Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Taxi Drivers Demand We Tolerate Their Intolerance

The Somali taxi drivers at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport spoke out at the commission meeting last night demanding "tolerance" for their discriminatory and intolerant behavior. Basically, if the commission - and passengers - refuse to accede to their demands, we are discriminatory and intolerant of their intolerance. Crazy, convoluted thinking.

“Our stance is first come, first served,” said airport director Steve Wareham. “The message is if you want to drive a taxicab at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, you will serve all customers.”

Many cabbies disagreed, saying that the proposal denies them the right to freely practice their religion. “This is discrimination,” proclaimed Ahmed Shine, a taxi driver for seven years.
Abdifatah Abdi, who said he was speaking for an association of cabdrivers, said the commissioners “will be judged on your decision.”

“You are deciding the livelihood of 600 drivers and their families,” Abdi said. “Say no to discrimination. Say yes to justice for the weak.”

Refusing to serve disabled passengers who require the services of guide dogs, gays, and people believed to be carrying liquor has been going on for months, eliciting outrage from around the world. Yet if we insist that these intolerant, discriminatory acts are stopped, the taxi drivers threaten us? Call us names?

If they refuse to obey our laws and public service regulations, pull their licenses! These victimizers' ploy of playing victim cannot stand. They agreed to abide by the laws and regulations when they applied for a license. To go back on that agreement now is the height of bad faith. What's their next ploy in the Muslim American Society's game plan? Stopping the cab and letting the meter run (while the passenger is stuck at the side of the road) while the cabbie goes off to "pray?"

They can freely worship as they choose, and if their religion supposedly "prohibits" doing the job, get a different job.

We must stand united and say, "First come, first served. No discrimination in public transport services, and if you are unwilling to abide by those rules, get another job that meets your preferences."

Singapore bans spitting and chewing gum. If chewing gum is more important to you than obeying Singapore's laws out of respect for Singaporeans' right to make their own laws, don't visit Singapore. For that matter, anyone who comes to this country must abide by our laws. If our laws don't suit them, go home or go elsewhere. It's a matter of respect. And out of respect for ourselves, our principles, our laws, we must stand up for ourselves. Stop this nonsense!

Monday, February 26, 2007

Always Remember: 2/26/93

Today is the fourteenth anniversary of islamic terrorists' first attack on the World Trade Center. Six people were killed by the truck bomb set off in the underground garage, and over a thousand were injured.

It was clearly an act of islamic terrorism, led by the "Blind Sheik." Illegal immigration was a primary vehicle for infiltrating terrorists then, just as it was a primary vehicle enabling the follow-up attack on 9/11. The Clinton Administration did nothing to stop illegal immigration and islamic terrorist infiltration during the entire eight years of their tenure. That set the stage for the follow-up attack in the early months of the Bush Administration.

Many of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 entered this country legally - but fraudulently. They came posing as "students" to attend flight schools, yet they had no jobs, nor prospects for jobs, with any airline or air charter company. And what they were "studying" could never have landed them any airline or pilot job because they were quite clear they had no interest in learning how to land a plane -- the most crucial aspect of any pilot's training. They were out-and-out visa fraud perpetrators. Worse, most overstayed their visas, and thus were illegal aliens.

Those who aided and abetted them were often illegal aliens also. To cite only one of many, many examples, an illegal alien helped several of the hijackers to obtain Virginia driver's licences. All together, the 19 hijackers held 63 sets of identification documents, including the identity and Social Security number of a one-year-old child.

Fourteen years after 2/26, and 5-1/2 years after 9/11, we have more illegal aliens than ever. The Bush Administration treats illegal aliens as if they were all "good-hearted" "down-trodden" gardeners and nannies just seeking a "better life" (at citizens' expense!). Yet terrorists and their cells are still here and growing. Crime rings are here -- and growing. Heinous criminals are here -- and their numbers are growing, as are the numbers and types of crimes they commit.

Illegal immigration - whether they "enter without inspection" (i.e. illicitly cross the border), overstay a visa, or commit fraud to obtain a visa - is the most critical issue Americans face. The problem underlies a vast array of other issues:

1. The unaffordability of health insurance and the closure of hundreds of emergency and trauma care facilities across the country. Non-paying illegal aliens have bankrupted hospitals despite such extreme efforts to shift costs that medical care has become unaffordable for the majority of working American citizens.

2. Overcrowded schools, underperforming schools, the sharp rise in schooling costs without any perceptible improvement in educational standards and outcomes.

3. Unaffordable housing -- tremendous surge in demand among those who cannot (or will not) pay for housing increases costs for everyone across the board. Remember "demand-push inflation?"

4. Costs of crime: police force costs, free legal representation (public defenders) for illegal aliens accused of crimes, the costs of the injuries and damages done by criminals, costs of prosecution, costs of incarceration. A third (or more!) of law enforcement and incarceration costs in many areas of the country are solely due to illegal aliens' crimes. In other words, less than 10% of our population accounts for 33% of law enforcement costs! Illegal aliens kill more US citizens each year than the war in Iraq has killed in four years.

5. Crumbling infrastructure: each added person adds over $10,000 in infrastructure costs (streets, sewers, street lights, water lines, reservoirs, power grids, sidewalks, ad infinitum). Illegal aliens do not pay-their-way in the taxes needed to repair, replace, and expand infrastructure to meet needs which are accelerating due to rapid - and unplanned/unpredicted - population increases.

6. Overpopulation/overcrowding: we're adding millions of people per year to our population. We're short of water, housing, roads, and just plain room. We no longer produce enough food to feed our population, no less be able to export enough to feed millions around the world. Yes, we do still export agricultural products, and we import; the truth remains that we are no longer self-sufficient in food or water. Increased population density adds to physical and psychological stresses, destroys our farmlands, and reduces our carrying capacity for the number of mouths we have to feed.

7. Social service costs: they may be here illegally, but they sure know how to "work the system" to collect "free" medical care, "free" education, "free" food, Section 8 housing vouchers and other housing assistance, and hundreds of other social services. It costs citizens additional hundreds of billions of tax dollars at every level: local, state, and federal. It gobbles up billions of our charitable contributions. And much of that money ends up siphoned out of our economy and into offshore accounts.

8. The threat of terrorism is greater than ever: islamic "charities" are transferring dollars to support terrorists, and organized crime rings are siphoning off sales taxes, selling untaxed cigarettes, etc., to support terrorist cells. "Lone islamic 'activists'" are attacking Jewish centers and driving SUVs into crowds of college students. "Tourists" are photographing, videotaping, and probing for weak spots they can exploit in terrorist acts. Fifth columns are "softening us up" with crazy demands which step-by-step lead to islamic subversion of our culture and institutions.

Illegal immigration damages our country and our citizens every day at every level. And not even the attacks of 2/26 and 9/11 have awakened many Americans to the vast dangers illegal immigration poses to our selves, our families, our communities, our society, our values, our principles, our civilization.

Zero Tolerance for Immigration-Law Violators! We must remember the lessons of 2/26, 9/11, and the costs we bear every single day.

Sunday, February 25, 2007

Boycott Banks Enabling Lawbreakers

The National Illegal Immigration Boycott Coalition (NIIBC) has called for a boycott of the Bank of America and other banks which offer bank accounts and credit cards to illegal aliens. People without Social Security Numbers can offer accounts to those with the notoriously unreliable Matricula Consular from Mexico and similar insecure and unreliable "identification" cards from other countries (e.g. Guatemala).

Bank accounts and credit cards enable criminals, terrorists and their supporters to launder money; enable tax fraud; facilitate money transfers offshore; and enable immigration-law violators to remain in this country - i.e. to continue breaking the law! It is illegal for them to work, yet they can zip money around the world - and the banks have no idea who these account holders really are, where the money is coming from, or whether income taxes have been (or will be) paid when due.

NIIBC has a petition to protest Bank of America's new policy of granting credit cards (Visa) to illegal aliens at The site also lists banks throughout the country which are believed to support and abet illegal immigration.

Check with your bank to verify whether they open accounts for illegal aliens/people with unverifiable, easily obtained, easily forged foreign ID cards. You might seriously consider closing your account if they do. Enabling illegal immigration and other crimes is itself a crime, as well as a potentially dangerous business practice. That bank has set itself up as a prospective target for massive bank fraud! Charge up the card, ship the money offshore, then split, leaving the bank holding an emply account with no way to trace the account holder (who, if traced, can flee the country and disappear), and no way to recover the money.

They're only in it for the money. Banks figure there's huge market in 12 million or more illegal aliens illegally working in this country. And they expect huge profits.

But they help criminals to continue perpetrating crimes. And they expose themselves to potential losses and liabilities that could make them riskier for your investments, your accounts, your tax dollars. (Who do you think insures banks against losses - the federal government through your tax dollars!)

Zero tolerance for immigration-law violators -- and for those who aid and abet their crimes.

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Revoke Licenses of Discriminatory Taxi Drivers

There has been a worldwide public outcry over the Somali muslim taxi drivers who refuse to pick up passengers at the Minneapolis-St. Paul (MN) airport.

Claiming it is "against their religion" to transport certain people, taxi drivers have left passengers stranded for an hour or more until a non-muslim driver came along. Those stranded include anyone suspected of carrying liquor in their baggage, and those with dogs - even seeing eye dogs for the blind and other companion/service animals for the disabled.

These drivers should have their licenses revoked for discrimination against members of the public. Stranding passengers - tourists from around the world, business people, locals returning home - at an airport any hour or the day or night is totally unacceptable behavior. "Religion" is no excuse for endangering disabled people's safety and welfare, or discriminating against anyone. Those who want a license to drive a cab must not discriminate in any way against any member of the public who is willing and able to pay for their services.

All those opposed to application of the Shari‘a (islamic law) in the United States need to make their views heard in Minnesota. You can do this in either of two ways.

In writing: MAC is asking for “input from the public” through Friday, March 2, 2007, before it makes a decision on the proposed increase in penalties. Written comments should be addressed to:

Landside Operations Department
Metropolitan Airports Commission
MSP International Airport/Lindbergh Terminal
4300 Glumack Drive Suite LT-3129B
Saint Paul, MN 55111-3010.

In person: For those living in the Twin Cities area, MAC will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, at 2 p.m., to solicit testimony from the public via verbal or written testimony. The location will be at:
Ramada Mall of America (formerly, the Thunderbird Hotel)
2300 East American Boulevard
Bloomington, Minnesota

Ensure anti-discrimination laws of the US are upheld for public transportation. Demand that any taxi driver who refuses to pick up a passenger at the airport have his license revoked. No exceptions, no excuses.

Those taxi drivers who are not willing to transport any member of the public should not have a license. Let them find another occupation more to their liking.

Monday, February 19, 2007

Border Patrol Agent Acquitted After Second Trial

Ramos and Compean are not the only Border Patrol agents to suffer malicious prosecutions for doing their jobs. Former agent David Sipes was convicted and fired for using "excessive force" in 2001 following trial. In 2000, responding to a sensor alarm at the border, Sipes apotted 12 -15 illegal aliens. When he ordered the group to halt, Jose Guevara, Nehemias Diaz and Evarado Sanchez fled into heavy reeds. Sipes said he was defending himself when he struck Guevara with his flashlight. Guevara needed five stitches for a cut on his head.

The federal Appeals Court ordered a retrial. "The government stated in writing the aliens were allowed to remain and work in the United States pending trial and specified that 'no other promises or advantages' had been given. That was not true."

What did the illegal aliens actually get? Social Security cards, witness fees, permits allowing travel to and from Mexico, living expenses and free use of government phones -- and a "get out of jail free card." The appeals court also found that the government failed to disclose that after Mr. Sipe's arrest and before the trial, Mr. Guevara was caught by Border Patrol agents with illegal aliens. The arresting agents released him when he displayed a card given to him by prosecutors. "Since Guevara had been granted free passage in his deal with the government, his arrest with illegal aliens was evidence that he was a transporter, as well as evidence of the extent of the government's support accorded him in order to obtain his testimony," the court said. "As the defense termed it, Guevara was given a 'get out of jail card.' "

Guevara also received $80,000 "compensation" for the cut that got 5 stitches. (5 stitches means the cut was probably less than one inch long, i.e. it likely did not "need" stitches.)

Sipes was acquitted at the new trial. Now he's trying to get his job back. Meanwhile, he's lost six years of seniority, salary - his job, his reputation, his life.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez and his Department of Justice have totally run amuck, prosecuting law enforcement officers for doing their jobs, and rewarding criminals for their crimes. Prosecuting those who defend US citizens and our borders - and themselves from assaults by criminals - reveals that our government has gone completely off the rails. This is becoming the "land of the lawbreaker and home of the weasel."

Violating immigration laws is a crime; immigration-law violators need to be deported and barred from re-entry. And our Border Patrol needs protection from malicious prosecution of bogus claims of "excessive force."

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Meddling Mexicans Behind Miscarriage of Justice

The transcript of the Ramos-Compean is finally out. So is the bombshell. Mexican officials demanded that the US prosecute the Border Patrol agents - for a "shooting" for which there is little or no evidence was committed by the agents.

The testimony against the agents was the word of an admitted drug smuggler who admitted he entered the US illegally. He confessed to his own crimes six days before he was granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for testifying against the agents. Meanwhile, he was never questioned regarding the smuggling ring, its leaders and other participants, routes, schedules, and other information which would help combat the smuggling.

Documents obtained in the Ramos-Compean case and the prosecution of Texas Sheriff's Deputy Guillermo "Gilmer" Hernandez clearly show the Mexican government demanding prosecution of law enforcement officers for stopping illegal aliens from Mexico during the commission of crimes. In both instances, local investigations were supplanted by federal prosecution actions.

Maricela Rodriguez Garcia "was in a Chevrolet Suburban van full of illegals that attempted to run over Hernandez after he had stopped the vehicle for running a stop sign April 14, 2005, in Rocksprings, Texas. Firing his weapon at the rear tires, a bullet fragment hit Rodriguez in the mouth, cutting her lip and breaking two teeth." []

(boo-hoo-hoo to Maricela)

Clearly, the Mexican agenda is to totally neutralize US law enforcement so as to allow Mexican criminals completely free rein to enter, remain and commit crimes in the US.

We citizens elect our officials to uphold our Constitution, our sovereignty, and protect our citizens and our rights by upholding our laws. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez and his Justice Department staff, US District Attorney Johnny Sutton, and the Department of Homeland Security from Secretary Michael Chertoff on down seem to be working for the Mexican government, not American citizens who pay their salaries.

Zero Tolerance for Illegal Immigration. Zero Tolerance for malicious prosecution of law enforcement officers doing their jobs of chasing down and arresting lawbreakers, expecially when that malicious prosecution is at the behest of a foreign government protecting its criminals.

Sunday, February 11, 2007

More Questions on Border Shooting Scandal

Two Border Patrol agents have been convicted and sentenced to extraordinarily long prisons terms in what must be the most malicious prosecution in US history. Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean were pursuing a suspicious van. Accounts conflict, but basically, the driver fled on foot toward the border, then turned with something in his hand that the agents believed was a gun. They fired several shots, but the suspect ran across the Rio Grande back into Mexico.

The agents picked up their shells, and in the van found 750 pounds of marijuana.

Next, the drug smuggler, who admits he's a Mexican drug smuggler who entered the US illegally, was given immunity from prosecution as well as free medical care for testifying against the Border Patrol agents. He's also suing for $5 million for his injuries from a gunshot wound.

Questions nobody else seems to be asking:

1. If the smuggler was shot by the agents in the thigh and groin, how did he manage to run back across the border into Mexico? With his purported injuries, how could he outrun several fit, trained law enforcement officers?

2. Why didn't anyone find any blood on the ground between the place where the smuggler was shot and the river? Numerous agents searched the area, they picked up the shells, etc., yet there is no mention of any blood anywhere. No wonder the agents were quite certain the smuggler was never hit.

3. Why the bollixed ballistics report? There is no hard evidence that the bullet actually came from one of the border Patrol agents' guns. Egregious mismanagement of the bullet itself as well as the forensics report can only lead one to believe evidence was manufactured to suit the hidden agendas of US Attorney Johnny Sutton.

Everyone assumes a bullet from an agent's gun shot the drug smuggler. That assumption just might be very wrong.

The drug smuggler - an admitted criminal - says he was not armed. But there's no proof. He says he was shot by Border Patrol, but there's not a lick of evidence he was shot in the US, no less by Border Patrol agents.

Possibility: The smuggler was shot in Mexico for leaving his load behind. That 750 pounds of marijuana was worth how much? How many drug czars would pat a mule on the back and shrug off that large a loss? Possibility: the shooting was staged to frame the agents. Possibility: the smuggler was shot in Mexico for any number of reasons unrelated to his smuggling.

There is no hard, incontrovertable evidence for anything in this case.

This case is far from over. We cannot tolerate our law enforcement officials being prosecuted for doing their jobs. Shooting a fleeing felon when there is any suspicion that he's armed is rational behavior. Handcuff the law enforcement officer and you no longer have any law enforcement.

Call the White House (202-456-1111, 9-5 weekdays, Eastern Time), call your Senators and Representative. Demand an investigation that answers these questions, and all the others that have been raised.

Tuesday, February 06, 2007

How Paternalistic and Patronizing Can You Get?

Some Americans can get very paternalistic and patronizing when it comes to medical care. How many news stories have you read of "some poor Mexican/whatever" who claims to have entered the US illegally "for medical care for my kid/grandma/whomever" -- some major sob story for the "human interest" below-the-fold front page. It's a lot of hooey!

While living in the "jungles of Borneo" - a rather remote area of rather impoverished Indonesia - a friend was seriously injured. The people who found him got him to a clinic, which rustled up a helicopter to take him to the nearest hospital (no road). I went to the hospital -- it looked like something out of Albert Schweitzer's Africa a century ago. But the doctors proved knowledgeable and the nursing care was unsurpassed. They got him stabilized and able to undertake the four-hour air ambulance flight to Singapore. Two weeks later, he was released, fit as the proverbial fiddle. The bill? Including helicopter and air ambulance, about a quarter of the cost of a trip to a US hospital if he'd had similar injuries here.

Californians have long trekked to Tiajuana to refill prescriptions at a fraction of US prices. I first ran into people doing that in 1973. Now northerners hike across the Canadian border, too. Americans go to India, Singapore, Thailand and elsewhere for major surgery, at as little as 10% of US costs.

So why do we listen to illegal immigrant advocates' pity ploys for free medical care for "poor" illegal aliens and rich "medical tourists" who come here? They only come here for care because if they are here illegally, it's free.

Mexico has national health insurance, $399 a year. How much does your insurance cost? The cheapest plan for a single (not provided by employer) in Connecticut is over $950 a month, about $100 a month more for both husband and wife. Dental, vision and prescriptions excluded.

Mexico does more kidney transplants per capita than the US, and their waiting list is shorter. So why the infamous Duke U. Hospital case of a few years back, where a Mexican teen was brought in by her father, who pleaded for donations, visas, housing and more? He sobbed that his daughter would die without surgery in the States -- and thousands of Americans sobbed with them, and coughed up cash. But the surgery really was cheaper and more readily available at home in Mexico.

We are being taken for fools. And it is our own paternalistic and patronizing attitudes -- the notion that good medical care is not available in "poorer" countries, or even "other countries" -- that allows us to be suckered.

I talked with some hospital administrators, nursing administrators, hospital purchasing heads and learned that at many hospitals across the US, a quarter of each hospital bill of paying patients consists of costs shifted from non-paying patients (predominently illegal aliens). For a genuinely poor American citizen, the hospital will help the patient apply for state medicaid programs. Any other American, they'll put a lien on your house or anything else to get paid. Legal permanent residents, who could lose their chance at citizenship if they are deemed "a public charge," will pay, period. Health care in the US is only "free" for illegal aliens because the hospital can do nothing to make them pay, hence, they refuse to pay no matter how many thousands of dollars they have stashed away in their home country.

Another quarter of each paying-patient's hospital bill is administrative costs -- completing a myriad of insurance forms, waiting for reimbursement, and calculating cost shifting for non-payers.

The result? American health care costs double what it should - and would if we put a stop to freebies for immigration-law violators.

The cure is simpler than the disease: any non-citizen who claims inability to pay their hospital bill must contact their consulate (or the hospital can do it for them) and arrange for funds transfer from home to pay the bill. Stabilize and transport. Send them home, at their expense, for the remainder of their care. Anyone who refuses gets turned over to ICE for immediate repatriation.

Any illegal caught by the Border Patrol within 100 miles of the border who needs medical attention should be transported straight to the border for their officials to transport to the nearest medical facility. It's cheaper - and offers them faster access to care - than shipping them up to Tucson or Phoenix.

Next time your medical or insurance bill fractures your budget, write your Senators and Representative demanding an end to "free" medical care for immigration-law violators and "medical tourists." They can get decent care for a fraction of the cost in their home countries so we can afford some decent care ourselves.

And above all, don't let paternalistic attitudes blind you to the Great Illegal Alien Health Care Scam.

Saturday, February 03, 2007

OTM Need Not Apply

Last month's employment figures are out, and Dr. Edwin S. Rubenstein's analysis tells the story most of the media gave a miss.

First, new employment was a mere 55% of what we need to add each month just to keep pace with our growing native-born population. The Boomlets (aka Boom Echo) born in the 1980's are flooding the job market - long before their parents can consider retiring and handing down their jobs. We need to create 180,000-200,000 NET new jobs per month just to launch three-fifths of the Americans born a couple decades ago into the workforce. That's just for native-born citizens, and assumes ZERO immigration (legal or illegal).

Remember, we've been churning out over 4 million babies a year since the early 1980's, and we need enough net new job growth to put half or more of them to work as they leave/graduate from school/college.

Last month, analysts expected 170,000 new jobs - a bit less than the minimum required - and got 110,000.

But Ed Rubenstein finds the household survey - a different, and usually more enlightening data collection method - tells a bleaker story. The household survey shows 31,000 new jobs, but Hispanics (over half of which are new immigrants, almost exclusively illegal) gained 90,000 jobs while other-than-Hispanics lost 59,000. Hispanics not only took all of the new jobs created, but also twice as many more from existing - American - jobholders.

Meanwhile, all those new American-born entrants to the workforce are not counted in the unemployment statistics until they have worked long enough to qualify for unemployment, typically 26 weeks of work. And due to time-lags in data collection and the vagaries of unemployment eligibility rules, statistics can run about a year behind. This is among the reasons the household survey is often considered more accurate than grosser Labor Department figures.

If you're American, anything other than Hispanic, it appears you need not apply for the jobs available. You are being replaced with cheaper, tax- and insurance-free, illegal aliens.