Archive for the ‘national security’ Tag

Police: Illegal Immigrants Raped 14-year old Texas Girl at 4th of July Party   Leave a comment

This is just sick.  So they’re just here to work and pick fruit, huh?  Coming to enjoy the good life here, is that it?  Sure, Americans can and do do this too, but just think, if the border was sealed and under control AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS DOING THEIR JOB BY ENFORCING THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION LAWS then there would be one less minor raped right now.  One less girl who will never, ever be the same…

Honduran Immigrants Charged with Raping Teen

Updated: Wednesday, 14 Jul 2010, 4:45 PM CDT
Published : Monday, 12 Jul 2010, 2:19 PM CDT

Horseshoe Bay, TX – Horseshoe Bay Police say a 14-year-old girl was raped by two illegal immigrants at a 4th of July party in south Horseshoe Bay.

The victim told police that she had gone with her cousin to a July 4th party on 39th Street in Horseshoe Bay. The victim’s 23-year-old cousin left her alone in a room with Anibal Escobar, 19, and Anael Martinez, 22. The two Honduran natives made sexual advances toward the teen and had sexual intercourse with her against her will. The victim’s cousin found her in naked in the bath tub. They both left the party and returned home.

The victim told her mother the next day of what had happened and she contacted police to report the sexual assault. The victim was questioned by a forensics interviewer with the Hill Country Advocacy Center in Burnet and the victim relayed the events of the alleged incident with Horseshoe Bay investigators present. Investigators contacted Texas Ranger Jesse Ramos who assisted in the investigation in interviewing the suspects and others present at the residence as none of the group of witnesses or suspects spoke English.

Escobar and Martinez were arrested during the early morning hours of July 9th. They were both charged with Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child Younger than 17, a first degree felony, and transported to the Burnet Detention Facility. Both remain in custody in lieu of magistration and setting of bond.

The investigation is continuing and may result in additional charges. Investigators are in contact with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in regards to the status of the two suspects who have indicated they are in the country illegally.

Advertisements

Latino KKK: Brown Beret Says “This is America–Go back to Europe”   Leave a comment

Hi All!

My goodness, so much has been happening since I last updated my blog that I’m not sure where to start, but I’m going to go ahead and start with this video that I meant to post a few days ago but I was speechless to make comment on it.

Well, I guess the video speaks for itself.  This most likely will not make it into mainstream liberal media, much the way the new black panther video went. 

This is jus the most lunatic, insane thing I have ever seen or heard in my entire life.  These people are REALLY out of touch with reality!

Maricopa County California Sheriff Launches 16th Illegal Immigrant Sweep in Desert   Leave a comment

Now this is how it’s SUPPOSED to be done!

Brave Maricopa County, CA and Sheriff Arpaio!!!!!!!!  My hat goes off to you!!!!!

Here’s the article:

Arpaio launches 16th immigration sweep in desert

Posted: Thursday, July 15, 2010 4:29 pm |

The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office launched its 16th crime and immigration sweep Thursday in a stretch of desert in the southwestern portion of the county.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio says the one-day sweep was prompted by reports of many drug and immigrant smugglers moving through the Vekol Valley.

Since early 2008, Arpaio has launched patrols that seek out traffic violators and arrest other offenders, such as people accused of human smuggling.

Critics say officers racially profile Latinos in the patrols. Arpaio denies the allegations, saying people pulled over in the sweeps are approached because deputies have probable cause to believe they committed crimes.

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.

WE NEED YOUR PRAYERS PEOPLE!  SUPPORT ARIZONA!  FRIEND GOV. JAN BREWER ON HER FACEBOOK PAGE!  IF YOUR STATE ISNT’ ONE OF THE 9 WHO IS SIDING WITH ARIZONA, BUG YOUR CONGRESS-PERSON!  THIS NEEDS TO HAPPEN!

>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.

Republican Senator Says He Backs Birther Lawsuits   Leave a comment

I’m going to have to research on whether or not he really does have a Hawaii birth certificate.  It just seems a bit fishy to me—like of all the states he had to be ‘born in’, it had to be that one.  Right.  Also, the fact that mainstream media didn’t do a very good job of verifying this at all and basically swept it under the rug is also cause for consideration.  Supposedly the birth certificate has been located, but it wasn’t announced on the news or anything for everyone to see.  Apparently THAT information is only for the select few who think birthers are crazy.  Note there are not even any links on the article to any mainstream media exposition of said birth certificate.

Usually when the mainstream liberal media does that, it means that they are hiding something ‘someone’ doesn’t want the public to see.

Okay, I KNOW that sounds conspiracy theory-like, but anyone who spends any time looking at the news can honestly deny that everything every station says sounds the same…exactly the same in some cases—especially in the liberal viewpoints they espouse. It just seems kind of, well, ‘fishy’ (I like that word, I’m going to use it a lot today)!

Vitter actually doesn’t mention the birth certificate matter as a main part of his comments.  It seems like he mentioned it in passing and the media grasped that and viciously dragged it out of context to get some attention.  Even as I write this commentary, I want to touch on the birth certificate issue and what I think of how he feels about it, even though that’s not the point.  However, he does acknowledge the fact that there is still question about it.  Do I think that this is a ploy to get votes?  Of course!  Just because someone is siding with conservatives doesn’t mean that they are not doing so just to get their vote.

But note how he tries to change the subject in the article.  I think he just agreed that it’s an issue, the media and his fellows focused on it to try to make him to be a nut (he IS a Republican in this hostile liberal environment) which I think is wrong but par for the course in mainstream media.

Anyway, here’s the article.

Republican senator says he backs birther lawsuits

By BEN EVANS, Associated Press Writer Ben Evans, Associated Press Writer – Tue Jul 13, 1:58 am ET

WASHINGTON – Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana says he supports conservative organizations challenging President Barack Obama’s citizenship in court.

Vitter, who is running for re-election, made the comments at a town hall-style event in Metairie, La., on Sunday when a constituent asked what he would do about what the questioner said was Obama’s “refusal to produce a valid birth certificate.”

Such claims about Obama’s birth certificate have been discredited. But with the crowd applauding the question, Vitter responded that although he doesn’t personally have legal standing to bring litigation, he supports “conservative legal organizations and others who would bring that to court,” according to a video of the event.

“I think that is the valid and most possibly effective grounds to do it,” Vitter said, although he later cautioned that the matter could distract from policy issues.

“I think if we focus on that issue and let our eye off the ball … I think that’s a big mistake,” he said. “I’m not dismissing any of this. I think first and foremost, we need to fight the Obama agenda at the ballot box starting this fall.”

So-called birthers have challenged Obama’s standing as president by arguing that he was not born in the United States.

Hawaii officials have repeatedly confirmed the president’s citizenship, and his Hawaiian birth certificate has been made public, along with newspaper birth notices published when he was born in 1961.

Last year, a federal judge in Washington threw out a lawsuit on the issue, calling the case a waste of the court’s time and suggesting the plaintiff’s attorney may have to compensate the president’s lawyer.

Vitter said at Sunday’s event that the only direct information he has about the issue is what he’s learned through the news media “filter.” His spokesman did not respond to a question Monday about whether the senator questions Obama’s citizenship.

A spokesman for Rep. Charlie Melancon, a Democrat challenging Vitter, called the birth certificate issue “nonsense.”

“While Louisiana families are suffering from the biggest man-made disaster in history, David Vitter is trying to score political points by perpetuating a completely debunked conspiracy theory,” spokesman Jeff Giertz said.

PEACEFUL ACTION ALERT: Opponents Pack Hearing on Mosque Near Ground Zero   Leave a comment

Oh…MY….GOD!

I have been trying to avoid this since I first heard about it.  It’s just too….sad.  It’s too deep.  It’s too insane to even allow it to happen. 

I can’t believe that this is being considered. 

I can’t believe that discussion of this is even being allowed.

I can’t BELIEVE that they want to even DEVELOP Ground Zero in the first place . . . but to put a mosque on that property . . . WHAT ARE THEY THINKING?

That’s like . . . bulldozing Auschwitz and putting a Hitler memorial on top of it.

That’s like . . . letting the KKK have their headquarters where Martin Luther King Jr. got shot.

That’s like . . . putting a nuclear power plant and pro-nuclear weapon museum in Hiroshima.

I mean…it’s blasphemous!  And I don’t mean in a religious sense.  Let’s keep that out of it.  I mean that it’s just blasphemous in principle.  It’s blasphemous against the American people.  It’s blasphemous TO ALL AMERICANS WHO REMEMBER 9-11 AND TO THOSE TO DIED IN THOSE ATTACKS! 

I cannot even wrap my head around this. 

If this passes . . . it will be a dark, dark, dark day for this country—a day where we rolled over and allowed our enemies to step on us and kick us, asserting their dominance. We might as well pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan because we would have just lost the war.  What’s the point in fighting if we allow them to build their mosque on hallowed ground?  That’s what Muslims do.  When they declare war on another country or religion, whenever they CONQUOR said country or said religion, they tear down their important symbols and churches and whatnot and they BUILD MOSQUES ON THOSE SITES AS A SIGN THAT THEY HAVE WON!

Again, I ask . . . WHAT THE HECK ARE THEY THINKING!!!!!  (and I want to use more colorful language when I say this!)

Opponents pack hearing on mosque near ground zero

By CRISTIAN SALAZAR, Associated Press Writer Cristian Salazar, Associated Press Writer – Tue Jul 13, 11:56 pm ET

NEW YORK – Dozens of opponents and some supporters of a mosque planned near ground zero attended a raucous hearing Tuesday about whether the building where the Muslim place of worship would be created warrants designation as a city landmark and should be protected from development.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio, who has sought an investigation into the funding of the mosque, was among the witnesses who testified in support of giving the building landmark status, which could complicate plans by Muslim groups to develop a community center and mosque there.

After noting the lower Manhattan building’s history and architectural significance, Lazio said it also warranted landmark designation because on Sept. 11, 2001, it was struck by airplane debris from the terror attacks against the nearby World Trade Center. That connection to the attacks, he said, made it “a place of deep historical significance and a reminder of just what happened on New York’s darkest day.”

Lazio has called on state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, his Democratic opponent in the governor’s race, to investigate the funding of the project. On Tuesday, he repeated that request and said the pace of the landmark designation process should be slowed to allow time to thoroughly investigate the matter.

Nearly 100 people attended the hearing at a college campus on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Fifty-six people testified at the hearing, which turned contentious at times, with some speakers drowned out by shouts from the audience and with one man escorted out by campus security.

“To deprive this building of landmark status is to allow for a citadel of Islamic supremacy to be erected in its place,” said Andrea Quinn, a freelance audio technician from Queens who said she had worked with people at the World Trade Center.

But Rafiq Kathwari, who described himself as a moderate Muslim, said the landmark discussion had been hijacked.

INTERESTING USE OF THE WORD ‘HIJACKED’ L

“This has been made by a very vocal minority into an issue of bigotry,” said Kathwari, as he held up his U.S. passport and was nearly drowned out by shouts from the crowd. “I’m standing in a hall in which I feel ashamed to be an American.”

AS AN AMERICAN HE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SITE AND WOULD BE VOTING TO MAKE IT A HISTORICAL LANDMARK AND MOVE THIS MOSQUE SOMEWHERE ELSE!

The mosque and the related community center are a project of several groups, including the American Society for Muslim Advancement and the Cordoba Initiative, which promotes cross-cultural understanding between Islam and the West. Cordoba’s director, Imam Faisel Rauf, has refused to disclose the sources of funding for the mosque.

SEE!!!!!  Gee, I wonder who is funding this!!!!!!

But Sharif El-Gamal, the CEO of the company that owns the property, said that the project’s backers were committed to transparency and were working to set up a nonprofit organization.

“We are going to go through a capital campaign,” which will consist of equity debt, bonds, grants and fundraising from the grass roots, he said. They were committed to working with the attorney general’s Charities Bureau, which supervises charitable organizations and works to protect donors, he said.

El-Gamal testified at the hearing, saying they were opposed to designating the building a landmark because it does not meet the requirements of historical significance.

“This is not the Woolworth building, this is not the Chrysler building,” he said later in an interview.

The five-story building on Park Place, a few blocks north of Wall Street, was completed between 1857 and 1858 and is an Italian Renaissance-inspired palazzo. It formerly housed a department store, which closed after the building was damaged on Sept. 11. Muslim prayer service is held at the building at least one day a week.

Landmark status could require the owners to obtain the approval of the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission before making significant changes. It’s unlikely that, if granted such status, the building could be demolished.

The city’s 11-member Landmarks Preservation Commission is expected to vote later this summer on whether the building meets the standards of architectural, cultural and historic characteristics to qualify it for landmark status.

THIS IS THE LINK TO THE CHAIR OF THE LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION IN NYC:

http://nyc.gov/html/mail/html/maillpc.html

PLEASE EMAIL HIM AND ASK HIM TO PRESERVE THE BUILDING ON PARK PLACE AND GROUND ZERO SO THAT THEY DON’T DEMOLISH IT!!!!!!! 

EMAIL HIM EVERY SINGLE DAY!

THIS IS A SLAP IN THE FACE TO THOSE WHO DIED THERE AND THE FINGER TO THOSE WHO HAD TO WATCH AND LIVE IN FEAR FOR MONTHS AND YEARS AFTERWARDS!

IF THIS GUY WHO WANTS TO BUILD THIS MOSQUE THERE WERE ANY KIND OF AMERICAN, HE WOULD BE PUSHING TO MAKE IT A LANDMARK TOO AND BUILDING HIS MOSQUE SOMEWHERE ELSE!

I WOULD HAVE A LOT MORE RESPECT FOR THEM IF THEY DID THAT!

THIS IS THE MOST DISCUSTING THING I’VE EVER HEARD!

*steps down from soap box—fuming*

And this is why I didn’t want to bring it up. 

And this is why I am moved to tears when I hear our National Anthem.

Call it corny.  Call it lame.  Call it whatever you wish.  But we are a sovereign nation, they attacked us and killed civilians on our own land, and considering their history of invasion and destruction and building their places of worship over the ruins of the old civilization – THIS FITS THE BILL!!!!

If this gets passed . . . it will be a D*** shame. 

*kicks soapbox away and storms off, cursing—still fuming*

Obama: Al Qaeda Is Racist–NOT because of 9/11, but Because of Uganda   Leave a comment

HOW is this even POSSIBLE!?  HOW?  Tell me please!  How can our president, the president of OUR country, say NOTHING about al-Qaeda for his entire presidency, and then when they admit to the World Cup bombing in Uganda he comes alive and condemns them as ‘racist’. 

NOT FOR KILLING 4,000 AMERICANS ON AMERICAN SOIL USING HIJACKED AMERICAN AIRLINERS . . .NOT BECAUSE THEY THREATEN OUR COUNTRY–BIOLOGICAL, NUCLEAR, THREATENING ALL THE TIME THAT THEY ARE GOING TO KILL AMERICANS AND BEHEADING OUR SOLDIERS ON TAPE AND SHOWING IT ON THEIR TV . . . but because they blew up Africans in Uganda and seek out Africans to to use as suicide bombers.

*Double Facepalm*

Okay–no, I don’t think what al-Qaeda did was right, nor am I lessening the fact that it happened.  Not one bit.  But COME ON!  What side is Obama on?  Ours?  I don’t see it!  He didn’t mention us once?  Not once?  Not one of those 4000 civilians on 9/11 or not one of those American soldiers?  Not ONCE?

And from what I’ve heard from mainstream media about that group, I really don’t think they are focused on Africans.  They pretty much sound like they are focused on US and destroying US . . . and that’s not considered racism? 

So Tea Partiers are racist because they don’t like the socialist agenda, but al-Qaeda isn’t, even after 9-11?  It took a bombing in Africa to get a reaction.   

*Triple Facepalm*

And he wonders why his popularity rating has dropped so much?

The news just amazes me every day…

President Obama, White House: Al Qaeda Is Racist

In an interview earlier today with the South African Broadcasting Corporation to air in a few hours, President Obama disparaged al Qaeda and affiliated groups’ willingness to kill Africans in a manner that White House aides say was an argument that the terrorist groups are racist.

Speaking about the Uganda bombings, the president said, “What you’ve seen in some of the statements that have been made by these terrorist organizations is that they do not regard African life as valuable in and of itself.  They see it as a potential place where you can carry out ideological battles that kill innocents without regard to long-term consequences for their short-term tactical gains.”

Earlier today a senior administration official said the Obama administration believes that Al Shabaab carried out the attack.

Explaining the president’s comment, an administration official said Mr. Obama “references the fact that both U.S. intelligence and past al Qaeda actions make clear that al Qaeda — and the groups like al Shabaab that they inspire — do not value African life. The actions of al Qaeda and the groups that it has inspired show a willingness to sacrifice innocent African life to reach their targets.”

This can be seen, the official said, in the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, when hundreds of Africans were killed and thousands wounded.

“Additionally, U.S. intelligence has indicated that al Qaeda leadership specifically targets and recruits black Africans to become suicide bombers because they believe that poor economic and social conditions make them more susceptible to recruitment than Arabs,” the official said. “Al Qaeda recruits have said that al Qaeda is racist against black members from West Africa because they are only used in lower level operations.”

“In short,” the official said, “al Qaeda is a racist organization that treats black Africans like cannon fodder and does not value human life.”
The president also said in the interview that “it was so tragic and ironic to see an explosion like this take place when people in Africa were celebrating and watching the World Cup take place in South Africa.  On the one hand, you have a vision of an Africa on the move, an Africa that is unified, an Africa that is modernizing and creating opportunities; and on the other hand, you’ve got a vision of al Qaeda and Al Shabaab that is about destruction and death. 

“And I think it presents a pretty clear contrast in terms of the future that most Africans want for themselves and their children,” Mr. Obama said. “And we need to make sure that we are doing everything we can to support those who want to build, as opposed to want to destroy.”