Archive for the ‘mexico’ Tag

Car Bomb Signals New Dimension to Mexican Drug War   Leave a comment

And we want this here

What is this going to take for anyone to realize that this is a WAR?!!!!  You know–bring troops, lay the law down and all that.  These aren’t just simple drug cartels, as though they are not worth the effort.  These are TERRORISTS!  I have said that from the very beginning.  I’ve pointed out that this has gotten way out of control.  This has been going on since I lived in California, over almost two years ago, and it’s only going to get WORSE! 

Which, apparently, it has.  And this happened right across the border from Texas!!!!!

This is what the Taliban use.  This is what Middle Eastern terrorists do.  Next there’ll be suicide bombers. 




And I’m tempted to say, “Don’t these drug cartel guys have anything better to do with themselves that kill people?”

This is wrong on so many levels!  Mexico needs to get their act together.  We can send troops to two countries overseas thousands of miles away, but we can’t send them to our borders to PROTECT AMERICA!!!!?????? 

This, to me, sounds more eminent and important.  I’m not bashing the Iraq and Afghanistan wars by any means, I’m just pointing out that we need to also be thinking about the home front.  When this starts happening here, and I’m sure it will, is Obama going to protect us?  Doubt it. 

These people need to be stopped!

Car bomb signals new dimension to Mexican drug war


AP – The remains of a vehicle are cordoned off in a street in the northern border city of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, …

By ALICIA A. CALDWELL and E. EDUARDO CASTILLO, Associated Press Writers Alicia A. Caldwell And E. Eduardo Castillo, Associated Press Writers Sat Jul 17, 2:29 am ET

CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico – A drug cartel has used a car bomb for the first time in Mexico’s decades-long fight against traffickers, setting a deadly trap against federal police in a city across the border from Texas, the mayor of Ciudad Juarez said Friday.

Mayor Jose Reyes said federal police have confirmed to him that a car bomb was used in the attack that killed three people Thursday.

It was the first time a drug cartel has used a bomb to attack Mexican security forces, marking an escalation in a raging drug war that already is extremely deadly: On Friday alone, a dozen people were killed and 21 wounded in a series of gun battles between soldiers and cartel gunmen in the Mexican border city of Nuevo Laredo, the federal Interior Department said.

In Thursday’s bombing, federal police and paramedics were lured to the scene by a phone call reporting that shots were fired at a major intersection and a municipal police officer lay wounded, Reyes told The Associated Press.

As the paramedics were working on the wounded man, a parked car exploded, he said.

Reyes said authorities later determined that the wounded man was not a policeman, although he was wearing a fake uniform. The man was among the three people who died in the attack. The others were a federal police officer and a medical technician.

Brig. Gen. Eduardo Zarate, the commander of the regional military zone, told reporters that up to 22 pounds (10 kilograms) of explosives might have been used, although investigators were still trying to determine what type.

He said the bomb might have been detonated remotely with a cell phone, adding that burned batteries connecting to a mobile phone were found at the scene.

“From what distance? We don’t know. But we think it was a distance that allowed (the assailants) to watch the area, waiting for the police to get out of their vehicle,” Zarate said.

The car bomb demonstrates the growing boldness and military sophistication of Mexico’s drug traffickers, who have dramatically stepped up attacks against security forces and government officials since President Felipe Calderon deployed thousands of troops and federal police to crush the cartels in their strongholds.

“We have to change the way we operate,” Reyes said. “We’ve started changing all our protocols, to include bomb situations.”

City and federal authorities said the attack appeared to target only security forces.

“The threat was directed at the police departments, so it is not a threat against the population,” he added. “But we have to be very careful with our police departments, their actions and how we protect them, and of course, how we protect the population from the fallout.”

A graffiti message appeared on a wall of a Ciudad Juarez shopping mall Thursday night warning of more car bombs.

In Nuevo Laredo, meanwhile, the shootouts in at least three points of the city prompted the U.S. Consulate to warn American citizens in the city to remain indoors. The Consulate said gunmen were blocking some streets with hijacked vehicles at the height of the battles.

“We have received credible reports of widespread violence occurring now between narcotics trafficking organizations and the Mexican Army in Nuevo Laredo. We have credible reports of grenades being used,” the Consulate said in a statement. “We advise all U.S. citizens in Nuevo Laredo to remain indoors until the security situation improves.”

The Mexican Interior Department said it “energetically condemned the cowardly acts.”

Seven of the 21 wounded were listed in serious condition, and three of the seriously wounded were children apparently caught in the crossfire, the Interior Department said in a statement.

The dead included nine suspected gunmen, two civilians and one soldier. Nuevo Laredo has been the scene of vicious turf battles between the Gulf cartel and their former allies, the Zetas drug gang.

Army officials reached by phone in Nuevo Laredo declined to comment.

Roadblocks have been another tactic to recently emerge in Mexico’s drug war. Gangs in the neighboring northeastern states of Nuevo Leon and Tamaulipas, where Nuevo Laredo is located, have thrown up the blockades to impede soldiers from coming to the aid of colleagues under attack.

Drug gangs have previously attacked Mexican soldiers and police with grenades and powerful rifles, and there had long been fears they might turn to bombings. Soldiers have seized homemade explosives from gang vehicles after gunbattles, and assailants have stolen explosive material from transport vehicles.

Federal police said the bombing attack was in retaliation for the arrest of a top leader of the La Linea drug gang, Jesus Acosta Guerrero, earlier in the day.

Police said Acosta Guerrero, 35, was the “operations leader” of La Linea, which works for the Juarez drug cartel. He was responsible for at least 25 killings, mainly of rival gang members, and also ordered attacks on police, a federal police statement said.

The Juarez cartel appeared to claim credit for the attack in the graffiti message, which accused federal police of supporting the rival Sinaloa cartel, led by Mexico’s most-wanted kingpin, Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman.

“What happened … is going to keep happening against all the authorities that keep supporting ‘El Chapo,'” the message read. “We have more car bombs.”

Calderon’s government has long faced allegations that his government does not pursue the Sinaloa cartel as aggressively as other gangs, accusations he vehemently denies.

Oh snap!  Even the mainstream media is bringing this sordid detail up.  I NEVER expected to see that!!! 

Sorry compadre, you got busted!

The question is though–what will America do about it?  Probably nothing.  Obama will just continue to kiss Calderon’s feet and roll over like a puppy to have his tummy scratched, completely ignoring the facts and the problems.  All the two of them talk about is why Arizona isn’t allowing un-hindered illegal immigration up through its deserts.

GEEEEEEE!  I WONDER WHY?!!!! >rolls eyes

What appeared to be the charred bottom half of the explosives-rigged car still lay at the scene of the attack Friday. The debris from the blast was spread out over a 300-yard (300-meter) radius. The explosion also blew out the windows of a nearby home and blackened the corner of the building nearest to the crash.

“Thank God we weren’t home,” said a woman who lives in the damaged house. She refused to give her name, citing safety concerns, before driving away from the scene Thursday.

Although the car bomb was a new tactic, it was far from the deadliest attack on Mexico’s security forces. Last month, a carefully planned ambush killed 12 federal police officers in the western state of Michoacan.

And a week before July 4 local and state elections, suspected cartel members ambushed and killed the leading candidate for governor of Tamaulipas. Calderon called the assassination — which followed a series of attacks and threats against candidates throughout the campaign — evidence that drug cartels were trying to control Mexican politics through intimidation.

Federal Attorney General Arturo Chavez said he could not confirm if the latest attack involved a car bomb and said investigators were running forensic tests to determine if the assailants packed the car with explosive material or launched grenades.

Chavez said the killings did not qualify as terrorism.

“We have no evidence anywhere in the country of narco-terrorism,” he said.

The attorney general says at least 24,800 people have been killed in drug-gang violence since Calderon launched his military-led offensive in 2006.

Ciudad Juarez has become one of the most dangerous cities in the world, with more than 4,000 people killed since the beginning of 2009. Reyes said at least 14 police officers have been killed in the city and surrounding areas in recent weeks.


E. Eduardo Castillo reported from Mexico City.


First of Arizona Anti-Illegal Immigration Law S.B. 1070 Hearings Held Today   Leave a comment

Well, it has begun.  The courts are finally going to be hearing the cases against Arizona’s anti-Illegal Immigration laws which mirror the Federal Law on the books. 

Firstly, please note that these trials are happening in Phoenix—a reputed ‘Sanctuary City’—with a judge that sides with Illegal Immigrants.

This does not bode well.  I am trying not to be negative about this and I’m praying for a miracle, but seriously folks . . . the odds are totally against them, even THOUGH THEY ARE IN THE RIGHT!  My prayers are with Arizona though this and it looks like these first frivolous law suits might get thrown out, but still . . .

And the fact that this officer refuses to comply with FEDERAL LAW should also be put under examination.  If he refused to pay his Federal Taxes—which paying them IS A FEDERAL LAW—do you honestly think he would get away with it and be able to use the fact that he refuses to pay his taxes as a reason to sue in court?  THAT is ridiculous!  I can see the point of these illegal immigrant groups that are suing, no matter HOW misguided, but not this guy!  He’s the most misguided of them all!

Sorry, I like to use the term ‘misguided’ in reference to those who are ‘misguided’ and ‘misinformed’ about the law.  LOL!!!  It just seems fitting.

Anyway, you had better believe that next week, when the Department of Justice makes their case, I will be paying attention!  My ears will be perked and my hackles raised to find out what is going to go down and will be until a verdict has been issued.


>steps off soapbox<

K, here’s the article:

Attorney: Immigration law puts cop’s job at stake

By JACQUES BILLEAUD, Associated Press Writer Jacques Billeaud, Associated Press Writer – 3 mins ago

PHOENIX – A Phoenix police officer’s attorney says the officer could be fired if he doesn’t enforce the state’s new immigration law, which he has sued to block.

Officer David Salgado and the statewide nonprofit group Chicanos Por La Causa filed one of seven lawsuits to try to overturn the law.

Attorneys for the Arizona governor told U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton Thursday that the lawsuit should be dismissed because Salgado and the group lack legal standing to sue and that there’s no valid claim of immediate harm.

Bolton didn’t rule immediately after hearing approximately 40 minutes of arguments on Gov. Jan Brewer’s dismissal motion.

Instead she began hearing arguments on the challengers’ request for an order blocking implementation of the law beginning July 29.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

PHOENIX (AP) — A federal judge heard arguments on Thursday morning over whether Arizona’s new immigration law should take effect at the end of the month, marking the first major hearing in one of seven challenges to the strict law.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton also is considering Gov. Jan Brewer’s request to dismiss the challenge filed by Phoenix police Officer David Salgado and the statewide nonprofit group Chicanos Por La Causa.

Bolton began by quickly dismissing Brewer as an individual defendant to the lawsuit, a motion unopposed by Salgado’s lawyer. She then began considering whether to dismiss the case.

Bolton said last week that she may not rule on the officer’s request to block the law before it takes effect July 29.

Hearings on the six other lawsuits, including one filed by the federal government, are set for next week.

The large ceremonial courtroom at the main federal courthouse in Phoenix was packed with more than 100 spectators as the hearing began. More than a dozen lawyers were in place along two L-shaped tables, evenly divided between each side. The jury box was filled with law clerks for judges who work in the building who came to observe.

Protesters and supporters of the law gathered outside the courthouse amid heavy security.

About two dozen supporters of the law, many dressed in red, white and blue, held up signs praising Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a major backer of the crackdown on illegal immigrants, and one said “American Pride.”

About 50 feet away a group opposed to the law held up signs calling for repeal of the law.

The groups competed with each other using bullhorns.

“We demand an injunction. We demand a federal intervention,” opponent Sandra Castro of Phoenix, 22, yelled into a bullhorn.

The law requires police, while enforcing other laws, to question a person’s immigration status if officers have a reasonable suspicion that the person is in the country illegally.

Supporters say the law was needed because the federal government hasn’t adequately confronted illegal immigration in Arizona, the busiest illegal gateway for immigrants into the United States. Opponents say the law would lead to racial profiling and distract from police officers’ traditional roles in combating crimes in their communities.

Since Brewer signed the measure into law April 23, it has inspired rallies in Arizona and elsewhere by advocates on both sides of the immigration debate. Some opponents have advocated a tourism boycott of Arizona.

It also led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave Arizona for other American states or their home countries and prompted the Obama administration to file a lawsuit seeking to invalidate the law.

Salgado’s attorneys argue the judge should block the law before it takes effect because it would require an officer to use race as a primary factor in enforcing the law and because the state law is trumped by federal immigration law.

Attorneys for Brewer asked that the officer’s lawsuit be thrown out because Salgado doesn’t allege a real threat of harm from enforcing the new law and instead bases his claim on speculation. They also said the state law prohibits racial profiling and that it isn’t trumped by federal immigration law because it doesn’t attempt to regulate the conditions under which people can enter and leave the country.

The other challenges to the law were filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, civil rights organizations, clergy groups, a researcher from Washington and a Tucson police officer.

Bolton plans to hold similar hearings July 22 in the lawsuits filed by the federal government and civil rights groups.


Associated Press Writers Paul Davenport and Michelle Price contributed to this report.

Justice: ‘Sanctuary Cities’ Safe from Law–Arizona ‘actually interferes’   Leave a comment

Wow–what an amazing statement!

Ug there is too much here to comment on so I am taking it line by line, but the article speaks for itself.  How lame that our congress refuses to stand up for its own law and chooses to back down from those who openly defy it–backing down from both illegal immigrants and the sanctuary cities that offer them safe shelter.  THIS is why we are having so many issues!  If you give them incentives to come and stay here then they will never leave.  If they are forced to stay in their own country then they will actually have to deal with their own political problems and stand up for themselves instead of sneaking across the border and leaching off of us.  Maybe they’ll have a revolt and put a new party in government, a non-corrupt one, or maybe not.  Either way, that’s something we could deal with down the road, AFTER we seal the borders and send them all back.

Anyway, just my two cents. 

Here’s the article:

Justice: Sanctuary cities safe from law

Arizona’s policy ‘actually interferes’

A week after suing Arizona and arguing that the state’s immigration law creates a patchwork of rules, the Obama administration said it will not go after so-called sanctuary cities that refuse to cooperate with the federal government on immigration enforcement, on the grounds that they are not as bad as a state that “actively interferes.”

”There is a big difference between a state or locality saying they are not going to use their resources to enforce a federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law,” Tracy Schmaler, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., told The Washington Times. “That’s what Arizona did in this case.”

THIS doesn’t make sense!!!!!!!!  I mean it LITERALLY doesn’t make sense!!!!!!  Laws are SUPPOSED to be UPHELD!  Right?  Am I right?  Or am I just reading too much into it…?

But the author of the 1996 federal law that requires states and localities to cooperate with federal authorities on immigration laws thinks the administration is misreading the statute and that sanctuary cities are in violation of federal law. Drawing a distinction between those localities and Arizona, he said, is “flimsy justification” for suing the state.

“For the Justice Department to suggest that they won’t take action against those who passively violate the law  who fail to comply with the law  is absurd,” said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee and chief author of the 1996 immigration law. “Will they ignore individuals who fail to pay taxes? Will they ignore banking laws that require disclosure of transactions over $10,000? Of course not.”

Officials in Arizona say they’ve been unfairly singled out by President Obama and Mr. Holder, who last week sued to overturn Arizona’s new law, arguing that it could lead to a patchwork of state immigration rules.

Obama is also making a laughing stock of our country by doing this!  What are other countries THINKING about us?  If America was a family (which it is, I suppose) and the president was the father (which he is, I suppose) then HOW does it look when the father sues a family member?  It’s sick!  It’s foolish!  It’s not right!  Obama needs to support Arizona because OBVIOUSLY there is something very wrong!

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer and other critics said that sanctuary cities  — localities that refuse to check on someone’s legal status or won’t alert immigration authorities when they encounter illegal immigrants  — are just as guilty of creating a patchwork of laws, and violate the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.

Mr. Smith said the administration doesn’t appear to understand his law, which requires localities to share information on illegal immigrants with federal authorities.

“The White House is just plain wrong on the premise since the Arizona law mirrors federal law – it does not ‘interfere’ with it,” he said.

The Arizona law, which goes into effect July 29 unless a court blocks it, requires authorities to inquire about the legal status of any detained person about whom they have reasonable suspicion might be in the country illegally. The law as amended specifically prohibits using race or ethnicity as a reason for suspicion.

Messages left with Mrs. Brewer‘s office Wednesday were not returned. But in a statement last week, she said Arizona was being targeted.

“President Obama‘s administration has chosen to sue Arizona for helping to enforce federal immigration law and not sue local governments that have adopted a patchwork of ‘sanctuary’ policies that directly violate federal law. These patchwork local ‘sanctuary’ policies instruct the police not to cooperate with federal immigration officials,” she said.

Mr. Obama took an active role in targeting Arizona, including ordering the Justice Department to get involved. But on sanctuary cities, the White House has deflected questions, first telling a reporter it would get an answer about the president’s thinking but eventually shifting questions over to the Justice Department.

In his original directions to Justice to review the Arizona law, Mr. Obama asked for lawyers to look into potential conflicts with federal immigration law and potential civil rights violations, such as racial profiling.

When it was filed July 6, though, the Justice Department lawsuit attacked the law only as an infringement on federal prerogatives. It did not make any accusations that the law violates civil rights, though Mr. Holder threatened a second lawsuit on that issue during on Sunday’s political talk shows.


Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez defended the Arizona lawsuit on Monday, telling the American Constitution Society that the federal government can’t tolerate different policies.

“You cannot have a system of 50 quarterbacks in the immigration system because immigration includes issues of law enforcement, it involves decisions with implications in foreign policy, it involves incidents with humanitarian implications, and you can’t have 50 states making immigration law and have a coherent system,” Mr. Perez said, according to, which covers the Justice Department.

But defenders say Arizona’s law would be a problem only if it conflicted with Congress’ immigration policy.

Which it doesn’t.  It supports the current anti-Illegal Immigration law already on federal books.

On Wednesday, Michigan Attorney General Michael A. Cox filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the federal lawsuit arguing that Arizona’s law is consistent with what Congress intended. He was joined by attorneys general from eight states and one territory.

The Arizona law has become a flash point for the broader immigration debate, with polls showing a majority of voters supporting the crackdown.

Arizona officials have said the federal government has failed in its responsibility to police the borders, and the state is experiencing a crime wave spurred by illegal immigration. They have said the new law is meant to fill in the gaps in enforcement.

On Wednesday, two Republican senators – Jim DeMint of South Carolina and David Vitter of Louisiana – announced that they will introduce an amendment to a bill that would halt the Justice Department lawsuit by denying it federal funding.

Sanctuary cities are difficult to categorize, and there is no hard-and-fast rule for the label.

A 2007 report from the Justice Department‘s inspector general found 15 cities that don’t regularly inform federal authorities when they arrest an illegal immigrant, and 10 cities that wouldn’t regularly tell authorities when a known illegal immigrant was being released from custody, either of which could be viewed as shielding illegal immigrants from detection.

The IG report said two jurisdictions – Oregon, and the city and county of San Francisco – acknowledge themselves as sanctuaries. It also said that many cities that are categorized as sanctuaries include language in their policies requiring local authorities to cooperate to the extent required by federal law.

A 2005 report by the Congressional Research Service listed 32 jurisdictions it said might be considered sanctuary cities.

UPDATE: 9 States Back Arizona Anti-Illegal Immigration Law in Court!   1 comment


I WOULD have chosen a USA Today article to post but…I don’t like them much >rolls eyes< call me picky…LOL!

Anyway, here ya are!  We need to get more states to back Arizona up!!!  Come on, America!  Stand up for what’s right!

Brief for 9 states backs Arizona immigration law

By David Runk The Associated Press | Posted: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 2:25 pm |

DETROIT – States have the authority to enforce immigration laws and protect their borders, Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox said Wednesday in a legal brief on behalf of nine states supporting Arizona’s immigration law.

Cox, one of five Republicans running for Michigan governor, said Michigan is the lead state backing Arizona in federal court and is joined by Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Virginia, as well as the Northern Mariana Islands.

The Arizona law, set to take effect July 29, directs officers to question people about their immigration status during the enforcement of other laws such as traffic stops and if there’s a reasonable suspicion they’re in the U.S. illegally.

President Barack Obama’s administration recently filed suit in federal court to block it, arguing immigration is a federal issue. The law’s backers say Congress isn’t doing anything meaningful about illegal immigration, so it’s the state’s duty to step up.

“Arizona, Michigan and every other state have the authority to enforce immigration laws, and it is appalling to see President Obama use taxpayer dollars to stop a state’s efforts to protect its own borders,” Cox said in a statement.

Arizona’s Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, in a statement released by Cox’s office, said she was thankful for the support.

In a telephone interview, Cox said the nine states supporting Arizona represents “a lot of states,” considering it was only Monday that he asked other state attorneys general to join him. The brief was filed in U.S. District Court in Arizona on the same day as the deadline for such filings.

“By lawsuit, rather than by legislation, the federal government seeks to negate this preexisting power of the states to verify a person’s immigration status and similarly seeks to reject the assistance that the states can lawfully provide to the Federal government,” the brief states.

The brief doesn’t represent the first time Cox has clashed with the Obama administration. Earlier this year, he joined with more than a dozen other attorneys general to file a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of federal health care changes signed into law by the Democratic president.

Like with his stance on health care, the immigration brief again puts Cox at odds with Democratic Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm. Granholm, who can’t seek re-election because of term limits, disagrees with the Arizona law, her press secretary Liz Boyd said. The Michigan primary is less than three weeks away on Aug. 3.

“It’s a patently political ploy in his quest for the Republican nomination for governor,” Boyd said

Sour grapes much, Ms. Boyd?

Virginia and Missouri Have their Own “Arizona Law” but the Feds Don’t Sue Them. Why?   Leave a comment

Here’s an interesting video I stumbled across.  I had heard about this a while ago but just had not had the time to delve into it further.  But, it furthers both my point and my confusion to Obama’s hatred over the Arizona Law.  And the hatred of Mexico.  Why WOULD the Federal Government attack Arizona specifically over SB 1070 law, when Prince William County, Virginia (3 years) and Missouri have had their own for years?

The positive results have included, but I’m sure are not limited to, a 38% reduction in violent crimes, fewer uninsured illegals giving birth, a  drop in English as second language  enrollment, and  80% of Prince William County citizens favor the law.

The only things I can think of are as follows:

a) Obama doesn’t know about these laws because he doesn’t care

b) Obama is desperate to pass his comprehensive Immigration Reform bill and he needs something to attack in order to:

                1) Get the Latino vote


                2) Draw attention to his bill in order to gain support


d) Neither Virginia or Missouri are drug cartel territory.  The Arizona trafficking routes are important and Obama must protect them.  For what?  I dare not suggest any conclusions.  But I will say that it doesn’t seem very noble to me.  (>cough< Calderon backs the Sinaloa Cartel, maybe Obama does too? >cough<)


Mexico Schools Teaching Kids to Hit the Floor at the Sound of Gunshots   Leave a comment

And we want this here?

By leaving our borders open, we very well could be some day soon.  It’s pretty sad for these kids to have to live like that.  El presidente Calderon needs to stop kissing the behinds of his precious cartels and man up to protect his people.  Either that, or by some form of miracle, there needs to be some sort of uncorrupt individual to take his place. 

Another good reason to seal our borders is to save these people.  Had our borders been sealed from day 1 and these people were forced to stay and deal with their problems, they might have actually overthrown their own government and they wouldn’t have to deal with any of this frightening garbage!  It’s not our problem, but they are making it our problem.  We need to grow up and rip off the band-aid so they can look at how things are and fix it instead of running away and depending on us to solve their problems.  Eventually we need to cut the cord.

Here is the article:

Mexico schools teach lessons in survival

Posted 6m ago
By Chris Hawley, USA TODAY

MEXICO CITY — Schools across Mexico are teaching students to dive to the floor and cover their heads as the violence-torn country sees more urban gunfights between drug gangs.

At least nine shootouts have erupted in school zones since mid-October, three of them in the past month. On June 15, soldiers and gunmen battled for an hour 60 feet from a preschool in the central town of Taxco.

Several Mexican states require “shootout drills” and incorporate them into summer teacher-training courses, which will begin next week. School ends Friday in most of Mexico.

“We’re in a situation like nothing we’ve ever lived through before, and we need to make sure the children are safe,” says Juan Gallardo, director of school safety in the northern state of Tamaulipas.

Drug-related violence has reached record levels in Mexico since President Felipe Calderón launched a military crackdown on the cartels in late 2006. As of Monday, there had been 5,775 drug-related killings in 2010, up from 2,275 in all of 2007, according to an unofficial tally by the Reforma newspaper.

Shootouts have become common as drug gangs ambush government forces and each other in an attempt to control smuggling routes and drug sales. Last week, 21 gunmen died in a shootout between gangs in a rural area near the Arizona border.

Most attacks have not targeted schools, but students can be caught in the crossfire. On March 19, two college students were killed by stray bullets as they left a study session in the prestigious Tec de Monterrey university in the northern city of Monterrey.

Gunbattles erupted near public schools on June 18 in the western town of Bellavista and on June 24 in the northern city of Apodaca. In Apodaca, police evacuated two elementary schools and a preschool.

After the battle June 15 near the preschool in Taxco, the southern state of Guerrero held shootout drills in several schools and ordered training for all 52,400 teachers in the state.

New guidelines instruct teachers to take all students indoors, lock classroom doors and keep the children away from windows. Children should lie on the floor and cover their heads with their hands to protect themselves from flying glass or chips of concrete. Above all, children should not take pictures or video of the shootout.

“The first thing the kids want to do is take pictures to post on their social networks,” says Erika Arciniega, director of crime prevention for the Guerrero state police. “We don’t want them to become targets.”

In Nuevo León state, where college students were killed in a crossfire in March, education officials are preparing a video teaching children how to protect themselves in shootouts, state Education Secretary José González said. Officials distribute manuals with instructions for surviving a shootout.

“Upon hearing gunshots near the school zone, the teacher will immediately order all students to lie with their chests to the floor,” the guide says. “Avoid visual contact with the aggressors.”

Some of the students’ parents don’t think such training is a good idea, says Angel Carrillo, principal of the Rafael Briceño Elementary School in the western city of Colima.

“Some of the parents think it scares the kids too much,” he says.

Contributing: Hawley is Latin America correspondent for USA TODAY and The Arizona Republic 

Recession Sparked Global Immigration Crackdown Slant   Leave a comment

Hmmm—spinned much?  “Recession Sparked Global Immigration Crackdown”

You know, it’s getting kind of lame having to point this stuff out all the time, but at least it’s not a vicious attack on America this time.  Most of the ‘crackdown’ they are whining is dealing with illegal immigrants.  The reduction of HB-1 work visas is merely a side effect of there being NO JOBS for them!  That isn’t a crackdown.  It’s just a fact of life. 

At least we aren’t the only country with this kind of problem.  Could you imagine what would happen if we bulldozed illegal immigrant housing here in our country?  Wow!

Study: Recession sparked global immigration crackdown

By Liz Goodwin

Tue Jul 6, 6:09 pm ET

When times get tough, many countries slam the doors on immigrants. 

Well yeah—if there aren’t jobs enough for a country’s own people, why should they want people from other countries to come and take them?

This sounds so vicious too, especially when you consider the rhetoric of the left and how they delete the word ‘illegal’ from ‘illegal immigrants’ to confuse ‘legal immigrants’ who have a right to be here and ‘illegal immigrants’ who don’t.

That’s what a new study by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (flagged by the Wall Street Journal) finds. As jobs became scarce in 2008, many previously welcoming European countries adopted policies to crack down on both legal and illegal immigration, which had skyrocketed during the boom years between 2000 and 2007. Several nations tightened limits on the number of immigrants they allowed in, and began issuing fewer work permits for immigrants already in the country when unemployment began to shoot up in 2008. Ireland and Italy both passed laws barring illegal immigrants from using public services. The U.K. raised fines for employers who hire illegal immigrants. Greek police bulldozed a migrant camp near Patras. And the U.S. discouraged banks who received bailout funds from hiring foreign-born workers on temporary skilled-worker visas.

Wow, could you IMAGINE if American Police bulldozed migrant camps here?  I can’t, but if they did, that would be one heck of a firestorm to contend with! 

Meanwhile, a host of countries took the novel approach of encouraging immigrants to leave the country entirely. Spain’s government offered to pay travel costs for those who agreed to leave and doled out a lump sum of unemployment money to the immigrant once he or she arrived home. The U.K., France, the Czech Republic, Japan, and Denmark also adopted programs that encourage foreigners to return to their home countries. Ironically, at the same time developed countries were tightening immigration restrictions, fewer immigrants were seeking work abroad, as the dismal job outlook discouraged them from trying. Applications for H-1B visas, which allow highly skilled workers to temporarily work in the United States, fell by 16.1 percent from 2008 to 2009. Illegal immigration also fell dramatically in the U.S. and Europe over the same period. 

You know what is cleverly and clearly missing from this article.  The author is so busy demonizing other countries and how they treat their immigrants—mostly our allies—but she is not even TOUCHING on how horribly Mexico treats THEIR illegal immigrants!  NOW THAT would be a story that would most likely NEVER reach the mainstream news.

I found this interesting article on the Mexican Illegal Immigration Law on the USAToday website of all places.  Could you IMAGINE if American police acted in this way towards illegals?  And Calderon has the AUDACITY to come here and complain about the Arizona law?  Nevermind that we have federal laws that say the EXACT same thing!

Activists blast Mexico’s immigration law

TULTITLN, Mexico — Arizona’s new law forcing local police to take a greater role in enforcing immigration law has caused a lot of criticism from Mexico, the largest single source of illegal immigrants in the United States.

But in Mexico, illegal immigrants receive terrible treatment from corrupt Mexican authorities, say people involved in the system.

And Mexico has a law that is no different from Arizona’s that empowers local police to check the immigration documents of people suspected of not being in the country legally.

“There (in the United States), they’ll deport you,” Hector Vázquez, an illegal immigrant from Honduras, said as he rested in a makeshift camp with other migrants under a highway bridge in Tultitlán. “In Mexico they’ll probably let you go, but they’ll beat you up and steal everything you’ve got first.”

Mexican authorities have harshly criticized Arizona’s SB1070, a law that requires local police to check the status of persons suspected of being illegal immigrants. The law provides that a check be done in connection with another law enforcement event, such as a traffic stop, and also permits Arizona citizens to file lawsuits against local authorities for not fully enforcing immigration laws.

Mexico’s Foreign Ministry said the law “violates inalienable human rights” and Democrats in Congress applauded Mexican President Felipe Calderón’s criticisms of the law in a speech he gave on Capitol Hill last week.

Yet Mexico’s Arizona-style law requires local police to check IDs. And Mexican police freely engage in racial profiling and routinely harass Central American migrants, say immigration activists.

Which the Arizona law expressly prohibits

“The Mexican government should probably clean up its own house before looking at someone else’s,” said Melissa Vertíz, spokeswoman for the Fray Matías de Córdova Human Rights Center in Tapachula, Mexico.

In one six-month period from September 2008 through February 2009, at least 9,758 migrants were kidnapped and held for ransom in Mexico — 91 of them with the direct participation of Mexican police, a report by the National Human Rights Commission said. Other migrants are routinely stopped and shaken down for bribes, it said.

A separate survey conducted during one month in 2008 at 10 migrant shelters showed Mexican authorities were behind migrant attacks in 35 of 240 cases, or 15%.

Most migrants in Mexico are Central Americans who are simply passing through on their way to the United States, human rights groups say. Others are Guatemalans who live and work along Mexico’s southern border, mainly as farm workers, as maids, or in bars and restaurants.

The Central American migrants headed to the United States travel mainly on freight trains, stopping to rest and beg for food at rail crossings like the one in Tultitlán, an industrial suburb of Mexico City.

On a recent afternoon, Victor Manuel Beltrán Rodríguez of Managua, Nicaragua, trudged between the cars at a stop light, his hand outstretched.

“Can you give me a peso? I’m from Nicaragua,” he said. Every 10 cars or so, a motorist would roll down the window and hand him a few coins. In a half-hour he had collected 10 pesos, about 80 U.S. cents, enough for a taco.

Beltrán Rodríguez had arrived in Mexico with 950 pesos, about $76, enough to last him to the U.S. border. But near Tierra Blanca, Veracruz, he says municipal police had detained him, driven him to a deserted road and taken his money. He had been surviving since then by begging.

Abuses by Mexican authorities have persisted even as Mexico has relaxed its rules against illegal immigrants in recent years, according to the National Human Rights Commission.

In 2008, Mexico softened the punishment for illegal immigrants, from a maximum 10 years in prison to a maximum fine of $461. Most detainees are taken to detention centers and put on buses for home.

Mexican law calls for six to 12 years of prison and up to $46,000 in fines for anyone who shelters or transports illegal immigrants. The Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that the law applies only to people who do it for money.

For years, the Mexican government has allowed charity groups to openly operate migrant shelters, where travelers can rest for a few days on their journey north. The government also has a special unit of immigration agents, known as Grupo Beta, who patrol the countryside in orange pickups, helping immigrants who are in trouble.

At the same time, Article 67 of Mexico’s immigration law requires that all authorities “whether federal, local or municipal” demand to see visas if approached by a foreigner and to hand over migrants to immigration authorities.

“In effect, this means that migrants who suffer crimes, including kidnapping, prefer not to report them to avoid … being detained by immigration authorities and returned to their country,” the National Human Rights Commission said in a report last year.

As a result, the clause has strengthened gangs who abuse migrants, rights activists say.

“That Article 67 is an obstacle that urgently has to be removed,” said Alberto Herrera, executive director of Amnesty International Mexico. “It has worsened this vicious cycle of abuse and impunity, and the same thing could happen (in Arizona).”

A bill passed by the Mexican Senate on Oct. 6 would eliminate the ID requirement in Article 67 and replace it with language saying “No attention in matters of human rights or the provision of justice shall be denied or restricted on any level (of government) to foreigners who require it, regardless of their migration status.”

The Mexican House of Representatives approved a similar measure on March 16, but added a clause requiring the government to set aside funds to take care of foreigners during times of disaster. The revised bill has been stuck in the Senate’s Population and Development Committee since then.

To discourage migrants from speaking out about abuse, Mexican authorities often tell detainees they will have to stay longer in detention centers if they file a complaint, Vertíz said.

A March 2007 order allows Mexican immigration agents to give “humanitarian visas” to migrants who have suffered crimes in Mexico. But the amnesty is not automatic, and most migrants don’t know to ask for it, the commission said.

 Hawley is Latin America correspondent for USA TODAY and The Arizona Republic

It’s just a nauseating political move designed to get votes for both presidents on both sides of the border.  Calderon knows that a majority of his people don’t like Americans, so standing up to us would win him key votes, since they are in the process of having elections.  Or at least I’m sure he hopes it does.  That, and it’s been proven that he is siding with a particular drug cartel and the Arizona law would interrupt the functioning of that cartel.  Being that Obama has already given American land over to Mexico specifically FOR the drug cartels and BECAUSE of them, it makes me wonder if Obama doesn’t have his hand in that cookie jar too. 

We all know that the democrats are panicking over the November elections here.  We know that they are not going to win based on the vote of the general American population, especially the conservatives and self-proclaimed ‘Tea Partiers’.  He knows that, in general, Latino immigrant voters tend to vote democratic and committing to amnesty and denouncing any action to protect America’s sovereignty would anger that demographic.  So, instead of protecting his people, he’s pandering to the Latino vote, hoping that this move will earn him credits with them. However, in Obama’s attack on Arizona, the Department of Justice states that they are just seeking to uphold the law.  If they were so interesting in upholding American law, they would be attacking those states and cities that are kissing the illegals feet and welcoming in with open arms, donning them with welfare funded by the American taxpayer, which is IN COMPLETE VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL LAW!

WHAT’S WORSE!!!!  OBAMA IS SIDING WITH ANOTHER COUNTRY AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is completely unforgivable!  UNFORGIVABLE! 

I’m not sure how else to explain it or express it.  I am continuously baffled and not baffled anymore by the socialist politics that are happening.  Part of me wants to believe in my country, the country my father and grandfathers served, and countless men and women have died to protect, but seeing the gluttonous monstrous liberalism that is corroding Her from the inside out…I begin to wonder if my faith will ever be restored. I am praying for November.  I am praying for 2012.  Today I may seem a little low in my hope, but overall I have faith that the American people will have their say and will step up for what’s right.  I have faith that the sovereignty of our nation will be upheld and that the liberal swill will be suppressed in November until we can kick it out in the next presidential election.

Tell your congress person how you feel about this foolery going on and how you want them to vote.  I have always considered doing so a waste of time because they will vote however will benefit them the most, but at least we can say that we tried. God Bless America!