Showing posts with label Arizona Illegals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arizona Illegals. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

Arizona Immigration Law In Supreme Court

Supreme Court signals support for Arizona immigration law provision
Published April 25, 2012
FoxNews.com

Immigration fight heads to highest court The Supreme Court signaled Wednesday that it might uphold a key element of Arizona's immigration law, as justices across the board suggested the state has a serious problem on its hands and should have some level of sovereignty to address illegal immigration.

The justices appeared to ready to allow a provision requiring police officers to check the immigration status of people they think are in the U.S. illegally.

The justices strongly suggested Wednesday they are not buying the Obama administration's argument that the state exceeded its authority, with Chief Justice John Roberts at one point saying he doesn't think the federal government even wants to know how many illegal immigrants are in the country.

"You can see it's not selling very well," Justice Sonia Sotomayor told Obama administration Solicitor General Donald Verrilli.

Just like the health care overhaul challenge heard earlier this month, Wednesday's hearing on the immigration law drew passionate surrogates from both sides. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer was loudly booed by the law's opponents in front of the courthouse. She said in a statement Wednesday afternoon that "I am filled with optimism -- the kind that comes with knowing that Arizona's cause is just and its course is true."

While the justices addressed the traffic stop provision Wednesday, it was unclear what the court would do with other aspects of the law that have been put on hold by lower federal courts. Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who helped draft the law, voiced optimism in Arizona's chances.

"This was a very good day for Arizona in the Supreme Court today," he told Fox News. "The U.S. Justice Department was on the ropes."

But Brent Wilkes, director for the League of United Latin American Citizens, warned that the law would take a "human toll" on Arizona families if allowed to stand.

"This is really a racial profiling bill," he told Fox News.

The hearing Wednesday morning has implications far beyond Arizona's borders, as several states, including Alabama and South Carolina, have followed in Arizona's footsteps to craft their own immigration enforcement measures.

The Obama administration, which opposes those measures, has argued that the country cannot sustain a patchwork of separate immigration laws.

Verrilli, who is arguing on behalf of the government, said in his brief that the Executive Branch has the power to enforce immigration policy.

"For each state, and each locality, to set its own immigration policy in that fashion would wholly subvert Congress' goal: a single, national approach," he wrote.

But Arizona argued that the current system is broken, and that the state is paying an unfair price for that failure.

"Arizona shoulders a disproportionate burden of the national problem of illegal immigration," attorney Paul Clement argued in his brief. He argued that enforcement attention in California and Texas has turned the Arizona border into a funnel for illegal immigrants, with a third of illegal border crossings occurring there.

The attorney described Arizona's law as a response to an "emergency situation" -- with illegal immigrants soaking up millions of state dollars in health care and education, posing safety risks to ranchers and cutting into the state's job market.

Two of the key statutes, which have been blocked and will be at issue in Wednesday's arguments, are provisions to bar illegal immigrants from seeking a job and to require law enforcement to check the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being in the country illegally in the course of a routine stop.

A ruling from the Supreme Court is likely to come this summer, in the thick of the presidential election year -- it could either bolster what has been a bold move from the Obama administration's Justice Department to intervene in state issues ranging from immigration to voter ID laws, or stop the administration in its tracks and open the floodgates to even more state laws that challenge federal authority.

The immigration case arrives at the high court Wednesday just weeks after the justices heard arguments in the multi-state challenge to the federal health care overhaul.

Democrats on Capitol Hill this week were already scrambling to prepare for the possibility that the high court upholds the immigration law. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., announced a plan to introduce a bill that would effectively nullify Arizona's law -- though it would stand virtually no chance of passing in the Republican-controlled House.

"Immigration has not and never has been an area where states are able to exercise independent authority," Schumer said Tuesday at a Capitol Hill hearing, where he announced he would introduce the proposal should the Supreme Court "ignore" the "plain and unambiguous statements of congressional intent" and uphold the Arizona law.

But former Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce, the author of the law, said: "We have a national crisis, and yet everyone wants to ignore that: the cost, the damage, the crime." The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/25/arizona-immigration-law-battle-arrives-at-supreme-court/#ixzz1t4nZYLr7

Friday, April 08, 2011

AZ Teacher Exposes Illegal Immigration

AZ Teacher Exposes Illegal Immigration in Classrooms

Substitute teacher Tony Hill unknowingly ignited a rhetoric bomb when he wrote a letter to Arizona State Sen. Russell Pearce, the legislator behind Arizona’s infamous SB 1070.

This letter was read on the state Senate’s floor to support legislation requiring parents to prove their children are citizens of the United States before the children may enter school.

The letter was written by Hill on March 15, 2011, after substituting at Harold W. Smith Elementary School.

Wrote Hill:

“During the Pledge of Allegiance I notice the vast majority of students refusing to stand and say the pledge. I asked the students why they refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance and they responded by saying, "we are Mexicans and Americans stole our land."

The teacher's instructions were for the students to read a few pages and answer the questions regarding Mark Twain in their history textbook and to finish their final drafts to Senator Steve Gallardo thanking him for his position on Illegal Immigration rights. Their teacher apparently had showed them a video with Senator Steve Gallardo and Lou Dobbs.

Most of the students came unprepared for class not possessing paper and pencil. I provided the students with paper and pencils only to have them wad-up the paper and throw it at each other along with their pencils.

The students' final drafts that I read were basically the same. Most of them stated they were in the country illegally, White Americans are racist, and that they came here for a better life. I asked the class if America adopted Mexico immigration laws would Americans still be consider racist?

That question they could not answer and called me a racist for asking it. I mentioned that my wife and children are Hispanic so how could I be racist? I asked the students to stop speaking Spanish in class because it was impolite to speak a language in front of people who may not speak that language. Their response was that Americans better learn Spanish and their customs because they are taking their land back from us.

When it came to completing the Mark Twain assignment only 10 students completed it out of all my classes. Most of the students refused to open the book, tore the pages out of the book, or threw the textbooks at each other. I thought are these the students we are trying to educate with taxpayers money. I have found that substitute teaching in these areas most of the Hispanic students do not want to be educated but rather [want to] be gang members and gangsters.

They hate America and are determined to reclaim this area for Mexico. If we are able to remove the illegals out of our schools, the class sizes would be reduced and the students who wanted to learn would have a better chance to do so and become productive citizens.”

"They hate America and are determined to reclaim this area for Mexico," wrote Hill.

Citizens, we need your help. This letter was the result of one substitute teacher's day covering for an absent elementary teacher.

Imagine how many other classrooms there are just like this at other
elementary schools across the nation. And let's not forget middle schools and high schools.

Can you imagine the dangers posed to your child or children by having students like this in his or her classroom?

I certainly don't want my children educated alongside other students who already have the high aspirations of joining dangerous gangs affiliated with the Mexican cartels' drug-trafficking and human-smuggling - all while they scorn a tax-payer funded education and the chance to better themselves.

That money could be better spent educating American children who love our country, our values, and our way of life.

Fellow Patriots, please use this opportunity to join Minuteman PAC in sending a blast fax to Congress demanding they secure our borders, reform birthright citizenship, and mandate parental citizenship for a FREE education.

As Washington squabbles today over the 2011 budget, we need to let them OUR representatives know exactly where they can save billions of dollars - by NOT providing a free education to the children of illegal immigrants.

The American education system is funded by the taxes collected from citizens like yourself and I.

It seems only right and just that these funds educate OUR children without the disruption and danger of having anti-American students with hopes to join Mexican-cartel gangs in the same classroom.

Mr. Hill's letter is a damning indictment of every elected official, and President Obama himself, who has stalled in pushing through real immigration reform and border security measures.

Help us tell Washington just how sick and tired we are of career politicians supporting Amnesty measures in order to obtain those votes, while sacrificing every opportunity to secure the U.S.-Mexico border. Send your Blast-Fax to Congress Today!

Now, more than ever before, we have to act.

We must secure our border. We must secure our classrooms.

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Danger Stalks The LIne

MERCER: Danger stalks the line

Arizonans are living and dying under the gun
By Carmen Mercer
6:42 p.m., Monday, August 16, 2010

Imagine if, on a regular basis, you had drug runners with machine guns trespassing into your backyard from a foreign country and looking at you as if you're the one with the problem. This is not a fictional scenario. It has happened to several of my friends in Arizona who own ranches near the U.S.-Mexico border and have had the bad luck to be stationed at crossing points for drug runners coming into the United States.

In one case, a friend of mine was up on a pole fixing a fence that had been torn down the day before by those crossing over illegally onto his property. He watched as three persons with machine guns came across from Mexico onto his ranch, and one of them looked up at him menacingly and said, "Everything OK?" After he was somehow able to speak again, he muttered a suitably innocuous answer, then went about his business and prayed that somehow he would survive.

Fortunately, in his case, he did. But for Robert Krentz, an Arizona rancher who was killed in March by someone authorities suspect was an illegal immigrant, fate was not so kind. The footprints of the suspected killer were followed from Krentz's bullet-riddled body some 20 miles south back into Mexico.

Those of us who have been dealing with border issues for years were saddened but not shocked by what happened. If anything, we're surprised that it hasn't happened more often. Ranchers and others in Arizona deal with these dangerous situations on a regular basis, and when the Border Patrol is called in, the suspects often have disappeared.

There's an even worse situation to consider. One friend of mine who has a ranch on the Arizona-Mexico border was awakened late one night by his dog barking. When he went to the window, he saw several men in military helmets and full body armor marching across his land, just a few feet from his house. That was strange enough, but when he heard them speak, a chill ran through him. My friend served with the U.S. Army in the Middle East and clearly recognized that the men were speaking Arabic. Because of his ranch's location near the border, it was logical to assume that they were crossing from Mexico. He shuddered when he thought of where they might be heading and what they might be planning. Once again, when the Border Patrol arrived, the men were long gone, and they were never found.

Illegal immigrant traffic into Phoenix alone has been linked to spikes in crime rates, including murders related to drug trafficking and fatal car accidents involving unlicensed, drunken drivers. Add to this a tab in the billions of dollars for free health care and education for illegal immigrants and their children - all at taxpayers' expense - and the thousands of jobs lost by legal citizens to the cheap labor offered by non-taxpaying, illegal workers. All of this sort of thing, of course, led to the law change that occurred this summer in Arizona, commonly referred to as S.B. 1070, which is meant to address the illegal immigration problem in the state that the federal government has largely chosen to ignore.

The very people in the federal government who for so long have turned their backs on the border problems in Arizona, Texas and California are complaining about human rights violations related to the Arizona law change. The law is very clear about requiring that police have a legitimate reason for stopping someone - not because he "looks Mexican." If one has reason to suspect the person is illegal - such as presence in a crowded van on a known highway corridor for illegal crossings without a valid driver's license or other proof-of-residency documents - then the officer may inquire about his immigration status and alert federal authorities, if necessary.

The same applies to a drug dealer who commits a violent crime. If he has no legal documents to validate his identity, that opens the door to reasonable suspicion about his legal-residency status. It is part of the government's job to protect its citizenry from dangerous criminals and, in the case of illegals, to have them deported to their country of origin.

This is nothing new. Those who are in the United States as alien residents have been required to carry appropriate documentation with them since the 1940s. S.B. 1070 simply puts the pressure on the federal government to enforce that law.

However, there is a world of difference between reasonable suspicion and simply carding people at random, which is what some critics of S.B. 1070 assume is its intent. From a logical point of view, one has to ask - particularly in a time of economic hardship - how Arizona law enforcement personnel would have the resources to make random stops of drivers and other persons even if they have the legal right to do so.

Lack of evidence, however, has not stopped those who are very much opposed to the Arizona law from assuming it has features that it does not and that it is racist by nature. This is a very powerful accusation, and yet it is not backed up by the facts.

If, God forbid, another major terrorist incident takes place on U.S. soil, and it is committed by a member of an Islamic terrorist group who crossed into this country illegally from Mexico, the blood will be on the government's hands. In the case of Robert Krentz and the thousands of other innocent citizens killed over the years by illegal immigrants, it already is.

It's time we stop blaming Arizona for taking action against this massive problem and commend the state's governor and citizens for their courageous and necessary step forward.

Carmen Mercer is one of the co-founders of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corp and the author of America De-fence-less; www.carmenmercer.com

Friday, April 30, 2010

Politics As Usual, or Something Far Worse?

April 30, 2010

Political Ping-Pong Balls

Arizona has taken a stand. If the Feds won't enforce the immigration laws, they will do it themselves. Actually, they HAVE been doing it all along, they are just now making it official as well as highly visible.

Yes, some of the immigrants are victims in a sense, but this has to be done to protect citizens from those illegal immigrants who sneak in and open drug distributorships, human trafficking way houses, and kidnap for ransom anyone who protests. Murder is the favorite tool of their business.

Apparently the politicians who strive to pass amnesty laws think it is worth all the above death and mayhem to get more votes for their party. That is the real bottom line. Drugs, murder, human trafficking, are all ok if it gets more votes. Those otherwise law-abiding immigrants who entered illegally are far overshadowed by those who came here expressly to commit vile crimes against each other and against our sovereign country.

Amnesty at this point in our history would be a huge mistake. A wink and a nod to the drug culture of the Central Americas would plunge us ever deeply into a chasm we cannot escape. Amnesty was tried before, and failed miserably during the Reagan years.

This is not a racial issue as claimed by the left, and it never was. It is a matter of who shall have the right, the privilege, to live in our country. Is it to be hard working, honest people or should it be just any scum who can slither their way under a fence and into our country? If those murderous thugs did not exist here in America, the rest would be left alone as they have been in decades past.

Those politicians who espouse amnesty are trading your personal safety for votes to keep themselves in office so they can commit further trespasses against your life, your personal freedoms.

Think about it. The poor, the disenfranchised, always get the worst treatment. And this time it is from the very party they have counted on and have been led to believe will save them.

Friday, April 03, 2009

Arpaio Not Invited To Comittee Hearings

Controversial Arizona Sheriff Snubbed by House Panel on Immigration
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio couldn't defend himself because the House didn't invite him.

FOXNews.com

Thursday, April 02, 2009

House Judiciary subcommittees convened Thursday to examine allegations of unconstitutional immigration enforcement tactics -- and took target practice at Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona, whose controversial methods have been called racist by activists and Democratic lawmakers.

But Arpaio didn't defend himself on Capitol Hill. He did not testify to the committee and he did not attend the joint hearing.

That's because the Maricopa County, Ariz., law enforcement chief wasn't invited, said House Judiciary Committee sources.

"He was not asked or invited to come to this hearing, but he wasn't the direct focus of it," a source within the Judiciary Committee, speaking on condition of anonymity, told FOXNews.com.

The joint hearing by the House Judiciary Committee Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law Subcommittee and Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties Subcommittee Thursday was convened to "focus on wide-ranging allegations of racial profiling in connection with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement's 287 program." It also was used to "examine allegations of unconstitutional policing and immigration enforcement tactics" like those used by Arpaio.

Arpaio's policing methods have drawn widespread criticism from lawmakers and activist groups, like Amnesty International and the ACLU, for allegedly using racial profiling to fight crime in the Southwest. The Arizona sheriff and his deputies have also come under fire for keeping harsh prison conditions and for unfairly targeting illegal immigrants.

Arpaio, who promotes himself as "America's Toughest Sheriff," said he's being unfairly vilified for his approach to law enforcement.

"It's a political witch hunt to use me to stop local law enforcement from enforcing federal laws," Arpaio told FOXNews.com on Thursday, noting that activists who regularly protest his policing hold up signs calling him "Hitler" and "Nazi."

"I've been the sheriff going on 17 years, and I always get re-elected. And all the polls on this issue of immigration support me so it's just a small minority of politicians and activists who accuse me" of mistreating suspects, Arpaio said.

Among the primary concerns during testimony was section 287 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which was put into law in 1996 as a result of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act.

Section 287 authorizes the secretary of Homeland Security to enter into agreements with state and local law enforcement agencies that allow them to identify and detain immigration offenders they encounter during their law enforcement operations.

On Thursday, members of Congress and some of Arpaio's most outspoken critics -- like Mesa, Ariz., Police Chief George Gascon -- met on Capitol Hill to review the impact of federal immigration law on the ability to combat crime by illegal immigrants while also protecting their civil rights.

Gascon did not mention Arpaio by name during his opening testimony, but said the authority handed to local police by federal officials has created an environment in which racial profiling and "constitutional concerns" are setting back the effort to protect the public.

"The impact on local law enforcement in this politically charged environment can be devastating. In some cases, it is setting the police profession back to the 1950s and '60s when police officers were sometimes viewed in minority communities as the enemy," he said.

During Thursday's testimony, Arpaio's absence was noted.

"I want to make clear that he declined to come," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., chairwoman of the immigration subcommittee.

But when Lofgren was questioned by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, about whether the sheriff had been formerly invited, Lofgren said, "No, he said in advance he would not intend to come. In a newspaper article he said he would not come."

Arpaio, who has served as Maricopa County's sheriff since 1992, said he has dedicated the last 30 years working with the federal government, inside the Justice Department and as a Drug Enforcement Administration official, and he would think lawmakers would want to hear about his experience.

"You think they would have called me just to get my expertise -- if nothing else -- about the Mexican-U.S. border. But instead they get one of my biggest critics -- a Mesa police chief who doesn’t like me going into his town arrested illegals -- and a couple other people," he said.

"These congressmen never had the courtesy to ask me to speak," he said.

Arpaio also defended his policing methods, saying they are both constitutional and effective in lowering crime rates.

"We investigated 147,000 people booked into our jail under 287. And 23,000 murderers all the way down we proved are illegal so they can not get back on the street. That's why crime has gone down in this area," he said.

The sheriff said he has invited congressional critics to come to Arizona to observe his operations, but so far has got no response.

"I'm just enforcing the law that I took an oath of office to enforce. And nobody's going to deter me or scare me away," he said. "They can go after me all they want, but I'm very comfortable the way I run my operation."

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Arizona Backing Down

Ariz. governor ends sheriff's immigration contract
By CHRIS KAHN – 9 hours ago

PHOENIX (AP) — Gov. Janet Napolitano ordered the state to end an anti-illegal immigration contract with a high-profile sheriff Tuesday so she can pay for a larger effort to track down thousands of felons around Arizona.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Tuesday criticized the governor's decision as a maneuver to thwart his efforts against illegal immigrants.

"Dirty politics are at work right now," Arpaio said at a news conference.

Arpaio, who describes himself as "America's Toughest Sheriff" and is best known for feeding jail inmates green bologna sandwiches, clothing them in pink underwear, and making them work on chain gangs, received praise for his anti-immigration efforts from many who believe the federal government isn't doing enough to remove people in the U.S. illegally.

But his raids and sweeps of illegal immigrants in Phoenix and nearby Guadalupe have drawn protests from community leaders and civil liberties advocates. Arpaio, a Republican, has also been criticized for letting thousands of felony warrants go unserved while he chased illegal immigrants.

According to the Arizona Department of Public Safety, there are about 59,000 outstanding, unserved felony warrants in the state. The majority are in Maricopa County, the state's most populated county.

Napolitano spokeswoman Jeanine L'Ecuyer denied that the Democratic governor was trying to cut into efforts to stop illegal immigration.

"It couldn't be further from the truth," L'Ecuyer said.

Pennie Gillette-Stroud, the DPS chief of the criminal investigations division, said Napolitano's multi-agency task force will focus on violent, repeat criminals as well as undocumented immigrants with felony warrants.

To help pay for the task force, the state Department of Public Safety won't renew a $1.6 million contract with the sheriff's office. That contract ends May 17th, DPS spokesman Bart Graves said.

Monday, February 11, 2008

Terrorists Entering Through Arizona

First aired August 13, 2004 at 11:00PM MST
Investigators: Terrorist Alley

Illegals from terrorist nations are crossing the border into Arizona.

Tom McNamara and the Eyewitness News 4 Investigators have spent the last three months talking to experts and eyewitnesses.

The stories are compelling and the evidence is frightening, and just this week, Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo released a report showing that the problem is worse than anyone thought.

Here's what the Eyewitness News 4 Investigators uncovered.

"It's a Muslim prayer blanket. It was found about a mile and a half west from the Douglas port of entry in 2001."

Larry Vance is a rancher who lives near the U.S.-Mexico border in Douglas, Arizona.

For years, he says he's watched - and documented - thousands of illegals crossing the border and running away to eventual arrest... or freedom and anonymity somewhere in this country.

And in just one hour, during this stake-out along the border between Douglas and b\Bisbee, The Investigators count 198 illegals in five different groups crossing into the U.S. with no resistance.

Watch as they huddle in the bushes, then climb thru a few strands of barbed wire and run for freedom.

We called Border Patrol and waited another full hour, but no one ever came.

Later, we checked Border Patrol logs which note agents being dispatched following our call, but also note those agents found no signs of activity in the area.

In recent years, Vance says, the evidence some illegals leave behind is alarming.

Vance says, "Other log books, diary-type things, other bits and pieces of paper with Arabic written on them found in the area over the last few years

We've all heard of the U.S. government's Terror Watch List: countries flagged because Americans are endangered by their citizens, yet regularly, illegals from those countries are crossing the Arizona border, blending in with groups of Mexican and South American illegal immigrants.

If apprehended, they are brought to this federal detention center in Florence, Arizona.

The investigators found that on this day, several individuals of this kind were being detained here, including some from Sudan, Iran, and even Iraq.

These are just the ones who were caught.

These detainees are called 'other than Mexicans' or OTM's. Most will eventually be sent back to their home country.

But some disappear very quickly, usually before they even reach this center or other holding facilities. They're taken away by tight-lipped federal agents to who-knows-where.

Who are they? They're called 'Special Interest Aliens" or "SIA."

According to Ben Anderson, a retired U.S. Army Colonel, The SIA that they don't want to talk about. That's special interest alien. These are people from those countries that we consider terrorist threats."

Anderson is a retired U.S. Army Colonel who tracks illegal immigration from his home in Sierra Vista, Arizona. He has a website sharing his research into Special Interest Aliens.

"You will not read about that. You will not hear about that. They will not talk about that. They will not provide that info to the press

Colonel Anderson says these Special Interest Aliens originate in the Middle East or Northeast Asia. They travel through Spain to what's called the tri-border area of Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay, then, to Mexico City.

They pay to learn Spanish language skills, and by the time they reach the U.S., they're acting and talking like Mexicans to fool border agents.

And, Anderson says, they're entering the United States right through our backyard. "This is the main alley. It's called "Cocaine Alley" or "Terrorist Alley." Whatever you want to call it, Arizona is the prime place."

Cochise County is the center. It's the point of gravitus, center of gravity for all illegals," says Anderson.

Anderson says some Special Interest Aliens are well-funded. paying tens of thousands of dollars to be smuggled into this country. They manage to get passports from non-terrorist nations.


And here's the shocking part: if they are caught, they are often released on their own recognizance, never to be seen again.

According to Retired Border Patrol Agent David Stoddard, "There are Middle Easterners coming across the border as we speak."

Stoddard agrees with Anderson. Stoddard spent 17 years as a Border Patrol agent and supervisor in the Tucson Sector before retiring.

"What's scary is that I can show you places out here on the line right now where 18-wheelers can be driven across."

"These 18-wheelers can be loaded with anything -- illegal aliens, atomic weapons, whatever."

Stoddard says Americans would be shocked if they knew just how many people from all over the world are getting into this country across the Arizona border. And he says we're even less safe from terrorism today than we were before 9/11.

Take for example, the capture of terrorist suspect Jose Padilla. The Justice Department says Padilla and an accomplice planned to enter the U.S. thru Mexico to blow up apartment buildings in major cities, like New York.


Or the case of suspected al-Qaeda sleeper agent Mohammed Junaid Babar.

Babar has told investigators of a scheme to smuggle terrorists across the Mexican border. He's tied to a terror plot to carry out bombings and assassinations in London.

And the Tombstone Tumbleweed newspaper reports that in June, 53 Middle Eastern men were apprehended by Border Patrol agents near Willcox.

It's believed they were from Iran or Syria.

Stoddard says, "It's the ones who are sneaking into our country under cover of darkness between our ports of entry that concern me and should concern every American.

Border Patrol Council President T.J. Bonner says, "You don't know what is getting by you unless you come across, as you said, small pieces of evidence, remnants of things that give you clues, that not everybody is coming across from mexico looking for a job."

Bonner knows exactly who and what current agents are uncovering along our border and he has a dire warning:

"It's only a matter of time before another terrorist attack occurs, unfortunately.

Some in Congress are starting to take notice of the threat. Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo released a report that revealed a 50% increase in OTMs, illegals Other Than Mexicans, crossing the border.

Tancredo says some illegals from terrorist nations are paying as much as $50,000 to be smuggled in. He says they're not paying that kind of money simply to work at a 7/11.

Madrassas for Arizona

March 09, 2005

Turning Arizona Public Schools Into Muslim Madrassas --IT'S ALREADY BEGUN

[Another long post, but more bloggy, with great chunks of other peoples' words. This may be blessing or curse, depending on the reader's taste for my prose. At any rate, read it and weep. Then get angry. Then do something. And remember the goal: No dhimmis here. Ever.]

by Jerome du Bois

Before we begin this very long post, a quick question for Arizona parents of middle-school students: if someone placed a pretty mat on the floor, told you to face in a certain direction, kneel, bow down, and repeat strange words five times a day for a month, would you do it? Your children will, before the end of the year. You can count on it, their grades will depend on it, and right now there's nothing you can do about it.

. . . it is hard to understand why, in an American textbook in which the birth and expansion of Islam gets 55 pages, the Middle Ages in Europe get merely seven, and the Byzantine Empire six. By way of contrast, the story of the Umayyad Muslims is told in seven pages, and even more peculiarly for students in a Western culture, a chapter about "Village Society in West Africa" takes up eight pages. --Rod Dreher, NRO, February 12, 2002, commenting on Across The Centuries, a seventh-grade social-studies textbook.

Michael H. Hart's top 100 list of the most influential people in the history of the world was presented to teach that Muhammad was #1, Sir Isaac Newton was #2 and Jesus was #3. --from an email to Daniel Pipes by FISH, February 27, 2005, about History Alive! The Medieval World and Beyond, a newer seventh-grade social-studies textbook.

Schools and campuses are no exceptions as places where Islam can be victorious. . . . We should use every opportunity to sensitize non-Muslim peers and school staff to Islam and to establish an environment in which everywhere a non-Muslim turns, he notices Islam portrayed in a positive way, is influenced by it and eventually accepts Islam.--from DawaNet, "How To Make America An Islamic Nation." (See Pipes here.)

Coming soon to an elementary school near you: mandatory indoctrination in Islamic customs and practices. According to The Kansas City Star, third-, fourth- and fifth-graders in Herndon, Virginia, are to be given lessons in the three Rs: Reading, ‘Riting, and Ramadan. During this instruction, public school children will play act being Muslims, and, perhaps unwittingly, convert to Islam. -- Alexis Amory, FrontPage, October 20, 2004.

On February 23, 2005, the Arizona Republic ran a story about Scottsdale Unified School District Superintendent John M. Baracy, a Ph.D who makes over $200,000 per year. [Email is: superintendent@susd.org.] The subject: he changed six job titles. It was cute. From Anne Ryman's article:

She used to be known as the receptionist.

Now she's the Director of First Impressions.

Barbara Levine is one of several employees in the Scottsdale Unified School District whose job titles have changed in a sharp departure from the traditional titles that parents grew up using.

National workplace experts say they are unaware of another school district in the United States that has changed its titles so dramatically, and they disagree over whether the new titles, which are designed to reflect the district's commitment to learning, are good. Parents, they say, could become confused over whom to contact if they have a complaint.

Was the school bus late? Blame the "transporter of learners," formerly the bus driver.

Got a problem with your school principal? Take it up with the 10-word "executive director for elementary schools and excelling teaching and learning," formerly known as the assistant superintendent of elementary schools.

Sound confusing or like hyperbole?

Scottsdale Superintendent John Baracy, who created the new titles for about a half-dozen employees, doesn't think so.

"This is to make a statement about what we value in the district. We value learning," said Baracy, who pledges to back up the new titles with better customer service.

Better customer service? I'm impressed --at first-- but I have a question for Dr. "Excelling" Baracy on a lot less whimsical subject than job titles. In fact, I address my question to everyone on the Governing Board. [Email is: govboard@susd.org.] This means you--

Mrs. Christine Schild, President, appointed 2002, three sons in Scottsdale schools;
Mrs. Jennifer Petersen, appointed 2004, three children in Scottsdale schools;
Ms. Karen Beckvar, appointed 2002;
Mrs. Molly Holzer, appointed 2004, two children in Scottsdale schools; and
Dr. Eric Meyer, appointed 2004, two children in Scottsdale schools--

--and the first one to answer gets a Muslim-approved forehead-activated prayer-rug buzzer. Here's my question:

With all this valuing of learning going on, why won't you allow a seventh-grade social studies textbook to go home with the student? You know, one of your "customers"?

Could it be because it champions, foregrounds, and whitewashes Islam?

At least one Scottsdale father wants to know. Read his recent comment (links added by me) on Daniel Pipes's website, responding to Pipes's November 24, 2004 article, Teaching Islam in American Schools:

Submitted by FISH (fish123abc@cox.net), February 27, 2005 at 10:45

Excellent article, Dr. Pipes, and thank you for taking the time to write it!

My child is in the 7th grade in Scottsdale, Arizona. The school's officially adopted social studies textbook is titled Across the Centuries and is published by Houghton Mifflin. However, Across the Centuries has been shelved and the school is piloting a brand new book from Teacher's Curriculum Institute, aka TCI, titled History Alive! The Medieval World and Beyond (this book is not permitted to go home). In my opinion, this book is highly biased towards Islam, historically incorrect and also includes fake history along with Islamic religious proselytizing and indoctrination techniques.

The school has spent approximately 5 weeks of the third quarter grading period teaching Islam to 12 and 13 year olds. The children had to write a full biography on the life of Muhammad, using the information from the textbook --an extremely indoctrinating exercise. This biography will be a large portion of their grade for the 8 week period. Michael H. Hart's top 100 list of the most influential people in the history of the world was presented to teach that Muhammad was #1, Sir Isaac Newton was #2 and Jesus was #3. The school hosted two professional Muslim speakers, from the Islamic Speakers Bureau of Arizona, to speak to all 7th grade social studies classes. This took one whole day. The Muslim speakers brought prayer rugs and taught the children to pray the Muslim way. I also believe that there were recitations from the Koran and possibly an Islamic "fashion show".

To the best of my knowledge, in this Islamic program, there are none of the negative aspects of Islam touched upon. It is my opinion that in the book, History Alive! The Medieval World and Beyond, Christians are trounced and portrayed as murderers of the Muslim and Jewish people. The Jewish people are only mentioned, and very briefly, in order to be victimized, persecuted and murdered by the Christians. All the while, Islam builds great and grand new empires, has many great and wonderful achievements in architecture, education, science, geography, mathematics, medicine, literature, art and music, and ultimately rules benevolently over the Jewish and Christian people.

Islamic indoctrination in American education is a highly successful insidious industry that is extremely well organized, well connected, legally savvy, brazenly influential, and without successful opposition. When individuals complain to the schools, we often find ourselves engaged in a seriously daunting uphill battle. There should be an opposing and equally aggressive and well connected organization of people who are willing to stop the Islamization of our school children and of our public schools. This is a big job. Sharing information, increasing awareness and being connected are half the battle.

There is a large amount of information available about the Islamization of public school textbooks. Of course, Daniel Pipes' website is a good place to start. Check The Textbook League and William Bennetta, The American Textbook Council and Gilbert Sewall for starters. Search the internet using terms like Islamic indoctrination in public schools, textbooks promote Islam, Islamic dawa in public schools, Across the Centuries criticism, Serge Trifkovic Across the Centuries, Textbooks for Jihad by Lee Kaplan, Look who's teaching Johnny about Islam by Paul Sperry, etc. . . You will find many articles and one will lead to the next and so on . . .

I feel strongly that religious studies should not be taught in public elementary, middle or high schools. Religious studies can be offered in public colleges to adults who are able to make their own choices about what they want to be "fed." I wish that the people in charge of our children's public education felt the same way!

I've never heard of a school textbook that the student was forbidden to take home, and neither has my wife, a former teacher. While we're waiting for Dr. Baracy and the SUSD Governing Board's answer to this anomaly, we will explore further this Islamic insinuiation campaign, which did not burst onto the Scottsdale scene two weeks ago like a saddle sore. It goes back years. For example, the "shelved" book Across The Centuries is just as egregious and misleading at the book that replaced it, is used in many school districts nationwide, was read by John Walker Lindh, for example --and was first published in 1991.

I'll be taking us back about ten years, in reverse order, to see what American Muslims have in store for you and me. (I can give you the short version in two words, though: The Borg.) But before we jump, I'd like to point to who has paid attention to this educational scandal, and who has ignored it. Nationally, Charles Johnson and his commenters covered a lot in one posting. Instapundit had a one-sentence link after a story about Al Qaeda in Tucson. Solomania has a mention. Rantburg had a fat quote and some good comments. As for local political blogs, I confess I barely glance at them. But I checked in with Blog for Arizona, a Dean hangover site. No mention. Then I used the blogroll there to check out over three dozen Arizona sites. Nada. (Oh, azcentral.com had a cute little follow-up on the job title thing.) Finally, what about Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser a Phoenix physician, organizer of the only "Moderate Muslim March" yet, and Chairman of the American Islamic Forum For Democracy? Who even has access to azcentral.com's blog, pluggedin? Anything from him . . . ? No. Silence from the Doctor.

We're on our own here. Get on the bus, dear learner, while I transport us back --in-- time.

Less than a year ago, on April 25, 2004, there was a rally in downtown Phoenix organized by Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser. Several sources describe it in several ways, but the pitch was "Muslims for moderation, and against terrorism." I mention it here to provide some local context, because it was so recent, and because the turnout, from a Muslim community of 50,000-plus, was so pitifully small.

Since our children are grown and gone, we don't monitor local educational policies and programs. But we sure have the antennae out for Islam. In fact, to make our position about Islam clear, here I'll republish the main part of Seven Statements For Muslims, which I first posted on November 2, 2004 --Re-Election Day (joy), and the day Theo van Gogh was ritualistically murdered (sorrow) by a Muslim, in a Muslim way, for Muslim reasons (anger):

1. The Jews are not a question mark. (Thought experiment: Imagine a history of the world without any contributions by Muslims. Now imagine the same without Jews.)

2. Women are equal to men. They are not property or chattel or anything less than any man, and indeed superior to any man who thinks women should be anything less than any man.

3. The Qu'ran was not orally or mentally channelled inerrantly to Mohammed by the Angel Gabriel. It is a palimpsest, edited, abridged, and extended over many years. This is just historical fact, attested to by the Hijazi Ultraviolets.

4. Allah isn't alone. He shares the world with all the gods in Mecca's cave, and Yahweh, Shiva, Chango, The Everywhere Spirit, Ein Sof, and many more.

5. I don't trust your words. You have a practice called Taqiyya: "Muslims hold that the Islamic version of dissimulation is applied only externally with the tongue and not internally (on the heart, spirit, and soul). In other words, a Muslim is allowed to say untruths to a non-Muslim if in their heart they still respect the truths that they externally deny." (Definition from fact-index.com.) And you want us to trust Muslims? No. Because of taqiyya, I cannot believe a single thing any Muslim says.

6. There is nothing spiritual or mystical about the Arabic language. It may not even be of Arabian origin; evidence suggests it originated in the Levant. So chanting anything in Arabic, or writing it down, is no different than chanting or writing in English or German or Urdu or Spanish or Esperanto.

7. There will be no more one-way tolerance. One man, one vote, once don't go 'round here. Submission is not in our law, our tradition, our Constitution, or our blood, habibi.

Opposition, stubborness: now, that's another matter.

With that settled . . . As soon as I saw FISH's emailed comment over at Daniel Pipes --Scottsdale? That's in my Valley!-- I started Googling and digging.

History Alive! is part of an entire K-12 curriculum. The new middle-school text with its Islamic emphasis may be a pilot program here, but some California parents know well an earlier high-school version, with its bias against Israel. On October 3, 2003, the online magazine j., the Jewish News Weekly of Northern California, published an article by Alexandra J. Wall:

A Middle East curriculum used in some local high schools is strongly biased against Israel, the S.F.-based Jewish Community Relations Council is charging.

The offending curriculum, the “History Alive!” series distributed by the Rancho Cordova-based Teachers’ Curriculum Institute, was discovered by a Santa Rosa parent who not only brought it to the attention of the JCRC but filed a complaint against Maria Carrillo High School.

The parent, an attorney, did not want to be named in j. but he is angry.

First, he found a textbook he found factually incorrect. But what he saw in some supplemental materials was even worse.

The supplementary materials provided by TCI have so many inaccuracies that the section on the Arab-Israeli conflict shouldn’t be used, according to the JCRC’s report.

One especially offensive activity, the JCRC said, divides the students into two groups. There are the “Pads,” whose ancestors have lived in the Land of Pad for thousands of years, and the “Jeds,” who are told: “Your ancestors used to live in the Land of Z, which you believe was given them by God. Your ancestors were forced to leave the Land of Z 2,000 years ago, and your people have been scattered throughout the world ever since.”

The exercise has the teacher, acting as “the Great Power,” favoring the Jeds over the Pads in trying to reach a small, overcrowded plot of land bordered by desks in the classroom. The Pads and Jeds debate whom it belongs to, and the teacher is to act unimpressed by whatever the Pads have to say, while agreeing with the Jeds.

Jackie Berman, the JCRC’s education specialist co-authored the JCRC study with Yitzhak Santis, the JCRC’s Middle East director.

That exercise is perhaps the most egregious example, the JCRC maintains, but there are many such problems in the curriculum, causing Berman to conclude: “That’s why it can’t really be fixed, by saying, ‘Change this around or that.’ It’s just permeated with this kind of bias.”

Neither Berman nor a TCI spokeswoman knew how widely the TCI curriculum is used in this area, but Berman said she had been in touch with the JCRC in Chicago, where schools were also using it. According to the company’s Web site, www.historyalive.com, TCI programs are used by more than 1,000 school districts across the nation, and there are testimonials from California officials from Fremont Union High and Cupertino Unified school districts.

On Monday, Berman and Jonathan Bernstein, director of the Central Pacific region of the Anti-Defamation League, met with the assistant superintendent of the Santa Rosa City School District, Steve Butler. The ADL has dealt with the TCI curriculum on a national level.

Butler said the district tried to solve the complaint filed by the parent informally, as is district procedure. When they were unable to, they convened a committee of four educators not connected to the school to review the offending materials.

The committee found that with supplementary information, including some provided by the parent, as well as the JCRC’s report, multiple points of view were represented, Butler said.

The conclusion the panel came to was that the materials “are not perfect, but they weren’t at a point where they needed to be censored or banned,” he said. “This is making a mountain out of a molehill for us.”

That response does not please those at the JCRC. A copy of the report is set to be sent off to TCI shortly. And Santis said this will be an ongoing story.

“We’re not satisfied,” said Santis. “If the Santa Rosa school district acknowledges it’s flawed, why are they using it? We urge that the school district drop this curriculum completely.”

The district’s response certainly was not enough for the offended parent either. He said he is not only filing a complaint against the teacher, but plans to continue the appeal to the state department of education and is willing to file a lawsuit, if necessary.

This effort paid off. On February 14, 2004, Ms. Wall followed up with another story:

A textbook company has agreed to rewrite its unit on the Middle East after the S.F.-based Jewish Community Relations Council issued a report claiming it was biased against Israel.

The JCRC report concluded that the supplemental materials that go along with the Teachers Curriculum Institute’s “History Alive!” textbooks were too filled with inaccuracies and so biased that they should not be used.

Jim Lobdell, senior director of TCI in Rancho Cordova, estimated that it could take a year to update the Middle East curriculum, but in the best-case scenario, it will be done sooner. In the meantime, a notice appears on TCI’s Web site that warns teachers to use discretion with the existing unit.

All current TCI customers will receive the new materials at no charge.

Last fall, the parent of a student at Santa Rosa’s Maria Carrillo High School complained to school officials not only about the textbook his son was using — which he said was biased against Israel — but about the supplemental materials. When the school district refused to stop using the materials, he took the matter to the JCRC, which, upon reading the chapter in question, became alarmed.

This prompted Jackie Berman, the JCRC’s education specialist, and Yitzhak Santis, JCRC Middle East director, to write a report analyzing point by point how the curriculum was flawed. A back and forth ensued with TCI, which sent the report to scholars of its choosing to offer their opinions.

A JCRC board member sent the report to attorney Alan Dershowitz. The board member called Dershowitz’s assistant to see if he would be willing to look at the materials as well as the report, and he did.

“I agree completely that the historical distortions and factual mistakes that appear throughout the curriculum make it unacceptable for classroom use and I hope that the proper authorities will seriously consider your criticisms,” Dershowitz wrote.

Lobdell said that the JCRC’s report prompted TCI leadership to seek the opinions of additional scholars and teachers on the unit in question.

“The feedback we got from them and the context of the events since 9/11 and the heightened sensitivities around the issues in the Middle East prompted us to update the lessons that we have,” said Lobdell.

Which is cause for cautious celebration at the JCRC. “Of course we’ll be watching,” said Berman, “but we’re hoping it turns out right now.”

Since TCI’s decision, the Santa Rosa school district has stopped using its materials.

What concerns me here is that it apparently doesn't matter if Scottsdale is using the "new materials" or the old materials: either is unacceptable as a portrayal of truth. More importantly, the earlier text, Across The Centuries, was flawed as well.

On February 11, 2002, Daniel Pipes posted Think Like A Muslim [,Urges "Across The Centuries"]. The heart of the piece:

. . . But the really serious problem concerns the covert propagation of Islam, which takes four forms:

* Apologetics: Everything Islamic is praised; every problem is swept under the rug.

Students learn about Islam's "great cultural flowering," but nothing about the later centuries of statis and decline. They read repeatedly about the Muslims' broadmindedness (they "were extremely tolerant of those they conquered") but not a word about their violence (such as the massacres carried out by Muhammad's troops against the Jews of Banu Qurayza).

* Distortion: Jihad, which means "sacred war," turns into a struggle mainly "to do one's best to resist temptation and overcome evil." Islam gives women "clear rights" not available in some other societies, such as the right to an education? This ignores the self-evident fact that Muslim women enjoy fewer rights than perhaps any other in the world. ("Across the Centuries" implicitly acknowledges this reality by blaming "oppressive local traditions" for their circumstances.)

* Identification as Muslims: Homework assignments repeatedly involve mock-Muslim exercises. "Form small groups of students to build a miniature mosque." Or: "You leave your home in Alexandria for the pilgrimage to Mecca. . . . write a letter describing your route, the landscapes and peoples you see as you travel and any incidents that happen along the way. Describe what you see in Mecca."

And then there is this shocker: "Assume you are a Muslim soldier on your way to conquer Syria in the year A.D. 635. Write three journal entries that reveal your thoughts about Islam, fighting in battle, or life in the desert."

* Piety: The textbook endorses key articles of Islamic faith. It informs students as a historical fact that Ramadan is holy "because in this month Muhammad received his first message from Allah." It asserts that "the very first word the angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammad was 'Recite.' " It explains that Arabic lettering "was used to write down God's words as they had been given to Muhammad." And it declares that the architecture of a mosque in Spain allows Muslims "to feel Allah's invisible presence."

By 2002, this book had been in use 11 years. This fact made me think about John Walker Lindh. Did he use this book? The answer is yes.

During 2002, the American Textbook Council formally studied and researched seven major history and social studies textbooks. They published a report in February 2003, and a reply to critics the following December. (Both available in pdf on their website. You may also peruse eye-opening excerpts on jihad and sharia.) Earlier this year, their website published an update, part of which I excerpt below, with my emphases:

During the last two years, beginning with the American Textbook Council report, "Islam in the Classroom," published in February 2003, several reviews, articles and books have documented bias and evasions in world history textbooks on the subjects of militant Islam and Islamic terrorism. Textbooks misrepresent the scope and aims of militant Islam, critics agree. They contain fallacies and untruths about jihad, sharia, slavery, status of Muslim women, terrorism, and tolerance.

These reviews independently reach the same conclusions. Most conspicuously, history textbooks distort the meaning of jihad. Houghton Mifflin's seventh-grade text, Across the Centuries, has come in for singular criticism. Houghton Mifflin's books dominate the nation's largest state, but they are in no way worse on this score than competing textbooks. Textbooks make no distinction between sharia and Western law, and they pretend that women are making great strides in the Islamic world, when all evidence indicates otherwise. Social studies textbooks ignore the global ambitions of militant Islam. They fail to explain that Muslim terrorists seek to destroy the United States and Israel. They omit geopolitical goals that include theocracy and world domination by religion.

Islamic organizations act as domestic textbook "censors." Strictly speaking, since only governments censor books, the Islamists are merely agents of suppression, using educational publishers to do their bidding. But for years, publishers have ignored -- "stonewalled" -- those who have pressed them about motives, funding, legal status, and strong-arm tactics on the part of their Muslim "consultants."

Now comes a test. Are new textbooks that publishers plan to introduce in California in the next few months going to correct Islam-related errors and tell the truth about terrorism? Or will California succumb to the potent Islamist lobby and its attendant multiculturalists in the state? We'll have a better idea next spring, when publishers, including Houghton Mifflin, submit their new and revised textbooks in Sacramento.

Anyone who is interested in world history or how Islam is covered in social studies classes should pay attention to a new seventh grade history textbook, History Alive! The Medieval World and Beyond. The textbook and its instructional materials are now being piloted in Scottsdale, Arizona. The program is almost certainly to be submitted in the important California adoption this spring.

What's the Muslim educational lobby like in Arizona? I have no idea, but I'll be checking it out for sure. I hope these chunks of quotations have been carving out the story for the reader as well. But there's more.

In 1994, Valerie Moore took her daughter to school one day.

Valerie Moore says her daughter "was indoctrinated in the Islamic religion for over four months while in the seventh grade" in 1994. Moore expressed shock in arriving at Joseph Kerr Junior High School in Elk Grove, Calif., one day and being greeted by a "huge banner on the front grounds of the school that read 'There is one God, Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet.'" Moore also recounts witnessing "children dressed in Muslim attire, chanting from the Koran and praying while marching around the cabala. [sic]" Moore recalls the banner being up all day.

"What if we put up a sign that says 'Jesus is Lord' for 30 minutes? Oh, no. You can't do that – separation of church and state," Moore laments. "They aren't just teaching them about Islam; they have them practicing it. They have them kneeling down and praying to Allah. I have a problem with that. That's more like inculcation." Moore says when she complained to the school officials she was ridiculed and yelled at.

This was in 1994. This excerpt is from the fanatical Christian website blessedcause.org, which I won't link to. That doesn't change the facts, though. This kind of thing is proliferating in schools across the land: invasion of the mind-snatchers. (Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they don't want to turn your kids into Muslims.) When I'm done here, please follow FISH's advice and Google those links I've made available in his comment.

In the meantime, we may ask, as Lowell Ponte did in FrontPage on December 3, 2003,

How did such a textbook get written and approved? It was launched in accord with California policy in 1991, which wanted such a book to advance the state’s multi-culturalist, inclusive agenda.

(America by some accounts is now home to more Muslims than Presbyterians and is adjusting its culture and politics accordingly. But it’s worth noting that of the world population of 1.2 billion Muslims –-one in five human beings-– the majority is non-Arab. The five nations with the largest Muslim populations, according to the CIA World Factbook, are Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh (formerly East Pakistan), and Turkey –-with a combined Muslim population above 650 million. The next five with the most Muslims include Nigeria, Ethiopia and Persian Iran, with only Egypt and Morocco as nominally “Arabic” nations in the top ten. And yet the pro-Muslim multiculturalist agenda would lead people to believe that Islam is a predominately Arab faith, perhaps because of its origin in Saudi Arabia.)

In 1990 a new man was named its Chairman and Chief Executive Office at this textbook’s publisher Houghton Mifflin, and in 1991 he was also given the title President at the company. He was Nader F. Darehshori, who before coming to the United States in “the early 1960s,” as his short biography tells, was for a year a teacher “in a one-room elementary school in his native Iran.”

Iran, of course, is an overwhelmingly-Islamic country.

The textbook was published with approval by the Council on Islamic Education (CIE), formed in 1988 to promote a better treatment of the subject of Islam in such texts. But, reportedly, according to one Houghton Mifflin executive CIE not only reviewed the book for errors and insensitivities after it was written, but also supplied information about the crusades that was incorporated into the textbook itself. [Dhimmi Watch has the skinny on the unscrupulous CIE.]

But how did the Scottsdale pilot program for the new book originate? Why Scottsdale? Because it's unified, K-12, we'll get 'em young and keep 'em? Because Across the Centuries was building up too much negative baggage, bogged down and barnacled with controversy?

But exactly how did this book get into the classroom --and once there, must never leave? Who decided that?

Who knows? I've emailed FISH to ask him why he does not have a copy of that book in his hand. He hasn't replied yet. I'm not questioning his behavior; I really want clarification of school district policy. Did he demand a copy of the book, and they refused? I'm emailing everyone I can think of as soon as I finish this post.

Will Arizona follow California, smoothing the path for Islamification? Despite the huffing about pilot program, California is way ahead of Arizona in educational dhimmitude. I checked out the guidelines for studying Islam recommended by the History–Social Science Curriculum Framework and Criteria Committee of the California Board of Education in their report for the California Department of Education, October 11, 2001 (which reaffirms the 1998 guidelines):

In this unit students examine the rise of Islam as a religion and as a civilization. Attention should be given to the historic events of A.D. 636–651 when Arab armies reunited the ancient Middle East. Students should analyze the geographic and economic significance of the trade routes between Asia and Europe that were used by Arab merchants. They should consider the importance of a common literary language (Arabic) and religion (Islamic) in unifying the many ethnic groups of this region. The religious ideas of Mohammed, the founder of Islam, should be discussed both for their ethical teachings and as a way of life. Mohammed should be seen as a major historical figure who helped establish the Islamic way of life, its code of ethics and justice, and its rule of law. Students should examine the position of Christians and Jews in the Islamic world who, as “People of the Book,” were allowed to practice their religious beliefs. Contributions of Islamic scholars, including mathematicians, scientists, geographers, astronomers, and physicians from many ethnic groups, should be emphasized and their relationship to Greek thought acknowledged. Scholars at Baghdad and Córdoba, the two great centers of Muslim learning, helped to preserve much of the learning of the ancient world; and, by the end of the ninth century, they added important new discoveries of their own in mathematics, medicine, geography, history, and science. Attention should be paid to the flowering of Jewish civilization in Córdoba, where poets, philosophers, and scholars established a vibrant culture.

Anything about those guidelines seem unusually greasy to you?

These guidelines were reaffirmed two days ago at the conclusion of the 2005 California Council for the Social Studies Conference at the Airport Hyatt Regency in San Francisco. (Pdf available from Google here.) According to the pdf of the Conference Schedule, there were dozens of workshops on dozens of subjects. None of them covered specific aspects of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or Buddhism. But the following workshops were offered:

--Standards Based Unit Projects for 7th Grade World History MS
Greg Clifton, Teacher , JL Stanford MS, Palo Alto; Jason Dickinson

Three standards based unit projects will be shared from the topics of Islam, Medieval Japan and Medieval/Renaissance Europe. Project descriptions and rubrics will be provided. Student examples will be shown.

--Making Sense of Differing Interpretations of Islam MS SH G
Munir Shaikh, Council on Islamic Education, Shabbir Mansuri

What are Islam’s true teachings, and who decides? Find out how to make sense of Muslim’s diversity. Learn how religion, culture, politics and other factors affect our perceptions of Islam.

--What Do State Standards Say Regarding Teaching About Religion? MS SH G
Munir Shaik, Council on Islamic Education, Shabbir Mansuri

This session will provide participants with an overview of how the standards of California and other states address teaching about religion. Is there consensus on how to cover religion?

--Creative Ways to Teach About the Middle East in our Schools, Grades 6-10 MS SH
Ron Pahl, Professor, CSU Fullerton; Connie DeCapita

Lots of exciting lessons on how to teach about the Middle East in the classroom. Traditional peoples, their cultures, map work, Israel/Palestine, the US Iraqi invasion & other modern critical issues.

Daniel Pipes put it succinctly: why is Islam priveleged in our public schools over every other religion? My answer is: because they're pushy and motivated, and American non-Muslims are complacent and lazy.

What are you going to do, Scottsdalians, Arizonans? Let the Arizona Muslims turn your children into little dhimmis, banging their foreheads on the floor five times a day for Allah? Don't let it happen. In the name of the future of America, don't let it happen!

Posted by Jerome at March 9, 2005 01:20 AM | TrackBack

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

The Exodus Begins ...

The Uncooperative Blogger

January 20, 2008 Sunday 11:27 AM EST

1133 words


Oh the Irony--Mexico is Having Problems Re-Absorbing It's Citizens

The Uncooperative Blogger


Jan. 20, 2008 (The Uncooperative Blogger delivered by Newstex) -- Cross posted from Miss Beth's Victory Dance

Arizona had an interesting law go into effect January 1, 2008. It's called the Employer (EPLI) Sanctions Law and requires ALL employers to verify ALL employees are United States citizens. In anticipation of this law going into effect, many illegals from the Tucson and Phoenix areas "self-deported" with their families right around Christmas (normally, the illegals would pack up the family and cross back "home" to visit with the family and then come back here). In anticipation of the new law, the border was full with the illegals moving home.
Well... That's a good thing.

Then, we have several businesses in Phoenix going belly up and declaring bankruptcy. Three reasons--1) the Employer Sanctions Law; 2) the businesses catered to illegals (who are self-deporting) and 3) if the businesses didn't specifically cater to illegals, they hired illegals.

This is also a good thing.

Here's the ironic part...Mexico has issues with the Employer Sanction Law. Mexico is concerned it can't handle the influx of it's own citizens back into their home country.

According to a January 4, 2008 AP article entitled "Mexico Criticizes Arizona Employer Sanctions Law" here, "Measures like the one approved in Arizona do not contribute to solving the issue of migration by workers between the two countries, and ignore the contributions that migrants make to the U.S. economy and society," Mexico's Foreign Relations Department said.

And:
The Mexican government considers migration an unavoidable phenomenon given the higher wages in the United States. It strongly opposes tightened U.S. controls such as border fences, and instead wants temporary work-visa programs and legalization of workers in the United States.Well, what can you expect from a country whose main export is its own citizens?

It gets better,
Two articles in Arizona papers today (although I first heard this on the 3p.m. news last night while waiting for my daughter's softball game to begin.

The first article was published by the Tucson Citizen, Sheryl Kornman reporting and is titled "Sonoran Officials Slam Sanctions Law In Tucson Visit". The opening paragraphs of this article A delegation of nine state legislators from Sonora was in Tucson on Tuesday to say Arizona's new employer sanctions law will have a devastating effect on the Mexican state.

At a news conference, the legislators said Sonora - Arizona's southern neighbor, made up of mostly small towns - cannot handle the demand for housing, jobs and schools it will face as illegal Mexican workers here return to their hometowns without jobs or money.a few more "How can they pass a law like this?" asked Mexican Rep. Leticia Amparano Gamez, who represents Nogales.and:

"Mexico is not prepared for this, for the tremendous problems" it will face as more and more Mexicans working in Arizona and sending money to their families return to hometowns in Sonora without jobs, she said.and the money quote from this "What do we do with the repatriated?" he asked. "As Mexicans, we are worried.

They are Mexicans but they are also people - fathers and mothers and young people with jobs" who won't have work in Sonora."Then, there's this article from Channel 12 News (NBC Affiliate, Phoenix), Melissa Gonzalo reporting and titled "Sonoran Legislators Oppose Employer Sanctions Law" . Sonoran legislators from Mexico's PAN democratic party said their state is not prepared for a mass return of Mexican nationals. They met with Arizona legislators at the State Capitol Wednesday morning.

They said they understand the reasons for the employer sanctions law, but said they don't think all the consequences were taken into account.

"We are concerned because probably we won't be able to have all the resources to help in case the amount of people are too many people," said coordinator of the group, Florencio Diaz Armenta. The delegation from Sonora said they cannot quantify how many people have returned to their state from Arizona, so far. But they said, based on anecdotal information, they know there are two groups returning- day laborers and professionals.

Armenta said Mexico does have a plan in place to help those immigrants returning to their country, but he said it is not enough. He said they plan on continuing to engage in open dialogue with Arizona lawmakers in hopes of reaching an agreement. "There is a history of relationship between the states Arizona and Sonora," said Armenta. "We have families on both sides, so we have to worry about what happens on both sides of the border." He said they hope to invite Arizona legislators to meet in Sonora the next

The delegation from Sonora also met with LULAC in Tucson.My take on this? Mexico didn't think Arizona would follow through. Now, Mexico (the country whose main export is its people) has to find a way to solve their own problems with their own people--and they don't like it. They are having to deal with the same problems (on a significantly smaller scale at this point) the United States has had to deal with in absorbing their citizens into our country. They are, quite simply, going to have to find solutions to deal with their citizens. They're going to have to work on their economy, work on their infrastructure, all the things that make a country. They're not going to be able to count on the illegal earnings flowing back to them from the United States. That money flow is drying up.

And it's not just Arizona enforcing the laws. Tulsa, Oklahoma is enforcing as well. From World Net Daily, we see this headline (article postes August 25, 2007): "Mandatory Deportation Has Illegals On The Run" with the subtitle of "State Law Limiting Benefits Looms, and Estimated 25,000 Take to Road". The money quote from this article is "This isn't about whether you are for or against immigration, or for or against immigrants. It doesn't matter what your skin color is or if you speak with an accent. What matters is if you are in the country legally or illegally. The only people threatened by House Bill 1804 are those who choose to break the law," he said.

Expect more whining from Mexico and racist groups such as Aztlan and La Raza. Laws are being enforced, sanctuary cities are rescinding their sanctuary stand (Phoenix for example) and the illegals are peaceably exiting the country.

The views expressed on blogs distributed by Newstex and its re-distributors ("Blogs via Newstex") are solely the author's and not necessarily the views of Newstex or its re-distributors. Posts from such authors are provided "AS IS", with no warranties, and confer no rights. The material and information provided in Blogs via Newstex are for general information only and should not, in any respect, be relied on as professional advice. No content on such Blogs via Newstex is "read and approved" before it is posted. Accordingly, neither Newstex nor its re-distributors make any claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained therein or linked to from such blogs, nor take responsibility for any aspect of such blog content. All content on Blogs via Newstex shall be construed as author-based content and commentary. Accordingly, no warranties or other guarantees will be offered as to the quality of the opinions, commentary or anything else offered on such Blogs via Newstex. Reader's comments reflect their individual opinion and their publication within Blogs via Newstex shall not infer or connote an endorsement by Newstex or its re-distributors of such reader's comments or views. Newstex and its re-distributors expressly reserve the right to delete posts and comments at its and their sole discretion.

January 20, 2008

Monday, December 31, 2007

Arizona Leads the Way

What would happen if the United States seriously enforced the ban on hiring undocumented workers? We may find out starting Jan. 1, when Arizona promises to do it locally.

The Arizona law is tough. Companies that knowingly employ illegal workers will have their business licenses suspended for a first offense and permanently revoked for the second.

The law clearly sees the workplace — not the state's 376-mile border with Mexico — as the main front in curbing illegal immigration. As a result, it could very well succeed.

Supporters of open borders predict economic chaos as Arizona companies lose access to cheap labor. Will dishes go unwashed and lawns unmowed? We shall see.

Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano reluctantly signed the law but vows to enforce it. A moderate Democrat, she maintains a close relationship with the governor of Sonora, the Mexican state to her south. She was also the first American governor to ask for National Guard reinforcements along the border.

Immigration happens to be Washington's responsibility. Federal law already forbids employers to hire undocumented workers. Until recently, the Bush administration virtually ignored the ban. Whenever anger at this dereliction grew politically problematic, Bush would stage some new military show at the border.

The troop movements provided a nice distraction but seem to have only modestly cut the flow of illegal immigrants. Folks from every continent enter the United States unlawfully through portals far from Mexico. Nearly half of all undocumented workers came here legally but overstayed their visas.

What the fixation on the border does is create unnecessary friction with Latin America. It seems to single out one ethnic group, discomforting even native-born Hispanics who object to illegal immigration. Roughing up poor peasants makes for an ugly visual, as do high fences facing what's supposed to be a good neighbor.

Without the job magnet, of course, most illegal aliens would simply not come here. That would free law enforcement to go after the bad actors trying to enter. The Mexican border would become a far more peaceful crossing that allows an easy back-and-forth of shoppers, tourists, friends and family members.

The question remains, how essential is illegal labor to America's prosperity? One thing is clear: The people who want it should not be providing the answers.

The National Journal asked Napolitano about "business community" complaints that Arizona's law would hurt the local economy. Napolitano said that she hears them, but other parts of the "business community" are telling her, "We're tired of competing against companies that are hiring illegally and therefore don't have to pay the same wages we pay."

And there are nonlabor concerns. Explosive population growth, fueled in part by illegal immigration, has created environmental challenges throughout the water-sport Southwest. On the social side, a massive influx of impoverished people with little English makes the task of providing education and other services that more vexing.

The president does not seem to share these anxieties. As a cheap-labor conservative, Bush's warm spot for open borders is understandable.

Less explicable are the views of diversity liberals who otherwise despise the man but attribute his policies to a soulful feeling for Mexico. A recent New Yorker article saw Bush's tolerance of illegal immigration through the prism of his experience as governor of Texas, a border state with deep Hispanic roots. No mention was made of Bush's long record as a stomper of labor standards wherever they might impair corporate profits.

Back in Arizona, Napolitano is now readying implementation of a major new immigration law. While it is not totally to her liking, she sees few alternatives. When it comes to fixing illegal immigration, Washington won't become functional anytime soon — and Arizona can't wait.

Providence Journal columnist Froma Harrop's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. Her e-mail address is fharrop@projo.com

2007, The Providence Journal Co."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2004097607_harrop31.html