Although the deaths of migrants from North Africa and the Middle East upon the doorstep of Europe has occupied the attention of news media over the past few weeks, the difficulties endured by nations which serve as buffers between the third world and the West are often overlooked. One of the countries taxed by an influx of refugees from war-ravaged nations is the west African nation of Cameroon. Over 100,000 refugees reside in that country after fleeing Nigeria and the Central African Republic, because of a brutal Islamic insurgency  and ongoing civil war, respectively.

In other migration news, dozens of Rohingya Muslims from Burma are reported missing after their boat capsized in the Bay of Bengal. Despite the grossly misleading reportage we’ve been treated to by outlets like the BBC and Washington Post, among others, the inter-communal violence within Burma is not simply a case of an Islamophobic backlash, as Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi has repeatedly pointed out. This Daily Telegraph photo essay provides a much more nuanced view of the violence engulfing Burma, much of it directed against Rakhine State’s Buddhist population by Muslim jihadists.

Moving on to the Western Hemisphere, we learned today that the U.S. Treasury Department has blacklisted 20 businesses linked to Rafael Caro Quintero, the Mexican drug lord responsible for the brutal torture and execution of DEA agent Enrique “Kiki” Camarena, who was recently released from prison this past August, despite having over a decade remaining on his prison sentence. Thanks to the endemically corrupt Mexican government, the proceeds of Quintero’s racketeering empire remained in his family, which will undoubtedly prove useful to one of the world’s most wanted fugitives.

In cheap labor lobby news, Indian outsourcing titan Infosys has reached a settlement with the federal government in its lawsuit alleging widespread visa fraud. The wholesale importation of foreign workers by Indian outsourcing firms is a problem in the high tech industry, although it is not the sole, nor even the primary, reason for the widespread unemployment and underemployment of highly qualified computer programmers and STEM graduates. As Norm Matloff has explained, the employment practices of American companies are even worse than their Indian counterparts, which shouldn’t surprise anyone who’s come across the ubiquitous pro-amnesty ads bankrolled by amnesty’s biggest cheerleader in Silicon Valley.

Finally, the news that there are still hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens streaming into the United States shouldn’t surprise anyone who’s been paying even perfunctory attention to the immigration reform debate occurring in Washington D.C. over the past year. While most of these aliens come from Central America, their  ultimate destination is clear. Despite the pressing need for border security, Janet Napolitano’s replacement at DHS doesn’t seem to be concerned about the waves of illegal aliens streaming across our southern border.

Mark Krikorian speculates that Mr. Johnson was installed in order to enact the wholesale version of amnesty via administrative fiat. Whether his promotion leads to stealth amnesty or is simply a savvy public relations move on the part of the Obama administration, the remainder of this year will provide some interesting clues as to how the anti-citizen party will proceed in its path to electoral hegemony.

Stay tuned…

Update: The Silent Majority No More has some great coverage of the May Day absurdity, which I urge you all to check out for yourselves!

One of the perennial problems faced by the left is the inclination to either devolve into myopic, sectarian bands, or to remain so diffuse and broad in its appeal that it doesn’t accomplish much of anything. The latter tendency can be seen in the evolution of movements like Occupy Wall Street, which never quite formulated a cogent agenda, despite rendering aid  to distressed victims of Hurricane Sandy this past year. Although, even this operation didn’t proceed quite as smoothly or as transparently as one would expect from an organization that ostensibly has no defined hierarchical structure. 

The message emblazoned upon the placard seen above-whether  born out of sincerity or a mischievous desire to troll Marxists-was probably the most succinct, coherent statement I encountered in Union Square this week, however ironic it must seem juxtaposed against a public celebration of the international labor movement. 

Nevertheless, supporters of OWS were plentiful during Wednesday’s festivities, even as open borders activists attempted to use May Day  to mobilize their supporters on behalf of millions of illegal aliens seeking amnesty. 

Aside from some conspicuous flag-waving, and manning a much smaller version of The People’s Library, there didn’t seem to be much activity among the occupiers, especially in comparison to last year, when the movement occupied the preeminent place among the day’s citywide rallies.  

To its credit, the illegal alien lobby  recognized the fleeting nature of this particular historical moment. Alas, it might be another two years before their benefactors in Congress attempt to foist an equally unpalatable deal upon a skeptical American public. That’s why they came out in force, albeit much reduced in number-in order to demand-their words, not mine-perpetual immunity from legal and political repercussions related to the laws they’ve violated. 

The focus, as always, was on the reunification of families-ones marked by severe genetic deformities, if these portraits are any guide-separated by the purportedly arbitrary, cruel immigration policies pursued by the American government. 

Although more focused than the generic leftists in attendance, the open borders enthusiasts did try to link to their opposition to immigration enforcement of any kind to a variety of other topical issues, including critiques of the military industrial complex. While some would opine that militarizing the border would be a far better use of American resources than some of the Defense Department’s current priorities, especially considering the empirical evidence validating this assertion, those gathered in Union Square beg to differ. Interestingly enough, they seem to share the views of the Cato Institute in this regard. 

The May 1st Coalition-a group created in the wake of  a uniformly ineffective 2006 boycott of American businesses and public schools by illegal aliens-was the chief organizer of this event, and was responsible for much of the publicity advertising the rally. 

Perhaps unsurprisingly, this group opposes the Gang of Eight giveaway in its current form because they view it as far too punitive to the poor, beleaguered migrants who simply want legislative immunity conferred upon them for trespassing our laws-both civil and criminal. I suppose a tax amnesty is too heavy a burden to ask them to bear in return for funding their  health care, welfare and unlimited access to legal counsel. 

As expected, organized labor-including our good friends from the SEIU-constituted a significant presence. After all, who else is going to replenish the declining ranks of union membership in this country’s private and public sectors? 

Having a portion of your paycheck confiscated and subsequently earmarked for the political ambitions of  union executives, is apparently a life-time affair. 

In addition to the open borders brigade-and its union auxiliaries-there were a host of Marxists; this being May Day, after all. No one has ever accused the reds of being reluctant to attach themselves to a more popular cause or party. In that vein, the  hoary Trotskyites of the Socialist Workers Party trundled out their pristine reading material-including copies of their flagship publication, The Militant-to generally disinterested passersby. 

They did manage to incorporate anti-enforcement buzz phrases into their otherwise predictable signage. It’s often said that politics make strange bedfellows, and immigration politics is perhaps the prime example of this cliche being grounded in truth. Very strange, in this case. Or perhaps not, when you view the proposed immigration law through the prism of a policy that guarantees a steady supply of cheap labor and cheap votes. Ostensibly, socialists oppose the former, but I suppose not when it imperils the latter.  

Nelson Mandela was chummy with one of the 20th century’s most ruthless, prolific totalitarian despots? You don’t say!? This sort of accusation might lead people to think he was a Communist! Well, I suppose the Trotskyists are good for something after all. 

Not to be outdone, the SWP’s arch-nemesis-the (Maoist) Workers World Party-was also there.  So coercive statists with an affection for genocidal Communists had a plethora of choices that day. 

Some of them were more enthusiastic in their appreciation for the Great Helmsman than others. Thankfully, the two sides didn’t come to blows. We all know how ugly these type of situations can get. 

The Spartacist League was on message. 

For the most part. 

Much like Kim Jong-Un himself, admirers of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea couldn’t help but plead for public attention. 

Ah yes, those dastardly warmongers. The nerve of them! 

I wonder what this appreciator of Juche thinks of Kenneth Bae’s recent arrest and conviction. 

One of the more interesting aspects of these sort of events-whose hallmark is the repetition of cliched phrases-is learning more about some often overlooked groups in the world of political activism. The organization referenced above, the National Alliance For Filipino Concerns, is one such group. Founded in San Jose, California, it bills itself as an advocacy organization for the Filipino diaspora, a large segment of which can be found within the United States. 

Despite the fact that there are over three and half million people of Filipino descent in this country-and over one and a half million Filipino immigrants-they have figured less than prominently in our nation’s periodic debates over immigration. Several hundred thousand Filipinos are also here illegally, but they too haven’t become a significant debating point in our national discussion of various amnesty proposals such as the DREAM Act. Juan Antonio Vargas-media darling and illegal alien scofflaw-seems to be the exception to the rule.

The maltreatment of domestic workers from The Philippines, especially those living and working in the Arabian Peninsula-but even for those who work in households on this continent-is notorious. The Saudi Arabian diplomatic compound that doubled as a modern-day slave pen is just one of the most startling examples of an epidemic that the Philippine Forum is attempting to highlight with that banner. Notwithstanding my disagreement with the political philosophy espoused by most of the protesters in Union Square-and opposition to their proposed solutions to our broken immigration system-I have to commend some of them for exposing a global moral blight that too few Americans are aware of. 

In addition to the individuals concerned about the flagrant abuse and exploitation of Filipino domestic workers, there was a large contingent of avowedly Communist political parties and Marxist organizations which are based in the Philippines itself. 

There were young Filipino Marxists. 

Older Filipino Marxists-standing next to a representative of the International Migrants Alliance.

The political coalition with which most of these organizations are affiliated. I’ll let you infer it’s ideological proclivities. 

For the life of me I couldn’t tell you what political current this woman’s philosophy represents, but chances are she’s Filipino. 

And finally, female Filipino Marxists. 

As most of you know, the vast majority of illegal immigrants come from Mexico-over sixty percent, according to the Department of Homeland Security. So it was not surprising that many of the participants in the May Day rally were Mexican nationals, including the woman seen above, who’s part of an international alliance of vendors. For those of you who aren’t fluent in Spanish, here’s a link to their English-language website.

There were also friends of Yo Soy 132, a Mexican political movement created in opposition to then PRI presidential candidate-now president-Enrique Pena Nieto and the perceived deficit in honest coverage of his presidential campaign, as well as its bitterly contested aftermath. Like its counterpart in the United States, the establishment press in Mexico is controlled by large media conglomerates, often indifferent to the concerns of ordinary citizens. As we’ve learned recently, what doesn’t get reported is often just as important as what is covered. 

There were also devout adherents to the philosophy of third-worldism-such as the International Women’s Alliance-at Union Square. Apparently, some people haven’t gotten the message. 

One curiosity was the apparent lack of any  Puerto Rican nationalists, which is a group that usually shows to events like these. I didn’t spot a single machetero or independista, and was despairing of finding any until I saw the man wearing the colorful t-shirt seen in the photo above. Bingo! 

In contrast to that lonely devotee of the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party, there were a multitude of Communists willing to trod across the Flatiron District and Gramercy Park  in order to broadcast their innovative, youthful message of perpetual global enslavement, mass starvation and genocide, and statist terror. 

Despite its promising name, most of the individuals I saw bearing these signs seemed to have some tread on the tires. 

A few were in the Fidel Castro ballpark. 

While one man seemed to be giving Lenin himself a run for his money in the youthful vigor department. 

Luckily,  a few non-geriatric Communists did show up, including our favorite ginger-headed Kim Jong-il fanboy. 

 Even a stopped clock is right once a day.

In the second part of my May Day coverage, expect more Communists-as well as a patriotic counterpoint!

With the United States Senate rushing headlong into its rendezvous with destiny, i.e. deconstructing what remains of this nation’s anemic and beleaguered economy, and the U.S. House following suit, it  seems appropriate to examine cui bono from these developments. Obviously not American citizens, beyond Facebook billionaire Mark Zuckerberg and the politicians who’ll be handsomely rewarded by his corporation as a result of  yet another mass amnesty. Undoubtedly the thousands of immigration attorneys who’ll be enriched through the passage of the Gang of Eight proposal-whose case was pleaded by Laura Lichter, the president of the AILA, in laughably skewed immigration hearings-will accrue some financial benefits after comprehensive immigration reform finally occurs.

Certainly, the individuals and institutions which have collectively spent over a billion dollars lobbying Congress over the past half-decade feel that they have a vested interest in altering this nation’s immigration laws. However, the more immediate beneficiaries will be the millions of illegal aliens who will have their status changed, with the resultant benefits, including those enjoyed by their immediate family members and relatives.

That part of this story is the ostensible focus of Two Americans, a documentary about Katherine Figueroa-whose beatific face you see juxtaposed against the snarling visage of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in the print ad above-a nine year-old girl from Arizona whose Mexican parents were arrested and detained after an immigration sweep at their workplace.

I caught a screening of the film by directors Dan Devivo and Valeria Fernandez, which was sponsored by the Justice Action Center and Racial Justice Project of New York Law School, last week just as the debate-such as it is-about immigration reform was percolating within Congress. As you can tell by the names of these academic centers, the foremost concern among faculty members-and presumably, their students-is achieving a desired political outcome-in this case for preferred racial and ethnic groups-regardless of whether that result is consonant with basic Constitutional precepts, a broader conception of justice according to natural law, or a firm foundation in American history. One of the main problems I have with the legal  assault against immigration enforcement-and the left’s approach to the law in general-is that it relies upon this sort of results-based policy, which is predicated on achieving an outcome that is politically-not deontologically-correct.

In my estimation, this is the polar opposite of “justice,” whose definition has until recently-perhaps before the era when critical legal studies achieved a foothold in academe-meant the application of objective rules which applied equally to everyone, regardless of skin color, ethnicity, religion, or sexual preference. Fortunately, the filmmakers behind Two Americans do grapple with the statutory and constitutional issues, such as habeas corpus, due process, and equal protection, that the enforcement of immigration laws in Arizona-specifically, the suppression sweeps launched by Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Maricopa County-raise. In fact, the film’s focus upon these enforcement actions-and the difficult questions of federalism and the criminal justice system-is arguably the most substantive aspect of this documentary. Personally, I wish the directors had chosen to focus exclusively on these issues, rather than attempt to create an ambitious, almost panoramic-yet not altogether successful-film that often feels like four or five separate documentaries stitched together.

While the film’s promotional materials bill it as an investigation of Joe Arpaio’s expenditure of state funds as head of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, as well as a portrayal of the struggles of young Katherine Figueroa, it actually touches upon at least half a dozen other subjects that could have constituted distinct cinematic projects. From the President’s implementation of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, an extension of his administration’s administrative amnesty, to the political struggle over Arizona’s landmark law SB 1070, to the issues of leadership raised by the activities of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, to the relationship between Arpaio and the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, to the relentless effort by his critics, such as Randy Parraz,  to dislodge him from office, to the battle between Sheriff Joe and the President himself, this documentary seemingly attempts to cover every angle of the immigration debate within Arizona in its hour and a half running time.

The relationship between the sheriff and Figueroa’s family is tenuous at best, as Dan Devivo readily conceded during a post-screening question and answer session, where he described how Joe Arpaio is merely a stand-in for all of the elected officials and law enforcement officers-however few in number-who are attempting to enforce immigration laws in a robust manner. I was genuinely surprised by the negligible amount of time devoted to Katherine’s dilemma-even the focus on the Figueroa family was divided between interviews of Katherine, her parents, and her custodial relatives. She is a very appealing personality for the anti-enforcement movement-lending credence to Mickey Kaus’s theory that the DREAM Act was merely a stalking horse for a much broader amnesty-and I had made the assumption going into the screening that she would be centerpiece of this film.

Admittedly, I wasn’t moved to tears-a reaction that Andrea Callan, the ACLU advocate who hosted this event, assured us would be forthcoming-at any point during Two Americans. Perhaps I’ve become inured to the barrage of sob stories and media puffery which deluge the American public on a daily basis regarding the plight of the undocumented. However, it’s hard to discount the notion that Katherine Figueroa’s story is tailor-made for a sympathetic human interest story which could have filled the plot of an anti-enforcement film in its own right. The directors chose to focus instead on the political nature of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s public persona, which is often overlooked in discussions about the utility, legality, and impact of his office’s enforcement campaigns.

In truth, Arpaio is, in addition to being the chief law enforcement officer in Maricopa County, a public official whose capacity as sheriff rests upon his popularity with Arizona voters. So it’s not surprising that his most hotly contested public stance generates scrutiny regarding his motives; the filmmakers asserted-both in the film and subsequent Q&A session-that his crusade against illegal immigration is driven solely by political opportunism. It’s a charge seemingly buttressed by the testimony of a former colleague-interviewed throughout this film-who claims that Joe Arpaio jumped on the anti-illegal alien bandwagon in order to prosper politically. However, I feel this critique wanting, not least because Dan Devivo, in response to an audience member’s (translated) question, averred that Arpaio’s support within Maricopa was dwindling with each subsequent election. One wonders why an extremely popular elected official would adopt a stance that would earn him scorn and political antagonism among open borders enthusiasts throughout the country-and certainly generate opposition within his home county-if it wasn’t based at least partially on personal conviction.

Furthermore, the same insinuation can be made of Arpaio’s political enemies, such as open borders socialist Raul Grijalva, whose political fortunes-and campaign bank account-haven’t suffered as a result of his dogged campaign against SB 1070 and the current sheriff of Maricopa County. And while  questions pertaining to Arpaio’s use of his investigatory authority-particularly with regard to his office’s MACE unit-are certainly valid, the misuse and exploitation of power by some of Arpaio’s most powerful opponents is a question never broached by Two Americans. Specifically, the highly politicized tenure of Thomas Perez-President Obama’s nominee to replace Hilda Solis as Secretary of Labor, but at the time of the administration’s lawsuit against Maricopa County the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights-is never raised, nor is his extensive history of open borders activism.

Given that this documentary is advocacy journalism, I don’t know how much balance on this subject the audience is entitled to expect. However, the narrative thread of this film continuously returned to the bad faith of people who support immigration enforcement, with the implicit accusation that their beliefs are responsible for the travails of Katherine Figuroa, rather than the actions of her two parents. I give the filmmakers credit for highlighting to a certain degree the fusillade of hatred open borders advocates have unleashed upon Arpaio-including the credible death threats he has received in office-yet the reasons why Arizona voters continue to support him are never seriously scrutinized, nor examined in anything but the most cursory manner.

The extensive and sustained public support for laws such as SB 1070 never arises at any point in this documentary, and the only footage of protestors who are critical of illegal immigration focuses, curiously enough, on members of the National Socialist Movement. The many peaceful, multi-ethnic, well-attended rallies supporting this law-which were covered by mainstream, liberal media outlets in Arizona at the time-completely escape the notice of the filmmakers, as do the public statements of  large, representative, reputable immigration reduction and anti-illegal immigration organizations and individuals in this country. In the end, I think that is the biggest shortcoming of Two Americans. Not the sprawling focus, but the refusal to honestly present the arguments made by the respective camps in the immigration debate. It’s a problem that will persist so long as one side refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of their opponents’ beliefs.

Today is the federally designated holiday commemorating our separation from Great Britain, despite the fact that the adoption of the Declaration of Independence  by the Second Continental Congress occurred on July 2, 1776. Even so, this is a great day to reflect upon how our country arrived at this point in its history. Which is why I’m providing you with audio from one of Professor Thomas E. Woods Jr.’s brilliant lectures exploring the all-too-often obscured history of the United States.

This particular lecture examines the early colonial history of America-up to and including the decision by the thirteen colonies to sever ties with its mother country-and how individual states asserted their rights in the face of collectivist aggression. It’s a talk that is pertinent to our current political climate, which finds the very concept of federalism under relentless assault from all quarters.

The author of this nation’s political and legal cornerstone knew more than anyone else how destructive the the powers of a centralized state could be, which is why uncovering the true history behind our forefathers’ audacious endeavor-at a time of unparalleled attacks against the Bill of Rights and individual autonomy-is such an urgent task.

Happy Independence Day, readers! I hope that you’ve spent some of it contemplating the beauty of our nation’s founding document, and hopefully examining what makes this country a unique experiment in republican self-governance.

It’s difficult to gauge the ultimate impact of this past week’s Supreme Court decision invalidating much of Arizona’s landmark immigration enforcement law, with the exception of Section 2(b), i.e. the clause empowering local police to ascertain someone’s immigration status if  ”reasonable suspicion” exists when he or she is detained.  Even this seeming bright spot is obscured by Justice Kennedy’s muddled opinion, which seems to invite future litigation by the usual suspects, who will have their cases heard before the same judge who has thwarted the implementation of the bulk of SB 1070 for the past two years.

Heather Mac Donald, of the Manhattan Institute, wrote an incisive analysis of the decision for National Review Online, which merits reading by anyone who marveled at some of the flawed reasoning involved in overruling a state law that mirrors federal law in most regards. Her exploration of Justice Scalia’s bold dissent-which has earned universal scorn among the commentariat-is especially compelling. Because the current administration has invested its political capital in administrative amnesty and abandonment of immigration enforcement, it has fallen upon the states to do the work which the Supreme Court has deemed the exclusive province of the federal government. Since the current POTUS believes he must bribe Hispanic voters-who presumably favor amnesty-in order for he and his party to survive politically, he will use the perquisites of the  imperial presidency in order to thwart states-such as Arizona-which have the temerity to defend the territorial integrity of their borders.

That’s why the prospect of states reasserting their sovereignty-described so eloquently in Justice Scalia’s dissent-is so appealing. I disagree with the suggestion by some in the immigration reform movement that the Supreme Court’s refusal to preempt local and state enforcement constitutes a legal victory. Like Roy Beck, I believe that the most efficacious means of deterring illegal immigration-and of forcing illegal aliens currently living here to repatriate themselves-is cutting off access to jobs. Notwithstanding the majority’s decision to nix that portion of SB 1070 which criminalized illegal aliens seeking work, the fact that  during its last term the Supreme Court decided to uphold the Arizona Legal Workers’ Act indicates that there are tools available to counteract the damage done by the Obama administration’s quest for perpetual supplicants.

Even so, the courts’ decision to vitiate most of Arizona’s enforcement mechanisms leaves the ball in the court of the Obama administration, which has made its intentions with regard to this issue more than clear. Combined with its decision to wage class war against American citizens, the amount of leeway enjoyed by those who would enforce the laws American bureaucrats won’t has been reduced significantly. However, if individual states like Arizona begin to assert their rights under the Constitution-a path advocated by one of today’s most articulate advocates of liberty-then the power exercised by open borders proponents, and consequently, the damage inflicted upon Americans, can be mitigated. Although the prospect of nullification might appear dramatic in nature, it is a response less outrageous than the excesses of an unaccountable federal government with blood on its hands. Plus, the precedent has already been established.

We shouldn’t pin our hopes on an insipid standard-bearer for a national party that has equivocated and vacillated on one of the most important issues of our time. Nor should we  rely upon a federal government that has repeatedly betrayed a beleaguered American public. We need to trust ourselves enough to realize that the solution to this problem, like so many others, rests in our hands and in the wisdom of this country’s founders. A message particularly resonant on the 136th anniversary of the proclamation of the world’s most revolutionary charter of freedom.

As always, American Rattlesnake stands with Sheriff Joe, Governor Jan Brewer, and the good people of Arizona. 

Even as Janet Napolitano’s flunkies and the Obama administration continue their war against Arizona, the vast majority of ordinary Americans, and rank and file ICE agents,  stand for law and order and against an illegal invasion aided and abetted by elected and unelected officials in Washington D.C. We stand with them as well. 

As four separate wildfires devour the state of Arizona-burning more than 17,500 acres at last count-it’s instructive to look at how our government has handled its investigation into the two enormous ones which blazed a path of destruction across the state in 2011. According to the Arizona Daily Star, both the Horseshoe 2 and the Monument Fire were caused  by humans, which in the case of national forests invariably means illegal aliens and/or Mexican narco-traffickers nesting within wilderness cordoned off from American citizens. The tragedy, which should elicit anger and frustration in anyone concerned about the environment and the lives of law-abiding Arizonans, is that the Forest Service-the ostensible guardian of this land-has now recommended that investigations into both of these horrific fires be closed for lack of evidence. 

This recommendation comes in spite of the fact that the Government Accountability Office has implicated illegal aliens in the willful destruction of forest land-often for the purpose of protecting lucrative human and drug smuggling routes into the United States. Attempting to contain fires caused by our government’s neglect of border enforcement is bad enough, but as Jon Feere of the Center for Immigration Studies reports, these responses are inevitably hampered-if not halted altogether-because of the presence of thousands of illegal trespassers. The only reactive measure taken by federal officials, unfortunately, is too put up signs warning American citizens to beware of their presence.

Our good friend Cindy Kolb traveled back to Cochise County to document the scene of the crimes. To appreciate the scale of this tragedy, simply look over the Facebook gallery she’s created in order to show the rest of us-who don’t live along the most heavily used rat line for human smuggling and narcotics trafficking in the country-just what has been lost because of the federal government’s neglect and indifference to the concerns of those who live in border states. The picture that you see at the top of this entry is of the Horseshoe 2 fire, courtesy of NASA, but you need not be a rocket science in order to understand that our government’s border security policy of benign neglect has real-world consequences. It has resulted in irreparable destruction to our natural environment, incalculable damage to the property of thousands of Arizonans, and threatened the lives and security of scores of Americans. It’s long past time that we reasserted control of American territory, regardless of the damage such an action might do to the sensitivities of Mexican consular officials or people who should never have stepped foot into this country in the first place.

This month’s Rattle brings us a host of stories that the mainstream media didn’t cover sufficiently-preferring instead to shower accolades upon the man responsible for abandoning immigration enforcement in the name of political opportunism. We’ll cover everything from the latest spate of violent crimes committed by illegal aliens to Barack Obama’s continued roll out of administrative amnesty, which now includes directives to ignore both interior enforcement and border security.

But first, we’ll examine this administration’s ongoing obstruction of Congress’s investigation into the ever-broadening gun-walking scandals. Courtesy of Sipsey Street Irregulars-whose coverage of Fast and Furious is non pareil-we learn that the White House is blocking testimony from Kevin O’Reilly, a former staff member of the National Security Council who wants to speak with the Senate Judiciary Committee and House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. This administration’s invocation of executive privilege is just the latest example of obstruction of justice  relating to Fast and Furious.

It should be recalled that last July the acting head of the ATF told Congress that his agency was paying FBI agents to ignore the law in pursuit of this administration’s bizarre and opaque political goals. Immigration control, not gun control, is a solution that Barack Obama’s Justice Department dismisses out of hand. We can only hope that, as Katie Pavlich reports in Town Hall, Chairman Darrell Issa pursues this investigation to its conclusion, which hopefully will result in a more than a few stiff prison sentences. Speaking of Katie Pavlich, she has a fantastic new book about Fast and Furious entitled-appropriately-Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal, which I urge you all to read.

Obfuscation and evasion are hallmarks of this administration, especially as it pertains to immigration and border security, as an insightful commentary from Michael Cutler published by Fox News Latino illustrates. The former INS agent and current immigration watchdog points out that Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security is effectively “cooking the books” by relying solely upon  documented arrests-a misleading statistic-in order to pretend that this administration is cracking down upon illegal entry into the United States. FAIR’s Legislative Update further dissects this policy, which is drawing increasing scrutiny from Congress-particularly Chairman Darrell Issa and Rep. Jason Chaffetz- notwithstanding what Tom Tancredo accurately describes as a bipartisan conspiracy to hobble border security and immigration enforcement. By not logging and tracking the number of illegal border crossers who were not detained, Customs and Border Protection is painting a rosy picture of a much more dire situation.

The deceit of this administration extends beyond the CBP and encompasses virtually every aspect of immigration enforcement, both at the border and inside of the United States. Even though ICE is touting the Cross Check raids it initiated earlier this month-intended to apprehend ostensibly violent criminals, absconders and  fugitives from justice-this is merely a political expedient designed for election year consumption. The truth is that Barack Obama’s administrative amnesty proceeds apace, with four cities ordered to halt deportations, according to the Dan Stein Report. Remarkably, the Executive Office for Immigration Review has closed San Francisco’s immigration court and plans to completely halt its proceedings for the entire summer. Jim Kouri reports on yet another component of Barack Obama’s administrative amnesty, the decision to suspend deportations of illegal aliens with “families,” inside of the United States.

And while illegal aliens are not being deported, they will be able to enjoy state-of-the-art detention facilities, including some new amenities such as beach volleyball and cable TV. Lamar Smith excoriates this administration for its skewed priorities in a must-read op-ed published in The Hill. Although this new detention manual  might seem farcical, it’s far from a laughing matter. As Jim Kouri points out in his Examiner column, the Department of Homeland Security has taken virtually no action against foreigners who overstay their visas. This negligence persists over a decade after the September 11th massacres, which were committed by a cadre of jihadists whose visa applications are symptomatic of our country’s dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy. This is not merely an hypothetical problem, even after the destruction of the World Trade Center, as the case of illegal alien Amine El Khalifi demonstrates. The fact that this indifference to the lives of American citizens continues unabated, despite repeated pressure exerted by the GAO serves to illustrate this administration’s fundamental lack of accountability.

Even as it lags behind in locating and detaining criminal aliens, the administration of Barack Obama has deigned to grant Temporary Protected Status to thousands of Syrians living in the United States. As we’ve pointed out in the past, Temporary Protected Status is anything but temporary. In fact, it is merely another expedient used to grant de facto amnesty to a group of illegal aliens who can prove “hardship” circumstances, most of which persist indefinitely-making their stay in the United States permanent. This is even more disturbing when juxtaposed against the State Department’s recent decision to bar inspection of a visiting Egyptian delegation consisting of Muslim Brotherhood officials. Of course, Egypt isn’t the only country where the Ikwhan has a strong foothold.

The problem is that Barack Obama’s ostensible opposition, i.e. congressional Republicans, are doing virtually nothing to investigate the egregious overreach of his administration on immigration matters. Quite the contrary, some are hard at work developing proposals that would only worsen the situation, such as DREAM Lite, in hopes of  cultivating the ever-elusive Hispanic vote. Republican leaders in the states are not faring much better in this regard, as the difficult struggle in New Hampshire to prevent illegal aliens from capitalizing upon in-state tuition benefits demonstrates.

In an update to a story that we’ve covered recently, the North Carolina General Assembly held another hearing on illegal immigration and potential enforcement mechanisms. Unfortunately, according to NC Listen, it was dominated by illegal aliens and their supporters in the legislature, including some of the very people who had disrupted a previous hearing about these problems. Heading further south, we learn that the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhood Act has been killed in the Mississippi State Senate. Apparently, Judiciary Chairman Hob Bryan has caved knuckled under to the Mississippi Poultry Association and its desire for cheap labor, notwithstanding the harm such a decision may inflict on innocent Mississippians. Its neighbor to the East, Alabama, has revisited HB 56, the landmark legislation that targeted illegal aliens living in that state. Rep. Micky Hammon has decided to alter some of the provisions that have been enjoined by a federal court, but maintains that he and his fellow Republicans will not repeal the law, which is welcome news.

In not so good news, Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle has decided to defy Immigration and Customs Enforcement and refuse detainer requests for criminal aliens housed in her county’s jails. Saul Chavez is one beneficiary of Preckwinkle’s benevolence, having fled the country upon being released from jail after killing William McCann. The carnage our government’s policies wreak is not limited to the odd vehicular manslaughter though, as the massacre at Oikos University in California makes clear to any impartial observer. Limits to Growth has an insightful story about mass-murderer One L. Goh which explains the circumstances surrounding his rampage which the main stream media willfully ignores. Oikos was apparently more concerned with harvesting tuition payments by foreign students-often with loans backed by American taxpayers-than ensuring the safety of its student body. It brings to mind  9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, whose entrance to the United States was facilitated by a campus administration eager to recruit students from the Middle East, heedless of the potentially deadly repercussions.

The fact that there are visa mills exploiting the F-1 Visa program should come as no surprise to people who are aware of the extensive fraud and exploitation present in the legal immigration system. Just as in Canada-which recently charged attorney Sandra Zaher with inventing false refugee claims-the United States is plagued by immigration fraud so pervasive that the conviction of Earl Seth David, aka Rabbi Avraham David, head of a New York law firm, headlines an ICE press release. The irony of an agency headed by John Morton-who’s tasked with expediting illegal immigration-spotlighting the conviction of someone for immigration fraud is apparently lost on this administration.

In another prime example of abuse, a lawsuit by two former employees of Larsen & Toubro InfoTech Limited Inc alleges systemic fraud at the India-based IT firm for which they once worked. Joining an earlier class action filed against the firm, this suit asserts that the plaintiff was forced to not only forge documents related to H-1B visas-a program rampant with corruption and fraud-but told not to report the crime to outside authorities. Read the sickening story for yourself, if you feel you have the requisite stomach. The baffling purposes of the H1-B visa program weren’t illuminated by a recent decision by Judge Gregory Frost, who ordered suppressed almost all information related to the case of  Geza Rakoczi, who is described thusly,

…a young alien man with a mysterious legal status, probably an illegal alien, who has a bachelor’s degree from a marginal educational institution, a private one that accepts all applicants, and his employer, a mortgage finance company in trouble in two different states.

Putting the lie to the idea that these visas are reserved for “highly-skilled” immigrants. More often than not they are merely convenient bodies used to replace the more demanding, highly-compensated Americans who they’ve made redundant. If you don’t believe me, just ask the wife of unemployed semiconducter engineer Darin Wedel, who is still waiting to hear back from President Obama. But do not fear, the virtual border fence is back on track,which I suppose is small comfort to the thousands of hard-working Americans like Mr. Wedel.  However, India is not the only nation to take advantage of the nebulous, easily exploitable H1-B visa program. As Phyllis Schlafly  points out, the Islamist Gulen movement in Turkey has used these same visas in order to indoctrinate Muslim students in American charter schools. The dangers posed by the Gulen movement have been explored ad nauseam in other forums, but it should be noted that even if you ascribe the most benign of intentions to the Gullenists, the idea that fundamentalist Muslim teachers are somehow highly skilled workers is implausible on its face.  Focusing on yet another rising Asian power, the New American has an interesting story about the PRC’s use of the EB-5 immigrant investor visa program in the state of Idaho which is well worth reading.

Returning to more timely issues, we discovered this past week that it’s not all that difficult to register to vote using a fabricated identity, or even assuming the persona of the current Attorney General  of the United States. Thanks to James O’Keefe we’ve discovered how simple it is to game the system, although officials at the increasingly misnamed Justice Department don’t seem to agree. Of course, acknowledging that vote fraud exists would require the Obama administration to prosecute those responsible for it, which wouldn’t bode well for the electoral prospects of Barack Obama’s party. From New York to Florida, from Indiana to Arizona, stealing elections has become quite commonplace, even as the White House-and its complaisant cronies in the media-scoff at the notion. Some Democrats, though, readily admit that trying to manipulate the outcome of elections is a routine practice, and a few even have the integrity to support measures that would rectify this betrayal of democracy.

In an ironic twist, labor unions-which were some of the most vehement supporters of President Obama’s Stimulus plan-are now complaining about some of the jobs stemming from stimulus projects going to Korean workers. I suppose the lesson is to be careful what you wish for, especially if it is over 700 billion dollars worth of taxpayer-financed boondoggles.

In more border violence, two illegal immigrants were murdered just northwest of Tucson on Thursday by two camouflaged gunman, echoing an attack that occurred  near the same city in 2007. This sort of bloodshed is rare but not unheard of in Arizona, especially in the Tucson sector, where over forty percent of this nation’s  illegal aliens come through. It is yet another reason why the constitutionality of SB 1070 must be upheld by the Supreme Court, in spite of the hostility of open borders dogmatists such as the misleadingly named Democrats in the House of Representatives.

Our final story is related to our relationship to the state as individuals, and how that relationship is changing as a result of our government’s decades-long recalibration of this country’s demographics. Courtesy of the Pew Hispanic Center, we now know that over seventy percent of Latinos want the government to provide more services to Americans, not less. Limits to Growth has a fascinating summary of the survey’s other findings, which include a belief among Hispanics that they should learn English in order to succeed in the United States, but not in order to integrate into the broader society. The findings about faith in government are worth exploring though, because they reinforce something that our side has been saying for a very long time. Namely, that Hispanic voters’ support for Democrats and generally left wing political candidates has very little to do with the GOP’s position on immigration, but a lot to do with their endorsement of redistributive economic policies.

The findings of the Pew Hispanic Center demonstrate that the cause and effect most often cited in declining Republican Party affiliation among Hispanics-embodied by the specious narrative about Pete Wilson and the waning fortunes of the California GOP-is reversed. Hispanics do not support the Democratic Party because it advocates open borders, the Democratic Party supports open borders because it enhances its ability to win future elections. In effect, what is happening is that the political elite is electing a new people. This dynamic needs to be remembered whenever we hear mealy-mouthed Republicans exhorting us to abandon any attempt to impose reason upon an anachronistic immigration system that is designed to thwart the wishes of the vast majority of the American public.

It’s going to be a long, tumultuous election year.

Our last Rattle of 2011 runs the gamut, all the way from an immigration enforcement success in Pennsylvania to a disappointing judicial setback in South Carolina. However, we begin the final roundup of the year with a must-read essay in The American Conservative by W. James Antle III. It looks at the immigration scorecard in a sober, realistic analysis that takes into account the substantive victories of immigration reformers-such as continued nationwide support for SB 1070 and its clones-to the unquestionable failures, including a seismic change in the language of the immigration debate, which has turned the phrase “immigration reform” into a synonym for wholesale amnesty. It’s a piece that anyone who is concerned about this subject-as I know most of you are-should read in its entirety. 

We continue by highlighting a great post over at the American Thinker that poses several questions that Newt Gingrich has yet to satisfactorily answer about his dubious proposal to create a tiered system of permanent non-citizen workers out of the pool of 11-20 million illegal aliens currently living here. Be John Galt  expresses some other concerns that have yet to be addressed by Newt while emphasizing the points made by Mickey Kaus in his own analysis of Newt’s plan. Something that conservatives supporting Gingrich-but who are ostensibly opposed to amnesty-need to answer is why they’re backing a candidate whose immigration platform mirrors the one put forward by open borders, libertarian economist Bryan Caplan.

Staying in the field of presidential politicking, American Rattlesnake wholeheartedly endorses the statements of Mitt Romney, vis-a-vis President Obama’s illegal alien uncle, Onyango Obama. For those of you who might not recall, Omar Onyango Obama is not only residing in this country illegally-much like the President’s beloved Aunt Zeituni-but is the owner and operator of a liquor store in Boston, despite his recent DUI conviction.

Meanwhile, Mitt Romney’s opponent Rick Perry continued his tough on the border pantomime in Iowa, decrying the inability of the federal government to control our southern border with Mexico, as well as declaring that he would withdraw the Justice Department’s lawsuits against states like Arizona and Alabama. The pull quote from this article is “the border has to be shut down for the future of the United States of America.” One wonders what he would do with the estimated forty percent of illegal aliens who overstay their visas. I suppose we’ll just have to wait and see how serious Governor Perry is about his newfound posture of immigration hawk.

It does seem that the current crop of presidential candidates is being forced to address the concerns of Republican voters, however reluctantly and haltingly. That said, VDare has a fascinating piece exploring the damage that refugee resettlement has caused in Manchester, New Hampshire, and why the national GOP has been completely AWOL on this issue, despite its ritualistic paeans to the role of New Hampshire as the first state in the nation to hold its presidential primary. The politically courageous current mayor of Manchester is standing up for his constituents, even if the federal government and parasitical members of the refugee resettlement industry won’t. Perhaps the boldness of Ted Gatsas will serve as an example for his timorous counterparts in the national GOP to emulate. We can all hope.

The internal strife caused by the U.S. State Department in Maine is mirrored in Florence, Italy, where the tragic deaths of two Senegalese street merchants is being exploited by media organs to condemn the “racism” of ordinary Italians. Sadly, the exploitation of tragedies like this for political purposes is nothing new to the multicultural zealots spearheading the militant, Gramscian left. Nor is the equation of patriotic, reasonable opposition to mass immigration to racism an anomaly, unfortunately. It seems like these sorts of ad hominem attacks come with the territory, as Peter Brimelow pointed out in yesterday’s post.

Heading down to Washington D.C., we find that the usual rogue’s gallery of open borders demagogues is trying once again to foist amnesty upon an American public, and a Congress, that has consistently rejected it since it was first introduced over a decade ago.  The tireless efforts of Dick Durbin to give the bird to American taxpayers and hard-working students wouldn’t be newsworthy in itself, if not for the fact that a Philippine newspaper is now leading the charge to see the enactment of the DREAM Act. Media bias in reporting of immigration issues is nothing new, especially from foreign newspapers who hold no reverence for American law. However, the fact that a member of the United States Senate is cribbing notes from a newspaper overseas in order to undermine the country he’s ostensibly representing is a sad commentary on the state of politics in America in 2011.

Taking a short jaunt to Baltimore, we say farewell to WBAL institution Ron Smith. Before being struck down by cancer at the age of 70, Smith was a resonant voice of reason and integrity in a world where too may fall prey to the lure of the D.C. cocktail circuit. Gregory Kane has a fitting tribute to him in the Washington Examiner. Michelle Malkin testifies to the humanity of Ron on her website as well. Like the late, great Terry Anderson-another immigration patriot who died last year-Ron Smith will be missed by many people across the country, most of whom never knew him personally. Rest in Peace, Ron.

In slightly cheerier news, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives has approved a bill that would penalize employers who hire illegal workers. Fox News Latino has the entire story, which touches upon similar bills that were eventually enacted in states like Alabama and Arizona. On the other hand, the drive for immigration enforcement suffered a blow in South Carolina, where a federal judge has enjoined a law that cracked down on human smuggling and gave law enforcement officers the opportunity to detain those arrested for unrelated crimes if they were illegal aliens. As Governor Nikki Haley’s spokesman has said, the ultimate resolution of this case rests in the hands of the Supreme Court.

Our neighbor to the north is having its own immigration problems, which  have been amply documented by American Rattlesnake in previous updates. Canada’s capable Immigration Minister Jason Kenney is tackling them in stride, initiating the largest crackdown on citizenship fraud in recent memory. Of course, his proactive initiatives-including an innovative tip line ordinary Canadians can use to report cases of immigration fraud-have earned scorn from the usual suspects. Notwithstanding the carping from bottom-feeding immigration attorneys and radical, open borders socialists, Kenney has earned respect from the public and his adversaries across the aisle, as this National Post article demonstrates.

If only our president had cabinet members willing to stand up for their fellow countrymen. Instead, we have Hilda Solis, the U.S. Secretary of Labor, doing everything in her capacity to empower illegal aliens instead of the Americans who are struggling beneath a crushing unemployment rate and prolonged recession. Even as the unemployment rate plummets in the Yellowhammer State because of HB 56, Solis tries to find ways to double down on the failure of the Obama administration to provide economic opportunities for American citizens. Combined with the administration’s decision to remove the last remaining National Guard troops from our southern border, Barack Obama has demonstrated his disdain for the concerns of the American electorate.

In other administration news, the head of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Alan Bersin, has resigned from his post. An unconfirmed recess appointment by President Obama, Bersin will be replaced by David V. Aguilar. But don’t worry open borders enthusiasts, Mr. Aguilar is four square in favor of amnesty, although he prefers to call it something else.

Finally, the ongoing congressional investigations into Operation Fast and Furious and this administration’s persistent coverup continue apace. We now have Senator Joseph Lieberman, previously known for his atrocious record on immigration issues, directing the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, which he currently chairs, to investigate the interagency “miscommunication” that lies at the heart of the Fast and Furious debacle. Let’s hope that he and Senator Grassley can elicit a more responsive reaction by administration officials than we’ve seen in the past. What is certain is that the men and woman who were killed, including Agent Jaime Zapata, as a result of the Justice Department’s and ATF’s negligence will never return to the warm embrace of their loved ones. If nothing else, let’s push for some measure of justice and accountability for those still alive.

Hat Tips: The Tea Party Immigration Coalition NCFreedom and NAFBPO

Several weeks ago, there was a fantastic analysis by Numbers USA’s press watchdog on the common misperception floated by reporters, as well as mass immigration enthusiasts, that immigration to this country is simply a response to supply and demand economics.

This canard is a favorite of libertarian open borders supporters, especially the consistently misguided Will Wilkinson.  Although I’m too sick to address this issue in any length at the moment, you can look forward to my deconstruction of the liberaltarian Wilkinson’s bizarre-and not very libertarian, truth be told-philosophy in the weeks ahead.

Stay tuned.