Mexico has invaded the US over 216 times

A confrontation between sheriff's deputies and uniformed drug traffickers along the Texas border (1/23/06) has intensified concerns about illegal incursions into the United States by Mexican soldiers while heightening bilateral tensions over border violence. U.S. officials are demanding that Mexico fully investigate an incident Monday (1/23/06) in which several men wearing Mexican military uniforms and carrying high-grade military weapons helped marijuana traffickers escape into Mexico after almost being apprehended by sheriff deputies. Of course Mexican officials deny that real Mexican soldiers were involved, even though numerous pictures and videos have been taken inside the US clearly showing Mexican soldiers. The incident has refocused attention on the Mexican military soldiers and police personnel have crossed onto U.S. territory over 216 times in the past 10 years.

West, the county sheriff, said such incursions occur several times a month, and that he and others have been trying to get federal officials to focus on the problem. "I'm sick and tired of the federal government calling us liars," said West, a Democrat re-elected last year. "Just about every time we catch a big load (of marijuana), every time we chase them back, Mexican soldiers are there.”They're sitting there with Humvees and state-of-the-art military equipment. We're sitting there with (patrol cars). We're sitting there with limited high-powered rifles and sidearms versus machine guns," West said. He noted one case in 2002 when a Border Patrol agent reported a Mexican military vehicle inside Arizona. To avoid a problem, the agent tried to drive away but said the Mexican soldiers fired at him, shattering his back window. In another case in 2000, Border Patrol agents confronted two Mexican army Humvees a mile inside New Mexico. One of the vehicles stopped, but the soldiers in the other fled and fired two shots at the border agents.

"It was no doubt that it was Mexican military, because I've seen them and I've dealt with them all my life down here," said Arvin West, sheriff of Texas' Hudspeth County, whose officers filmed Monday's incident using cameras he bought to back up his allegations. West has said Monday's clash was among the more serious incidents, in which soldiers helping drug smugglers "are sitting there waiting with their machine guns to make sure the drugs get back OK."
The U.S. ambassador to Mexico, Antonio Garza, sent a diplomatic protest to the Mexican government Wednesday, demanding an explanation and questioning Mexico's commitment to combating violence along the border. Local authorities in Texas and U.S. Border Patrol officials have been even more strident in their criticism, saying the incursions by Mexican soldiers are very common and worrisome. They also have condemned federal officials for not taking the matter seriously enough.

While Mexico's Defense Ministry is investigating Monday's incident, a spokesman for President Vicente Fox asserted that the suspected soldiers were actually traffickers wearing fake uniforms. Foreign Ministry officials said the traffickers' equipment did not match that of local army units. Yet for all Mexican analysts, the fact that drug traffickers can operate along the border in Mexican army uniforms, even if fake, raises disturbing questions by itself.
Monday's border incident began when Texas authorities tried to stop three SUVs on an interstate highway near El Paso. The vehicles fled toward the border, where people in Mexican army-style uniforms with army-style weapons in an army Humvee appeared to be waiting for them on the other side of the Rio Grande. The state officers and sheriff's deputies had their guns drawn, as did the smugglers, but no shots were fired. More than 1,400 pounds of marijuana was found in one of the vehicles, which blew a tire and was abandoned on the Texas side, while the armed, uniformed men flanked a second vehicle stuck in the river while it was unloaded then burned the stuck vehicle before fleeing into Mexico.

From Senator Joe Lieberman

Today I announced my decision to vote "no" on the nomination of Samuel Alito to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. I'd like to take this opportunity to explain to you why I made this decision.

As you know, the US Supreme Court, as a body, holds a uniquely powerful and autonomous role in our system of government; as the highest court in the land, it is the ultimate arbiter of many decisions which affect the lives of every American citizen. Because decisions made at the Supreme Court level have altered the course of American history, its impact on our great nation is immeasurable, and lasting.

That power, combined with the fact that individuals who are chosen to sit on the Court serve for life, makes the decision as to how one will vote on a Supreme Court nominee one of the most awesome responsibilities I, as one of your United States senators, can ever face.

At the core of our great nation is a belief in personal freedom and equal opportunity for all Americans. Those are the principles upon which this nation was founded, and has thrived. They define who we are, what we stand for, what we believe in, and what countless men and women have died protecting since before we even became a sovereign nation.

While I respect Judge Alito's intellect and ability, and his experience, it is his judicial philosophy regarding those freedoms and opportunities that I question.

As a judge, he has issued more than 350 opinions over 15 years. As a government attorney in the 1980s, he made numerous personal statements regarding his philosophy. In reviewing that body of evidence, it is clear to me that while Judge Alito may have the intellect and experience necessary to be a Supreme Court Justice, he might not protect and defend those freedoms and opportunities.

As a Supreme Court Justice, that would be, in a word, unacceptable. We, as a people and as a nation, have come too far to turn back the clock. A woman's right to choose, for example, grounded in the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade case, is settled law. I don't believe Judge Alito agrees with that, nor am I confident he would vote in a manner consistent with respecting that precedent.

As well, in civil rights cases, Judge Alito has repeatedly established an unusually high bar, I think too high a bar, for entrance to our courts for people who believed they've been denied equal opportunity and fair treatment based on race or gender.

As a society, we should always be looking to move forward, to become a "better people," and to set an example for the rest of the world. We tell the rest of the world every day that our nation is unique; we do that, in part, because in the United States of America, personal freedom and equal opportunity are rights for everyone, not privileges for the few.

It is in that spirit that I said "no" to Judge Alito, and "yes" to the American people.

Thank you for your continued friendship and support.


Senator Joe Lieberman

"Get Tough" approach to employers

Jumping into a debate they have largely avoided, top Arizona Democrats are proposing legislation that would penalize employers if they knowingly hired undocumented immigrants.

The bill drew immediate opposition from business lobbyists and some immigrant rights groups as well as a firm denunciation from a key Republican who has pushed unsuccessfully for similar sanctions.

Sen. Bill Brotherton, D-Phoenix, said it's time that lawmakers reduce the demand for undocumented workers by requiring employers to check the validity of Social Security numbers against a federal database. Most legislative bills in recent years have aimed at the "supply" of such workers by focusing on tighter border security and penalties aimed at undocumented immigrants working in Arizona.

"I felt there was a vacuum in the area of employer sanctions," Brotherton said. "I'm filling that vacuum."

Brotherton was joined at a Capitol news conference by Attorney General Terry Goddard. Gov. Janet Napolitano, who last week called for penalties on employers who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants, worked with Brotherton on the legislation.

Under the terms of Senate Bill 1215, employers would have to cross-check the Social Security numbers of prospective employees with the federal government to make sure the employee was legally eligible for employment. If a number didn't match the name on the employment application, the employer could not hire that person. If the check turned up that the potential employee had overstayed a visa or otherwise lost employment eligibility, that also would bar hiring.

Employers would have two options: the Basic Pilot Program administered by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security or they could have checks done by the Social Security Administration.

Failure to make checks could bring fines of up to $5,000.

A companion bill, Senate Bill 1216, would impose fines of up to $5,000 against anyone who knowingly hired an "illegal alien."

Reaction was swift and strong.

Hiring and employment growth in Arizona would grind to a halt if employers were forced to use the federal Basic Pilot Program, said Farrell Quinlan, vice president of communications for the Arizona Chamber of Commerce. The program, which checks the validity of an employee's Social Security and immigration status, is still being used on a trial basis and has kinks that would become obstacles if more than 100,000 Arizona employers were to flood it with requests, he said.

"There's a reason it's called a Basic Pilot Program," Quinlan said. "It's basic, and it's a pilot."

Currently, the federal program is voluntary, and there is no state law requiring employers to ensure their employees are legal U.S. residents. Although it is illegal to hire undocumented workers, federal enforcement is lax.

Salvador Reza, a director of the Tonatierra community organization, echoed the business complaints that the legislation could hurt the state economy.

"A lot of companies will shy away from coming to Arizona, and the companies that require undocumented workers will have to close down," he said.

Reza said that the move "looks good politically" but that the state is powerless to really solve the problem.

"What they need to do is pressure the federal government to pass immigration reform that works," he said.

Radio host Elias Bermudez, organizer of last week's massive immigration rally at the Capitol, said the bills are "another fruitless effort on the part of our legislators and our law enforcement officers to solve a problem that is not within their jurisdiction nor their ability to solve."

Bermudez, of Immigrants Without Borders, called the employer-sanction proposals a "waste of money, waste of resources and waste of time that can be better spent dealing with issues they can solve."

Brotherton was unfazed, saying the job checks moved quickly and effortlessly when his staff tested them recently.

He added that federal Homeland Security officials assured his staff that they could handle a sudden influx of hits on the computer database.

Business officials estimate it would affect more than 100,000 employers with staffs ranging from a few to thousands.

"I don't think it's much of a burden," he said of the effect on employers. "It's free."

However, he and Goddard, whose office would be responsible for enforcing the law, said they agree with critics that the solution to America's immigration crisis must come from the federal government.

"We have set up a system that encourages folks to pay a coyote (smuggler) to cross the border and then get false identification," Goddard said. "It is not fair. It encourages criminal acts and, frankly, is going to hurt the economy in the long run."

Their proposal drew a harsh denunciation from state Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, who has proposed employer sanctions for three years only to see Democrats oppose him.

"It's deception, and it reminds me of the ¡Three Amigos!: They run around, fire their gun, show it to you, but they're not ready to get into the battle," he said, referring to Napolitano, Goddard and Brotherton.

He predicted Brotherton's bill will get nowhere in the Republican-dominated Legislature and challenged Democrats to sign on with his bill. Brotherton said he intends to stick with his bill and said it will get a vote even if he has to tack it on to other bills.

Goddard and Brotherton said they support a guest-worker program, such as that proposed by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

An Arizona employment-check system could highlight the need for guest workers, Goddard and Brotherton said, because it would pinpoint employers who say they can't find enough legal workers.

Goddard said the early draft of the bill envisions up to $500,000 for enforcement plus whatever money is collected from fines.

That would be enough money to hire about a half-dozen employees, mostly investigators, and is an inadequate amount, he said.

Employers who can't prove that they used the federal databases could be subject to fines. Brotherton said he didn't have details of how that would work but speculated state investigators could be able to have federal officials run a check on which firms had used the job-check databases.

UN SCUM

The UN is a failure. While the United States pays the biggest portion of the tab, the UN makes backroom deals with our enemies. In 2005 UN diplomats lounged around on what looks like a 1970s Merv Griffin set by day and double parked their cars by night. "Peacekeepers" of the UN raped those they were sent to help, including children, across the world. In the 10 years since Black Hawk Down, 9 million more Africans have been killed from conflict. The last time that many people died, we held people accountable. What, if not this, is the UN for?
Where are the editorials condemning the current state of the UN? The media was too busy in 2005 trying to scuttle the John Bolton nomination because he might be hard on the UN. Had the media spent the broadcast time and column inches on UN reform that they spent chasing moonbat scandals, they could have made a difference in lives.

The Terrorist State of Iran

Iran, whose president has denied the Holocaust, said Sunday it would hold a conference to examine the scientific evidence concerning Nazi Germany’s extermination of 6 million Jews. Hard-line Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has recently provoked global condemnation for saying the Holocaust is a “myth” and calling for Israel to be wiped from the face of the earth. Iran further alarmed Western countries last week by restarting its research at a nuclear facility after a two-year freeze. “It is a strange world. It is possible to discuss everything except the Holocaust,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told reporters.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the hardline President of Iran, launched an angry tirade against the West yesterday, accusing it of a ‘dark ages’ mentality and threatening retaliation unless it recognised his country’s nuclear ambitions.

In a blistering assault, Ahmadinejad repeated the Islamic regime’s position that it would press ahead with a nuclear programme despite threats by the European Union and United States to refer Iran to the UN Security Council, where it could face possible sanctions. He added that Iran was a ‘civilised nation’ that did not need such weapons. Iran insists its nuclear programme is a wholly peaceful attempt to generate electricity.

Addressing a rare press conference in Tehran, he appeared to issue thinly veiled threats against Western countries, implying that they could face serious consequences unless they backed down. ‘You need us more than we need you. All of you today need the Iranian nation,’ Ahmadinejad said. ‘Why are you putting on airs? You don’t have that might.’

Reminding the West that it had supported the monarchical regime of the former Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi - overthrown in the 1979 Islamic revolution - he went on: ‘Those same powers have done their utmost to oppress us, but this nation, because of its dignity, has forgiven them to a large extent. But if they persist with their present stance, maybe the day will come when the Iranian nation will reconsider.’ He added: ‘If they want to deny us our rights, we have ways to secure those rights.’

US Ambassador John Bolton shows the world how to have a spine, castigating Kofi Annan and the United Nations for a disgusting Palestinian Solidarity event, held every year, that features a map omitting the state of Israel: US decries Palestinian map display at U.N. event.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton has complained to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan about an annual U.N. event where a map of pre-1948 Palestine, an area that now comprises the state of Israel, is displayed.

“It was entirely inappropriate for this map to be used. It can be misconstrued to suggest that the United Nations tacitly supports the abolition of the state of Israel,” Bolton said.

“Given that we now have a world leader pursuing nuclear weapons who is calling for the state of Israel to be ‘wiped off the map,’ the issue has even greater salience,” he said in a January 3 letter, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters on Friday. The letter was first reported in the New York Sun.

Bolton’s letter complained about the symbolism of Annan attending the latest International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, held last November 29, along with General Assembly President Jan Eliasson and Russian Ambassador Andrei Denisov, the Security Council president for November.

He questioned whether the United Nations could promote the event when U.S. law prohibits funding such events. Washington’s dues cover about a quarter of the regular U.N. budget.

Annan’s office was preparing a response to the letter, U.N. chief spokesman Stephane Dujarric said. He said the secretary-general was grateful that Bolton and others had brought the matter to his attention and had raised the matter of the map with the General Assembly’s Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, which stages the annual event. It was not Annan but the committee that decided in 1981 to display the pre-1948 map at the annual event, he said.

“This gives a very unfortunate impression that the United Nations favors replacing Israel by a single Palestinian state, which is not the case,” he said, stressing that Annan regularly describes Israel as a full U.N. member and strongly disapproved of the Iranian president’s comments.

Border agents become targets

Federal officials have warned U.S. Border Patrol agents that they could be the targets of assassins hired by immigrant smugglers, according to a confidential memo obtained by the San Bernardino County Sun newspaper.

"Unidentified Mexican alien smugglers are angry about the increased security along the U.S./Mexico border and have agreed that the best way to deal with U.S. Border Patrol agents is to hire a group of contract killers," the Department of Homeland Security said in a Dec. 21 officer safety alert.

The alert states that the smugglers intend to bring members of the Mara Salvatrucha street gang -- known as MS-13 -- into the country to perform the killings, The Sun reported Tuesday.

Federal officials consider MS-13, with an estimated 30,000 members in 33 states, to be one of the most dangerous gangs in the country. It was formed in Los Angeles by immigrants from El Salvador.

The safety alert was based on an FBI report. An FBI spokes-man in Washington said he could not comment.

Michael Friel, a spokesman for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, said he could not comment directly on the confidential memo but recalled that agents' lives have been threatened before.

"It's no surprise that these smugglers, these criminals, would be threatening our agents," Friel said. "And that would be a huge mistake on their part if they try."

On Tuesday, the agency issued a statement saying it takes seriously the risks of securing America's borders.

"Border Patrol agents and CBP officers are prepared to respond appropriately to threats either against the country or themselves," the statement said. "Border Patrol agents and CBP officers have received various types of threats in the past and have worked diligently with their law-enforcement partners to address these threats. ... The difficult and sometimes hazardous duty of securing our borders is CBPs first and foremost responsibility."

Border Patrol officials say assaults on agents increased significantly during the past year.

On Dec. 30, in an incident that strained U.S.-Mexican relations, an agent shot and killed an 18-year-old man who allegedly threw a large rock at him near the wall separating Tijuana and San Diego.

Last week, agents in Texas reported two incidents in which they were shot at from the Mexican side of the border.

T.J. Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council, a 6,500-member union, said the DHS alert proves agents' lives often are at risk.

"MS-13 has shown that its members have very little regard for human life," he said. "Some of the atrocities they have committed are truly unspeakable, and it worries me to know that our agents on the line are now the targets."

Immigrant population reaching new high

As the nation considers immigration proposals from Congress and the President, a Center for Immigration Studies analysis of new Census Bureau data shows that the immigrant population (legal and illegal) reached a new high in 2005. The data, which the Bureau has not yet analyzed, also show that 2000-2005 is the highest five-year period of new immigration (legal and illegal) in American history. Almost half of new arrivals are estimated to be illegal aliens.

The new report provides a detailed picture of the socio-economic status of immigrants, including estimates for illegal aliens. States with the largest increase in immigrants are California, Texas Georgia, New Jersey, Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Washington, Virginia, Arizona, Tennessee, Minnesota, and Nevada.

Full article
http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back1405.pdf