God Save America

By Alan Caruba

It’s an issue that will dominate the elections in 2008. It is illegal immigration, but there was scarce attention paid during the debates leading up to the Iowa caucuses. The candidate that promises to put a stop to it will be the candidate that wins. The party that temporizes will be the party that fails.

The conflict in Iraq has siphoned the energy to pay attention to Mexico, but as that battlefront recedes, the eyes of voters will be on our southern border. A war is being fought there. Some may argue that no such war has been authorized or declared, but a full-scale invasion has been taking place for years, resulting in an estimated one tenth of all Mexicans presently living in the United States.

They are not pilgrims. They are parasites.

The drain on our economy is something that, while well documented, has not received sufficient attention from the mainstream media. After all, we are “neighbors” with Mexico, so how could they hardly be considered an invading horde costing Americans billions of dollars every year?

Good neighbors don’t do that kind of thing, but Mexico is not a good neighbor.

Mexico is working very hard to provide the seaports for goods shipped more cheaply there than to American ports. They would then be transported via a super highway from the Texas-Mexico border to a Mexico owned and operated customs port in Kansas. Presently, some 40% of all imported goods arrive in the U.S. via the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Putting American dockworkers in the unemployment lines and harming our trucking industry is of little concern to our “neighbor” to the south.

Perhaps, however, the real war receiving scant attention is the one being conducted by Mexican drug lords and their cartels. At present most of the war is being fought in Mexico and, as Terence Jeffrey, the editor-in-chief of CNSnews, recently pointed out, one episode was fought in Cananea. Where’s that? “It is almost in Arizona.” Cananea is about 20 miles south of the U.S. border in Mexico. “The nearest town of any size is Nogales, Arizona and the nearest big city is Tucson. Cananea is a war zone.

How long before that shooting war takes place in the streets of American cities? Not long at all. In June 2007, World Net Daily reported that, “The ultra-violent, U.S.-trained elite, Mexican paramilitary commandos known as the ‘Zetas’, responsible for hundreds of murders along the border this year, have expanded their enforcement efforts on behalf of a drug cartel by setting up trafficking routes in six U.S. states.” Texas law enforcement officials report that the Zetas “have been active in the Dallas area since 2003.”

The war is all about the provision of huge amounts of heroin, cocaine, marijuana, and methamphetamine into the U.S. market.

Click to read more …

By Jim Kouri

To address concerns about unemployed or underemployed Soviet-era weapons scientists in Russia and other former Soviet Bloc nations, the US Department of Energy established the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention or IPP program in 1994. The general idea was to engage former Soviet weapons scientists in nonmilitary work in the short term and create private sector jobs for these scientists in the long term.

To address this issue, the US Congress requested that analysts from the Government Accountability Office analyze DOE policies, plans, and budgets. Analysts also interviewed key program officials and representatives from 22 Russian and Ukrainian institutes.

According to the GAO’s initial report, the DOE has overstated accomplishments for the 2 critical measures it uses to assess the IPP program’s progress and performance — the number of scientists receiving DOE support and the number of long-term, private sector jobs created.

First, although DOE claims to have engaged over 16,770 scientists in Russia and other countries, this total includes both scientists with and without weapons-related experience.

The GAO’s analysis of 97 IPP projects involving about 6,450 scientists showed that more than half did not claim to possess any weapons-related experience. In addition, officials from 10 Russian and Ukrainian institutes told GAO analysts that the IPP program helps them attract, recruit, and retain younger scientists who might otherwise emigrate to the United States or other western countries and contributes to the continued operation of their facilities.

This is contrary to the original intent of the program, which was to reduce the proliferation risk posed by Soviet-era weapons scientists.

Second, although DOE asserts that the IPP program helped create 2,790 long-term, private sector jobs for former weapons scientists, the credibility of this number is uncertain because DOE relies on "good-faith" reporting from US industry partners and foreign institutes on the number of jobs created and does not independently verify the number of jobs reported to have been created.

Click to read more …

By Daniel Clark

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has decided to postpone the construction of an American missile defense base in his country, a move that news reports have attributed to his being less pro-American than his predecessor, Jaroslaw Kaczynski. Tusk’s reason for this change in policy, however, does not indicate an erosion of the Poles’ loyalty to their American allies. Rather, it is based on their concerns about America’s wavering dedication to its own missile defense project.

Tusk wants to delay the deployment of the missile shield until after this year’s U.S. presidential election, and it’s hard to argue with his judgment. Everybody knows that if the Democrats win the presidency, they will mothball our missile defense plan, just as Bill Clinton did for the entire eight years of his administration. Russia, the powerful and cantankerous neighbor to Poland’s east, has protested the U.S. missile shield from the outset. If Tusk proceeds with the project, only to see it abandoned by our next president, he’ll have antagonized the Kremlin for no good reason.

It’s not as if the Poles would have a hard time believing that the Democrats would hang them out to dry. That’s because Poland has been among our most trusted allies in Iraq – you know, the ones that John Kerry slandered as "the coalition of the bribed and coerced." Those allies can’t help but be leery of Kerry’s party, members of which have threatened to cut off funding for the war, demanded a "redeployment" to Okinawa, and refused to accept the delivery of good news from General Petraeus.

With the prospect of a Democrat victory in November, Poland risks angering not only Russia, but also a newly elected, Democrat-controlled government here in the U.S.

The real story out of Poland, then, is that the Democrats have succeeded in deterring an ally from helping the United States. This is important not only insofar as their obstruction of our missile defenses are concerned, but also in serving as a parallel to their effect on another important American ally – the people of Iraq.

Click to read more …

Rep. Heath Shuler’s (D-N.C.)  introduced last November,  H.R. 4088 Bi-Partisan, SAVE Act (Secure America with Verification Enforcement. Presently, this bill has 136 co-sponsors representing 26 states. Shortly thereafter, two versions of H.R. 4088 Bi-Partisan, SAVE Act were introduced in the US Senate. The Pryor/Landrieu bill is S. 2368 and Sen. Vitter's bill is S. 2366.

The following is the November 6, 2007  press release from Rep. Heath Shuler’s office.
_______________________________________________________

SAVE Act Secures America’s Borders, Provides Employers with Tools to Verify Work Eligibility, and Enforces Current Laws

Washington, D.C. – Representative Heath Shuler was joined by over eighty other members of Congress today to introduce the Secure America through Verification and Enforcement (SAVE) Act. The bipartisan group of lawmakers came together to support what they called “commonsense” immigration legislation.

“Today Democrats and Republicans are joining together, putting politics aside and supporting a commonsense bill that is for the good of America,” Rep. Shuler said.

Rep. Shuler’s SAVE Act is 3-part plan to drastically reduce illegal immigration — a strict emphasis on border security, employer verification, and interior enforcement.

“Illegal immigration is one of the most pressing issues facing America today. It is estimated that over 12 million people are currently here illegally, and thousands more are coming in every week,” said Rep. Shuler. “Americans are very upset at their government for not taking action, and they have a right to be. ”

The SAVE Act addresses border security by increasing manpower and making needed technological and infrastructure improvements on America’s northern and southern borders, including 8,000 new Border Patrol Agents and provides the infrastructure they need to be effective.

It expands the E-Verify program to provide all employers with the tools they need to ensure that their employees are here legally. The E-Verify program is a simple, effective, and free program that allows employers to efficiently and quickly ensure that the people they hire are legally allowed to work in the U.S. The program will be phased-in over four years, beginning with the federal government, federal contractors, and employers with over 250 employees. Smaller businesses would begin using the system in a graduated manner.

The SAVE Act also provides the tools, resources and infrastructure necessary to enforce existing federal laws and penalize offenders. It increases the investigative abilities of Immigration and Customs Enforcement with more agents and more training. Additionally, it provides assistance for state and local law enforcement.

“I am introducing this legislation because I have the ability to reach across the aisle and bring both sides together to reach a commonsense solution. This is what the people of Western North Carolina want and what the American people want,” Rep. Shuler concluded.

The SAVE Act has original cosponsors from 26 states.

Source: Numbers USA. Visit their website to get more info on the illegal immigration troubling our country.

By Alan Caruba

It’s an issue that will dominate the elections in 2008. It is illegal immigration, but there was scarce attention paid during the debates leading up to the Iowa caucuses. The candidate that promises to put a stop to it will be the candidate that wins. The party that temporizes will be the party that fails.

The conflict in Iraq has siphoned the energy to pay attention to Mexico, but as that battlefront recedes, the eyes of voters will be on our southern border. A war is being fought there. Some may argue that no such war has been authorized or declared, but a full-scale invasion has been taking place for years, resulting in an estimated one tenth of all Mexicans presently living in the United States.

They are not pilgrims. They are parasites.

The drain on our economy is something that, while well documented, has not received sufficient attention from the mainstream media. After all, we are “neighbors” with Mexico, so how could they hardly be considered an invading horde costing Americans billions of dollars every year?

Good neighbors don’t do that kind of thing, but Mexico is not a good neighbor.

Mexico is working very hard to provide the seaports for goods shipped more cheaply there than to American ports. They would then be transported via a super highway from the Texas-Mexico border to a Mexico owned and operated customs port in Kansas. Presently, some 40% of all imported goods arrive in the U.S. via the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Putting American dockworkers in the unemployment lines and harming our trucking industry is of little concern to our “neighbor” to the south.

Perhaps, however, the real war receiving scant attention is the one being conducted by Mexican drug lords and their cartels. At present most of the war is being fought in Mexico and, as Terence Jeffrey, the editor-in-chief of CNSnews, recently pointed out, one episode was fought in Cananea. Where’s that? “It is almost in Arizona.” Cananea is about 20 miles south of the U.S. border in Mexico. “The nearest town of any size is Nogales, Arizona and the nearest big city is Tucson. Cananea is a war zone.

How long before that shooting war takes place in the streets of American cities? Not long at all. In June 2007, World Net Daily reported that, “The ultra-violent, U.S.-trained elite, Mexican paramilitary commandos known as the ‘Zetas’, responsible for hundreds of murders along the border this year, have expanded their enforcement efforts on behalf of a drug cartel by setting up trafficking routes in six U.S. states.” Texas law enforcement officials report that the Zetas “have been active in the Dallas area since 2003.”

The war is all about the provision of huge amounts of heroin, cocaine, marijuana, and methamphetamine into the U.S. market.

Click to read more …

By Jim Kouri

In the United States, Tuberculosis infection and disease occur most often among people born in areas of the world where TB is common, such as Asia, Africa, and Latin America. In most cases, these foreign-born persons become exposed to and infected in their country of birth and bring the contagious disease into the US.

Of all TB cases reported to the Centers for Disease Control in 1997 — the last year studied — 39% were in foreign-born persons. This is an increase from 1986, when 22% of cases were in foreign-born persons. Tuberculosis case rates were seven times greater in the foreign-born compared with the US-born population.

Also, foreign-born individuals now represent 46 percent of all tuberculosis cases reported in the United States compared to 27 percent of cases eight years ago. The CDC is currently processing new data on the illegal alien-TB connection.

TB cases come from Mexico, Philippines, and Vietnam, by and large. All people who apply for immigration and refugee status are screened for TB disease before coming to the United States. Immigrants with TB disease who are infectious at the time of screening are required to receive treatment before they are allowed entry into the United States.

However, the majority of those entering the US are illegal aliens who undergo no physical exams nor do they undergo treatment for their diseases.

Click to read more …

by Robert E. Meyer

I recently heard about a statement from a discussion that allegedly occurred between an Islamic student attending an American university, and a traditional America student. The following statement may well be a fictitious conversation based in urban legend, but it is an accurate anecdote of the real threat America faces from the ideology of radical Islamic extremism. The Islamic student apparently stated resolutely, "Because of your Democracy we will invade you. Because of my religion we will dominate you." It rings as almost a parallel to the prophetic proclamation of Nikita Kruschev, who uttered from an Iowa cornfield during his excursion of the U.S., "we will bury you."

Many liberals, as well as certain of my conservative brethren, have sounded the alarm about the perils to freedom that come from surveillance programs initiated or expanded under the Patriot Act by the current administration. Yet, one has to wonder how we could have or will continue to root out existing internal security threats without them? Such regulation occupies a thankless status. I often have said to colleagues in regards to small, consistent pay increases in my profession: "You hardly notice the difference when you get your raises, but you would sure notice if you weren't getting them." I would suggest something similar could be said regarding onerous security measures. You don't notice that they do any good, but I suspect you would notice something bad were they not in place. That sort of condition lends itself to pejorative consideration.

Imagine a different scenario. You pick up a major newspaper on September 12th, 2001. On page A-17 is a short news story about how several small groups of young Saudi males carrying box cutters, were stopped by security at JFK and Logan International Airports.

Click to read more …

By Alan Caruba

In a month, August 20 and 21, the leaders of the United States, Canada, and Mexico will sit down together in Montebello, Quebec to discuss making the borders between these three nations disappear. They will discuss progress on a vast highway project passing through America to link Mexico with Canada.

So far, no one has asked the citizens of these three nations whether they want to do this. It is not up for a vote in Congress and, indeed, Congress has no supervision over the gnomes in the U.S. Department of Commerce who are busily “harmonizing” the laws under the auspices of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP).

This, we’re told, is not a treaty so Congress has no constitutional oversight obligation. I guess it’s more like a nice big handshake between the presidents and prime minister of these three nations who, let’s face it, just know better than the rest of us. I mean, do Canadians really think they’re in charge of Canada? Americans should have a say about programs affecting America? Or has anyone asked Mexicans if they want to be part of some “harmonized” configuration not unlike the European Union?

Last time I checked, the European Union lacked a constitution because some of its member states, notably France, had rejected the one that was offered.

Click to read more …

By Alan Caruba

Here’s one of those statistics that sums up everything you need to know about America’s immigration crisis. The May 14 edition of US News & World Report had a small item noting that, “Mexico has lost more people to migration to the United States than to death since 2000.”

“An average of 577,000 people moved to the United States annually during the 2000-2005 period, while 495,000 people died in Mexico.” The U.S. agency providing this data estimates that about 11 million Mexicans are living, legally or not, in the United States.

This is not about disliking Mexicans. Many have come here legally, become citizens, and have risen in our society to contribute in business, academics, and government. This is about saving America from a wholesale and entirely illegal invasion, and its consequences.

Mexico has an entirely different view of people who would move there. The Center for Security Policy points out that Mexico prohibits foreigners from owning land within 100 kilometers of the Mexico border and within 50 kilometers of the Mexican coastland, prime real estate. Mexican law permits the government to revoke the naturalized citizenship of anyone who chooses to live in his country of origin more than five years.

Click to read more …

by Christopher Adamo

It is neither alarmist nor prophetic to state with grim certainty that America will, in the not too distant future, suffer yet another major Islamist attack, possibly dwarfing the enormity of 9-11. Since shortly after that event, forces both within our nation and abroad have diligently sought to undermine American resolve to appropriately respond to the enemy. As a result, that enemy now perceives a growing and broadening opportunity to eventually hit us again.

Barring a nearly miraculous rebirth of American determination to avert that possibility (and any remnants of such determination are rapidly dissipating from the mainstream of society), the Islamists will, sooner or later, fall upon a feasible occasion to strike, and they will use it.

Click to read more …