish politicians and a [cowardly] Danish press – who is otherwise proud to be critical – has told nothing to the Danish people about this project which begins in January. This also showed clearly at the conference. Only very few politicians showed up and no media. Those politicians who showed up had obviously never heard about the Euro-Mediterranean project.

The goal of the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation is to create a new Greater European Union encompassing both Europe and North Africa, with the Mediterranean Sea becoming a domestic Eurabian sea. The goal is to establish a “comprehensive political partnership,” including a “free trade area and economic integration”; “considerably more money for the partners” (that is, more European money flowing into North Africa); and “cultural partnership” – that is, importation of Islamic culture into post-Christian Europe. According to the SIOE, in the Euro-Med plan “Europe is to be islamized. Democracy, Christianity, European culture and Europeans are to be driven out of Europe.

Fifty million North Africans from Muslim countries are to be imported into the EU.” Skeptical? It’s already happening. The British newspaper the Daily Express reported in October 2008 on “a controversial taxpayer-funded ‘job centre’ ” that opened in Mali at that time as “just the first step towards promoting ‘free movement of people in Africa and the EU.’ Brussels economists claim Britain and other EU states will ‘need’ 56 million immigrant workers between them by 2050 to make up for the ‘demographic decline’ due to falling birthrates and rising death rates across Europe.” To offset this decline, a “blue card” system is to be created that will allow card holders to travel freely within the European Union and have full rights to work – as well as the full right to collect welfare benefits. A Muslim population from Africa moving freely into Europe threatens America. On Christmas Day, a Nigerian Muslim flew from Amsterdam to Detroit and tried to explode a bomb on the plane – after he was allowed to board the plane without a passport.

The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership will make jihad attacks like this one all the easier. And once in Europe, Muslims have already begun demanding special privileges and accommodations. IslamOnline reported on Dec. 21 that “Muslims activists from 26 European countries have come together to launch the first rights council to enlighten European Muslims about their rights, monitor rising Islamophobia and defend Muslim rights in European courts of law.” Ali Abu Shwaima, a Muslim leader in Italy, explained: “We think European human rights groups are not doing enough to defend the rights of Muslims. Therefore we thought that we need this new council, especially that all laws and constitutions in Europe respect freedom of religion and oppose all forms of discrimination and racism.” “Islamophobia,” “discrimination” and “racism” are all terms Muslims in Europe and America use to confuse people into thinking that the perpetrators of Islamic terrorism are the real victims. And it is working: Mr. Wilders is going on trial in the Netherlands, instead of all the Islamic hate sponsors he is fighting against. It has to be this way, to increase harmony among the Muslim and non-Muslim member states of the Euro-Med Partnership. This internationalism is already destroying what has made Europe free and great. And now Mr. Obama seems to want to do the same to America.

written by Eee Zee

written by Eee Zee

Robert Krentz was murdered while tending to his Arizona ranch last weekend and local police suspect an illegal alien is responsible.  (Fox News, March 30, 2010).   The 58 year-old rancher was gunned down on his own property shortly after radioing his brother Phil that he had encountered an illegal alien.

When Krentz didn’t show up to meet his brother about an hour later as planned, Phil called the police and a search party was formed.  Late that night, Krentz was found slumped over his ATV, shot to death along with his dog. Law enforcement officials with tracker dogs followed the footprints from the crime scene on Krentz’s ranch 15 miles to the border where they crossed into Mexico.

The prominent rancher, who often brought water to illegal aliens and helped those who were injured, was apparently caught by surprise, as his ATV’s engine and lights were still on and he did not use either of the two guns he was carrying with him.  (Fox News, March 30, 2010).  Police believe that he could have been attacked by a drug cartel scout or a member of a band of thieves that has been terrorizing ranches in the area.  It is also possible that Krentz’s murder was a retaliatory killing because just one day before, his brother stopped a caravan of illegal aliens who were carrying 280 pounds of marijuana.  Id. Border patrol arrested all eight illegal aliens and impounded the drugs.

Whatever the motive behind the slaying of this innocent man, neighboring ranchers are both scared and frustrated with the lack of government action to secure the border. Friends and neighbors of the slain rancher denounced politicians for their empty promises to secure the border that failed to protect Krentz on his own land.  (The Arizona Republic, April 1, 2010).  The Krentz family issued a statement urging President Obama to deploy U.S. military personnel to the U.S.-Mexican border, but this is not the first time they have sought help from their elected officials.  The family repeatedly expressed concern to authorities over the $6.2 million damage to their property and livestock caused by “illegal foot traffic,” and Robert’s wife, Susan, wrote to Congress in 2007 that “We are in fear for our lives and safety and health of ourselves and that of our families and friends.”  (Fox News, March 30, 2010).

Lawmakers from Arizona and New Mexico are joining their constituents’ demands that the Obama administration deploy hundreds of National Guard and Border Patrol agents to the southern border. (Fox News, March 30, 2010).  In the wake of the murder, state and federal politicians are calling upon the government to beef up border security and protect American citizens.  Former Congressman J.D. Hayworth, who is currently challenging Senator John McCain’s bid for reelection, said that the killing debunks claims that the border is secure, “To put it diplomatically, that’s incorrect.  To put it realistically, that’s a lie.”  (The Arizona Republic, April 1, 2010).

Senator McCain also called upon the federal government to immediately deploy the National Guard to the border in a letter to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano, who made a similar request to President George W. Bush in 2006 when she was the governor of Arizona.  McCain urged, “I hope that you will take a personal interest in ensuring that Arizonans can feel safe and protected on their own property and not live in fear of the increasing violence along the border.”  (CBS News, March 30, 2010).  Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, whose request for National Guard troops last year was denied by the Obama administration, joined the demand for deployments, calling the killing a “horrible and unnecessary tragedy.”  (Fox News, March 30, 2010).  (Politico, April 2, 2010).   President Obama has not responded to the renewed requests for increased border security, but just last month he spoke to reporters about the issue of National Guard deployments.  (Id.)   Obama has made it clear that he does not want to “militarize” the border, but he called it “unacceptable if you’ve got drug gangs crossing our borders and killing our citizens.” .

written by Eee Zee

The release of internal documents last week revealed that ICE officials recently set quotas to deport more illegal aliens in 2010 than the previous year.  (The Washington Post, March 27, 2010).  As the Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) spokesman is scrambling to distance the agency from the content of the documents, amnesty forces are decrying the apparent move to enforce immigration laws, what they call a betrayal.  The special interest groups are in an uproar because the memos from January and February of this year indicate that U.S. immigration authorities are both seeking to reverse a severe drop in deportations, and to do so are moving away from the Obama administration’s public pledge to focus enforcement efforts solely on violent criminal illegal aliens.  (ICE Memos).

The internal memos have stirred controversy among opposition groups because they suggest a deviation from the public commitments made by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano and ICE chief John T. Morton.  Over the past year, Napolitano has expressed a determination to abandon the worksite enforcement actions and neighborhood sweeps the Bush administration focused on, and instead vocally supported the deportation of criminal aliens.  (The Washington Post, March 27, 2010).  However, in a February 22, 2010 memo authored by Jim Chaparro, head of ICE detention and removal operations (DRO), the senior official noted that deportations for the current year were already down significantly, and that ICE agents would have to focus their efforts on more than criminal aliens in order to meet the agency’s goal of 400,000 removals this year.  Id. The memo has attracted attention not only for the rare statement of ICE enforcement goals in explicit terms, but because Chaparro – who was also a senior Homeland Security Official under President Bush – also provided a road map to help agents deport more illegal aliens.

Unfortunately, instead of defending the appropriate expansion of removal activities, ICE spokesman Brian P. Hale was quick to distance DHS leaders from it. “Portions of the memo were inconsistent with ICE, inconsistent with the administration’s point of view and inconsistent with the secretary,” said Hale.  Id. Morton also released a statement that the memo was issued without his authorization, adding, “We are strongly committed to carrying out our priorities to remove serious criminal offenders first and we definitively do not set quotas.”  (The Los Angeles Times, March 31, 2010).   Morton is under fire from amnesty activists who are calling for his removal because they view the memo as “a clear violation” of his previous statements.  According to the Center for Community Change, “ICE has gone rogue and needs to be reined in with dramatic action.”  Id.

The news that immigration officials could be committed to actually enforcing the law has been met with disbelief and intense anger from amnesty advocates, leading Morton to promise that the memo had been “withdrawn and corrected.”  Chaparro also released a new memo clarifying that his earlier statement  “signals no shift in the important steps we have taken to date to focus our priorities on the smart and effective enforcement of immigration laws, prioritizing dangerous criminal aliens…while also adhering to Congressional mandates to maintain an average daily [detention] population and meet annual performance measures.”  (The Washington Post, March 27, 2010).  Interestingly, Chaparro did not alter or rescind any of the strategies he had previously outlined to combat the sharp decline of deportations.

written by Eee Zee

President Obama once again demonstrated his allegiance to pro-amnesty organizations by appointing a union lawyer to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) who opposes employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens.  President Obama appointed Craig Becker to the NLRB last week as part of a series of recess appointments to fill 15 administration positions, a move that upset Republicans who argued the president circumvented the Senate’s authority to confirm nominations.  (The Wall Street Journal, March 29, 2010). Though both parties agree that most of the nominees are not controversial, the appointment of Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has sparked fierce opposition.

The main controversy comes from public comments Mr. Becker has made on employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens. In a 2001 radio interview on WBEZ, Becker publicly stated that he opposes sanctioning employers for hiring illegal aliens.  (Breitbart, January 8, 2001).  Calling the impact of employer sanctions “discriminatory” and “harsh,” Becker said the policy of imposing sanctions ignored the fact that illegal aliens are here to stay. Becker’s nomination, which has been pending for about a year, has also been controversial because he is the associate general counsel of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and also works for the AFL-CIO, both of which support amnesty and spend millions of dollars advocating for such legislation. Many feel that his history creates a conflict of interest because the NLRB oversees union elections and referees disputes between employers and unions.  Opponents of Becker’s nomination feel he won’t be impartial.

Both Democrats and Republicans feel Becker’s radical positions should disqualify him from the position at the NLRB.  Only two months ago, the Senate blocked Becker’s appointment through a filibuster. At that time, Senator Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) remarked, “Mr. Becker’s previous statements strongly indicate that he would take an aggressive personal agenda to the NLRB, and that he would pursue a personal agenda there, rather than that of the administration.  This is of great concern, considering that the board’s main responsibility is to resolve labor disputes with an even and impartial hand.”  (Politico, February 8, 2010).  In fact, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has already said it will ask Becker to recuse himself from 12 pending cases due to his prior opposition to the group.  (The Wall Street Journal, March 29, 2010).

Obama’s decision to appoint Becker is a huge win for labor unions. The Workforce Fairness Institute, which is funded by business owners, called Becker’s appointment a “payoff to union bosses at the expense of America’s employers and employees.”  (CBS News, March 29, 2010).  While union advocacy groups such as American Rights at Work celebrate, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce warns, “the business community should be on red alert for radical changes that could significantly impair the ability of America’s job creators to compete.”  (CBS News, March 29, 2010).

written by Eee Zee

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that three Muslim cousins have been arrested for shooting a dozen people in one night with a BB gun, believing they were homosexual.

The three suspects, Mohammad Habibzada, Shafiq Hashemi, and Sayed Bassam, allegedly drove up next to one victim and videotaped shooting him in the race. He reported the attack to law enforcement, which then arrested the group.The victim refused medical treatment and did not suffer serious injury.

The videotape that was recorded showed attacks on 11 other males that same night, although the report did not say whether they were also suspected of being homosexuals by the attackers. They were released after paying bail but re-arrested when they showed up in court for the additional crimes seen.

The only victim to come forward denies being gay and said in court that what makes the attack “even a little sillier … they were out shooting for gay guys and they didn’t get one,” according to the Bay Area Reporter.

Islam, like Judaism and Christianity, takes a firm stance against homosexuality. In some Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran, the lifestyle is outlawed, punishable by imprisonment or even execution.

A Pew Research Center study in 2007 found that 61% of American-Muslims felt that homosexuality should be discouraged, as opposed to 51% of the overall American population that believes it should be accepted.

written by Eee Zee

On March 26, federal authorities arrested Raja Lahrasib Khan, a taxi cab driver in Chicago born in Pakistan for allegedly having ties to Al-Qaeda and planning to bomb a stadium, The Washington Post reports.

Khan has been tied to Ilyas Kashmiri, a high-level Al-Qaeda operative in Pakistan who recruited another Chicago Muslim for a plot to kill the author of cartoons in Sweden mocking Mohammed. Recently, two American women were arrested as part of a larger plot to kill the same author.

The court papers state that Khan was recorded describing a plot to attack a U.S. stadium in August, describing the sound of the explosives as “boom, boom, boom, boom.”

The India Times reports that an FBI sting operation helped lead to Khan’s arrest. He told an undercover agent that he met with Ilyas Kashmiri in 2008 in northwestern Pakistan. Khan is also accused of planning to give money to Kashmiri. FoxNews.com says that Khan told the agent that he has known Kashmiri for 15 years.

Khan also said that Kashmiri told him that Osama Bin Laden is in good health and is still acting in a leadership capacity, according to OneIndia News.

“…these charges, once again, affirm that law enforcement must remain constantly vigilant to guard against domestic support of foreign terrorist organizations,” a statement from U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald reads.

written by Eee Zee

The Quilliam Foundation, a moderate Muslim organization in the United Kingdom, has accused the country’s Islam Channel of promoting extremism, prompting an investigation by the Office of Communications, The National reports.

“A number of presenters with extremist tendencies were regularly given the opportunity to air their opinions on the network without a challenge from more moderate Islamic voices,” the Quilliam Foundation’s report states.

It also accused the network of sexism by instructing women not to leave their homes without a male chaperone and the permission of her husband. On one program, a guest said that a woman should never refuse to engage in sexual activity with her husband.

The Foundation also criticized a program called IslamiQA, where viewers were told that “the majority of people in hell will be women” because of their negative affects on society.

“Although the channel does not directly call for terrorist violence, it clearly helps to create an atmosphere in which religiously-sanctioned intolerance and even hatred might be seen as acceptable,” Talal Rajab, the author of the report, told This Is London.

The channel has also been criticized for having links to Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born imam currently in Yemen working for Al-Qaeda. Al-Awlaki is believed to have had a role in the Fort Hood shooting in November and the underwear bomb plot on Christmas Day.

The Guardian reported on January 24 that the leader of the channel is wanted in Tunisia on terrorism charges and that their website had links to several sermons of al-Awlaki, including one titled “It is a War Against Islam.” The links were removed after attention was brought to them.

Islam Channel was launched in 2004 and nearly 60% of British-Muslims are said to watch the program regularly. It is currently the most popular Muslim network in the United Kingdom.

written by Eee Zee

A 15-year old Muslim student in France attacked his teacher with teargas after describing the Al-Qaeda organization as a “terrorist group,” Agence France-Presse reports.

The history teacher, who asked that their name not be disclosed, said they were reading from the textbook about Al-Qaeda’s role in the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.

“He stood up and declared that al-Qaeda is not terrorist and that neither is the Taliban,” before activating the teargas can, the teacher told the Agence France-Presse.

The report said that a criminal complaint has been filed against the student. He is reported by The Mirror in the United Kingdom of being of North African descent.

The Atlas Shrugs blog has linked to a video of the attack recorded by a cell phone that was obtained by a French news station. The student is seen aggressively approaching the teacher, who falls down on the ground screaming. The teacher appears to trip over the student’s leg when he tries to corner her, although it is unclear if he was deliberately trying to make her fall.

“Western Europe has major immigration coming in from North Africa, and these primarily Muslim immigrants often form their own communities inside the country,” explains Ryan Mauro, the Christian Action Network’s National Security Advisor.

“This lack of assimilation is a significant factor in the growth of extremist religious ideology that justifies such violence.”

According to Islam expert Daniel Pipes, there are 751 “no-go” zones in France that are mostly Muslim and are not actively controlled by the government or law enforcement.

written by Eee Zee

One would wonder why Hasan did not find his way to Afghanistan or Irag and fight for his beliefs?  Could it be that being is the United States is a heck of a lot more comfortable than being in those tribal based hell-holes with people bent on converting all infidels to Islam and hating Jews for all the wrong reasons?

Could it be that even without universal healthcare, cap and trade, unionization of everything, hope and change, returning to a welfare society, converting to a nanny state and the Obama socialism, this is the greatest country on the face of the earth.  I know that every immigrant from European countries I know constantly remark that we are the greatest and that we don’t realize how great we are. And that was before the Messiah was elected president.

Could it be that the bigger goal of these Islamic Jihadists is to infiltrate this country and take us down from within, one step at a time; taking a century if it takes that long?  There is no doubt that due to our political correctness this is an easier way to conquer us than on the battlefield. They now know without a doubt that we will look the other way or that they can hide behind our constitution if need be to avoid either detection or expulsion.

The Sean Connery character in the movie “The Wind and the Lion” said it 30 years ago to the Brit he had kidnapped; “the sands are forever”, meaning that they have forever to convert all infidels to Islam.  It is not a stretch to envision that amongst the approximate 8,000,000 Muslims now in the United States that there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands that think just like Nidal Malik Hasan.  They read the Qur’an literally as do the Imam’s in their mosques preaching hate toward us infidels.  And in their world THERE IS NO FREEDOM FROM RELIGION!

Political correctness will be our death!  You have to look no further than the aftermath of this incident.  The four liberal networks, NBC, CBS, ABC and CNN would not even call this a terrorist act and immediately began spreading lunatic ideas like Major Hasan was under stress leading to his meltdown.  The Messiah in a speech he made after commandeering the networks led with the mythic oppression of Native Americans rather than the issue at hand.  The hundreds of liberals coming forth to assert that this incident had nothing to do with Islam is just typical of us putting our heads in the sand.

In addition, these Islamic Jihadist whackos mostly look like normal people making it easy for them to hide amongst us.  Nidal Malik Hasan attended high school in Roanoke, Va., studied biochemistry at Virginia Tech, played sports, didn’t get into any trouble, and appeared to be a normal, well-adjusted individual. He was a psychiatry resident at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington and was apparently working at Fort Hood during the pre-deployment process for soldiers.

I guess his statement as he was shooting people of “Allahu akbar” (Allah is the greatest!) and the business cards he had in his apartment with the “Soldiers of Allah” imprint, or something to that effect, were not enough for the Messiah and the liberal press to call a spade a spade.  Kind of like arguing with a liberal, facts don’t matter to them!

written by Eee Zee

Federal officials will release more details on a series of raids this weekend against Hutaree. As of right now, it appears the FBI raided the militant Christian group based on leads they were preparing to attack Muslim Americans.

Gee, if I remember right just a few months, the FBI and other federal agencies were tracking Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who had radical Islamic ties and then ended up shooting up the Fort Hood army post in Texas. During that attack, the federal government did their damndest to cover Hasan’s Islamic ties while choosing not to immediately to prevent Hasan’s actions knowing he was a threat.

Why did they act this way? Oh, because the feds were scared of discriminating against Muslims and the possible backlash if they took him in before he had the opportunity to attack Foot Hood.

So is the lesson here in 2010 in Barack’s America, that if you are a Christian preparing for a holy war, the federal government will provide preventive measures to stop any future actions, but if you are a Muslim and preparing for jihad in the United States, they will allow you to carry out your actions and then arrest you to avoid any Islamic backlash? I mean, that’s what I am taking from this today.

By the way, I don’t advocate either of the actions of either Hutaree or Hasan. I just think the FBI’s decision making should be examined closely.

written by Eee Zee

Islam is great. Ya just have to love a religion that allows you to kill your wife if she gets raped but you can’t tell a woman she turns you on.

The pair, an Indian flight attendant and her cabin services supervisor, were convicted of “coercion to commit sin” over the messages and initially sentenced to six months in jail, The National newspaper said on its website, citing court documents.

The sentence was reduced on appeal last week to three months and deportation orders against the pair were lifted, it added. It did not reveal the content of the messages.

Dubai’s foreign population has expanded rapidly in recent years as expatriates flocked to the Gulf Arab trade and tourism hub for its tax-free earnings and year-round sunshine.

The changes have challenged the Emirati population, which is now vastly outnumbered by foreigners, raising concern that their emirate’s rapid pace of growth is a threat to their social and religious identity in what remains a deeply conservative region.

An Emirates spokeswoman declined to comment on the case as it was still ongoing.

The paper said the case emerged after the flight attendant’s husband filed a lawsuit against his wife a year ago accusing her of being in an illicit relationship with her supervisor. It said the couple had been embroiled in a divorce battle since 2007.

The case is the latest decency case against foreigners accused of not respecting local mores.

In a separate case, a British pair caught kissing in public in Dubai is appealing a month-long jail sentence handed down after an Emirati mother complained her child had seen their indiscretion.

The pair, a British man living in Dubai and a female friend, were arrested in November on accusations of kissing and touching each other intimately in public and consuming alcohol, their lawyer said. They were ordered jailed for a month.

In a high-profile case in 2008, a British couple narrowly escaped jail after a court found them guilty of engaging in drunken sexual activity out of wedlock, and for doing so in public on a beach in the emirate.

They were sentenced to three months in prison followed by deportation, but had their jail terms overturned on appeal.

In a separate case this year, a British couple who shared a hotel room managed to escape trial in Dubai for having sex out of wedlock by producing a marriage certificate.

by Cynthia Johnston

written by Eee Zee

There are already 38 million illegals in the country. La Raza, the Mexican supremacist party for expansion of the Mexican welfare state, is actively fighting against illegals participating in the census. They do this through the Mexican media, and through the Catholic church. The Senate has joined in this fight. BOTH LA RAZA ENTITIES DO NOT WANT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO KNOW HOW BAD THE MEXICAN INVASION AND OCCUPATION IS!

Judicial Watch:
Mexicans Say Amnesty Will Boost Illegal Immigration

If President Obama keeps his promise of giving the nation’s 12 million illegal aliens amnesty it will encourage more Mexicans to enter the United States, according to residents of the struggling Latin American country who are undoubtedly rooting for the commander-in-chief’s plan.

The majority of illegal immigrants in the U.S. are from Mexico therefore the president’s reprieve project will greatly affect that nation. Two-thirds of Mexicans say they know someone living in the United States and around one-third have an immediate member of their household or close relative living in the U.S.

A majority of those residing south of the border say legalizing their undocumented countrymen will inspire more Mexicans to head north, according to a recent survey conducted by an internationally known polling and market research company. A vast majority of Mexicans with a relative in the United States said a legalization program would make people they know more likely to go to America illegally.

The results of the survey were made public this week by a research organization dedicated to studying the economic, social, fiscal and demographic impacts of immigration in the U.S. It reveals that nearly one-third of Mexican residents (nearly 40 million people) would like to live in the U.S. and if there was an amnesty a large number would come illegally with the hope of qualifying for a future exoneration.

An amnesty, therefore, would stimulate more illegal immigration which is the last thing this country needs. Furthermore, rewarding those who have violated our nation’s laws with coveted U.S. residency and possibly citizenship demeans the system, especially for those who follow the appropriate steps to come lawfully.
It’s bad enough that U.S. taxpayers annually dish out billions of dollars to educate, medically treat and incarcerate illegal aliens who are, in many cases, depleting local governments. Los Angeles County alone spends more than $1 billion a year, including $48 million a month in welfare costs, to provide services for illegal aliens. The crisis is hardly limited to border states, which have traditionally been the most impacted. Georgia’s skyrocketing illegal population costs taxpayers nearly $2 billion a year.

*

ILLEGAL ALIEN POPULATION MAY BE AS HIGH AS 38 MILLION
Illegal alien population may be as high as 38 million A new report finds the Homeland Security Department “grossly underestimates” the number of illegal aliens living in the U.S. Homeland Security’s Office of Immigration Studies released a report August 31 that estimates the number of illegal aliens residing in the U.S. is between 8 and 12 million. But the group Californians for Population Stabilization, or CAPS, has unveiled a report estimating the illegal population is actually between 20 and 38 million. Four experts, all of whom contributed to the study prepared by CAPS, discussed their findings at a news conference at the National Press Club in Washington Wednesday. James Walsh, a former associate general counsel of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, said he is “appalled” that the Bush administration, lawyers on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and every Democratic presidential candidate, with the exception of Joe Biden, have no problem with sanctuary cities for illegal aliens. “Ladies and gentlemen, the sanctuary cities and the people that support them are violating the laws of the United States of America. They’re violating 8 USC section 1324 and 1325, which is a felony — [it's] a felony to aid, support, transport, shield, harbor illegal aliens,” Walsh stated. Walsh said his analysis indicating there are 38 million illegal aliens in the U.S. was calculated using the conservative estimate of three illegal immigrants entering the U.S. for each one apprehended. According to Walsh, “In the United States, immigration is in a state of anarchy — not chaos, but anarchy.”

written by Eee Zee

By INGER EBERHART – Special to the Telegraph

Like most Americans I would find it quite refreshing to hear “leaders” in the minority community and editorial writers acknowledge the damage done by illegal immigration. The Americans most and first affected by the crime of illegal immigration are native-born Hispanics and African Americans.

“I don’t believe there are any jobs that Americans won’t take, and that includes agricultural jobs,” says Carol Swain, professor of law at Vanderbilt University and author of “Debating Immigration.’” “Illegal immigration hurts low-skilled, low-wage workers of all races, but blacks are harmed the most because they’re disproportionately low-skilled.”

Not the concept promoted by the uniformly constructed columns from the media elite who are now in panic mode because President Obama has not pushed for another amnesty for illegal aliens as promised during the campaign.

As if with one voice, editorial writers and guest columnists nationwide are hopefully promoting the notion that our economy, job market and national morality would somehow be boosted if we legalized 12-20 million illegals who were able to make it past our Border Patrol agents.

Nonsense.

A new Zogby survey finds that minority voters’ views are somewhat different than advertised by the “amnesty now” editorial writers. The poll of Hispanic, Asian-American and African-American likely voters finds that overall, each of these groups prefers enforcement and for illegal immigrants to return home.

As Dr. Steven Camarota of the Washington, D.C. based Center for Immigration Studies notes, “These views are in sharp contrast to the leaders of most ethnic advocacy organizations, who argue for increased immigration and legalization of illegal immigrants.

The Zogby poll also exploded many of the myths of monolithic Hispanic views on illegal immigration and enforcement. Most members of minority groups do not feel illegal immigration is caused by limits on legal immigration, instead, members feel it’s due to a lack of enforcement.

1. Hispanics: Just 20 percent said illegal immigration was caused by not letting in enough legal immigrants; 61 percent said inadequate enforcement.

When asked to choose between enforcement that would cause illegal immigrants in the country to go home or offering them a pathway to citizenship with conditions, most members of minority groups choose enforcement:

2. Hispanics: 52 percent support enforcement to encourage illegals to go home; 34 percent support conditional legalization,

3. Asian-Americans: 57 percent support enforcement; 29 percent support conditional legalization,

4. African-Americans: 50 percent support enforcement; 30 percent support conditional legalization.

We are endlessly bombarded with the worn out and absurd concept that the majority of Americans who demand border security and equal protection under the law — even immigration law — are somehow “anti-immigration.” We already take in more immigration than any nation on the planet.

No one can envy the job of the propagandists who are charged with convincing us that we need amnesty for 12-20 million more workers or welfare recipients while Americans and real immigrants struggle.

Officially, national unemployment sits at 10 percent and the numbers are even worse for black males. That group suffers an unemployment rate of more than 17 percent. Each time the federal government conducts raids on employers who employ illegals — formerly shut out poor Americans fill the job slots. Many times, wages then go up.

It’s just not true that undocumented workers are doing the jobs that we won’t do.

Honesty on immigration is at a premium these days. Americans should make a decision on whom to believe: The writers and ethnic-based groups with an agenda or the voice of the people who demand a fair chance at jobs

written by Eee Zee

By Frosty Wooldridge and RN Stephany Gabbard

If you don’t think our Congress is taking Americans for a ride, think again. According to the late Dr. Madeleine Cosman, “At least 300,000 anchor babies annually become citizens in California.”

In 1994, 74,987 anchor babies in maternity units cost taxpayers $215 million in Stockton, California. In 2003, 70 percent of the 2,300 babies born in San Joaquin General maternity ward were from illegal aliens. That number has exploded today with over three million illegal aliens residing in California.

The French economist Frederic Bastiat said, “The unseen is more expensive than the seen.” In Stockton, California, the Silverio Family was featured in the Wall Street Journal in 2003. They were fruit pickers who arrived illegally from Oxtotilan, Mexico in 1997. The wife, Felipa had three kids, but popped an anchor baby named Flor. The child was premature and spent three months in a neonatal incubator at a cost to the San Joaquin Hospital of over $300,000.00. They conceived another, Christian. The second baby made them eligible for $1,000 per month welfare. Because Flor is disabled, she receives $600.00 monthly for asthma. Although the illegal aliens made $18,000.00 annually picking fruit, they collected $12,000.00 of your tax dollars for their anchor babies. One night the father, Cristobal crashed his van. He had no license or insurance. Taxpayers paid for all hospital bills. That’s why 77 hospitals in Border States were going bankrupt in 2003, but Senator John McCain wrote a rider into the Medicaid Bill for $1.4 billion of your tax dollars. It passed.

Not to finish the spending spree on these anchor babies, the children attend California schools at a cost of $7,000.00 per year over and above what their parents pay in taxes. The cost for all five of their children for one school year exceeds $35,000.00 times 18 years for a grand taxpayer total of $630,000.00. This is only one family. No wonder California is $24 billion in debt. Last week, Governor Schwarzenneger handed out IOUs to vendors to the tune of $54 million.

Additional costs for illegal alien children stem from translators, advocates and middlemen. MediCal in 2003 sponsored 760,000 illegal aliens. Supplemental Security Income is a non-means-treated federal grant of money and food stamps. Be assured that scams and fraud run rampant. Over 500,000 ‘mentally disabled kids’ are on drugs for ADHD and ODD. One lady, Linda Torres was arrested in Bakersfield with $8,500.00 in small bills in her pocket. It was her SSI lump award for her disability, which was heroin addiction.

Just so Americans across the country don’t feel left out, let’s move to Georgia. Net Fiscal Costs of Illegal Immigration for Georgia:

Births of illegal aliens in Georgia cost to taxpayers:

2000– 5,133 births cost: $13 million
2001– 9,528 births cost: $23 million
2002—11,188 births cost: $27 million

Additionally, receiving public assistance in 2002 for 25,000 children of illegal aliens cost Georgia taxpayers $42 million annually. Health care costs to Georgia taxpayers for illegal aliens in 2002 was 64,000 doctor visits which ran Grady Health System into a $63 million deficit.

What is it in your state? This picture is a small window into the massive fraud being perpetrated on your wallet by your congressional leaders. What is your senator or congressman doing about it? The simple answer fulfills French economist Bisbiat’s rule of the unseen. Your congressional reps assist this fraud! They encourage it every day by doing nothing about thousands of unlawful immigrants crossing our borders and they have done nothing since 9/11 to deport the estimated 20 million already here.

With over three million illegal aliens arriving annually, they birth 300,000 anchor babies in California alone and you pay the maximum. When those legal ‘American’ babies grow to 18, they can ‘chain migrate’ their kin into our country. We’re talking about a crisis SO huge, your children and this country will not survive it.

This year, U.S. House Representative Nathan Deal (R-GA) introduced a new bill to stop anchor babies from becoming U.S. citizens. It languishes in committee.

Automatic citizenship is enshrined in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” That provision, ratified in 1868, was drafted with freed slaves in mind.
Deal and his supporters say the 14th Amendment wording was never meant to automatically give citizenship to babies born to illegal immigrants.

“This is a sensible, overdue measure that closes a clause that was never meant to be a loophole,” said Bob Dane, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which seeks tighter immigration restrictions.

Ireland and other countries are changing their laws to stop anchor babies.

written by Eee Zee