Saturday, April 16, 2011

The New York Times - MOUTHPIECE FOR LA RAZA PROPAGANDA

THE NEW YORK TIMES IS NOW MEX OWNED BY BILLIONAIRE MEXICAN CARLOS SLIM. IT IS NOW THE MOUTHPIECE FOR LA RAZA PROPAGANDA.


YOU WON’T READ ANYTHING IN THE NYT THAT IS NOT APPROVED BY LA RAZA AND FOR UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER TO THE MEX INVASION!



*

Go to http://www.MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com



*



Heather Mac Donald

Praising Arizona

The state’s new immigration law is perfectly reasonable, but you wouldn’t know it from the New York Times.

30 April 2010

Supporters of Arizona’s new law strengthening immigration enforcement in the state should take heart from today’s New York Times editorial blasting it. “Stopping Arizona” contains so many blatant falsehoods that a reader can be fully confident that the law as actually written is a reasonable, lawful response to a pressing problem. Only by distorting the law’s provisions can the Times and the law’s many other critics make it out to be a racist assault on fundamental American rights.

The law, SB 1070, empowers local police officers to check the immigration status of individuals whom they have encountered during a “lawful contact,” if an officer reasonably suspects the person stopped of being in the country illegally, and if an inquiry into the person’s status is “practicable.” The officer may not base his suspicion of illegality “solely [on] race, color or national origin.” (Arizona lawmakers recently amended the law to change the term “lawful contact” to “lawful stop, detention or arrest” and deleted the word “solely” from the phrase regarding race, color, and national origin. The governor is expected to sign the amendments.) The law also requires aliens to carry their immigration documents, mirroring an identical federal requirement. Failure to comply with the federal law on carrying immigration papers becomes a state misdemeanor under the Arizona law.

Good luck finding any of these provisions in the Times’s editorial. Leave aside for the moment the sweeping conclusions with which the Times begins its screed—such gems as the charge that the law “turns all of the state’s Latinos, even legal immigrants and citizens, into criminal suspects” and is an act of “racial separation.” Instead, let’s see how the Times characterizes the specific legislative language, which is presumably the basis for its indictment.

The paper alleges that the “statute requires police officers to stop and question anyone who looks like an illegal immigrant.” False. The law gives an officer the discretion, when practicable, to determine someone’s immigration status only after the officer has otherwise made a lawful stop, detention, or arrest. It does not allow, much less require, fishing expeditions for illegal aliens. But if, say, after having stopped someone for running a red light, an officer discovers that the driver does not have a driver’s license, does not speak English, and has no other government identification on him, the officer may, if practicable, send an inquiry to his dispatcher to check the driver’s status with a federal immigration clearinghouse.

The Times then alleges that the law “empower[s] police officers to stop anyone they choose and demand to see papers.” False again, for the reasons stated above. An officer must have a lawful, independent basis for a stop; he can only ask to see papers if he has “reasonable suspicion” to believe that the person is in the country illegally. “Reasonable suspicion” is a legal concept of long-standing validity, rooted in the Constitution’s prohibition of “unreasonable searches and seizures.” It meaningfully constrains police activity; officers are trained in its contours, which have evolved through common-law precedents, as a matter of course. If the New York Times now thinks that the concept is insufficient as a check on police power, it will have to persuade every court and every law enforcement agency in the country to throw out the phrase—and the Constitution with it—and come up with something that suits the Times’s contempt for police power.

On broader legal issues, the Times is just as misleading. The paper alleges that the “Supreme Court has consistently ruled that states cannot make their own immigration laws.” Actually, the law on preemption is almost impossibly murky. As the Times later notes in its editorial, the Justice Department ruled in 2002, after surveying the relevant Supreme Court and appellate precedents, that “state and local police had ‘inherent authority’ to make immigration arrests.” The paper does not like that conclusion, but it has not been revoked as official legal advice. If states have inherent authority to make immigration arrests, they can certainly do so under a state law that merely tracks the federal law requiring that immigrants carry documentation.

The Times tips its hand at the end of the editorial. It calls for the Obama administration to end a program that trains local law enforcement officials in relevant aspects of immigration law and that deputizes them to act as full-fledged immigration agents. The so-called 287(g) program acts as a “force multiplier,” as the Times points out, adding local resources to immigration law enforcement—just as Arizona’s SB 1070 does. At heart, this force-multiplier effect is what the hysteria over Arizona’s law is all about: SB 1070 ups the chances that an illegal alien will actually be detected and—horror of horrors—deported. The illegal-alien lobby, of which the New York Times is a charter member, does not believe that U.S. immigration laws should be enforced. Usually unwilling for political reasons to say so explicitly, the lobby comes up with smoke screens—such as the Times’s demagogic charges about SB 1070 as an act of “racial separation”—to divert attention from the underlying issue. Playing the race card is the tactic of those unwilling to make arguments on the merits. (The Times’s other contribution today to the prevailing de facto amnesty for illegal aliens was to fail to disclose, in an article about a brutal 2007 schoolyard execution in Newark, that the suspected leader was an illegal alien and member of the predominantly illegal-alien gang Mara Salvatrucha.)

The Arizona law is not about race; it’s not an attack on Latinos or legal immigrants. It’s about one thing and one thing only: making immigration enforcement a reality. It is time for a national debate: Do we or don’t we want to enforce the country’s immigration laws? If the answer is yes, the Arizona law is a necessary and lawful tool for doing so. If the answer is no, we should end the charade of inadequate, half-hearted enforcement, enact an amnesty now, and remove future penalties for immigration violations.

Heather Mac Donald is a contributing editor of City Journal, the John M. Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, and the coauthor of The Immigration Solution: A Better Plan Than Today’s.

*

April 29, 2010

Survivor Recounts Horror of Attack in Newark Schoolyard

By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA

NEWARK — She lay face-down on the pavement, trying in terror to follow the orders of those who had already robbed and molested her. “Somebody had their knee on my back,” she said, when suddenly, “They pulled my hair up and was trying to chop my neck off with a machete.”

“I guess the knife was dull, because I just felt banging,” Natasha Aeriel told a jury here Thursday morning. “But then I saw a bunch of blood.” Screaming for mercy, she managed to push one attacker off her and rose to flee, when another shot her in the head.

The sole survivor of a notorious attack in a Newark schoolyard that left her brother and two friends dead almost three years ago, Ms. Aeriel told her story publicly for the first time in State Superior Court in Essex County. She recounted the horror of Aug. 4, 2007, in grim detail, in testimony that is at the heart of the prosecution’s case in the first trial of one of the six men accused in the slayings.

Despite partial facial paralysis from the shooting that forces her to talk from one side of her mouth, Ms. Aeriel, 22, spoke clearly in three and a half hours on the witness stand, pausing just once to regain her composure. But her left hand was in nervous motion much of the time, holding her chin or her cheek, playing with the collar of her light brown jacket or running through her braids.

More than 20 relatives and friends of the victims sat in the gallery, underlining her words with a few gasps, silent tears, even a little laughter and, at one point, a smattering of applause, which brought a rebuke from Judge Michael L. Ravin.

She calmly described her wounds, tugging at her gray blouse to reveal a machete scar on her right shoulder, and pointing to the spot where the bullet struck behind her left ear. She told of living in chronic pain and of multiple operations to remove bullet fragments from her head, reattach her ear and partially reconstruct her jaw.

But what she could not do was say much about the defendant in this trial, Rodolfo Godinez, 26. She identified another of the accused as the one who shot her and said a third hacked at her neck and shoulders. In the aftermath of the attack, she was able to identify some of the defendants from pictures, but not Mr. Godinez, whose lawyers have acknowledged that he was there but say he did not participate in the attack.

Investigators have described Mr. Godinez, a native of Nicaragua, as a recruiter for MS-13, or Mara Salvatrucha, a violent street gang composed mostly of Central Americans.

Mr. Godinez’s lawyer, Roy Greenman, repeatedly raised questions about possible gaps or inconsistencies in Ms. Aeriel’s memory of that night. Earlier in the investigation, for example, she said there were six or seven people in the group that attacked her and her friends, but on Thursday she testified that it was definitely six.

Mr. Greenman also had her recount how police detectives, after interviewing her in summer 2007, did not talk to her again for almost a year — and so were unaware that she had firmly identified a suspect she saw on television as the one who shot her.

Much of Ms. Aeriel’s testimony could have been lifted from a horror movie script, starting with an innocent gathering of four friends behind Mount Vernon School in the Ivy Hill neighborhood, relaxing and listening to music on their car radio on a hot summer night.

There was Ms. Aeriel, then 19; her brother, Terrance Aeriel, 18; Ms. Aeriel’s best friend, Iofemi Hightower, 20; and Dashon Harvey, 20, whom she remembered dancing to the rap song “Wipe Me Down.” Three were students at Delaware State University, and Ms. Hightower had planned to enroll there.

Mr. Godinez and a friend were already in the schoolyard, drinking beer, and a while later four more people — a mix of young men and teenage boys — joined them. At that point, Mr. Aeriel, who had stepped away from his friends to make a phone call, sensed that something was wrong. He sent his sister a text message saying that they should leave, she testified, and walked swiftly back to his friends with a serious expression.

They were preparing to get back in the car, Ms. Aeriel said Thursday, when the other group, at least two of them armed with guns, surrounded them and ordered them to lie face-down on the ground and to empty their pockets.

“They was checking our pockets, telling us if they find anything, we’re dead, don’t hold nothing back,” she said. Under questioning by Mr. Greenman, she insisted that each of the six was demanding their valuables and threatening them.

Mr. Harvey had a new cellphone that he tried to hide, she said, but it began ringing. “I was scared they were going to take my car,” she said. “I didn’t think they would start going crazy the way they did.”

“They was like, ‘Mama, you sexy,’ that kind of craziness,” Ms. Aeriel told the jury. Someone tried to pull down Ms. Hightower’s pants, but she was wearing a belt. Then someone yanked down Ms. Aeriel’s basketball shorts and touched her, she said, and “all I could keep doing was saying, ‘Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, Jesus.’ ”

Turning her head slightly, Ms. Aeriel said, she caught the last glimpse she would ever get of her brother and her friends. The attackers marched the other three to a different spot, and then Ms. Aeriel felt the machete.

As she fought off the attacker, “I was screaming, ‘Don’t do that, please don’t do that, why?’ ” she recalled. As she stood up, she heard gunshots, and she kept screaming. Moments later, she said, one of the group shot her.

Ms. Aeriel testified that she had repeatedly tried to get to her feet, crawled a short distance, and “then I’d fall in a pool of blood.” She finally blacked out.

Regaining consciousness in an ambulance, she testified, “I kept saying, ‘Leave me here, leave me here; it’s some kids behind that wall — go take care of them.’ ”

*

BOOK:



The Immigration Solution: A Better Plan Than Today's [Hardcover]

Heather Mac Donald

(Author), Victor Davis Hanson (Author), Steven Malanga (Author), Myron Magnet (Introduction)

*



Product Description

Heather Mac Donald describes how an epidemic of crime, gangs, and illegitimacy is creating a new Hispanic underclass, and how the Mexican government aids and abets illegal immigration to the United States and thwarts state and local attempts to resist it. Steven Malanga shows how, despite much argument to the contrary, Hispanic immigrants produce a net cost to the American economy, not a net benefit, and he goes on to outline the kind of immigration policy that would be both liberal and in America's interest. Victor Davis Hanson writes about his own experience growing up in California's farm country and watching the Hispanic immigrant influx transform his state for the worse. The Immigration Solution proposes the same kind of policy in place in other advanced nations, one that admits skilled and educated people on the basis of what they can do for the country, not what the country can do for them.



*

A READER’S REVIEW ON AMAZON:



In the introduction of this well argued collection of essays, Myron Magnet points out how the illegal immigrant advocates engage in an Orwellian misuse of language. They describe themselves as "pro-immigration" and not defenders of law breaking. The Late Milton Friedman warned, "that you can't have free immigration and a welfare state." Rarely, if ever, in our nation's past did immigrants receive welfare benefits. Illegitimacy rates were low and the newest residents desperately attempted to improve their lot in life. Today's illegal immigrants, especially within the Hispanic community, are often anti-intellectual and hostile towards the very idea of assimilating into the wider American community. A dangerous permanent underclass is turning many of our cities and towns into dystopian hell holes. Many well meaning people are so intimidated by the false charge of racism and "nativism" that they prefer to pretend the problem really doesn't exist. The intellectual virus of political correctness regretfully dominates the discussion. Rational and dispassionate dialogue is often near impossible. Sadly, many Hispanic citizens are also guilt tripped into believing they owe something to these illegal residents. The situation is only getting worse. Time may not be on our side. We obviously are not going to shoot and mistreat the illegals. It is best that we instead find realistic solutions to resolve the crisis. This book offers some excellent recommendations.



The MSM hides the brutal truth from the American people. Few realize that the Mexican government, for instance, hypocritically encourages its own citizens to enter our country illegally---while it treats its own illegal immigrants like subhuman creatures. This is a relatively short book of only 183 pages and an index. It is perhaps the best book available for those who desire to acquire a better understanding of this issue in a relatively short period of time. You need to especially read The Immigration Solution before voting in November.

*

Review



"...A call to arms combined with an outline for a sensible immigration policy." -- Thomas Tancredo, United States Congressman from Colorado



*

"Demolishes open-borders myths and provides a clear, sane path toward an immigration plan that benefits America..." -- Michelle Malkin, author of Invasion



*

"Even if you disagree with their preferred policy changes, their suggestions are serious, provocative, and worthy of careful thought..." -- Dr. George Borjas, Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government and the author of Heaven's Door: Immigration Policy and the American Economy

*



"In this book, the writers from City Journal again show why that magazine is so indispensable. Having helped change conventional wisdom on the urban problems of crime and welfare, they have now taken a hard look at an issue even more suffused with sentimentality and cliché. The Immigration Solution is essential reading for anyone seeking to develop an informed opinion on this vital national issue." -- Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies

*



"The Immigration Solution demolishes open-borders myths and provides a clear, sane path toward an immigration plan that benefits America and adheres to the rule of law. Heather Mac Donald, Victor Davis Hanson, and Steven Malanga battle muddled amnesty advocates with impeccable logic, facts, and principle. This book is not just a must-read. It's a must-do. -- Michelle Malkin, author of Invasion

*



"The Immigration Solution is a cogent analysis of our illegal immigration crisis and the public policy choices facing America. This book is a critically important read for our elected officials and the citizens they should be representing." -- Lou Dobbs



*



"The Immigration Solution is essential reading for anyone seeking to develop an informed opinion on this vital national issue." -- Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies



*

"The Immigration Solution is not just another book about the catastrophe cause by millions of illegal aliens flooding our country; it is a call to arms combined with an outline for a sensible immigration policy. If every member of Congress would read this book, we might be able to beginning the process of securing our borders and reducing the number of illegal immigrants within them." -- Thomas Tancredo, United States Congressman from Colorado



*

"The Immigration Solution" is an excellent new book that discusses illegal immigration without the political rhetoric, spin, demagoguery, and unsubstantiated claims that have become all too common in the media and among politicians.



*

It was written by three scholars at leading think tanks -- Heather Mac Donald and Steve Malanga of the Manhattan Institute and Victor Davis Hanson of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. Unlike many other scholars, they know how to write so that the general public can understand what they are saying."--- -- Thomas Sowell, Real Clear Politics



*



"The divisive debate over immigration is going to continue for some time to come. MacDonald, Malanga, and Hanson lucidly present their concerns over the current direction of immigration policy and offer more than a few suggestions for change. Even if you disagree with their preferred policy changes, their suggestions are serious, provocative, and worthy of careful thought-and, regardless of your ideological background, you might actually find yourself nodding more than a few times as you read through the book." -- Dr. George Borjas, Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government and the author of Heaven's Door: Immigration Policy and the American Economy



"A comprehensive and enjoyable history of the machinations behind and history of DreamWorks and the personalities involved. ... A valuable resource to discover some of the inner workings of the DreamWorks story." --Thomas Jackson, American Renaissance, August 2008

*

• Hardcover: 224 pages

• Publisher: Ivan R Dee (November 2, 2007)

• Language: English

• ISBN-10: 1566637600

• ISBN-13: 978-1566637602

*

No comments: