CFIR Dallas, TX


Saturday, July 03, 2004

KRT Wire | 07/03/2004 | Mexican state of Zacatecas poised to elect migrants to office

KRT Wire | 07/03/2004 | Mexican state of Zacatecas poised to elect migrants to office
The Dallas Morning News

SAN PEDRO APULCO, Mexico - (KRT) - Martin Carvajal is campaigning hard for mayor, but in this small farm town he could just as well be running for saint.

To most folks here, Carvajal has the answers. He will create jobs and prosperity and even bring home some of their sons and daughters - many working illegally in the United States.

In short, this furniture maker from Fort Worth is the savior who will turn around this town of 5,000 in southern Zacatecas state.

"Martin, you have given us hope, great hope," said Silvia Gonzalez, 33, a teacher whose entire family is in the United States and whose students in secondary school already talk about heading north.

"The pressure is enormous, because in my candidacy there is no room for failure here," said Carvajal, 48.

Coming home is often difficult, but many migrants returning to San Pedro Apulco and other Zacatecas towns are getting the red-carpet treatment as residents prepare for state elections Sunday.

Mexicans will closely watch vote results here, because Zacatecas becomes the first and only state in Mexico to allow its migrants living abroad to seek elected office, and because voters are poised to elect their first woman governor.

Amalia Garcia, of the left-leaning Party of the Democratic Revolution, or PRD, is leading in the gubernatorial race. Polls show her leading her closest rival, Pepe Bonilla of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, by up to seven percentage points. Garcia, a 53-year-old lawyer, would become the first democratically elected female governor in Mexico. Other women have held that post, but they were "imposed" by the PRI, which ran the country for more than 70 years.

"I'm not sure we're ready for a woman governor, but Amalia seems the lesser of two evils," said Luis Hernandez, a 26-year-old waiter from Plano, Texas, who is in Zacatecas and plans to vote Sunday.

Analysts say that in the state - where almost every family has a relative working north of the border - some voters prefer to support home-grown candidates who have achieved success in the United States. They regard such people as their best ticket out of poverty.

"At a time when Mexican politicians here can't get the job done," said Miguel Moctezuma Longoria, an immigration expert from the Autonomous University of Zacatecas, "more and more voters are looking to those abroad for answers."

The right for overseas Mexicans to run in Zacatecas elections grew out of the case of Andres Bermudez, a wealthy California farmer. Three years ago, Bermudez was elected mayor of Jerez. He left midway through his three-year term after authorities discovered an electoral-law provision that prohibited a person from holding office without proving continuous residency in the country.

Under pressure from abroad - primarily from remittance-sending migrants - Gov. Ricardo Monreal pushed through a legislative measure last August that abolished the residency rule.

Bermudez is once again seeking the mayor's job in Jerez. He is one of at least seven emigrants who are running for office in Zacatecas. Carvajal's platform includes a pledge to lobby Washington non-governmental organizations for matching funds to train workers, create new investment opportunities and open markets for Zacatecas products, such as honey. Carvajal, who entered the United States illegally almost 28 years ago but is now a naturalized citizen, said that as mayor he would seek help from paisanos abroad.

"I'll be the mayor for constituents in two countries," he said. "They are key."

Such talk impresses locals such as Carlos Jauregui local president of Convergencia, one of three parties in an alliance of conservative and left-leaning interests to back Carvajal. The other parties are the National Action Party, or PAN, and the PRD.

"What we want is for him to create jobs, jobs, jobs," he said. "We see Martin's experience in the United States as a plus. He left with nothing and returned as a successful businessman."

Some, however, are skeptical. Maria Gutierrez, 48, called Carvajal "an outsider."

"If he had it so good in Texas, why does he want to come back?" she asked. Observers expect Carvajal, who has nominal opposition, to coast to victory. His four grown children are supportive. The candidate's wife is another story.

Olivia Carvajal, 49, said her husband is a good man who never felt quite at home in the United States. Carvajal, also a Zacatecas native, said their children probably would stay in Fort Worth to run the family furniture business even if he won.

Asked if she wants her husband to win, Carvajal said, "He's worked so hard to make this dream come true."

Pressed, she smiled and muttered, "No comment." > News > Nation -- Migration to fuel census growth > News > Nation -- Migration to fuel census growth
By Leonel Sanchez

March 18, 2004

Census projections released today show the nation's Hispanic and Asian populations will triple to more than 100 million and 33 million, respectively, in less than 50 years, a trend that will be fueled by high immigration and fertility rates.

"The main thing is migration. We have over a million additions to our population through migration," said Gregory Spencer, chief of the population projections branch of U.S. Census Bureau.

"When you think that many are young and of child-bearing age you can expect what's going to happen. They're going to have children and that keeps multiplying the effect."

Non-Hispanic whites will continue to be the majority of the population in 2050, but just barely, according to the census. That group, which now makes up nearly 70 percent of the population, will account for 50.1 percent.

"After 2030 all the surviving baby boomers are going to be over 65," Spencer said. "That group is disproportionately non-Hispanic white."

The number of non-Hispanic whites will increase during that period, from 195.7 million to 210.3 million, but their share of the overall population will shrink in the face of population increases among Hispanics, Asians and African-Americans.

The Latino share of the general population will nearly double, from 12.6 percent to 24.4 percent. The Asian share will rise from 3.8 percent to 8 percent and the African-American population will grow from 12.7 percent to 14.6 percent.

The overall population will increase from 282.1 million to 419.9 million, a 49 percent increase, largely because of those three groups.

The Census Bureau did not break down its population projections by states. But the San Diego Association of Governments projects that by 2030 Latinos will make up 37 percent of the county's population and non-Hispanic whites will account for 40 percent.

Immigration will continue to play a key role, said Edward Schafer, senior planner at SANDAG. "We forecast 17,000 people per year coming from outside the United States. The biggest share is from Mexico."

The nationwide census projections are being released as the debate over immigration is heating up because of an article written by a prominent Harvard professor. Samuel Huntington argues that massive emigration from Mexico, in particular, threatens to divide the United States into two cultures.

"Unlike past immigrant groups, Mexicans and other Latinos have not assimilated into mainstream U.S. culture, forming instead their own political and linguistic enclaves from Los Angeles to Miami and rejecting the Anglo-Protestant values that built the American dream," Huntington says in his soon to be released book, an excerpt of which appeared in Foreign Policy magazine this month. "The United States ignores this challenge at its own peril."

Demographers said the new census projections give some weight to Huntington's argument.

"He's right on with Mexican immigration being without any precedent in U.S. history," said Steven Camarota, an immigration researcher at the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C.

"Whether it's a real threat to national cohesion that's an open question in my mind. It still might work out. One of the things that happened before is that we cut off immigration in (the early 1920s) and it remained low for five decades. That played a role in integrating and assimilating immigrants and their descendants into society."

Harry Pachon, president of the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute in Los Angeles called Huntington's thesis flawed and his research questionable because studies show that Latinos, like past immigrant groups, eventually assimilate into mainstream society.

"By the third generation, Latinos are marrying somebody who is not a Latino," Pachon said. "By the third generation, many Latinos have lost their Spanish language and are speaking mainly in English.

"They're following the same trajectory as past groups like the Italians and the Germans."

They are also meeting with the same suspicions, he added.

"There's always a reaction when one group gets large. People will always have questions: Are they really American? Are they really going to blend in? Those questions are as American as apple pie."

US Border Patrol launches police-state sweeps against California immigrants

US Border Patrol launches police-state sweeps against California immigrants
More than 470 undocumented immigrants have been arrested in San Bernardino and San Diego counties in California since June 4 in a wave of random sweeps carried out by the Border Patrol (BP), part of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection. People are being detained at random to confirm their immigration status. Those who are considered deportable are then sent to jail while their deportation is processed. No consideration is given to the fate of immigrant families or to their US children; people are simply whisked away.

In the course of three weeks, daily BP sweeps took place at bus stops, near markets and during routine traffic stops mainly in the cities of Ontario, Temecula, and Upland in San Bernardino County; Corona in Riverside County; and Escondido in San Diego County. Many of ! those arrested have already been deported to Tijuana, Mexico.

The targets of the raids are ordinary immigrants, some of them with many years of residence in the United States. Over the course of three weeks, approximately 10,000 people who had committed no crime were stopped and asked to prove their right to reside in the US. Church officials and immigrant advocates indicate that the main criterion for stopping these individuals was the color of their skin.

Those who could not produce documentation were taken into custody until a relative or friend brought in their documents. Of the 470 arrests made, most were from Mexico. While awaiting deportation, immigrants from Central and South America and Mexico who requested a court hearing are detained, often in privately run prisons in the company of felons, where many are beaten, humiliated and assaulted, according to Human Rights Watch reports.

A special mobile task force consisting of 12 agents from the Temecula Station carried out the sweeps in San Bernardino, Riverside and San Diego counties.

The primary objective of the raids, according to BP agent Tomas Jimenez, “is to prevent the entering of terrorists and terrorist arms to the United States.” Other Border Patrol officials indicated during a meeting with San Bernardino community leaders that the raids were part of an intelligence-gathering operation aimed at terrorists and smugglers.

There is no evidence that this is so. No smugglers or terrorists have been apprehended. A far more likely motive is that this is a test of a new procedure, part of an escalating trend of using unconstitutional methods against undocumented workers. Counting on an increase in manpower and resources, the BP has expanded its operations inland, testing the political reaction among immigrant groups.

The arrests and deportations have created a sense of unease among Asian and Latin American workers throughout California. Immigrants in cities in Los Angeles County, in Santa Barbara ! and in San Jose also have reported seeing border patrol vans patrolling their neighborhoods.

The Border Patrol denies that the sweeps went beyond the three Southern California counties. Both the BP and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have declared that the reports of sweeps in other cities of the state are unfounded; however, these agencies have no credibility among immigrant workers.

Immigration vans have been spotted in Monterrey and in Salinas, a center of agricultural labor. On May 6, in San Francisco, ICE agents conducted a raid on the Sunset Hotel, allegedly to arrest a South Asian immigrant. While there, they swept through the facility and arrested another South Asian as well as seven Mexican undocumented workers. Since then, two more similar raids have taken place. Last year, immigration raids were also conducted in the Chinatown district.

In Los Angeles, BP agents have stopped and detained immigrants in South and Central Los Angeles. In San Diego, BP agents have been reported boarding the trolleys and questioning passengers in immigrant neighborhoods, as well as in the central Old Town district.

People are afraid to leave their homes, to shop, to go to clinics or schools. In the Central Valley city of Firebaugh, halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco, reports of BP agents watching roads in and out of the city have kept hundreds of immigrant workers away from their agricultural jobs. In nearby Dos Palos and Los Baños, there were reports of 27 arrests; and in Los Baños, an entire family was taken into custody at a supermarket parking lot.

The BP insists it has the right to conduct these raids, and has done so in Texas and other parts of California. It denies that it singles out Mexican-looking individuals to stop, and has assured “law-abiding” citizens that they have nothing to fear.

The raids suggest otherwise. A Pomona day worker who witnessed BP agents questioning workers in Ontario reported that the! y only stopped and questioned Latino workers, bypassing black and white individuals.

Senior Agent Jimenez stated to the Los Angeles Times that agents will refrain from checking in churches, homes and schools. But according to a report from the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), there is evidence that English classes for adults have been targeted; also raided were trolley stations and a quinceañera cotillion party in Orange County.

The randomness of the sweeps raises profound constitutional questions. The Bill of Rights of the US Constitution prohibits authorities from unreasonable searches and recognizes the right of all people in the United States against self-incrimination.

The practice of detaining people in the streets and busting into their homes and workplaces to check on their identification is common in police states. By requiring people to prove who they are, when they have committed no crime, the BP is in fact establishing a precedent that can be used against anyone, immigrants and citizens alike.

Washington officials at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) objected to the raids only from the standpoint of procedure. The DHS suggested that the BP may have overstepped its authority, and that ICE should have been involved. It also declared that the profiling of immigrants on the basis of skin color is contrary to their policies. The DHS did not disavow the legality of the sweeps and will take no disciplinary action against the BP in Temecula. Suzanne Luber, a DHS spokeswoman, indicated that the Temecula unit’s actions were a coordination problem and not a disciplinary one, since no laws were violated.

Immigration raids on factories and farms targeting undocumented workers were common in California before 1994. After that, th! e immigration enforcement shifted to the 25 crossings along the California-Mexico border.

Since 2001, attacks on immigrants have steadily escalated. At the US-Mexico border, an increase in BP agents and the use of high-tech equipment have forced undocumented workers to take perilous desert routes. So far this year, 388 immigrants have died trying to cross, according to Mexican government statistics. More than half a million arrests have been made at the border.

An economic collapse and a severe drought in Mexico are pushing increasing numbers of workers across the border. In their desperation to feed their families, and unable to enter legally, immigrants have no choice but to risk their lives to enter the United States.

The sweeps have mobilized immigrants and their supporters in protest across California, including about 5,000 people who marched on June 15 between Ontario and Pomona, California. At the Temecula Border Patrol Station, on June 28, hundreds protested the raids in a tense demonstration in which riot-equipped agents surrounded the demonstrators. Other protests have taken place in Salinas, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego and Santa Ana.

At the Ontario protest, demonstrators included undocumented day laborers from Pomona and other cities, which, at great personal risk, took a stand against the repression. Also marching were community college and university students as well as representatives of community organizations and religious officials.

A June 30 demonstration in San Diego’s Chicano Park included parents whose sons and daughters are fighting in Iraq, including a father who lost his son there. The San Diego Union-Tribune quoted a woman whose son is in Fallujah: “He is fighting for a country where rights are being taken away from his family, his friends, and his community,” said Sonia Rodriguez.

Arizona voters face crucial ballot issues

Arizona voters face crucial ballot issues
Arizona voters face crucial ballot issues
Elvia Díaz, Chip Scutari and Robbie Sherwood
The Arizona Republic
Jul. 2, 2004 12:00 AM

An anti-illegal-immigration initiative that would affect all Arizonans who voted or sought welfare benefits may be headed to the Nov. 2 ballot after its supporters turned in more than 190,000 signatures Thursday.

But the battle over the fate of Arizona's Clean Elections law is headed to court before it can go to voters in the form of an initiative.

Related info
• More border news »
• More politics »

Protect Arizona Now, aimed at preventing voter fraud and denying public benefits to undocumented immigrants, will likely thrust Arizona into the center of the nation's debate over illegal immigration. Hours before Thursday's 5 p.m. deadline, Kathy McKee, state director of Protect Arizona Now, submitted 190,887 signatures to the secretary of state.

McKee said she's confident election officials will find the 122,612 valid signatures necessary to send the issue to voters.

In November, Arizonans also will consider six legislative referendums and a salary increase for lawmakers.

McKee noted that Protect Arizona Now targets welfare benefits.

"We're mandated to educate children of illegal aliens in kindergarten through (Grade) 12," she said. "But we're not mandated to provide free breakfast, free lunch, after-school programs and many other things."

The measure would require all Arizonans to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote and when seeking state benefits. Voters would have to show identification when casting a ballot in person. Currently, Arizonans must fill out a form when registering to vote, affirming that they are U.S. citizens and Arizona residents.

Critics of Protect Arizona Now say the measure could prevent undocumented immigrants from getting library cards, water or trash collection, among other things.

A lasting impact
Voters face a relatively light crop of ballot questions; a maximum of nine overall (10 in Maricopa County), the fewest since 1996.

The decisions will have a lasting impact, though, as the measures could continue funding for freeways and the Valley's light-rail system and allow public universities to retain some of the profits from their technological inventions.

Voters will also decide if state lawmakers deserve a 50 percent raise, boosting their salaries to $36,000 from $24,000.

And, ironically, Arizonans will have a chance to limit the initiative process.

The ballot won't be set until Protect Arizona Now's signatures are verified. And the Clean Elections case should be heard over the next two weeks, with the losing side appealing to the Arizona Supreme Court.

A group called No Taxpayer Money for Politicians, which opposes the Clean Elections law, wants to end the publicly funded campaigns and put that money into state coffers. The group filed 275,000 signatures last week, far more than needed.

But the Clean Elections Institute sued Thursday, saying the measure violates the "single subject rule" because it would also get rid of public financing that would prevent the Clean Elections Commission from doing its voter-approved duties. The five-member commission uses public money to schedule debates, publish a voter guide and regulate campaign-finance laws.

The suit also contends that petitions used to explain the purpose of the anti-Clean Elections initiative were "highly partisan" and "designed to mislead voters."

Proponents of the anti-Clean Elections initiative say they aren't worried about the last-minute legal challenge.

Transportation tax
In Maricopa County, voters will consider Proposition 400, which would extend the half-cent transportation sales tax for 20 years to help pay for light-rail lines, new and improved freeways and other transit improvements in the Valley.

The tax, set to expire next year, would generate $8.5 billion, more than half of the $15.8 billion local leaders are seeking to improve the Valley's transit system. Federal and state funds would cover the rest.

Of the six legislative referendums, two would add restrictions to the initiative process. Lawmakers, mostly Republican leaders, complained throughout the recent revenue shortfall and budget crisis that voter-mandated spending for health care and education had tied their hands as they struggled to balance the state budget.

One measure would require that if initiatives seek state money, they include a tax increase or some other funding source to cover the costs. That would prevent another initiative like 2000's Proposition 204, which provides health insurance for any Arizonans living in poverty. The measure quickly overwhelmed its funding source, Arizona's portion of the nationwide tobacco settlement.

The other measure would move back the filing date for ballot propositions, by four months, to seven months before an election.

Legislative pay raise
Legislators had no say in putting a proposed pay raise for themselves on the ballot, but many are pulling for its victory. Voters shot down a $6,000 pay raise in 2000.

Voters will have to wait at least another month to find out whether Protect Arizona Now has enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot.

Alfredo Gutierrez, a former state legislator and co-chairman of the Statue of Liberty Coalition formed to defeat the measure, said the group is ready to raise roughly $2 million to fight the measure.

"This isn't going to make the border any safer or secure," Gutierrez said. "It will simply harass innocent people. We're not talking only undocumented immigrants. Everyone would be required to carry proof of citizenship when seeking any public services."

Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa and a leading supporter of Protect Arizona Now, said residents in Arizona and elsewhere are fed up with illegal immigration.

"Americans want something done about the abuse, the fraud and illegal immigration," Pearce said this week. "This is simply allowing the voters of the state of Arizona to decide if their elections ought to be protected and if their welfare dollars ought to be protected."

Hector Cabrera, a 42-year-old undocumented immigrant from Mexico who waits for work at a day labor center in north Phoenix, was dismayed to find out people like him will be the target.

Cabrera said that he has never gotten any free government handouts but that he worries he and other undocumented immigrants will be caught in the public fight over Protect Arizona Now.

"Most of us come here to work," Cabrera said. "We will keep coming as long as there is work for us."

Regulating Immigration Consultants (Gotham Gazette. July, 2004)

Regulating Immigration Consultants (Gotham Gazette. July, 2004)
Regulating Immigration Consultants
by Chaleampon Ritthichai
July, 2004

Hoping that she could quickly qualify for US residency, Izabela Dechnik, a Polish cleaning woman, gave $2,000 to a woman named Adela Holzer, who claimed that she could expedite the process with the help of a senator in Washington D.C.

Dechnik was not the only person to whom Holzer made this promise.

"She always said that this was the senator who was going to grant us residency," Pascual Diez, who gave Holzer more than $5,000, told Hoy.

Though Holzer promised "fast track service," years passed and not one of the immigrants who paid Holzer received a green card. Holzer, very simply, was conning them. In 2002, she was convicted of grand larceny and fraud for stealing a total of $50,000 from her immigrant clients.

Stories such as this are common in immigrant communities, which is why the government is trying to do something about it.

In June the City Council unanimously passed a new bill that would require immigration assistant service providers to give a written contract to their clients, and would prevent them from making statements promising government action or suggesting that they have special influence. The New York State legislature passed a similar bill. Both only await the signatures of Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Governor George Pataki, respectively, to be turned into law.

"Assisting immigrants is a thriving industry in certain areas, and one that for long has been left unchecked," said State Senator Frank Padavan, who had introduced the bill in the State Senate. With these new laws, immigrant service providers will be regulated for the first time.

There is agreement of course that scam artists should not be tolerated. But there is sharp disagreement over the role of immigrant assistance service providers, some questioning whether the new laws won't legitimize an occupation that shouldn't really exist at all.

Many immigration service providers call themselves "notarios," which means lawyers in Spanish, when they are, in fact, just a notary public. The new laws will require that they post a sign stating that they are not attorneys and not allowed to give legal advice.

"How would you feel if you were sick and going to see a doctor who has a sign hanging in the office saying that 'I am not a doctor,' said Eugene Glicksman, chairman of the County Lawyers Immigration and nationality committee. "What these bills say is that we are going to let anybody represent immigrants."

According to the federal law, only attorneys and accredited individuals or non-profit organizations can represent immigrants. Under the new law, immigration service providers can transcribe responses to government agencies; translate instructions and questions from forms, assist in getting documentation. They are prohibited from giving legal advice to clients.

Proponents of the bills argue that regulating, instead of outlawing, immigration service providers, allows some room for legitimate business to exist.

"While there are some bad actors who have been ripping off immigrants, at the same time there are some immigrant consultants who do play some helpful and legitimate role to immigration communities," said Mark Lewis of New York Immigration Coalition.

But lawyers said it is difficult for immigrant assistance service providers to avoid giving legal advice. Even the selection of the forms is in effect the practice of law, they argue, because one has to understand the law in order to pick the right application.

"If people need legal advice, they should seek out the services of an immigration attorney," Padavan said.

But for many immigrants, hiring a lawyer could cost an entire month's wages. "Many immigrants chose to go to immigration consultants because they provide low cost services," said Lewis, who added that "some of the notarios understand the law better than lawyers."

Some immigrants questioned why they should pay a lump sum of money to a lawyer to simply filling out forms. "I have been filing things myself without a lawyer," said Christelle Arcostanzo, an immigrant from France.

"There is no such thing as just filling out the form," Claudia Slovinsky of the Association Bar of New York told the New York Law Journal. “That form is tip of a big, huge iceberg.”

If Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Governor George Pataki approve the measures as expected, lawyer groups said they would consider constitutional challeges on the ground that these bills go against federal law.

"These bills do not require immigration assistants to have even the most minimal knowledge, training or experience," Glicksman said. "I would not be surprised if there were litigation on this."

An immigrant from Bangkok, Thailand, Chaleampon Ritthichai is the editor of The Citizen.

Political Passion Counts But Your Vote for Bush Might Not!

Political Passion Counts � But Your Vote for Bush Might Not!
Political Passion Counts – But Your Vote for Bush Might Not!
Joan Swirsky
Friday, July 2, 2004
Remember the presidential election of November 2000? Just kidding. Democrats are still trying to avenge Gore’s loss by insisting it was rigged in spite of three recounts showing that George W. Bush won the Electoral College vote – the only vote that has counted for over 100 years – and despite a six-month study in 2001 by largely leftwing publications (including the New York Times) that concluded Bush won by any and all counts.

So goes the loss of power and the lust for socialism.
Story Continues Below

But the outcome of the presidential election in November 2004 may be even more controversial because of three crucial factors that Republicans, conservatives and moderates must pay attention to NOW!
The Electronic Voting Factor

While it is widely believed that all things in the high-tech, impersonal world of technology are beyond the manipulation of crooked zone leaders, under-the-table payoffs, stuffed ballot boxes, staged protest rallies and even sabotage, nothing could be further from the truth.

The template for what may happen in November was dramatized this year when American Idol – the popular Fox TV show that invited the American public to vote or text message their preferences to decide who won the hot competition – was accused by both journalists and the public of manipulating the outcome.

As it happened, the most talented singer, Fantasia Barrino, won. But several immensely talented wannabes were voted off while lesser hopefuls remained to the end to inflict on the public their uniquely atonal Karaoke renditions of songs that deserved better.

How did this happen? Why did people all over the country – many who spent hours on the phone dialing hundreds of times – complain to Fox, the Federal Communications Commission and their legislators that they were “robbed” of their vote?

It turned out that – gasp – “the system” was flawed and that people who had mastered power dialing and text messaging had the advantage. While voters who called phone services like Verizon and others had lots of trouble getting through, those who called one of the program’s sponsors, AT&T, cast their votes with suspicious ease and the over-two-million voters who pay for that service largely determined the outcome.

What does this have to do with the upcoming presidential election? A lot! No American can now trust that anyone in charge of electronic technology, including manufacturers of electronic voting machines who may have their own political agenda) will not skew the election – through fraud – toward the candidate they favor. Nor, for that matter, can anyone trust the machines themselves!

Equally alarming is that no voter can be sure that the programming for election equipment is not outsourced to foreign countries like Russia, China, France or Germany that have America’s worst interests at heart! Nor can voters preclude the possibility of hacker attack or sabotage, knowing as they do that defective hardware and software and malicious programs could easily subvert the election.

Seeking Solutions

In 2002, President Bush signed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) earmarking $3.9 billion to buy new computerized voting machines and provide incentives for states to improve their methods of voting. But since then elections in CA, FL, MD, GA, the list goes on, have taken place using electronic equipment that failed.

It’s noteworthy that manufacturers of electronic voting machines estimate that the small percentage of Americans who actually vote – about 50 million out of nearly 300 million, or approximately 20 percent – will use the e-vote in November.

HAVA requires that ALL voting machines provide a permanent paper record to insure verification and transparency, and that voters must be given the “opportunity to change the ballot or correct any error before the permanent paper is produced." Sounds good, right?

Well, not exactly. While most states have made efforts to comply with HAVA, most reforms won’t kick in until 2005 or later!

Groups like the San Francisco-based Verified Voting Foundation and say that electronic voting equipment is vulnerable to programming errors, equipment malfunctions and malevolent tampering, with no way to detect malfeasance or deliberate rigging either before or after a vote.

They insist that the only solution is for the equipment to provide a voter-verifiable paper ballot trail. However, many of the machines being purchased don’t meet this standard and thus provide no way is to determine the correct outcome of the upcoming election.

A Preview of November

In January, an electronic vote for a seat in the Florida House of Representatives showed that 134 votes were unrecorded and the winner won by only 12 votes. Although state officials acknowledged that touch-screen voting machines in 11 counties had a software flaw, the lack of a paper trail made checking the vote impossible – just as it threatens to be in November.

And in April when longtime, liberal Republican Senator Arlen Spector was challenged by conservative Pat Toomey, Spector won by 18,000 votes out of a million cast. The election could have been rigged – and some suspect it was – if only two or three ballots from each precinct in the state’s 67 counties had been tampered with.

The “battleground” states of Florida and Pennsylvania are only two great states in this country. But what will happen if the electronic voting outcome in November is called into question in other battleground states like California, Ohio, Michigan, Texas, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Indiana, Washington, Virginia and the District of Columbia?

Too Little, Too Late

It may seem encouraging that a few congressional Republicans and Democrats have asked the General Accounting Office (GAO) to investigate and report on the security of electronic voting systems and to suggest steps that federal and state governments have taken or should take to insure they are reliable.

But the GAO’s report is due AFTER the 2004 election!

In December, Senator Robert Graham (D-FL) introduced a bill, "The Voter Confidence Act” (S. 1980) that was followed by in May by an identical bill (H.R. 2239) by Representative Rush Holt (D-NJ), requiring a voter-verifiable paper ballot on every voting system.

But these bills have gone NOWHERE!

The Campaign for Verifiable Voting, a non-partisan group in Maryland, has urged all voters to request paper ballots to create a verifiable paper trail of their votes.

But many state judges have denied requests for paper ballots!

While most election organizations insist that the voting problem is non-partisan, numerous polls report that Republicans overwhelmingly support legislation that mandates verification of electronic voting with paper ballots but Democrats overwhelmingly hate the idea, “feeling” that checking those receipts would take too much time and cause too much “confusion.”

Which begs the question: Why would any American not want proof of his or her vote unless the absence of proof would be to his or her advantage?

The Soros Factor

Not 12 hours after President Bush was declared the winner of the 2000 election, Jesse Jackson and a number of other leftwing rabble-rousers appeared before the media in Florida, surrounded by throngs of people holding protest placards and mouthing what amounted to the Democratic National Committee’s talking points: “I was robbed of my vote!” “I couldn’t understand the ballot!” “I feel disenfranchised!”

The staged – and obviously preplanned – protests were followed by weeks of desperate Democrats squinting their eyes to determine if a chad was “hanging” or “pregnant” – a spectacle never witnessed before in American history.

But to George Soros – Hungarian-born multibillionaire, American citizen and hedge-fund genius – it was business as usual.

In a riveting exposé of the 74-year-old that was published by NewsMax’s magazine in May, writer Richard Poe – who delved the very depths of Soros’ ruthlessness, greed and Machiavellian nature – revealed him as a man who hates God, hates “American supremacy” and America itself (where he has made zillions) and, above all, HATES President Bush, calling his ouster “the central focus of my life.”

But he is not simply a naysayer. To the tune of $5 billion, Poe reported, Soros’ “philanthropy” in America has supported the noble issues of “abortion, atheism, euthanasia, gun control, mass immigration and other radical experiments in social engineering.”

Soros’ by-now seasoned strategy in overthrowing those he hates from power in what he refers to as “velvet revolutions” – coup-d’états that shed no blood but succeed in both garnering himself phenomenal wealth and the “regime change” he desires.

In 1992, he decimated the English economy. In 1997, he crashed the Asian economy. In 1998, he brought about regime change in Slovakia, doing the same in 1999 in Croatia and the same in Yugoslavia in 2000. He has now set his sights on the Ukraine.

But more important, they are set on the United State where he wants to inflict his hateful and perverse vision of society on America by installing another puppet – in this case John Kerry – as his emissary.

His foray into Yugoslavia is instructive. “Soros’ protesters filled the streets of Belgrade to halt an election that was still in progress,” Poe reported. “The vote was close enough that Yugoslav law required a runoff election.”

Equally revealing was Soros’ regime change strategy of 2002 in the former Soviet Republic of Georgia. To stop President Eduard Shevardnadze’s reelection, Soros used the TV station he owned in Russia to question the final tally, sending thousands of protestors he had paid to demonstrate in the streets, assailing the Parliament and accusing it of vote fraud, and finally succeeding in having Shevardnadze resign to avoid a civil war.

Eerily similar to Florida in 2000, isn’t it? And not unimaginable that another Florida-like fiasco could be repeated this November, especially because rich and rabid leftist Democrats from Great Neck, NY, to Beverly Hills, CA, and everywhere in between are already organizing groups of lawyers to fly to battleground states – before the returns are in – to protest the outcome of the vote.

This includes Kerry, who is encouraging 2,000 lawyers he has assembled to "challenge anyplace in America where you cannot trace the vote and count the votes."

What will happen if the upcoming election is thrown into Soros-created chaos, the final tally undetermined beyond January of 2005? With no president in office, who will have control over our nuclear codes? Will a preplanned military dictatorship move into place? Will civil unrest force us to get out of Iraq and lose the war on terrorism?

And will Soros’ dream of a socialist regime be installed as it was in Spain? We still don’t know if the recent overthrow of Spain’s popular president – who days before the election lead by high margins in the polls – was the result not of a terrorist train wreck but rather Soros’s manipulation or, for that matter, the manipulation of electronic voting equipment by computer-savvy terrorists like the ones trained in American flight schools on Boeing 757s and 767s?

Our highest officials now warn us that al Qaeda WILL – not might but will attack us in another devastating onslaught. While they theorize about the capacity of our enemies to explode natural gas lines, poison our food or explode a “dirty bomb” in a densely-populated area, none of them have mentioned the most devastating possibility of all – sabotaging the American election of 2004 and thus throwing our very way of life into pandemonium.

In the most doomsday scenario – which is, unfortunately, highly plausible – if no winner is declared because our election turns out to be massively flawed – and massively protested – our country could be paralyzed and thus more vulnerable to terrorism han ever before.

While Soros’s name is not commonly associated with the Florida debacle of 2000, it is clear that he may not have been far from the eye of the storm. Gore’s success was crucial to the megalomaniac, who, Poe documented, wielded tremendous power in the Clinton administration and influence with its highest-ranking officials in the State and Treasury departments.

Working closely with Gore during the Clinton years, Soros was a central figure in determining American policy toward the defunct Soviet Union, a role that ultimately led him to the center of the huge “Russiagate” scandal that involved billions of dollars in illegal transfers out of Russia through the Bank of New York.

According to Poe, Iowa Republican James A. Leach, who headed the House Banking Committee at the time, said that the scandal might be “one of the greatest social robberies in human history.” But like most Clinton scandals, it was surgically excised.

Soros’ power in the U.S. literally evaporated when Bush took office; hence his burning rage and insatiable hunger for American regime change, and his determination to use his riches to buy the election of his fellow socialist, John Kerry.

To that end, Soros has spent multimillions for Democratic ad campaigns, with promises to spend multimillions more to support the work of the 527 groups that have found a way to circumvent so-called campaign-finance reform.

And that is not to omit the vast sum – reportedly $10 million – he has given to the radical, far-left Internet group, or the $5 million he’s spent on America Coming Together, for which he hired dozens of felons to go door-to-door to register voters in Florida, Missouri and Ohio.

It is significant, as Poe reported, that Soros has “not one patriot…or one practicing Christian” on his formidable payroll.

So in addition to the gaping glitches in electronic voting, there is the God-hating and America-hating George Soros who is out to defeat President Bush.

The Hate Factor

Since 2000, the Democrats have been on a sustained rampage that, to borrow from Pascal, “reason knows nothing of.”

First, they tried to make the president’s tax cuts the centerpiece of their resistance, claiming that Kerry’s socialist philosophy would redeem the recession – until, that is, Bush’s tax cuts kicked in and the economy found its way to a robust recovery.

Then they protested the war in Iraq, squawking endlessly about the bogus issues of WMDs and Abu Ghraib while studiously failing to mention the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan, the dismantling of Al Qaeda’s infrastructure and of course the toppling of Saddam Hussein and his murderous regime.

Then they tried the bash-Bush-with-books strategy, trotting out historically revisionist tracts by Clarke, Carville, Corn, Conason (and dozens of others by authors whose last names don’t begin with C). They also took the visual media route with any number of movies and TV shows either subtly or blatantly alluding to the “stolen” election or the “dumb” president, as well as Michael Moore’s recent “fakeumentary” which exhibited, above all, its creator’s Marxist-Leninist bent.

And of course, they counted on – and received – the full measure of one-sided liberal media spin, complete with a spectacular lack of objectivity.

But taxes, propaganda, vindictive books, Hollywood fiction and media distortion are but squashable ants when it comes to the great issue of our day: The war against terrorism and who is best suited to protect our country against its inevitable onslaughts.

As spelled out in my recent article, (, and in one by Paul Sperry (, on September 11, 2001, more than 80 of Kerry’s constituents met their untimely deaths aboard American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175.

This horrifying fact is made all the more horrifying when one realizes that Kerry – more than anyone in our nation – could have prevented those deaths and the great tragedy that befell out nation on that fateful day.

Kerry’s lack of action gives Americans a chilling preview of how seriously he will protect our country if the electorate is misguided enough to vote him in or if they ignore his consistent record in voting against every military and intelligence budget for his entire tenure in the Senate.

Is the Democrats’ hatred enough to put the safety of our country in the hands of a man who ignored the most serious warnings about the most catastrophic attack on our country in history? Who to this day embraces the corrupt U.N.? Who still believes that the French are our “friends”? And let’s not forget, who, in 1969, slandered his Vietnam War compatriots and in so doing gave aid and comfort to our Communist North Vietnamese enemies?

What can be done about this toxic mixture of electronic voting unreliability, Soros’ blood money and the animating hatred of the Democrats?

When it comes to Soros, just about the only thing concerned Americans can do is to pass along the information Poe accumulated about Soros (and that is repeated here) to their entire e-mail and snail-mail lists, as well as to simpatico radio and TV hosts, the better to expose this American-hating scourge and his malicious motives to as many people as possible.

When it comes to the poisonous, irrational hatred that leftists harbor toward our president – an unfortunate character flaw they share with Soros – there is simply no antidote.

But when it comes to the most important power that Americans share – the power of the vote – ordinary citizens can and should:

Call your two Senators (1-800-839-5276) to demand that they IMMEDIATELY pass The Voter Confidence Act (S.1980), requiring a voter-verifiable paper ballot on every voting system.

Call your Congressperson (1-202-225-3121) to demand the same of H.R. 2239.

Call or e-mail your senators and representatives and demand that they support – and enact – proposed legislation by Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL): the Federal Election Integrity Act of 2004 (HR 4530) that requires voters to provide current and official photo identification – a U.S. birth certificate, naturalization card or U.S. passport – when voting in federal elections, and requires states to verify that potential voters are U.S. citizens, the better to avoid election manipulation by upwards of 15 million illegal voters.

Contact Rep. Hyde to express your support for the Federal Election Integrity Act at 1-202- 225-4561 or fax to 1-202- 225-1166.

Call your state’s senator, assemblyperson and Attorney General to demand that they mobilize efforts to have each voting precinct in your state monitored.

Call your local and state Boards of Elections (or go to their websites) to demand that they put paper ballots at each polling place and have on-site monitoring by trained poll watchers.

Call and e-mail every talk radio host or hostess in the nation, as well as your local newspaper, to alert them to the necessity of including paper ballots when voting electronically. Ask them to publicize the telephone numbers of the Senate and House and encourage their listeners/viewers/readers to light up their switchboards with DEMANDS to pass The Voter Confidence Act and the Federal Election Integrity Act of 2004 BEFORE NOVEMBER 2!

Alert your church or synagogue, your mayor, the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and all other relevant organizations to the importance of calling the House and Senate about this urgent issue.

Keep handy the phone numbers of your local newspaper and TV station and alert them if your election board refuses to issue you a paper ballot to verify your vote.
In short, flood the powers-that-be with your demand for a verifiable vote. All of this should take only an hour or two of your time – a worthy expenditure considering the dire consequences of not taking action!

Joan Swirsky is a New York-based journalist and author who can be reached at

Immigration Drug Bust, Dozens In Custody

Immigration Drug Bust, Dozens In Custody
July 2, 2004

Nineteen arrests so far in a nearly year-long investigation of cocaine and methamphetamine trafficking in and around North Las Vegas. A raid on the Salon Mexico bar at Carey Avenue and North Las Vegas Boulevard last night had eight people in custody on drug charges and 11 people on immigration charges.

Raids also were made at two other places in the Las Vegas area. The FBI and local police were involved in the 11-month investigation.

Vegas Meth, Cocaine And INS Bust Nets 22 Suspects

Vegas Meth, Cocaine And INS Bust Nets 22 Suspects
July 2nd, 2004

An overnight drug bust may put a healthy dent in southern Nevada's meth and cocaine supply. Federal agents and local police teamed up to bring in 22 people, and more arrests could be ahead. News 3's Denise Rosch tells us why the raid was a long time coming.

Agents have been working this investigation for nearly a year. This afternoon, a handful of suspects made their first court appearance at the federal building. Meanwhile, some family members say their loved ones were rounded up for entirely different reasons.

The lights are on, but the doors remain locked at Salon Mexico, a North Las Vegas bar now at the center of a major drug investigation. Patti Rand works next door. "Wow. I had no idea. That's blowing me away." She says the bar used to be a problem. Prostitutes and drugs, she says, were common, but Rand tells us when a new owner took over about a year ago, things changed. "He's cleaned it up nice. He's been nothing but a nice neighbor, always says hi."

But Thursday night, police moved in, arresting eight people on drug charges and 11 more for immigration problems. Beatriz Romero says her brother, Carlos, was one of them. "All I know is that there was a raid. When we got here, we saw an immigration bus, and they were putting people in it. They didn't let the families talk to them."

Romero says her brother works at the bar sweeping floors and cleaning up. She admits he is not a legal citizen, but is going through the process. And Romero says she doesn't know anything about alleged drug activity. "If it was that, all the people inside, it wasn't their fault."

A spokesman for the FBI says the case centers around cocaine and methamphetamine. Agents believe large quantities of both were being brought into Clark County and sold there. The connection to Salon Mexico is still unknown. But for Romero, the only question that matters is what happened to her brother, Carlos. "I want to know what's going on. Did they deport him to Mexico or is he still in jail?"

Several other suspects named in this case were already in custody prior to last night's raid. If convicted on the drug charges, each person faces ten years to life in prison. - Seniors Locked Up For Buying Meds In Mexico - 10 News Investigations - Seniors Locked Up For Buying Meds In Mexico
« HOME / 10 News Investigations

Seniors Locked Up For Buying Meds In Mexico
Prescription Drugs Cheaper In Mexico

POSTED: 11:09 am PDT July 2, 2004
UPDATED: 12:47 pm PDT July 2, 2004

SAN DIEGO -- Of the 85 Americans in the La Mesa prison in Tijuana, Mexico, six are senior citizens who bought medications in Mexico without a prescription.

The Rev. David Walden, who ministers to Americans at the prison, said the seniors were only trying to save money buying their medications south of the border where prescription drugs are much cheaper.

"They are accused of trafficking drugs and end up in La Mesa. So we have senior citizens and it breaks my heart," Walden said.

Former inmate Freddy Roberts was arrested outside a pharmacy in Mexico after buying medication for his high blood pressure. Police officers asked for a prescription, but he didn't have one.

"I didn't go over with intention of committing a crime. People have to be careful going down there. They will pick you up," Roberts said.

Roberts was sentenced to four years in prison.

Dr. Leon Dychter said not only do you need a prescription, it must to come from a Mexican medical doctor or dentist.

"The first thing is to respect the laws here and you're not going to be in any problems at all," Dychter said.

Walden warns, if you don't play by the rules in Mexico, don't expect American justice.

"In Mexico, they don't have due process, so you're guilty until you prove yourself innocent," Walden said.

And that can take years inside La Mesa prison and thousands of dollars.

STLtoday - News - St. Louis City Top immigration official welcomes new Americans

STLtoday - News - St. Louis City / County
Top immigration official welcomes new Americans here
By Patrice Relerford
Of the Post-Dispatch

Seventy-two people representing 32 nations took citizenship oaths at the Old Courthouse.

Speeches about America being a nation of immigrants were not important to everyone in the audience at the Old Courthouse on Friday. Grace Duong, 2, cared more about playing with the orange stuffed "Garfield" toy that her father had given her than watching her mother, Hai Thay Nguyen, take the oath of citizenship.

When Grace grew tired of the cat, she looked for her mother but lost her in the crowd. She began to cry and call for her mother.

But Nguyen had left her seat to receive her naturalization certificate and to have her picture taken with Eduardo Aguirre Jr., director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and U.S. District Judge E. Richard Webber of the Eastern District of Missouri.

As soon as the picture was taken, Nguyen rushed back to her husband and daughter. She smiled and held Grace's hand while clutching the envelope that contained her naturalization certificate. Grace quieted down.

Nationwide, about 16,000 people were being sworn in as citizens this week in 122 ceremonies. Aguirre attended only a few of the ceremonies, but he could remember his own - he arrived from Cuba in the early 1960s when he was 15 years old as part of 14,000 children sent by their parents to flee Fidel Castro's regime. He was sworn in as a U.S. citizen in 1970 in Houston. He later became a banker.

In his remarks, Aguirre said that his agency was making a high priority of reducing a backlog of residency and citizenship applications but that post-9/11 security measures such as background checks would not be compromised.

"We're going to retain what makes America great by keeping our open doors," he said. "But we're going to make sure they're well-guarded."

At the Old Courthouse, Nguyen was one of 72 people representing 32 countries. They were called in groups based on their countries of origin. The largest group, 19, was from Bosnia-Herzegovina. Nguyen and her husband, Duy Duong, had moved to St. Louis from Vietnam; he became a citizen in 1999, and they live in the south part of the city.

Asked what she was looking forward to doing now, she replied, "I want to travel with a U.S. passport and write a petition for my mother to come here."

Her husband reminded her that she needed to register to vote before the upcoming election.

Long Bui, 78, of St. Charles, also stood when Vietnam was called. He has been in the U.S. for more than 20 years and seemed relaxed, an American flag sticking out of his shirt pocket. His daughter Lisa Bui stood by him and took pictures.

Martha Elias, 13, of St. Louis, leaned on a wall and smiled proudly as her sister, Harnet Nuguse, 28, was sworn in. "She's the only one from Eritrea," Martha said.

Judge Webber administered the oath of naturalization. "Those who gain their citizenship by choice tend to appreciate it more than those who gain it automatically," he said.

Added Aguirre, "It's a great day to be an American, but an even better day to become one."

The Brownsville Herald - Officials: Celebrate with caution

The Brownsville Herald - Online Edition
July 3, 2004 — With the Fourth of July weekend here, many people methodically believe celebrating the holiday wouldn’t be complete without fireworks.

But along with firework use comes a string of regulations.

And since the importation of any fireworks from Mexico is restricted by federal laws, U.S. Customs and Border Protection or CBP agents are stepping up efforts to seize the flow of the dangerous contraband across the United States-Mexico border, officials said.

“Because of the Fourth of July celebration, CBP agents at the port of entry are taking a closer look at all modes of traffic,” CBP spokesman Rick Pauza said Friday, noting security at local ports of entry remains at code yellow — the third-highest form of security alert.

“Our emphasis is on anti-terrorist operations. We are still seizing drugs and also because of celebration fireworks. But we are keeping our eyes peeled for terrorists or weapons of mass destruction,” he said.

Despite the confiscation of fireworks at the four international ports of entry in Cameron County, Pauza said sometimes the travelers don’t understand that it is illegal to cross them.

Those caught “innocently” trying to bring the devices into the U.S. face no penalty, Pauza said. But they will have to relinquish their fireworks or return them to Mexico.

Federal officials at the ports of entry are not alone in issuing warnings about fireworks. The Brownsville Fire Department said that setting off fireworks within the city limits could lead to residents getting fined if caught.

“They’re not permitted to be fired within the city limits,” said Brownsville Fire Chief Lenny Perez.

He said Brownsville police will have teams patrolling the city during the three-day weekend celebration watching for people firing the illegal explosives. If found in violation, individuals would be issued a citation and the fireworks will be confiscated. They could also face fines up to $300.

According to a 2003 U.S Consumers Product Safety report, fireworks-related injuries sent 9,300 people to the emergency room in 2003. The number has decreased during the past 10 years. An average of 12,500 injuries was reported from 1992 to 1994, statistics show.

In addition, six fireworks-related deaths were reported in 2003, with two of the deaths caused by fires started by fireworks.

The reports indicate that the deaths could have been avoided if consumers had practiced proper fireworks safety and kept a bucket of water handy.

MetroWest Daily News - Taxpayer Funded College Tuitions for Illegal Aliens

MetroWest Daily News - Columnists

In America: 'Concerned' about all students
By Miryam Wiley
Saturday, July 3, 2004

Last week, when Gov. Mitt Romney failed to sign the bill to allow certain immigrants to pay in-state tuition at the state's public colleges, I heard from a number of "concerned citizens."

"Undocumented immigrants can't ever be productive members of society," someone wrote. "I don't see where they lack opportunity by first becoming citizens," wrote another. One reader eventually accused me of being "compassionate" since I had demonstrated what he qualified as "silly notions" when I wrote that there was a time when African-Americans were also outsiders.

I respect all views and will forever defend everyone's right to speak up, but I am not giving up on the need to give opportunities to youth, wherever they may come from.

I am revisiting this subject to honor those for whom making this bill into law will never come soon enough.

"I am going to be a scientist," said 19-year W.S., who asked that his full name not be used. "What I really like is science, so I am planning to go to college to study astronomy or chemistry. I would love to go to MIT and to work at NASA."

A graduate of a Boston public high school, W.S. is an active member of the Access to Higher Education Task Force of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition, also known as MIRA. His parents work in the cleaning business, one of them, for a renowned university in Massachusetts.

Together with many other students, he visited legislators and their aides to explain the problem. He learned a lot of people are not tuned in to the immigrant reality. They hear the word "immigrant" and imagine that people are expecting privileges and protections, he said. Romney may not have read the bill carefully, he said.

"The governor sees the bill as a benefit to the immigrants and thinks that, since we are getting close to the election, it's not going to benefit him. But I think he doesn't understand it. When we visited the State House and talked to aides of legislators, they often wondered if immigrants would attend college for free.

"We educated them and let them know that all we want, since we live here, is to be treated equally and to have the same opportunities. Our families have been paying taxes for four or five years, like everyone else. This is not a bill to benefit the immigrants; it's a bill to give opportunities to all."

The language of the bill is specific as it allows students to access in-state tuition rates at public colleges and universities, provided they have attended at least three years at a high school in Massachusetts and have graduated or received the equivalent of a diploma. Also, candidates must have applied to become permanent residents.

It is important to note that a great majority of graduating high school students had no say in coming to this country. Their parents go through very difficult situations with a goal of giving their children a better life.

Despite the critics, the contributions of immigrants have been documented in several detailed studies. A report released in June 2003 by Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies predicts that "Household growth, the primary driver of housing demand, may well exceed 12 million between 2000 and 2010" and immigrants will "contribute more than one-quarter of this net increase."

The American Immigration Law Foundation also reports that the contributions of immigrants are vital because they tend to be younger and the native population is aging rapidly. As a result, the tax dollars of immigrant workers are increasingly important in funding the nation's retirement system.

They go on to mention Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan as he described the significance of this issue in testimony before the Senate Special Committee on Aging on Feb. 27, 2003 and noted that "the aging of the population in the United States will have significant effects on our fiscal situation. In particular, it makes our Social Security and Medicare programs unsustainable in the long run, short of a major increase in immigration rates, a dramatic acceleration in productivity growth well beyond historical experience, a significant increase in the age of eligibility for benefits, or the use of general revenues to fund benefits."

Eight other states have signed this bill into law and welcomed the immigrants to the table. It would be great if our governor could think back to some opportunity he was given and let us quote him as papers in Illinois were able to quote their governor on May 18, 2003, as he signed a similar bill:

"I'm where I am today because I was allowed to pursue the American Dream. My immigrant parents worked hard so I could get an education and make a contribution to my community," Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich said. "All of our young people should have the same opportunity regardless of their immigrant status."

London Free Press: News Section - A dream undone

London Free Press: News Section - A dream undone

In the Mexican village of Santa Anna Pilar, the news came over the loudspeaker on top of a car driving up and down the streets. Patricia Jaquez, 32, paid special attention. Her husband could not find a job and one of her three sons, an epileptic, needed expensive medicine.

A few hundred kilometres away in the small city of Francisco Madero, Maria Teresa Aleman, 32, got a phone call from her aunt in the state capital of Saltillo.

Divorced, Aleman and her three boys lived with her parents. Making $35 a week picking tomatoes, she could not afford her dream -- a small plot of land on which to build a shack.

Recruiters here are looking for people, her aunt said. Aleman took the four-hour bus ride to Saltillo to see for herself.

In Saltillo itself, Norma Munoz, 36, got a layoff notice from her job at an auto plants factory. On a tip, she walked to the nearby recruiting office.

There is work picking worms in Canada, the women were told. You can make in one day there what it takes a week to earn in Mexico.

So the three women left their homes, children and partners, arriving in Guelph on May 15, full of dreams.

* * *

Now, six weeks later, Munoz and Aleman are in hiding. They have lost their jobs and have no money. Jaquez is still struggling at a job she describes as "a lot of effort, but little money."

Despite the hardships, the three vow they will not leave Canada without accomplishing what they set out to do -- earn a decent living, and now, make sure no other migrants go through what they did.

"If we don't change anything, we will lose," Munoz declared.

The three women and 37 other Mexicans came to Canada under a little known pilot project that allows employers to privately hire low-skilled workers from other countries.

Migrants usually work on Canada's farms under a long-established program that gives the federal government certain powers, such as the ability to withdraw a farmer's right to get migrants if any are mistreated.

But as it's described on a federal government website, the two-year-old pilot project doesn't allow the Canadian government to "intervene in the employer/employee relationship."

"In Canada, agriculture has a long history of poor labour conditions," said University of Guelph professor and researcher Kerry Preibisch.

The pilot project, with loose guidelines and less government power, could only makes things worse, she said.

* * *

The problem started with worms. National Bait Inc. of Mississauga sells dew worms around the world,

It's been a good business for 40 years, said president Joseph Haupert, except for one problem.

"Canadians don't want to pick worms."

So National Bait Inc. got approval to hire 40 Mexicans under the federal pilot project.

Haupert said he had to put $100,000 up front for return airfare and work permits. He put the migrants up in the Maples Inn II in Guelph, where each one would pay $100 a month to share a basic but clean room with three others.

Crouched over a farmer's field, with a can of sawdust attached to one leg -- for keeping fingers dry -- and a can for worms attached to the other leg, a top picker can fill 20 to 30 cans of about 400 worms apiece in one 10 p.m.-to-5 a.m. shift, Haupert said.

With an $8-an-hour salary and bonuses kicking in after 12 cans, a good worker could make from $2,000 to even $5,000 a month, he said. But the Mexicans were barely able to fill 10 cans a night.

Many started showing up at medical clinics with strained backs, scrapes and pulled muscles.

Things got worse. Their paycheques arrived much later than -- and much lower than --expected.

No one had explained to the Mexicans that Canadian companies hold back the first two weeks' pay. Or that taxes and insurance deductions reduce paycheques. Or that they didn't get paid for sick days.

So much for all the money to send back home. They barely had enough for groceries.

Alerted of the problems, the Mexican consulate in Toronto set up a meeting between Haupert and the workers.

The consulate could do little except promise Haupert he'd get experienced farm workers next time and tell the migrants they should go home if they wanted.

Unsatisfied, about two dozen workers signed a "statement of solidarity" on June 11. They complained of poor working conditions, such as no access to latrine and limited drinking water. They asked for help from the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) and support from the public to get a new employer, and back pay for sick days.

Haupert rejected the migrants' concerns as "nonsense," calling them "lowlifes."

Those with real medical problems, not simply aching muscles, were getting the help they needed. And the Mexicans were working under the same conditions as other employees, who worked harder and complained less, Haupert added.

No one gets paid if they don't show up, he said.

"Otherwise, I'd be broke."

* * *

Haupert began sending home migrants, those who gave up and those he labelled "troublemakers."

By June 18, the number of migrants left in Guelph had dropped to 20, but things seemed to have settled down.

Munoz, Aleman and Jaquez sat outside the Maples Inn that day and chatted about their struggle.

Her nine-year-old son got on the phone a few days ago, Aleman said.

"Look, mom," he said. "It doesn't matter if we have a house. I just want you with us."

Aleman didn't give in. Worm picking wasn't going to make her rich, but it was better than starving in Mexico.

"Many of us are just thinking we want to go home," she said. "Then we get strong and want to keep going."

None of the women had great expectations about what worm picking would do for them.

"We have to be realistic and know we will never be able to advance to where other people are," Munoz said.

As they chatted, a call came in from National Bait. Haupert had fingered Aleman and Munoz as ringleaders. He ordered them home the next day.

"They are bringing in the drug trade," he told The Free Press over the phone that day. "One of the women is a hooker."

The stunned women spent the rest of that day wrestling with the idea of simply ignoring Haupert and staying in Canada. UFCW national co-ordinator Stan Raper tried to help. He learned the women could transfer to a new employer, if they found one, but the process could take eight weeks.

"We might get stuck and not be able to get a job because we have been outspoken," Aleman worried.

In the midst of the worry, they found humour in the allegations of prostitution.

"Maybe we could make more money," Munoz joked.

* * *

Sgt. Ron Lord of Guelph police checked occurrence calls from the Maples Inn for April 1 to June 22.

There were no calls for anything to with drugs or prostitution, Lord said.

The owner of the Maples, Walter Probst, had nothing but praise for the migrants.

"They are very nice people, very polite. We have had no problems."

* * *

On June 19, instead of boarding a bus to Toronto airport, Aleman and Munoz slipped away and were taken into hiding by the UFCW. A third woman, who will not talk to the media, was taken into hiding a day later.

Jaquez remained behind, still struggling to make her 12 cans a night.

A few days ago, the UFCW allowed The Free Press an exclusive interview with Munoz and Aleman.

The two women seemed quieter than usual, not as quick to joke or laugh.

It may be difficult for Canadians to understand why the women are so afraid they want to hide, said one UFCW representative.

"Over there in Mexico, you can't play around. You can disappear completely."

At the least, the women fear they and their families will be blacklisted by Mexican employers who hear of the problems.

"We don't know what is going to happen," Munoz said.

Her young children still think she's working and making money, Aleman said.

"It just makes things worse if the whole family knows."

This is not where they wanted to end up -- sharing a room that is big enough only for three single air mattresses and relying on charity to survive.

"I feel a little trapped," Aleman said. "We came here to work."

The women have volunteered to work for the UFCW, but those jobs don't pay. The union is having little luck finding a new employer.

"These are good people, hard working people," Raper said.

As for Haupert, he has given the women's names to Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

"I'm not going to try and get them back."

There's nothing Immigration Canada can do, said spokesperson Jean-Pierre Morin.

Until the women's work permits expire in October, they are in Canada legally, he said.

* * *

No one knows what will happen. Raper has promised to raise money for the flight home, if necessary.

The women aren't worried about that. Their families will help if needed, they said.

"Here, money is everything. In Mexico, family is important," Munoz said.

If she and Aleman give up, National Bait will think it can treat all workers this way, Munoz said. "This is the right thing to do. I was raised to be independent, to fight."

Munoz and Aleman usually speak through an interpreter. But after the interview, Munoz offered a wry smile and one last comment in English.

"We hope." | Inland Southern California | Inland News | Inland Southern California | Inland News

TEMECULA - A 28-year-old undocumented immigrant was found dead in a Border Patrol holding cell in Temecula hours after a confrontation with agents, authorities said Friday.

Details of the death remained sketchy Friday, and authorities said they had not determined whether the man died accidentally or had committed suicide.

An autopsy is scheduled for the Honduran man Tuesday, said Dennis Gutierrez, a spokesman for the Riverside County Sheriff's Department and coroner's office. Authorities have not released the man's name because his relatives had not been notified, but Honduras' Consulate in Los Angeles has identified the man as Ecar Paz Moradel.

Moradel was first taken into custody Wednesday evening in Corona.

He flagged down an officer around 10 p.m. near the police station, said Corona police Sgt. Jerry Rodriguez. The officer took Moradel, who authorities believe was a transient, to the station and brought in a translator.

Police arrested the man on suspicion of being under the influence of methamphetamines and put him in a holding cell until he sobered up, police said. He was released at 4:45 a.m. Thursday, Rodriguez said.

A little more than two hours later, police got a call from AAA Animal Hospital in the 400 block of East Sixth Street about a man trying to enter the business, Rodriguez said.

Christopher Alderson, 41, was working at the animal hospital when Moradel started hanging onto the door. Alderson said he noticed a large bruise on Moradel's head and watched the man talk to himself. At 8:10 a.m., police returned to the animal hospital after receiving a call that Moradel was trying to break a window, Rodriguez said.

Moradel returned 20 minutes later, Alderson said. He said he put Moradel in a chokehold for 10 to 15 minutes as he waited for police, who had been called again.

Police put Moradel in a holding cell and called the Border Patrol to pick him up.

Agent Richard Kite from the San Diego area said it is not uncommon to respond to requests from other law-enforcement agencies for assistance.

Around 11:30 a.m. Thursday, the police released the man to Border Patrol agents, Rodriguez said.Agents took Moradel to the station on Diaz Road for processing.

During the processing, Moradel became combative, and agents put him in a holding cell to calm him down.

Ventura County Star: Oxnard They walked 10 miles and were willing to walk more.

Ventura County Star: Oxnard
They walked 10 miles and were willing to walk more.

About 100 farmworkers and their supporters ended a two-day protest of immigration raids at La Plazita Park in Oxnard on Friday evening with the announcement of a third march in La Colonia set for 5 p.m. today.

The group of men, women and children entered the park nearly an hour after their scheduled arrival time of 5 p.m. A few sat next to a tree. The rest remained standing, chanting, clapping, asking for more.

"Are you tired?" asked a group leader with a bullhorn.

"No!" was the resounding response.

Stephanie Silva, 12, of Oxnard and her cousin, Lyanne Silva, 13, were.

Both doubted whether they'd finish the 10-mile trek from Saticoy to Oxnard on Friday. They continued on, they said, because of the farmworkers.

"I did it for them, for the people," said Stephanie.

The march, along with others conducted simultaneously throughout the state, was organized in response to immigration raids in Riverside and San Bernardino counties that have resulted in 420 arrests.

Ventura County residents have heard of similar raids in the county, but Border Patrol and Immigration officials said there are no records of any raids in the county, contrary to the rumors.

Farmworkers also marched to promote Senate Bill 1645. The so-called AgJobs Bill would give undocumented farmworkers who have worked at least 100 days before the legislation is passed the chance to qualify for temporary residency. They could eventually be eligible for permanent residency if they continued working in agriculture.

"They are so strong and willing here, they want to do it again," said Arturo Rodriguez, president of United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO. "Thanks to their hard work, we will succeed."

Rodriguez, who also participated in the march, called the protest a triumph.

Since the marches began taking place, the raids have stopped, Rodriguez said. "That's all thanks to you and your hard work."

Guillermo Licea agrees.

The 44-year-old Oxnard farmworker who has worked the fields for 17 years said the two days of marching wasn't exhausting.

"We're used to that because of our work. We're out in the sun a lot," he said.

"In the end, we'd still do it for the farmworkers and for those who work in hotels, restaurants, construction and factories."

Friday, July 02, 2004

Nader off state ballot, immigration battle heats up - 2004-07-02 - The Business Journal of Phoenix

Nader off state ballot, immigration battle heats up - 2004-07-02 - The Business Journal of Phoenix
2:42 PM MST Friday
Nader off state ballot, immigration battle heats up
Mike Sunnucks
The Business Journal
Independent, left-wing presidential candidate Ralph Nader is off the Arizona election ballot, handing a big win to Democrats and John Kerry's efforts to win the state in November.

The Nader campaign on Friday withdrew its bid to get on the November ballot in the state after finding itself short of the necessary valid petition signatures. It also was dissuaded by the legal resources to combat a Democratic lawsuit challenging those petitions and election paperwork filed by the independent.

Democrats filed suit last month in Maricopa County Superior Court challenging Nader's signatures and election paperwork.

On Friday, Nader officials announced their withdrawal and a Phoenix judge then ordered them off the November list of candidates.

Democrats, including state party chairman Jim Pederson, do not want Nader on presidential ballots in swing states such as Arizona fearing he will siphon off liberal, anti-free trade, anti-war voters from Kerry to the advantage of President Bush.

"Every candidate -- Democrat, Republican or Independent -- must follow the law in order to run for office," said Pederson, who also is a top Valley real estate developer, in a statement. "After realizing his operatives had failed to follow the necessary procedures or collect the requisite signatures, Mr. Nader had no other choice but to withdraw his bid to be placed on the Arizona ballot."

Republicans were happy to see Nader on the Arizona ballot but still are confident they will carry the state this fall.

"It's unfortunate that Democrats are so afraid of their weak candidate that they must support litigation to limit voter's choices," Arizona Republican Party spokesman Colin McCracken said.

Bush carried Arizona in 2000 by six points over Al Gore. Nader, who was running as the Green Party candidate, got 3 percent in the state in 2000.

A poll this week by Arizona State University showed Bush with a 12 point lead over Kerry.

On another front that could influence the presidential race, proponents of a controversial illegal immigration referendum have gathered more than enough petition signatures to get the "Protect Arizona Now" initiative on the November ballot.

The question is whether there will be enough signatures deemed valid by Secretary of State Jan Brewer and whether they will survive any legal challenges by opponents. If PAN makes the ballot in November, it is expected to boost conservative, anti-illegal immigration turnout which would help Bush.

PAN Executive Director Kathy McKee said a total 190,877 petition signatures were turned in on Thursday. The referendum needs 122,612 valid signatures to get on the November ballot.

PAN's petition efforts come despite major in-fighting between McKee and other referendum backers including Valley car dealer Rusty Childress and the Washington, D.C.-based Federation for American Immigration Reform.

PAN hopes to reduce illegal immigration into the state by requiring prospective voters and those seeking state welfare benefits to prove they are U.S. citizens. It also would require state agencies to report illegal immigrants to federal authorities.

Most of the state's business and political establishment oppose PAN, arguing border and immigration issues are federal matters. Opponents includes all of the state's Republican-heavy congressional delegation, Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano and business interests such as the Arizona Chamber of Commerce. Hispanic groups also oppose PAN, contending it is anti-Mexican.

PAN backers include Republican state legislators Sens. Robert Blendu, Jim Weiers and Marilyn Jarrett as well as House Majority Leader Eddie Farnsworth and House Majority Whip Randy Graf.

Graf is challenging incumbent Tucson Congressman Jim Kolbe, a PAN critic, in the September GOP primary.

Immigration likely to be key political issue in Arizona

Immigration likely to be key political issue in Arizona
Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune
July 04, 2004

PHOENIX - Juan Huerta hoped it would be another lucky day in America as he munched tamales at a picnic table in the parking lot of a day-labor center, keeping a close eye on the white men who drove by in their big pickups.

It was 7 a.m., and the men were searching for Mexican laborers who would spend the day in the 108-degree sun doing roofing, painting, landscaping and cement work. Huerta, who came to Phoenix two years ago, waited for the one employer who might pay him $8 an hour, maybe even $10, in exchange for his specialized carpentry skills. He called it good money, twice as much as he could earn in his native Mexico.

"I like America, good America," said Huerta, 25, speaking in broken English.

Lured by the promise of a better life, Mexican immigrants are rushing to Arizona in high numbers, complicating the politics of a state that's expected to play a key role in Nov. 2 presidential election.

Once a reliably Republican state, Arizona is now officially up for grabs as Democrats and Republicans are busy wooing Hispanics. In the latest poll by the Arizona Republic, President Bush had a narrow 44 percent to 41 percent lead over his presumed Democratic challenger, Sen. John Kerry. A separate poll found Hispanics backing Kerry by a margin of nearly 2-to-1.

Hispanics, who now make up nearly 25 percent of Arizona's population, could easily decide whether Bush carries the state in 2004, as he did in 2000. But Bush's critics say the president risks alienating conservative voters with his plan to make it easier for immigrants to stay in the United States.

The backlash is growing, led by a group called Protect Arizona Now. "Go to the welfare office - you can shoot off a cannon in there and there isn't anybody speaking English," said Kathy McKee, the group's chairwoman.

She also opposes the day-labor center, calling it an illegal operation, and is frustrated that federal authorities aren't cracking down on it.

Salvador Reza, who runs the Macehualli Work Center in northeast Phoenix, laughs heartily at the idea: "They could do it, but then they would have a war on their hands." He said that's the last thing Bush wants during a re-election campaign.

Reza said that most of the Mexicans who risk their lives by walking through the desert to get work in the United States are not interested in becoming U.S. citizens, only in working here. He said the day-labor center is simply a testament to free trade.

"The United States claims to be a free-market country, yet they don't see this as a free-market movement," Reza said. "If you understand outsourcing, then you have to understand insourcing."

Arizona, which has the second highest proportion of illegal immigrants in the nation, is spending $1.3 billion per year to pay for the extra costs of medical care, education and incarceration, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform. The group estimates that at least 425,000 illegal residents are living in the state.

McKee said that state taxpayers no longer can afford those costs.

In the presidential campaign of 2000, Bush expressed sympathy for Mexicans who entered the United States illegally to find work. In 2001, he made his first foreign trip to Mexico and told President Vicente Fox that the United States would do "everything we can to come up with a solution to this complex problem."

But answers have been elusive, with Bush finding himself caught between two Republican constituencies: businesses that want a supply of cheap, low-skill labor and conservatives who say it's unfair to reward those who entered the country illegally. The president angered many of his supporters with his plan to relax immigration laws by creating a guest worker program that would grant renewable three-year labor visas for those who have already come to the United States or those who have received job offers here.

Bush's proposal has languished in Congress and is opposed by Kerry, who says it's a temporary fix and would lock immigrant workers into a second-class status. Kerry, who was campaigning in Phoenix, favors a plan that would make it easier for working immigrants to become U.S. citizens.

In Washington, many members of Congress have been complaining that the Bush administration is not doing enough to secure the borders, especially since the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon nearly three years ago.

At an immigration hearing on Capitol Hill earlier this year, David Aguilar, chief of the Tucson border patrol with the Department of Homeland Security, called Arizona "the most active area that we have in the country right now."

He told Congress that the agency is not involved in "roundups or sweeps" of illegal aliens who are already in the United States.

Peggy Neely, a member of the Phoenix City Council, said that many people in Phoenix were disappointed when they realized the federal government "is not real excited to take care of this issue." But she said that opening the day-labor center provided a practical solution.

Neely, a Republican, supports Bush and doesn't blame the lack of enforcement on his administration, saying Sept. 11 forced the government to focus more on safety and less on tracking illegal aliens, particularly if they pose no criminal threat.

"There's not enough people for them to do both," she said. "It just has become overwhelming. ... It is a federal issue, and we do have to find a solution."

The Lompoc Record - Serving the Lompoc Valley - Hernandez released without being charged

The Lompoc Record - Serving the Lompoc Valley
7/2/04 A Oaxacan woman arrested on suspicion of killing her newborn son and burying him in the backyard of her Santa Maria home went free on Thursday after an autopsy revealed that the infant likely was dead at birth.

"Reyna Hernandez will not be charged with the death of her newborn infant," said Lt. Larry Ralston of the Santa Maria Police Department.

Though the case remains open, it no longer is considered a homicide investigation, Ralston said.

"Results of the autopsy reveal that the infant may have been deceased at the time of birth," he said. "Because of the condition of the infant, the pathologist is not able to clearly determine that the death was as a result of anything the mother may have done or failed to do."

Cause of the newborn's death could not be determined during a Thursday autopsy, but pending test results might yield more information, according to Sgt. Chris Pappas of the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department.

Christie Stanley, Santa Barbara County assistant district attorney, categorized the police investigation during the past two days as "very thorough," and said that the autopsy was the deciding factor in the case.

"In order to charge her in a crime involving the death of this baby, there has to be proof that the baby is alive," Stanley said. "We have to prove some criminal agency on her part."

Hernandez, 23, an undocumented immigrant from Mexico, had been held in Santa Barbara County Jail without bail from Tuesday until Thursday. She was suspected of killing the newborn and burying him about two weeks ago behind a shed at her family home in the 700 block of West Polk Street.

Hernandez told police that she disguised her pregnancy as she carried it to term, then secretly gave birth in the bathroom of the home she shared with at least six other people, Ralston said. She told police that she was unconscious during the delivery, and that when she came to, the baby wasn't breathing, he said.

She told police that, believing the baby was dead, she placed him in a plastic grocery bag and buried him in a hole she dug in the backyard without alerting anybody else at the house, Ralston said.

Burying the baby in this manner likely violates a misdemeanor health and safety code regarding improper disposal of a human body, Stanley said, adding that no charges would be filed at this time.

A cousin of Hernandez who was doing yard work discovered the body on Tuesday and alerted authorities.

Hernandez is estranged from the husband of two other children - ages 2 and 4 - and it is unknown who may have fathered the deceased newborn. She is employed as a field worker in Santa Maria, and has lived in the area for about five years.

Staff writer Quintin Cushner can be reached at 739-2217 or by e-mail at

Yahoo! Groups : pannews Messages : Message 748 of 748

Yahoo! Groups : pannews Messages : Message 748 of 748
> > This was written by a retired attorney, to his sons,
> > May 19, 2004.
> >
> > Dear Tom, Kevin, Kirby and Ted,
> >
> > As your father, I believe I owe it to you to share
> > some thoughts on the present world situation. We have
> > over the years discussed a lot of important things,
> > like going to college, jobs and so forth. But this
> > really takes precedence over any of those discussions.
> > I hope this might give you a longer term perspective
> > that fewer and fewer of my generation are left to
> > speak to. To be sure you understand that this is not
> > politically flavored, I will tell you that since
> > Franklin D. Roosevelt, who led us through pre and WWII
> > (1933 - 1945) up to and including our present
> > President, I have without exception, supported our
> > presidents on all matters of international conflict.
> > This would include just naming a few in addition to
> > President Roosevelt - WWII: President Truman - Korean
> > War 1950; President Kennedy - Bay of Pigs (1961);
> > President Kennedy - Vietnam (1961); [1] eight
> > presidents (5 Republican & 4 Democrat) during the cold
> > war (1945 - 1991); President Clinton's strikes on
> > Bosnia (1995) and on Iraq (1998). [2] So be sure you
> > read this as completely non-political or otherwise you
> > will miss the point.
> >
> > Our country is now facing the most serious threat to
> > its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in
> > your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII). The
> > deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact
> > that there are very few of us who think we can
> > possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what
> > losing really means.
> >
> > First, let's examine a few basics:
> >
> > 1. When did the threat to us start?
> > Many will say September 11th, 2001. The answer as far
> > as the United States is concerned is 1979, 22 years
> > prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on
> > us: Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979; Beirut, Lebanon
> > Embassy 1983; Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983;
> > Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988;
> > First New York World Trade Center attack 1993;
> > Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex
> > 1996; Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998; Dar es Salaam,
> > Tanzania US Embassy 1998; Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000;
> > New York World Trade Center 2001; Pentagon 2001.
> > (Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there
> > were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide). [3]
> >
> > 2. Why were we attacked?
> > Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms.
> > The attacks happened during the administrations of
> > Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2.
> > We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats
> > as there were no provocations by any of the presidents
> > or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or
> > Carter.
> >
> > 4. Who were the attackers?
> > In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out
> > by Muslims.
> >
> > 5. What is the Muslim population of the World?
> > 25%
> >
> > 6. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?
> > Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is
> > no doubt that the predominately Christian population
> > of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial
> > leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian), that
> > made no difference. You either went along with the
> > administration or you were eliminated. There were 5
> > to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for
> > political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests).
> > ( Thus,
> > almost the same number of Christians were killed by
> > the Nazis, as the 6 million holocaust Jews who were
> > killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other
> > than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the
> > world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy about
> > killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the
> > Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian
> > or any others. Same with the Muslim terrorists. They
> > focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way -
> > their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone
> > else.. [5] The point here is that just like the
> > peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from
> > the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there
> > may be, they are no protection for us from the
> > terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically
> > bent on doing - by their own pronouncements - killing
> > all of us infidels. I don't blame the peaceful
> > Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up
> > or die?
> >
> > 6. So who are we at war with?
> > There is no way we can honestly respond that it is
> > anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be
> > politically correct and avoid verbalizing this
> > conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win
> > if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you
> > are fighting.
> >
> > So with that background, now to the two major
> > questions:
> > 1. Can we lose this war?
> > 2. What does losing really mean?
> >
> > If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two
> > pivotal questions.
> >
> > We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as
> > it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so
> > many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the
> > second question - What does losing mean? It would
> > appear that a great many of us think that losing the
> > war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home
> > and going on about our business, like post Vietnam.
> > This is as far from the truth as one can get. What
> > losing really means is:
> >
> > We would no longer be the premier country in the
> > world. The attacks will not subside, but rather will
> > steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not
> > just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they
> > would not have produced an increasing series of
> > attacks against us over the past 18 years. The plan
> > was clearly to terrorist attack us until we were
> > neutered and submissive to them.
> >
> > We would of course have no future support from other
> > nations for fear of reprisals and for the reason that
> > they would see we are impotent and cannot help them.
> >
> > They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one
> > at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them.
> > They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter
> > whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw
> > its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim
> > terrorists bombed their train and told them to
> > withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to
> > do, will be done. Spain is finished.
> >
> > The next will probably be France. Our one hope on
> > France is that they might see the light and realize
> > that if we don't win, they are finished too, in that
> > they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us.
> > However, it may already be too late for France. France
> > is already 20% Muslim and fading fast. See the
> > attached article on the French condition by Tom Segel.
> > [6]
> >
> > If we lose the war, our production, income, exports
> > and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After
> > losing, who would trade or deal with us if they were
> > threatened by the Muslims. If we can't stop the
> > Muslims, how could anyone else? The Muslims fully know
> > what is riding on this war and therefore are
> > completely committed to winning at any cost. We better
> > know it too and be likewise committed to winning at
> > any cost.
> >
> > Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of
> > losing? Simple. Until we recognize the costs of
> > losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our
> > thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to
> > take that 100% effort to win.
> >
> > So, how can we lose the war? Again, the answer is
> > simple. We can lose the war by imploding. That is,
> > defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy
> > and their purpose and really digging in and lending
> > full support to the war effort. If we are united,
> > there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to
> > be divided, there is no way that we can win.
> >
> > Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't
> > comprehend the life and death seriousness of this
> > situation.
> >
> > - President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary
> > of Transportation. Although all of the terrorist
> > attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40
> > years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow
> > profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this
> > thing seriously? This is war. For the duration we are
> > going to have to give up some of the civil rights we
> > have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared
> > to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we
> > will most certainly lose all of them permanently. And
> > don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up
> > plenty of civil rights during WWII and immediately
> > restored them after the victory and in fact added many
> > more since then. Do I blame President Bush or
> > President Clinton before him? No, I blame us for
> > blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political
> > Correctness and all of our civil rights during this
> > conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None
> > of those words apply to war. Get them out of your
> > head.
> >
> > - Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war
> > and/or the Administration that it almost seems they
> > would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to add
> > that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is
> > because they just don't recognize what losing means.
> > Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the
> > enemy that we are divided and weakening, it concerns
> > our friends, and it does great damage to our cause.
> >
> > - Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the
> > politicians and media regarding the treatment of some
> > prisoners of war perhaps exemplifies best what I am
> > saying. We have recently had an issue involving the
> > treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war by a small
> > group of our military police. These are the type
> > prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing
> > their own people off buildings, cutting off their
> > hands, cutting out their tongues and otherwise
> > murdering their own people just for disagreeing with
> > Saddam Hussein. And just a few years ago these same
> > type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own
> > people for the same reason. They are also the same
> > type enemy fighters who recently were burning
> > Americans and dragging their charred corpses through
> > the streets of Iraq. And still more recently the same
> > type enemy that was and is providing videos to all
> > news sources internationally, of the beheading of an
> > American prisoner they held. Compare this with some of
> > our press and politicians who for several days have
> > thought and talked about nothing else but the
> > "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners - not burning
> > them, not dragging their charred corpses through the
> > streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them.
> > Can this be for real? The politicians and pundits have
> > even talked of impeachment of the Secretary of
> > Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of
> > comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of
> > the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle
> > we are in and the disastrous results of losing this
> > war, nothing can. To bring our country to a virtual
> > political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us
> > look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned -
> > totally oblivious to what is going on in the real
> > world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive
> > this internal strife. Again I say, this does not mean
> > that some of our politicians or media people are
> > disloyal. It simply means that they absolutely
> > oblivious to the magnitude of the situation we are in
> > and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing
> > us for many years. Remember, the Muslim terrorists
> > stated goal is to kill all infidels. That translates
> > into all non-Muslims - not just in the United States,
> > but throughout the world. We are the last bastion of
> > defense.
> >
> > - We have been criticized for many years as being
> > 'arrogant'. That charge is valid in at least one
> > respect. We are arrogant in that we believe that we
> > are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the
> > hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that
> > with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat
> > anything bad in the world. We can't. If we don't
> > recognize this, our nation as we know it will not
> > survive, and no other free country in the World will
> > survive if we are defeated. And finally, name any
> > Muslim countries throughout the world that allow
> > freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of
> > religion, freedom of the Press, equal rights for
> > anyone - let alone everyone, equal status or any
> > status for women, or that have been productive in one
> > single way that contributes to the good of the World.
> >
> > This has been a long way of saying that we must be
> > united on this war or we will be equated in the
> > history books to the self-inflicted fall of the Roman
> > Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow
> > history books to be written or read.
> >
> > If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye
> > on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5
> > years or less. They will continue to increase the
> > Muslim population of France and continue to encroach
> > little by little on the established French traditions.
> > The French will be fighting among themselves over what
> > should or should not be done, which will continue to
> > weaken them and keep them from any united resolve.
> > Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?
> >
> > Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from
> > them by some external military force. Instead, they
> > give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by
> > politically correct piece. And they are giving those
> > freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that
> > they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or
> > even to themselves, once they are in power. They have
> > universally shown that when they have taken over, they
> > then start brutally killing each other over who will
> > be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop
> > hearing from the politically correct, about the
> > "peaceful Muslims"?
> >
> > I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said
> > above. If we are united, there is no way that we can
> > lose. I believe that after the election, the factions
> > in our country will begin to focus on the critical
> > situation we are in and will unite to save our
> > country. It is your future we are talking about. Do
> > whatever you can to preserve it.
> >
> > Love,
> > Dad
> >
> > [1] By the way on Vietnam, the emotions are still so
> > high that it is really not possible to discuss it.
> > However, I think President Kennedy was correct. He
> > felt there was a communist threat from China, Russia
> > and North Vietnam to take over that whole area. Also
> > remember that we were in a 'cold war' with Russia. I
> > frankly think Kennedy's plan worked and kept that
> > total communist control out, but try telling that to
> > anyone now. It just isn't politically correct to say
> > so. Historians will answer this after cool headed
> > research, when the people closest to it are all gone.
> >
> > [2] As you know, I am a strong President Bush
> > supporter and will vote for him. However, if Senator
> > Kerry is elected, I will fully support him on all
> > matters of international conflict, just as I have
> > supported all presidents in the past.
> >
> > [3] Source for statistics in Par. 1 is
> >
> >
> > [4] The Institute of Islamic Information and
> > Education.
> >
> > [5] Note the attached article by Tom Segel referred to
> > in footnote 6 infra, the terrorist Muslim have already
> > begun the havoc in France. (The note was not attached
> > to the E-mail I received. Gene)
> >
> > [6] I checked this article with two sources - Hoax
> > Busters and Urban Myths. It does not come up as a Hoax
> > on either. I also then E-mailed Mr. Segel and he
> > confirmed the article was his.
> >
> > [7] "I don't think the Army or any branch of service
> > runs any type of war any more. It's done by senators
> > and congressmen. There are too many civilians
> > involved." Returning Iraq veteran, Sgt. 1st Class Greg
> > Klees as quoted in the Cedar Rapids, IA Gazette on May
> > 13th, 2004.
> >
> > [8] There are 64 Muslim countries. This does not count
> > countries like Spain that are controlled by the Muslim
> > terrorists.
> >
> >
> > Carl Hutchinson
> >
> >
> >
> >