Thursday, May 31, 2007
This, my friend, is the worst that can happen. Actually it's a very calm lecture on exactly what America faces - if we are going to continue on the same course we have been of massive and massively increasing immigration - legal and illegal.
It's called "Immigration by the Numbers" and is by Roy Beck from NumbersUSA.
Watch it now and understand!
The patient was identified as Andrew Speaker, a 31-year-old personal injury lawyer (FIGURES...) who returned last week from his wedding and honeymoon trip through Italy, the Greek isles and other spots in Europe. His new father-in-law, Robert C. Cooksey, is a CDC microbiologist whose specialty is TB and other bacteria (COINCIDENCE???).
Cooksey would not comment on whether he reported his son-in-law to federal health authorities. Nor did the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention explain how the case came to their attention. However, Cooksey said that neither he nor his CDC laboratory was the source of his son-in-law's TB.Speaker is now under quarantine at a hospital in Denver. He is the first infected person to be quarantined by the U.S. government since 1963.
The disclosure that the patient is a lawyer - and specifically a personal injury lawyer - outraged many people on the Internet and elsewhere. Some travelers who flew on the same planes with Speaker angrily accused him of selfishly putting hundreds of people's lives in danger.
"It's still very scary," 21-year-old Laney Wiggins, one of more than two dozen University of South Carolina-Aiken students who are getting skin tests for TB. "That is an outrageous number of people that he was very reckless with their health. It's not fair. It's selfish."
Speaker said in a newspaper interview that he knew he had TB when he flew from Atlanta to Europe in mid-May for his wedding and honeymoon, but that he did not find out until he was already in Rome that it was an extensively drug-resistant strain considered especially dangerous (OH... WELL... THAT'S DIFFERENT...).
Despite warnings from federal health officials not to board another long flight, he flew home for treatment, fearing he wouldn't survive if he didn't reach the U.S., he said. He said he tried to sneak home by way of Canada instead of flying directly into the U.S.
...and more on daddy-in-law...
Speaker's father-in-law has worked at the CDC for 32 years and is in the Division of Tuberculosis Elimination, where he works with TB and other organisms. He has co-authored papers on diabetes, TB and other infectious diseases.
"As part of my job, I am regularly tested for TB. I do not have TB, nor have I ever had TB," he said in a statement. "My son-in-law's TB did not originate from myself or the CDC's labs, which operate under the highest levels of biosecurity."... I dunno... it seems awfully coincidental...
Health officials in North America and Europe are now trying to track down about 80 passengers who sat near him on his two trans-Atlantic flights, and they want passenger lists from four shorter flights he took while in Europe.
However, other passengers are not considered at high risk of infection because tests indicated the amount of TB bacteria in Speaker was low, said Dr. Martin Cetron, director of the CDC's division of global migration and quarantine.
Health law experts said Speaker could be sued if others contract TB.
"There are a number of cases that say a person who negligently transmits an infectious disease could be held liable," said Lawrence Gostin, a public health law expert at Georgetown University. "So long as he knew it was infectious, and knew about the appropriate behavior but failed to comply, he could be held liable."It's just crazy what a huge risk this guy took with other people's lives. It shows a total disregard for other's lives and a pure selfishness that we Americans, unfortunately, seem to excel at.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Hundreds of Muni supervisors and midlevel managers will receive annual cash incentives for regular job attendance under a proposed contract with the employees’ union and the agency.
The financial incentives are meant to reward managers and supervisors who already have acceptable attendance records — and to encourage others to follow suit, officials said.
The workers, represented by Transport Workers Union Local 200, would receive a $350 annual bonus if they work at least 1,880 hours a year, or about 36 hours a week in a 52-week year. About one-third of the 270 employees would currently qualify for the payment, officials said.
Absenteeism among midlevel managers and supervisors is not a huge problem, said human resources director Diana Buchbinder, “but there still is an issue.”
The incentive program on the table is part of a proposed 74-page contract between the Municipal Transportation Agency and the union that would start July 1 and run through June 30, 2009.
In addition to the attendance program, the contract includes 11 paid holidays, five additional floating holidays and accrued vacation time that starts at two weeks for a first-year employee. Employees who use only 40 hours of sick leave during one year can turn floating holidays into cash.
The union has not approved the contract, which includes a 2 percent salary increase in April 2008 and a 3.75 percent salary increase in April 2009. Union president Glenda Lavigne said the union asked for 8 percent over the two-year period.
After the rocky opening of the T-Third metro line in early April, Muni officials have been open about attempts to solve employee-related problems within the agency.
There are about 240 vehicle operators out on long-term leave. Another 16.5 percent of drivers are absent each weekday. A Board of Supervisors Budget Analyst report from the mid-1990s showed an average of 8.6 percent unscheduled absences among street supervisors and central control dispatchers during four randomly selected pay periods.
Muni human-resource officials have estimated that one-third of the 270 employees would qualify for the financial incentive the first year, costing Muni about $60,000. Under the terms of the contract, there must be a 5 percent increase in the number of eligible employees for the program to continue.
While the union has filed an unfair labor practices lawsuit against Muni with regards to the contract, the board of directors is expected to vote on the contract in late June.MUNI is one of the most bloated unions in America. With "incentives" like these, is it any wonder why no one ever seems to be working. Why the hell should they? But, of course, Socialist S.F. will never do anything about it, because unions can do no wrong... in fact, some do nothing at all...
Here's the SFExaminer story
During my conversion from "San Francisco Liberal" to conservative, that is the one thing that has remained constant. I'm amazed that the Socialists - who have been railing against Bush for years - are suddenly in bed with him on immigration.
05-30) 04:00 PDT Glynco, Ga. -- President Bush cranked up his campaign for immigration reform Tuesday, accusing detractors of unfairly picking apart a compromise bill and of denouncing the legislation without reading it (LIKE HE READ IT?).
The president used his most forceful language yet in support of the Senate bill, which would establish a new point system for awarding green cards and offer legal status to many (ACTUALLY "ALL") illegal workers already in the country.
"The first step to comprehensive reform must be to enforce immigration laws at the borders and at work sites across America (HAHAHA - THAT'S REALLY FUNNY, GEORGE! CONSIDERING YOU'RE THE SAME DOUCHEBAG THAT HAS BEEN WITH-HOLDING ENFORCEMENT TO USE AS A BARGAINING CHIP FOR YOUR AMNESTY! FUCKING DOUCHE). And this is what this bill does," Bush said at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco. "For the skeptics who say (RIGHTFULLY) that we're not concerned about border security or workplace enforcement, they need to read the bill."
Bush accused conservative opponents of the bill of engaging in "empty political rhetoric."
"I know there are some people out there hollering and saying, 'Kick them out.' That is simply unrealistic. It won't work," the president said. "If you want to scare the American people, what you say is, the bill is an amnesty bill. It's not an amnesty bill (YES IT IS). That's empty political rhetoric, trying to frighten our fellow citizens (LIKE YOU CARE ABOUT CITIZENS YOU FUCKING CHIMP)."
Under the deal struck this month between the White House and a bipartisan group of senators, workers seeking legal status would need to pay fines and back taxes and eventually VERY EVENTUALLY) demonstrate proficiency in English.
Border security also would need to be improved before other parts of the immigration package -- including a temporary worker program and legal status for some workers who are currently illegal -- can take effect.
One reason Bush chose to speak to law enforcement trainees at this federal site about 60 miles south of Savannah was to underscore his commitment to improved border controls (YEAH, RIGHT). The bill would increase the number of border agents to 20,000, add hundreds of miles of fencing and vehicle barriers, and build 105 more surveillance towers.
"A lot of Americans are skeptical about immigration reform primarily because they don't think the government can fix the problems," Bush said. "And my answer to the skeptics is ... give us a chance to fix this problem (YOU'VE HAD SIX YEARS AND ALL YOU'VE DONE IS FUCK IT UP). Don't try to kill this bill before it gets moving."
White House officials declined to say whether the president has made progress in persuading members of his own party to support the deal.
"I'm not going to get into nose counting right now," said White House spokesman Tony Snow. "We have been inviting folks to take a look. And I think the more they hear, the more they're going to be inclined to support it."
The immigration package survived several legislative challenges last week, its first on the floor of the Senate. The administration and other supporters say they are optimistic that the bill will be passed in the Senate with its central compromise intact: legal status for many (ALL) of those already in the country in return for shifting the emphasis in the (DISTANT) future away from family unification toward a more merit-based system.
The bill's fate in the House is less certain.
Last year, a comprehensive immigration reform package squeaked past the Senate only to die in the House. This year, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, has said the White House needs to deliver 70 Republican votes or the bill will not make it to the president's desk.
"I appreciate the Republicans and Democrats in the United States Senate ... who put politics aside and put courage first to work on a comprehensive bill," Bush said. "It takes a lot of courage in the face of some of the criticism in the political world to do what's right, not what's comfortable. And what's right is to fix this system now before it's too late."
What a prick!
One of the common whines you hear from the erase-the-borders crowd is that we've dealt with huge deluges of illegal immigrants before. But, may I point out that even back then we had mandatory health screenings in order to keep dangerous pathogens out of the country. What do we have now? Nothing! Absolutely nothing!
So get used to it... SARS, birdflu, XDR TB... can a return of smallpox be far behind?
Read about this asshole here
Here, thanks to NumbersUSA, are just a few major problems with the bill...
These Failures in the Bill Ensure that Illegal Immigration Will Continue After the Amnesty
You don't need to bother reading any of the talking points, myth/fact sheets and rebuttals from the White House that your Senators hand out, unless they address the following failures.
The reason? No matter what else the bill might have in it, if it doesn't address the failures listed below, there will continue to be massive illegal immigration in this country.
Failure #1: BUSH/KENNEDY BILL DOES NOT REQUIRE EXIT SYSTEM TO ENSURE AGAINST 'OVERSTAYED' ILLEGAL ALIENS IN FUTURE
If the tradeoff for giving legal status to 12-20 million illegal aliens is that this bill will ensure an end to illegal immigration in the future, the bill has to aggressively combat the problem of people entering the country legally on temporary visas and then failing to leave at the appointed time.
An estimated 40% of all illegal aliens came to this country legally on temporary visas as students, tourists and workers.
It was easy for them to stay because our government has no idea whether the millions of people entering for short-term visits each year ever leave.
The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act called for an automated entry/exit (or check-in/check-out) system that would record the arrival into and the departure from the United States of every alien. In theory, when someone failed to check out on time, the computer would flag the person's record so he could be apprehended the next time he came into contact with the government.
But the Clinton Administration and Bush Administration dragged their feet in implementing the exit portion of the system (US-VISIT is the entry portion). Last year, the Bush Administration just announced that it had no intention of implementing an exit system!
Not surprisingly, the Bush White House made sure that its Grand Compromise leaves out a requirement that a computerized exit system be in place and working before any new immigration programs can begin. This ensures that if this bill passes, we will continue to have hundreds of thousands of legal visitors becoming illegal aliens each year.
Failure #2: NO MONEY FOR ENFORCEMENT
Some of the relatives of the victims of the 9/11 attacks immediately pointed this out, noting that all the enforcement measures are subject to future appropriations.
The 9/11 Families for Secure America noted that Congress has been passing all kinds of enforcement measures through the years that never got implemented because the White House refuses to ask for funding and because the Congress routinely short-changes them.
Without appropriations, none of the talk about increased enforcement means much -- based on the track record of the last three Administrations (including the first Bush) of ignoring immigration laws.
Failure #3: AMNESTY HAPPENS BEFORE ENFORCEMENT
Of course, the White House says this is not true. They point out that the part of the amnesty that puts illegal aliens on the path to green cards and citizenship doesn't start until the enforcement triggers are met.
The triggers must be met before the Z-visas are given out to illegal aliens.
But the big hole in that argument is that illegal aliens get their legal status long before the z-visas. They get their "probationary" legal status, including a work permit and social security number, at the very beginning after the bill passes. If the z-visas are never offered (because the enforcement triggers aren't met), the bill would allow the now-legal aliens to work and live in the U.S. the rest of their lives under the probationary status.
Failure #4: ENFORCEMENT TRIGGERS ARE ABOUT PROCEDURE BUT NOT ABOUT RESULTS
The enforcement triggers are tied to starting an expanded foreign guest worker program and to extending the rewards of amnesty from lifetime residence to getting on a path to U.S. citizenship.
The triggers are all about process and nothing about results.
The bottom line for the American people is not that we want more enforcement but that we want less illegal immigration.
Without results, we couldn't care less how many Border Patrol or detention beds we have. What we care about is reports that instead of adding a net of 500,000 (official numbers) to our illegal population each year we are adding a net of 100,000 or preferably zero.
None of the triggers are tied to numbers of illegal aliens getting across our borders or overstaying their visas or absconding after a court orders them removed.
The triggers can be met without any reduction in future illegal immigration at all.
Rosemary Jenks writes:
So the triggers do NOT require that DHS has operational control of the border;
..... they do NOT require that DHS comply with the law and build all of the fence;
..... they do NOT require that DHS implement the exit system that would allow us to know if "guest workers" actually leave, even though it has been in the law since 1996;
..... they do NOT require work site enforcement;
..... and they do NOT require that DHS increase its apprehension rate or its alien absconder removal rate.
(Read Rosemary's short summary of S. 1348.
Your Senator(s) may be pushing the process triggers because he/she believes they would result in less illegal immigration. But given the insistence of the last three Presidents that law enforcement agents not aggressively use the laws at their disposals to stop the flow of illegal workers, why should any American trust a trigger that is not tied to results?
Without a results trigger, we are left entirely to the matter of trust.
The fact is that S. 1348 primarily gives Pres. Bush the power to do what the law already requires him to do or allows him to do but which he has refused to do for six years.
He has taken our border security hostage and now suggests that he might do these things that current law requires/allows if Congress will just pay him a ransom of amnesty and an expanded guest worker program.
As I said earlier, your Senator(s) may think paying the ransom is worth it if Bush really means it this time that he will obey the law. But there is virtually nothing in the bill that should give them or us any confidence.
The only effective triggers in this bill are connected to weapons aimed at the heads of American citizens.
For a great analysis of the weakness of these triggers, be sure to read Sen. Grassley's (R-Iowa) "Trigger" floor speech.
As a Senator who was hoodwinked by Sen. Kennedy (D-Mass.) in 1986 to support an amnesty in exchange for enforcement that never happened, Sen. Grassley is a man whom every Senator should consult before making the same kind of 20-year costly mistake.
WHAT ABOUT THE GOOD THINGS IN THE BILL
Although we do not have a clear indication that your Senator is switching his position in support of amnesty, it is possible he/she is thinking that they have saved the country immensely by:
Increasing annual legal immigration by 300,000 a year instead of by a million a year.
Eliminating chain migration categories 16 years from now -- after doubling the level of chain migration for the next 16 years. (See Rosemary Jenks' chart showing the annual increases in green cards and guest worker visas.)
Eliminating the visa lottery (55,000 a year).
Creating a more substantial system of workplace verification of employees, and seeking larger increases in enforcement tools.
There is no doubt that Senate negotiators have forced the White House and Sen. Kennedy to make some concessions. And there is no doubt that some things in the bill like the elimination of the lottery and the enhancement of workplace enforcement and the attempted elimination of chain migration are fine gestures.
But there was no reason to negotiate ransom for these things.
The Senators who claim they don't really like rewarding illegal aliens but had to do it to keep the rewards down forget that if they had all stood their ground, they could have added up to the 40 Senators it will take to kill the bill on a cloture vote.
The only reason the Bush/Kennedy Comprehensive Amnesty of any kind has a chance of getting through the Senate is because of Senators who are supporting the lesser of evils instead of stopping the evil.
It is not too late. They can all stop negotiating ransom with the hostage takers, stop this bill and begin working to fund enforcement and to force the Bush Administration to implement the laws on the books.
This is just sinister.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Pelosi - one of the principal architects of our out-of-control chain migration policies - finally chimed in on the new immigration giveaway, saying that it doesn't giveaway enough...
And how closely do you think these family ties are scrutinized - given our administration's total reluctance to enforce any aspect of our immigration law?
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is "not pleased" with the immigration bill now before the Senate and suggested Saturday that it needs major changes before she can support it.
"I agree that it's a good first step,'' the Democratic leader said after giving a commencement address at the University of San Francisco, "but I'm very concerned about what it says about family reunification.''
The long-awaited immigration measure, supported by President Bush and leading senators from both parties, eliminates the decades-old rule that sent the siblings and adult children of U.S. citizens and legal residents to the front of the immigration line.
Under a compromise sought by Senate Republicans, those family members would have to take their chances under a new immigration "point system" that gives preference to English-speakers with advanced degrees or specific job skills.
Family reunification will be a prime principle in any immigration bill that comes out of the House, Pelosi promised.
"A point system for unification undermines our family values that we espouse in our country," the San Francisco congresswoman said. "I don't know why we have to compromise on reunification of families, I really don't.''
Pelosi, as I said, is a principal architect of what the border busters call "family reunification," whereby someone who gets a green card can bring in their "family." And family, as it stands now, includes not just spouses and minor children, but adult children (and their spouse and children), brothers and sisters (and their spouses and children), and their parents. It is not uncommon that a single green card holder imports 20 or more members of their family. In some rare cases, that number is over 50! Virtually all of the folks in these extended families are poor and with little education, and a vast majority get some sort of benefits very soon after arrival.
Who would want to import millions and millions of poor people to get on welfare? A fucking Socialist, that's who. Someone who believes that a massive entitlement system is some form of "justice."
Even the Communist Chinese are envious!
Saturday, May 19, 2007
So I am now vowing not to post on SFGate. There are some reasonable people who post regularly but there are also some real idiots. And I don't have the time or energy to argue with them.
Friday, May 18, 2007
Mending Fences on Immigration
Friday, May 18, 2007
NOTHING LIKE it has been seen in the history of this republic: lawmakers from both sides of the immigration debate agreeing (MORE LIKE SURRENDERING) to legalize 12 million illegal immigrants in a single initiative (COMMONLY REFERRED TO BY THOSE WITHOUT AGENDAS AS AN 'AMNESTY').
The obstacle course laid out for those immigrants to become permanent residents -- let alone citizens -- seems unnecessarily tortuous (GOD FORBID THEY WOULD HAVE HAVE TO DISPLAY EVEN THE SLIGHTEST RESPECT FOR AMERICAN LAWS).
Yet this agreement vastly overshadows the last time Congress seriously grappled (AND FAILED MISERABLY) with the challenge of illegal migration -- the 1986 Immigration and Reform and Control Act, which provided a path toward citizenship for some 3 million illegal immigrants (AND OPENED THE FLOODGATES TO THE 12 MILLION NOW HERE).
This is one of the few instances where the reforms being proposed can be rightly described as (TREASONOUS) "comprehensive." The last occasion such a thoroughgoing overhaul of federal law has been attempted was when Congress ended welfare as we knew it a decade ago (AND SHIFTED THE RECIPIENTS FROM AMERICANS TO MEXICANS).
Our immigration system, which until now has been overwhelmingly based on the principle of "family unification," would begin to tilt toward awarding a larger number of visas to immigrants with job skills to offer. It would introduce a "point" system, such as the one in place in Canada and Australia. In about eight years, some 40 percent of all permanent-residence visas would be issued based on employment skills. That's triple the current number (BUT UNTIL THEN THE CURRENT SYSTEM, ALLOWING IMMIGRANTS TO BRING IN LARGE NUMBERS OF THEIR VERY EXTENDED FAMILIES WILL STILL BE IN PLACE AND PROBABLY ACCELERATED TO HISTORIC LEVELS).
At the same time, it is far too soon to declare "victory" (FOR MEXICO) on any of the agreement's provisions. Despite Tuesday's triumphant announcement, many of the details (OF OUR SURRENDER) are still being worked out.
As Demetrios Papademetriou, president of the Migration Policy Institute, and an influential player in the immigration debate for many years, pointed out, "As we all know, when it comes to immigration, the devil is in the details."
Some of those "details" include the temporary or guest-worker provisions of the agreement, which requires workers to return to their home countries after working here for just two years (A USELESS PROVISION THAT EVEN I FAIL TO SEE THE LOGIC BEHIND - I SUPPOSE THE CONSERVATIVES FEEL IT'S NECESSARY TO COUNTER THE DEMOCRATS' PLANS TO MAKE EVERY IMMIGRANT WORKER PERMANENT). They'd have to stay there for a full year before being allowed to return. The limitations on which family members would be eligible for permanent residence must also be scrutinized (AND COMPLETELY ELIMINATED, MAKING OUR SURRENDER TOTAL).
Other "details" are how the point system will be established -- and who will be the winners and losers under such a system (IT'S CLEAR WHO WILL BE THE LOSERS... AMERICAN WORKERS).
Another key detail will be how to craft the legislation so that it does not invite another cycle of illegal immigration, as occurred after the 1986 reform (WHY WOULD THE CHRONICLE CARE? INVITING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS HAS BEEN THEIR RAISON D'ETRE LATELY).
The details, however, should not obscure the central accomplishment, which was to figure out a way around the "amnesty" bogeyman (WHILE STILL PASSING AN AMNESTY) that has blocked meaningful immigration reform for most of the past decade (ACTUALLY, ONLY THE LAST 2 YEARS, WHEN IT BECAME TOO BIG A PROBLEM TO IGNORE ANY LONGER).
The agreement affirms a principle that has been at the core of America since its founding: that this is a nation of immigrants, regardless of where they came from or how they reached our shores (...AND HOW MANY LAWS THEY'VE BROKEN? IS THE CHRONICLE REALLY ADVOCATING ANARCHY HERE?)
Thursday, May 17, 2007
To keep abreast of just how bad this is going to get, click here for NumbersUSA's Congressional Immigration Action Center, where they have daily updates on the destruction of America.
Thanks a lot, Pelosi. Thanks a lot Reid. They'll be dancing in the streets in Mexico when this is all over with.
Read it here, if you've got the stomach...
Prengaman is a propagandist extraordinaire. I have to give him credit, few people can sell so much Leftist propaganda as "news."
MEXICA Mexica (Meh-shee-kah) is the original Nahuatl (the so-called Aztec language) way of pronouncing Mexican, Mexicano, and Chicano and Chicana. The Mexica was the last of our great Anahuac civilizations (1325 to 1521). Mexica is the only one of our cultures and civilizations which has enough surviving material from which we can reconstruct our Anahuac nation. The Mexica were victims of an ethnocide that left no one today who can authentically call themselves Mexica, much like in Italy there is no one who can authentically call themselves Roman. Therefore, the rest of us who have lost all of our civilization identity and culture or tribal identity and culture, and even those of us who have a civilization or tribal identity, can and should embrace Mexica identity as a collective identity for all of us that we use in order to reconstruct our Anahuac nation and as a means of Liberation. Mexica does not negate Maya or Huichol or Comanche or Shoshone or any of our other Nican Tlaca (Indigenous) civilizations or cultures. Mexica is our point of unity and our means of reconstructing all of our nation.
ANAHUAC Anahuac (Ah-nah-wak) is the true name of our nation. We are all part of the Anahuac civilization that gave us the Olmeca, Zapoteca, Teotihuacan-Toltec, Maya and Mexica civilizations. The Mexica part of our Anahuac heritage is how we can reconstruct ourselves as a Nican Tlaca (Indigenous) nation, as the Anahuac Nation. We have historic, cultural, linguistic, and racial factors that make us one Anahuac nation, which includes all of our civilizations and cultures. The Mexica heritage gives us a history, language, theology, and study base from which we can rebuild all of our Anahuac heritage. We are a beautiful mosaic of civilizations and cultures throughout this whole continent that Europeans call "America". But this is not "America", this is Anahuac.
NICAN TLACA Nican Tlaca is our Nahuatl (Mexica) language way of saying "We the people here", in reference to all of us who are Indigenous to Cemanahuac (what Europeans call "the Western Hemisphere") and more specific to Anahuac which is the northern part of Cemanahuac (which is falsely called "North America"). Nican Tlaca refers to all of the people of our race in the "Western Hemisphere". We are not Indians or indios because those are the people of a nation called India. We are also not "Native American" because we are not related to Amerigo Vespucci, nor do we accept the concept of "Native" because it is always used in a derogatory manner. Notice how there are no "Native" Europeans.
NOT MESTIZO Mestizo is a racist term imposed on us by the Europeans. Mestizo (Mixed-blood)as an identity denies us our full humanity, it enslaves us to the European world. Full-blood or Mixed-blood we are still Nican Tlaca. Being Mixed-blood (so-called Mestizo) does not stop us from being Nican Tlaca, no matter how "white" one looks. The shades and physical looks of our Mixed-blood people are just scars from the rape of our nation. The scars do not define us! Our history, our heritage, and our continent ARE what defines us.
"CENTRAL AMERICA" "Central America" was artificially created in 1823. Before that date we were all part of Anahuac. Anahuac includes Mexico, "Central America", Canada and the so-called U.S. We are not "Central Americans", therefore we use that term it quotes to reject it; while at the same time we know that most of our people are ignorant to its racist and colonial terms and that is the only way that they will know what we are talking about. Much like us using the English or Spanish language, we use them in order to communicate with our people but we know that they are not our languages. If we wrote the whole website just in Nahuatl or Maya the majority of our people would not understand a word of our website.
NOT HISPANIC Hispanics are the Spaniards, the people of Spain. We are not Spaniards! We are Mexica! We are the people of Anahuac. We are the Nican Tlaca (Indigenous people) of this continent, the true owners of this continent. We are not Spaniards or the property of Spain. Calling ourselves "Hispanic" denies us our true Nican Tlaca Anahuac identity, history and heritage. It enslaves us to the interests of the "Spanish" white world. Calling our people Hispanic is racist. Calling our people Hispanic is like calling the African descent people in the U.S. Britannic because they have British names and because they speak English.
NOT LATINO Latinos are the Latins: Southern Europeans--the Spaniards, French, and Portuguese. Calling ourselves "Latino" makes us cultural slaves of Europeans. Like Hispanic, Latino is cultural suicide. It is cultural genocide. It betrays our true Nican Tlaca ancestors.
NOT RAZA "Raza" is not an identity. "Raza" is basically the same thing as using the Eurocentric term "Mestizo"--it takes pride in Spanish blood (what little or nothing that we may have) and puts shame in our Nican Tlaca blood and culture. Calling ourselves "Raza" is a way of saying, "I'm not an 'Indio', I have some, mostly, Spanish blood". In Mexico "Dia de la Raza" is celebrated on October 12---Columbus Day. Imagine that! We are celebrating the rape of our mothers, the rape of our nation, the enslavement of our people.
EUROPEAN, WHITE AND CRIOLLO are basically the same thing. These are "White" people who are on our continent. Europeans can call themselves "Canadian" or "American" but their homeland is still Europe and they are still trespassing on our continent. A Criollo is someone of "authentic Spanish-European" descent who is still on our land exploiting our people, our resources and our wealth. GENOCIDE as defined by Raphael Lemkin, "...is the planned annihilation [killing] of a national [Mexican] or racial group by a variety of actions [biological warfare, oppression, enslavement] aimed at undermining the foundations essential to the survival of the group [Nican Tlaca of Anahuac] as a group.
is leading the way with actions that defend our people, actions that provide
a vision for the liberation of our people, actions that confront the racism
against us and the occupation of our continent by Europeans. We declare
ourselves independent from the Hispanic-Latino European colonialism and
racism that has enslaved us for over 500 years.
But hey, what do I know right? Since a majority of the people of this country now seem to believe that the proper place of white people is to be the BITCH of minorities, it is only a matter of time before the white Leftist scum of America get what they sorely want... to be the subservient, penitent bitch of a minority ruler.
|Here's an excerpt from an article by Gabriel Gamica from Family Security Matters...|
Some Human Rights and Nobody is Illegal Baloney
Once you have your family/child setup, you add some baloney in the form of distortions of human rights and human integrity. This depiction of enforcing basic, common sense immigration legislation as some sinister threat to basic human rights fits nicely with liberals' victimization, martyr and voiceless innocent victims rhetoric. Since the left already depicts any efforts to protect our national interest as a barbaric abuse by capitalist, bloodthirsty fiends, this extension of that menace to humanity spin works rather nicely.
|Apparently, in the twisted minds of liberals, daring to demand that people respect laws and other people is too much to ask in the face of people's automatic right to say "Hey, I'm human, so get off my back and let me do what I want because inside I am basically a good person." Go ahead and tie illegal immigration to past civil rights struggles involving African-Americans and women. Never mind that those latter groups had a moral right to demand their rights and were not breaking laws unlike illegal immigrants, who have neither the moral nor legal right to make the demands they increasingly, arrogantly and blatantly make every day.|
|Like it or not, I do not have the right to scream "fire!" in a theatre just because I am a human being and I cannot steal, rape or kill and then drivel that "no human being is illegal". To be sure, no human being is intrinsically "illegal," but human beings can commit illegal acts that must be punished and prevented. Between the human rights and "no human being is illegal" spins, people could go around vandalizing and harming others claiming immunity on the basis that they are humans with rights and are never "illegal". This they do even as they demand blanket amnesty and citizenship and even go as far as seeing no differentiation between illegal and legal immigration. Once again, FSM's Sher Zieve gets it exactly right in her outstanding report,|
|Illegals Demand Blanket Amnesty and U.S. Citizenship.|
... indeed... When the Liberal douchebags scream "No one is Illegal," what they mean is "NoTHING is Illegal." Fits in perfectly with the Left's fetish for criminals - particularly non-white criminals - and their sick contempt for victims of crime.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Santa, the Tooth Fairy, and Maxine Waters
Imagine being told for years that something was true and right, only to find out it was a lie.
How were you impacted when you found out it was Dad in the Santa suit, and the "elves" were actually pimply-faced teenaged kids hired over the holidays from the checkout counter at Toys "R" Us?
What thoughts raced through your mind as you opened one eyelid and saw Mom slipping her hand under the pillow to obtain your recently separated dental equipment? The Easter Bunny? A sham, too!
Recent events have jolted some traditionally liberal-leaning groups on the subject of illegal immigration. Akin to looking in the closet and finding Santa's beard, the black community has begun to discover that the "truths" told to them over the years by the Democratic Party and liberals were misrepresentations of the true impact that illegal immigration was having on the average black person in the United States.
This has been a "taboo" topic for too long. It must now be discussed openly and honestly.
While Maxine Waters and Jesse Jackson hold hands with illegal immigrant activists in a show of solidarity and Al Sharpton criticizes a talk-show host over words that are replicated in popular rap music, illegal immigration continues its cancerous growth to the detriment of the black community.
Let's think about it rationally for a moment. Illegal immigrants create an inexpensive labor pool for American business. Because most of the jobs that illegals take are unskilled, manual labor, illegals work for low wages - since it represents a huge improvement over their prospects back home.
However, immigrant populations tend to compete with indigenous groups for these same entry-level-type jobs.
According to Education Week, 57.8 percent of black females will graduate from high school. The number is only 44.3 percent for black males. This means a large percentage of young blacks leave school without appreciable job skills.
Entry-level jobs would be perfect avenues to begin the process of developing the abilities necessary to survive in our economic system. Unfortunately, they are often stripped of the opportunity to compete for these jobs because illegals are too readily available to take them.
We often hear the racist comment that many Americans are "too lazy" to accept these jobs. C'mon, get real. It is too easy for an employer to drive down to The Home Depot and pick up a couple of illegal immigrants than it is to actively recruit for capable and willing individuals in the black community. The "laziness" is obviously on the part of the employers, and not on available United States citizens.
The media help propagate this misperception by incorrectly reporting the results of polls performed within the black community. The (RABIDLY PRO-ILLEGAL ALIEN) San Francisco Chronicle reported that most blacks support illegal immigrants and efforts to create pathways to citizenship. However, the Pew Research Center reported that nearly 25 percent of all blacks surveyed lost a job to an illegal or knew someone who did.
The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a black think tank, said nearly half of the respondents felt illegal immigration was a problem and that the country could not afford more illegals.
So, who is right? Common sense would tend to support the latter.
It is interesting how the left often overlooks the cost that hits the black community in the area of community services. Money spent on emergency rooms, health care clinics, education and other social services is provided largely free of cost to illegal immigrants. As activist Ted Hayes was recently quoted as saying, "This disproportionately affects African Americans."
Why do we spend precious social-service dollars on the illegal immigrant poor, when our fellow Americans - regardless of race - need our help? Why does the illegal immigrant child obtain a seat in a classroom next to American citizens, free of charge? Why is our educational system being diluted, compromised and choked to the detriment of Americans?
Armed with these facts, many black Americans are rising up against the entrenched leadership that presumes to speak for the entire community.
Unfortunately, black individuals who depart from the "conventional wisdom" of the Maxine Waters of the world are often shouted down as Uncle Toms - or worse. So, for the sake of political correctness and alignment with the left, many black Americans continue to be misled and deceived about the true impact that illegal immigration has on their lives.
Throughout this discussion, not once has the race of the illegal immigrant been mentioned. Why is that? Simply put, this is not a racial issue. Its a matter of right and wrong.
Many have tried to compare the plight of the illegal immigrant to the civil rights struggles of the 1960s. To do so is to denigrate the accomplishments of so many in the acquisition of rights that should never have been removed.
That is the difference. Illegals are trying to forcibly obtain the rights that rightfully belong to United States citizens of all ethnicities and races.
So, let's debunk the myths right here, right now. There is no Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy - and no beneficial impact to black America by illegal immigration. If anything, illegals hurt the development of the black community and restrict opportunities for participation in our economic system.
Immigrant Plan Puts Job Skills Ahead of Family
Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
(05-09) 04:00 PDT Washington -- Key senators and the White House are attempting to negotiate a "grand bargain" (GRAND "SELLOUT?") on immigration that would grant visas to immigrants based more on their skills as workers than their family ties to those already here.
As part of the deal, the estimated 12 million (BUT COULD BE AS HIGH AS 30 MILLION) people now in the country illegally -- including about 2.1 million in California (MORE LIKE IN LOS ANGELES) -- would be allowed to remain here.
After two months of intense, closed-door negotiations, major stumbling blocks remain, and time has all but run out before the Monday deadline set by Senate Majority Leader (AND EFFEMINATE PANSY) Harry Reid, D-Nev., for debate to begin on a comprehensive immigration overhaul.
Both sides in the immigration debate that has roiled the country for more than a year are under intense pressure to reform a system that all agree is broken. Legislators are getting heat from businesses, immigrant lobbying groups and those most opposed to easing immigration -- as well as the broader public. Polls indicate that voters are dismayed by what they perceive (NOTE TYPICAL LOCKHEAD PROPAGANDA INSERTION - THERE IS NOTHING 'PERCEIVED' ABOUT IT!) as widespread law-breaking by those entering the country illegally but shrink from such punitive measures as mass deportation.
In the closely divided Congress, neither party alone has the power to change immigration law to suit its tastes. House Republicans tried and failed to do so last year with a border crackdown. This year, Democrats, who narrowly control the chambers, need a hefty chunk of the GOP in the House and Senate to pass any legalization plan, given the fractures in their own party over such issues as a giant temporary worker program that could intensify wage competition among lower-skilled workers.
President Bush is bent on making immigration reform a legacy of his presidency (NOW THAT EVERYTHING ELSE HE'S TOUCHED HAS TURNED TO SHIT), and he has detailed two Cabinet secretaries, Michael Chertoff of Homeland Security and Carlos Gutierrez of the Commerce Department, to try to hammer out a deal. Shifting the overall immigration policy from a reliance on family ties to a skills-based system represents a last-ditch effort to win over Republicans who were opposed to Bush's earlier overtures on legalization.
The proposal would require both sides to swallow hard, but it offers each the tantalizing prospect of long-sought goals that otherwise appear unattainable (FOR THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT).
Republicans who have taken a hard line on immigration, such as Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, would have to consent to a sweeping legalization program for the 12 million undocumented immigrants in the country -- an effort conservatives (RIGHTLY) denounce as amnesty.
Democrats, particularly Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, would have to agree to a big shift in the system Kennedy authored in 1965, which established family ties as the basis of U.S. immigration. Immigrant groups, particularly Latinos and Asians who make (VERY) heavy use of the extended family categories, are deeply wedded to the principle of what they call family reunification.
But both sides could see huge payoffs.
Democrats would get a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and more green card slots to clear up the long backlogs for family members now waiting for legal entry.
Republicans would get a change in the system that would weigh a prospective immigrant's skills more heavily than kinship. That is a key concern of Republicans who oppose legalizing the 12 million in the country now because under today's system, these new legal permanent residents could sponsor their extended families later. So-called chain migration proved a potent restrictionist argument last year, causing worries in both parties.
Many Republicans also contend that the U.S. immigration system should prioritize the national economic interest rather than the personal interest of immigrants themselves and that the United States is admitting far too many unskilled people, many of whom are high school dropouts (IF THAT).
They cite the 1997 findings of the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, led by the late Rep. Barbara Jordan, D-Texas, that called for "shifting admission priorities away from the extended family and toward the nuclear family, and away from the unskilled and toward the higher skilled immigrant."
Key Democratic negotiators have shown interest in such a bargain. They are not necessarily averse to giving more preference to skilled immigrants (WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT THEY'RE NOT WHITE). But they want to see the details of how such a system would be structured.
Supporters are quick to note that immediate families -- spouses and minor children -- still would be allowed under any new system to accompany the primary immigrant, as current law allows.
The proposal "doesn't include immediate family," said Sen. Mel Martinez, a Florida Republican and Cuban immigrant who is a key broker in the talks. "It has to be understood, this is about extended family, about changing the dynamics of immigration for future flows to one that is more in keeping with what every other country in the world does pretty much (FOR A DAMN GOOD REASON). Which is, what is in the best interests of the country, what are the immigration needs of the country, not just what is the need of the family, particularly distant family."
Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand are cited as models. All are immigrant-receiving countries that use point systems, which place priorities on such things as education, work experience and language to receive immigration benefits.
The current U.S. system of family-based preferences dates to 1965 and is weighted heavily to kinship, or what is called family reunification. More than 60 percent of all legal immigrants enter under family preferences, the reverse of the ratios used in Canada and other countries using point systems. About 15 percent are employment based. In addition, about half of the quotas reserved for employment-based migrants are taken by spouses and children (AND YOU WONDER WHY THE AVERAGE SCHOOLING LEVEL OF IMMIGRANTS IS LOW).
The family categories include not only spouses and children of legal immigrants but their adult children and siblings. U.S. citizens can also sponsor their parents. Waiting lines to receive legal permanent residence, or green cards, under such categories extend more than a decade for relatives from China and India, and as long as two decades and more from Mexico and the Philippines.
"Denying brothers and sisters (immigration benefits) would impose on ethnic groups a narrow definition of family," said Bill Ong Hing, a professor of law and Asian American Studies at UC Davis (TOKEN NON-HISPANIC AND AN IDIOT TO BOOT) who testified Tuesday to the House Judiciary Committee's panel on immigration, chaired by (THE TOTAL DIMWIT) Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose.
Republicans asked Reid for more time Tuesday, but the Senate leader said a deal must be in place by next week when he intends to begin debate.
"I appreciate the pressure he's put on us," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who supported last year's sweeping Senate legalization bill. "The only thing that will fix the problem would be a bipartisan new bill."
Now, obviously there are huge problems here, but it is surprising and refreshing to hear at least some elements of a halfway reasonable immigration policy starting to be debated.
First the bad... anyway you cut and paste it, this plan is still an Amnesty with a capital 'A,' and it seems more and more clear that any plan that we're going to get rammed down our throats is going to include citizenship for every single illegal alien in America - including murderers, rapists, drunk drivers, and terrorists. This is, of course, really fucked up, but apparently political correctness means we are now a nation of people who just loves them criminals. I realize that I'm in the minority, but most Americans have no fucking clue what they are about to do to their country.
On the not-so-dark side, even folks like Mel Martinez are wising up to the scam of what the border busters call "family reunification," a code word for chain migration. Put in place in large part thanks to my Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, chain migration is the system by which an immigrant can bring to the United States members of the family, and "family" is a VERY broad term; under the present system it means you can bring not just your spouse and kids, but your parents and all of their kids and their extended families. It is not at all uncommon for one immigrant to sponsor 20 or more family members under the 1965 plan offered by that fat fuckwad from Massachusetts.
Right now, all of this is just talk, and the truly Satanic Dark Lord of the Devil is in the details.
I have little faith that people like Kennedy, that pansy Harry Reid, or HJC immigration panel chair and complete dingbat Zoe Lofgren have the brains or the guts to do what is right, or even close to what is right. Having to make a compromise with assholes like these is not promising. But, at least, some folks are finally really talking about a few of the really critical issues that we "restrictionists" (Jesus Carolyn, why not just say "racist bigots?") have been harping on... namely chain migration and the lack of skill and education among immigrants. Still no mention of ANY limits to this program (wanna bet that that is part of the deal?), meaning you may as well get used to overcrowding and fighting for resources because it is going to get real bad real soon.
Sunday, May 6, 2007
So here's a little thing to ponder as the immigration "debate" continues...
We have this highly unholy alliance going on between the Kennedy/Pelosi cadre on the one hand, and Bush and the Industrialists on the other. Both of them some how figure that they will get what they've always wanted through this alliance and the deluge of poor immigrants that will ensue. The Right will get what they've always wanted: A return to slavery and a permanent underclass of cheap labor. And the Left will get what they've always wanted: a massive influx of "downtrodden masses" for which to bring about the Socialist revolution.
Obviously, this is not going to work.
The Industrialists would not be pushing for immigration if they thought for a second that they would have to pay them as much as they pay Americans. And the Left would not be pushing for massive immigration if they thought it wouldn't topple the white, male ruling class.
Even the virulently racist Southern Poverty Law Center pulled its head out of its ass long enough to make some report about how guest-worker programs were just a scam to provide businesses with slave labor. Gee... YA THINK?!?
Some Industrialist scum have even gone so far to suggest that massive immigration is a solution to global poverty. Well, sure, I suppose... if you emptied out every poor country on Earth and shipped everyone to industrial countries... you'd have billions of people working for peanuts (but some had no peanuts at all!) which will satisfy the industrialists, and huge concentrations of poor people in rich countries, which makes the Socialists salivate.
In the meantime, this would lead to the destruction of the Nation/State, the destruction of ALL indigenous culture everywhere in the world, and the setting up of the Global Confrontation that the childish Socialists have been dreaming about.
World War III.
At least we'll save money on transporting troops around the world... we'll simply be importing the combatants...