archives

sovereignty

This tag is associated with 13 posts

Phoenix Delays Sanctuary Policy Amid Mounting Pressure After JW Report

(from Judicial Watch, in part)

Phoenix Delays Sanctuary Policy Amid Mounting Pressure After JW Report

Days after Judicial Watch exposed a new policy banning Phoenix police from contacting the feds after arresting illegal aliens, alarming pressure on the city council and chief of police has forced officials in Arizona’s largest city to postpone the order. Crafted at a Hispanic advisory committee that promotes open borders, the policy also prohibits officers from asking about suspects’ immigration status. The new policy’s two principle measures violate key provisions of a state law upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court and leave the city vulnerable to costly lawsuits.

In the aftermath of Judicial Watch’s story, which included a copy of the Phoenix sanctuary Immigration Procedures, police management is backing off and reconsidering the ramifications. Sources with direct knowledge of the matter told Judicial Watch that Phoenix Police Department brass is worried about getting sued under an Arizona law that states the following: “No official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may limit or restrict the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.” The measure also states this: “If an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States is convicted of a violation of state or local law, on discharge from imprisonment or on the assessment of any monetary obligation that is imposed, the United States immigration and customs enforcement or the United States customs and border protection shall be immediately notified.”

Following Judicial Watch’s initial report, the chief of the Phoenix Police Department, Jeri Williams, issued an unusual and unprecedented Employee Notification System (ENS) delaying the new sanctuary order. The ENS was titled “Operations Order 4.48 Revision” and states the following: “Operations Order 4.48, which provides direction regarding immigration related issues, is still being reviewed and revised.  The anticipated effective date, July 10th, 2017, is no longer achievable. The final revisions should be completed within the coming weeks.  A new effective date will be shared once the policy has been finalized.” Williams is Phoenix’s first female police chief and agency sources tell Judicial Watch she tried to quietly implement the sanctuary measures, perhaps hoping they’d go unnoticed. Earlier this year the chief, who was hired last summer, alluded to her stance on immigration enforcement in a local newspaper article questioning whether Arizona’s 325,000 illegal aliens trust the police. Chief Williams is quoted saying this: “We maintain open communication with our diverse residents and want to ensure that our crime victims and witnesses feel comfortable and confident when reporting crimes to our officers. As your chief, I commit to you that racial profiling will not be tolerated.”

The Phoenix Police Department has about 3,000 officers that were permitted to use “sound judgement” at any time under the agency’s longtime immigration enforcement policy. That allowed front-line officers to directly contact federal immigration officials involving criminal illegal immigrants. Under the revised policy, all contact with federal immigration partners must be funneled through a single Violent Crimes Bureau (VCB) desk sergeant who will document all immigration related data and give authority to call ICE. “This will bottle-neck the process,” according to a veteran Phoenix law enforcement official who added that the new policy was generated without any input from rank-and-file. Arizona law enforcement sources also told Judicial Watch that no other restrictions of this kind and magnitude regarding a federal crime are found in Phoenix Police Department policy. Officers continue to have the discretion to contact the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Secret Service, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Postal Inspectors, U.S. Marshalls and Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) without fear of violating department policy.

If an illegal alien is arrested for a state crime, officers in Phoenix would no longer be allowed to take them directly to ICE for deportation and document the crime in a report if the sanctuary measures get adopted. Taxpayers must fund a mandated booking into county jail under the new rules, which state; “if there is a federal criminal charge and the person is under arrest for a state and/or local charge/s…the person will be booked into the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office…” Keep in mind that Maricopa Sheriff Paul Penzone doesn’t like honoring ICE holds on jailed aliens and considers illegal immigrants “guests.” The new Phoenix Police Department rules also eliminate a table showing state immigration enforcement laws as well as documentation of police contacts with verified and/or suspected illegal aliens, a troublesome change that omits valuable city crime statistics.

Besides forbidding questioning suspects regarding place of birth, country of citizenship and legal status in the United States, the postponed Phoenix policy says that transportation of illegal aliens to ICE by officers has been eliminated for civil immigration violations unless the illegal alien “consents to a transport.” Both restrictions violate key provisions of a 2010 Arizona law known as Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act (SB1070). Open borders and civil rights groups fought the law in federal court and succeeded in getting rid of many of its mandates but the U.S. Supreme Court upheld two key clauses in Section 2 of the measure. The first, requires law enforcement officers to determine a suspects’ immigration status if “reasonable suspicion” exists that the person is in the U.S. illegally. This grants officers the discretion that has just been stripped in Phoenix. The other clause in Section 2 allows state law enforcement officers to transport illegal immigrants directly to federal custody. The new Phoenix sanctuary measure, also replace the term “illegal alien” with “a person unlawfully present.”

Judicial Watch will continue investigating Phoenix’s efforts to provide illegal immigrants sanctuary and has filed public records requests for the police department’s communications with third-party groups pushing for the now-paused policy change.

What if metropolitan areas decided to create ‘free zones’ for other criminals?  Burglars, armed robbers?  Something less violent?  Forgers, counterfeiters?

(I know, reductio ad absurdum much, Guffaw?)

Especially, if it impacted national security and sovereignty?

How should the federal government react?

I only bring this up as Phoenix is in my back yard (or I theirs…)

(I know, only questions today…)

Apologies for the poor copy/paste – it was the only way I could get it all in.

Our Tax Dollars At Work, Again

(from Judicial Watch)

JW Files Suit For ‘Refugee Travel Loans’ Information

Tightening our immigration and refugee programs is a matter of national security (despite what some out-of-control judges may think), and it is also a matter of cost.

In this regard, we have filed a lawsuit against the State Department for records on the number of “Refugee Travel Loans” issued by State’s Bureau for Population, Refugees, and Migration to the United Nation’s International Organization for Migration from 2010 to the present.

We are also seeking the number of loans defaulted upon and the amount of money written off on each defaulted loan. We filed the suit on January 24, 2017, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:17-cv-00157)).

Judicial Watch filed the suit after the State Department failed to respond to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on February 5, 2016, seeking the following:

  • All records reflecting the number of Refugee Travel Loans furnished by the State Department’s Bureau for Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) to the International Organization for Migration (IOM) per year; the number of travel loans that are defaulted upon per year; and the amount of money written off per defaulted loan.

The Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration provides funding for aid and relief work abroad and the bureau’s admissions office handles settling refugees in the United States. According to the agency’s website, it spent nearly $545 million “to provide new beginnings to the world’s most vulnerable refugees” in 2016 and more than $2.8 billion to “humanitarian assistance overseas.” It provided $103 million directly to the UN’s International Organization for Migration.

The International Organization for Migration, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, has an annual budget of $1.4 billion  and (as of 2014) a staff of 9,000 throughout the world. According to the International Organization for Migration website, the organization provides interest-free loans “furnished by the Department of State” to “all refugees arriving in the United States:”

All refugees arriving in the United States are offered interest-free travel loans by IOM.  Refugees who accept these travel loans are required to sign a promissory note prior to departure, committing themselves to repayment of the debt within 46 months after arrival in the United States.

IOM arranges for refugee travel using funds furnished by the Department of State, and is mandated to subsequently effect collections on behalf of the Department of State.  Repayments made by refugees toward their loans are returned to the Department of State for use by the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) to defray the cost of future refugee travel.

In July 2016, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution making the International Organization for Migration part of the UN.

Even The Washington Post reported that the nine resettlement agencies contracted by the State Department to help resettle refugees in the U.S. actually make more than $5 million a year in commissions on refugee debt collection.

The State Department has stonewalled our request for refugee loan information and associated taxpayer losses for a year – an unlawful delay that screams “cover up.”  This is an opportunity for the Trump State Department to come clean and clean up this refugee welfare program.

And there’s a lot more for the Trump administration to clean up when it comes to “refugee loans.”  In June 2016, Judicial Watch reported:

The U.S. government gives refugees on public assistance special “loans” of up to $15,000 to start a business but fails to keep track of defaults that could translate into huge losses for American taxpayers, records obtained by Judicial Watch reveal. The cash is distributed through a program called Microenterprise Development run by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Refugee Resettlement.

***

HHS is not the only government agency doling out huge sums of cash for this cause, though its focus on refugees appears to be unique. Others, such as the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of Labor (DOL) also dedicate hundreds of millions of dollars to various microenterprise causes. For instance, in one recent year alone USAID spent $223 million  on microenterprise development activities, according to figures released by the agency. The USDA also allocates large sums to provide loans and grants to microenterprise development through a special “Rural Microloan Revolving Fund” and the DOL regularly pours lots of money into various microenterprise projects that are promoted as workforce investments in areas with high rates of poverty.

So the debate about refugees is more than about keeping dangerous refugees out, but there is also the matter of asking just how much it costs to make politicians to feel good about themselves by using our tax dollars to provide special assistance to these foreign nationals.

I have no problem with legitimate, vetted refugees or immigrants following protocols for legal residency and eventually even citizenship.  I used to know a guy who, with his family, escaped Saddam Hussein and Chemical Ali’s tyranny, to arrive here, become a citizen, and open a liquor store.  He practically hugged every customer who walked in!

And I remember wondering where Lee Harvey Oswald got the ‘Traveler’s Aid'(CIA) funds of $200, after renouncing his U.S. citizenship and living in the Soviet Union.  And was allowed to return back to the United States after purportedly giving away military secrets to the Russians.  With nary a hitch.

Much has changed since the 1960’s.

And not for the better.

 

Looking For Another Civil War Spark?

Because BLM, pipeline protests, post-election riots, yadda yadda aren’t yet doing it?

Do you think President Trump will allow SEVEN major metropolitan areas to openly flaunt federal law?

Or send in the National Guard?

(OR, will he just let them fester in the increased crime from undocumented folks who suck at the government teats until they are dry?)

Time will tell, I guess.

(It does look like a good starting point to find and collect the (up to) three million illegal aliens he wants to deport, though?)

Hey look, they are spread about the country!

We CAN’T Build A Wall!

Yep.  Costs too much, difficult terrain, yatta yatta

Mr. B, however, shows us otherwise:

A wall won’t stop illegal border crossing!

Unless, of course, you are in Turkey.

Maybe our Mexicans are smarter than their Syrians?

Odd, that.

Turkey sealing Syrian border with giant wall

The problem isn’t the wall.  It’s the will to build it.

Educated people need to balance the need to protect the Republic from drug smuggling, human trafficking, arms smuggling and terrorism with the need to protect our sovereignty and freedom here.

In short, a passive method (such as a wall) beats running willy-nilly all over the Southwest, looking for yet another border breach, and searching people and vehicles without warrants.  And airplane and drone surveillance.  (Yeah, it’s that pesky Fourth Amendment, again!)

Of course, philosophically, they need to look at WHY it’s so difficult to construct said wall, WHY the administration frowns on border enforcement, and maintaining a national cultural unity.  Assimilation?  WHY is that frowned upon?

And WHY aren’t we concerned with the Canadian border?  I’d bet folks come in that direction, as well!

Qui Bono!?  (Who benefits?) Who benefits from NOT enforcing border security, cultural cohesiveness and promoting assimilation?  And from allowing the smuggling to continue unabated, while playing at enforcement?

(Hint – It’s not just the illegal aliens…)

‘No, the Constitution Does Not Bar Religious Tests in Immigration Law’

from Free North Carolina)

Via Mike

Properly vetting would-be immigrants’ religious beliefs is not only legal — it would be wise and prudent. Of all the ignorant pronouncements in the 2016 presidential campaign, the dumbest may be that the Constitution forbids a “religious test” in the vetting of immigrants. Monotonously repeated in political speeches and talking-head blather, this claim is heedless of the Islamic doctrinal roots on which foreign-born Islamists and the jihadists they breed base their anti-Americanism. It is also dead wrong.

The clause said to be the source of this drivel is found in Article VI. As you’ll no doubt be shocked to learn, it has utterly nothing to do with immigration. The clause states, “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States” (emphasis added). On its face, the provision is not only inapplicable to immigrants at large, let alone aliens who would like to be immigrants; it does not even apply to the general public. It is strictly limited to public officials — specifically to their fitness to serve in government positions.

More @ NRO
But…But…RACISM!  BIGOTRY!  No Wall!  Yadda, Yadda…
But ‘they’ don’t let facts get in the way of their agenda.
AGAIN – political correctness will be the death of us.

OBAMA CUTTING BORDER SURVEILLANCE IN HALF!

borderOBAMA CUTTING BORDER SURVEILLANCE IN HALF!

Agents threatened with termination for enforcing law

Yeah, I saw this in my email and scoffed at it!  (The source was to me, questionable)

Then, my mole inside the BP confirmed the story – before I could even ask him.

As a lame duck President, does he not even care anymore about his ‘legacy’?

Or is this just more Cloward & Piven, progressive claptrap, designed to ‘level the playing field’?

How does a Chief Executive, with the duty and responsibility for enforcing the law, even make such a decision?

Of course, he has HIS armed guards.

He should try living in Naco or Nogales!

The U.N. Is Up To It’s Old Tricks, Again…

(courtesy of ACTIVISTPOST, in part)

The UN Plans To Implement Universal Biometric Identification For All Of Humanity By 2030

(…)

Even after writing several articles about these new Global Goals, I still don’t think that most of my readers really grasp how insidious they actually are.  This new agenda truly is a template for a “New World Order”, and if you dig into the sub-points for these new Global Goals you find some very alarming things.

For example, Goal 16.9 sets the following target

By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration.

The United Nations is already working hard toward the implementation of this goal – particularly among refugee populations.  The UN has partnered with Accenture to implement a biometric identification system that reports information “back to a central database in Geneva.”  The following is an excerpt from an article that was posted on findbiometrics.com

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is moving forward with its plans to use biometric technology to identify and track refugees, and has selected a vendor for the project.Accenture, an international technology services provider, has won out in the competitive tendering process and will oversee the implementation of the technology in a three-year contract.

The UNHCR will use Accenture’s Biometric Identity Management System (BIMS) for the endeavor. BIMS can be used to collect facial, iris, and fingerprint biometric data, and will also be used to provide many refugees with their only form of official documentation. The system will work in conjunction with Accenture’s Unique Identity Service Platform (UISP) to send this information back to a central database in Geneva, allowing UNHCR offices all over the world to effectively coordinate with the central UNHCR authority in tracking refugees.

I don’t know about you, but that sure does sound creepy to me.

To me, as well, Mr. Snyder!

He further states:

If you aren’t using cash, that means that all of your economic activity is going through the banks where it can be watched, tracked, monitored and regulated.

Every time the elite propose something for our “good,” it somehow always results in them having more power and more control.

I hope that people will wake up and see what is happening.  Major moves toward a one world system are taking place right in front of our eyes, and yet I hear very, very few people talking about any of this.

Of course, pile this upon other agenda items (like ‘universal disarmament’ of the civilian population) and we’re back to the (one-world) governmental wish list of CONTROL.

Supporters of the U.N. are fond of claiming critics are paranoid, and that the U.N. does so much good. Here is a corrupt organization, made up largely of despotic regimes and poorer nations (sometimes conflated) mostly financed by The United States, and largely ineffective in resolving world conflicts.

Remember The Korean War?  It still continues!  And most of the time, the U.S. pays for most of the aid given poorer nations.

I remember seeing signs by the side of the highway intoning ‘Get Us Out Of The U.N.!’ in the 50’s.

Maybe it’s time we left…

War Is A Racket

As my dear, departed Father used to intone, “I used to be young and foolish – I’m not young anymore!”

When I was younger, I supported The War Police Action in Vietnam.  The rationale seemed simple.  Our allies (the South Vietnamese) were under attack by the (Soviet Russian and Red Chinese communist supported) North Vietnamese.

It seemed to be a way to make The Cold War hot, without actually fighting Russia and China directly.

And we must not only defend out allies, but oppose communism wherever it rears it ugly head.

This was similar to the Korean War Police Action Conflict a few years earlier.

(And we know how well THAT worked out!)

And I was prepared to voluntarily go and fight for my Country.

Except, with a fused hip, the military changed my draft status to IV-F.  And I sat on the sidelines.

And we saw how well Vietnam worked out…

Since that time, there was Lebanon, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Grenada, Panama, the Balkans, then Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan (in part).

And there was always a rationale proposed by the government regarding why we needed to go to war.  You may agree with some.  You may disagree with some.

But, as I age, I am beginning to question governmental motives more.

YES, I do believe it was appropriate for us to fight the Nazis and the Japanese Empire in WWII.  And I am still an anti-communist.

Vietnam, Germany, Italy and Japan are now trade partners.

And Red China rules our financial future.  Whether we like it or not.

War for petroleum?  Or to stop WsMD?  That debate will probably continue.

We should defend our national interests.  But, if we are being played by government (or corporate interests) to leap to that defense…(?)

The military-industrial complex President Eisenhower warned us about does exist.  The question is how much of government is enmeshed in it?

War Is A Racket

 Re-post from NamSouth 2009 and FNC 2011/2012

Here richly, with ridiculous display,

The Politician’s corpse was laid away.


While all of his acquaintances sneered and slanged, I wept:


For I had longed to see him hanged.


–Hilaire Belloc

War is a Racket by Smedley Butler is a famous speech denouncing the military industrial complex. This speech by two-time Congressional Medal of Honor recipient exposes war profits that benefit few at the expense of many. Throughout his distinguished career in the Marines, Smedley Darlington Butler demonstrated that true patriotism does not mean blind allegiance to government policies with which one does not agree. To Hell with war.

*********


Smedley Darlington Butler (July 30, 1881June 21, 1940), nicknamedThe Fighting Quaker andOld Gimlet Eye “, was a Major General in the U.S. Marine Corps and, at the time of his death,the most decorated Marine in U.S. history

During his 34 years of Marine Corps service, Butler was awarded numerous medals for hero ism including the Marine Corps Brevet Medal (the highest Marine medal at its time for officers), and subsequently the Medal of Honor twice. Notably, he is one of only 19 people to be twice awarded the Medal of Honor, and one of only three to be awarded a Marine Corps Brevet Medal and a Medal of Honor, and the only person to be awarded a Marine Corps Brevet Medal and a Medal of Honor for two different actions.
 
In addition to his military career, Smedley Butler was noted for his outspoken anti- interventionistviews, and his book War is a Racket. His book was one of the first works describing the workings ofthe military-industrial complex and after retiring from service, he became a popular speaker at meetings organized by veterans, pacifists and church groups in the 1930s.
 

The instantaneous Internet news cycle doesn’t help with our decision-making.  ANYONE can post their ‘facts’ as news, making thoughtful political reasoning nearly impossible.
And EVERYONE seems to have an agenda!

Perception

Perception

It’s what makes the World go ’round.

What do I mean?

If we all viewed things exactly the same, how would that work?  Religion, politics, types of food?  Sex?

The current President?  The last President?

99+% of the folks I know have NOT recently been to Europe.  But most have an opinion regarding the refugee crisis.  Even to the point there may not be a crisis!

I’ve had recent conversations with two liberal friends (yes, I have those) regarding what they know about the goings-on in Europe.  Apparently, those nasty non-Syrian White folks are only interested in protecting the sovereignty of their individual nations, and just hate being forced to accept Islam and the terrorism which seems to be attached to it.

Bastards!

I don’t agree with them.  Not because they are liberals, but because I’ve a different World view.   Even the most liberal of reportage indicates the vast majority of immigrants are young adult males.  Where are the women and children – don’t they need asylum, as well?

And then there’s the increase in attacks on non-Muslim folks by roving bands of Muslim folks.  And a breakdown of the rule-of-law.  And these attacks are by men.

It’s 711 A.D. all over again!  Except this time it’s not just the Iberian peninsula.

Some here think there is a breakdown of traditional American society, and many of the (illegal) immigrants arriving here are keeping to their cultures to the exclusion of American culture! 

And the current administration wants to increase the number of legal immigrants from war-torn Islamic nations.

Because, not doing so would be racist and politically incorrect.

I sense a dangerous pattern here.

Not because of xenophobia, but because of dilution of American Culture.  People are supposed to want to come here because of the freedoms we offer, not to abuse that freedom to force the end of our culture.

Sharia Law, anyone?

Another example of The American Paradox.  Being free enough to allow differences of opinion, but not so free as to accept poison pills into The Republic.

It might be too late for Europe (Muslims wanting to stop observance of Oktoberfest).  I hope it is not too late here.

refugees1

In The News

No, not the story you thought…

(Although my thoughts and prayers are with the dead, wounded and their families and friends in Oregon.)

Brian Terry

Associated Press

A jury has found two men guilty of murder in the killing of a U.S. Border Patrol agent whose death exposed the botched federal operation known as Fast and Furious.

The jury found Jesus Leonel Sanchez-Meza and Ivan Soto-Barraza guilty of all counts. Jurors had begun deliberations Wednesday afternoon, a week after the trial began in federal court in Tucson.

Sanchez-Meza, also known as Lionel Portillo-Meza, and Soto-Barraza were part of a five-man crew that planned on robbing drug smugglers when they encountered Agent Brian Terry and three others on Dec. 14, 2010.

(Reports are they will receive life in prison…)

additionally, from Fox News

The killing led to intense political rhetoric as Republicans sought to hold the Obama administration accountable over the Fast and Furious operation. They conducted a series of inquiries into how the Justice Department allowed guns to end up in the hands of criminals.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder was held in contempt after he refused to divulge documents for a congressional investigation into the matter. Since then, the Justice Department has focused on arresting and trying all suspects involved.

About f’n time!
Now, what about the charges against Holder et al for complicity, conspiracy and obstruction?I’m not holding my breath…

"Round up the usual suspects."

In Loving Memory…