Wednesday, June 9, 2010

WAR ON OUR OWN BORDERS! MEXICO DEFENDS THEIR BORDER AND INVADES OURS!

FBI: Mexicans chased away U.S. agents after shooting


CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico (AP) — Pointing their rifles, Mexican security forces chased away U.S. authorities investigating the shooting of a 15-year-old Mexican by a U.S. Border Patrol agent on the banks of the Rio Grande, the FBI and witnesses told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

The killing of the Mexican by U.S. authorities — the second in less than two weeks — has exposed the distrust between the two countries that lies just below the surface, and has enraged Mexicans who see the death of the boy on Mexican soil as an act of murder.

Shortly after the boy was shot, Mexican soldiers arrived at the scene and pointed their guns at the Border Patrol agents across the riverbank while bystanders screamed insults and hurled rocks and firecrackers, FBI spokeswoman Andrea Simmons said. She said the agents were forced to withdraw.

"It pretty quickly got very intense over on the Mexican side," she said, adding that FBI agents showed up later and resumed the investigation, even as Mexican authorities pointed guns at them from across the river.

A relative of the dead boy who had been playing with him told the AP that the Mexicans — who he described as federal police, not soldiers — pointed their guns only when the Americans waded into the mud in an apparent attempt to cross into Mexico.

The Mexican authorities accused the Americans of trying to recover evidence from Mexican soil and threatened to kill them if they crossed the border, prompting both sides to draw their guns, said the 16-year-old boy who asked not to be further identified for fear of reprisal.

The confrontation occurred Monday night over the body of Sergio Adrian Hernandez Huereka, who died of his wounds beside the column of a railroad bridge connecting Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, and El Paso.

Each government has made veiled accusations suggesting misconduct on the part of the other's law enforcement agents.

Hernandez was found 20 feet (six meters) into Mexico, and an autopsy revealed that the fatal shot was fired at a relatively close range, according to Arturo Sandoval, a spokesman for the Chihuahua state attorney general's office. Mexican authorities said a .40 caliber shell casing was found near the body, suggesting that the Border Patrol agent might have crossed into Mexico to shoot the boy.

That would violate the rules for Border Patrol agents, who are supposed to stay on the U.S. side — and could open the agent to a Mexican homicide prosecution.

A U.S. official close to the investigation told the AP that authorities have a video showing that the Border Patrol agent did not cross into Mexico. In fact, the official said, the video shows what appear to be members of Mexican law enforcement crossing onto the U.S. side, picking something up and returning to Mexico. The official was not cleared to speak about the video and spoke only on condition of anonymity.

Alejandro Pariente, Chihuahua state's regional deputy attorney general, said the U.S. Border Patrol has given him video which he is reviewing. He declined to describe it except to say that it has sped up the investigation.

The two killings have provoked anger in Mexico like no other recent controversy surrounding immigration, including Arizona's new law making it a state crime to be an illegal immigrant and President Obama's decision to send the National Guard to the border.

Although many Mexicans were unhappy with both initiatives, popular and official reaction had been subdued, in contrast to street protests seen in previous years when the U.S. has cracked down on the border. Many Mexicans have since given up hope for a quick solution to the immigration problem, while other issues including growing drug violence have taken center stage in relations between the two countries.

That has started to change with the back-to-back deaths of two Mexicans at the border: the teenager killed Monday, and migrant Anastasio Hernandez, 42, who died after a Customs and Border Protection officer shocked him with a stun gun at the San Ysidro border crossing that separates San Diego and Tijuana, Mexico. Anastasio Hernandez, who had lived in the U.S. since he was 14, was buried in San Diego on Wednesday.

Mexican news media were filled with images of the 15-year-old's bloody body and his grieving relatives. One tabloid ran a large photograph on its cover, with the banner headline "Grindaderas," salty slang that roughly translates as "things Americans do."

Mexican President Felipe Calderon pledged to "use all resources available to protect the rights of Mexican migrants," and his foreign secretary, Patricia Espinosa, said Mexico wasn't taking the Americans' word that the Border Patrol agent had been defending himself from rock-throwers when he opened fire.

Chihuahua state Gov. Jose Reyes Baeza blamed the two killings on racism fueled by Arizona's law.

"We believe that this killing, the second in recent days in the border between the two countries, is due to xenophobia and racism, derived from the approval of Arizona's anti-immigration law," Reyes said.

Meanwhile, the Border Patrol released statistics showing that assaults on agents along the border between El Paso, and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, were on pace to far exceed totals in the previous four years.

In the past seven months, Border Patrol agents in the El Paso sector have been assaulted 33 times, compared with 39 times in the entire previous year. Twenty-nine of those incidents were rock-throwing, compared to 31 such incidents in all of fiscal 2009.

That's what happened Monday night, when suspected illegal immigrants who ran back to Mexico began throwing rocks at Border Patrol agents detaining other immigrants, Simmons said.

At least one rock came from behind the agent, who was kneeling beside a suspected illegal immigrant whom he was holding prone on the ground, Simmons said. The agent told the rock throwers to stop, then fired his weapon several times, hitting the boy, she said. The FBI is leading the investigation because it involves an assault on a federal officer.

The agent was not injured, Simmons said.

T.J. Bonner, president of the union representing Border Patrol agents, said rock throwing aimed at Border Patrol agents is common and capable of causing serious injury.

"It is a deadly force encounter, one that justifies the use of deadly force," Bonner said.

Mexicans ridiculed that stance.

"Let's say that Anastasio and Sergio Adrian attacked the border agents, one with his fists and the other with rocks," columnist Manuel Jauregui wrote in the newspaper Reforma. "Does that mean that killing them was the only valid option?"

LA RAZA Mex Supremacy Taught in Los Angeles - Center of Mex Occupation!

MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com
THE LA RAZA PROPAGANDA MACHINE FOR THE EXPANSION OF MEXICAN SUPREMACY AT WORK:

THE THING IS… THERE’S NOTING MORE RACIST THAN LA RAZA! “THE RACE”. MEXICANS ARE THE MOST RACIST CULTURE IN THE HEMISPHERE!

*
“In Mexico, a recent Zogby poll declared that the vast majority of Mexican citizens hate Americans. [22.2] Mexico is a country saturated with racism, yet in denial, having never endured the social development of a Civil Rights movement like in the US--Blacks are harshly treated while foreign Whites are often seen as the enemy. [22.3] In fact, racism as workplace discrimination can be seen across the US anywhere the illegal alien Latino works--the vast majority of the workforce is usually strictly Latino, excluding Blacks, Whites, Asians, and others.”
*

UPDATE: On June 3, The Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education offered the following official response to this article:
“The Board of Education has directed the Superintendent to ensure that LAUSD civics and history classes discuss the recent laws enacted in Arizona in the context of the American values of unity, diversity, and Equal Protection for all.
FOX NEWS
Los Angeles Students to Be Taught That Arizona Immigration Law Is Un-American
By Jana Winter
Published June 02, 2010
This article was updated on June 3. See update at the end of the article.
The Los Angeles Unified School District school board wants all public school students in the city to be taught that Arizona's new immigration law is un-American.
The school board president made the announcement Tuesday night after the district's Board of Education passed a resolution to oppose the controversial law, which gives law enforcement officials in Arizona the power to question and detain people they suspect are in the U.S. illegally when they are stopped in relation to a crime or infraction.
Critics of the law say it will result in racial profiling.
The school board voted unanimously on Tuesday to “express outrage” and “condemnation” of the law, and it called on the school superintendent to look into curtailing economic support to the Grand Canyon State. About 73 percent of the students in the school district are Latino.
But supporters of the law say the school board is way out of bounds and that the measure will just distract from the children's education.
“This is ridiculous, it’s ridiculous for us to be involved in Arizona law,” said Jane Barnett, Chairman, Los Angeles County Republican Party. “There is a 50 percent dropout rate in some parts of the school district—is this going to keep kids in school?”
According to its press release, "The Los Angeles Board of Education also requested that Superintendent Ramon Cortines ensure that civics and history classes discuss the recent laws with students in the context of the American values of unity, diversity and equal protection for all people.”
"America must stand for tolerance, inclusiveness and equality,” said Board President Monica García, according to the release. “In our civics classes and in our hallways, we must give life to these values by teaching our students to value themselves; to respect others; and to demand fairness and justice for all who live within our borders. Any law which violates civil rights is un-American."
In an e-mail to FOXNews.com, school district spokesman Robert Alaniz elaborated:
“The Board of Education directed the Superintendent to ensure that LAUSD civics and history classes discuss the recent laws enacted in Arizona in the context of the American values of unity, diversity, and Equal Protection for all. Much like a number of controversial periods and laws that are part of our history and are currently taught including:
-- Slavery
-- Jim Crowe laws and segregation
-- Native American reservations
-- Residential schools (for Native Americans)
-- The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882
-- Anti-Irish racism in the 19th century
-- Racism against immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe in the 20th century
-- Anti-Semitism
-- Internment camps for Japanese Americans during World War II
-- The Mexican Repatriation Program (1929-1939)."
The school district resolution also opposed another new Arizona law that bans schools from teaching classes that promote the overthrow of the government or advocate ethnic solidarity.
The school board called on Arizona's leaders to reverse both of these “misguided” new laws, the press release said.
The board said the laws “effectively sanction and promote unconstitutional racial profiling and harassment,” and “blatantly violate the civil rights of both Arizona residents and all visitors to the State.”
They said Arizona’s new laws also “severely restrict the education of all children in Arizona by refusing to incorporate vital sections of history that incorporate the contributions of this country’s many diverse groups.”
The superintendent was also asked to investigate ways to curtail contracts with Arizona-based businesses and district travel to the state.
"We need to do everything in our power to help our students be global citizens, develop appreciation for the diversity in our midst, and reject any forms of racism or bias," said Board Vice President Yolie Flores. "This resolution highlights our commitment to ensuring that our students understand the ideals and constitutional rights that this great country is founded on, while also gaining an appreciation of the histories and cultural contributions of those who have helped build this nation."
“It is a sad day in America when the rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution are trampled upon under the color of law and authority,” said LAUSD Board Member Martinez. “Everyone, regardless of their status in the United States, has the right to equal protection under our laws. These Arizona laws are nothing but a knee-jerk backlash resulting from the lack of a comprehensive and well thought out immigration reform policy.”
The LA County Republican chairwoman said she’s been inundated with phone calls, e-mails and Facebook messages from people all over Los Angeles who say their school district has no business meddling in another state’s laws when they’ve got so many problems of their own to deal with.
“This is really crazy,” she said. “Everybody is upset about this.”
Barnett called the school board resolution a “pathetic stunt” that distracts educators from what they should be focusing on: educating the students.
“This is nothing we should be involved in. Let the courts deal with this,” she said. “We need to keep out of other people’s states’ business.”
Nathan Mintz, the founder of the South Bay Tea Party and the Republican nominee for the 53rd State Assembly seat.
“This is just another example of these embedded bureaucrats in California doing anything they can to deflect and distract from the poor job their doing of educating our children,” said Nathan Mintz, the founder of the South Bay Tea Party and the Republican nominee for the 53rd State Assembly seat.
He said attacking Arizona’s immigration law is just “a distraction from the key issue of educating the kids in our schools.”
“We support Arizona,” Barnett said. “In fact, I think we ought to go there right now for vacation.”
______
UPDATE: On June 3, The Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education offered the following official response to this article:
“The Board of Education has directed the Superintendent to ensure that LAUSD civics and history classes discuss the recent laws enacted in Arizona in the context of the American values of unity, diversity, and Equal Protection for all. This very important piece of current events would be taught in our classrooms along with a number of controversial periods and laws which are a part of our history and are currently being taught including: slavery; Jim Crow laws and segregation; reservations and residential schools for Native Americans; The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882; the anti-Irish racism in the 19th century; racism against immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe during the 20th century; anti-Semitism; internment camps for Japanese Americans during World War II and the Mexican Repatriation Program during the 1930s.
Let’s remember that these laws were all deemed as “necessary” (in some cases for the security of our nation) during particular times in our history. To ignore what is currently happening in Arizona would be total denial of current events and a part of our history. At the very least it’s a discussion that should take place in the classroom.”

IMMIGRANTS MUST PASS ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEST? Not In This Country!

IMMIGRANTS TO FACE ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEST....? But not in America. Here, we spend millions so that illegals who overwhelmingly loathe the gringo’s culture, language and flag, don’t have to speak it.
It’s part of the culture’s LA RAZA “THE RACE” racism.
*

Immigrants to face English language test

By Chris Greenwood, Press Association

Immigrants coming to Britain to marry or join their partner will soon be asked to take an English language test first, the Government announced today.
All non-European migrants will have to demonstrate basic communication skills that enable them to deal with everyday life before receiving a visa.
The measure, due to come into force this autumn, will apply to spouses and unmarried couples who are already in Britain as well as overseas applicants.
Anyone wishing to come to Britain must first demonstrate they can speak English at the same level required for skilled workers admitted under the points-based system.
The introduction of an English language test was one of four key elements of the Conservatives' election manifesto.
Prime Minister David Cameron said he wanted to promote the integration of newcomers into British society. But his deputy Nick Clegg questioned similar policies under Labour and highlighted how Britons may struggle abroad if other nations implemented tests.
Home Secretary Theresa May said: "I believe being able to speak English should be a pre-requisite for anyone who wants to settle here.
"The new English requirement for spouses will help promote integration, remove cultural barriers and protect public services.
"It is a privilege to come to the UK and that is why I am committed to raising the bar for migrants and ensuring that those who benefit from being in Britain contribute to our society.
"This is only the first step. We are currently reviewing English language requirements across the visa system with a view to tightening the rules further in the future.
"Today's announcement is one of a wide range of measures the new Government is taking to ensure that immigration is properly controlled for the benefit of the UK, alongside a limit on work visas and an effective system for regulating the students who come here."
The prospect of English language tests for migrants heading for Britain was raised several times by the previous administration.
In 2002, the then home secretary David Blunkett announced proposals for tests on language and the ways of British life. Citizenship tests were introduced but English tests for foreign spouses failed to win backing and were quietly shelved.
The new plans mean a spouse coming from outside Europe must provide evidence they have passed an English language test by an approved provider.
Visa applicants in these circumstances must already meet a range of criteria before being allowed to enter the UK under current rules.
All applicants must show their marriage or partnership is genuine and that they can support themselves financially.
Whether people are married in the UK or overseas, the non-UK partner must apply for a two-year settlement visa to come and live in the UK as a spouse.
At the end of the two years they can apply to the UK Border Agency for indefinite leave to remain.
Last year some 38,000 visas for spouses were granted and a further 21,000 people were granted indefinite leave to remain.
The move is likely to have a particular impact on Britain's Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities, who make up a large proportion of these figures.
Isabella Sankey, of Liberty, labelled the news "disgraceful" and said some people may be unfairly penalised.
She said: "While a good command of English is clearly beneficial for someone settling in the UK with their partner or spouse, making this a prerequisite to entering the country is disgraceful.
"What happens to the happily married British citizen with a non English-speaking spouse who returns from abroad to care for elderly parents?
"Surely a common-sense approach would acknowledge how much easier it is to learn English once in the UK."