Public Safety

The Lobby Needs More Room

December 26, 2011 By Guest Opinion 56 Comments

The history of civilized man has seen a never-ending evolution of what we call a “system of justice.” It was not until well after Christ that the concept of a judge and jury was born to enable the accused in criminal matters to be judged by a group of his/her peers. As a matter of fact; in ancient Rome there was no such thing as a “criminal court.” If a person were to have been criminally wronged it was his/her responsibility to pursue a civil claim against the accused. The government took no interest in prosecuting any crimes unless they were against the government itself. Essentially; a person with no immediate family could be robbed and killed in the middle of the street in broad daylight and there would be no prosecution because no-one had standing to pursue the claim.

My; how things have changed. In today’s world we are all judges, juries and prosecutioners who look only to the daily news and commentaries to reach judgment. We assume that everything we see and hear; especially from any source of reasonably reliable information; such as the news media, is the gospel truth. We feel no responsibility to question the conclusion reached by a public figure. The problem is; if we are all guilty of everything we are accused of; Satan’s waiting area would simply not be large enough to process all of the new admittees.

Case in point: I enjoy listening to Barry Young every morning on KFYI but I am consistently baffled by his attacks on former Arizona Senate President Russell Pearce. Mind you; Senator Pearce is a friend of mine and that may appear to suggest bias; but with or without any predilection of opinion concerning anyone’s character I am frustrated by Mr. Young’s assumption that Senator Pearce participated in some sort of conspiracy to plant Olivia Cortes on the ballot for Senator Pearce’s seat in the senate. Let’s look at the facts:

Senator Pearce is; in no uncertain terms, the “father” of SB 1070; the legislation that adopted already existing federal law into a much less stringent set of Arizona statutes. This made Senator Pearce a target for the liberal media to effectively “take him down.”
The media fueled a recall effort that was; in no uncertain terms, baseless.
Certain members of a tea party conspired to plant a sham candidate on the ballot in order to dilute Jerry Lewis’ support.
Certain members of Senator Pearce’s political panel; including some of his own relatives, perceived the benefits of this independent candidate without any knowledge or understanding of the basis for her political support and actually assisted in the effort.
Only after it became known that Ms. Cortes was not an actual candidate was any assistance and support withdrawn from her campaign.

Under no circumstances is there any shred of evidence that Senator Pearce, his campaign staff, or his relatives had any knowledge of the sham while they were taking advantage of it. Nevertheless; they are duly tried, prosecuted, and convicted by Mr. Young and the rest of the media for a crime they did not commit. The sad truth of this is that the State of Arizona has now been robbed of a man of unblemished character who has served us in law enforcement for many years, has been shot and wounded by criminals, and has almost lost his own son in the same fashion. Yet he is a very happy man when he observes large groups of newly naturalized citizens of the United States; primarily Hispanics, as they are sworn in near the State’s Capital. I have yet to see any of the liberal media; or even Barry Young, comment on this. I must assume that this revelation of the actual truth may serve to confuse and mislead the propagandized readers and electorate and it therefore would be nonsensical to acknowledge this reality. It is therefore best that the media let the sleeping dog lie and allow the general public to have grossly distorted opinions of one of their greatest heroes. Sounds fair to me.

Senator Pearce; as I am certain we are all aware is not the only victim of the distortion of the truth. I do not personally know former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas any more than occasional meetings and I therefore can make no comment concerning his matters before the Court. I am nevertheless honored to claim that Rachel Alexander is a close friend who is also the victim of; sadly enough, malicious prosecution simply because she was doing her job. Unfortunately; when doing one’s job may interfere with the goals of someone in power, somebody has to take the fall.

Let me put this in perspective: Ms. Alexander has not discussed with me any of the behind-the-scenes details of what led to her being accused of these compromises in ethical duties. She was working at her post as Assistant Maricopa County Prosecutor. Her boss; Mr. Thomas, assigned to her the prosecution of certain elected officials. She was presented with facts and evidence that clearly raised reasonable suspicion concerning wrongs committed by these individuals. It was therefore her duty to proceed with levying charges against them. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE DID SHE DO ANYTHING WRONG. Nevertheless; exposure of these facts concerning these elected officials meant that they needed to fight back. Please notice that there has never been a shred of allegation that Ms. Alexander did anything unethical in the rest of her life. The ONLY claim that can be made may be that she was working very hard to do her job.

Ms. Alexander’s need to answer her accusers is entirely political. It is work to take the attention off of the accused and shift it to the accuser. It has thus far been successful; which raises the point, why continue to accuse Ms. Alexander of any wrong-doing when there is no shred of evidence that she was not simply doing her job? . . . . . Because somebody has to take the fall to save these politicos from personal humiliation.

It is an unfortunate circumstance of life that we are all wrongly accused of indiscretions throughout our existence. It began in childhood with finger pointing at our siblings and even the family pet. Even I must confess to having been prosecuted by the State Bar Association in the early 90’s similarly to Ms. Alexander. I therefore understand the burden that she will carry whether she is completely acquitted or whether they determine that she deserves the least available public admonishment of a censure; which is a published reprimand without any suspension of her license.

Let me tell you why I was censured. The facts are that I never did anything wrong but I nevertheless failed to oversee what my employees were doing and therefore my trust account didn’t balance. The reason I didn’t see what was wrong with the account was that certain employees were scheming to embezzle money from the firm. They put up smoke screens and hid from me what they were doing. I nevertheless confessed to this and I simply made sure that the final reports specifically stated that I did nothing wrong, but that the errors were based on“negligence.”

The problem with this is that most people who see that I was censured ASSUME that I did something dastardly wrong and that I am a hardened criminal. The worse problem is that I am in fact responsible for the errors made by my employees but that Senator Pearce and Ms. Alexander did absolutely nothing wrong. They never had ill intent, they never consciously acted to wrong anyone. They were simply doing their jobs and they were doing them quite well; only to be dragged into “politically necessary” damage control by their opponents fueled by the almighty left-wing media.

I beg of any who read this: do not rush to conclusions until you know and understand the facts. That is a patent expression of “innocent until proven guilty” but it is painfully obvious that the media do not grasp the significance of those words. Let me put it this way: Senator Pearce and Rachel Alexander both knew by virtue of considerable experience with politics and the media that any misstep would be attacked without mercy. Do you really believe that either of them would have even contemplated doing anything like what they accused of? If so; they are not the real victims of medial prosecution, you the general public are. You are hypnotized into believing trumped up exaggerations produced by those who resist the good of what these people are doing for justice. It is a baffling quandary that the very system we fight to defend is the very same thing that fights to defeat us.

Justice will begin to be served when Senator Pearce is back in office and when all charges against Rachel Alexander are summarily dropped. That service will only end when every person acknowledges that these dedicated individuals are in fact innocent of any wrongdoing.

Please tell Satan to cancel the remodeling.

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Crime and Punishment, Elected Officials, Ethics, Illegal Immigration, Media, Public Safety, State Government

Brian Terry: When Justice Denies

December 15, 2011 By Wanumba

The somber anniversary of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry’s death, murdered in the line of duty in Arizona, the weapon used to murder him was provided to the criminals through the illegal cross-border networks by the Obama Administration’s Department of Justice through their heinous FAST and FURIOUS scheme.

Brian Terry: SEMPER FI: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0jTJq_VfS8

Filed Under: Border, Constitutional Law, Crime and Punishment, Ethics, Federal Government, Illegal Immigration, Judicial, Memorial, National Security, Public Safety

Link to FAST AND FURIOUS Investigation

December 13, 2011 By Wanumba

For Arizonans who want to follow the latest in the on-going investigation of the FAST and FURIOUS Obama Administration’s Justice Department’s appalling scheme to provide U.S. weapons to Mexican drug cartels.

Committee on Oversight & Government Reform

http://issues.oversight.house.gov/fastandfurious/

*****

Filed Under: 2nd Amendment, Border, Drugs, Ethics, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, Judicial, National Security, Public Safety

Lt. Mike Stauffer Supports ‘Arizona Compact’ and Disavows ‘Tent City’

November 18, 2011 By Press Release 30 Comments

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 18, 2011
CONTACT: West Kenyon

I support the Utah and the proposed Arizona Compacts, in that they reaffirm my beliefs in the rule of law and the constitutional enforcement of the laws and statutes passed by the legislature. These declarations also reaffirm the community’s trust in the discretion of their law enforcement officers in the performance of their duties.

In addition, I have determined that the “tent city” facility does not adhere to the best practices and professional standards of the American criminal justice system. The inhumane treatment of inmates and the lack of rehabilitative services at this facility should be a cause of concern for all citizens.

Under my direction, the “tent city” facility in its present form will cease to exist. As Sheriff I will replace this facility with a self-sufficient work farm for first time and low risk inmates to learn skills, attend rehabilitation programs and provide food and services to the rest of the county jail system.

The inmates at this proposed work farm, who legally reside in the United States, will have the opportunity to participate in a new type of work release program. I will partner with local Maricopa County businesses to interview and hire qualified inmates for work in their businesses. The inmates will be paid by the business to a county audited fund to help defray the costs of administering the work farm and the work release program. The remainder of the inmates pay check, after taxes, will be placed in a trust fund for the inmate, which the inmate will have access to upon their release. The inmates will have earned these funds and a job. Upon their release, they will have the means to provide for themselves and their families as they transition back in to our community. This will have a positive impact on the recidivism rate, as the former inmate will have skills and the ability to make positive choices.

As Sheriff, I will seek to partner with other agencies within the criminal justice system and private enterprises to craft a humane and effective set of programs that will provide realistic treatment and choices for the inmates to become productive citizens upon their release back into society.

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Campaigns & Elections, County Government, Illegal Aliens, Illegal Employment, Illegal Immigration, Press Release, Public Safety Tagged With: Arizona Compact, Mike Stauffer, Sheriff, Tent City

Is MCSO ignoring serious crimes?

June 1, 2011 By Goldwater Institute 15 Comments

by Clint Bolick
Goldwater Institute

In a pair of reports in 2008-09, the Goldwater Institute documented a very disturbing practice in the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office: a persistent habit of declaring serious crimes solved and closing cases without serious investigation, much less arrest or identification of suspects.

Amidst the swirl of funding misappropriations and alleged internal misconduct, MCSO’s failure in this core law-enforcement function has gone relatively unnoticed. But the real-world ramifications are enormous, because declaring a crime solved without investigating it means that criminals are at large, no one is looking for them, and the victim likely never will have justice.

When El Mirage formed its own police department several years ago, it obtained dozens of files from MCSO in which serious criminal cases were closed with little or no investigation.

More recently, according to ABC 15, MCSO itself reopened 500 cases dating back to 2005, and found that 400 lacked investigative work. Many of the uninvestigated cases reportedly involved sex crimes against young victims.

In our reports, the Goldwater Institute recommended that all law enforcement agencies be required to report essential statistics such as number of crimes, cases closed by arrest or otherwise, and cases prosecuted; and that random audits should be conducted to ensure that cases that are declared solved actually resulted in the arrest or identification of a suspect who is beyond the reach of law enforcement. Unfortunately, those recommendations were stripped from a government transparency bill in the legislature in 2010. These recommendations were introduced again this year and didn’t even get a hearing.

If there is a silver lining to this dark cloud perhaps it is that all this media attention will finally prompt the legislature into action next year. If there is one area beyond all others in which people need to be able to hold government accountable, it is those entities charged with the high responsibility of protecting our safety, our lives, and our property.

Clint Bolick is director of the Goldwater Institute’s Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation.

Learn More:

Goldwater Institute: Mission Unaccomplished: The Misplaced Priorities of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office

Goldwater Institute: Justice Denied: The Improper Clearance of Unsolved Crimes by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office

ABC 15: MCSO speaks out about ignored sex crimes

Filed Under: County Government, Crime and Punishment, Public Safety

Dimensions of National Security

May 29, 2011 By Wanumba

Sheriff Paul Babeu in his letter this week, raised an issue that provoked a number of thoughts. He alludes to an argument that has roots in a Democrat political positioning to frame our national security as a budgetary zero sum game : we “need” to pull our troops out of foreign theatres of war and redirect them to our border.

We are quite capable of doing both, and always have been. The budget arguments are cynical fog, when stimulus money went to tax cheats and the Democrat Party politically connected, NOT to any “economic stimulus.” The Democrats had no problems whatsoever throwing copious amounts of tax payer money around for their pet projects, while national security at home and abroad is being slowly, inexorably bled of financial support.

Democrats proudly opine that they” saved” General Motors, a peculiar choice of national interest spending while making emotional arguments to abandon two incredibly geopolitically strategic positions that have enabled the United States for years now to disrupt Al Qaeda operations against Americans and our allies. GM is actually contributing less to the national marketplace after receiving taxpayer money than before, and is sinking daily, in the the throes of bizarre corporate mission creep that is suddenly more interested in promoting Chairman Mao than building a solid car. Instead of investing aggressively in Afghanistan, as they aggressively invested in the likes of failed business model GM, Democrats announce to our enemies that current American political policy is to weaken our positions there. Priorities? How about sanity?

The US went overseas,as we have ALWAYS done since our military was structured to do to protect our nation since the 1801 Barbary Wars against the state-sponsored Islamic terrorism of high seas grand theft and hostage-taking which was being waged against unprotected American merchant fleets and American citizens overseas. Bin Laden coordinated the 9/11 attacks from what he believed was the safety of far away Afghanistan. Anti-American terrorists used Iraq as a safe haven for years. The foreign bases of Al Qaeda allowed them to attack and murder Americans on foreign soil and then catastrophically on US soil. As Thomas Jefferson proved, it is far more effective and efficient to identify the source of the problem and project our forces to it instead of haplessly running to and fro trying to police the entire globe, always too late or in the wrong place, and at crushing expense. The effects are multiplied in efficiences. With physical proof that America is willing to take the fight to foreign havens, other countries take the hint and are far more reluctant to allow terrorists to nest within their borders. Not worth the trouble.

The American policy as established at the end of World War II of providing security to enable local governance to be established in Germany, destroying the NAZI grip on German politics, resulting in over 50 years of continuous peace in Europe – literally and historically a world’s record for that region, is being applied in Afghanistan and Iraq, but this historically proven strategy is under attack from the Left which seems to have an agenda apart from credible American national security. It seems hard to believe today, but Germany and all of Europe needed easily a half-century American commitment, but Democrats can’t seem to grasp that worthwhile things take time, investment and effort to be lasting successes.

This is the same political Left that is blocking basic common sense border security. Why should anyone buy their arguments for dismantling two hundred years of succesful foreign military strategy when they don’t want to apply very basic and cost-effective security measures at an increasingly violent southern border?

Some of the plans sound like job creation schemes. Thousands of troops on the border, patrolling up and down. Let’s point out that if Mexico or say, an aggressive drug cartel consolidated enough power by murdering off its rivals and decided to grab some US territory, calculating that the political will wasn’t there to react , and invaded – say not to expressly redraw the border, but to stake out new operating forward positioning territory, what would an actual military defensive response look like?

Given instructions to drive out the invaders and secure the area, the most common military response, i.e the most effective and cheapest historical solution to control a border, from China to Scotland, Egypt to Cyprus to India, would be a …wall. Nothing fancy, the Moroccan wall to control the rebel Western Sahara Polosario is a big ol’ sand berm, but it is what is called a “force multiplier,” providing troops a superior defensive position, enabling fewer troops to control longer stretches far more effectively than a thousand patrols. In an actual conflict zone, the military’s first act is to “secure the perimeter.” Basic Tactics 101. Instead, we have Wishful Thinking 101.

Most commanders would not require “extra troops.” Extra troops mean higher costs – greatly increasing support expenses and burdensome supervisory responsibilities, a solution more appealing to politicians, bureaucrats and unions than results-oriented field commanders. Fences and walls don’t require pensions, health care, social security deductions or tax withholding.

National security is not a one dimensional issue of “budget.” It’s a multidimensional inter-relationship of place, at home and abroad; of depth, foreign and domestic, intelligence to combat, legal, financial and information fronts; of time, years of commitment that provides protection and stability. Effective national security requires sensible but not exploitative cooperative efforts between a myriad of people and agencies with a common goal, efforts that obviously include the elected representatives of the People. In this day of global transportation, the problems of Afghanistan are easily transported to our shores. Border security and global security are irrevocably linked.

In 1798, a time when ocean crossings took weeks by sailing ships, without instant global communications, in American cities and towns from Boston to Charlottesville, in taverns and salons, in newspapers and in theatres; North African, Ottoman Empire Islamic terrorism was the hottest topic of the day. Americans were not only losing millions of dollars in property every year, they were losing family and neighbors to Muslim state-sanctioned piracy. America has never had a period in her history when she wasn’t forced to deal with aggressive, anti-American aggression, a constant testing of our resolve and our ability to defend ourselves and our interests. Foreign nations noticed there was much to take from American merchant trade, and when America wasn’t able to protect her shipping, it was instantly pillaged. Nothing out there has changed, except the speed at which it can be applied against us.

Our elected representatives have spent years talking without delivering actions on basic, sensible measures. Yet, they certainly didn’t waste any time the past two years delivering though on throwing other people’s money around like candy at a Mardi Gras parade. They have proved they can act very quickly if they really want to.

Sheriff Babeu and the officers under him and their collegues who work in the border counties from California to Texas certainly work hard and have great responsibility to the People. A single day of real physical defense against drug lords, criminals and terrorists is worth more than twenty years of high-falutin’ political rhetoric. The Constitution expressly provides for the “common defense,” so our elected officials have no credible grounds for cynically emptying the U.S. budget and running up debt in a manner that threatens our ability to protect our nation “from enemies foreign and domestic.” US taxpayer money is not for spending on GM, massage parlors and gelatin wrestling in Antarctica, while leaving our military and law enforcement structures in the lurch.

Filed Under: Federal Budget, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, Military, National Security, Public Safety

US Supreme Court rules for AZ

May 26, 2011 By American Post Gazette 4 Comments

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

Thursday, May 26, 2011

US Supreme Court rules for AZ

States can yank licenses for companies that hire illegal aliens

By David G. Savage, Washington Bureau

8:34 AM PDT, May 26, 2011

The Supreme Court on Thursday gave Arizona and other states more authority to take action against illegal immigrants and the companies that hire them, ruling that employers who knowingly hire illegal workers can lose their license to do business.

The 5-3 decision upholds the Legal Arizona Workers Act of 2007 and its so-called business death penalty for employers who are caught repeatedly hiring illegal immigrants. The state law also requires employers to check the federal E-Verify system before hiring new workers, a provision that was also upheld Thursday.

The court’s decision did not deal with the more controversial Arizona law passed last year that gave police more authority to stop and question those who are suspected of being in the state illegally. But the ruling is likely to encourage the state and its supporters because the court majority said states remained free to take action involving immigrants.

Thursday’s decision is a defeat for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, several civil-rights groups and the Obama administration, all of whom opposed the Arizona law and its sanctions on employers. They argued that federal law said states may not impose “civil or criminal sanctions” on employers.

But Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said another portion of the same law made clear that states were free to use their “licensing” laws to punish employers. Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. formed the majority in Chamber of Commerce vs. Whiting.

The Arizona law upheld Thursday was signed into law by then-Gov. Janet Napolitano, who now serves as secretary of Homeland Security for President Obama.

In dissent were Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor. They said federal law prohibited states from imposing their own immigration-related rules on employers. Justice Elena Kagan sat out the case.

Soon after the Arizona employment law went into effect, lawyers for the chamber and civil-rights group sued, contending it was preempted or trumped by federal immigration laws. But a federal judge and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Arizona measure. The Supreme Court affirmed those decisions Thursday.

Roberts noted that eight other states had passed similar laws. They are Colorado, Mississippi, Missouri, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia.

The other Arizona law involving police enforcement has been challenged – successfully, so far – by the Obama administration and civil-rights groups. They say enforcement of laws against illegal immigration is exclusively in the hands of federal authorities. A federal judge and the U.S. 9th Court of Appeals have put that Arizona law on hold. Gov. Jan Brewer said she planned to appeal the issue to the Supreme Court.

Filed Under: Border, Constitutional Law, Crime and Punishment, Illegal Aliens, Illegal Employment, Illegal Immigration, Public Safety, States Rights

Suspect in deadly ‘reverse sting’ drug bust was federal informant

April 28, 2011 By Goldwater Institute 3 Comments

by Mark Flatten
Goldwater Institute

The man accused of initiating the drug buy that led to the 2010 death of a Chandler, Ariz., police officer made a plea bargain with federal prosecutors four months earlier to avoid a long prison term, and worked as an informant for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration at some time prior to the deal erupting in gunfire.

But Chandler police did not know John H. Webber had been working with federal officials when they ran a “reverse sting” targeting a quarter-million dollars that Webber and his cohorts agreed to pay for 500 pounds of marijuana supplied by undercover officers. Had the deal gone down as planned, the police would have kept the money under Arizona’s forfeiture law.

But after the marijuana was delivered, one of the suspects opened fire with an AK-74 rifle, mortally wounding Detective Carlos Ledesma, according to police reports. Two other undercover detectives were shot, and two suspects were killed during the shootout on West Maldonado Drive in south Phoenix, about 16 miles from the Chandler border.

Chandler police did not bring in the DEA, the U.S. Attorney’s Office, or Phoenix police to help in the operation. If they had, any money obtained through forfeitures would have been split among the law enforcement agencies involved. It also would have given them a chance to learn one of the suspects had been working with federal agents.

To read the rest of this Watchdog Report, click here.

Filed Under: Constitutional Law, Crime and Punishment, Public Safety

Commander-In-Chief Belshazzar Obama Undermines America’s Fighting Forces

April 8, 2011 By Wanumba

Governor Sarah Palin just articulated a MAJOR GLOBAL SECURITY ISSUE that no one else has raised, yet should have: Barack Obama publically announcing he won’t pay our troops in order to hold them hostage to keep Republicans from repairing the national damage from the last Congress’s horrific spending spree that has exploded our national debt. The internationally dispersed announcement that the President of the United States of America cares so little about American soldiers as they fight on the front lines- that Obama will stonewall in order that our soldiers suffer to protect a partisan Democrat Party political agenda – will EMBOLDEN our enemies AGAINST our troops while this despicable announcement DEMORALIZES our men in women as they serve far from our comforts in foreign theatres of war against a vicious enemy that declares its goal is to annihilate not only America, but Western Civilization itself.

Obama and the Democrats have made no secret of their desire to “bring our troops home,” not just from a single arena, but as a stunning shift in geopolitical vision – to abandon over two hundred years of successful, informed, active and liberating American presence internationally. At the birth of America, the isolationist vision now re-marketed by the Democrats prevailed, until Americans were attacked, again and again by foreign nations at our shores, our merchant shipping, Americans killed, captured, enslaved, economic losses in the millions. After hard losses, death and destruction, our military was retooled and built for realism – and projecting of our forces to the sources of aggression, not waiting until war arrives at our shores. It would be playing with a treacherous betrayal of our national security to strangle our troops to manufacture a pretext for abandoning centuries of a highly successful traditional military strategic operational structure.

This is DEVASTATING. Obama as POTUS and Commander-In-Chief is SCREWING the troops who are under his authority – our ENEMIES LOVE IT. They CAN’T BELIEVE their good luck! What other president on the planet would do that? Perhaps American-murdering terrorist Ghaddafi ‘s calls to his “brother Obama” have PAID off!! Can we now also question the sleazy sincerity of the Democrats, who have assured us for years that poor Blacks, Hispanics and uneducated Whites make up a disproportionate percentage of our military, and Obama now won’t pay them if he doesn’t get his way, blatently hurting minorities in disproportionate numbers? If their wailing rhetoric was true and Democrats actually cared, they wouldn’t even consider this sort of nasty, racist by their own words, political brinkmanship, but they are not distancing themselves from this raw brutality against American citizens who count on their payslips to support themselves, their families, to pay their bills.

Obama will have a very nice dinner tonight, no, not just nice, but exquisite – the best other people’s money can buy – as he has had every night he’s been POTUS, banqueting like Belshazzar before the Persian conquest. Obama seems to have a taste for the finer cuisine, at taxpayer expense, consuming as a glutton, entertained by some of the very same A-List celebrities whom the terrorist oil-rich Ghaddafi family paid $2 to $3 million per performance, while troops under his authority eat cold, dry MREs and sleep on the dirt. Now Obama and his political party, the Democrats, announce their shared priorities are protecting the likes of special interest death industry Planned Parenthood, not the Constitutional “provide for the common defense.”

Sarah Palin CAUGHT IT. Where are the other voices? This goes beyond political parties. All Americans should be united in disgust and with condemnation for this dangerous rhetoric and path Obama seems so careless to lead us all down as he ratchets up the mortal danger aligned against our troops. Our troops don’t get paid, Obama don’t get paid. Even the rhetoric alone – examined carefully by our enemies – deserves aggressive rebuke. How does a commander eat while he denies his troops their food? This sort of egotistical selfishness is routinely condemned in the military as a grotesque failure of leadership, and the cost of feeding Obama and his friends with luxuries like $100 a pound steaks and $300 a bottle wine for the past two years at the White House with live performances by Paul McCartney and Beyonce to name only two of many entertainers, dwarfs the expense of feeding entire platoons during the very same time period. Now, multimillionaire Obama’s openly stating he intends to block payment of services rendered by our troops, putting their families, their mortgages, their credit ratings, everything they need to function in our society AND and their lives at risk as our enemies assemble to attack. Obama’s fitness for such an important job as Commander -In-Chief is now in question – a terrible thing thing to for citizens to have to consider.

Filed Under: Federal Budget, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, Guest Opinion, Military, National Security, Public Safety

The New Barbary Coast: Muslim Piracy 2011 – Somalia and the Horn of Africa

February 23, 2011 By Wanumba 21 Comments

The US has had a long-standing and successful policy for dealing with Muslim pirating, a policy established by Thomas Jefferson in the Tripolian War 1801, otherwise known as the First Barbary War. In contrast to John Adams who maintained Muslim piracy was something the United States would have to learn to manage, Jefferson argued that it was not possible to police an entire ocean, so the successful strategy was to identify and project American force to attack the safe haven ports and the governments that support the pirates. Further, all American merchant ships were forced to navigate through the Straits of Gibraltar, a natural choke point that funneled merchant ships into the waiting hands of Barbary pirates, a known trap. James Madison continued Jefferson’s policy in response to a second wave of Muslim piracy, the Algerine War 1816, a deliberate test by the North African Muslim despots to see if the old ransoming racket could be revived since Jefferson was no longer POTUS. Americans were not harrassed by any state-sponsored Muslim piracy after that.

In 1904, when Muslim warlord Rasuli in Morocco snatched an American and kept him hostage, Pericardis, President Theodore Roosevelt quickly blazed out with warships and hot rhetoric: “Pericardis ALIVE or Rasuli DEAD.”

Ion Pericardis was not an ideal American – he’d renounced his citizenship – the Moroccan government actually was innocent of this hostage-taking, so it wasn’t a case of state-sponsorship, but they managed to get rebel warlord Rasuli to cough him up before Roosevelt’s ships barrelled in. Roosevelt was aware of all this, his purpose was to demonstrate to everyone that America would defend her citizens anywhere in the world, making it safe for Americans to live, work and travel abroad.

Jimmy Carter ignored this successful history and allowed himself to be mired in negotiations designed to humiliate him; painting the USA as weak in the eyes of the Muslim world. Clinton further encouraged an image of weakness in the Muslim world as he failed to respond aggressively to the first WTC attack, and to an intensifying pattern of increasingly deadly attacks against Americans and American military abroad during his eight years in office.

9/11, planned for years during Clinton’s Administration and executed during Bush’s first nine months on the job, judged by the eye-for-an-eye expectations of the Muslim tribal culture, was an act that absolutely required a violent response for the USA to be credible in the eyes of Muslims. Judged by their actions, Carter and Clinton were dismissed as weak and afraid to respond, so jihadist-inspired Muslims believed Bush would also display cowardice and do nothing. They were mistaken. Bush’s swift and comprehensively coordinated offensive defense came as a total shock to the terrorists; to their chagrin and dismay, Bush was revealed as a “Strong Horse.”

Far from being incomprehensible, Somali pirates have displayed classic tribal behaviors, including starting negotiations with ridiculous demands for phenomenal amounts of money they had no hope of getting, expecting major reductions through standard haggling. To their surprise, they got their first outlandish price, a devastating mistake on the part of the ransom payers. The depth of Somali depravity was soon discovered to be not so deep with the first captured ”pirate captain” being all of 16 and in delighted awe at the luxury of an American Navy brig, excited to be sent off to the USA. Hmm.

But the profound damage was done … millions of dollars of ransoms fund new boats, better weapons and worse, attract hard-core and violent terrorists who are trained to exploit law-less zones, and with the natural choke point of the Gulf of Aden through which thousands of merchant ships and tankers pass through, seek to control a region that has great strategic and tactical value.

Now, if any half-awake sociology major in Tempe, sucking down an over-priced burned bean latte at Starbucks with a computer and google earth can track Somali pirate ships right now departing docks at their decrepit ports in their collapsed nation-less nation, and back again, and how much more does our military have, then obviously we have the means to track and target these Third World pirates with ease.

We have the capability – in spades, in abundance, but the Obama Abministration isn’t interested in stopping this. Simple as that.
The big question is: Why not? Is it international incompetence? Is it an agenda that is valued more than the Consitutional duty to defend America from enemies foreign and domestic?

The US military could destroy the pirate ability and desire to pirate, (most would quickly surrender anyway, they aren’t suicidal) and conquer the wretched strip of overgrazed and bullet-pocked land called Somali in a WEEK, even with nap-time, and not even use a fraction of what we have, and who would complain? There is no “Somali” government and everyone’s ships are at risk of pirate attack, so who would complain about ending that harrassment?

In 1790, George Washington got this report from his Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson summarizing US options to Barbary Muslim piracy:

1) US pay to ransom captives, and pay annual protection racket tribute to the Muslim pirate states
2) Abandon the Mediterranean
3) Use military force to end the pirate harrassment.

“Nothing new under the sun.” In 2011 we have the same options:

1) US pay to ransom captives, thus financing criminality and increasingly directly international violent terrorism (a negative)
2) Abandon the Horn of Africa region (a negative)
3) USe military force to end the pirate harrassment for everyone. (a positive)

The DEMOCRATS haven’t yet displayed they have learned ANYTHING about this region, tribal dynamics and the international implications for their inactions and capitulations. Four American citizens have just lost their lives because of it. Their lives should not be have lost in vain, nor should be permitted to be the harbinger of more deadly attacks against Americans abroad.

Filed Under: Foreign Policy, Government, Guest Opinion, International Trade, Military, National Security, Public Safety, Terrorism

Sticks and stones may break their bones

February 4, 2011 By American Post Gazette 20 Comments

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

February 3, 2011

Sticks and stones may break their bones

Our law enforcement officers, first responders one and all, put their lives on the line for us every day. They have to deal with dangerous situations that most of us would be very glad to avoid at all costs. What we fail to remember sometimes, is that the uniform does not change the fact that these people are first and foremost, human beings, just like the rest of us.

Is it not enough that they have to face danger without having to endure mindless abuse as well? Just imagine the kind of mentality that leads some people to hurl invectives at the police officers who serve and protect us, but perhaps those nitwits identify with the bad guys, and see law enforcement as the enemy. Now our first law enforcement guys and gals cannot even be sure it is safe to eat in a restaurant. Something is wrong with this picture.

Let us know what you think. It’s your call. This memo below was sent today to all Sheriff’s employees:

Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 3:03 PM
To: Sheriff
Subject: E-mail for all Sheriff’s Employees

Please give special attention to the message below from Chief Brian Sands.

It came to our attention that earlier today, one of our District 1 deputies, while on a lunch break at a McDonald’s restaurant in the Mesa area, was verbally harassed by a number of food handlers there.

Workers saw the uniformed deputy, proceeded to verbally harass him in Spanish spewing hateful comments towards him and the Office and Sheriff as a whole. The deputy refused to take the meal, fearing contamination. Finally the deputy contacted the corporate office to brief them on what had occurred.

After a review of the facts with this deputy, and in light of the fact that we have conducted employer sanctions cases against a McDonald’s restaurant in the past which resulted in a strained relationship between the fast food chain and this Office, I am suggesting that all employees who wish to eat at a McDonald’s restaurant, do so with caution.

Chief Brian Sands

Enforcement

MCSO

star

Filed Under: Culture, Ethics, Illegal Employment, Public Safety

Court issues restraining order against anti-Prop. 107 spokesman

October 19, 2010 By Press Release Leave a Comment

A m e r i c a n P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

For Immediate Release
Contact Leon Drolet at 602-845-0107
www.arizonacri.org

Court restrains anti-Prop 107 spokesperson who threatens to attack Ward Connerly

Phoenix, AZ – A Maricopa County Court official issued a legal restraining order against the spokesperson for a group opposing Proposition 107 on Friday after he sent a public message threatening to physically attack Ward Connerly, a pro-Prop 107 leader.

Anti-Prop. 107 spokesperson Steve Russell was ordered to stay more than 100 feet away from anti-affirmative action leader Connerly after Russell publicized his threat late Thursday night.

Proposition 107 would ban race and gender based affirmative action in Arizona. Connerly is nationally known for opposing government race and gender preferences and was participating in a debate on Prop. 107 hosted by the Goldwater Institute in Phoenix. Russell is a designated spokesperson for a group calling itself ‘Protect Arizona’s Freedom’, which supports Arizona’s existing affirmative action programs and opposes Prop. 107. Russell was not part of the Goldwater debate.

Maricopa County Justice of the Peace Clancy Jayne issued Friday’s court order after Russell sent out the threatening electronic message late Thursday evening following the debate. Russell announced publicly on his Twitter account that he “would not hesitate to punch connerly [sic] in the face if I saw him…”

Russell served as spokesperson for PAF at the taping of a televised Secretary of State Town Hall Meeting in September. During his taped official PAF statement opposing Prop. 107, Russell accused Connerly, who is black, of being financially supported by the Ku Klux Klan.

“Unfortunately, I must take violent threats seriously, especially when they are in the context of other inflammatory rhetoric, such as has been characteristic of Mr. Russell” Connerly stated. “A few affirmative action supporters are quite radical and I have been threatened before. Mr. Russell has attempted to incite hatred against me with his bizarre KKK smears, and now feels compelled to brag about his willingness to assault me physically. I don’t know how stable Steve Russell is.”

Russell describes himself as “radical, somewhat socialistic” on the profile he provides to online dating website Match.com.

PAF is lead by AZ State Rep. Krysten Sinema (D-Phoenix), who serves on the group’s advisory committee. Rep. Sinema recently told Time Magazine that, “I’m very concerned about the tone of politics in recent years. We’ve seen a decline in civility and bipartisanship, and a rapid increase in hostility between those who have differing opinions. I think this has led to the alienation of the public in governance, which jeopardizes democratic participation.”

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2023831_2023829_2025183,00.html#ixzz12V061JIK

Connerly called on Rep. Sinema to walk her talk on civility.

“I call on Rep. Sinema, the Mayor of Phoenix, and other high profile public officials who are opposing 107 to condemn Mr. Russell and disassociate themselves from his threats,” Connerly stated. “I have been threatened before and have had a pellet gun fired at my office building because of my stance in favor of the principle of equal treatment for all. No one should be threatened with violence in our nation because of their views.”

# # # #

Filed Under: Campaigns & Elections, Crime and Punishment, Public Safety, Race Relations

PART TWO: SHAKING HANDS WITH THE DEVIL: “Gasoline on the fires” Rodriguez’s MACHETE death wish against Arizonans.

September 8, 2010 By Wanumba 18 Comments

Stephen Holder of the New York Times, in a Mt Olympus sort of 2,500 or so miles away, weighs in on the new movie, MACHETE. “Conveniently timed to sprinkle gasoline on the fires of the immigration debate, Robert Rodriguez’s splatter comedy “Machete” has already riled up hardliners … Although laughter is the appropriate response to this pulpy, lighthearted gorefest, its pro-Mexican, anti-American stance is so gleefully inflammatory that some incensed nativists may refuse to get the joke … Funny throwaway jokes include the casting of Lindsay Lohan in a flashy cameo as April, a rich, scowling slut who dons a nun’s habit to wield a machine gun … She and her sexy blond mother, June (Alicia Rachel Marek), divert Machete in a threesome. Completing the unholy trinity of rotten, greedy Americans, along with McLaughlin and Booth, is Von (Don Johnson), a border vigilante who keeps his own army ready to slaughter any encroaching Mexican horde.

The only American with a conscience, Sartana (Jessica Alba), is a hard-nosed immigration officer who switches sides. The movie’s heroine, Luz (Michelle Rodriguez …) a taco stand operator known as She (pronounced Che), also runs “the network,” a secret revolutionary Mexican army waiting for the signal to rise up.” http://movies.nytimes.com/2010/09/03/movies/03machete.html?ref=movies

Boy Howdy, we’ve literally circumnavigated the globe and lived on three continents and NO ONE we’ve met from Timbuktou to Katmandu, is able to yuk it up the way ol’ sophisticated Stephen Holder can at the sight of people getting their heads cleaved in two by machetes. Even though it left New York Times film critic Stephen Holder in stitches, the Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists would be appalled to watch such a disrespectful depiction of a Catholic nun. Religious people respect those who commit themselves to piety, but evidently, they’re more sophisticated at the “Grey Lady,” than those rubes.

But hullo. That New York Times review is in stark contrast to this review, evidently from one of the “nativists” Holder turns his nose up at:

Writer/Director Robert “Rodriguez’s message is clear — if the racist gringos in Arizona (and Texas and California) prevent this illegal influx — the border crossing Mexicans, not Mexicans crossing the border — the reaction will be bloody carnage by way of machete, the preferred execution tool of drug cartel thugs fond of cutting off the heads of their victims.” – Kurt Nimmo – Infowars.com

There is just no common ground here; could it be there are two versions of MACHETE; one hilariously, by tony Manhattan standards, side-splitting, and one horrifyingly skull-splitting, by totally humorless rube standards? So which review of MACHETE correctly captures the spirit of the “splatter comedy gorefest Machete”? The oh-so-ironic detached aloofness of the New York Times review or the analysis of the “nativists” as the “do as I preach not as I do” New York Times indulges in some old-fashioned hypocrisy, insensitivity, and bigoted “code words” ? Or is the NYT enabling bigotry but trying to pass it off slashing and hacking as funny? Kenyans wouldn’t find any hilarity- nearly 2,000 killed, many by attackers armed with machetes, over 200,000 chased from their homes.

Following Classic Progressive Infallibility Requirements,often used by the New York Times, only those who actually were part of the film can say anything about it, so we dismiss the dueling reviewers in favor of the words of the MACHETE lead actor:

“… Danny Trejo proclaims the film is an angry response to Arizona’s attempt to prevent a huge influx of not only illegal immigrants but Mexican cartel drug traffickers targeting the state’s police officers.”
http://www.infowars.com/rodriguez-plans-at-least-two-machete-sequels/

Oh, that’s incovenient, “angry response.” So, “comedy” isn’t the genre. That proves that Stephen Holder of the New York Times doesn’t know what he’s talking about, so we go to the review that perfectly matches actor Danny Trejo’s statement and see what other mischief is up:

“The image of a bloody machete in a clenched fist, now plastered across the Latin American world to promote ‘Machete’– spotted recently by a listener in Puerto Rico– holds a double meaning. “Todos con Machete” is more than just a rally cry to join the hero of this Mexploitation film; the machete is the common symbol for peasant uprising in Mexico, Central and South America– the weapon of a disarmed population.” – Alex Jones & Aaron Dykes – Infowars.com

“The message of ‘Machete’ became politicized back in May shortly after director Robert Rodriguez leaked a trailer with a special “message to Arizona” that stirred fierce debate about the film. Rodriguez backed off of the fiery rhetoric however, after scenes from the script and warnings from Hispanic members of the film’s crew confirmed its overt racial overtones and prejudiced violence. Rodriguez told Ain’t It Cool News that he simply had ‘too much tequila‘ and that many of the most controversial scenes would be cut. ..” http://www.infowars.com/will-machete-release-spark-racial-violence/

So we had to take the word of a director/writer who hides behind a Tequila bottle as his defense. MACHETE is now playing in theaters across Arizona so the public can confirm that director Robert Rodriguez lied about toning down it’s “overt racial overtones and prejudiced violence.” Suitably, Tequila as a liquid is completely transparent, totally fitting to the quality of his claim. http://www.prisonplanet.com/‘machete’-producers-lied-about-racist-bloodbath.html

Stephen Holder of The New York Times wasn’t wrong though on one crucial and chilling element of MACHETE: ”Conveniently timed to sprinkle gasoline on the fires of the immigration debate …” Gasoline on the fires is NOT what this nation or Arizona needs now , or ever.

Excerpts: President Bill Clinton’s Remarks to the People of Rwanda (March 25, 1998)

“…4 years ago in this beautiful, green, lovely land, a clear and conscious decision was made by those then in power that the peoples of this country would not live side by side in peace.

The Government-led effort to exterminate Rwanda’s Tutsi and moderate Hutus … the killers … armed mostly with machetes and clubs …It is important that the world know that these killings were not spontaneous or accidental …These events grew from a policy aimed at the systematic destruction of a people. The ground for violence was carefully prepared, the airwaves poisoned with hate … scapegoats … denying their humanity … to make it easy for otherwise reluctant people to participate in wholesale slaughter.

We owe to those who died and to those who survived … we owe to all the peoples of the world who are at risk because each bloodletting hastens the next as the value of human life is degraded and violence becomes tolerated, the unimaginable becomes more conceivable.”

According to “warnings from Hispanic members of the film’s crew” the spirit behind the film is more than disturbing, but frightening enough for some Hispanics working on the film to leak that they were worried about the EFFECT this film would have in the form they were seeing develop. The name to remember is self-described Tequila-dodgy Robert Rodriguez, closely associated with James Tarantino, who ‘specializes’ in revenge-driven, self-absorbed film gore-fests. The multimillionaire actress to remember is Jessica Alba. She can’t say she needed the money. Evidently behind Alba’s pampered pretty face is a hard-core racist, “I love your money, but I hate you all.” Remember actor Danny Trejo, fresh from proclaiming the film ” an angry response to Arizona,” beaming on the red carpet, blinking with delight in the flashes of paparazzi and publicists – a movie star hoping for sequels to slice and dice and carve his way through “gringos” to Jessica Alba’s level of wealth made off “gringos.” Trejo is fully expecting to make beaucoup bucks as MACHETE is distributed throughout Latin America. But why pick on just them? What were Robert de Niro, Lindsey Lohan, Michelle Rodriguez, Don Johnson and Stephen Seagal thinking? They need the money? Maybe Lohan needed to post bail. That’s a legit excuse, and certainly sums up the morally and ethically vacant quality of her decision-making in life, and in totally degrading herself in her role in MACHETE.

But what’s red machete to red carpet Danny Trejo angry about? How many Mexicans are being killed in Mexico, kidnapped and killed in the United States by Mexicans? Who killed 72 Central Americans two weeks ago in Mexico? Who is responsible for the murder rate in Tijuana and a dozen other cities across Mexico? The drug cartels are not made up of aliens from Mars, yet they get a free pass of who they are and from where they came. How much of the drugs that enrich these cartels end up in elite Hollywood parties, forced through the border properties of hard-working American citizens, on the backs of Mexicans and Central Americans so dehumanized by their fellow “Hispanics,” they are called “mules?” Who abandons those “mules” to die in the desert rather than be caught with them by our Border Patrol?

Yet, none of this matters! The LIE is what will move people, and film media is an extremely potent and effective way to create not a false reality, which isn’t possible, but a false PERCEPTION of reality, which is sufficient to energize people to do things they would not have done otherwise. MACHETE characters argue lawlessness, and that people are defined only by their ethnicity, not their citizenship. American citizens, specifically Hispanics, should sell out their nation if ethnicity demands it.

With the Obama Administration in un-Constitutional, full public pillorying of Arizona, through applying the full force of the Federal government against the state for the Audacity of SB 1070, mobilizing presidential cabinet officials to re-engineer their departments to harass Arizona, Arizona governance, and Arizona law enforcement, encouraging boycotts to economically hurt Arizonan citizens - the business owners, the employees – and all coordinated by the same political party, the Democrats, in a highly partisan, highly ideological attack aimed to overturn one law, a film like MACHETE, re-written to name Arizona in an on-screen threat, released at a time like this, is spelled I-N-C-I-T-E-M-E-N-T.

Conspiracy to Murder: The Rwanda Genocide and the International Community “Linda Melvern … documents the extensive preparation for the genocide by extremists within the government of Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana going back at least to 1991. When the genocide began, they had bought and distributed the equivalent of one machete for every three Hutu males and, with breathtaking cynicism, manipulated the media and state institutions to stoke anti-Tutsi passions to a fever pitch.” http://www.amazon.com/Conspiracy-Murder-Genocide-International-Community/dp/1859845886/ref=sip_rech_dp_10

As the L.A. City Council voted to boycott Arizona to “hurt the state,” director Rodriguez smirked as he retooled his “vision” to contribute to the Obama and Democratic Party theme of “hurt Arizona;” a vision that evidently was created while Rodriguez claims he was drunk, and as such would have been totally without normal inhibitions. Any given two minute scene in a movie takes hours, even days to produce. That’s a lot of Tequila. Has Rodriguez had his liver function checked recently? Or is he just lying? Is it lying enhanced by copious Tequila?

We Wish to Inform You that Tomorrow We Will be killed with Our Families: Stories from Rwanda by Philip Gourevitch : “In 1994 … in April, … Hutu husbands picked up machetes and killed their Tutsi wives … during May … the leading pop singer in Rwanda urged his Hutu countrymen over the state-sponsored radio to “Kill the cockroaches-”the Tutsis … in June, neighborhood “work groups” of Hutu men and women gathered to go over “hit lists” prepared by the government. During the time it took you to read the above, at least five Tutsis were killed, day by day, week by week, through July.”
http://www.amazon.com/Wish-Inform-Tomorrow-Killed-Families/dp/0312243359/ref=sip_rech_dp_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1283738609&sr=8-1

The Democrats under Bill Clinton’s failed leadership averted their eyes when Lt. General Romeo Dallaire, head of the United Nations Mission in Rwanda, warned of a buildup in violent rhetoric and political assassinations, and provided detailed intelligence of the plans of the extremist Hutus in the Rwandan government. President Bill Clinton hid behind his State Department, which he tasked with spending its time dodging in a manner that would become his shameful trademark: ‘ the meaning of ‘ … “genocide,” while Clinton refused to mobilize anything to stop it. With the failure of American leadership in this crisis, the United Nations dithered, paralyzed; then worse, withdrew troops.

A Democratic Party Administration presided over the worst single slaughter of a targeted group of human beings since World War II – 800,000 murdered in 100 days – then played mealy-mouthed contrite and hung their heads and claimed to the surviving Rwandans, “We didn’t really know what was happening.” How grotesquely similar is the current Democratic Party Administration’s dodgy rhetoric and lack of action today as Arizonans repeatedly warn of the increasing lawlessness at our southern border, the bankrupting of the state from unreimbursed costs, asking the Federal government to do their duties? The pleas are falling on willfully deaf Democrat ears, from Obama to Pelosi to Reid, and every Democratic Party-controlled Department head in-between. Obama promises 3,000 troops to the border, and lets Arizona sit on the curb until he finally sends … 30, with no more authority or means as any random United Nations unarmed “observers.”

The extremist Hutu cabal in Rwanda, refusing to accept any peaceful power-sharing with Tutsis, very deliberately used relentless radio broadcasts for months before they made their move to seize control and begin the “Final Solution” to their perpetual Tutsi problem, to propagandize Hutus that the Tutsi were pushing them off their ancestral lands, that Tutsis looked down on Hutus as inferior, would make Hutus subservient to them, were exploiting them, and ominously, would destroy them if they weren’t destroyed first. Thus informed by the extremists, many Hutus acted in what they believed to be national and ethnic self-defense. The GHOSTS OF RWANDA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xON22c7pZ6c

The extremist Hutu arguments were identical to the extremist Atzlan arguments against Americans. Just swap “Hispanics” for “Hutus” and “Americanos” for “Tutsi.” The machete is indeed the “poor man’s weapon” even in Africa, and is the trademark of violent Salvadoran M-13 gangs which have already well infiltrated U.S. states up and down the Eastern seaboard. The Hutu extremists shipped in and distributed machetes by the thousands to equip their Hutu gangs as they indoctrinated them with hatred for the Tutsi.

It just takes the right combination of rhetoric and depictions of injustice, no matter if manufactured, to stir righteous rage against “evil suppressors.”

Roberto Rodriguez is a cheap soul brother to the extremist Hutu media propagandists, using film to cynically prejudice Hispanics against Americans, while trying to make a buck and an edgy name for himself. While wanting to be paid in U.S. dollars, not Mexican pesos, Rodriguez purposely singled out Arizonans to be sure the hate has an identifiable target, “Throughout the script, groups aligned with political attempts to curb, restrict and/or control illegal immigration are thoroughly demonized. Minute Men and militia are portrayed as wanton killers, picking off illegal children in the desert “like jackrabbits” and slinging derogatory terms like “wetback.” http://www.infowars.com/leaked-machete-script-confirms-race-war-plot/

Should we accept Hollywood’s standard weasel dodge, their self-serving fig leaf derision against the public it seems to hate, only useful for whatever leftover cash is in their pockets? That “it’s only satire” or “it’s free speech” or that we say nothing despite discovering the snarky open insult of writer/director and bigot Rodriguez’s “Tequila Defense?” Rodriguez didn’t “sprinkle gasoline on the fires of immigration, ” he POURED it.

It doesn’t really matter now if MACHETE doesn’t have much of a theatre audience, does it? DVD sales – legal and pirated copies - will quickly spread this toxic flick’s poison across the country, across the continent, to be watched again and again and again, dehumanizing Americans and Arizonans – “gringos” again and again and again. Actions have consequences. Hollywood elites can afford electric fences, security gates and personal bodyguards, so they obviously do not care about consequences of their destructive behavior.

Lt General Romeo Dallaire, wrote his memoir of the Rwandan genocide to tell the world what happened, and to hope that by that, other genocides would be averted. The magnitude of the horrors still eludes his human understanding of it, but he remembers one thing clearly, meeting the masterminds of the Hutu extremist cabal who had designed and were directing the slaughter, in a darkened hotel room that reeked with alcohol. Dallaire suddenly, and totally unprepared for it, saw not men confronting him, but things otherworldly, the embodiment of evil. And there he asked himself a question he never dreamed he would ever ask: “Do I shake hands with the Devil?”

The answer is “NO.”

We don’t need any fraud exploitative films about MACHETES; we already have them, the real thing:
SHAKE HANDS WITH THE DEVIL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJDGGxaGCNs

To add insult to injury, this is tax-payer supported film-making through political hacks on The Texas Film Committee. How did we get to this place? Politicized committees handing out other people’s money to subsidize films which demonize or in this case, graphically slaughter those very same people, using the crudest, most derogatory racial stereotyping, and dehumanizing of Americans as justification for murder? The Texas Film Committee has foolishly shaken hands with the duplicitous Devil in Roberto Rodriguez and his Hollywood cabal of soulless mockers.

Will innocent Arizonans be the ones to pay for their folly? Potentially, with Arizona’s open carry of firearms, Arizonans may not be the first ones to pay, but rather Americans in Democratic Party-controlled states and cities where lawful citizens have been disarmed by Progressive Liberal Left laws, and undermined by Democratic Party “sanctuary city” enabling of illegality. Despite the terror it evokes, a machete is no match fora gun. The Democratic Party’s poor choices in promoting lawlessness, and inciting violence, while reducing the self- protection capabilities of the lawful may well backfire on them. Even the New York Times Stephen Holder, between fake gaffaws petending it’s all a joke, admits that MACHETE is: “gasoline on the fires.”

Filed Under: Culture, Guest Opinion, Public Safety, Race Relations

PART ONE: Raising Hell in Arizona: Shaking Hands With the Devil

September 6, 2010 By Wanumba 5 Comments

Excerpts: President Bill Clinton’s Remarks to the People of Rwanda (March 25, 1998)

“…4 years ago in this beautiful, green, lovely land, a clear and conscious decision was made by those then in power that the peoples of this country would not live side by side in peace.

The Government-led effort to exterminate Rwanda’s Tutsi and moderate Hutus … the killers … armed mostly with machetes and clubs …

It is important that the world know that these killings were not spontaneous or accidental … They were most certainly not the result of ancient tribal struggles. Indeed, these people had lived together for centuries…

These events grew from a policy aimed at the systematic destruction of a people. The ground for violence was carefully prepared, the airwaves poisoned with hate, casting the Tutsis as scapegoats for the problems of Rwanda, denying their humanity. All of this was done, clearly, to make it easy for otherwise reluctant people to participate in wholesale slaughter.

We cannot change the past, but we can and must do everything in our power to help you build a future without fear and full of hope.

We owe to those who died and to those who survived … our every effort to increase our vigilance and strengthen our stand against those who would commit such atrocities in the future, here or elsewhere. Indeed, we owe to all the peoples of the world who are at risk because each bloodletting hastens the next as the value of human life is degraded and violence becomes tolerated, the unimaginable becomes more conceivable—we owe to all the people in the world our best efforts to organize ourselves so that we can maximize the chances of preventing these events. And where they cannot be prevented, we can move more quickly to minimize the horror.

So let us challenge ourselves to build a world in which no branch of humanity, because of national, racial, ethnic, or religious origin, is again threatened with destruction because of those characteristics of which people should rightly be proud. Let us work together as a community of civilized nations to strengthen our ability to prevent and, if necessary, to stop genocide.”

http://millercenter.org/scripps/archive/speeches/detail/4602

As the Obama Adminstration and Democratic Party political demonization, harrassment by legal suits, and isolation of Arizona continues for the audacity of SB1070, where are the Democrat Party Icons, the Clintons? How pathetic to see that now Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who as First Lady, stood at her husband’s side on the blood-soaked soil of Rwanda, is apparently nothing but a cynical, willing tool in of the Democratic Party in the Obama Administration to create just the sort of divisions, condemnations, false accusations, and racial and ethnic demonization against the citizens of Arizona which are indistinguishable from the opening salvos of the extremist Hutu propaganda campaign against the Tutsi, begun at least two years before the Hutu president of Rwanda’s plane crashed, the trigger for the actual genocidal onslaught. Was Hillary not listening or was it simply another phony Democrat posturing to cover up yet another horrific failure?

Where are the Clintons? Hillary and Bill said they were like “co-presidents.” They told the world they’d learned from Rwanda. Why are they not both, Bill Clinton as former president and Hillary today as Secretary of State, standing up for Arizona instead of being either AWOL or producing divisive rhetoric and patently absurd international complaints against Arizona’s elected leadership and her lawful citizens? They talked a lot about “never again, lessons learned.” Does this mean their pious speech of peace and conflict resolution is not ever to be taken as if they actually mean it? Hillary Clinton fancies herself presidential material, but instead of distancing herself, she’s complicit in just the sort of political low down corrosiveness that the extremist Hutus began against the Tutsi to neutralize them as political rivals … not just for the next election cycle, but permanently.

With the overwhelming horror overshadowing all, about the Rwandan genocide, there is a critical warning to be learned that is often overlooked: The radical Hutus used the blunt tool of genocide to stop a comprehensive peace agreement and power sharing government brokered by the U.N. between moderate Hutus and Tutsis. They deliberately incited mob violence to upend a lawful process being agreed upon by the majority of Rwandan citizens. Tyrants, Communists and anarchists have long used violence and physical intimidation to overturn Rule of Law. Rwanda was just one of the more extreme outcomes of the same process. But once started on this downhill road, it’s not always possible to brake to stop the momentum to total chaos.

Who with a (D) of the lofty rhetoric of civil rights and human dignity will correct the Democratic Party’s un-Constitutional and dangerous undermining of our nation’s domestic tranquility? Or is that waaay too much to expect of anyone who associates with a political party that was so committed to slavery it dragged the country into a bloody civil war rather than give slavery up peacefully?

Arizonans may search, but they will find no one in the Democratic Party willing or interested in defending the rights of the PEOPLE. If a catastrophe like Rwanda leaves Democrats from school boards, to town councils, to city councils, to mayors, to representatives, to president publically repentant, but privately uncaring and unchanged, how puny and insignificant the squeaks from some U.S. state must seem in comparison.

But the issue at heart is a hostile Federal Government’s mis- use of Federal power levers, rank public pilloring, destructive boycotts, negative propaganda and pure demonization to upend a normal, correct and fair law-making by duly elected state officials. Arizona has done nothing wrong, has nothing to be ashamed of or is guilty of anything. Unknowingly, Arizona evidently seriously disturbed a Democratic Party national political plan. With no legitimate means to stop Arizona, the Obama Administration and the Democratic Party have chosen poorly; isolating the target, personalizing the target and now seek to destroy the target. Radical Saul Alinksy wrote those words and he dedicated his book, “Rules for Radicals” to “Lucifer.” Yes, that Lucifer, the Devil.

Arizona’s stand then is not just to protect her lawmakers, her law enforcement officers and her people, but to stand for Rule of Law against anarchy, to stand firm for what’s good and right against those who would carelessly break it all to pieces.

(“Shaking Hands with the Devil” - from Lt. General Romeo Dallaire’s Rwanda memoire, “Shake Hands with the Devil.”)

Filed Under: Culture, Government, Guest Opinion, National Security, Public Safety, Race Relations

AZ Law Enforcement Leaders Rally Behind Andrew Thomas For AG

August 17, 2010 By Press Release 23 Comments

A m e r i c a n P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Arizona Law Enforcement Overwhelmingly Supports Andrew Thomas For Attorney General

PHOENIX, ARIZONA. AUGUST 16, 2010. Liberals and elites may not like the approach Andrew Thomas used to reduce crime and illegal immigration throughout Maricopa County, but Arizona law enforcement, overwhelmingly, supports his bid to be the next Attorney General.

With just a week to go before Election Day, Thomas’ endorsement list now boasts a stunning number of Arizona’s highest profile law enforcement leaders. Second Amendment and conservative voices are also flocking to Thomas.

“Cooperation with these and many other Arizona leaders is why we reduced crime and illegal immigration, and will do so if I’m elected Attorney General,” Thomas said.

Among those chiming in for Thomas are: Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu, Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Yavapai County Sheriff Steve Waugh, Mohave County Sheriff Tom Sheahan, Graham County Sheriff P.J. Allred, Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith, Peoria Police Officers Association, Phoenix Law Enforcement Association and Arizona Police Association.

Former Arizona Attorney General and NRA President Bob Corbin has also weighed in to support Thomas, as has the NRA itself. Other conservative leaders such as U.S. Congressman Trent Franks and former Congressman and anti-illegal immigration hawk Tom Tancredohave endorsed Thomas too. Tancredo even withdrew his endorsement of Tom Horne to support Thomas. Arizona Right to Life supports Thomas as well, who has repeatedly criticized Horne for his support of taxpayer-funded abortion policies while in the State Legislature.

“Elites and powerbrokers have fought me from the beginning as I tried to crack down on illegal immigration and implement innovative policies to keep criminals in jail longer. But Arizona law enforcement knows what it takes, and I am proud they are standing with me,” Thomas said.

During Thomas’ time in office, crime rates plummeted. The 19 percent drop is more than twice the national rate of decline, in despite of an 11 percent increase in the county’s population during that time. The illegal immigrant population has dropped by anywhere from 18 percent (Dept. of Homeland Security estimate) to 30 percent (Center for Immigration Studies estimate). Like the fall in crime rates, this dramatic decline in illegal immigration is far greater than the average in the rest of the nation.

Thomas has a track record of successfully defending illegal immigration crackdowns in our courts, including his successful efforts to prosecute illegal immigrants for conspiring to violate the state’s human-smuggling law and to defend Prop 200′s voter ID requirements and the employer-sanctions law, which he defended along with the Attorney General’s Office.

If elected Attorney General Thomas has pledged to expand that office’s prosecutions of illegal immigrants under the state’s human smuggling laws. The office is not currently pursuing such prosecutions.

Thomas is married with four children. He is a graduate of Harvard Law School. Prior to serving as Maricopa County Attorney, Thomas served as an assistant attorney general for Arizona, deputy counsel and criminal justice policy advisor to the Governor, special assistant to the Director of the Arizona Department of Corrections, and a deputy county attorney.

For more information about Andrew Thomas, please go to www.ThomasforArizona.com.

Paid for by Thomas For AG

For information on liberal Republican Tom Horne running against Thomas, visit The Tom Horne Truth.

Filed Under: Campaigns & Elections, Endorsements, Illegal Aliens, Illegal Immigration, Public Safety

SB1070 A VICTORY FOR ARIZONA: A Message From Senator Russell Pearce

August 3, 2010 By Guest Opinion 14 Comments

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

Tuseday, August 3, 2010

The Obama administration and their allies in the media are celebrating Clinton appointee Susan Bolton’s temporary injunction against SB 1070. I sure hope she gets that 9th Court appointment, she has earned it. The New York Times called it “Warning to Other States.” Some patriots are becoming discouraged.

In reality, SB 1070 is a warning to illegal aliens and their allies in the federal government respect our laws and Americans have reason to celebrate.

As of July 29, Sanctuary/Catch & Release policies in this state are illegal under state law. Citizens, you remember the term, “We The People?” Well, We The People can sue our government for failure to enforce our laws and will and that will be a up to $5,000 per day for any policy that restricts or limits the enforcement our federal law to the full extent permitted by law. State officials are required to report illegal aliens. There are still increased penalties for hiring illegal day laborers.

SB 1070 is already working. CNN reported that even though SB 1070 “now heads for higher courts…some of the estimated 500,000 undocumented immigrants in Arizona are leaving the state.”

Judge Bolton’s temporary injunction against parts of the law is minor setback, but Arizona will fight this in court until we prevail just as we did when a judge issued an injunction against Proposition 200.

The citizens of the United States are standing with Arizona. According to a July 19 Quinnipiac University Poll, Americans oppose the Justice Department’s lawsuit against SB 1070 by a margin of over 2-1 and in another national poll support SB1070 by 66%, again by over 2 to 1.

Most know that illegal immigrants are, well, you know illegal. Barack Obama does not.

The basis of the Justice Department’s complaint is not that SB 1070 interferes with federal immigration law, but rather that it interferes with the Obama administration’s “discretion in enforcing the provisions of the federal immigration laws” that means his priorities of NON enforcement over ours of enforcement.

This discretion means they only will go after illegal aliens who are also “engaged in or suspected of terrorism or espionage; aliens convicted of crimes, with a particular emphasis on violent criminals, felons, and repeat offenders; certain gang members; aliens subject to outstanding criminal warrants; and fugitive aliens, especially those with criminal records.” He means they must commit another crime and have another victim before they will do anything and then maybe. What is another homicide, molestation, home invasion, kidnapping, of job taken from an American bread winner to getting those future votes or the cheap labor the profits over patriotism crowd is demanding.

All this while the Mexican drug wars are flooding across the border into Arizona with home invasions and kidnappings becoming commonplace. Phoenix is the kidnapping capital of America. 15 police officers have been shot or maimed by illegal aliens in Phoenix alone. During the debate over 1070, my friend and 5th Generation Arizona Rancher Rob Krentz was murdered by illegal alien drug dealers. Days after the law passed, a police officer was shot by other illegal alien drug smugglers. I have a son who is a Deputy Sheriff who was shot and critically wounded while serving Homicide warrants on illegal alien suspects.

Illegal immigration also strains the economy of Arizona. The non-partisan Federation for American Immigration Reform recently released a study that found illegal aliens cost Arizona Taxpayers 2.6 billion dollars a year. Before Arizona passed the Legal Arizona Workers Act to keep employers for hiring illegal aliens, 9.8% of our workforce as illegal.

Arizona’s stand against illegal immigration is not just about States’ Rights, it’s about a State’s Responsibility.

When I assumed office, I put my hand on the bible and solemnly swore to “support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Arizona, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and defend them against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

SB 1070 is the law of the State of Arizona.

Article IV Section 4 of the US Constitution states: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion.” The flood of illegal aliens—many of whom are terrorists, violent drug dealers, and gang members—is nothing short of an invasion. I swore to protect the Constitution as the founders intended it, not the political agenda of a left wing activist judge and administration.

By siding with lawbreakers and undermining the Democratic will of the American people, I’m tempted to call the Obama and his lackeys domestic enemies. At the very least he is more concerned about what America’s enemies think about SB 1070 than the American people. Obama’s Deputy Secretary of State issued an affidavit against SB 1070. Among his justifications was Venezuela’s outrageous accusation that the law “could lead to the legitimization of racist attitudes and the latent risk of violence.”

That’s right, Obama’s state department is using slander by anti-American Socialist Dictators like Hugo Chavez as an excuse to overturn the democratic process in Arizona!

I do not take my oath of office lightly. It is my duty as a public servant and an American citizen to ensure that SB 1070 is enacted and enforced. The people of Arizona will not rest until this happens.

Filed Under: Constitutional Law, Government, Illegal Immigration, Legislation, Public Safety, States Rights

Defending Arizona: Our AWOL Representatives

August 1, 2010 By Wanumba 12 Comments

WHERE are our sitting US Senators, McCain and Kyl, all our Arizona Congressmen and Congresswomen, publically and vociferously defending Arizona and Arizona local law enforcement on the floor of the Senate and the House and through every and all media outlet, against the Obama Administration’s cynical and toxic approval of coordinated campaigns to dishonestly smear our police, sheriffs and deputies as racists, agitating street violence by bussing in professional protestors with radios and scanners to harass, interfere with, abuse and exhaust local law enforcement officers? WHERE are they denouncing all Unconstitutional actions to destroy domestic tranquillity by divisive and damaging boycotts against Arizona and Arizonans?

AZ law enforcement is under siege and our two senators are AWOL; AWOL for Federal enforcement actions, border security and AWOL for addressing local AZ state hardships. Aren’t they sent to Washington by the citizens of this state to advocate and use all their political skills to insure that Federal border responsibilities are met for the protection of Arizonans, and by that, all Americans? Pick a random agitator from one of “32 unions” advertised as rolling into Arizona this past week from out of state, and ask what party they vote for: DEMOCRAT. Pick a random boycotting-voting LA City Council member, what party are they of: DEMOCRAT. A California city mayor decreeing a rupture of city business with Arizona: DEMOCRAT. A random pick of a boycotting non-governmental organization voter from say, La Raza: DEMOCRAT. An Arizona-elected Congressman encouraging a boycott of Arizonans for wanting to enforce the laws of our nation: DEMOCRAT. An Arizona city mayor disparaging the men and women in the police and sheriff’s departments who keep him safe: DEMOCRAT. Given that partisan behavior, how much credibile action to preserve our domestic tranquillity can we expect from ANY of our representatives who belong to the Democratic Party? NO respresentative, Democrat or Republican should have anything to do with such corrosive tactics, but evidently the Democrats perceive too much politican gain to listen to reason or to refresh their oaths to preserve the Constitution.

It’s more than a disgrace that this is falling along partisan political lines when the threat to our domestic tranquility – our local, state and national security – will negatively affect everyone, no matter the political party or ideology. With the Democratic Party loyalties of the overwhelming majority of the agitators, on the streets, in the courts, in the media, and in Congress, and nothing but divisive rhetoric coupled with willingness to act on boycotting from the Democratic Party, we look to the Republican Party to bring this back to reason, rationality and self-preservation of the nation.

So, where are the REPUBLICANS who are DENOUNCING this injustice? Arizona sent not one, but TWO Republican Senators to Washington. Where are the photos of them standing shoulder to shoulder with Governor Jan Brewer, or with Sheriff Joe Arpaio, or the deputies of Maricopa county, or the police of Nogales and Tucson, or relentlessly on national media insisting that freedom to speak one’s mind politically, and peaceful marches is one thing, but blocking traffic, making physical obstructions so that citizens can’t get to work on time, defacing and damaging public and private property, engineering chaos so that businesses can’t reach their customers, anarchist mobbing and banging at the county jail gates as part of a plan to harass and overwhelm policing,” is quite another thing. So is inexcusable silence from ALL our elected officials as Arizonans are smeared nationally by the Democrats in the administration, the Congress, the national media, and internationally by our State Department, hypocritically employing what they claim they are against, massive group stereotyping and profiling, as “racists.”

“Hispanic” is a precise term in linguistics, but a very mushy and undefined one in international terms, encompassing people from over a dozen countries – on three continents, with many accents, dialects and cultural differences. Does this “Hispanic” favoritism extend to the Spanish of Spain or the West Africans of the Spanish Western Sahara or is it really code for a specific country, favored even over its own “Hispanic” neighbors? With “brown people” invoked even more frequently by Democrats now than “Hispanic,” then surely the Hispanics of Africa’s Equatorial Guinea are far browner than ANY Central or South American could EVER aspire to be, so by the reasoning, shouldn’t then Equatorial Guineans get to be head of the line for a freebie to definitely prove to everyone that Americans or specifically Arizonans, are not racists?

If the oft-invoked, yet actually undefined “Hispanic” community succeeds in unlawfully forcing capitulation to allow “Hispanic” foreigners of a specified geopolitical zone, to jump the queue of legal applications for US citizenship, before all others, then who’s the NEXT group who will try mob rule to get what they want? If it works, then it’ll become the “process.” How many people doing it by the book will throw down their two-three-four-five years of applications, paperwork and fees with a, “The hell with this!” in disgust?

Arizona is already host to organized crime expanding out of its base in Mexico. That the average Arizonan citizen doesn’t see much of it is a testimony to the effectiveness and diligence of our LOCAL law enforcement in confronting and containing this violent and dangerous foreign-based criminality. WHERE are our elected officials publically thanking our law enforcement, showing solidarity, and assuring them and the public, in word and in deed, that they back every single man and women in law enforcement in Arizona?

Actions have consequences, long term consequences, sometimes irrevocable consequences. Degeneration and decay take far less energy and effort than advancement and improvement. A loss of trust is nearly impossible to restore. A failure to uphold fair application of laws will lead to rampant lawlessness in all levels of society. An unwillingness to defend, by representatives who were elected by their constituents, who are the PEOPLE of the Constitution of the United States, is a failure and especially in this case, that has long-term local, state and national ramifications, none of them positive. The People, as voters, have the responsibility to chose their representatives wisely, take personal responsibility to become informed, to be active, and to hold their representatives accountable.

Perhaps Americans have to live through a period of chaos and destruction before they truly comprehend what they had, and squandered … but with little hope then of ever recovering it.

Filed Under: Border, Debates, Government, Guest Opinion, Illegal Immigration, National Security, Public Safety

The Lobby Needs More Room

Brian Terry: When Justice Denies

Link to FAST AND FURIOUS Investigation

Lt. Mike Stauffer Supports ‘Arizona Compact’ and Disavows ‘Tent City’

Is MCSO ignoring serious crimes?

Dimensions of National Security

US Supreme Court rules for AZ

A m e r i c a n P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

Thursday, May 26, 2011

US Supreme Court rules for AZ

States can yank licenses for companies that hire illegal aliens

Suspect in deadly ‘reverse sting’ drug bust was federal informant

Commander-In-Chief Belshazzar Obama Undermines America’s Fighting Forces

The New Barbary Coast: Muslim Piracy 2011 – Somalia and the Horn of Africa

Sticks and stones may break their bones

A m e r i c a n P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

February 3, 2011

Sticks and stones may break their bones

Court issues restraining order against anti-Prop. 107 spokesman

PART TWO: SHAKING HANDS WITH THE DEVIL: “Gasoline on the fires” Rodriguez’s MACHETE death wish against Arizonans.

PART ONE: Raising Hell in Arizona: Shaking Hands With the Devil

AZ Law Enforcement Leaders Rally Behind Andrew Thomas For AG

SB1070 A VICTORY FOR ARIZONA: A Message From Senator Russell Pearce

A m e r i c a n P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

Tuseday, August 3, 2010

Defending Arizona: Our AWOL Representatives

About Sonoran Alliance

Recent Posts

Sonoran Alliance on Amazon

Categories

Links

Archives

Tag Cloud

Subscribe

Meta

Recent Posts