Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Never Satisfied

The affirmative action columnist for the Washington Post Joe Davidson of the Federal Page is on a bender again over the alleged overrepresentation of whites in the federal workforce. Of course, to him, any whites in the federal workforce is overrepresentation.
Diversity in the federal workforce has been a mixed bag over
the past 10 years, according to a report by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission.
The Annual Report on the Federal Work Force shows that the
percentage of men among federal employees dropped to 55.9 percent in fiscal
2009, from 57.7 percent in 2000, while women increased to 44.1 percent from 42.3
percent. Diversity was not helped by a small decline in the employment of
African Americans, but the portion of Latinos grew slightly.

"As the largest employer in the nation, the federal
government should lead the way in creating a diverse and just workplace," said
Jacqueline A. Berrien, who chairs the EEOC. "Government employers need to
continue to recruit and promote employees who represent the tapestry of America.
They must also improve the efficiency of the complaint process so that justice
delayed is not justice denied."

Discrimination complaints are up, but just barely,
the report found. The number of individuals who filed complaints rose by 1.8
percent in 2009, over the previous year.
At the senior pay levels, white males continue to strongly
dominate the ranks, though their percentage dropped to 61 percent of senior pay
recipients in 2009 from 66.7 percent in 2000, the report shows. Women increased
their presence in the highest pay levels among civil servants, but still
comprise just 29 percent of that category. Hispanics also showed a small gain.
Black Americans did not increase their representation in the top pay grades and
actually moved backwards slightly to 7.05 percent from 7.11 percent.
In the typical leftist dishonesty, Davidson does not tell you that the latest statistics for the workforce show that whites are 76% of the population and only 68% of the federal workforce. Blacks are 12% of the population and 17% of the federal workforce.
Any objection to this blatant discrimination against whites is ridiculed, but the only evidence Davidson presents of discrimination against blacks in the federal workforce is a letter from a whining black woman who claims she was discriminated against when she was 16 years old and applying for a job with Prudential Insurance and the writer is 60 years old.
In response to Nisbet, how interesting that for 50 years as a
government official, he has never discriminated against African Americans but
apparently did not observe the daily, systemic discrimination around him. I
presume that if he has been working for 50 years in America, he is at least in
his late 60s. Well, I am in my early 60s and I can tell him what that world was
like. For example, I can tell him of being a 16-year-old National Merit
Scholarship Semifinalist and going for an after-school file clerk job at
Prudential Insurance in Chicago and being told that I failed a test to place
names in alphabetical order. When I asked to see the results, I was told that
was against company policy.

Some 20 years later, the EEOC charged Prudential with
systemic discrimination but required [people to] provide proof that you were
discriminated against. What would I have provided? And who benefited from those
types of discrimination?
The writer then claims that blacks dominate employment with the Postal Service because of civil service exams.
Does he ever wonder why blacks came to be "over-represented,"
as he terms it, at the Postal Service. While he was in his wonderful
rose-colored world, he did not know that the post office became the one agency
where blacks could take a test and be objectively rated (or were needed).
Because of discrimination, if you had an advanced degree, as a black person,
this was one place that you could find a job. It became the place of hire for
the best and the brightest in the African American community.
Funny, leftists sued to prohibit civil service exams in the early 80s and successfully eliminated the general civil service exam. Very few agencies use any sort of exam to hire today, mostly specialty occupations like law enforcement positions. In fact, the end of written examinations has led to affirmative action hiring and racial discrimination against whites.

More ICE Fail

In a convoluted story, two Yemeni nationals have been arrested on terrorism charges in Amsterdam after arriving there from the U.S., and despite an apparent attempt to test security with objects replicating explosive devices, were allowed to travel.

The icing on this cake though was that one of the Yemenis was an illegal alien.

The men were identified as Ahmed Mohamed Nasser al Soofi, 48, a Yemeni who has
permanent resident status in the U.S. and who lived in metro Detroit until two
or three years ago, and Hezem Abdullah Thabi al Murisi, 37, a Yemeni who
traveled to the U.S. on a visitor's visa and also spent time living and working
in metro Detroit.

It appears that the issue over changed flights was not part of the test-run, but missed flights.

Both of the detained men missed flights to Dulles International Airport from
Chicago, and United Airlines then booked them on the same flight to Amsterdam,
the U.S. government official said. The men were sitting near each other on the
flight, but not together.


However, one of the aliens was carrying $7,000.00 in cash, just below the $10K reporting requirement for the export of financial instruments, as well as strange objects in their checked luggage.

In addition, officials said, al Soofi was found to be carrying $7,000 in cash
and a check of his luggage found a cell phone taped to a Pepto-Bismol bottle,
three cell phones taped together, several watches taped together, a box cutter
and three large knives. Officials said there was no indication of explosives and
he and his luggage were cleared for the flight from Birmingham to Chicago
O'Hare.



I find it hard to believe that TSA routinely finds bundles of watches taped together, much less a single watch taped to a bottle.

Kip Hawley, the former Transportation Security administrator, said it is not
unusual to find items like watches and cell phones bound together on flights to
countries like Yemen. He said this would always catch the screener's eye. In
2007, TSA alerted screeners that suspicious items found at U.S. airports may
indicate that terrorists were conducting dry runs. Screeners are deliberately on
the lookout for such items. None of the items found on the men or in their
luggage violated U.S. security rules. But the items and the men's changing
travel itinerary raised concern that it may have been a deliberate test of the
U.S. aviation security system to determine what would raise red flags.

While it is unlikely that terrorists do make dry-runs for their final assault, but they do routinely assign others to test security and report back what can pass through security.
The official says he can't recall a dry run in any of the scores of cases he's
worked on. "Rehearsing an attack runs the considerable risk you'll be caught
without ever being able to attempt the strike — which is the only goal of
terrorists," he says. "If you're determined to strike and have chosen your
method, you'd be better off taking your chances, since success isn't even an
option if you don't try. Testing the terrain simply increases the risk you'll be
caught without ever really have constituted a threat." Most would-be terrorists,
he says, go through painstaking, detail-obsessed planning in the shadows to
increase their chances of success once they go into action — though that sort of
sweating the small stuff usually helps set off vigilante antiterrorism
agencies.
Which makes this official's lack of concern especially troubling. Most likely these two were not terrorists, but recruited to appear suspicious to test what could get through. There is a big difference between a dry-run by a terrorist cell, a test of security is completely different and goes on all the time.
But the real crime is Immigration and Customs Enforcement's policy of not arresting illegal aliens in the U.S. One of these two meets ICE's standard for the Administrative Amnesty, no felony convictions. ICE only arrests those illegals with criminal convictions and makes no effort to find and remove other illegal aliens. Aggressive interior enforcement would have prevented much of these events, but illegals know that they can live openly in the U.S. without fear of arrest.
DHS has also refused to implement a departure control system or inspect departing aliens. Such a practice would have identified Al Murisi as an illegal and disrupted this test-run before it got started.

Saturday, August 28, 2010

The T Stands For Trollop

But for the Department of Homeland Security, the T stands for Trafficking, trafficking victim. The T of course is the T visa, a non-immigrant visa that includes employment authorization and welfare benefits, as well as adjustment to legal permanent resident eventually.

To consider a situation ‘trafficking’ depends on the type of work, and the use of force, fraud, or coercion to obtain or maintain work.

Under Federal law, the term “severe forms of trafficking” can be broken into two categories:

• Sex trafficking: recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act where the commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or the person being induced to perform such act is under 18 years of age.

• Labor trafficking: recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.

That is what the law says, but, as always, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and Hearing Officers with the Executive Office For Immigration Review, have their own definition. Basically anyone who is smuggled into the United States. It should be known as the S Visa, or Smuggling Visa, but that is much too accurate of a description. Originally it was a reaction to a case in Los Angeles where some Thai illegal aliens were being held in actual slavery, chained and surrounded by barbed wire, and forced to work in the manufacture of apparel. It was reasoned that the victims of modern slavery should, if they were illegal aliens, be rewarded with legal permanent residence, if they were discovered. Illegal slavery has always existed in the U.S. since the end of the War Between The States, and has always been aggressively prosecuted. There was never any need to reward illegal alien victims. They could always remain in the U.S. to testify, and during that period were usually paroled and given work permits until the criminal case against the perpetrators was concluded. But the radical left is continually looking to increase Third World immigration and though small in numbers, trafficking victims were a good source. Now every illegal alien prostitute is a victim, even if they are free to hit up Macy's and Bloomingdales in their free time.

There was however, never alot of victims of the sort above, held in abject bondage in merciless conditions. So changes had to be made. So the T Visa, sort of like the T Virus from a certain video game, has morphed into something else. It has become the new way for prostitutes to be rewarded for their choice of profession and remain in the U.S. in that same profession.

The left has always said there is nothing wrong with prostitution and has always celebrated the prostitute as a method of epater le bourgeoisie. It has since morphed, again, into another way to increase third world immigration. The major source has been Mexico and Asia. Allegedly the women are lured with promises of "hostessing" or "domestic work." While I believe that Mexican women can be lured with the prospect of domestic labor, just visit any hotel chain, the idea that "hostessing" is anything other than prostitution in the eyes of Asians is absurd. It is in the common vernacular throughout East Asia for prostitute. And it is widespread in the U.S.


Many of San Francisco's Asian massage parlors -- long an established part of the city's sexually permissive culture -- have degenerated into something much more sinister: international sex slave shops.

Once limited to infamous locales such as Bombay and Bangkok, sex trafficking is now an $8 billion international business, with San Francisco among its largest commercial centers.

San Francisco's liberal attitude toward sex, the city's history of arresting prostitutes instead of pimps, and its large immigrant population have made it one of the top American cities for international sex traffickers to do business undetected, according to Donna Hughes, a national expert on sex trafficking at the University of Rhode Island.

"It makes me sick to my stomach," said San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. "Girls are being forced to come to this country, their families back home are threatened, and they are being raped repeatedly, over and over."

Because sex trafficking is so far underground, the number of victims in the United States and worldwide is not known, and the statistics vary wildly.

The most often cited numbers come from the U.S. State Department, which estimates that 600,000 to 800,000 people are trafficked for forced labor and sex worldwide each year -- and that 80 percent are women and girls. Most trafficked females, the department says, are exploited in commercial sex outlets.

Relying on research from the Central Intelligence Agency, the State Department estimates there are 14,500 to 17,500 human trafficking victims brought into the United States each year -- but does not quantify how many of those are sex victims. Some advocacy groups place the number of U.S. victims much higher, while others criticize the government for overstating the problem.

The stories of bondage, excuse the double entendre, but the reality is that most of the women from Asia know exactly what they are getting into. And they certainly are not being held against their will.

Federal investigators say that even those who come to the United States with the idea of working as high-society call girls cannot imagine the captivity and the degrading workload they face.


Most of the women involved are quite free to engage in the well known vices of Asian women; high-end shopping and gambling. It is hard to be a slave if you are busy at Macy's and Bloomingdales, or deeply involved in majong or Pai-gow Poker.

According to the research study, the trafficking victims work average of 13.5 hours a day. One woman answered that she worked minimum 7 hours one day whereas another woman answered that she once worked 24 hours one day. Two years ago, before the recession hit the U.S. market, these women in massage parlors had 23 customers an average day. Many of these women rely on drugs, shopping, and gambling in order to cope with shame and guilt caused by prostitution at massage parlors. Some victims develop drug addiction after the massage parlor owners first gave them the drugs to cope with guilt and shame. In addition, the scholars argue that the victims' drug addiction only benefits the massage parlor owners because victims' drug addiction makes it that much easier for the owners to control the victims. Therefore, the scholars argue that the victims are only revictimized through such drug abuse.

Some other victims use gambling as an outlet to relieve their stress caused by the prostitution. One woman testified that she was pressured into gambling at first by her colleagues. When she first entered a casino club, she only played with 10 or 20 dollars. But, later on, she was losing between $10,000 and $15000 per night, which amounts to her total earnings for 10 days. Many women who become addicted to gambling end up incurring more debts that they eventually need to pay the debts off through prostitution.

Some women rely on shopping for expensive clothes and luxurious products in order to cope with shame and guilt caused by prostitution. As prostitution at massage parlors bring incomes between 20,000 and 50,000 a month, these women develop habits of spending thousands of dollars at a shopping mall. They buy clothes and underwear, which can cost about a few hundred dollars a piece. According to the research, they find satisfaction by wearing expensive clothes and underwear. Also, they buy expensive products (which cost about thousands of dollars each) for friends and families as a method of coping with stress, shame and guilt caused by prostitution at massage parlors.

In fact, prostitution is quite open and legal in Korea, source of most of the women working in prostitution. And the same is true in China, another source.

Today, sex work accounts for 4 percent of the country's gross domestic product, according to government reports. Prostitution brings $21 billion a year -- more than electricity and gas combined. There are an estimated 330,000 sex workers, 80,000 brothels and 69 red-light districts in a country the size of Indiana.

Busan is infamous for Wan Wol Dong, a maze of dark alleys where women are on display in row upon row of "glass houses." A peculiar Korean invention, a glass house is about the size of a parking space, with glass walls on three sides and a mirrored back wall concealing a private bedroom. Women sit on chairs or chaises or on the floor inside, illuminated by red lights that cast a pink glow.


The radical left of course blames America, even when the prostitute wins a T Visa, but the ugly truth is that the women prefer the sex trade and remain in it after they get their green card.


Regardless of a great research method, the scholars however fail to recognize the dire needs of victim assistance programs for these women trafficked to massage parlors in the U.S. Instead, they portray these women as willing participants to earn more income after the rescue. Victims of sex trafficking and prostitution like these women are left with scars that need to be treated through multiple steps of counseling for a long time. Without such treatment, they are more than likely to fall back into the massage parlors or brothels all over again. Their language barrier, feelings of isolation as well as low self-esteem lead these victims to believe that prostitution is the only means of survival for them. Some women even mentioned that they would like to open their own massage parlors in the future when they make enough money to do so. Therefore, unless these women are treated properly, the vicious cycle of sex trafficking in massage parlors in the U.S. will never end.

We, of course, are supposed to furnish them with job training, but, in reality, they don't want job training, they like the work they have. And besides trafficking "victims," San Francisco's brothels, massage parlors, and Craigslist girls remain predominately Asian, and enjoying the work, and certainly not enslaved, and not at all ashamed of their work.

But in the end, the T Visa is based solely on unverifyable claims by prostitutes. The memory is surprisingly convinient, remembering some smallest details, like the words in the advertisement in a newspaper that started their downward descent ending in a "special" visa from the taxpayers of the United States:


The story was told by You Mi Kim to May through a Korean interpreter and is You Mi's version of events. The shadowy nature of the sex-trafficking industry made it difficult to locate traffickers and co-workers who were willing to go on the record to corroborate You Mi's story.

The Chronicle verified the locations of the apartments and brothels where You Mi said she worked. May and Fitzmaurice also went to her hometown in Busan, South Korea, and spent time in her neighborhood, at her university, the casino where she worked and in the shopping malls where she went into credit card debt.

You Mi's attorney shared her knowledge of You Mi's case.

This year, You Mi also recounted her story for the U.S. government, which granted her a special visa for trafficking victims, given only to those who can prove they were enslaved through "force, fraud or coercion." The government's decision was based on interviews with You Mi's attorney, and on You Mi's written story, which was translated into English by the same interpreter who worked with The Chronicle.

Sad story, but reading closely enough one finds that she knew what she was in for:


You Mi looked over the ads for room salons. She knew that the first round inside a room salon, pouring drinks, is never enough. Women always have to go to the second round -- having sex -- if the customer asks for it. And the customer always does.

I for one would like to know where You Mi is working now. I suspect we all know where she is. She certainly can't go home to her parents with the shame of a sex trafficking visa. But since the SFPD does not raid bordellos in San Francisco, we shall never know.

Darryl McPherson Thinks You Are An Idiot

The current meme in law enforcement in the ever expanding desire to avoid accusations of profiling is that "We target crimes, not individuals." The moronic United States Marshal, Darryl McPherson, for the Northern District of Illinois, and his good buddy, John Morton, are on that kick.

We don't target individuals, we target crimes. We pursue fugitives for the crimes they commit, not for the gender or race they represent," McPherson said.

Of course McPherson is terrified that someone will find out that most of the people he just arrested were criminals of color and a foreign nationality. That would creat very bad mojo in the Obama Regime and with his boss Eric Holder. Especially since McPherson is black. Arresting his fellow men of color must be especially galling.

The idea is as ludicrous as it gets. Especially for a United States Marshal. The U.S. Marshals Service is an agency who's main mission is the specific targeting of individuals, not crimes. Just watch their show on television, Manhunters, which follows the exploits of the U.S. Marshals Service Fugitive Task Force in New York City, which on each episode targets, not crimes, but specific individuals, for arrest. Why, because they have outstanding arrest warrants. Perhaps, Darryl McPherson should view his agency's most excellent TV show. Perhaps the less than eloquent McPherson should refer the the very interesting document that Deputy U.S. Marshals quite frequently execute, an arrest warrant. The most important thing on an arrest warrant is the name of the person to be arrested. Perhaps because McPherson is a political hack nominated by Dick Durban and despite years in the U.S. Marshals Service still doesn't know what an arrest warrant is. He can check it out at Wikipedia. Obviously he was not paying attention in CITP and his follow-on Marshals' training. All one has to know is that the hack Abner Mikva led Durbin's search committee. Or he can go on a ride along with Lenny DePaul. But I think that McPherson knows better, despite his affirmative action hiring and promotion, but he does think the public are morons.

Just like McPherson, his partner in crime, John Morton, also thinks you are a moron:

Morton said a review of such cases was going on nationwide. He dismissed the suggestion that dismissing them was any type of backdoor amnesty.


A backdoor amnesty is exactly what it is.

Friday, August 27, 2010

Another Piece Of The Administrative Amnesty

This time it is granting citizenship to aliens who should have been arrested, prosecuted and deported. The Obama Regime has added another aspect to it's Administrative Amnesty. Representative of this is a recent development where a legal permanent resident registered to vote, falsely claim to be a U.S. citizen, and voted in violation of the law:

Can an immigrant who resides legally in the U.S. on a work visa but who
voted illegally in a presidential election year still become a naturalized U.S.
citizen?
Yes, actually. Especially if the Department of Homeland Security
sends a letter instructing him to request removal from the voter rolls.
That happened this summer in Putnam County, Tenn., where County Administrator of Elections Debbie Steidl says an immigrant who illegally registered to vote – and
then voted – in 2004 is now seeking to become a U.S. citizen.
Steidl says the man gave her a form letter from the DHS instructing him to:
"Submit … evidence that you have been removed from the roll of registered voters. This can be accomplished by contacting your local election commission where you
registered and voted. Submit a letter of explanation of why you registered to
vote, and where you registered to vote, when you discovered that you were not a
United States Citizen."

She told FoxNews.com that, were the immigrant to be removed from the voter
roll, as the DHS suggested, all traces of his illegal voting record would
normally be shredded within two years.
"I went to my election commission and I said: ‘this frightens me for my country,'" she said. "They agreed with me. Why would you let someone who committed voter fraud become a citizen? That's what they're doing." But immigration advocates say voting illegally can be an honest mistake, and the DHS is correct not to turn down immigrants who apply for citizenship solely because of it.
"I think a lot of people are truly very unaware about not being eligible to vote, and some election officials are maybe not clear enough on what's required," said Natalie Sullivan, director of the Immigration Advocates Network. "So immigration has a process in place to consider what the circumstances were, and decide on a case-by-case basis."
Sullivan said that, even if the records were shredded, the immigrant’s apparent admission to DHS could still provide evidence. "If he has already admitted on the naturalization application that he previously voted, that is also a form of evidence… DHS is ultimately going to make the decision about what has allegedly occurred," she said.
The DHS did not respond to calls for comment. "Good moral character" is a requirement to obtain citizenship, and a memo issued by the Immigration and Naturalization Service in 2002 says immigration officers have discretion about whether to allow someone to become a citizen after admitting to voting illegally.
"Officers must balance the facts regarding the applicant’s unlawful voting or false representation as a U.S. citizen against other factors such as family ties and background," the memo reads.

As a matter of course, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) failed to refer this case to the U.S. Attorney's Office for criminal prosection and failed to follow the law by denying the citizenship application and placing the alien in removal proceedings.

Instead, USCIS advised the alien to ask the Registrar to remove his name from the voter roles. Why USCIS did this cannot be determined, as removal from the voter rolls has nothing to do with the only exception to the relevant laws prohibiting aliens from voting; to wit the alien was the child of U.S. citizens and resided in the U.S.:


The CCA establishes exceptions to removal under sections 212(a) and 237(a), to
GMC under 101(f) of the INA, and to criminal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 611
and 1015(f), for any alien:


· whose natural or adoptive parents (both parents) are or were U.S. citizens
· who permanently resided in the U.S. prior to his or her 16th birthday, and
· who “reasonably believed” at the time of the violation or false representation that he or she was a US citizen.


Of course, even though the law has a single well defined exception, USCIS has determined that it can ignore violations that do not meet the legal standard for a waiver in violation of the Congressional mandate:

1. Determine if the applicant:
(a) actually voted in violation of the relevant election law; or
(b) made a false claim to U.S. citizenship when registering to vote or voting in any
Federal, State, or local election any time on or after September 30, 1996;
2. If either “a” or “b” above happened,
the applicant is removable. Now determine whether the applicant is eligible
for the exceptions from removal as provided under sections
212(a) and 237(a) of the INA. If the applicant is eligible for the exceptions, the applicant is no longer removable. Proceed with adjudication of the N-400 (see Step 6).
3. If the applicant does not qualify for one of the exceptions, determine whether
the applicant’s case merits the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.
4. If the applicant’s case does not merit the exercise of prosecutorial discretion, initiate removal proceedings and continue the naturalization application, pending the outcome of such proceedings.
5. If the applicant’s case merits prosecutorial discretion, proceed with adjudication of the N-400 (see Step 6).

Nowhere in the law does USCIS have the "discretion" to ignore the law. It is an authority that USCIS has granted itself for the purpose of thwarting the expressed will of Congress and relevant legislation, all to serve the interests of aliens. This is just another aspect of the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty, naturalizing aliens who should have been arrested, charged, convicted, and deported.

Deporting Criminals

Not. John Morton, the lying head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement claims that ICE's priority is deporting dangerous criminals. That is why he is refusing to arrest other illegal aliens and is dismissing charges against already arrested illegal aliens. He is making room for the "really dangerous criminal illegal aliens."

That is a lie. A plain and simple lie. Celso Campo-Duartes is proof of that:



In 2005, Mexican national, Celso Campo-Duartes was arrested after he ran over an elderly man in Gwinnet County, Georgia. The man eventually died from his injuries.



The 83-year-old man was getting his mail when he was hit. After the accident, he spent the next few months in a hospital bed where he died. Last week, the family of Aubrey Sosebee, the man killed in the hit-and-run, was notified that Campo-Duartes had been arrested again on a probation violation. They were shocked, as they believed the illegal alien had been deported. Gary Sosebee, the man’s son, told the Atlanta Journal Constitution: “He shouldn’t have even been on the road, let alone this country…What’s he still doing in this country? That’s what we want to know.”



Campo-Duartes spent a little over two years in the Gwinnet County Detention Center after he was charged in October 2005 with serious injury by vehicle, driving without a license, driving without insurance, and having a tag from another vehicle on his car. He could not afford bail.



Initially, Campo-Duartes refused to enter a gulty plea and sat for 26 months behind bars, awaiting trial.



While he was in jail, Campo-Duartes wrote to Superior Court Judge Timothy Hamill, and explained that he had a wife, three children and an elderly mother for whom he provides. He claimed that because of his incarceration, his family lost their home and was starving.



In January 2008, Campo-Duarte negotiated a plea to a charge of failure to stop at or return to the scene of an accident. He was sentenced to two years in prison and three years of probation, and released with time served.




And then he was was not deported.



In August 2009, he was arrested for driving without a license and released on the same day on $760 bond.



He was not deported. John Morton says such criminals are one of his priorities. Obviously not. Very obviously not, since this is not the end of the story:



Two months later, he was arrested again on the same charge, but this time, Immigration and Customs Enforcement placed an immigration hold on him.



But ICE did not deport him:



However, Campo-Duarte was somehow released eight days later.

In May 2010, Campo-Duartes was arrested again and charged with disorderly conduct and driving without a license. He has been held without bond.



Perhaps he will be deported, but we don't know if he had felony or misdemeanor convictions. If they are misdemeanors, he will get out scott free. Not much punishment for killing a man.

Embracing Their Hyphenated Identity

And the jihad. Poor immigrant Muslims are disappointed in the debate about the Ground Zero Victory Mosque.

Although the Muslim students hadn't eaten since dawn, something besides
food was on their minds as they loaded plates with tandoori chicken, chickpeas
and rice at American University to break their Ramadan fast.

Obviously hamburgers, steak, and fries are not good enough for them. They certainly have not acculturated. Especially on the free speech aspect of American political culture.


For weeks, their faith had been under attack by some opponents of a proposed Islamic center near Ground Zero. Every time they turned on the TV, there were new reports of anti-Muslim sentiment: mosque construction being opposed by hundreds of miles from Ground Zero; a Florida pastor vowing to burn copies of the Koran to mark the anniversary of Sept. 11; a poll showing that 43 percent of Americans hold
unfavorable views of Muslims. And just this week, a Muslim cabbie was stabbed in New York.


All of it points to a swelling hostility that many of these students had scarcely known was there and that religious and political leaders worry could fuel alienation and radicalism among some young American Muslims.

At AU, there is little evidence of that, although the students who gathered on Tuesday for an iftar, the banquet that marks sundown, said the backlash has been particularly jarring, coinciding with the holy month of Ramadan, a time of fasting, prayer and reflection. "We've all been talking about it," said Farah Mohamed, 19, a sophomore who grew up in Massachusetts, adding that the conversations have permeated every layer of their world -- from class discussions to Facebook status updates.


She and many of her peers have never felt like outsiders, not even in the tense days after the Sept 11 attacks. With their scoopneck shirts and skinny jeans, they are part of the patchwork of ethnicities and religions woven through most U.S. campuses. For
them, any suggestion that being Muslim is incompatible with being American is
disturbing.


"My brother came home one night really upset," said Asma Mian, a
20-year-old junior from Potomac. He'd encountered a man on the Metro who was
railing against the proposed community center and mosque in Lower Manhattan.


Poor baby, free speech upsets him. Of course, as immigrants of color, they don't accept the idea that Americans can speak out on important issues of the day and debate those issues and they may dare to disagree with immigrants, recent or otherwise.

However, Muslim immigrants are a flutter and taking it all personally:

It rattled her to see her 17-year-old brother so emotional. "He barely gets
involved in politics. He's not extremely religious or anything," she said,
adding that people his age can be quick to take offense. They "feel like it's
more a personal attack. It's more mortifying than it would be if you were
older."

And any discussion about the issue results in little disguised threats to go on active jihad:

That anger, youth leaders and terrorism experts warn, could push some young
Muslims into the arms of such extremists as U.S.-born cleric Anwar al-Aulaqi,
who has been linked to several terrorist plots. In his recruiting efforts,
Aulaqi often portrays Islam as being under attack by the West.
The most
vociferous mosque opponents "do not know what they are doing," said Yahya Hendi,
the Muslim chaplain at Georgetown University. "They are radicalizing people."
'Only takes one or two'
Brian Fishman, a counterterrorism expert at the New
America Foundation, said that the vast majority of American Muslims disagree
with Aulaqi and are unlikely to be radicalized by the mosque debate.
"The
problem is that it only takes one or two," Fishman said. "They get a couple of
people to do something crazy, and that will spark a backlash and reinforce a
cycle of separation."

Madiha Nawaz, a 20-year-old senior who was born in Pakistan and grew up in Fairfax, voiced similar concerns as the sun set over the AU campus. If protesters succeed in stopping the Islamic center's construction, she said, it could make young Muslims feel more marginalized.
"It could lead people toward being more self-secluded," she said, "and it could lead to homegrown terrorism."

Of course, the opportunity for some affirmative action swag appears to be a prime motivator in the whiners:

In fact, many Muslims regard the current controversy as an opportunity to
assert themselves as Americans, just as other minorities have had to do in the
past.
"It's become more of a civil rights issue than anything else," said
Adeel Zeb, former AU chaplain and founder of the Deen Foundation for Muslim
Campus Life. "Young Muslim Americans are becoming more proud to be Muslim
because of all this controversy. Your civil rights are being tested on a
national scale."
Although Zeb said he could see the controversy potentially
aiding extremists, he said it also could help young Muslims unite and build
stronger bridges with non-Muslims.
"It really hits the heart of young Muslim
Americans," he said. "Everyone has to go through this pledge process the way
other groups have in America."

In the end though, they have already self-identified as not really Americans, but hyphenated Americans; disloyal and a threat.

"You saw it in Topeka, Kan., you saw it in Brown v. Board of Education,"
she said. "It may be time for us now. It may be time for Muslim Americans to
embrace their hyphenated identity."

All I can say is if you don't like it here, leave before you kill somebody in a suicide blast.

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Another Aspect Of The Administrative Amnesty

Passport fraud. Hillary Clintong and the Obama Regime have surrendered to the ACLU, fraudulent midwives, and their illegal alien customers on the issue of U.S. passports issued to Mexican illegal aliens. The Department of State recently surrendered in a class action lawsuit filed by Mexicans against the DOS for refusing to issue passports to said illegal aliens because, besides not being American citizens, their birth certificates were fraudulently obtained from corrupt midwives who falsely issued birth certificates to Mexican citizens.

The back story:

Elected officials from the Texas border region met with representatives
from the U.S. Department of State and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on
Tuesday to confirm the end of discriminatory practices that denied passports to
scores of border residents delivered by midwives.
U.S. Representatives
Solomon P. Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi, Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, Ruben Hinojosa,
D-Mercedes, and Silvestre Reyes, D-El Paso discussed the outcome of a class
action lawsuit between the American Civil Liberties Union and the Department of
State, which ended in a June settlement requiring new procedures for evaluating
the passport applications of those delivered by midwives.
Seventy-five midwives have been convicted of falsely registering
Mexican-born children as American,
according to the
Associated Press. As border residents attempted to comply with new travel
regulations that require those returning from Mexico to carry a passport,
hundreds were denied on the basis of being delivered by midwives.
Passport
applicants were asked to find proof of U.S. citizenship status and look for
documents like baptism certificates, medical records and birth announcements.
After long waits, many were ultimately denied passports.

The implication of this settlement is enormous, especially in a nation dominated by free healthcare for illegal aliens. No one in Texas goes to a midwife outside of a hospital setting. Why, because proper care from a physician at a hospital is free to the poor and illegal. Only crazy hippies and environuts want to risk their lives giving birth "the natural way" and without the security of physicians on standby and the resources of a hospital. Even real midwives mostly practice in a hospital setting with real trained physicians on standby. While before the welfare state and Medicare was established midwives were commonly used by the poor in Texas, especially the poor Mexicans of the Rio Grande Valley. Today, however, illegals and the poor used and abuse the hospitals of Texas for free medical care. No one uses midwives when a physician and hospital are free. Midwives charge real money, hospitals don't. But the real money is for the fraudulent birth certificate.

Of course, the whole premis of the poor using midwives is a scam and exists only to support the issuance of fraudulent birth certificates to illegal aliens so they can obtain the benefits of citizenship, like passports. And, like the decision to stop deporting illegals, the decision to surrender to the ACLU and give passports to illegal aliens is part of the Administrative Amnesty. The DOS has no authority to surrender its authority to deny passport applications and to investigate and seek prosecution for various criminal statutes that prohibit passport fraud, such as Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1543, Passport Fraud.

Another count for the impeachment proceedings.

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

More ICE Non-Feasance

Another big, stinking, f-bomb from the Department of Homeland Security was sent to Congress recently. DHS announced that it will not be complying with the legal mandate to verify the departure of lawfully admitted aliens. Along with its recently announced decision to dismiss deportation proceedings against tens of thousands of illegal aliens, DHS has decided it is a law unto itself, not bound by statute or Constitition.

The Department of Homeland Security is not expected to implement a congressionally mandated program that would confirm the departure of foreign visitors from the United States through electronic fingerprint scans — a so-called biometric exit system.


Two department officials, who asked not to be named because the
matter involves internal deliberations, told The Washington Times that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano will discuss options about the system at a special meeting Wednesday. But the officials said Ms. Napolitano is strongly leaning toward an exit-control system based on gathering the names of departing foreigners, rather than their fingerprints — an option known as a biographical solution.
Abandoning plans for biometric exit would require Congress to reverse
repeated legislative mandates for such a system, designed by lawmakers to solve
one of the thorniest problems in immigration control and enforcement: knowing
whether foreign visitors are leaving the country when they should.
Those who remain after their visas expire represent as much as 40 percent of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States, and many lawmakers see exit controls as an essential component of any effort to restore integrity to the troubled immigration system.

But planning for an exit system has stalled under successive administrations as
officials have grappled with the logistical challenges involved. There has been
widespread concern about the cost and the impact on the country's already
congested airports and border crossings...



"The department is working closely with its internal components,
Congress, and many stakeholders to determine the costs and benefits of
implementing a biometric air exit program," Bob Mocny said in a statement. Mr.
Mocny is director of US-VISIT, the Homeland Security program that collects
electronic fingerprints from most foreign visitors as they arrive — and is
widely seen as a rare success story for the department. US-VISIT, which would
be expected to implement any exit-monitoring system, ran pilot programs last
year at Atlanta and Detroit airports, where federal employees collected
fingerprints. In Detroit, Customs and Border Protection officers used hand-held
scanners for departing passengers as they boarded the planes. In Atlanta,
Transportation Security Administration personnel used the scanners at screening
checkpoints.


One Homeland Security official said the pilot programs were
successful and demonstrated that the job could be accomplished at a much lower
cost than estimated. But in public, officials have downplayed the test
programs. At a hearing of the House Homeland Security Committee this year about
foreigners who overstay their visas, Homeland Security Undersecretary Rand
Beers who oversees US-VISIT, did not even mention the pilot programs in his
opening remarks.


Instead, Mr. Beers highlighted the work with biographical exit data — using lists of arriving and departing foreigners to identify those who had entered the country but not left on time, so that overstayers could be reported to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).



So ICE can release them later? What is the point? Of course the whole exercise of this miniscule effort at departure control is of use if ICE will not even process those that are arrested. However the whole program appears from the start to be headed for sabotage. The only important sentence in the whole story is this:


"The department is working closely with its internal components, Congress, and
many stakeholders to determine the costs and benefits of implementing a biometric air exit program,"

Ah, the most important words, costs and benefits. The fix is apparenlty in at DHS to not implement the law as written by Congress. There will not be a biometric air exit program, much less on on the land border. DHS has been stalling for years and refuses to implement the only effective system, departure control by inspection of aliens by an officer of the United States, as all other countries do. The United States is the only nation in the world that does not inspect persons departing from the country. In all other countries a traveler is inspected upon arrival and departure. The U.S. does not do it. Not because it is difficult, but because it is claimed to be costly. However, all international airports have sterile Federal Inspection Areas, where immigration and customs inspections are completed for arriving persons. Those areas could easily be expanded or duplicated at international airports. The greatest cost would, of course, be manpower. Customs and Border Protection currently performs entry inspections and spot departure inspections. The costs could easily be covered by a $10.00 fee added on to international airline tickets and a $5.00 fee on all pedestrians or vehicles entering the U.S. All international airports in the U.S. are cash cows for their operating authorities and those entities could easily cover the costs of the physical plant of a sterile departure area at airports. The fee on pedestrians and vehicles would correspondingly cover the costs of the new physical plant needed for land border departure control.

The important fact is that the U.S. government should be inspecting those who are departing as well as those who are arriving.

Further evidence that USVISIT was not designed to comply with the law is that it is run under the authority of ICE rather than CBP. ICE handles interior (non)enforcement, while CBP has the legal and customary authority over arriving and departing persons. Why was USVISIT given to ICE? Only to sabatoge the program. One need only go as far as the aforementioned Bob Mocny, who was a golden boy of the Doris Meissner regime at the legacy INS and closely associated with the non-enforcement policies of the Clintong Regime, especially that relating to the end of the public charge. He climbed the ladder from the most notorious legacy INS District for non-enforcement, San Francisco, to DC, during the Clintong Regime and apparently learned his lessons well, doing well under Bush's 6 years of non-enforcement, when the exit verification requirement was first passed and not implemented.

What the Obama Regime is doing is violating a legal mandate for a exit verification system. Another impeachable offense.

The Administrative Amnesty Goes Into High Gear

Immigration and Customs Enforcement has accelerated the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty. In a pilot program in Houston, ICE has begun dismissing removal cases against illegal aliens en mass:


The Department of Homeland Security is systematically reviewing thousands of pending immigration cases and moving to dismiss those filed against suspected illegal immigrants who have no serious criminal records, according to several sources familiar with the efforts. Culling the immigration court system dockets of noncriminals started in earnest in Houston about a month ago and has stunned local immigration attorneys, who have reported coming to court anticipating clients' deportations only to learn that the government was dismissing their cases. Richard Rocha, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman, said Tuesday that the review is part of the agency's broader, nationwide strategy to prioritize the deportations of illegal immigrants who pose a threat to national security and public safety. Rocha declined to provide further details. Critics assailed the plan as another sign that the Obama administration is trying to create a kind of backdoor "amnesty" program.


While the Obama Regime says that they are concentrating on criminal aliens, in fact, criminal aliens are eligible for the Administrative Amnesty. Those with a misdemeanor conviction are eligible.


Gonzalez said DHS attorneys are conducting the reviews on a case-by-case basis. However, he said they are following general guidelines that allow for the dismissal of cases for defendants who have been in the country for two or more years and have no felony convictions. In some instances, defendants can have one misdemeanor conviction, but it cannot involve a DWI, family violence or sexual crime, Gonzalez said.


Of course, those in the know understand what misdemeanors are; they are felonies that a local District Attorney did not want to take to trial, so they became misdemeanors through a plea bargain.

So, here we have it, any illegal alien here two years or more and no felony convictions is here forever. The implication of this is what will be done with them. Some will get status through a relative, some file a fraudulent claim as a trafficking victim, all after paying to be brought here in the first place.


An El Salvadoran man married to a U.S. citizen who has two U.S.-born children. The client had a pending asylum case in the court system, but the case was not particularly strong. Now that his case is terminated, he will be eligible to obtain permanent residency through his wife, Mendoza said. A woman from Cameroon, who was in removal proceedings after being caught by the U.S. Border Patrol, had her case terminated by the government. She meets the criteria of a trafficking victim, Mendoza said, and can now apply for a visa.


Let me predict what will happen next: Most of these illegals given the Administrative Amnesty will have no option to legalize.


Immigrants who have had their cases terminated are frequently left in limbo, immigration attorneys said, and are not granted any form of legal status. "It's very, very key to understand that these aliens are not being granted anything in court. They are still here illegally. They don't have work permits. They don't have Social Security numbers," Mendoza said. "ICE is just saying, 'At this particular moment, we are not going to proceed with trying to remove you from the United States.' "


So, an enterprising hack from the immigration bar will file a lawsuit, claiming that since the federal government will not deport his client, then his client must be given status. In this political climate even the Obama Regime will not give them status, so they will wait for a judge to order a status granted or grant that status himself. The Obama Regime will then not appeal the case, and there we will have it, not an Administrative Amnesty, but a Judicial Amnesty, in keeping with the decline of America from a Republic to an Kritarchy.

The Regime has also released policy on another group of illegal aliens; those with spouses, parents, siblings, or children in the U.S. They will received expedited assistance in adjudicating petitions on file and have their deportation cases dismissed. Basically, any illegal with a relative who can file a petition will be let off scott free.

Of course, this will be a backdoor way to evicerate 287(g) and the aggressive action of local law enforcement officers like Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Any illegals they arrest will be released. In the end, this is the case for impeachment of Obama. Will the Stupid Party step up?

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

ICE Congratulates Itself

For gross deriliction of duty. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) released a breathless press briefing congratulating itself on arresting 47 gangbanger illegal aliens. Out of a poputlation of 10-13 million illegals that ain't saying much for ICE's competance, but looking closer makes ICE even look less competant, if that is possible. But for ICE, they can always hit bottom and reach lower. One jokes about the FBI, Famous But Incompetant, but for ICE incompetance is its first name.

Look how long it took to find one illegal alien absconder:

A 30-year-old citizen of Cambodia and national of Thailand, who is a member
of the Asian Boyz gang who was ordered deported in August 2001. He failed to comply with his removal order and a warrant of deportation was entered against
him. His criminal record dates back to 1998 and includes convictions for armed
assault to murder, multiple counts of assault and battery with a dangerous
weapon, armed robbery, and carjacking.

Not many Asians in New England, you would think that finding one illegal ordered deported 9 years ago would be easy, but not for ICE. It took ICE 9 years to catch this guy who has undoubtedly been arrested numerous times in the past nine years. Thanks for nothing John Morton and the clowns at ICE.

Ooopps, I Overstayed

Appologies to the tramp Britney Spears, but that is not an excuse for overstaying your period of admission, much less by overstaying by two years. Many reasons are given by illegal aliens for violating our laws, but claiming it was a mistake? Then applying for political asylum after you are caught?

In all Abraham Jaars and his wife Delicia, as well as their children, have been in the U.S. for 24 years illegally.

A North Side family, fighting for years to remain in the United States, now
faces a larger battle.
Abraham Jaars, who left South Africa 24 years ago with
his young family amid a fractious apartheid regime, has cancer and precious time
left.

Yet efforts to deport him, his wife, and their son and daughter
persist, despite a judge’s recommendation five years ago that the matter be
settled.

“The Jaars(es) are productive members of our society who have come to
know this country as their home,” wrote U.S. District Judge R. Guy Cole.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a previous denial of
asylum, and Cole agreed with the technical legal reasons for that decision. But
he said “this result appears pointless and unjust.”

Abraham, 68, his wife, Delecia, and grown children Roslee and Grant
have had nothing more than a traffic ticket since they left South Africa in 1986
on six-month visitor visas. They own a house and cars, paid their taxes and are
active in their church, said Ryan Mowry, a friend of the family’s.

Cole had encouraged federal immigration officials to, “at a minimum,
consider indefinitely deferring enforcement,” according to court records.

But that hasn’t happened, said the family’s attorney, Dennis
Muchnicki. “They have been fighting it tooth and nail,” he said of
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, “and never attempted to resolve the
matter.”

The family members have said they inadvertently overstayed their visas
by two years but sought asylum based on persecution under apartheid. Mr. and
Mrs. Jaars are multiracial.


The case of the Jaars typifies what is wrong with our immigration system. Illegal aliens openly flout the law, working, buying houses and cars, and allegedly even openly pay their taxes, by which I presume they mean income taxes. All with no problems.

Then we are expected to believe that they "mistakenly" overstayed for two years. The details are not in the story, but most likely they were either arrested or exposed in some manner, then filed for political asylum in an effort to remain. And filed not when they first arrived and stayed for two years, but only suddenly became aware of apartheid in 1988, and decided that they did not want to return there. The obvious question is why they did not apply for asylum at the American Embassy or Consulate in South Africa. They applied for the tourist visa, why not asylum, or, more technically, refugee status? Then, why did they not apply for asylum immediately after arriving? Clearly the asylum application was defensive in nature, trying to stave off deportation. But in any event by 1990, apartheid was over and they could have returned with no problems then.

But, as their attorney has said, they are fighting deportion "tooth and nail." To what reason one does not know, don't they like Nelson Mandela's democracy?

Worse yet, Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been colluding with the Jaars by refusing to remove them:

Five years ago, Rob Baker, former field-office director for detention and removal operations in the Detroit office of ICE, delayed deportation by one year but promised nothing more. “I can't have personal feelings about these cases, about whether they’re being wronged or not,” Baker said then . “I really have to use the law and follow it to the best of my ability.”

So, they got the Olley, Olley, Oxen Free, one year free that became five years. Which leads to the ICE policy of deferring actions against illegal aliens. And to what purpose? Obviously ICE was waiting for the amnesty that never came and has been administering their own administrative amnesty of deferred action.

Now they are begging for indefinate deferred action in anticipation of the next unyet realized amnesty.

Cole had encouraged federal immigration officials to, “at a minimum,
consider indefinitely deferring enforcement,” according to court records.

Frighteningly this demand for deferred action came from a sitting federal district court judge, R. Guy Cole, who should know better than to interfer in executive authority, much less on the side of lawlessness. If Judge Cole wants to make immigration policy, he should resign and run for Congress, where immigration policy is supposed to be made.

Of course, the radicals have made this a moral crusade, demanding exemption from the law for the Jaars.

“The idea that government officials should divorce their personal
consciences from their unconscionable acts is a disgrace,” said Muchnicki.
“Faceless bureaucrats always find it easier to be cruel rather than to take the
risk of being kind.”

Making the deportation of the Jaars to the beautiful multiracial democracy of South Africa the equivalent of participation in genocide. And, by the way, demanding that an executive branch official violate their oath of office, sort of like ICE and Obama are doing in countless other cases.

There is no reason that the Jaars should not benefit like Jessica Colotl and countless others have. Perhaps this newspaper article is part of the strategy, which is very likely, to get indefinate deferred action, much as others have done.

Stand by for news on the deporation of the Jaars. Time will tell.

Saturday, August 21, 2010

Hi Ho Hi Ho, The Wicked Witch Of Mexico Is Dead!

Mario Obledo, professional Mexican, has died. He was an inveterate racist, who had a deep hatred of white people, and supported open racial discrimination against white people.

Mario Obledo, the president of the National Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California's former secretary of health and welfare, has died. He was 78.

Obledo died Wednesday in Sacramento after having a heart attack, said his wife, Keda Alcala-Obledo.

During his career, Obledo was known for his efforts in supporting civil rights and humanitarian causes.

In 1998 he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom Award, the nation's highest civilian award, by President Clinton.

While serving as Gov. Jerry Brown's secretary of health and welfare from 1975 to 1982, he was credited with encouraging Latinos to enter state government.

Obledo also was co-founder of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, or MALDEF, and the Hispanic National Bar Assn.


Obledo also hated the United States and the rule of law. He was opposed to freedom of speech and the First Amendment to the Constitution. He considered any speech he opposed to be unacceptable and openly advocated and used violence and intimidation against non-Hispanics.

A controversial billboard that calls California the "Illegal Immigrant State" may bring several Latino organizations together to battle the Orange County-based group that installed the sign near Blythe.

Mario Obledo, former state Health, Education and Welfare secretary and president of the California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations, said this week that he plans to "deface or burn" the billboard and that he has asked Latino leaders in California to support him later this month.


He was also a bit of a childish, pedantic and probably a little senile moron who panicked at the sight of the Taco Bell Chihuahua.

Mario Obledo, president of the California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations, and the state director of the League of United Latin-American Citizens (LULAC) on Monday launched a boycott against Taco Bell for using a Chihuahua in its commercials. Obledo and others picketed the firm's corporate headquarters in Irvine.

"This is Day One," said Gil Flores, state president for LULAC, one of the largest Latino civil-rights groups in the United States. "This is a California boycott against Taco Bell and its products."


Of course the Taco Bell Chihuahua achieved cult like status, inspiring a rather bad movie and one aspect of the antics of Paris Hilton.

Generally one does not speak ill of the dead, but Obledo will go down in history with Benedict Arnold, Alger Hiss, Baraka Hussein Obama II, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and "One-Bill" Gil Flores.

Friday, August 20, 2010

OMG!

The South Korean military is still issuing .38 Special revolvers to its troops!

Thursday, August 19, 2010

Vive La France

France is apparenlty, at least partially, taking action on illegal immigration, much to the consternation of leftists everywhere.

First, there is a crackdown on illegal aliens from Africa camping in public places in Paris:

A video showing French police dragging immigrant women and children away
from a protest squat has sharpened accusations that President Nicolas Sarkozy
has made a cynical turn towards the authoritarian right.
Although police
insist that the disturbing footage is misleading, the film of the apparently
brutal arrests north of Paris last month coincides with a noisy campaign by the
floundering Mr Sarkozy to revive his image as a politician tough on crime and
immigration.
In the video, posted on YouTube, DailyMotion and other sites, a
pregnant African woman is seen screaming as she is dragged away by police.
Another woman, a baby strapped to her back, is seen being dragged along the
ground by police officers.
The film was shot on 21 July at La Courneuve when
police broke up a demonstration by 150 people, mostly African immigrant women,
protesting against their eviction from illegal squats in a council tower block.

Next, a concerted crackdown on Gypsies and their criminal activity.

Christian Fraser visits a French Roma (Gypsy) camp
Dozens of Roma
(Gypsies) have arrived back in Romania after being repatriated by France under a
controversial policy backed by President Nicolas Sarkozy.
At least 70 Roma
left France and hundreds more will follow in the coming weeks after their camps
were shut down.
The French government says it is a "decent and humane" policy
of removing people from deplorable conditions.
But rights groups say the Roma
are being demonised, and Romania has warned France against "xenophobic
reactions".
"We understand the position of the French government. At the same
time, we support unconditionally the right of every Romanian citizen to travel
without restrictions within the EU," Romanian President Traian Basescu
said.

Unlike our bad neighbor to the south, Felipe Calderon, President Basescu is a little more cooperative:

However, Mr Basescu added that he was prepared to send police to France to
help implement the repatriation scheme.

Of course, the reaction is predictable:

Some are accusing the country of racism and Xenophobia. The French
government says it is a "decent and humane" policy of removing people from
deplorable conditions.


The leftists don't deal with the reasons the Gypsies are unliked in France; such as burning down picturesqe French villages.

Three hundred soldiers are patrolling a normally tranquil village in
France's Loire Valley after dozens of armed travellers clashed with
police.
The riot erupted on Sunday morning in Saint-Aignan after a gendarme
had shot and killed a traveller who had driven through a checkpoint, officials
said.
Travellers armed with hatchets and iron bars then attacked the village
police station and hacked down trees.
They also toppled traffic lights and
road signs and burned three cars.
"It was a settling of scores between the
travellers and the gendarmerie," said the village mayor, Jean-Michel Billon.
He said the travellers also pillaged a bakery in the village. Just 3,400
people live in the village in a popular tourist region of central
France.Dangerous driver
Prosecutors quoted by the French TV channel TF1 said
a traveller called Luigi had failed to stop at a police checkpoint on Friday
night and had dragged a gendarme on the car bonnet for 500 metres
(yards).
The gendarme escaped with only minor injuries. As the driver
approached a second checkpoint he accelerated towards two gendarmes, one of whom
opened fire.

And blockading bridges does not endear one either to the vacation loving French.

Roma (Gypsies) have blocked a major road bridge near Bordeaux in protest
after hundreds of them were evicted from an illegal campsite.
Around 250
vehicles blocked the bridge for five hours on Sunday, causing tailbacks of up to
five kilometres on a public holiday weekend.
More than 40 illegal camps have
been closed in the past week.
The French interior minister says Roma from
Eastern Europe will be deported on "specially chartered flights".
The
blockade on the Aquitaine Bridge was the first major counter-protest by Roma and
travellers since the French government began its crackdown.Crackdown
The
regional traffic information centre said the blockade caused tailbacks of five
kilometres on the Paris-bound carriageway of the A630.
Police said the Roma
had been expelled from a camp in the town of Anglet, to the south, and were
prevented from setting up a new camp on an exhibition ground nearer
Bordeaux.
There are hundreds of thousands of Roma or travelling people living
in France who are part of long-established communities.

Even more interesting is that these allegedly poor people have nice new campers and vans.

I hope the Muslims are next.

The Illegal Alien's Best Friend

John Morton, ostensibly head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but, in reality, a saboteur of the enforcement of immigration laws. In a new development, after the renewed implementation of Catch-and-Release, is the new Do-Not-Catch. In a policy document being circulated at ICE, Morton is proposing prohibiting arrests of illegal aliens stopped for traffic violations. (h/t CIS and the indefatigable Jessica Vaughn)

Vaughn has put it better than I ever could:

According to the draft document's cover e-mail from Ann Yom Steel, a
political appointee whose mission seems to be to harass and discourage local
agencies who want to help ICE and who want ICE to help them, the agency is
responding to the "many concerns [of immigration law enforcement critics]
related to immigration detainers, including that they could distort the state
criminal process or open the window for pretextual, minor criminal charges." In
other words, ICE believes the ethnic advocacy groups who accuse local cops and
sheriffs of abusing their authority by trumping up traffic charges on innocent
illegal aliens in order to have them deported. Therefore, all illegal aliens who
violate traffic laws will get a free pass from ICE, unless they also happen to
have committed other "real" crimes. The policy draft says: "Immigration officers
shall not issue a detainer unless an LEA [law enforcement agency] has exercised
its independent authority to arrest the alien. Immigration officers shall not
issue detainers for aliens who have been temporarily detained by the LEA (i.e.
roadside or Terry stops) but not arrested," although the LEA may hold them
without a detainer if ICE is coming right away (don't hold your
breath).

Interestingly enough, the hand of Harold Hurtt, the former Houston Chief Of Police and opponent of local enforcement of immigration law, who, by the way, is part of the cadre of itinerant black police chiefs who jump from chief's job to chief's job, following failure after failure, as part of the affirmative action practiced by most large cities, is quite obvious.

The memorandum quite stupidly refers to traffic related misdemeanors. Obviously someone unfamiliar with law enforcement wrote this policy draft. Very few traffic offenses are misdemeanors, almost all are infractions. So this policy document if followed will result in nothing happening, as it does not prohibit arrests and detentions of immigration law based on infractions. Stupid is as stupid does.

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

The Immigration Court Amnesty

The Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty has many aspects. One is non-feasance by the Obama Regime, just not arresting illegal aliens. Another is catch-and-release, arresting an illegal alien, but immediately releasing that illegal alien with the full knowledge that no effort will be made to re-arrest the illegal alien if he or she fails to appear at their hearing before the Executive Office For Immigration Review (EOIR), commonly but inaccurately called immigration court. A third aspect of the Administrative Amensty is re-interpreting establish law and policy in favor of illegal aliens. The Obama Regime attempted this with its draft memorandum circulated at US Citizenship and Immigration Services that proposed redefining most illegals as eligible for legal permanent residency.

The fourth option of the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty is that exercised in the EOIR where aliens placed in removal proceedings win their first challenge to their removal before a Hearing Officer. Usually, if an illegal alien wins the first hearing, then the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appeals the decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), and if there is a loss there, to the Attorney General, who can overturn a BIA decision. The new aspect of the Administrative Amnesty is to not follow up any adverse decision with an appeal. We learned this from the failure of DHS to appeal the absurd decision by Hearing Officer Leonard Shapiro who granted asylum to Obama's aunt Zeituni Onyango. The decision to not appeal was clearly part of the Obama Amnesty, offering multiple attempts at asylum in violation of the law. This sets precedent for other illegals to continuously appeal in hopes of remaining and eventually obtaining a decision in their favor.

Obama's aunt is not the only beneficiary of this policy of not appealing the decisions of Hearing Officers. Jose Manuel Gonzalez-Sandoval is another beneficiary. He is a felon with multiple convictions and a legal permanent resident:

Pinal Shooting Suspect Was Subject Of Deportation Hearing

by Lindsey Collom - Aug. 18, 2010 02:11 PM The Arizona Republic

Authorities say a man accused of shooting at deputies earlier this week was the subject of deportation proceedings earlier this year.

Jose Manuel Gonzalez-Sandoval, 38, is accused of violating an order of protection at his ex-wife's home in Arizona City and shooting at two Pinal County Sheriff's deputies who tried to make contact Monday evening. He remains on the loose.


He was placed in removal proceedings, but obtained a favorable decision by the Hearing Officer. Obviously a bogus claim that his U.S. citizen wife or children would be hurt by his deportation. Since he was a professional criminal and spent most of his time committing crimes or in jail, it is not known how his family would be hurt by his deportation, except for the loss of income from crime.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials say Gonzalez-Sandoval, a Mexican citizen, is a lawful permanent resident of the United States.

Vincent Picard, an ICE spokesman in Phoenix, said the agency sought to revoke Gonzalez-Sandoval's residency status following convictions for multiple violent crimes. Authorities say he has 15 prior criminal cases.

In March, an immigration judge ruled in favor of Gonzalez-Sandoval and canceled the removal proceedings, Picard said. Details were not immediately available Wednesday.

The Sheriff's Office said Gonzalez-Sandoval was booked into the Pinal County Adult Detention Center on an outstanding warrant July 14 and turned over to ICE for deportation. He was later released.

On July 17, deputies were called to his ex-wife's Arizona City home on reports that he violated a protection order. Sheriff's officials say deputies found Gonzalez-Sandoval nearby in his vehicle but that he sped away when they tried to make contact. The pursuit reached speeds above 100 mph and was called off due to Gonzalez-Sandoval's "blatant disregard for public safety," a Sheriff's Office statement said.

"This foreign-born criminal was in a gunfight with two of my deputies and previously fled from us at speeds over 100 mph," Sheriff Paul Babeu said. "This dangerous criminal has an extensive rap sheet and should have been deported. Why are we allowing these violent non-citizen criminals sanctuary in America?"


Of course, Gonzalez-Sandoval went on to commit more crime and is again in custody, thanks to the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty non-appeal policy and Catch-and-Release. A two-fer for the Obama Regime. If the Obama Regime had appealed the March decision, Gonzalez-Sandoval would instead be still in custody waiting for a decision by the BIA. Instead is is on the streets, committing more crimes and endangering the public. So much for the Obama Regime's vaunted emphasis on deporting dangerous criminals. But the goal of all these policies is the same, more illegal aliens allowed to remain in hopes of a formal amnesty sometime in the future.

Shocking Mendacity

From the hearing officer of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EIOR), Leonard I. Shapiro, who granted Obama's aunt political asylum. Apparently the grant of asylum was not based on the laws governing such claims, as she was inelligible to file a third claim for asylum while under removal proceedings for two failed and fraudulent claims that were rejected by other more intelligent hearing officers.


The immigration judge [sic. Hearing Officer] who granted President Obama’s aunt asylum three months ago based his decision on the fact that an anonymous federal official had disclosed information about her immigration status to the media, a “reckless’’ act that exposed her to heightened threats of persecution in her native Kenya, according to the ruling, obtained yesterday by the Globe.
Interestingly enough, the Boston Globe has not released a copy of the decision and their reporter does not know much about immigration law as she gives another reason for the approval:


Shapiro agreed with Onyango’s assertion that she had been singled out for publicity and, unlike her relatives in Kenya, would be a “target.’’ He also outlined “serious interethnic conflict’’ that had consumed Kenya in recent years and resulted in hundreds of deaths. She belongs to the minority Luo ethnic group and said that she feared for her life if she had to return to Kenya.

The fear of future persecution base on membership in a group is a standard for asylum, but a violation of the Privacy Act of 1974 is not. There are measures in the Privacy Act for redress including criminal and civil penalties. None of which is relevant to her claim. And none of which are of concern to a Hearing Officer.

More importantly, her previous claims were exposed as fraudulent and even Shapiro acknowledged that.


In his ruling, Shapiro said Onyango’s testimony in February was sometimes confusing and inconsistent with what she said during her last quest for asylum six years ago. While Onyango did not prove that she suffered persecution while she lived in Kenya, he said he believed that her fear of future persecution was genuine.

But Shapiro's venture into criticizing the release of information that Obama's aunt was illegal was information that the public had a right to know, was without foundation. He is a Hearing Officer in an immigration proceeding, not a judge of any sort; not a federal magistrate judge or a District Court judge. Any leak of information should have had no bearing on his decision, which is fatally flawed in itself. Zeituni Onyango is not the only relative of Obama's from Kenya. He has dozens of close relatives, and the closest, his half-brother, lives openly and without problem in Kenya. He is, of course, of the same Luo tribe as Auntie Onyanga and just as well known and unmolested.

Worse yet is his finding that her claim of possible future persecution had credibility given that even Shapiro acknowledge that her previous statements in asylum proceedings had no credibility:
In his ruling, Shapiro said Onyango’s testimony in February was sometimes confusing and inconsistent with what she said during her last quest for asylum six years ago.

Of course, what confusing and inconsistent mean is that the statements had no credibility. And, since there was no real evidence present supporting her claim of possible future persecution, credibility is all she had to present and her past statements were not credible. In fact, her previous statements to the EOIR were lies, plain and simple. She lied to get asylum and she failed twice with those lies. No Hearing Officer of any intelligence would have accepted at face value any claim, not only after two sets of lies, but her repeating those obvious lies again.

Even more interesting was Shapiro's false claim that President Bush issued an order to stop arrests and deportations of all illegal aliens in response to the leak of Onyango's status, but, in fact, Bush was informed about Onyanga's status before it was leaked and the order issued before the leak. The leak was in response to the order, not the cause of the the order:
"The disclosure intentionally linked the Respondent's status as an asylum applicant with President Obama's presidential campaign, and the effect was to politicize confidential information about the Respondent which the United States government had no authority to release," Shapiro wrote. "The illegality and political ramifications of this breach were made apparent when, following the breach, President (George W.) Bush swiftly issued a directive requiring federal agents to obtain high-level approval before arresting fugitive immigrants."

More of Shapiro's decision are basically lies:


Shapiro found that because Onyango's identity and status were disclosed, she would be a target in Kenya not only for those who oppose the United States and Obama but for members of the Kenyan government "who oppose President Obama's politics and/or his ethnicity, which the Respondent shares."

Shapiro, however, said Onyango's relationship to Obama is distinct from her Kenyan family members' relationships to him because she has lived in the United States since 2000 and applied for U.S. asylum.

One of Onyango's Cleveland-based lawyers, Scott Bratton, said the asylum process is confidential, in part to protect people who may be sent back to their home countries. Leaking the information just before the election put Onyango at greater risk, he said.

"She is known to everybody now," he said. "She is known to have applied for asylum. She's been thrust into the spotlight, and because of that she has a fear of returning."

There is, of course, no evidence that her life here made her more of a target for anything in Kenya. It is just her unsubstantiated claim. As are all of Shapiro's findings based on such unsubstantiated claims. Claims from a person show to be a liar.

The Kenyan government actually celebrated Obama's election and organized trips for Obama relatives to the U.S. for the inauguration:
It also noted the Kenyan government celebrated Obama's election as president and sponsored a delegation of several family members to travel to the 2009 presidential inauguration in Washington, D.C.

In fact her relationship to Obama is a social benefit and any relationship with Obama is celebrated in Kenya:



In unison they began chanting in the Luo tongue: "Obama biro! Yao neyo," or "Obama is coming! Clear the way!"

As the government in Nairobi declared the day a public holiday in celebration, the people of Nyangoma Kogelo, a small village in the hills of western Kenya where Mr Obama's father grew up, were celebrating the ascension of their relative to the highest office in the world.

But the biggest lie is that Obama had no influence on this decision.

Bratton also said the president played no role.

"This wasn't a favor to the president," he said. "The president wasn't involved in this case at all. She went through the asylum process just like anybody else would, and the case was granted."

She did not go through the asylum process like anyone else. No alien is allowed to reopen a previous denied asylum case years afterward, after she had failed to follow the proper appeal process and while an abscondee. Only because of her relationship with Obama was she allowed to reopen her case. Only because Obama is President was such a worthless decision authored by Shapiro.

And, most importantly, only because Obama is President, has DHS failed to file an appeal of this decision. Such a baseless decision from a Hearing Officer would normally been appealed, but not this time. Auntie Zeni is free and only because of Obama.