January 28, 2007
This will become very important very soon.
Athens Banner Herald
January 9, 2007
High court upholds ID theft conviction
ATLANTA – The Georgia Supreme Court has upheld the identity fraud conviction of an illegal immigrant from Mexico who used the name and Social Security number of a Danielsville man to get a job at a poultry plant.
In a unanimous decision released Monday, the justices said Georgia’s identity theft law is not unconstitutionally vague, nor is it pre-empted by federal law.
The high court found that Nohe Gomes Hernandez “misappropriated the Social Security number of Jason Smith,” a Danielsville resident, and that he “then used this misappropriated number to obtain a Social Security card and a California driver’s license in Smith’s name” so he could get a job at a Northeast Georgia poultry plant.
Read the rest from the Athens Banner Herald here.
The opinion from the Court here.
Report fraud here
The phone number at the Georgia Governor’s office is 404 656 1776.
From AZCentral.com last year
State effort proves that Social Security info can be verified
Oct. 16, 2006
Quietly, for the past year, state officials tucked away in a non- descript building near the state Capitol have waged a small battle against illegal immigration.
What they do seems pretty simple: They check state employees’ Social Security numbers to make sure they match those on file in Washington.
But that monthly running of the numbers might prove significant in the debate over illegal immigration in Arizona.
Because it knocks down a major argument that kept state Republicans from supporting legislation last year that would crack down on employers of illegal immigrants.
Namely, it shows the database works.
Arizona started checking the names and Social Security numbers of its employees in December after Gov. Janet Napolitano signed an executive order mandating the program.
Since then, every five weeks or so, the state Department of Administration has electronically sent the names and numbers of all 42,000 state employees through the Social Security Number Verification program.
You can read more about what Arizona has done here.
You can call Governor Perdue’s office and ask if Georgia is doing the same thing here. 404 656 1776 I am.
This effort at compliance with existing laws does NOT require legislation.
Hispanics Lead U.S. In Unmarried Birthrate
January 23, 2007
Illegal immigrants can get welfare for their U.S.-born children, and it has become “culturally O.K.” for Hispanics to take advantage of the welfare system, according to Amy Braun, who works for an Orange County, Calif., home for young single mothers who are in crisis.
The birthrate among Hispanic women in the U.S. is twice as high as the rest of the American population – and an increasing number of Hispanic children are born to unmarried mothers.
Hispanic women now have the highest unmarried birthrate in the country – more than three times that of whites and Asians, and almost 1 1/2 times that of black women, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
For every 1,000 unwed Hispanic women, 92 children were born in 2003, the latest year for which data are available. The rate for unmarried white women is 28 children per 1,000, for Asians it’s 22, and for black women, 66.
According to Heather Mac Donald, a senior fellow of the Manhattan Institute, 45 percent of all Hispanic births occur outside marriage, compared to 24 percent for whites.
Hispanics now dominate the federal Women, Infants and Children free food program, with Hispanic enrollment soaring more than 25 percent from 1996 to 2002. Black enrollment fell 12 percent and white enrollment dipped 6.5 percent during the same period
Try hard to make yourself believe that another path to citizenship will change this.
Try hard to recognize that the colonization of American by Mexico is a rich blessing – and that President Bush is trying to secure American borders.
Read the rest here.
January 27, 2007
A Saturday grin from Baltimore in the USA TODAY blogs: Illegal aliens find justice in a parking lot, ask ICE agents for “daylabor” jobs.
Guess what? They were all arrested for being in the U.S. illegally! L:ike they do it in Mexico!
Read it and smile. I am.
Oops…illegals ask immigration agents for work
A large group of illegal immigrants picked the wrong folks to ask for work in the parking lot of a Baltimore convenience store.
“About 10 agents in three or four unmarked vehicles stopped at the 7-Eleven around 11 a.m.,” according to the Baltimore Sun. “As soon as the agents pulled their vehicles into the lot, about two dozen men approached, asking in Spanish if those in the car had work for them.”
The immigration agents, driving unmarked cars and wearing raid jackets that identified them as police officers, had been hunting for a fugitive alien, but ended up arresting the 24 men after determining that they were not authorized to be in the United States, the agency says in a press release.
Homeland Security says six of the aliens had criminal records in the United States, eight had been deported in the past and two were already in the process of being removed from the country.
“Although ICE conducts targeted enforcement actions, we will not ignore immigration violations we encounter during the course of doing business,” the head of ICE’s Baltimore office said in the statement.
Now….about 20 million to go. What if we began to arrest 24 illegals each day in every city in America?
BONUS info: Link to ICE News release site.
January 26, 2007
The “WHY” of the president’s refusal to secure American borders lies in the fact that he and his corporate bosses have decided that borders are far too expensive and are barriers to increased profits.
They have no intention of ever securing our borders, what we are watching is the stalling dance while Mexico moves into our nation and remains long enough to vote.
I have written about it here.
This is not a secret, although we are having more than a little bit of a problem getting our elected officials to acknowledge the plan, much less find the courage to speak up aginst the disolution of American soverignty.
We will spend a lot of time on this here.
Below is a transcript of the CNN LOU DOBBS TONIGHT broadcast from last night, with Dobb’s guest, Robert Pastor, a cheif architect of the plan to “integrate” the three nations of North America.
DOBBS: Two years ago the Council on Foreign Relations published a report titled “Building a North America Community.” among the goals expressed, to break down trade regulations between the United States and Canada. Between Canada and Mexico and of course, then the United States. But without congressional approval or certainly without congressional oversight or voter approval.
Critics call the plan the North America Union. And many say that it would ultimately destroy U.S. sovereignty.
Robert Pastor is a member of the group that broke the original report. He joins us tonight. It’s good to have you with us.
ROBERT PASTOR, CENTER FOR NORTH AMERICAN STUDIES: Thank you very much.
DOBBS: Robert Pastor, you were co-chairman of an independent task force sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations, and in this report titled “Building a North American Community” the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass states, “The Task Force’s central recommendation is establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security of community, the boundaries of which would be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter.”
At this point what is the basis for moving forward on that?
PASTOR: Well, the United States, Canada and Mexico now are already the largest free trade area in the world. We have $800 billion worth of trade. This is a source of comparative advantage for the United States. But the council report feels that we could take greater advantage if we were deepen economic integration, if we can secure ourselves better, not only at our borders, but also by thinking about continental security perimeter as well.
DOBBS: Why would you think about, just out of curiosity, a common security perimeter when the United States does not have secure ports nor does it have anything approaching secure borders?
PASTOR: Well, it’s precisely because our ports are not secure and our borders are not secure that we need to find not only better ways to do that but also better ways to turn our two neighbors into partners to enhance our security and to enhance our prosperity as well.
DOBBS: And that can’t be done with sovereign nations? There has to be integration of an economy? A customs union, if you will? And a common security perimeter?
PASTOR: I think the vision defined in that report is one of three sovereign nations cooperating with each other to deepen economic integration, to create a common external tariff, to improve our economies and to secure ourselves better.
DOBBS: Let me ask you, the Banff meeting in September of last year. You were there, weren’t you?
PASTOR: I was.
DOBBS: And representatives of all three governments. Military, business, economic ministers and commerce officials. Why was the press not permitted to be there?
PASTOR: Well, there were press in the room. But the leaders of the three groups decided that they wanted to keep the discussions active and vigorous, and therefore confidential.
My personal view is that I would have preferred for the meeting to have issued a statement or a report afterwards. And I hope that if the group comes together again that they’ll do that.
DOBBS: Under what authority are they coming together?
PASTOR: Oh it was a conference.
DOBBS: I know it’s a conference. I’m asking what authority?
PASTOR: I think the three leaders. One was George Schultz from the United States. Peter Lougheed, the former premier of Alberta, Pedro Aspe, a former minister of finance of Mexico. Just assembled a group of about 75 people.
DOBBS: Just willy-nilly, got together.
PASTOR: Oh yes, don’t you attend conferences from time it time to learn about the world.
DOBBS: No I prefer frankly to learn about the world through travel, my reporting, my reading and studying. The fact of the matter is, I really have an aversion to conferences altogether. But I know that some people make a living on them. Who is paying for all of this?
PASTOR: Well I was not organizing that. You’ll have to get to the organizers of the conference. I think foundations. There may have been some corporate sponsorship as well. I was just invited to it.
DOBBS: Right, you also are considered by many to be the architect of this North America Union, or competitors council as it’s coming forward.
I would like to ask you something, I found rather curious in the North America Forum. Saying, “While a vision is appealing, working” – this, by the way, brought forward by Judicial Watch through freedom of information.
“While a vision is appealing, working on the infrastructure might yield more benefit and bring more people on board, evolution by stealth.”
Why should anyone in this country, Mexico or Canada, presuming they’re interested in the sovereign rights and power of their respective nation, tolerate this kind of elitist nonsense?
PASTOR: Well, I’m not sure what you mean by elitist nonsense. I think …
DOBBS: I would be glad to explain it.
PASTOR: Well, go ahead.
DOBBS: The fact of the matter is that government relations are defined by our Constitution. And this is an attempt to integrate economies without the approval of the elected officials of the country and without transparency of any kind or consideration of the part of the elites who are combing behind this idea. We have a North America Free Trade agreement with very specific methodologies and appropriate processes to follow. None of that is being followed here.
PASTOR: Surely you of all people would not want to criticize freedom of speech. You don’t want to criticize an opportunity …
DOBBS: I wouldn’t criticize it at all. As a matter of fact I’m so thrilled with the freedom of press and the public’s right to know, I’d like it see it fully transparent to all of us. Wouldn’t you?
PASTOR: Well, I couldn’t agree with you are.
DOBBS: Well, why don’t you talk it on your folks and say, let’s get this thing straightened out and let’s talk about what we’re really talking about.
PASTOR: Well I think — I commend you for beginning a discussion, which we ought to have on a national level about how to relate to our neighbors to enhance our security and enhance our prosperity as well. That’s exactly what this is about. And there has been inadequate understanding of that.
And frankly very timid acts by each of the three governments. So I would like to see …
DOBBS: Well you call them timid, I call them absolutely arrogant. And I’m one of those folks when you say stealth I get awfully excited about it. I know lots of other Americans do too. And certainly I bet you – I haven’t talked with the Canadians or the Mexicans, but the fact is when individuals start taking on sort of super-governmental initiatives without either approval or direction of elected officials, it gets to be problematic, don’t you think?
PASTOR: Well, you’re certainly not suggesting that nobody should talk about these issues. In fact I would like to talk about them with you as well. Let’s talk about, for example, how to enhance our prosperity among the three countries. I think we should move towards to negotiate a customs union. A common external tariff.
DOBBS: Well, I think …
PASTOR: I don’t think it makes any sense for us to have rules of origin procedures on our borders.
DOBBS: Let me — We’ll continue this conversation. We’re out of time but let me just respond quickly to that one. I think that when we worry about prosperity with a $75 billion trade deficit with Canada, a $50 billion trade deficit with Mexico in such a asymmetrical, the nature of all of these economies, that I would like some more thoughtful people than you’ve aggregated to take on the issue but I’ll be glad to continue on this issue and looking forward to talking to you in the next few weeks.
PASTOR: Well, I do to. You just call me up any time.
DOBBS: Thank you, Robert Pastor.
You have got it, partner.
January 24, 2007
Below is a transcript of Georgia Senator Johnny Isakson on CNN’s Lou Dobbs Tonight broadcast last night:
Read more about Senator Isakson’s position on our borders here. More Johnny Isakson’s please!
Please see bottom of this blog for info on sending a thank you to Senator Isakson for his wisdom and courage.
DOBBS: The White House, says President Bush tonight, will announce what they call visionary proposals to deal with our illegal immigration and border security crises. One leading member of the president’s party, Senator Johnny Isakson, has introduced legislation that would in fact require the president to secure our borders first before introducing any so-called guest worker plan. Senator Isakson joins us here tonight. Good to have you with us, Senator.
SEN. JOHNNY ISAKSON (R), GEORGIA: Thank you, Lou. Good to be here.
DOBBS: Why did you introduce the legislation?
ISAKSON: I ran for the Senate in ’03 and ’04. Biggest domestic issue in the state of Georgia was illegal immigration. And I committed myself to come here and try to find a meaningful solution.
And I think we have, by simply putting a trigger on any new program and saying, until you have secured the border and certified that it’s secure and appropriated the money, no new guest worker program. Otherwise, we’ll repeat 1986’s era, where Congress gave amnesty and had 20 million come into this country.
DOBBS: Senator, what has been the reaction among your colleagues, both in your party and in the Democratic Party, to your proposal?
ISAKSON: Last year, we got 40 votes on an amendment to the original bill, Kennedy-McCain. Seven Democrats, 33 Republicans. A lot of them went home and then came back and said if I had to do over it again, I would vote for that. I have had constructive conversations with McCain, and Graham, and Kennedy. It’s my hope that this year, we can make this the meaningful platform where we finally address this problem in America.
DOBBS: There has been so much game playing in this town on the issue of immigration reform. And I have to ask you, when the president’s releasing the excerpts that he did today, says that to take — in order to take the pressure off the border, we have to have a guest worker program. May I ask it this way, does that make any sense to you whatsoever?
ISAKSON: I have great respect for the president, but it does not make any sense. We made that mistake 21 years ago, and that’s why we have the crisis today. As long as it’s more attractive to get in this country illegally than it is legally, you’re going to continue to have that flow.
DOBBS: And the idea of securing the border, you’re talking about adding 14,000 additional.
DOBBS: Border Patrol agents.
ISAKSON: 24/7 eyes in the sky, 20,000 detention beds, 2,500 port of entry people, and a verifiable I.D. to end this forged document industry that’s proliferated in the country.
DOBBS: It strikes me as an entirely reasonable approach and an absolutely critically necessary. I have said for some time, you cannot reform immigration law if you can’t control immigration.
ISAKSON: And you can’t call it comprehensive if you’re not securing the border.
DOBBS: Well, anywhere but this town you could.
But let me ask you this, if in point in fact this president continues to insist on these guest worker programs and amnesty, and the rhetoric that attaches, do you think there is any way in the world that it can be stopped with a Democratically-controlled House and Senate?
ISAKSON: It’s my hope, because it’s the people’s issue, and it used to be just border states were affected and certain towns. It’s pervasive in the country now. So it’s my sincere hope we can, but I hope the White House will have a vision and see what the problem is, and recognize border security has got to be the bridge to immigration reform.
DOBBS: Senator Johnny Isakson, we thank you for being here. Appreciate it.
ISAKSON: Thank you, Lou. Thanks.
DOBBS: Good luck.
ISAKSON: Thank you.
PLEASE THANK THE SENATOR HERE.
If you are not familiar with the story of two brave border patrol agants going to jail for shooting an illegal alien drug dealer, start here.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Becky Ruby
Wednesday, January 17, 2007 (202) 225-2059
Gingrey meets with Border Patrol agent sentenced to 12 years in prison for wounding Mexican drug smuggler
“Where are our priorities?”
Agent begins serving prison time today
WASHINGTON – U.S. Congressman Phil Gingrey last week met with Jose Alonso Compean, a former U.S. Border Patrol agent sentenced to 12 years in jail for shooting a Mexican drug smuggler attempting to enter the U.S. with nearly 750 pound of marijuana. Compean and his partner, former agent Ignacio Ramon, will begin serving their sentences today.
Gingrey has signed a letter to U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales expressing serious concern over the handling of Compean’s case. The drug smuggler, Osvaldo Davila, was granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for testifying against Compean and Ramon. Compean fired a shot that struck Davila in the rear while Davila was fleeing back to Mexico to escape capture. Compean and Ramon attest that Davila was armed; Border Patrol agents are trained and authorized to use their weapons in such situations.
“Where are our priorities?” asked Gingrey. “We’re turning a blind eye to someone smuggling a million dollars worth of drugs into the U.S., but we’re going to send a Border Patrol agent to jail for doing his job? That is perverted justice. How do we expect to secure our border from criminal immigrants if we jail the men and women tasked with protecting us? There are many troubling aspects of this case, particularly that these agents were convicted on charges from a Mexican drug smuggler who was granted immunity for his testimony. If no one else will act with reason, President Bush himself needs to intervene.”
Attached, please find a photograph of Jose Compean, his wife Patty, and Congressman Gingrey.
Earlier this month, Gingrey signed a letter to U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales expressing deep concern over this case. Below is the text of that letter:
January 8, 2007
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales
United States Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20530
Dear Attorney General Gonzales:
We as Members of Congress remain seriously concerned over the apparent misdirected and overreaching federal prosecution of two distinguished U.S. Border Patrol agents who were doing their job protecting America’s borders from an illegal drug smuggler. We respectfully ask for your immediate intervention in this case and to not oppose a motion filed in court that will keep these men from having to report to prison next week.
There remain several discrepancies in the government’s case against Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean which strongly question whether justice was served. For example, they were convicted mainly on the testimony of a habitual Mexican drug smuggler, who was sought out and given immunity by federal prosecutors to testify. The integrity of this witness must be called into question, but a sealed indictment for drug charges forbade Ramos and Compean from doing so during their trial. Also, there is insufficient proof as to whether or not the drug smuggler was armed that day and in fact threatened Ramos and Compean, forcing them to fire their weapons to protect themselves.
Many of these claims will form the basis of an appeal which attorneys for Agents Ramos and Compean have filed. These agents are not a flight risk nor are they a danger to the community. Because of this and with utmost concern for the safety of these men should they be incarcerated, we ask that you direct your federal prosecutors assigned to this case to not oppose a motion on behalf of the agents that will allow them to remain free on bond pending their appeal.
We believe that the lawful protection of our nation’s borders is of the utmost importance and we should do everything we can to support the men and women of the U.S. Border Patrol in pursuing that goal. The prosecution of these agents is viewed by many in the Border Patrol as putting the concerns of illegal immigrants and drug smugglers ahead of our homeland security. It undermines their critical mission to dutifully enforce our immigration laws. By denying justice in this case, we are effectively turning our backs on the Border Patrol and the duty we entrust to them to secure our borders. We therefore respectfully urge your intervention in this matter.
Members of Congress
# # # #
Congressman Phil Gingrey, M.D. (GA-11)
(202) 225-2059 (direct)
(202) 225-6063 (cell)
January 23, 2007
When we all hear the president address the nation tonight with his plea for another amnesty and a promise at future border security, we should consider what he is not telling us.
Buried by the media, “A Line in the Sand: Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border”, the October, 2006 report from the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security [ don’t get me started ] illustrates the war-like conditions of the American border with Mexico and is a must read.
War-like being an accurate description of the ongoing invasion and colonization of the American nation.
We wonder if the President of the United States has read it.
The 38 page report may put some doubt in even the most ardent “we lasted this long as a nation, everything will be OK eventually” crowd.
For those of us rooted in reality, some news from the congressional report on the Southwest border:
* “Members of Hezbollah have already entered the United States across the Southwest border.”
* Of the 1.2 million illegal border crossers apprehended in 2005, only 165,000 were not from Mexico – and 650 of those were from countries with known terrorist activity.
Let’s see, it can’t be too bad having unsecured borders in a war on terror if we are catching 10 – 30 percent of the potential terrorists illegally entering our homeland. At the worst, only about 1,500 of them made it over our borders last year. Right?
A quote from Representative Michael McCaul, Republican from Texas, chairman of the Subcommittee on Investigations which assembled the report says a lot about security under the Bush administration.”The thing that keeps me up at night when I think, what can we do to prevent another 9/11?, is that [the Mexican crime cartels]own these delivery routes,” McCaul was quoted in Mittelstadt’s October 17, 2006 story, “Border Patrol, Lawmen Outgunned by Cartels.”
There can be no harm to American sovereignty if more than 10 percent of Mexico now lives in the U.S., right? And polls in that Third World narco-oligarchy show that more than 40 percent of the remaining population of 106 million would “migrate” here if they could.
Maybe another guest worker, path to citizenship program would solve their problems – it won’t ours.
The House report estimates that as much as 11 million pounds of cocaine made it into our nation from Mexico last year and states that Mexican drug cartels are the most dangerous criminal enterprise facing American law enforcement.
That 1,950-mile border with Mexico that the strongest nation in the world cannot control?
The House report points out that “the Mexican drug cartels wield substantial control over the U.S. – Mexican border.” And that they operate with military grade weapons, technology and intelligence. Our own Border Patrol Agents and law enforcement are out-gunned and out-manned.
We are past the five-year mark from the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, wages are going down for low-skilled Americans – if they can get a job without knowledge of the Spanish language – and 90 percent of the drug dealing MS-13 gangs here in Ben Franklin’s republic are described by the FBI as being made up of illegal aliens.
Try hard folks, everything will be all right if we can just grant another amnesty and path to citizenship. Si?
The Bush administration and the Democrats promise to secure the border and enforce our employment laws right after the repeat of the one-time path to citizenship of 1986…like they did then. Si?
The report can be read here. The telephone number to the White House is here. How to contact your Senators here
From a U.S. Government Website. U.S. info.state.gov
“In the United States, members of the U.S. House of Representatives represent people. There is one member for approximately every 650,000 citizens. Members of the U.S. Senate represent land. There are two senators from every state, no matter its population. This arrangement reflects a deal made in the 18th century at the time the U.S. Constitution was written to balance the interests of large and small states. In the 21st century, the effect has been to give agricultural interests disproportionate influence in the U.S. Senate, reinforcing support for American agricultural subsidies that can distort trade”.
I hope that some readers will read the entire article.
January 21, 2007
« Previous Page
“… Societies do not usually
lose their freedom at a blow.
They give it up bit by bit,
letting themselves be tied down
with an infinity of little knots.
As rules and regulations
increase, their range of actions
is gradually compressed.
Their options slowly lessen.
Without noticing the change,
they become wards of state.
They imagine themselves still
free, but in a thousand and one
ways, their choices are limited
and guided by the authorities.
And always, there are
what seem to be sensible
reasons for letting their
autonomy be peeled away—
“safety,” “health,” “social
justice,” “equal opportunity.”
It is easy to become
accustomed to docility.
That is why eternal vigilance
is the price of liberty.
Not because liberty is easy
to shatter. But because it can
be softened and dismantled
with the acquiescence of the
very men and women from
whom it is being stolen.”
– Jeff Jacoby, columnist,
— Next Page »