minuteman civil defense corps
minuteman civil defense corps: Page 1
Freelance writer and Vanity Fair contributor Judy Bachrach offers a smear of Lou Dobbs in "Lou Doubts" (poder360.com/article_detail.php?id_article=549). It's yet another example of the illegal activity-supporting establishment trying to reduce his influence in order to profit from illegal activity in one way or another.
The Washington Post doesn't appear to be sore losers about the failure of immigration "reform". They recently published a vile column from Harold Meyerson and a similar editorial. Now comes Dana Milbank with "Hasta La Vista" (link) about Rep. Tom Tancredo dropping his presidential bid. The problems start with the title, a childish attempt at irony. The running theme throughout is that Tancredo is angry; in fact he uses that word four times. Why is he an "angry man"?
We know this because he has proposed dropping bombs on Mecca. We know this because he sang "Dixie" at a South Carolina gathering full of Confederate flags and white supremacists. And we know this because he wants to expel 12 million people now living in the United States.
The first sentence was only the ultimate response to nukes having gone off in several U.S. cities. The second is discussed here and here. The third might imply that he supports mass deportations, when in fact he doesn't. Milbank then goes on to mock the fact that there were only 18 supporters when he made his announcement. Then:
In response to questions, he admitted he was pulling out to help defeat somebody he dislikes more than an undocumented Mexican in the desert: former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, the new Republican front-runner here with what Tancredo called an "abysmal" record of "inviting" illegal immigrants.
I don't think Tancredo would actually "dislike" someone who's trying to cross the desert into the U.S., he just doesn't want them to do it. On the other hand, the Washington Post's support for illegal immigration plays a part in encouraging people to try to cross the desert, despite the fact that thousands have died while trying. And, of course, Huck has promoted and enabled illegal immigration such as by helping Mexico to build a consulate in his state. Then, it's on to a lie:
Never mind that Huckabee was tough enough on immigration to win the support of the border-vigilante Minuteman Project.
The support only came from Jim Gilchrist himself, not any groups using that name. After discussing an admittedly stupid video that Tancredo released (youtube.com/watch?v=n5GUCQAdlxg), it's Milbank's turn to admit why he's the one who's angry:
"It's beyond anybody's wildest expectations that we have been able to, with the help of America, really, get our national leaders to pay attention to the issue," declared Candidate Two Percent... He boasted, with some validity, that his candidacy helped lead "nearly every Republican presidential candidate to commit themselves to an immigration plan that calls for securing our borders." It's true: As his rivals coopted his nativist positions -- even if just rhetorically -- Tancredo became a victim of his own success.
UPDATE: The technicalities of the Gilchrist endorsement are described here:
it is important to note that the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (MCDC), the nation's largest Minuteman organization, is a 501(C)4 non-profit organization and cannot and does not endorse any candidate for public office. MCDC is not associated with Mr. Jim Gilchrist, who today endorsed Mike Huckabee for president. Jim Gilchrist's erstwhile Minuteman Project is itself an organization which by its own representations as a non-profit civic group cannot legally endorse candidates. It does not have any volunteers who observe illegal border activity. It has no border fence building projects. Jim Gilchrist here speaks only for Jim Gilchrist, he does not speak for the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, nor is he nationally representative of most patriots in the "Minuteman movement" – who under no circumstances could ignore the failed record nor endorse the duplicitous "plan" recently rolled out by candidate Mike Huckabee. The national media needs to recognize that Jim Gilchrist's endorsement is his own personal statement, nothing more.
Janet Murguia/NCLR misleads to support illegal immigration (Kansas City, Minuteman issue) - 11/04/07
The National Council of La Raza ("The Race") is an extremist-funding group that in turn is funded by large corporations  that profit from illegal activity. Senator Chris Dodd even wants to give them millions of dollars.
They recently pulled their 2009 convention out of Kansas City, MO because a member of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps was appointed to that city's Parks Board. Local Hispanic leaders even went as far as trying to deliver a letter to that board member's house in what appears to be an attempt to intimidate her.
Now, their president, Janet Murguia, offers "La Raza left because it objects to extremism". She objects to the "extremism" of the MCDC and pretends it isn't about policy. Since her group continually supports illegal immigration, and the MCDC opposes it, that's highly questionable.
Here's the only thing she has to say about everything that's been involved in this issue, including the letter:
While I can't address every issue raised since the controversy erupted, the views and passion expressed - on both sides of the issue - deserve a response.
Obviously, someone else would address a possible act of intimidation, but I guess that's more than we should expect from her.
Then, she brings up a quote from MCDC leader Chris Simcox; I don't know the context, but it appears to have been originally reported by Gustavo Arellano, someone who has a clear agenda and, even if he got the quote accurate, doesn't provide any context .
Then, she discusses an original member of the Minuteman Project who was sending messages to a Nazi group... "privately". It should be obvious to anyone that none of the Minutemen groups want such connections, and I'm not going to even bother to verify that after her extra-curricular activities were discovered she was tossed from the group.
Then, she delves into the ADL's "Immigrants Targeted: Extremist Rhetoric Moves into the Mainstream." The problems with part of that report are discussed at the link, and she helps point out yet another problem:
The founder of the Dustin Inman Society, D.A. King, said in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that immigrants are "not here to mow your lawn - they're here to blow up your buildings and kill your children, and you, and me."
Bolding added. And, in fact, that's similar to what's in the ADL's report :
Speaking at a Newton County (Georgia) Republican Party meeting in April 2007, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, King reportedly told attendees that undocumented immigrants are "not here to mow your lawn – they're here to blow up your buildings and kill your children, and you, and me."
Now, here's the kicker (which everyone knew was coming). The Southeast Regional Director of the Anti-Defamation League, Bill Nigut, says :
In a speech to a handful of Georgia Republicans in Covington earlier this year, King cleverly intertwined our legitimate fears of the threat from Islamic terrorists with a rant against undocumented Mexicans. At one point, according to a report in the Rockdale Citizen newspaper, he displayed a mock-up of a Mexican photo ID card, filled in with the name supplied by King: "Al Qaida Gonzalez." ...When he told the gathering that "They're not here to mow your lawn - they're here to blow up your buildings and kill your children, and you and me," King says he was speaking of the Islamic threat. But since Muslim yard services tend to be few and far between, his intentional mixing of images seems clear: He is out to create fear about all illegal immigrants, be they Islamic terrorists or Mexican gardeners.
So, now we see that King wasn't refering to "immigrants" (Murguia's word) or "undocumented immigrants" (the ADL's report's words), but to Islamist infiltrators. In other words, Murguia and the ADL report are highly misleading, and that was obviously intentional. (Further, the only "reporting" from the AJC that I could find is in a blog post, but I didn't check their archives.) At the last link, King says he was refering to this government report (PDF). (The Rockdale Citizen doesn't appear to have online archives: rockdalecitizen.com)
Obviously, both Janet Murguia and the ADL aren't just sloppy, what they say can't be trusted.
A documentary about the immigration situation in Northern Virginia from independent filmmakers Eric Byler, Annabel Park, and Jeff Man is currently being serialized on the web: youtube.com/9500Liberty. Nick Miroff of the Washington Post promotes it in "Raw Look at Immigration Crucible". Both he and a member of the local Minuteman Civil Defense Corps say they're balanced. However, a glance at the videos casts a great deal of doubt on that, and Miroff admits that both Byler and Park volunteered for the James Webb campaign. In fact:
"Watching George Allen look into the camera and point and say you are not the real Virginia, the real Virginia is the people who are laughing with me at you, reminded me of this whole thing that was never resolved," Byler said.
What a creative retelling of events. Whatever the issue with Macaca, the "real" statement wasn't directed at the cameraman: it was meant to draw a contrast between where Allen was and where Webb was at that moment, namely in Hollywood. Since Byler can't get that right, don't expect the videos to be much better.
A sample video is at: youtube.com/watch?v=k_Dw1ioGPGY Someone who might be refered to as an old coot objects to people speaking Spanish and has other old cootish concerns. For this the commentors on the video call him a racist. The overall impact of this segment is to portray Hispanics as oppressed victims of people like him.
However, the issues on that segment go much deeper, and both the filmmakers and Miroff appear to be too steeped in leftwing ideology to recognize those issues. Here's his first paragraph, refering to this video:
In one video, a man furious about hearing Spanish at a hardware store berates a group of Latino families with a lecture on American history, telling them "my ancestors were here before the Constitution." A little girl shyly reminds him: "The Indians were here before the Americans."
And, someone else says that the Europeans came here illegally. What Miroff and Byler don't pick up on is that we're importing people who think they have a race-based claim on our land. And, they're expressing that claim and using it as justification for coming here contrary to our laws.
That theme is also included in a clip called "Hispanic Children Will One Day Rise" (youtube.com/watch?v=HyzMOcjITvI); that's a quote from a black high school teacher (Patrick Garland) who spoke at a meeting of the Prince William County board after which they passed a Proposition 200-style ordinance (link). He spoke against the ordinance, and, on the video, he also says that, because we're a nation of immigrants, we're "in no position to say that this is our country."
Obviously, if we can't say who can come here, then we've not only got open borders we have no control over our country and in fact we no longer have a country.
Bearing in mind that YT is pretty much at the AOL level when it comes to political debate, the comments left on the videos show the dangers inherent in allowing mass immigration by those who can pretend to have some race-based right to come here at will. A few examples from different people are in the extended entry.
UPDATE: They've re-edited the old coot's episode here: youtube.com/watch?v=29WTKbpYhag
With that, they've revealed their hand: their goal is engaging in base racial demagoguery, not fostering debate.
3/2/10 UPDATE: Due to the switch to a new CMS, the formatting in the following got mixed up, confusing me in the other recent update that was here. In any case, the following are the Youtube video comments left by others referred to three paragraphs up, delimited by dashes; whether some of these should be run together is lost to the sands of time:
"America is the land of immigrants" who has the right to say "this is our country" the Native Americans are the one who should be able to say it, not Anglo-American.
coming from an half african and mexican male.i love my people and this land was ours and don't tell me my people had nothing to do with building this country.we built this country.
by-the-way. that old man has no more claim to live here than any of thoseb legal hispanics, his people came to America and persecuted my ancestors [the filmmakers posted a reply saying they wanted to interview that poster]
That old white guy needs to go to school. Every race here except for the Natives shouldn't be here. It was rightfully their land before the white people.
BTW I am not hispanic but I feel for them.some parts of Mexico was forcefully taken in violence hence California,Colorado,Texas now U.S.A..
you said it, this land is stolen... so, Mexicans are just recovering it
the fact that europeans have been illegal in this country since 1492 doesnt seem to cross anyone's mind
They think they own the land that they are on right now, and think it always belonged to them. When in all actuality it belonged\belongs to the Indians.
The Native Americans were in the country first until a pack of people from another country decide to take it over. Some Hispanics (primarily Mexicans) are mixed of European and Native American blood, so technically his "we were here first" argument is completely invalidated by that fact alone.
When each group(Irish, German, Italian) came to this stolen country they had their languages they spoke and if you were in a deli or store you heard it. We slaughtered the Native Americans and as far as this side of the world Natives of South America were here first. We shot and killed and stole land from them. I dare you to find me a spoiled white kid who is willing to leave their ipod or X box to work when their parents hand them everything.
If that american guy actually studied HIS history he would know that the americans as we know it today KILLED all the natives and claimed this land as theirs.
Far-left loon and Arizona state Rep. Kyrsten Sinema recently introduced a bill that would have outlawed the Minuteman Project and similar groups and have them labeled "domestic terrorists". (That earned her the prestigious honor of being selected for our first "Working For Mexico, Or Just Acts Like It?" post).
As could be expected, it was voted down in their Homeland Security and Property Rights Committee by a vote of 7 to 3. All the Republicans voted against it, and they were joined by Democrat Cloves Campbell.
Sinema voted for her own bill, and she was joined by fellow Democrats Steve Gallardo and Tom Prezelski.
I don't know how this happened, but:
Sinema ultimately conceded to [Chris Simcox] that she had no evidence that members of his organization are racists.
And, as could be expected, neither Sinema nor Gallardo are whizzes at that "logical reasoning" thing:
And Rep. Steve Gallardo, D-Phoenix, said some groups, although he wasn't naming them, are dangerous, as shown by hate mail and threats to Sinema and other legislators who don't see border and immigration issues the same way... At one point, Sinema asked Simcox if he was concerned because the first group ever to patrol the border in this country was the Ku Klux Klan...
Obviously, what they term "hate mail" may in fact simply be those who disagree and do so in a manner that causes ultra-sensitive lefties to get the faints. And, those who support something cannot be held responsible for the actions of others who support the same thing but do so in a manner with which the first group doesn't approve. And, of course, the last statement attributed to her above is guilt by association.
Arizona state Rep. Kyrsten Sinema recently introduced a bill that would turn civilian border patrols, neighborhood watches, and the like into felonies. Now, she claims that she's receiving threatening emails about it, and that may well be true. However, it's a standard leftie tactic to claim to be a victim and to try to portray all those on the other side as violent.
As for the article, 3TV/AZ Family must have good lawyers. The title of the article is "Local lawmaker receives threatening emails from Minutemen", which would lead one to believe that supposed reporter Claudia Rivero has actually verified the identities and affiliations of the senders. I tend to doubt that:
Many of the emails are signed by people who claim to be members of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps. But the president of the group says they do not tolerate such behavior.
According to this:
Chris Simcox, founder of the Tombstone-based Civil Homeland Defense group, and Glenn Spencer, who leads the Sierra Vista-based American Border Patrol, have long disagreed over style and approach to deterring illegal entrants.
Spencer said his group aims to document and report illegal immigrants by using video cameras and other surveillance. In contrast, Simcox describes his group as a "militia," and he leads armed volunteers on patrols near the border.
A recent statement by Simcox has served to incite bickering between the two men. Simcox issued this warning as part of a "message to the world": "Do not attempt to cross the border illegally; you will be considered an enemy of the state; if aggressors attempt to forcefully enter our country they will be repelled with force if necessary!"
Spencer told the Arizona Daily Star that with statements like that, Simcox has attracted an "unsavory element." Such rhetoric threatens the credibility of the anti-illegal-immigration movement...
"The purpose is to put pressure on the government, to have governmental institutions that are there to enforce the law, not to go out and threaten people," he said.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the coin, the Border Action Network has gathered 2000 signatures on a petition "asking Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard... to conduct an investigation of the militia groups and it they're breaking the law, they should be arrested and prosecuted."
You can read a horribly written but very informative article on the Border Action Network here. Think A.N.S.W.E.R. In this editorial, BAN's founder is quoted as saying "[illegal aliens] have civil rights and human rights that take precedence over defending the country."
See also the L.A. Times' hit piece on Simcox 'Patriots on the Borderline'. It reads less like a real newspaper article than an Indymedia reject, and it spawned a couple of letters to the Times. Note well the title of the letters page: "'Racist' Border Patrol Has Crossed the Line."
"Bellesiles calls in a fascinating array of sources to bolster his argument," rhapsodized... author Dan Baum in the Chicago Tribune...
Simcox, Spencer, and friends might have problems, some large, but I don't think we're going to get the whole truth from such biased sources.