Two stories in the news--one national, one local--highlight the sheer madness that is our immigration policy and enforcement.
Detained Man Leads Police to Body of Missing Washington Girl
In Tacoma, Washington, the body of 12-year old Zina Linnik was found; she had been missing since July 4, when she disappeared from an alley behind her house. The suspect in this murder--who gave police information on the body's location--is a Thai immigrant, who is now being held in a federal immigation detention facility, facing possible deportation based on a 1990 conviction for incest. He is also a sex-offender who has failed to register as such.
Mom seeks to take slain son to Guatemala
Here in Louisville, Kentucky, the body of 4-year old César Ivan Aguilar-Cano was found Saturday in a garbage truck; he had been missing since June 29, when he disappeared while playing behind his apartment building. The mother wants to return to her native Guatemala to bury her son's body, but fears she will not be allowed back in the US because she's an illegal alien, who is under a federal deportation order signed in 1996. Neighbors say the boy was often seen wandering far from the apartment with no adult accompaniment. The boy's father--to whom, apparently, the mother is not married--will not be returning to Gautemala for the burial.
I will leave these stories here without further comment.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Thursday, June 21, 2007
I live in a frickin' ghetto
Or, make that "a frickin' barrio".
I felt--or more correctly, smelt--the need to post this sign in the stairwell at my apartment this evening. As you can see.
And yes, they're almost certainly illegal aliens. They no habla. Had to call the police on them a few nights ago--at 1:00 am--because their drinking party (from the back of a pickup truck) led one of them to take a piss in the bushes right in front of the apartment building. And that was after I had politely asked them not to use my truck as their own personal bar stool.
Have I mentioned that I'm not particularly fond of illegal aliens?
I felt--or more correctly, smelt--the need to post this sign in the stairwell at my apartment this evening. As you can see.
And yes, they're almost certainly illegal aliens. They no habla. Had to call the police on them a few nights ago--at 1:00 am--because their drinking party (from the back of a pickup truck) led one of them to take a piss in the bushes right in front of the apartment building. And that was after I had politely asked them not to use my truck as their own personal bar stool.
Have I mentioned that I'm not particularly fond of illegal aliens?
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
And somewhere in the midst of it all...
...I got my 30,000th visitor.
Somebody from Westerfield, OH.
Whoever you are--and I think I know, 'cause I'm pretty anal-retentive about looking at my visitor stats--THANK YOU. It helps make up for the lousy numbers I've had so far this year.
And of course, a huge THANK YOU to everybody who visits, especially those of you who keep coming back for more. I hope it's not out of a morbid fascination with watching a human being go stark raving mad for all the blogosphere to see, nor from a never-dying hope that I'll finally post something interesting. Whatever your reasons, it's a humbling experience, and I wish to express my sincerest gratitude to all of you.
Somebody from Westerfield, OH.
Whoever you are--and I think I know, 'cause I'm pretty anal-retentive about looking at my visitor stats--THANK YOU. It helps make up for the lousy numbers I've had so far this year.
And of course, a huge THANK YOU to everybody who visits, especially those of you who keep coming back for more. I hope it's not out of a morbid fascination with watching a human being go stark raving mad for all the blogosphere to see, nor from a never-dying hope that I'll finally post something interesting. Whatever your reasons, it's a humbling experience, and I wish to express my sincerest gratitude to all of you.
Sunday, January 22, 2006
The Obama Tape
{transcript here}
We're here to discuss the war in Iraq, and how to bring closure to this embarrasing episode in America's history. Conditions continue to get worse and worse, while the insurgency gets stronger and stronger.
We were compelled to speak out in response to the lies of this administration. Polls clearly indicate Americans want the troops brought home. But the president continues to worry about "sending the wrong message" to the insurgents. He thinks by fighting this illegal, immoral war on foreign soil, he can assure the security of our homeland. This is clearly folly.
The war rages on. The number of dead American soldiers continues to rise. And our nation's reputation in the capitals of Europe continues to take a beating.
Pssst--Fred!!! You've got the wrong name on the graphic!!!
Iraq has become a breeding ground and a recruiting tool for terrorists. Our continued presence there will ensure this remains so.
And our presence there has not brought security. The capitals of so many European countries who made the ill advised choice to join us in this illegal, immoral war have been targeted by terrorist attacks.
The lack of such attacks on American soil would seem to be more a matter of blind luck. We know al Qaeda continues to plot against us, untroubled by all our illegal, unconstitutional efforts at stopping them.
Crap, Fred!!! That ain't right, either!!!
It is obvious this administration and this president lied us into this illegal, immoral war. Polls continue to show Americans grow weary of the war and want the troops brought home. It would be a far more prudent course of action to enact a long-term cease fire, to be monitored by the United Nations. If we don't attack them on their soil, they won't attack us on our soil. And then the work of reconstucting Iraq from the ravages of this illegal, immoral war can begin, making sure under the oversight of the United Nations that huge, multinational corporations in which senior officials of this administration have holdings, such as Haliburton, are not enriched in the process.
Dammit, Fred!!! Get it right this time, he's wrapping up!!!
In conclusion, even if, when all is said and done, it appears we have "won", we will truly still have lost -- in the erosion of our civil liberties, in the damage to our international reputation and diplomatic relationships, and in the ruin of our expectations of this administration to conduct itself in a legal and moral fashion. And we will not, in the end, have truly addressed the scourge of terrorism, for it springs from the very kind of conditions created by this illegal, immoral war, as we witnessed in the desperate acts of desperate men on 9/11--when they clearly felt they had no other way to effect positive change in their region of the world other than to strike at the 800 pound gorilla that we have become to them.
We have invaded and occupied their land, and violated their honor and sovereignty, as well as international law and the wishes of the international community.
We should just surrender right now.
Anybody got a white flag? Nancy, weren't you supposed to bring that?
'Bout time, Fred!!!
I keep telling you, my name is not Fred!!!
Can't you even get a simple thing like my name right???
Besides, I don't think Senator Osama... er, Obama Bin... I mean, Ben Osama..."
Fred, give it up.
We're here to discuss the war in Iraq, and how to bring closure to this embarrasing episode in America's history. Conditions continue to get worse and worse, while the insurgency gets stronger and stronger.
We were compelled to speak out in response to the lies of this administration. Polls clearly indicate Americans want the troops brought home. But the president continues to worry about "sending the wrong message" to the insurgents. He thinks by fighting this illegal, immoral war on foreign soil, he can assure the security of our homeland. This is clearly folly.
The war rages on. The number of dead American soldiers continues to rise. And our nation's reputation in the capitals of Europe continues to take a beating.
Iraq has become a breeding ground and a recruiting tool for terrorists. Our continued presence there will ensure this remains so.
And our presence there has not brought security. The capitals of so many European countries who made the ill advised choice to join us in this illegal, immoral war have been targeted by terrorist attacks.
The lack of such attacks on American soil would seem to be more a matter of blind luck. We know al Qaeda continues to plot against us, untroubled by all our illegal, unconstitutional efforts at stopping them.
It is obvious this administration and this president lied us into this illegal, immoral war. Polls continue to show Americans grow weary of the war and want the troops brought home. It would be a far more prudent course of action to enact a long-term cease fire, to be monitored by the United Nations. If we don't attack them on their soil, they won't attack us on our soil. And then the work of reconstucting Iraq from the ravages of this illegal, immoral war can begin, making sure under the oversight of the United Nations that huge, multinational corporations in which senior officials of this administration have holdings, such as Haliburton, are not enriched in the process.
In conclusion, even if, when all is said and done, it appears we have "won", we will truly still have lost -- in the erosion of our civil liberties, in the damage to our international reputation and diplomatic relationships, and in the ruin of our expectations of this administration to conduct itself in a legal and moral fashion. And we will not, in the end, have truly addressed the scourge of terrorism, for it springs from the very kind of conditions created by this illegal, immoral war, as we witnessed in the desperate acts of desperate men on 9/11--when they clearly felt they had no other way to effect positive change in their region of the world other than to strike at the 800 pound gorilla that we have become to them.
We have invaded and occupied their land, and violated their honor and sovereignty, as well as international law and the wishes of the international community.
We should just surrender right now.
Anybody got a white flag? Nancy, weren't you supposed to bring that?
Can't you even get a simple thing like my name right???
Besides, I don't think Senator Osama... er, Obama Bin... I mean, Ben Osama..."
Friday, February 4, 2005
Bad news in Washington State
Sound Politics: What really happened in Wenatchee?
The judge overseeing the Republican Party's contest of the clearly indecipherable Washington State gubernatorial election has made a ruling that appears to set an impossibly high evidentiary standard. At a first reading, it seems to insist that the election can be ruled invalid only if it can be proven that there were enough illegal votes cast for Christine Gregoire (the Democrat who lost both the initial election count and a machine recount, but who then in a hand recount ended up being credited with 129 more votes than Republican Dino Rossi, out of over 2.9 million votes cast/counted) to have made up that 129 vote final margin. But since voting is confidential--there is to be no way of determining after the fact how any individual voted--how is it going to be possible to prove, for instance, how the dozens of known felons who voted illegally cast their ballots?
Stunningly bad news. Worse, the judge indicated he would not order a new election, even if it is proven Gregoire won due to illegal votes. It is left open what rememdy, if any, would be imposed in such a case.
Keep your fingers crossed. Maybe the judge just had a hangover today.
UPDATE: from Tim Goddard, more info on the judge's ruling.
The judge "said, essentially, if the Republicans can prove their allegations as they have stated them, then their election contest will prevail. This is, obviously, quite good news."
"Second, the he ruled that he won’t be ordering a special election because he doesn’t have the authority. Some people have said this means “no revote,” which would be pretty deadly, but that’s not exactly true. Before Bridges even made his ruling, the Republican counsel said that the question before the court at that point was not “whether” to have a revote, but “when.” That is to say, would the court be able to order an election immediately, or wait until the next general election in November? The court has essentially said that the soonest there could be another Rossi-Gregoire showdown is in November, because the court’s power doesn’t extend far enough to order a new one immediately. The likely outcome of a successful contest now would be for the election to be nullified, Gregoire booted from office, leaving it vacant, meaning that the Lt. Governor Brad Owen would take over until November. While Republicans are dissappointed with this ruling, it’s hard to be too bummed about a judge admitting that his powers aren’t infinite."
OK, that's somewhat clearer, and slightly more palatable.
The judge overseeing the Republican Party's contest of the clearly indecipherable Washington State gubernatorial election has made a ruling that appears to set an impossibly high evidentiary standard. At a first reading, it seems to insist that the election can be ruled invalid only if it can be proven that there were enough illegal votes cast for Christine Gregoire (the Democrat who lost both the initial election count and a machine recount, but who then in a hand recount ended up being credited with 129 more votes than Republican Dino Rossi, out of over 2.9 million votes cast/counted) to have made up that 129 vote final margin. But since voting is confidential--there is to be no way of determining after the fact how any individual voted--how is it going to be possible to prove, for instance, how the dozens of known felons who voted illegally cast their ballots?
Stunningly bad news. Worse, the judge indicated he would not order a new election, even if it is proven Gregoire won due to illegal votes. It is left open what rememdy, if any, would be imposed in such a case.
Keep your fingers crossed. Maybe the judge just had a hangover today.
UPDATE: from Tim Goddard, more info on the judge's ruling.
The judge "said, essentially, if the Republicans can prove their allegations as they have stated them, then their election contest will prevail. This is, obviously, quite good news."
"Second, the he ruled that he won’t be ordering a special election because he doesn’t have the authority. Some people have said this means “no revote,” which would be pretty deadly, but that’s not exactly true. Before Bridges even made his ruling, the Republican counsel said that the question before the court at that point was not “whether” to have a revote, but “when.” That is to say, would the court be able to order an election immediately, or wait until the next general election in November? The court has essentially said that the soonest there could be another Rossi-Gregoire showdown is in November, because the court’s power doesn’t extend far enough to order a new one immediately. The likely outcome of a successful contest now would be for the election to be nullified, Gregoire booted from office, leaving it vacant, meaning that the Lt. Governor Brad Owen would take over until November. While Republicans are dissappointed with this ruling, it’s hard to be too bummed about a judge admitting that his powers aren’t infinite."
OK, that's somewhat clearer, and slightly more palatable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)