Saturday, October 31, 2009

Two videos worth watching for Halloween

Here are two videos worth watching for Halloween.

The first is here from GN Commentary called "Harmless Haloween".

The second is here from Beyond Today TV called "Is the Spirit World Real"

I think you might find both of these to be interesting!!

Friday, October 30, 2009

Hands (And Especially Bullets) Off Lou Dobbs!

A timely post from Brenda Walker of about what was reported at the house of Lou Dobbs.

Hands (And Especially Bullets) Off Lou Dobbs!
By Brenda Walker
You might think that the Main Stream Media might show some concern at an apparent assassination attempt against one of their own.
But, as of this writing, only Fox and a couple local outlets (NBC New York and the Star Ledger) have reported on a shooting at the home of influential CNN anchor Lou Dobbs, who has been a consistent voice for law and borders for several years.
"A gunshot was fired at the New Jersey home of CNN's Lou Dobbs after a series of threatening phone calls earlier this month, the host told listeners on his nationally syndicated radio show.
“Dobbs, a fervent proponent of U.S. border enforcement, told listeners of 'The Lou Dobbs Show' on Monday that the incident is part of an ongoing assault against anyone who opposes amnesty or leniency toward illegal immigrants.
“'They've created an atmosphere and they've been unrelenting in their propaganda,' Dobbs said in reference to pro-immigration groups like the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the National Council of La Raza and America's Voice. 'Three weeks ago this morning, a shot was fired at my house where I live. My wife was standing out and that followed weeks and weeks of threatening phone calls.' "[Police Probe Shot Fired at Home of CNN's Lou Dobbs, Fox News, October 29, 2009. inks added.]
You can hear Dobbs' radio remarks on the incident here: Shot Fired Into Home of Lou Dobbs of CNN! [YouTube]
IImagine the MSM hysteria if CBS’ Katie Couric had been targeted!
And it’s not as if there’s no precedent here. After a similar campaign of vilification, Dutch immigration patriot leader Pim Fortuyn was actually assassinated by a man who turned out to be a leftist immigration enthusiast—although that little detail took a long time to leak out.
Since a massive alien amnesty looks unlikely any time soon in an economy beset with continuing job loss, the Open-Borders Fifth Column needs to keep the troops riled up. That requires loud and frequent ethnic complaints, from manufactured outrage about a space alien Halloween costume to browbeating the already amenable San Francisco Board of Supervisors into loosening the requirement to drive with a license..
But Lou Dobb is the biggest target. The fact that he is married to a Hispanic woman, and her parents live with them on the family farm according to Sixty Minutes) doesn't count for much when the thought police against "hate" get their jackboots in a bunch:
"A coalition of 11 Hispanic and pro-immigrant groups has launched a petition drive to force CNN and its advertisers to drop Lou Dobbs, following a similar effort that reportedly led dozens of companies to pull their ads from Fox's Glenn Beck show…
““The campaign to get CNN's Dobbs off the air was launched Tuesday by a coalition that includes the National Council of La Raza, the League of United Latin American Citizens, and the New Democrat Network.
“The group posted their petition at, where they hope to get 100,000 signatures in the next six weeks. Then, the document will be sent to CNN and Dobbs' advertisers, organizers say. “
[Will boycott against CNN's Lou Dobbs work?, by Andres Oppenheimer, [Email him] Miami Herald, September 9, 2009. inks added.]
Dobbs broadcasts have educated millions of Americans that illegal immigration is out of control and creates a variety of damage in the country, e.g. diminished national sovereignty, cheap labor displacing citizens, border chaos, increased local crime and overpopulation overwhelming infrastructure. Many Americans who would have otherwise felt isolated and intimidated by the otherwise unrelenting Open Borders propaganda came to understand that they were not alone from watching Lou Dobbs Tonight.
Needless to say, Dobbs is depicted by his enemies as being outside the “mainstream”. But in fact he reflects the majority opinion of Americans across the political spectrum that immigration be legal, controlled and reduced.
Indeed, outside of his chosen focus on illegal immigration, Dobbs is distinctly moderate, even squishy. He was quoted in 2008 advocating greatly increased legal immigration, for which I criticized him: "Triple" Legal Immigration? Say It Ain't So, Lou Dobbs! In 2007, VDARE.COM’s Patrick Cleburne had to reprove Dobbs for failing to understand the importance of the English language issue. In 2005, Norm Matloff objected to a Dobbs piece on outsourcing and (immigrant-impacted) schools.
Sadly, the complaints to CNN head office are obviously having an effect. The last months have seen Dobbs' immigration coverage substantially reduced. One curious example: an interview with Leah Durant, the African-American director of Progressives for Immigration Reform was spiked, apparently because of La Raza opposition.
The Razas are pumped by their partial success in boycotting Fox’s Glenn Beck, who remains on the air, though with fewer advertisers.
The recent showing of CNN's Latino in America provided an excuse for revving up the attacks. The Raza media strategists must have figured a dandy talking point would be to claim that it was "hypocrisy" for CNN to present a four-hour documentary flattering Hispanics while still hosting the hated Dobbs. A Google search of hypocrisy dobbs cnn "latino in america" recently got 14,900 hits.
The New York Times’ Brian Stelter parroted the "hypocrisy" party line.
"Instead of being simply a draw for Hispanic viewers, CNN’s four-hour documentary, ‘Latino in America,’ turned into a political rallying cry for activist groups who are calling on the cable news channel to fire Lou Dobbs, a veteran anchor with well-known views on immigration. [...]
The anti-Dobbs campaign has, however, drawn considerable attention in the Spanish-language press; the Thursday front page of the New York newspaper El Diario featured a red slash mark through Mr. Dobbs's face and the word 'hipocresia,' Spanish for 'hypocrisy,' atop the illustration.
The hypocrisy, critics say, lies in CNN’s decision to woo Hispanic viewers with a prime-time documentary while still giving Mr. Dobbs a nightly forum. Roberto Lovato, [Email him] a founding member of, a Latino advocacy group, said in a statement, 'We won't allow the network to court us as viewers while, at the same time, they allow Dobbs to spread lies and misinformation about us each night.' “[CNN Special on Latinos Stokes Debate Over Dobbs , October 23, 2009. inks added.]
(Incidentally, Latino in America did poorly in the ratings compared with its earlier Black in America—a fact noted by reader Russell Bell. The two-day total of viewers for Black in America was 4.7 million, versus 1.8 million for Latino which was also shown over two days.)
The anti-Dobbs campaign is filled with lies and fraudulent accusations, such as this item from the reprehensible $PLC:
"Just how dangerous is Dobbs? According to Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center, 'The rise in hate crimes against Latinos coincides almost exactly with the time Dobbs has been propagating false conspiracy theories about Latinos on the air. He's not urging people to go hurt and kill—but that is the effect of what he does.' "[Is Lou Dobbs, CNN's Resident Bigot, on His Way Out?, By Don Hazen, Alternet, September 29 2009. inks added.]
Lou Dobbs has been one of the few MSM figures brave enough to criticize the $PLC for its anti-“hate” hysteria —essential to its notoriously massive fundraising efforts. For example, earlier this year he revealed that so-called “hate crimes” were decreasing in number according to the FBI, rather than increasing as the $PLC had claimed. (For a clip of the report, see the YouTube, CNN's Lou Dobbs Hate Crimes Going Down, Not Up.)
Busted! The $PLC doesn't like that. The cadre at the Poverty Palace would love to see Dobbs taken out in payback, and have called for him to be fired.
Another loudmouth in the censor brigade: Geraldo Rivera, the outspoken champion of violent criminal aliens. He memorably defended the permissiveness that allowed a drunk-driving illegal alien to kill teenagers Tessa Tranchant and Allison Kunhardt in a fierce on-air argument with Bill O'Reilly.
WHO THIS Newsbusters (October 24) had a clip of Rivera, speaking to a Puerto Rican group, full of Hispanic arrogance and condemnation for Dobbs: Geraldo Blames Lou Dobbs for Anti-Hispanic Sentiment in U.S.
"Lou Dobbs is almost single-handedly responsible for creating, for being the architect of the young-Latino-as-scapegoat for everything that ails this country.”
Au contraire, Geraldo! Many Americans were aware that immigration anarchy was a big problem years before Dobbs started reporting about it regularly. One example: the 1990 light-up-the-border protests south of San Diego, where hundreds of citizens turned on their vehicle headlights toward the sieve-like border to illustrate the anarchy.
Rivera went on:
"One of the aspects of our reality in the United States now is the defamatory tone of the immigration debate and how that immigration debate has slandered an entire race of people. It has been reckless beyond imagining, it has been reckless in a way that is beyond precedent. [...] It has been one of the most frustrating experiences of my professional life to watch as a good portion of the American people began to listen and believe that immigrants were responsible for crime in this country, responsible for bringing terror to this country, responsible for stealing jobs, responsible for affecting in a very negative way the American way of life. [...] "
("Stealing jobs?" Are the eight million illegal alien workers (according to Pew Hispanic Foundation) not a problem for unemployed citizens?)
"It is something that we absolutely said, 'No mas' during the election of 2008...It's why Obama is elected now. He is the first, I maintain, Latino president. He's the first brown president. Why? He could be, and he looks Puerto Rican. [Emphasis added] And the, and the, the point is he would not be president but for the Latino vote and the Latino vote was for the first time in my lifetime an expression of a community understanding its responsibilities, getting up, going to the polling place, and saying, 'No mas.'
“...we're a vital cog in this country, the largest minority in this country, the United States heading toward an ultimate majority status for Latinos by the end of this century. That is the reality of the people in this room. “[ inks added.
Funny—one of the knocks against Dobbs is that he has discussed the reconquista "myth" (actually an indisputable aim of Mexicans and others who hope that Hispanics will become the largest demographic group in America).
But when Geraldo celebrates "majority status for Latinos by the end of this century" that's fine, and not a racist provocation.
We can hope that CNN's top brass will hang tough against the intimidation of the Raza thought police. But these are dangerous times for free speech—particularly when anything suggesting American patriotism might be pronounced offensive by arrogant immigrants and their self-appointed leaders.
Concerned Americans need to get active—in this case to contact CNN in support of Lou Dobbs. Email your thoughtful remarks to the President of CNN, Jonathan Klein, at
Friends of free speech should further recommend that Dobbs be released from PC bondage and to resume his former level of truthful immigration reporting.
Hands Off Lou Dobbs!

Brenda Walker (email her) lives in Northern California and publishes two websites, and She agrees with Potter Stewart that "Censorship reflects a society's lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime."

Should Parents Protect Their Children From Halloween?

A timely seasonal post from . You can get more FREE information here

Should Parents Protect Their Children From Halloween?
A commentary by Gerhard Marx
United Church of God elder, United Kingdom

The human mind is very precious in God's eyes, since man was created "in the image of God" (Genesis 1:27). Parents carry the awesome responsibility of bringing up children properly, using the Word of God as their moral yardstick. "Bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord," the apostle Paul admonished guardians of the young (Ephesians 6:4).
Christian parents rightly recognize their obligation to protect their children from the evil influences the world throws at them. They are eager to shield them from mind-destroying drugs, premarital sexual behavior, drunkenness and many other illicit activities.
Should the activities most kids participate in on Halloween fall into this forbidden category as well? Or is your child's participation in this custom nothing more than engaging in a bit of fun? If you think it's okay, then I would suggest finding out more about the dark origins of its observance.
Halloween is the strangest of customs prevalent in Christian-oriented societies, yet it is engaged in by an ever increasing number of children and adults. For most people, dressing up as goblins or witches may seem like harmless fun, not realizing what lurks behind the scenes on this evening and what spirit is behind it all.
Halloween's pre-Christian origin
What about the origin of Halloween and the purpose it serves? Its origin is certainly not Christian. Halloween had its beginnings in a world of sinister forces condemned in God's Word, the Bible. A Christian should have nothing to do with it. Consider the reasons.
The ultimate authority in a Christian's life is God's Word (Deuteronomy 8:3 and Matthew 4:4)—not religious traditions that come to us from sources outside the Bible. Bearing this in mind, let's take a closer look at Halloween.
What's in a name?
The word Halloween itself is an abbreviated form of All Hallow's Evening. Hallow was the old English word for "making holy." Of course there has never been anything holy about Halloween.
Alexander Macgregor, referring to the Celtic people in early Britain, states in his book Highland Superstitions: "It was the night for the universal walking about of all sorts of spirits, fairies and ghosts, all of whom had liberty on that night."That liberty was often used in pursuing destructive goals. The superstitious inhabitants in pre-Christian Britain considered it a night of freedom to do mischief, and it's all too often the case today among the young on Halloween night.
Oct. 31 was also an annual time to commemorate the dead whose spirits would wreak havoc on the living if they didn't provide them with food.
James Napier, in his book Folklore, wrote that the practice of leaving food outside was directly linked to the belief that "at death the souls of good men were taken possession of by good spirits and carried to paradise, but the souls of wicked men were left to wander in the space between the earth and moon, or consigned to the unseen world. These wandering spirits were in the habit of haunting the living…but there were means by which these ghosts might be exorcised" (p. 11).
To exorcise these spirits and to free yourself from their evil sway (tricks) you would have to set out food (a treat). If the spirits were satisfied with your treat, they would leave you in peace. If not, they were believed to cast an evil spell on you.
No wonder the Bible speaks against involving oneself in observing days that have a sinister origin and are based on superstition. Notice the strong wording from God's Word: "There shall not be found among you anyone who…conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead" (Deuteronomy 18:10-11).
Decision time
What about your children? What comes to mind on the evening of Oct. 31? No doubt weird and frightening masks, youngsters dressed as witches and demons, pumpkins and turnips hollowed out in the shape of demonic faces, etc.
If you as a parent want God's Word to have the final say on how children should be brought up, why would you allow them to participate in this "strangest of all customs"? Read more about this day's origins in "Halloween: A Celebration of Evil."

Related Resources
Is Halloween Harmless? Every year at Halloween, well-meaning parents dress their children in grotesque and ghoulish costumes. Is Halloween really harmless? Who and what's behind this bizarre holiday?
Halloween: Behind the MaskEvery year, on the evening of Oct. 31, millions of families celebrate a distinctly odd holiday known as Halloween. For your own good, you need to know what lurks behind the mask of Halloween.
Halloween's Dark RootsIn recent years eye-opening materials have been published about the questionable background of Halloween
Ghouls, Ghosts and GoblinsIt seems like such harmless fun—children dressed as witches, skeletons or Darth Vader ringing the doorbell, enthusiastically announcing, "Trick or treat!" But is this preoccupation with the dead, witches and demons really harmless? And do you realize that Halloween was originally an important religious holiday—and still is in many parts of the world?
Can Halloween Be Christianized?What should you do in deciding how you will approach this hotly debated issue?
Who's Getting Tricked by Halloween?Why do witches, goblins, jack-o'-lanterns, cobwebs, graveyards and symbols of the occult surround this holiday? You need to know the real story.
A Halloween StoryFollowing is an imaginary dialogue on the reasons responsible people might wonder whether they should participate in the customs, and don the costumes, of Halloween.

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Is Halloween Harmless?

An interesting post from to read at this time of the year. See also here ,here, and here, and subsribe to a free, excellent magazine here and the blog you are reading here

Every year at Halloween, well-meaning parents dress their children in grotesque and ghoulish costumes. Is Halloween really harmless? Who and what's behind this bizarre holiday?

by Jerold Aust

It all looks like so much fun and seems so harmless: jack-o'-lanterns, grotesque grinning masks, long black witch attire with pointed black hats, costumes painted like skeletons, outfits that represent demons and goblins, and children going door to door, soliciting treats from compliant neighbors.But when Halloween comes around, do you find yourself yearning for the hours to pass until the whole trick-or-treat farce is over? If you don't, you should!Halloween's not-so-fun sideSince when is it acceptable for little children to threaten to commit vandalism?What happens if the homeowner doesn't come to the door or doesn't have the treats the kids might expect? Is it permissible for children to then soap his windows, toilet paper his trees, chalk mark his sidewalk or turn over plants as they leave? When is it okay for children to commit vandalism while on another person's property?Isn't it about time for all well-meaning citizens to just say NO to Halloween?The clergy, in general, hasn't stood against it. Some churches even have Halloween parties. Some citizens do speak up against it, as the letters to the editor in your newspaper occasionally show.Is Halloween simply good, clean fun, or is it something else entirely? You need to know!God is giving a wake-up call to professing Christians. As it was with those the prophet Elijah addressed in his day, so it is with us: "'How long will you falter between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.' But the people answered him not a word" (1 Kings 18:21). What will it take for Christians to accept and stand for God's truth rather than harmful traditions that originated in paganism?Where did Halloween originate?Just where did Halloween come from, and why is it so widely celebrated?The Encyclopedia of Religion explains: "Halloween is the name for the eve of Samhain, a celebration marking the beginning of winter as well as the first day of the New Year within the ancient Celtic culture of the British Isles. The time of Samhain consisted of the eve of the feast and the day itself (31 October and 1 November)."On this occasion, it was believed that a gathering of supernatural forces occurred as during no other period of the year. The eve and day of Samhain were characterized as a time when the barriers between the human and supernatural worlds were broken. Otherworldly entities, such as the souls of the dead, were able to visit earthly inhabitants, and humans could take the opportunity to penetrate the domains of the gods and supernatural creatures."Fiery tributes and sacrifices of animals, crops, and possibly human beings were made to appease supernatural powers who controlled the fertility of the land . . . Samhain acknowledged the entire spectrum of nonhuman forces that roamed the earth during the period" (1987, pp. 176-177, "Halloween").On this holiday "huge bonfires were set on hilltops to frighten away evil spirits . . . The souls of the dead were supposed to revisit their homes on this day, and the autumnal festival acquired sinister significance, with ghosts, witches, hobgoblins, black cats, fairies, and demons of all kinds said to be roaming about. It was the time to placate the supernatural powers controlling the processes of nature" (The Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th edition, Micropaedia, Vol. 4, p. 862, "Halloween").It was, bluntly put, a day devoted to appeasing demonic spirits and the dark side of the spirit world—something no Christian should have any part in (Ephesians 5:11).So how did this dark celebration continue into modern times? Sadly, Halloween came down to us from the Roman Catholic Church, which assigned a day of each year to each of their saints. When it reached the point that they had more than 365, they then combined them together on Nov. 1 and called it "All Saints Day" or "All Hallows Day"—the night before being "All Hallows Eve" or "Hallow Even" (holy evening), contracted to the name Hallowe'en or Halloween.Why did they choose this particular day? Again The Encyclopedia of Religion explains: "Samhain remained a popular festival among the Celtic people throughout the christianization of Great Britain . The British church attempted to divert this interest in pagan customs by adding a Christian celebration to the calendar on the same date as Samhain. The Christian festival, the Feast of All Saints, commemorates the known and unknown saints of the Christian religion just as Samhain had acknowledged and paid tribute to the Celtic deities" (p. 177).Thus a pagan celebration was relabeled as Christian.The Bible versus HalloweenYou cannot find any support for Halloween in your Bible, because God is adamantly opposed to it and the pagan, occult practices it revels in. He warns His people to have nothing to do with these (Leviticus 19:31; Deuteronomy 18:10-12). They blind us from the truth of God.God does not take Halloween lightly. As He says, "Learn not the way of the heathen" (Jeremiah 10:2, King James Version). And, "Take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, 'How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise'" (Deuteronomy 12:30).God will not always remain tirelessly patient with those who insist on celebrating harmful and superstitious customs such as Halloween. "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance . . . What kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God" (2 Peter 3:9-12, New International Version).The author of HalloweenThe author of sin and death, Satan the devil, is also the behind-the-scenes author of pagan customs like Halloween. Jesus said that Satan is a liar and the father of all lies (John 8:44). God is the God of the living, not the dead (Matthew 22:31-32). He is the God of not only true Christians alive today but, because of the certainty of the coming resurrection of the dead (1 Corinthians 15), of those who will yet live when raised from death. So certain is this resurrection that to God it is looked on as an accomplished fact (see Romans 4:17).Conversely, Satan is the "lord of the dead." Hebrews 2:14 says of Jesus Christ that "only by dying could he break the power of the Devil, who had the power of death" (New Living Translation).Satan is the lord of the dead in that he leads people by his lies and influence into the way of death and, as the next verse shows, puts them in bondage to the fear of death.He has foisted Halloween on ignorant people and even well-meaning Christians in a subtle and deceitful way, perpetuating it through the Catholic Church with a "Christian" mask that hides its demonic origins.Can people make Halloween harmless?When it comes to Halloween—or any other holiday for that matter—you should ask yourself, "Did God make man in His image, or did God intend man to remake God in man's image?" Now that's a sobering thought.The religious excuse for perpetuating Halloween might be that, as we've seen, church leaders long ago called it a "holy evening" for all the Catholic saints who had no day assigned to them. But face it: People who celebrate this evening today couldn't care less about such religious notions. All they think about is instant gratification, to follow the pack with everyone else and to have some fun.The Encyclopedia of Religion goes on to say: "Modern Halloween activities have centered on mischief making and masquerading in costumes, often resembling otherworldly characters. Folk customs, now treated as games [such as bobbing for apples], have continued from the various divination practices of the ancient celebrants of this occasion. Supernatural figures [such as the ghost, the witch, the vampire, the devil] play a key role in supplying an aura of the mysterious to the evening, whether or not they originally had an association with the festival."Children are particularly susceptible to the imagery of Halloween, as can be seen in their fascination with the demonic likeness of a carved and illuminated pumpkin, known as the jack-o'-lantern. In recent times, children have taken up the practice of dressing in Halloween costumes and visiting homes in search of edible and monetary treats, lightly threatening to play a trick on the owner if a treat is not produced" (p. 177).Halloween is one of many human traditions that cloud biblical teachings and keep people in the dark from God's truth that can set us free (John 8:32). It is not a harmless holiday for you or for your children. God warns us to avoid it and to follow His ways, because He hates for us to dabble in the spirit world of Satan and his demons! Instead, as God tells us in Isaiah 66:2, "On this one will I look: on him who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at My word." GN

Related Resources

Halloween: Behind the MaskEvery year, on the evening of Oct. 31, millions of families celebrate a distinctly odd holiday known as Halloween. For your own good, you need to know what lurks behind the mask of Halloween
Halloween's Dark RootsIn recent years eye-opening materials have been published about the questionable background of Halloween
Ghouls, Ghosts and GoblinsIt seems like such harmless fun—children dressed as witches, skeletons or Darth Vader ringing the doorbell, enthusiastically announcing, "Trick or treat!" But is this preoccupation with the dead, witches and demons really harmless? And do you realize that Halloween was originally an important religious holiday—and still is in many parts of the world?
Can Halloween Be Christianized?What should you do in deciding how you will approach this hotly debated issue?
Who's Getting Tricked by Halloween?Why do witches, goblins, jack-o'-lanterns, cobwebs, graveyards and symbols of the occult surround this holiday? You need to know the real story.
Halloween: A Celebration of DarknessModern celebrations of Halloween may appear on the surface to be quite harmless, but the spiritual implications of dabbling with the spirit world are extremely serious.
Holidays or Holy Days: Does it Matter Which Days We Celebrate?It's ironic that so many of today's popular holidays—including major religious celebrations like Christmas and Easter—originated in ancient pagan festivals and customs, while God's Holy Days revealed in the Bible are almost universally ignored. Which should you celebrate and why?
God's Holy Day Plan: The Promise of Hope for All Mankind Is it possible to know what the future holds for us? The Creator of mankind does have a plan for us, and He reveals it to us through an annual cycle of festivals described in the Scriptures. It is an astounding plan offering an incredible future to every man, woman, and child who has ever lived.

Shocked - Shocked To Find Corruption At A Mexican Consulate!

A very interesting post from Allan Wall of about what is happening at the Mexican consulate in Dallas. Remember, this is the city with the non-English speaking motorist here.

Memo From Middle America (Formerly Known As Memo From Mexico),
By Allan Wall
Shocked - Shocked To Find Corruption At A Mexican Consulate!
Have you heard the news? The Mexican consulate in Dallas is currently undergoing a change of leadership. Enrique Hubbard, the former consul general, is being replaced by Juan Carlos Cue. The new chief Mexican in Dallas has formerly served as consul general in El Paso, and comes to Dallas from his post as Mexican ambassador to Kenya. Maybe that means he’ll get along well with Obama! [Mexico Appoints New Head of Mexican Consulate for Dallas Diane Solis, Dallas Morning News, October 13, 2009]
Is this change at the consulate just a routine shuffling of diplomatic personnel? It’s true that Mexican diplomats usually serve in a post for two to four years, and Hubbard has just finished three years.
But it’s quite likely that Hubbard is being moved out because the Dallas consulate is the scene of a major scandal still under investigation by the Mexican government.
More on that later.
The Mexican consulate in Dallas, visited by 700 people a day, is considered Mexico’s most important consulate after those in Los Angeles and Chicago.
And that’s no small feat. Mexico runs the biggest network of foreign consulates in the U.S. As a matter of fact, it’s also the biggest network of consulates in the world. According to Wikipedia, not other country has as many consulates in one host country. Is this all really necessary? Think about it, Mexico is our neighbor. It’s not that far for Mexicans in the U.S. to return to Mexico and take care of business if they need to. So why does Mexico have so many consulates on U.S. soil?
Of course, the consulates do some legitimate work, although it could be handled by a smaller number. Thus they deal with American citizen business. For example, in 1991, before I moved to Mexico to work, I had to have my college diploma approved and stamped by the Mexican consulate in Dallas. Of course, Mexico didn’t issue me my diploma, but they had to stamp it anyway as part of my process to apply for work in the country.
Needless to say, there are no such requirements for Mexicans immigrating to the U.S.—even apart from the fact that so many do so illegally.
The bottom line on Mexico’s massive network of consulates: from an American point of view, they do a lot of damage.
Mexican consulates in the U.S. are centers of Mexican political activism. They get away with things that no self-respecting country would allow. They give advice to illegal aliens and link up with activists who promote illegal immigration and the Hispanicization of our country. Mexican diplomats frequently make public pronouncements on U.S. immigration policy and put pressure on our immigration authorities not to enforce the law. But our government has never reprimanded any of these undiplomatic meddlers.
You don’t have to take my Word for it. The Mexicans boast about it, Arturo Sarukhan, currently Mexican ambassador to the U.S., had this to say about the Mexican diplomatic network in the U.S.:
"Certainly the only way in which Mexico can advance a comprehensive agenda with the United States is if we use the (Mexican) embassy and the network of consulates as beachheads of lobbying for the image, the interests and the agenda of Mexico in all of U.S. territory and with all sectors of American society."
Mexican consulates distribute the matricula consular cards, which are used to keep illegals from being deported. The Dallas consulate issued about 50,000 of these things a year.
Of course, these cards only work because so many local U.S. governments accept them. If we didn’t accept them, they’d be harmless.
Here at VDARE.COM, we’ve been writing about meddling Mexican diplomats for years, see here for example .
Back to the Dallas consulate. Enrique Hubbard, the outgoing consul general, was in that position since 2006.
Enrique Hubbard’s Anglo-Saxon surname indicates he had an American or British ancestor, as some other prominent Mexicans. But don’t be deceived by the surname—he’s still a loyal Mexican. There is no Anglo-Mexican lobby existing south of the border comparable to the Hispanic lobby in the U.S.
When living in Mexico I fancifully speculated from time to time about such a possibility. Mexico, however, would never allow such a thing.
While in Dallas, Hubbard certainly did his share of meddling.

The Dallas Morning News’ Alfredo Corchado reported
"During his three years as consul general in Dallas, Hubbard gained a reputation as a strong advocate of immigrant rights. He took what many considered to be tough and bold stances against groups who painted Mexican immigrants as villains. He was also vocal against policies that targeted illegal immigrants living and working in Farmers Branch and Irving."
Mexico Removing Dallas Consul General Amid Investigation, August 15, 2009
Throughout 2007, from January to December, Hubbard was publicly bellyaching, on TV and radio stations, about immigration raids that detained illegal aliens, as a result of cooperation between local police and immigration authorities. Then he complained about receiving negative mail from Americans for his bellyaching.
In Mexico, however, local police are not only allowed, they are required to enforce Mexican immigration law.
Also during Hubbard’s time, the Dallas consulate aided illegal alien "refugees" fleeing tougher laws in Oklahoma, Georgia and Arizona.
So what about the corruption scandal for which the Dallas consulate is being investigated by the Mexican government?
Obviously, they are not being investigated for meddling in U.S. politics, since that’s part of the consulate’s mission.
No, the corruption consisted of defrauding fellow Mexicans.
Here’s the story from the Dallas Morning News, which has been following the case:
"The Mexican Foreign Ministry on Saturday reiterated that any financial irregularities committed at its consulates would not be tolerated and that appropriate action would be taken to weed out corruption."
"The announcement followed a report Saturday in The Dallas Morning News about alleged financial irregularities at the Mexican Consulate in Dallas, the nation's third busiest. The report, citing as sources a senior Mexican official familiar with the investigation and three other Mexican officials, said that consulate staff members had personally profited from selling passport photos and from skimming money from passport fees paid by customers. "
[Mexico Vows to Weed Out Consulate Corruption After Passport-Scam Inquiry, Alfredo Corchado, Dallas Morning News, Aug. 16th, 2009]
"Skimming money from passport fees"? Can you believe it?
Hubbard has claimed to know nothing of all this.
I’m reminded of that famous scene from Casablanca in which Captain Renault declares that "I’m shocked – shocked to find that gambling is going on in here."
Not that all this started under Hubbard’s watch, either. This particular passport scam is said to have been going on for at least seven years. But Hubbard failed to do anything about it, and has claimed not to have known about it.
Nevertheless, he’s been transferred out of Dallas. But don’t worry, he’s not leaving the U.S. He’s going to the American University in Washington, to teach and do research!
So you can expect to hear his pronouncements on U.S. politics from time to time.
OK, so there’s corruption in the Mexican diplomatic corps. There are way too many Mexican consuls in the U.S. And Mexican diplomats too often meddle in our own internal affairs.
But when has Washington done anything about all this? When has a Mexican diplomat ever been reprimanded for meddling?
The next time some arrogant Mexican diplomat starts haranguing our policemen for enforcing the law, or making pronouncements about U.S. legislation, or any such brazen meddling, his diplomatic credentials should be revoked and he should be kicked out of the country.
Can you imagine the outcry among the Treason Lobby crowd and the Mexican government?
Oh, it would be entertaining.
What if it became a U.S. policy to protect our sovereignty like this? Wouldn’t Mexican diplomats finally get the message and start behaving like diplomats—not as representatives of an emerging state within a state?
Add it to the to-do list—for when we get a patriot President.

American citizen Allan Wall (email him) recently moved back to the U.S.A. after many years residing in Mexico. In 2005, Allan served a tour of duty in Iraq with the Texas Army National Guard. His VDARE.COM articles are archived here; his articles are archived here and his website is here.

ACTION ALERT Send a Message to Senator Michael: Obamacare and Colorado's Appointed Senator

This is an effective alert from on something you CAN do to send a message about Obamacare.

Thursday, October 29, 2009
Send a Message to Michael: Obamacare and Colorado's Appointed Senator
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt
Please contribute to Jane Norton's campaign for United States Senate in Colorado. Even a $10 check sends a clear message to Senate Democrats that pushing Obamacare will cost many of them their jobs.When Bill Ritter, Colorado's beleaguered Democratic governor, anointed Michael Bennet to fill the United States Senate seat of Ken Salazar who was appointed Secretary of the Interior by President Obama, most Coloradans were stunned."Who is Michael Bennet?" they wondered.It turns out that Michael Bennet is Harry Reid north, a reliable vote for the hard left Senate Majority Leader. Bennet has tried to project a moderate image, but the upcoming vote on bringing Obamacare to the Senate floor --the only vote that counts-- will define Bennet for the year long Senate race ahead.On his Senate website, Bennet writes: "Health care reform needs to reduce health care costs for Coloradans, preserve choice of health insurance, improve access to quality, affordable care-especially for all kids and for families living in rural area - and be done in a way that does not overburden future generations with debt." Obamacare does none of these things, but instead slashes Medicare benefits for the half million Colorado seniors who receive them, imperils the livelihood of the Rocky Mountain State's 10,000 doctors, and will drive the cost of doing business up for every employer in the state. The taxes embedded in every version of Obamacare will hit every Coloradan, adding to the already rising tax burden that is fueling Colorado's swing back to the right. It is possible that Bennet will figure out the only way he survives in his first run for office next year is to refuse to vote for cloture and to make a big show of it. Democrats will try to encourage him to allow the debate to begin and end and then vote against the final bill, but Colorado voters are far too savvy for such a dodge. Michael Bennet, just like Evan Bayh and Blanche Lincoln, is in control of whether or not Obamacare is allowed to wreck American medicine.You can send a message to Bennet to vote no on cloture by sending a contribution to Jane Norton, the former Lieutenant Governor who is generally understood to be the front runner for the GOP nomination. You can contribute to Norton online here.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Hispanics Muscle Dallas Police, Chief Folds, Americans Protest

If you hadn't heard of this story, go ahead and read the article below from!

26 October 2009
Hispanics Muscle Dallas Police, Chief Folds, Americans Protest
[Athena Kerry]
Headlines come cheap these days – and so do “racism” claims.The Dallas Morning News reported this evening that Ernestina Mondragon was ticketed for making an illegal U-turn, driving without a license and driving while not speaking English — the latter being a legitimate ticketable offense in Dallas, although only applicable to commercial drivers.Never mind that Mondragon has been a legal resident for 29 years, or that her English-speaking daughter was in the car with her and did not offer to translate. No, the headline here is about her “humiliation”.
“[Attorney] Garcia and Mondragon…want an investigation into Dallas police training and supervision generally and specifically to uncover any evidence of racial profiling.“And I want the Dallas Police Review Board to monitor the investigation as an impartial third party,” Garcia said.Garcia said he will file a claim asking the city to refund fines that Mondragon paid. She also incurred about $7,000 in medical expenses when she appeared to get ill after the traffic stop and her family took her to Baylor Medical Center at Garland. Her daughter said her mom was found to have stress-related symptoms and was admitted and kept overnight.”Woman ticketed by Dallas police for not speaking English says she felt humiliated, by Richard Abshire, The Dallas Morning News, October 26, 2009. Link added.Police Chief David Kunkle has already folded with an apology, a promise to investigate, and the mass dismissal of all 39 similar charges from the last three years.
Significantly, the comments posted are just as critical as I (Texan born and bred) am. One industrious commentor, kk45 volunteers his services:

“…I work for a sign shop and would love to print a sign for all Hispanics who believe that America must accept all Hispanics, no matter how they got here, and must learn to speak Spanish. Hispanics will sue till you do!”

My favorite comment, posted by BinBama, pretty much sums it up: “Learn the Language. This aint the lottery lady.”

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

London Telegraph: Juarez is ‘murder capital of the world’

Sad news from the London Telegraph about the sister city of El Paso, Texas. Very sad news.

London Telegraph: Juarez is ‘murder capital of the world’

The city of 1.5 million people just across the border from El Paso, Texas, had 1,600 murders last year but in 2009 that total was exceeded by late summer.
Latest figures from the Chihuahua state attorney general’s office showed there were 195 this month alone.
The annual murder rate has now reached 133 per 100,000 inhabitants, surpassing Caracas, Venezuela. The comparable murder rate in New York last year was six per 100,000.

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
New Murders Break 2008 Record in Mexico
Liberal Views, Black Victims By Walter E. Williams
Drug-related killings skyrocket in Juarez

With Unemployment Near Ten Percent, Giffords Seeks Importation of More Cheap Foreign Labor

A very timely post from about an attempt to expand the number of immigrants now!

With Unemployment Near Ten Percent, Giffords Seeks Importation of More Cheap Foreign Labor
FAIR has learned that – with unemployment at its highest rate in more than 25 years – Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) is prepared to introduce legislation that would double the number of visas available annually for foreign workers under the H-1B visa program. The H-1B visa program allows employers to bring foreign workers to the United States to work in specialty occupations that require “the theoretical and practical application of a body of specialized knowledge and a bachelor’s degree or the equivalent in the specific specialty.” (Department of Labor).
Giffords has not yet formally introduced her H-1B legislation, but sources indicate that it will be similar to a bill that Giffords sponsored in the previous Congress. That legislation, entitled “The Innovation
Employment Act,” would have:
Doubled the H-1B visa cap from its current level of 65,000 a year to 130,000 a year;
Increased the H-1B cap to 180,000 in the years 2010 to 2015 if the 130,000 cap was reached in the previous year; and
Eliminated the cap – currently at 20,000 – on H-1B visas issued to foreign graduate students attending U.S. colleges and studying science, technology and related fields. (H.R. 5630, March 13, 2008).
In spite of lobbying by big business special interests seeking easier access to cheap foreign labor – including Microsoft (See Computerworld, October 20, 2008) – the Giffords bill was buried in committee and never received any significant consideration. (H.R. 5630 – All Actions).
Giffords’ decision to renew her pursuit of a massive increase in the importation of cheap foreign labor amid the current economic recession is curious, to say the least. According to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, the nationwide unemployment rate is now at a 26-year high of 9.8 percent. (Reuters, October 2, 2009; Bureau of Labor Statistics, October 2, 2009). Nevertheless, Giffords and others are continuing to seek to utilize the H-1B program to displace American workers with cheap foreign labor.
Last week, in fact, the Shreveport Times in Louisiana reported that the Caddo Parrish School Board had “agreed to pay $1,660 to each Filipino teacher recruited by Universal Placement International to apply for each teacher’s H-1B visa.” Caddo Parish has hired 43 teachers on H-1B visas “for difficult-to-fill positions.” Caddo’s agreement to pay $1,660 per teacher has come about as a result of a complaint filed by the Louisiana Federation of Teachers on behalf of more than 200 Filipino teachers working in several parishes throughout the state. The complaint was filed against Universal Placement International, alleging that this recruiting company had “charged teachers an exorbitant amount of money, about $15,000, to secure a teaching position in the United States and proper documentation. Once they arrived, teachers then were charged 10 percent of their monthly income.” (Shreveport Times, October 21, 2009).
Government studies have also indicated that the H-1B visa program is highly susceptible to fraud. (H-1B Benefit Fraud & Compliance Assessment, September 2008). In fact, on October 16, 2009, the federal government announced that it had arrested a California-based immigration lawyer and his business partners who had allegedly “set[] up nearly a dozen shell companies to file fraudulent employment visa petitions on behalf of their clients.” According to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), “[m]any of the petitions were for H-1B visas,” and “the aliens named in those visa applications [allegedly] never worked for the defendants or the fictitious companies.” The group then allegedly sold the H-1B visas to immigrants seeking to come to the United States for prices ranging from $6,000 to over $50,000. ICE claims that the lawyer and his partners then used the illegal proceeds to purchase empty cemetery plots to hide the funds. (ICE Press Release, October 16, 2009). High rates of fraud and technical violations within the H-1B visa program have prompted Senators Charles Grassley (R-IA) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) to introduce legislation with the stated goal of “reform[ing] and reduc[ing] fraud and abuse” in the H-1B program. (S.887, April 23, 2009).

202-224-3121: The Switchboard for the Congress

A timely post on the health care debate from Hugh Hewitt of with action alert items.

202-224-3121: The Switchboard for the Congress
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt
Please use the number 202-224-3121 to call the key Democratic senators and urge a no vote when Harry Reid attempts to bring Obamacare to the Senate floor next week or the week thereafter. The idea that Reid, Chuck Schumer and Patrick Leahy are the architects of your health care for the rest of your life should be enough to move you to action. It takes 60 votes to open debate. Urge each office you call to tell their senator to vote "no" on the cloture motion to open debate.

Start with Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas --each of whom face election in a year. Then move on to Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana who will be defeated in three years if she backs Obamacare in her increasingly conservative state, and then to Senator Ben Nelson to encourage him to continue to be a voice of moderate reasonability within the Democratic caucus. Then ask Senator Joe Lieberman to continue to be an independent voice within the caucus and to vote no on cloture.There are others, all listed below. Call them all and e-mail them as well. Senator Reid has decided to throw the long ball on the public plan as well as on the massive cuts to Medicare and the huge tax increases. There is nothing centrist about his plan, and the only thing bipartisan about it is opposition to it.We still don't have the bill to read. But we have been told enough to know that it has nothing to do with the "centrist" version that emerged from the Baucus committee. Reid figures if he can get debate started, he may have to nip and tuck parts of the bill along the way, but that he will eventually get the bill that the president and Nancy Pelosi wants. If anything passes the senate, it will almost certainly sail through the House untouched to save a second trip through the cloture bound upper body.The "escape hatch" touted by Reid is just more smoke and mirrors --the same sort of "opt out" nonsense that keeps public employee union members contributing their scarce dollars to left wing activist leadership paycheck after paycheck. California with its hard left legislature (and its bankrupt state treasury) will never "opt out" which means that the public plan will quickly become the dumping ground of the Golden State's private and public sector employers, which will devastate the private insurance industry as it drives California even deeper under the waves. The rationing committees will get to work quickly as well to bring the costs of all American medicine down by refusing to approve crucial treatments. Read today's Wall Street Journal story on Dr. Barry Straube, one of the key figures in your future health care as he is in charge of deciding what the government will pay for under Medicare:In deciding what treatments Medicare will cover, Dr. Straube's office looks at what is considered "reasonable and necessary" for beneficiaries. It is up to Dr. Straube and his staff to interpret that phrase in federal law because Congress never spelled out what it meant and industry groups don't agree on a definition.There will be more Dr. Straube's in your future under Obamacare and especially under the "public option." And that is just the beginning of the bad news. The cost of every medical device will be raised by hefty taxes imposed across the board. Taxes will be applied to many people with employer-provided health insurance. The same government that cannot produce enough H1N1 vaccine with months of warning and preparation time will be in charge of every aspect of medical care for every enrollee --voluntary or forced-- in the public plan.So now is the time to call with the simple message that you will not only vote against every Democrats' re-election in a year, you will work against every Democrat who is on the ballot next year and will be contributing money to their opponents. Hopefully the voters in Virginia will deliver such a message next week, and if New jersey voters do the same thing with the election of Chris Christie, even tone deaf Senate Democrats may hear the message they missed in August.The next three weeks will decide the future of American health care and not just for you but for your children and their children. Spend the time necessary to make your opinion heard.

Sen. Michael Bennet
DC Phone: 202) 224-5444Local Phone:Denver Metro Office: (303) 455-7600 Toll Free: (866) 455-9866 Fax: (303) 455-8851Colorado Springs Office: Phone: (719) 328-1100Link to E-mail.

Sen. Evan Bayh
DC Phone: (202) 224-5623
Local Phone: Evansville (812) 465-6500, Fort Wayne (260) 426-3151, Hammond (219) 852-2763, Indianapolis (317) 554-0750, Jeffersonville (812) 218-2317, Southbend (574) 236-8302
Link to E-mail

Sen. Blanche Lincoln
DC Phone: (202) 224-4843
Local Phone: Dumas (870) 382-1023, Fayetteville (479) 251-1224, Little Rock (501) 375-2993, Jonesboro (870) 910-6896, Texarkana (870) 774-3106
Link to E-mail

Sen. Mary Landrieu
DC Phone: (202) 224-5824
Local Phone: Baton Rouge (225) 389-0395, Lake Charles (337) 436-6650, New Orleans (504) 589-2427, Shreveport (318) 676-3085
Link to E-mail

Sen. Ben Nelson
DC Phone: (202) 224-6551
Local Phone: Omaha (402) 391-3411, Lincoln (402) 441-4600, Scottsbluff (308) 631-7614, Kearney (308) 293-5818, South Sioux City (402) 209-3595
Link to E-mail

Sen. Joe Lieberman
DC Phone: (202) 224-4041
Local Phone: (860) 549-8463
Link to E-mail

More linked here

‘The Simpsons’, Islamophobia and CAIR: The Price of Freedom

A very interesting article from Big Hollywood about mainstream culture's handling of the Islamic terrorist threat.

‘The Simpsons’, Islamophobia and CAIR: The Price of Freedom
by Mark Tapson
This past January, London’s Daily Star tabloid announced urgently that an upcoming episode – “the most controversial episode ever”! – of The Simpsons on the Sky1 network “pokes fun at Islam” and “is certain to enrage Muslim fanatics.” As anyone who morbidly follows this sort of thing (as I do) knows, enraging Muslim fanatics is hardly an accomplishment of Halley’s Comet-like rarity. It doesn’t take much: books, cartoons, teddy bears named Mohammad, posters of puppies, piggy banks, a Burger King ice cream swirl and the Nike logo (both of which apparently too closely resembled the Arabic script for “Allah”), are just a few of the recent Western offenses that have sparked their frothing outrage worldwide.
Yet despite the Daily Star’s perversely hopeful tone, there was no violent reaction in the UK from said fanatics, nor was there one in the United States after the episode originally aired here last Thanksgiving weekend (in a grimly ironic twist, the same weekend as the devastating mass murder and mayhem committed in Mumbai by a band of – wait for it – Muslim fanatics, or as the culturally sensitive media preferred to call them at the time, “gunmen”). So why no Muslim fury over The Simpsons?
In the episode “Mypods and Broomsticks,” Homer Simpson believes a local Muslim couple are terrorists planning to blow up the Springfield Mall. It turns out, unsurprisingly, to be a misunderstanding; no plot is being hatched after all. As a spokesman for London’s Sky1 reassuringly sums up, “At the end of the show, all the issues are resolved and Homer realizes the error of his ways.” In other words, Homer was wrong to suspect Muslims – despite seeing them unload dynamite in their garage, despite hearing them discuss blowing up buildings, despite finding the schematics of the targeted local mall on their computer, and despite the fact that, in the real world, Muslim fanatics do have an impressive track record of blowing up innocent civilians.
The moral of the toon: coming forward to protect your community from a possible terrorist attack by Muslims, even with an abundance of probable cause, marks you as a buffoonish bigot. So, contrary to the Daily Star’s claim, the episode did not poke fun at Islam, but at Homer. Simpsons creator Matt Groening explained to Sky1: “Cartoons deal in stereotypes. We try to be sensitive.” Well, sensitive to the murderous rage of Islamists, anyway, since the episode ridicules the stereotyping of Muslims as terrorists, while stereotyping Homer as an Islamophobic, paranoid, ignorant American.
Thus CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, ever-ready with a quick denunciation of any criticism of Islam or any association of it with terrorism, instead whipped out a statement approving of the episode’s plotline and congratulating the show’s creators “for tackling the disturbing phenomenon of Islamophobia.” If I were CAIR, I’d be much more concerned about tackling the disturbing phenomenon of violent jihad committed by fanatics who have supposedly hijacked my religion (then again, CAIR is currently tackling revelations that it is a Muslim Brotherhood front group committed to replacing American democracy with Sharia and theocracy). What if Homer Simpson had been right, and the Muslim couple intended to murder and maim hundreds at the local mall? I guess CAIR would rather that he keep quiet and stifle his Islamophobia than act on reasonable suspicion, report the possible bombing to the authorities, and save countless lives.

Najibullah Zazi
Admittedly, those are cartoon characters in the service of comedy writers whose aim is to give the topic a light treatment; but they nonetheless reinforce the default PC position that only stupid bigots draw a connection between Islam and terrorism. In the real world, meanwhile, Osama bin Laden and his ilk are busy making that connection themselves, and political correctness won’t save you from them.
“Mark, this is all very fascinating,” I hear you say,“but doesn’t Obama’s election mean that America is now safer and more ‘well-liked’?” (A concept I previously bashed here) “Won’t our Islamist enemies respond more peacefully and diplomatically to his flaccid ‘open hand’ policy and his many cringe-worthy expressions of pro-Islam sycophancy?” First of all, no less an authority than bin Laden himself has made it clear that he considers Obama no different from his predecessor. Second, since Obama has taken office, over 40 American-born Muslims or converts have been arrested for plotting terrorist attacks here and abroad, including Najibullah Zazi, a Denver-based Muslim who apparently is connected to al Qaeda and at the center of what could have been a catastrophic terrorist plot; Hosam Maher Husein Smadi, for attempting to car-bomb a Dallas office tower; and Muslim convert Michael C. Finton, who planned to blow up a federal building in Springfield (Illinois, not the one in The Simpsons). Even as I write this, Tarek Mehanna and cohorts, apparently desirous “to participate in Islamist holy war,” were arrested in Massachusetts for plotting to attack a mall in the U.S. Are all Muslims terrorists? Of course not; indeed, the fundamentalists have no qualms about targeting Muslims who aren’t onboard with the notion of embracing Sharia and a worldwide Caliphate. But make no mistake, there are untold numbers of Islamists here in America, and many of them want to kill you.
What can you do about it? Join a great activist organization like Brigitte Gabriel’s ACT! for America, buy The Citizen Soldier Handbook: 101 Ways for Every American to Fight Terrorism by my friend Michael Mandaville and put his action items to work, or simply keep your eyes open and trust your instincts. The LAPD recently rolled out a community awareness program called iWATCH, a neighborhood watch service designed to nip terrorist plots in the bud by providing citizens with a hotline to report suspicious activity. Seems a little long in coming - nearly ten years after an alert customs officer arrested Ahmed Ressam at the Canadian border and foiled the “millennium LAX plot” in late December, 1999 - but better late than never. Skeptical, pseudonymous police officer “Jack Dunphy,” pointing out that iWATCH bluntly warns against ethnic profiling, believes the program will be hamstrung by political correctness. He may be right; time will tell. In any case, if only programs of this sort were promoted as frequently on television as Obama’s volunteerism propaganda (which includes nothing about combating Islamic terrorism), Americans would become more conscious of a local role they can play in the war-formerly-known-as-the-war-on-terror.
“The price of freedom,” said Thomas Jefferson, “is eternal vigilance.” Not willful blindness, not political correctness, not naive complacency, but vigilance. While the current administration has its hands full demonizing its critics, winning the praise of dictators worldwide, and embracing anti-American radicals and Sharia supporters, radical Islam continues to wage war against us on our own soil. It’s up to each one of us ordinary Americans, us Citizen Soldiers, to throw off the yoke of political correctness, disregard trumped-up accusations of Islamophobia or racism, and help law enforcement protect our communities and our country from the enemy among us.

Newt, Sarah and a New GOP: "Are Republicans Willing To Call For A Moratorium On Immigration?"

An interesting post from commentator Pat Buchanan. Click the title to read it all!!

Newt, Sarah and a New GOP: "Are Republicans Willing To Call For A Moratorium On Immigration?"
By Patrick J. Buchanan
"Sometimes party loyalty asks too much," said JFK.
For Sarah Palin, party loyalty in New York's 23rd congressional district asks too much. Going rogue, Palin endorsed Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman over Republican Dede Scozzafava.
On Oct. 1, Scozzafava was leading. Today, she trails Democrat Bill Owens and is only a few points ahead of Hoffman, as Empire State conservatives defect to vote their principles, not their party.
Newt Gingrich stayed on the reservation, endorsing Scozzafava, who is pro-choice and pro-gay rights, and hauls water for the unions.
Scourged by the right, Newt accused conservatives of going over the hill in the battle to save the republic, just to get a buzz on. "If we are in the business about feeling good about ourselves while our country gets crushed, then I probably made the wrong decision." How Scozzafava would prevent America's being "crushed" was unexplained.


For, according to Gallup, 40 percent of Americans now identify as conservatives—only 20 percent as Republicans. If the GOP is not the conservative party, it will never be America's Party.
But what does "conservative" mean in 2009? And where do conservatives come down on the great issues?


According to Gallup, America is moving closer to the Republican position on regulations, abortion, guns and union power. But half of all Americans now favor cuts in legal immigration. Are Republicans willing to call for a moratorium on immigration to tighten the labor market and force wages up? Or does the Chamber of Commerce still call the tune?
Ronald Reagan arrived with new ideas that fit the needs of his time. Where are the Republican ideas that fit the needs of this time?
Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers; his book State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, can be ordered from

Can Halloween Be Christianized?

An interesting post about this time of the year from .

Can Halloween Be Christianized?
Finding the shadows of the evil customs of Halloween abhorrent, many Christians have sought to sanitize the holiday by integrating religious symbols with which they are more familiar and comfortable (this process is called syncretism). Some, for example, carve the name Jesus onto pumpkins and add religious phrases in the hopes of evangelizing those who go trick-or-treating.
Others have undertaken a more elaborate revision of the holiday, attempting to turn it into a harvest festival interwoven with Christian themes and devoid of its more obvious pagan overtones. Church basements are turned into carnivals featuring games, contests and, of course, candy.
What should you do in deciding how you will approach this hotly debated issue?
The fundamental argument in favor of mixing ancient pagan customs and practices with the worship of God is that some believe it is an effective way to gradually win people over to Christian understanding. (Of course, in the present world we should ask ourselves why people who already see themselves as Christian would find any need to continue associations with pagan religious customs.)
This is sometimes a hotly disputed subject, and sincere people have concluded it indeed is useful to integrate the practices of ancient religious customs with the worship of God.
But perhaps we should address a fundamental question: What does God advise?
There is a scriptural precedent that offers guidance and direction for those who accept the Bible's instruction. The Israelites were confronted with these issues as they settled and built a new nation in the Promised Land. They encountered many worshipers of pagan deities as they entered the land and for centuries faced the problem as they dealt with neighboring peoples.
Even before they entered the land, God revealed His thinking and told them how to handle this challenge. His directions were explicit: "When the LORD your God cuts off from before you the nations which you go to dispossess, and you displace them and dwell in their land, take heed that you are not ensnared to follow them ... Do not inquire after their gods, saying, 'How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.' You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way; for every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods ... Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it" (Deuteronomy 12:29-32).
God's instructions are crystal clear. He refuses to accept worship that is compromised and tainted by customs used in the worship of fraudulent religion. He expects His worshipers to revere Him in accordance with His commands, not their own imaginings.
Many centuries later the apostle Paul expressed a similar thought when correcting some in the church in Corinth for their poor judgment. "What partnership can righteousness have with wickedness?" he asked. "Can light associate with darkness? Can Christ agree with [the devil] ...? Can there be a compact between the temple of God and idols? And the temple of the living God is what we are" (2 Corinthians 6:14-16, Revised English Bible).
The modern debate over Christianizing pagan worship customs could be resolved simply by reading and heeding God's plainly expressed will. GN

Related Resources
Is Halloween Harmless? Every year at Halloween, well-meaning parents dress their children in grotesque and ghoulish costumes. Is Halloween really harmless? Who and what's behind this bizarre holiday?
Halloween's Dark RootsIn recent years eye-opening materials have been published about the questionable background of Halloween
Ghouls, Ghosts and GoblinsIt seems like such harmless fun—children dressed as witches, skeletons or Darth Vader ringing the doorbell, enthusiastically announcing, "Trick or treat!" But is this preoccupation with the dead, witches and demons really harmless? And do you realize that Halloween was originally an important religious holiday—and still is in many parts of the world?
Can Halloween Be Christianized?What should you do in deciding how you will approach this hotly debated issue?
Who's Getting Tricked by Halloween?Why do witches, goblins, jack-o'-lanterns, cobwebs, graveyards and symbols of the occult surround this holiday? You need to know the real story.
Halloween: A Celebration of Evil Modern celebrations of Halloween may appear on the surface to be quite harmless, but the spiritual implications of dabbling with the spirit world are extremely serious.
Holidays or Holy Days: Does it Matter Which Days We Celebrate?It's ironic that so many of today's popular holidays—including major religious celebrations like Christmas and Easter—originated in ancient pagan festivals and customs, while God's Holy Days revealed in the Bible are almost universally ignored. Which should you celebrate and why?

The Vitter-Bennett Census Amendment—Count Citizens, Stop Swamping America!

A very timely post from about two senators who are not trying to reward lawbreakers.

The Vitter-Bennett Census Amendment—Count Citizens, Stop Swamping America!
By Washington Watcher
In our Politically Correct age, the fact that the U.S. Constitution counted African Americans as "three fifths" of a person for the purpose of apportionment is regularly bemoaned.
But it’s less noted that those who wanted blacks to be counted as full persons did not do so out of egalitarian principle. They were delegates from the Southern states aiming to increase their political power by having slaves counted.
Similarly today, the Left wants to use the Census to entrench its political power by ensuring that as many illegal aliens as possible get counted. This would increase Congressional representation, because apportionment is on the basis of population not citizenship, skew the Electoral College to immigrant-impacted states, and (of course) mean yet more taxpayer-funded goodies for Hispanics.
The Census Bureau actively promotes this effort. It wants U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to suspend immigration enforcement during the count.
In 1980, 1990 and in 2000, the late unlamented Immigration and Naturalization Service did suspend immigration raids during the census. Back then, there were significantly fewer illegal aliens, and even less enforcement of our immigration laws. Suspending enforcement today would be an even bigger affront to the rule of law than it was in the last three censuses. Fortunately, Americans are much more outraged over illegal immigration, so it is unlikely this will become policy.
But the Bureau will spend an estimated $300 million to maximize the number of immigrants counted. Its tools include Public Service Announcements in English and Spanish, "Immigrant Awareness" posters, and multilingual survey forms.
More disturbingly, "Part of the outreach will occur through Census Bureau alliances with institutions such as churches and ethnic organizations to inform communities and overcome fears of working with the federal government." [To accurately count immigrants, 2010 census will include outreach in more languages, by Juliana Barbassa, Associated Press, October 14, 2009]
One of these "alliances" is with the notorious ethnic lobby National Council of La Raza allies. According to La Raza itself:
"In 1990 NCLR became one of five national organizations to form the first group of "Census Information Centers." (CIC) The CIC program partners, now expanded to include 60 organizations in the 50 states and in Puerto Rico, work with the U.S. Bureau of the Census to:
Educate members of their community on how to access and use Census data.
Motivate and train non-traditional data users to use Census data and apply the data to their needs.
Work collaboratively with the Census Bureau to support ongoing data collection activities and to raise awareness about the importance of Census data.
"As a result of its long relationship with the Census Bureau, NCLR has been able to produce numerous analyses, fact sheets, and other products that include social and economic data on the Hispanic population, and to increase dissemination of Census data to the members of the NCLR affiliate network." [NCLR Census Information Center, National Council for La Raza’s website]
It goes without saying that groups like La Raza have every incentive to do what they can to overcount the number of Hispanics. Until they were thoroughly exposed and disgraced, ACORN was also a partner with the Census.
Not all Open Borders groups want Hispanics to participate in the Census. The National Coalition of Latino Clergy & Christian Leaders is calling "for a boycott, asking for non-cooperation with the Census, until there's just and comprehensive immigration reform and legal status for everybody." [Census Boycott Splits Latinos, by Marcello Ballvé, New America Media, September 23, 2009]
Nonetheless, the bulk of the organized Hispanic lobbies are on board with working with the Census Bureau.
The New York Times recently ran an editorial headlined "How to Waste Money and Ruin the Census". [October 19, 2009]. Was it opposed to giving hundreds of millions of tax dollars to help left wing groups count illegal aliens—and in turn get billions of dollars in federal funding?
Of course not! It was referring to a common-sense solution to the illegal immigration problem. Senators David Vitter (R-LA) and Robert Bennett (R-UT) have proposed an amendment to the census appropriation bill requiring that the Census ask residents being counted for their citizenship and immigration status, and that Congress not include non-citizens for the purpose of apportionment.
According to the NYT, "Mr. Vitter’s demand would delay the count, could skew the results and would certainly make it even harder to persuade minorities to participate."
Some critics also claim that the Vitter-Bennett amendment will violate the 14th Amendment:
"Critics also point out that the Constitution only says the government must perform an ‘enumeration’ and says nothing explicitly about citizenship. Some groups also see the Vitter-Bennett amendment as a direct affront to the 14th Amendment, which discusses ‘equal protection’ and that House seats will be apportioned to the states ‘according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State.’ Nothing explicit there about citizenship, they say." [Citizenship and the Census, by Ed O'Keefe, Washington Post's Eye Opener Blog, October 15, 2009]
Of course, this purported 14th Amendment problem could be solved straightforwardly by a constitutional Amendment. And indeed in the beginning of the year, Rep. Candice Miller (R- MI) proposed "an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to provide that Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the number of persons in each State who are citizens of the United States."
Rep Miller only got 16 co-sponsors. But given the heightened interest in the issue, the amendment could gain much more traction in the coming weeks.
Of course, any constitutional amendment is a struggle to get ratified. But the struggle itself would force politicians to stand up and be counted on the issue.
Furthermore, it is not even clear that a Constitutional Amendment is necessary to bar non-citizens from being counted. Article I, Section 2 of The Constitution states
"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons"
Section 2 of the 14th Amendment abolished the three fifths clause and added,
“Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.”
The first sentence is pretty straightforward, but the second sentence needs to be placed in historic context. When the Amendment was written, blacks were not guaranteed the franchise by the Federal Government. Both Southern and some Northern States still denied African Americans the right to vote. As the South had no say in the 14th Amendment, if Mississippi barred African Americans voting, it would lose 1/3 of its representatives, but the effect would be negligible if Iowa were to do the same.
The 15th Amendment made this obsolete by guaranteeing the franchise regardless of "race, color, or previous condition of servitude" (i.e. slavery). But the fact that the 14th Amendment still excluded Indians or disenfranchised blacks for the purposes of apportionment contradicts the notion that the Constitution demands all residents must be factored in.
The courts have not decided directly on this issue. But the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the case Barnett v. City of Chicago (1998) that giving non-citizens "virtual representation" diminishes the voting rights of citizens.
The case dealt with the redistricting of Aldermanic wards in Chicago along racial lines. The Voting Rights Act is currently interpreted to require some gerrymandering of districts to ensure that ethnic groups are represented. In Chicago, Latinos had a lower percentage of majority Hispanic wards than their share of the population of the city.
But, writing for the majority, Judge Richard Posner concluded that the non-citizen Hispanics should not be considered because,
"Neither the census nor any other policy or practice suggests that Congress wants noncitizens to participate in the electoral system as fully as the concept of virtual representation would allow, although permanent resident aliens are permitted to make federal campaign contributions, 2 U.S.C. sec. 441e, as are certain other nonvoters. The right to vote is one of the badges of citizenship. The dignity and very concept of citizenship are diluted if noncitizens are allowed to vote either directly or by the conferral of additional voting power on citizens believed to have a community of interest with the noncitizens--that being the premise of the Latinos' claim in this litigation.” [Richard Barnett, Personally, Etc., Et Al. V City Of Chicago, Et Al. And Carole Bialczak, Richard Posner for the US 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Decided April 1, 1998]
The Barnett decision does not address U.S. Congressional apportionment. But the principle supports Sen. Vitter’s proposal.
Like most 14th Amendment problems, this is a grey area. The framers of the Amendment were dealing with the difficult issue of integrating former African American slaves into society. They did not anticipate tens of millions of illegal aliens swamping our country, still less that the combination of legal and illegal immigration from non-traditional sources would have shifted the racial balance to the point where America’s historic white core—the "posterity" for whom the Founding Fathers, all of them without exception white, said in the Constitution’s Preamble that they sought to ensure the "Blessings of Liberty"—is about to be forced, by public policy, into a minority.
But it’s an argument that patriotic immigration reform lawyers should explore.
In the meantime, I have a modest proposal on how to deal with the problem that illegal aliens pose for the Census: Deport them before we start counting!
"Washington Watcher" [email him] is an anonymous source Inside The Beltway.