Mexican troops on US soil, apparently in support of drug smugglers... and what's the point of asking Chertoff or anyone in the Bush Administration to investigate anything dealing with illegal aliens or border security?
From WorldNetDaily.com:
INVASION USA
Mexican military in U.S. border standoff
Police say they aided drug smugglers with Humvees, machine guns
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: October 17, 2007
3:47 p.m. Eastern
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Mexican soldiers and civilian smugglers engaged in an armed standoff with nearly 30 American law enforcement officials on the southern U.S. border, according to Texas police and the FBI.
At a spot more than 200 yards inside the U.S., Mexican Army troops set up several mounted machine guns when U.S. Border Patrol agents called for backup Monday, the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin of Ontario, Calif., reported.
The paper said Mexican military Humvees were towing what appeared to be thousands of pounds of marijuana across the border into the U.S., according to Chief Deputy Mike Doyal of the Hudspeth County Sheriff's Department.
The incident took place on the Rio Grande near Neely's Crossing, about 50 miles east of El Paso.
"It's been so bred into everyone not to start an international incident with Mexico that it's been going on for years," Doyal told the Daily Bulletin. "When you're up against mounted machine guns, what can you do? Who wants to pull the trigger first? Certainly not us."
Confirming the afternoon encounter, FBI spokeswoman Andrea Simmons told the paper, "Bad guys in three vehicles ended up on the border. People with Humvees, who appeared to be with the Mexican Army, were involved with the three vehicles in getting them back across."
Deputies captured one vehicle and found 1,477 pounds of marijuana inside, according to Doyal, who added Mexican soldiers set fire to one of the Humvees stuck in the river.
Such incidents are common, Doyal told the Daily Bulletin. Last November, his deputies were called on to back up agents from the Fort Hancock border patrol station in Texas after confronting more than six fully armed men dressed in Mexican military uniforms.
Armed with machine guns, the men were trying to bring more than three tons of marijuana across the border in military vehicles.
Doyal insisted the federal government must do something about the incursions, pointing out the deputies and border agents are not equipped for combat.
But Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff today played down the reports of Mexican military incursions, suggesting many could have been mistakes or criminals dressed in military garb. Last week, Mexican officials denied their military made any incursions.
The Daily Bulletin reported, however, border agents interviewed over the past year believe the confrontations were with Mexican military personnel.
A story by the paper last year highlighted a Department of Homeland Security document reporting 216 incursions by Mexican soldiers during the previous 10 years.
Chertoff downplayed the reports at that time, as well, calling them "overblown."
But border agents contend otherwise.
"We're sitting ducks," said one who spoke to the Daily Bulletin on condition of anonymity. "The government has our hands tied."
As WND reported in February 2006, an American law enforcement officer and news crew in Hudspeth County, Texas, witnessed an armed incursion into the U.S. by men dressed in Mexican army attire, the second such incident in two weeks.
Mexican officials have said their military is forbidden from traveling within three miles of the border, though U.S. border residents repeatedly have spotted mobile patrols of Mexican military units traversing roads that run directly parallel to the international boundary. Mexico says the armed men crossing into the U.S. are paramilitary forces loyal to drug-smuggling cartels.
Republican Reps. Duncan Hunter and David Drier of California last week asked Chertoff, the House Judiciary Committee, the House Homeland Security Committee and the House International Relations Committee to investigate the incursions.
Showing posts with label mexican gangs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mexican gangs. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Tancredo Tears into Border Mayors
I'm supporting Ron Paul, but there's a lot I like about Tom Tancredo. He's been out front on the illegal immigration issue, and I respect him for that.
It is a sad commentary on the American electorate that, given all the anger and frustration showed by the American people in stopping the McCain/Kennedy shamnesty bill, the most pro-border security and anti-illegal immigration voices in the entire Presidential field- Paul, Tancredo, and Hunter- have lousy poll numbers. It's pathetic that so many voters rely on the mainstream media, pundits, Hollywood, PACs, and other nefarious entities tell them who to vote for- they are mind-numbed sheep being led to slaughter by elitist wolves.
__________________________________________________________
Presidential candidate blasts “rogue” border mayors
Ryan Holeywell
October 11, 2007 - 9:38AM
McALLEN — Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo labeled some border mayors as “rogue” for refusing to cooperate with the federal government’s efforts to construct the proposed border fence in some parts of Texas.
Tancredo, a congressman from Colorado, also suggested in a news release earlier this week that the fence could be built north of U.S. border cities that don’t go along with it.
Tancredo’s comments came after The Associated Press reported earlier this month that some U.S. border leaders had denied some access to federal workers doing preliminary work on the fence.
“I’m glad he said it, because all it means is he wrote his own obituary,” McAllen Mayor Richard Cortez said. “Nobody like him can possibly be elected to a leadership position in this country.”
Brownsville Mayor Pat Ahumada said Tancredo’s comments were “not constructive” and added those who vehemently support the fence — such as Tancredo — are “being driven by fear or racism.”
“He has no clue how we live, how (the fence) will affect us and how close it is,” Ahumada said.
Tancredo, who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination, was polling at 1 percent in an NBC/Wall Street Journal conducted in late September. His campaign has raised $4,825 from two donors in the Rio Grande Valley, according to the Federal Election Committee.
Lately, he’s gained attention for his vocal support of the fence, as well as his vehement position on the need to reduce both legal and illegal immigration.
Tancredo told The Monitor his suggestion of building the wall north of some cities was “just for effect,” but he is serious about his support for the fence itself.
While Rio Grande Valley residents and elected officials alike may oppose the fence, Tancredo said, it “is a national security issue and we all have to pay the price and make some sacrifice.”
While Ahumada said he supports a so-called virtual fence created by dredging and expanding the Rio Grande, Tancredo said a physical barrier is the best option to stop “the invasion that is occurring,” referring to the influx of undocumented immigrants to the country.
He also said the fence sends a symbolic message to Mexico.
“It says clearly, ‘Here’s where one country ends and another one begins,’” Tancredo said. “Short of sending someone an atlas, this is the next best thing.”
Cortez said a fence could impede the billions of dollars of trade that comes through the country’s borders. But Tancredo said a fence would not affect legitimate business.
Ahumada said he invites Tancredo to visit the border and see for himself how it would affect the community. Tancredo said he’s visited the border many times and was in Texas last year, but he hopes to visit the state soon.
From: The Monitor
It is a sad commentary on the American electorate that, given all the anger and frustration showed by the American people in stopping the McCain/Kennedy shamnesty bill, the most pro-border security and anti-illegal immigration voices in the entire Presidential field- Paul, Tancredo, and Hunter- have lousy poll numbers. It's pathetic that so many voters rely on the mainstream media, pundits, Hollywood, PACs, and other nefarious entities tell them who to vote for- they are mind-numbed sheep being led to slaughter by elitist wolves.
__________________________________________________________
Presidential candidate blasts “rogue” border mayors
Ryan Holeywell
October 11, 2007 - 9:38AM
McALLEN — Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo labeled some border mayors as “rogue” for refusing to cooperate with the federal government’s efforts to construct the proposed border fence in some parts of Texas.
Tancredo, a congressman from Colorado, also suggested in a news release earlier this week that the fence could be built north of U.S. border cities that don’t go along with it.
Tancredo’s comments came after The Associated Press reported earlier this month that some U.S. border leaders had denied some access to federal workers doing preliminary work on the fence.
“I’m glad he said it, because all it means is he wrote his own obituary,” McAllen Mayor Richard Cortez said. “Nobody like him can possibly be elected to a leadership position in this country.”
Brownsville Mayor Pat Ahumada said Tancredo’s comments were “not constructive” and added those who vehemently support the fence — such as Tancredo — are “being driven by fear or racism.”
“He has no clue how we live, how (the fence) will affect us and how close it is,” Ahumada said.
Tancredo, who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination, was polling at 1 percent in an NBC/Wall Street Journal conducted in late September. His campaign has raised $4,825 from two donors in the Rio Grande Valley, according to the Federal Election Committee.
Lately, he’s gained attention for his vocal support of the fence, as well as his vehement position on the need to reduce both legal and illegal immigration.
Tancredo told The Monitor his suggestion of building the wall north of some cities was “just for effect,” but he is serious about his support for the fence itself.
While Rio Grande Valley residents and elected officials alike may oppose the fence, Tancredo said, it “is a national security issue and we all have to pay the price and make some sacrifice.”
While Ahumada said he supports a so-called virtual fence created by dredging and expanding the Rio Grande, Tancredo said a physical barrier is the best option to stop “the invasion that is occurring,” referring to the influx of undocumented immigrants to the country.
He also said the fence sends a symbolic message to Mexico.
“It says clearly, ‘Here’s where one country ends and another one begins,’” Tancredo said. “Short of sending someone an atlas, this is the next best thing.”
Cortez said a fence could impede the billions of dollars of trade that comes through the country’s borders. But Tancredo said a fence would not affect legitimate business.
Ahumada said he invites Tancredo to visit the border and see for himself how it would affect the community. Tancredo said he’s visited the border many times and was in Texas last year, but he hopes to visit the state soon.
From: The Monitor
A Scintilla of Hope for Higher Education
The following, from The Daily at the University of Washington, gives me some hope that all is not completely lost in our system of higher education- there are still at least some students who havent't drank the koolaid of the Left.
_______________________________________________________________
Mexican claims to U.S. soil historically unfounded
October 8, 2007
By James Foxcurran
College campuses most often use the negative terms “imperialism” and “colonialism” to describe European and American history. Meanwhile, in 21st century North America, our southern neighbor is being granted moral legitimacy for the same behavior.
Mexican immigrants are now present in the Southwestern United States with a population percentage they have never enjoyed at any other time in history.
While defendants are saying it’s just the natural process of the Mexicans moving back onto land that really belongs to them and that the Hollywood demonstrations should be a source of conventional wisdom, history is being overlooked.
Mexico had barely colonized most of the Southwestern United States when it became U.S. territory in 1848. Spain, then Mexico, merely held imperial sway over Indian territories.
In 1835, Texas had about 3,500 Spanish-speaking residents, compared with almost 30,000 Anglo-American settlers, according to Ray Allen Billington, in his book The Far Western Frontier: 1830-1860.
In California, there were about 4,000 to 7,000 Spanish-speaking residents in the 1840s. The vast majority of the population was still Indian. Scattered missions, pueblos and presidios represented most of the Mexican presence in the area, which is why it was so easy for the United States to seize the area during the Mexican-American war, according to “History of French America” by Gilles Harvard and Cecile Vidal.
Meanwhile, in 1803, at the time of the Louisiana Purchase, there were 40,000 to 50,000 French-speaking residents west of the Mississippi River between Missouri and Washington state.
This number tripled to quadrupled by 1850. However, there is no modern political constituency for this group, therefore the story is apparently not worth telling.
The only state that has always had a majority Spanish-speaking population is New Mexico, with 44,000 Spanish-speaking residents in 1830. Since the Spanish were the first to explore the Southwest, their geographic terms are on the map every place they stopped to relieve themselves.
These vestiges are often used to justify the massive Mexican colonization currently unfolding, in spite of the fact that it is actually the first wave of Mexican colonization, not the second.
History is often revised to reflect the current situation rather than the facts. This is exactly what is happening with the American Southwest and the inflation of Mexican claims to the land there.
This historical revisionism clearly has a political motivation to justify and legitimize the influx of illegal Mexican immigrants and to discredit efforts to respect our border and immigration laws.
As former Rep. J.D. (R-Ariz.) Hayworth said in the film Border Wars, “The Left sees cheap votes, and the Right sees cheap labor, so you have the perfect storm.”
While one certainly can’t stereotype all persons of Mexican immigrants, there is a distinction between Mexican-American families who have citizenship and roots in the United States, and an illegal alien of a foreign nation who is violating and evading federal laws.
While illegal immigration is unacceptable, it is important to have sympathy for the migrants.
The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, working with the border patrol is serving a heroic function that is saving Mexican and American lives in large quantities. I don’t see any Leftists sweating in the Arizona desert, saving illegal Mexican migrants from dying of dehydration and starvation.
The only people that have decisively responded to this human rights tragedy are the groups that Leftists despise and routinely slander.
Mexicans are gaining considerable political power and forcing politicians of both parties to shy away from defending the border and enforcing immigration laws.
A Zogby’s poll found that 58 percent of Mexicans agree with the statement, “The territory of the United States’ Southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico.”
This was on display last year with the massive marches of Mexican citizens waving Mexican flags in American cities. If this isn’t blatant colonization, with ulterior imperialist motives, I don’t know what is.
[Reach contributing writer James Foxcurran at opinion@thedaily.washington.edu.]
_______________________________________________________________
Mexican claims to U.S. soil historically unfounded
October 8, 2007
By James Foxcurran
College campuses most often use the negative terms “imperialism” and “colonialism” to describe European and American history. Meanwhile, in 21st century North America, our southern neighbor is being granted moral legitimacy for the same behavior.
Mexican immigrants are now present in the Southwestern United States with a population percentage they have never enjoyed at any other time in history.
While defendants are saying it’s just the natural process of the Mexicans moving back onto land that really belongs to them and that the Hollywood demonstrations should be a source of conventional wisdom, history is being overlooked.
Mexico had barely colonized most of the Southwestern United States when it became U.S. territory in 1848. Spain, then Mexico, merely held imperial sway over Indian territories.
In 1835, Texas had about 3,500 Spanish-speaking residents, compared with almost 30,000 Anglo-American settlers, according to Ray Allen Billington, in his book The Far Western Frontier: 1830-1860.
In California, there were about 4,000 to 7,000 Spanish-speaking residents in the 1840s. The vast majority of the population was still Indian. Scattered missions, pueblos and presidios represented most of the Mexican presence in the area, which is why it was so easy for the United States to seize the area during the Mexican-American war, according to “History of French America” by Gilles Harvard and Cecile Vidal.
Meanwhile, in 1803, at the time of the Louisiana Purchase, there were 40,000 to 50,000 French-speaking residents west of the Mississippi River between Missouri and Washington state.
This number tripled to quadrupled by 1850. However, there is no modern political constituency for this group, therefore the story is apparently not worth telling.
The only state that has always had a majority Spanish-speaking population is New Mexico, with 44,000 Spanish-speaking residents in 1830. Since the Spanish were the first to explore the Southwest, their geographic terms are on the map every place they stopped to relieve themselves.
These vestiges are often used to justify the massive Mexican colonization currently unfolding, in spite of the fact that it is actually the first wave of Mexican colonization, not the second.
History is often revised to reflect the current situation rather than the facts. This is exactly what is happening with the American Southwest and the inflation of Mexican claims to the land there.
This historical revisionism clearly has a political motivation to justify and legitimize the influx of illegal Mexican immigrants and to discredit efforts to respect our border and immigration laws.
As former Rep. J.D. (R-Ariz.) Hayworth said in the film Border Wars, “The Left sees cheap votes, and the Right sees cheap labor, so you have the perfect storm.”
While one certainly can’t stereotype all persons of Mexican immigrants, there is a distinction between Mexican-American families who have citizenship and roots in the United States, and an illegal alien of a foreign nation who is violating and evading federal laws.
While illegal immigration is unacceptable, it is important to have sympathy for the migrants.
The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, working with the border patrol is serving a heroic function that is saving Mexican and American lives in large quantities. I don’t see any Leftists sweating in the Arizona desert, saving illegal Mexican migrants from dying of dehydration and starvation.
The only people that have decisively responded to this human rights tragedy are the groups that Leftists despise and routinely slander.
Mexicans are gaining considerable political power and forcing politicians of both parties to shy away from defending the border and enforcing immigration laws.
A Zogby’s poll found that 58 percent of Mexicans agree with the statement, “The territory of the United States’ Southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico.”
This was on display last year with the massive marches of Mexican citizens waving Mexican flags in American cities. If this isn’t blatant colonization, with ulterior imperialist motives, I don’t know what is.
[Reach contributing writer James Foxcurran at opinion@thedaily.washington.edu.]
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Commit an Adult Crime...
Do adult time. When I was growing up, there was no crime problem in Manatee County. Nowdays, it's not safe to go to the beach on a holiday because that's become a favorite time and place for gangs to shoot it out, regardless of who gets hurt in the process.
I don't care if the brat thug in the following story is only 14 years old- she's a member of a Mexican gang, she was in felony possession of a weapon, and she assaulted a police officer. She committed adult crimes, and now she's facing adult prison time.
Black and Mexican gangs are starting to take over the County. There's gang graffiti all over the place, and earlier this year some gang thugs gunned down a 9-year old little boy. Forget coddling these little criminals- stick their butts in jail where they belong.
Our liberal paper doesn't say whether she's here legally or not. That detail seems to escape their notice when reporting the rise in Mexican gang violence.
_________________________________________
From The Bradenton Herald:
Unfair treatment of young suspect alleged
By MAURA POSSLEY
mpossley@bradenton.com
MANATEE --A 14-year-old girl who authorities claim is a gang member has been charged as an adult for alleged battery of a Bradenton police officer in July.
Magis "Maggie" Ruiz faces charges of battery of a law enforcement officer and attempting to deprive an officer of means of protection/communication.
During a hearing Wednesday, Ruiz, who wept softly, was slapped with a third charge - possession of a weapon during commission of a felony - ensuring she would be tried as an adult.
Prosecutors and police say Ruiz bit an officer's arm and went for the officer's gun during her arrest on a warrant the afternoon of July 11.
Once handcuffed and in the officer's vehicle, police allege Ruiz said she wished she had gotten the gun to kill the officer and claimed membership in the SUR-13 street gang.
But the teen's public defender, Jennifer Fury, is crying foul on the state attorney for leveling such charges on a person her age.
The state's claim that Ruiz boasted of her gang membership, Fury said, was at minimum an association with friends and a way of surviving an uphill battle she has faced her whole life.
Ruiz had been in the custody of Florida Department of Juvenile Justice since the age of 11, Fury said.
She has been abandoned by her mother, who in their last contact told the teen she had washed her hands of her, Fury said Ruiz has told her.
"I don't know how much involvement in gang activity she has," her attorney said. "She has not been out on the street."
Ed Brodsky, assistant state attorney, declined to comment Wednesday, saying judicial ethics rules prevent him from talking about a pending case.
He said the state attorney's office reviews juvenile cases separately, and a juvenile has to commit a serious enough offense to be tried as an adult.
"The facts of each particular case will speak for themselves," Brodsky said.
Fury on Wednesday went on to describe conditions Ruiz has been placed in at the Manatee County jail, which she says are inappropriate given Ruiz's age.
Ruiz lives in a small medical unit, her attorney said, with no sunlight and two other inmates, including Ashley Rios, a 16-year-old reputed member of SUR-13 who is facing charges of principal to murder in the May shooting death of 9-year-old Stacy Williams III.
Jail spokesman Randy Warren said juveniles are held separately from the jail's adult population.
They are housed in the safest environments possible and given access to the exercise yard, he said.
Jail officials ensure inmates in the units get along, are not co-defendants and are not known enemies, Warren said.
"We are limited in the areas we can put her in," he said. "In jail, you don't always get your own room."
Fury contends Ruiz is being unjustly targeted as a criminal. Holding her behind bars is not the solution, she said.
"I told her, 'No matter what happens, I'm not leaving you,' " Fury said. "Even if I fail, I'll go down swinging, because she needs to know there are adults out there who care. That's this girl's problem - everybody has failed her."
I don't care if the brat thug in the following story is only 14 years old- she's a member of a Mexican gang, she was in felony possession of a weapon, and she assaulted a police officer. She committed adult crimes, and now she's facing adult prison time.
Black and Mexican gangs are starting to take over the County. There's gang graffiti all over the place, and earlier this year some gang thugs gunned down a 9-year old little boy. Forget coddling these little criminals- stick their butts in jail where they belong.
Our liberal paper doesn't say whether she's here legally or not. That detail seems to escape their notice when reporting the rise in Mexican gang violence.
_________________________________________
From The Bradenton Herald:
By MAURA POSSLEY
mpossley@bradenton.com
MANATEE --A 14-year-old girl who authorities claim is a gang member has been charged as an adult for alleged battery of a Bradenton police officer in July.
Magis "Maggie" Ruiz faces charges of battery of a law enforcement officer and attempting to deprive an officer of means of protection/communication.
During a hearing Wednesday, Ruiz, who wept softly, was slapped with a third charge - possession of a weapon during commission of a felony - ensuring she would be tried as an adult.
Prosecutors and police say Ruiz bit an officer's arm and went for the officer's gun during her arrest on a warrant the afternoon of July 11.
Once handcuffed and in the officer's vehicle, police allege Ruiz said she wished she had gotten the gun to kill the officer and claimed membership in the SUR-13 street gang.
But the teen's public defender, Jennifer Fury, is crying foul on the state attorney for leveling such charges on a person her age.
The state's claim that Ruiz boasted of her gang membership, Fury said, was at minimum an association with friends and a way of surviving an uphill battle she has faced her whole life.
Ruiz had been in the custody of Florida Department of Juvenile Justice since the age of 11, Fury said.
She has been abandoned by her mother, who in their last contact told the teen she had washed her hands of her, Fury said Ruiz has told her.
"I don't know how much involvement in gang activity she has," her attorney said. "She has not been out on the street."
Ed Brodsky, assistant state attorney, declined to comment Wednesday, saying judicial ethics rules prevent him from talking about a pending case.
He said the state attorney's office reviews juvenile cases separately, and a juvenile has to commit a serious enough offense to be tried as an adult.
"The facts of each particular case will speak for themselves," Brodsky said.
Fury on Wednesday went on to describe conditions Ruiz has been placed in at the Manatee County jail, which she says are inappropriate given Ruiz's age.
Ruiz lives in a small medical unit, her attorney said, with no sunlight and two other inmates, including Ashley Rios, a 16-year-old reputed member of SUR-13 who is facing charges of principal to murder in the May shooting death of 9-year-old Stacy Williams III.
Jail spokesman Randy Warren said juveniles are held separately from the jail's adult population.
They are housed in the safest environments possible and given access to the exercise yard, he said.
Jail officials ensure inmates in the units get along, are not co-defendants and are not known enemies, Warren said.
"We are limited in the areas we can put her in," he said. "In jail, you don't always get your own room."
Fury contends Ruiz is being unjustly targeted as a criminal. Holding her behind bars is not the solution, she said.
"I told her, 'No matter what happens, I'm not leaving you,' " Fury said. "Even if I fail, I'll go down swinging, because she needs to know there are adults out there who care. That's this girl's problem - everybody has failed her."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
