Showing posts with label illegal aliens. Show all posts
Showing posts with label illegal aliens. Show all posts

22 April 2019

ALERT: MEXICAN SOLDIERS CROSSED THE RIO GRANDE INTO THE USA

From:  https://www.conservativereview.com/news/mexican-soldiers-detain-american-soldiers-u-s-soil-government-response/

Mexican soldiers detain American soldiers on U.S. soil. Government response: ?

 · April 22, 2019  
    Font Size A A A

ronniechua | Getty Images
The Mexican government is powerless to control the cartels at our border. But somehow when it comes to belligerently confronting our own soldiers on our own soil, the Mexicans seem to muster the personnel and temerity to defend their side of the border. Moreover, they apparently have the unbridled impudence to complain about armed American citizens defending our border, while they have permanently transformed our country in the worst way imaginable through their disrespect of our sovereignty. This is clearly no longer about immigration, but about a pure invasion that requires a military buildup.
On April 13, at around 2 p.m. Central Time, a group of five or six suspected Mexican soldiers approached an unmarked vehicle of two U.S. soldiers stationed at the border in El Paso County, Texas, and ordered them out of the vehicle. According to Newsweek, which obtained the “serious incident report,” the soldiers were in fact active duty members of B Battery, 1st Battalion, 37th Field Artillery Regiment, not from a National Guard unit. The Mexican soldiers disarmed one of the U.S. soldiers and placed his sideaerm in the U.S. vehicle.
While the soldiers were parked south of the border fence near Clint, Texas, they were north of the Rio Grande riverbed, which placed them “appropriately in U.S. territory,” according to Maj. Mark Lazane, a spokesman for NORTHCOM. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of Defense (DOD), after inquiring of the Mexican government, were informed that the Mexican soldiers thought that the Americans were south of the border. “Throughout the incident, the U.S. soldiers followed all established procedures and protocols,” according to NORTHCOM.
NORTHCOM confirmed that there are approximately 2,800 service members assigned to the border mission. “This includes approximately 1,200 on the Mobile Surveillance Camera mission, plus about 1,000 service members hardening ports of entry in Texas and New Mexico. There are approximately 200 personnel as part of a crisis response force, with the remainder being headquarters and logistics personnel supporting the mission.”
When I asked both NORTHCOM and the State Department if our government had conveyed our concerns to Mexico and asked for an apology, both departments declined to comment.
Zach Taylor, a retired 26-year veteran of the Border Patrol who has formed a group of retired border agents to better educate the public on the border, told CR that he is convinced these Mexican soldiers were making a political statement. “At the reported location the Rio Grande River is distinct and easily identified in relation to the actual international boundary,” asserted Taylor, who still lives near the border in Arizona. “That one of the supposed Mexican soldiers took one sidearm from an American and put it in the American vehicle is curious, as if the Mexicans knew exactly who they encountered, where they were encountered, and were simply making a statement. What the purpose of that statement was is open to broad speculation, but on the face of it, this was probably political – as in showing that to Mexico, borders mean nothing.” Taylor confirmed that he regularly saw this behavior during his time in the Border Patrol.
We have tens of thousands of soldiers stationed in other parts of the world fully equipped for war and with at least manageable rules of engagement. Why are the soldiers at our own border too few, so lightly armed, and seeking to “de-escalate a potentially volatile situation” of Mexican aggression rather than deterring it?
What is particularly disturbing about this incident is that one could defend Mexico’s powerless response to this border crisis and the robust cartel and smuggler activity as a lack of resources to secure its own border from non-state actors. But why is it that the Mexican government suddenly has the ability to cross into our own country and detain our own personnel, but is seemingly powerless to deal with the cartels on its own side of the border?
What is also disturbing is the lackluster response from our own government, juxtaposed to its aggressive posture against private militia groups seeking to secure our border. Our government refuses to hold the line at the border and defend the ranches from cartel activity by placing the military there in meaningful numbers and with a heavy deterrent. They certainly are not deterring the migrants. Just last week, 12,500 more illegals were released into our country with no regard for the public charge, safety concerns, or potential contagious diseases. That is literally the number one job of our federal government, as distinct from a state government. While nobody wants to see vigilantes patrolling our border, they are clearly not the problem, but a symptom of the lack of government control over our sovereignty.
Yet it appears that the FBI has arrested a leader of one New Mexico militia that recently detained a group of illegal immigrants until Border Patrol was able to get to the scene. On Saturday, the FBI arrested Larry Hopkins, the “national commander” of the United Constitutional Patriots, on firearms charges two days after the ACLU complained about the presence of this group at Sunland Park, New Mexico. According to Reuters, this is a group of mainly military veterans who have detained as many as 5,600 aliens until Border Patrol was able to arrive.
Why is it that our government, which appears unable or unwilling to deal with Mexican aggression, the cartels, or illegal immigration, is suddenly pursuing a zero-tolerance policy for American militias seeking to do a job the federal government won’t do? Failing to secure our borders is a breach of the social contract of government, as laid out in the Declaration of Independence, and if there is anything that would ever justify the citizenry to take action, it is this issue. It’s not something we want to see, but where is our own government in dealing with the problem?
Mexico’s Foreign Relations Ministry expressed its “deep concern” that these militia groups would “drive human rights abuses of people who migrate or request asylum or refuge in the United States.” That’s a pretty rich statement from a government that evidently refuses to apologize for stepping on our soil and detaining our own soldiers.
It’s also self-evident from this statement that Mexico, rather than working with us to stop this bogus asylum-seeking, is helping encourage it.
The president would be wise to announce a buildup of the military in Texas and New Mexico and change the rules of engagement. He should also renegotiate NAFTA while making border and immigration issues the main sticking points.
If our government would only go after those violating our sovereignty with as much rigor as they do those American veterans trying to defend it, justifiably or not, this entire issue would go away. As Trump often says, either we are a country, or we are not.


Find out what the mainstream media won’t tell you about President Trump and his administration.
Sign up to get BlazeTV host Jon Miller’s free White House Brief delivered right to your inbox once a day.
* indicates required

23 October 2018

ARMY OF 14K ILLEGALS POISED TO INVADE THE USA: WILL TRUMP BLINK?




THESE ARE NOT MIGRANTS OR AN IMMIGRANT CARAVAN.  IT'S AN ARMY OF INVADERS PUSHING ITS WAY INTO THE UNITED STATES WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE US GOVERNMENT OR ITS PEOPLE.  THEIR MENTALITY IS, "LIKE IT OR NOT, WE'RE COMING IN.  YOU BETTER FEED, HOUSE, AND MEDICATE US." 

IF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION BLINKS, THEN THAT'S THE END OF THE UNITED STATES AS WE KNOW IT.  SO FAR, THE ADMINISTRATION IS MAKING ALL THE RIGHT NOISES.  BUT, WITH TRUMP, ONE NEVER KNOWS.

15 November 2016

3,000,000 ILLEGAL ALIEN VOTES

THE BIG STORY COMING OUT OF THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IS THAT OVER THREE MILLION ILLEGAL ALIENS VOTED.  IN 2012, WE USED TO JOKE THAT HAD ROMNEY RECEIVED 50% OF THE ILLEGAL ALIEN VOTES, HE WOULD HAVE WON THE PRESIDENCY.

BUT THIS IS NO LAUGHING MATTER.  ILLEGAL ALIEN VOTES DILUTE OURS, THUS EFFECTIVELY DISENFRANCHISING AMERICAN CITIZENS.  YET, TIME AND AGAIN, ANY ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS ILLEGAL VOTING -- LIKE, GASP, REQUIRING A PICTURE ID -- IS CALLED RACIST.

EVEN THIRD WORLD AFRICAN COUNTRIES HAVE EASY ACCESS TO PHOTO IDS.  SADLY, IN FOURTH WORLD AMERICA, A PICTURE ID IS (PUTATIVELY) HARD TO COME BY...

26 August 2015

DOWN WITH RACIST JEB BUSH

TAKING A WHIPPING FROM THE DONALD, JEBIDYAH SPRINGFIELD BUSH WAS HISPANDERING FOR ILLEGAL ALIEN VOTES.  THAT'S FINE AND UNDERSTANDABLE.  YET, MUST HE THROW ASIANS AND ASIAN-AMERICANS UNDER THE BUS?!

Bush wrongly accused Asians of being the parents of anchor babies.  Jebidyah is so fucking dumb.  Hispanics make up 80% of legal and illegal immigrants into this country.  By that very fact alone, they would constitute the VAST majority of anchor babies. What's more, they don't pay for the births of these anchor/anvil babies.  The American taxpayers (i.e., Asian-Americans) bear the birthing and caring costs of these deadbeats.

Asian anchor babies, on the other hand, are born in private clinics paid for by their parents or grandparents.

SO WE SHOUT, "DOWN WITH RACIST JEBIDYAH BUSH!"

27 June 2014

MEXICO INVADES USA



ACCORDING TO TODAY'S DRUDGE REPORT, MEXICAN MILITARY HELICOPTERS CROSSED INTO THE UNITED STATES IN ORDER TO SHOOT AT AMERICAN BORDER CONTROL AGENTS...AMERICAN AGENTS RETURNED FIRE WITH SLINGSHOTS!

08 June 2014

Come One, Come All

THE OBAMA ADMIN HAS BASICALLY BLOWN THE SOUTHERN BORDERS WIDE OPEN FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.  

IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF ILLEGAL ALIENS, PARTICULARLY THE YOUNG, HAVE POURED ACROSS THE SOUTHERN U.S. BORDERS WITH IMPUNITY.

IN THE COMING MONTHS AND YEARS, PROPERTY CRIMES ARE LIKELY TO SURGE. WHILE TAX-PAYING AMERICANS ARE HARD AT WORK DURING THE DAY, THEIR PROPERTIES ARE BEING MOLESTED BY LOAFERS.

WAY TO GO, USA!

08 March 2014

TYRANNY OF THE STUPID


UNQUALIFIED BLACKS AND HISPANICS ARE ALREADY GETTING FREE RIDES IN CALIFORNIA'S TOP PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES.  NOW SENATE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT 5 (SCA-5), WRITTEN BY ILLEGAL ALIENS, PROPOSES TO OPEN THE FLOOD GATES FOR THESE DUMBASSES AT THE EXPENSE OF HIGHLY TALENTED AND HARD-WORKING ASIAN-AMERICANS.

SCA-5 ALSO HAS HORRIFIC IMPLICATIONS FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC.  HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE OPERATED ON BY LESS QUALIFIED DOCTORS?

*********************************************************************
FROM THE SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST (hk)

Asian Americans furious at proposal allowing California colleges to choose students by race

Blacks and Hispanics under-represented in California colleges - but families fear bias if ban on selection by factors including race is lifted
PUBLISHED : Thursday, 06 March, 2014, 9:13pm
UPDATED : Saturday, 08 March, 2014, 2:37pm
Hundreds of Asian American families flocked to a community hall in northern California to learn about a state law that many fear would discriminate against their children in college admission because of their race.
"No! No! No!" the crowd chanted outside the hall in Cupertino, an affluent small city in the heart of Silicon Valley, responding to "SCA 5" shouted from a megaphone.
SCA 5 is a state constitutional amendment that seeks to lift the ban on the use of race, sex, colour, ethnicity or national origin in admission at California's public universities and colleges.
It was approved by the state senate last month but still needs assembly approval before it goes to a referendum.
I have not seen Chinese or Asian Americans get so involved in a very long time
ALBERT WANG, NON-PROFIT ORGANISATION LEADER
Proponents of SCA 5 hope it will make it easier for under-represented minorities, such as black and Hispanic students, to secure enrolment. But Asian communities fear that this will come at their expense.
"I am so appalled to see this bill was proposed," said Xiaofei Zhang, the father of a girl in 10th grade, after the amendment was debated in Cupertino town hall.
"My wife and I spend the majority of our salaries on our daughter's education so that she can take piano lessons and learn all the skills that will get her to better universities one day.
"College admission should be solely based on merit. SCA 5 reverses the history and that's not American."
Asian students dominate admissions to a level that far outstrips their ethnic representation in California's population.
They made up 36 per cent of the University of California's admissions last year, despite making up only about 14 per cent of the wider population.
In contrast, blacks made up 4 per cent of admissions compared to 7 per cent of the population.
SCA 5 would go to a referendum in November if it passes the State Assembly.
The campaign against the amendment started online with about 100,000 signing petitions. The "No" campaign expanded to town hall meetings and the lobbying of state assembly members.
Protesters at a rally against the proposed college admissions amendment outside the town hall in Cupertino, California. Photo: Guisel Contreras"I have not seen Chinese or Asian Americans get so involved in a very long time," said Albert Wang, a non-profit organisation leader who has been campaigning on civic issues for 25 years.
"For Chinese parents it's almost their only purpose to have their kids go to great universities, so it really touches a nerve with everyone," Wang said, after moderating at an SCA 5 debate.
A Chinese American mother with two children, one of them in high school, said: "This proposal is very unfair to Asian Americans.
"We emigrated to this country in the hope that we can reach our goals by our hard work, but not get judged by our race.
"SCA 5 is also bad for America because it will hurt the competitiveness of this country."
It's not only Chinese Americans who are opposed to SCA 5. About 200 kilometres north of Cupertino in Sacramento, Kajian Moorthy, 16, is decidedly uneasy after learning about the proposal.
"It was scary for me," said the Mira Loma High School junior whose parents migrated from Sri Lanka. "My college applications are around the corner and I am worried about consequences."
Moorthy said he has had to study hard to become one of the top students in his school, and aims to go to the University of California (UC) Berkeley or UCLA (Los Angeles).
He is already enrolled in college-level classes, which he hopes will help him gain admission to his dream school. To boost his extracurricular portfolio, Moorthy also takes part in an after-school debating team.
"It would be unfair if I work hard but don't get anything in return," he complained. "Others don't work hard, but get special treatment."
Experts say a lack of resources for under-represented minority students has led to unfairness.
They warn that without special treatment, minorities would suffer further marginalisation and the overall education system would be compromised by a lack of diversity. "Black and Latino students are very disproportionately consigned to the poorest performing schools in the state," said Patricia Gandara, professor of education at UCLA.
"Many of their schools do not have consistent leadership or well qualified teachers."
Gandara said there was a 21 percentage point gap between under-represented minorities in California's high school graduating classes and in first-year college enrolment.
Deborah Santiago, chief operating officer of Excelencia in Education, a Washington-based non-profit group focused on advancing equality in higher education, said the impact of SCA 5 "would be minimal in terms of increased participation in the short run, because programmes would have to be developed that meet the strict scrutiny of the Supreme Court rulings on the use of race and ethnicity".
And Henry Der, former superintendent of Public Instructions with California's Department of Education, said: "People jumped to conclusions that the bill is going to impose a quota against Chinese students. The word quota does not exist in the bill nor does the issue of racial parity."
He said the ultimate impact of SCA 5 was "hard to predict".

RELATED TOPICS

Comments



gpkoo

The flaw in the practice of affirmative action in that it hopes to salve the society's collective guilty conscience for putting blacks and Hispanics through terrible K-12 education by admitting a few otherwise not qualified students into top tier colleges. Problem is that these kids are likely to fail because they have not been properly prepared during the first 12 years of their education.
To make sure they don't fail in college, it will be necessary to sign them to bogus classes and given "A" and "B" for lectures not given and examinations not taken and courses not existing. The American universities do that now but it's been for star athletes on their way to professional careers where academic competence counts for very little.

Macro75

Actually affirmative action is intended to support diversity, not minorities specifically. The courts have decided that there is a state interest in diversity at universities, especially state schools, and that in making admissions decisions schools can use race as one factor among many in making admissions decisions. They are not allowed to have quotas, but in effect that is where they seem to be heading in CA. This will be challenged in higher courts, and ironically could eventually undo years of effort to advance opportunities for qualified minority students. The schools in question in CA are majority Asian, from what I have read. Or at least Asian American students are over-represented in a strict sense. This circumstance seems specific to Southern California, but is increasingly true at other schools popular with certain demographics. One can love or hate affirmative action (I am not a big supporter because it is and has been a poor fix for the social imbalances it is supposed to redress), but it is not as a simple a legal issue as is presented in much of the debate and discussion.

ejmciii

I guess that it was ok when the discrimination was in favor of Asian students and against Caucasians but now it is bad because Asians are perceived as not needing affirmative action. Gotta love how fast affirmative action becomes bad when it does not benefit you any more.

guy.pant

Where have you been? Affirmative action has restricted Asian students for a long time - it didn't just happen overnight.

matt.lee.1485

How is it presently affirmative action when there is ban on the use of race, sex, colour, ethnicity or national origin in admission?

TigerJ

By definition, affirmative action is meant to support minorities. So yes, Asians do deserve it in the US, although they are actually getting the exact opposite. It's only right they protest.