Wednesday, March 9, 2011

RICHEST MAN IN THE WORLD, MEXICAN CARLOS SLIM HELU, and Mexico's Exportation of Their Poor, Criminal & Pregant Over U.S. Borders


MEXICO’S CARLOS SLIM HELU, OF NARCOMEX, RICHEST MAN IN THE WORLD. IN FACT, THERE ARE MANY RICH MEXICANS BECAUSE MEXICO HAS LONG EXPORTED THEIR POOR, ILLITERATE, CRIMINAL AND PREGNANT OVER OUR BORDERS FOR OUR JOBS, FREE MEDICAL, AND WELFARE.

THERE ARE NOW 38 MILLION ILLEGALS IN OUR COUNTRY, HENCE ALL THE HISPANDERING FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES!

*



World's Billionaires 2011: A Record Year For New Billionaires

Carlos Slim Widens Lead Atop List; Newcomers Include Founders of Zynga, Forever21.



BY LUISA KROLL AND KERRY A. DOLAN

Mar. 9, 2011

This 25th year of tracking global wealth was one to remember. The 2011 Billionaires List breaks two records: total number of listees (1,210) and combined wealth ($4.5 trillion). This horde surpasses the gross domestic product of Germany, one of only six nations to have fewer billionaires this year. BRICs led the way: Brazil, Russia, India and China produced 108 of the 214 new names. These four nations are home to one in four members, up from one in ten five years ago. Before this year only the U.S. had ever produced more than 100 billionaires. China now has 115 and Russia 101.



Atop the heap is Mexico's Carlos Slim Helu, who added $20.5 billion to his fortune, more than any other billionaire. The telecom mogul, who gets 62% of his fortune from America Movil, is now worth $74 billion and has pulled far ahead of his two closest rivals. Bill Gates, No. 2, and Warren Buffett, No. 3, both added a more modest $3 billion to their piles and are now worth $56 billion and $50 billion, respectively. Gates, who now gets 70% of his fortune from investments outside of Microsoft, has actually been investing in the Mexican stock market and has holdings in Mexican Coke bottler Femsa and Grupo Televisa.

*

MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com



EXPORTING POVERTY... we take MEXICO'S 38 million poor, illiterate, criminal and frequently pregnant



........ where can we send AMERICA'S poor?





The Mexican Invasion................................................

Mexico prefers to export its poor, not uplift them



March 30, 2006 edition



http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0330/p09s02-coop.html



Mexico prefers to export its poor, not uplift them

At this week's summit, failed reforms under Fox should be the issue, not US actions.



By George W. Grayson WILLIAMSBURG, VA.



At the parleys this week with his US and Canadian counterparts in Cancún, Mexican President Vicente Fox will press for more opportunities for his countrymen north of the Rio Grande. Specifically, he will argue for additional visas for Mexicans to enter the United States and Canada, the expansion of guest-worker schemes, and the "regularization" of illegal immigrants who reside throughout the continent. In a recent interview with CNN, the Mexican chief executive excoriated as "undemocratic" the extension of a wall on the US-Mexico border and called for the "orderly, safe, and legal" northbound flow of Mexicans, many of whom come from his home state of Guanajuato. Mexican legislators share Mr. Fox's goals. Silvia Hernández Enriquez, head of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations for North America, recently emphasized that the solution to the "structural phenomenon" of unlawful migration lies not with "walls or militarization" but with "understanding, cooperation, and joint responsibility." Such rhetoric would be more convincing if Mexican officials were making a good faith effort to uplift the 50 percent of their 106 million people who live in poverty. To his credit, Fox's "Opportunities" initiative has improved slightly the plight of the poorest of the poor. Still, neither he nor Mexico's lawmakers have advanced measures that would spur sustained growth, improve the quality of the workforce, curb unemployment, and obviate the flight of Mexicans abroad. Indeed, Mexico's leaders have turned hypocrisy from an art form into an exact science as they shirk their obligations to fellow citizens, while decrying efforts by the US senators and representatives to crack down on illegal immigration at the border and the workplace. What are some examples of this failure of responsibility? • When oil revenues are excluded, Mexico raises the equivalent of only 9 percent of its gross domestic product in taxes - a figure roughly equivalent to that of Haiti and far below the level of major Latin American nations. Not only is Mexico's collection rate ridiculously low, its fiscal regime is riddled with loopholes and exemptions, giving rise to widespread evasion. Congress has rebuffed efforts to reform the system. Insufficient revenues mean that Mexico spends relatively little on two key elements of social mobility: Education commands just 5.3 percent of its GDP and healthcare only 6.10 percent, according to the World Bank's last comparative study. • A venal, "come-back-tomorrow" bureaucracy explains the 58 days it takes to open a business in Mexico compared with three days in Canada, five days in the US, nine days in Jamaica, and 27 days in Chile. Mexico's private sector estimates that 34 percent of the firms in the country made "extra official" payments to functionaries and legislators in 2004. These bribes totaled $11.2 billion and equaled 12 percent of GDP. • Transparency International, a nongovernmental organization, placed Mexico in a tie with Ghana, Panama, Peru, and Turkey for 65th among 158 countries surveyed for corruption. • Economic competition is constrained by the presence of inefficient, overstaffed state oil and electricity monopolies, as well as a small number of private corporations - closely linked to government big shots - that control telecommunications, television, food processing, transportation, construction, and cement. Politicians who talk about, much less propose, trust-busting measures are as rare as a snowfall in the Sonoran Desert. Geography, self-interests, and humanitarian concerns require North America's neighbors to cooperate on myriad issues, not the least of which is immigration. However, Mexico's power brokers have failed to make the difficult decisions necessary to use their nation's bountiful wealth to benefit the masses. Washington and Ottawa have every right to insist that Mexico's pampered elite act responsibly, rather than expecting US and Canadian taxpayers to shoulder burdens Mexico should assume.

*

DOES ANYONE THINK THAT AMERICA IS LESS POOR SINCE 2006 AS THE MEX OCCUPATION & WELFARE STATE HAS EXPANDED MONTHLY?



Unfettered Immigration = Poverty



By Robert Rector Heritage.org
May 16, 2006



This paper focuses on the net fiscal effects of immigration with particular emphasis on the fiscal effects of low skill immigration. The fiscal effects of immigration are only one aspect of the impact of immigration. Immigration also has social, political, and economic effects. In particular, the economic effects of immigration have been heavily researched with differing results. These economic effects lie beyond the scope of this paper. Overall, immigration is a net fiscal positive to the government’s budget in the long run: the taxes immigrants pay exceed the costs of the services they receive. However, the fiscal impact of immigrants varies strongly according to immigrants’ education level. College-educated immigrants are likely to be strong contributors to the government’s finances, with their taxes exceeding the government’s costs. By contrast, immigrants with low education levels are likely to be a fiscal drain on other taxpayers. This is important because half of all adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. have less than a high school education. In addition, recent immigrants have high levels of out-of-wedlock childbearing, which increases welfare costs and poverty. An immigration plan proposed by Senators Mel Martinez (R-FL) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE) would provide amnesty to 9 to 10 million illegal immigrants and put them on a path to citizenship. Once these individuals become citizens, the net additional cost to the federal government of benefits for these individuals will be around $16 billion per year. Further, once an illegal immigrant becomes a citizen, he has the right to bring his parents to live in the U.S. The parents, in turn, may become citizens. The long-term cost of government benefits to the parents of 10 million recipients of amnesty could be $30 billion per year or more. In the long run, the Hagel/Martinez bill, if enacted, would be the largest expansion of the welfare state in 35 years. Current Trends in Immigration Over the last 40 years, immigration into the United States has surged. Our nation is now experiencing a second “great migration” similar to the great waves of immigrants that transformed America in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In 2004, an estimated 35.7 million foreign-born persons lived in the U.S. While in 1970 one person in twenty was foreign born, by 2004 the number had risen to one in eight. About one-third of all foreign-born persons in the U.S. are illegal aliens. There are between 10 and 12 million illegal aliens currently living in the U.S.[1] Illegal aliens now comprise 3 to 4 percent of the total U.S. population. Each year approximately 1.3 million new immigrants enter the U.S.[2] Some 700,000 of these entrants are illegal.[3] One third of all foreign-born persons in the U.S. are Mexican. Overall, the number of Mexicans in the U.S. has increased from 760,000 in 1970 to 10.6 million in 2004. Nine percent of all Mexicans now reside in the U.S.[4] Over half of all Mexicans in the U.S. are illegal immigrants,[5] and in the last decade 80 to 85 percent of the inflow of Mexicans into the U.S. has been illegal.[6] The public generally perceives illegals to be unattached single men. This is, in fact, not the case. Some 44 percent of adult illegals are women. While illegal men work slightly more than native-born men; illegal women work less. Among female illegals, some 56 percent work, compared to 73 percent among native-born women of comparable age.[7] As well, Mexican women emigrating to the U.S. have a considerably higher fertility rate than women remaining in Mexico.[8] Decline in Immigrant Wages Over the last 40 years the education level of new immigrants has fallen relative to the native population. As the relative education levels of immigrants have declined, so has their earning capacity compared to the general U.S. population. Immigrants arriving in the U.S. around 1960 had wages, at the time of entry, that were just 13 percent less than natives’. In 1965, the nation’s immigration law was dramatically changed, and from 1990 on, illegal immigration surged. The result was a decline in the relative skill levels of new immigrants. By 1998, new immigrants had an average entry wage that was 34 percent less than natives.’[12] Because of their lower education levels, illegal immigrants’ wages would have been even lower. The low-wage status of recent illegal immigrants can be illustrated by the wages of recent immigrants from Mexico, a majority of whom have entered the U.S. illegally. In 2000, the median weekly wage of a first-generation Mexican immigrant was $323. This was 54 percent of the corresponding wage for non-Hispanic whites in the general population.[13] Historically, the relative wages of recent immigrants have risen after entry as immigrants gained experience in the labor market. For example, immigrants who arrived in the U.S. in the 1960s and 1970s saw their relative wages rise by 10 percentage points compared to natives’ wages during their first 20 years in the country. But in recent years, this modest catch up effect has diminished. Immigrants who arrived in the late 1980s actually saw their relative wages shrink in the 1990s.[14] Immigration and Welfare Dependence Welfare may be defined as means-tested aid programs: these programs provide cash, non-cash, and social service assistance that is limited to low-income households. The major means-tested programs include Food Stamps, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, public housing, the earned income credit, and Medicaid. Historically, recent immigrants were less likely to receive welfare than native-born Americans. But over the last thirty years, this historic pattern has reversed. As the relative education levels of immigrants fell, their tendency to receive welfare benefits increased. By the late 1990s immigrant households were fifty percent more likely to receive means-tested aid than native-born households.[15] Moreover, immigrants appear to assimilate into welfare use. The longer immigrants live in the U.S., the more likely they are to use welfare.[16] A large part, but not all, of immigrants’ higher welfare use is explained by their low education levels. Welfare use also varies by immigrants’ national origin. For example, in the late 1990s, 5.6 percent of immigrants from India received means-tested benefits; among Mexican immigrants the figure was 34.1 percent; and for immigrants from the Dominican Republic the figure was 54.9 percent.[17] Ethnic differences in the propensity to receive welfare that appear among first-generation immigrants persist strongly in the second generation.[18] The relatively high use of welfare among Mexicans has significant implications for current proposals to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants. Some 80 percent of illegal immigrants come from Mexico and Latin America.[19] (See Chart 1) Historically, Hispanics in America have had very high levels of welfare use. Chart 2 shows receipt of aid from major welfare programs by different ethnic groups in 1999; the programs covered are Medicaid, Food Stamps, public housing, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, General Assistance, and Supplemental Security Income.[20] As the chart shows, Hispanics were almost three times more likely to receive welfare than non-Hispanic whites. In addition, among families that received aid, the cost of the aid received was 40 percent higher for Hispanics than for non-Hispanic whites.[21] Putting together the greater probability of receiving welfare with the greater cost of welfare per family means that, on average, Hispanic families received four times more welfare per family than white non-Hispanics. 1. Part, but not all, of this high level of welfare use by Hispanics can be explained by background factors such as family structure.[22] It seems likely that, if Hispanic illegal immigrants are given permanent residence and citizenship, they and their children will likely assimilate into the culture of high welfare use that characterizes Hispanics in the U.S. This would impose significant costs on taxpayers and society as a whole. Welfare use can also be measured by immigration status. In general, immigrant households are about fifty percent more likely to use welfare than native-born households.[23] Immigrants with less education are more likely to use welfare. (See Chart 3) 1. The potential welfare costs of low-skill immigration and amnesty for current illegal immigrants can be assessed by looking at the welfare utilization rates for current low-skill immigrants. As Chart 4 shows, immigrants without a high school degree (both lawful and unlawful) are two-and-a-half times more likely to use welfare than native-born individuals.[24] This underscores the high potential welfare costs of giving amnesty to illegal immigrants. 1. All categories of high school dropouts have a high utilization of welfare. Immigrants who have less than a high school degree are slightly more likely to use welfare than native-born dropouts. Legal immigrants who are high school dropouts are slightly more likely to use welfare than native-born dropouts.[25] Illegal immigrant dropouts, however, are less likely to use welfare than native-born dropouts mainly because they are ineligible for many welfare programs. With amnesty, current illegal immigrants’ welfare use would likely rise to the level of lawful immigrants with similar education levels. Illegal Immigration and Poverty 1. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, 4.7 million children of illegal immigrant parents currently live in the U.S.[26] Some 37 percent of these children are poor.[27] While children of illegal immigrant parents comprise around 6 percent of all children in the U.S., they are 11.8 percent of all poor children.[28] This high level of child poverty among illegal immigrants in the U.S. is, in part, due to low education levels and low wages. It is also linked to the decline in marriage among Hispanics in the U.S. Within this group, 45 percent of children are born out-of-wedlock.[29] (See Table 1.) Among foreign-born Hispanics the rate is 42.3 percent.[30] By contrast, the out-of-wedlock birth rate for non-Hispanic whites is 23.4 percent.[31] The birth rate for Hispanic teens is higher than for black teens.[32] While the out-of-wedlock birth rate for blacks has remained flat for the last decade, it has risen steadily for Hispanics.[33] These figures are important because, as noted, some 80 percent of illegal aliens come from Mexico and Latin America.[34] In general, children born and raised outside of marriage are seven times more likely to live in poverty than children born and raised by married couples. Children born out-of-wedlock are also more likely to be on welfare, to have lower educational achievement, to have emotional problems, to abuse drugs and alcohol, and to become involved in crime.[35] 5. Poverty is also more common among adult illegal immigrants, who are twice as likely to be poor as are native-born adults. Some 27 percent of all adult illegal immigrants are poor, compared to 13 percent of native-born adults.[36] Economic and Social Assimilation of Illegal Immigrant Offspring One important question is the future economic status of the children and grandchildren of current illegal immigrants, assuming those offspring remain in the U.S. While we obviously do not have data on future economic status, we may obtain a strong indication of future outcomes by examining the educational attainment of offspring of recent Mexican immigrants. Some 57 percent of current illegal immigrants come from Mexico, and about half of Mexicans currently in the U.S. are here illegally.[37] First-generation Mexican immigrants are individuals born in Mexico who have entered the U.S. In 2000, some 70 percent of first-generation Mexican immigrants (both legal and illegal) lacked a high school degree. Second-generation Mexicans may be defined as individuals born in the U.S. who have at least one parent born in Mexico. Second-generation Mexican immigrants (individuals born in the U.S. who have at least one parent born in Mexico) have greatly improved educational outcomes but still fall well short of the general U.S. population. Some 25 percent of second-generation Mexicans in the U.S. fail to complete high school. By contrast, the high school drop out rate is 8.6 percent among non-Hispanic whites and 17.2 percent among blacks. Critically, the educational attainment of third-generation Mexicans (those of Mexican ancestry with both parents born in the U.S.) improves little relative to the second generation. Some 21 percent of third-generation Mexicans are high school drop outs.[38] Similarly, the rate of college attendance among second-generation Mexicans is lower than for black Americans and about two-thirds of the level for non-Hispanic whites; moreover, college attendance does not improve in the third generation.[39] These data indicate that the offspring of illegal Hispanic immigrants are likely to have lower rates of educational attainment and higher rates of school failure compared to the non-Hispanic U.S. population. High rates of school failure coupled with high rates of out-of-wedlock childbearing are strong predictors of future poverty and welfare dependence. Immigration and Crime Historically, immigrant populations have had lower crime rates than native-born populations. For example, in 1991, the overall crime and incarceration rate for non-citizens was slightly lower than for citizens.[40] On the other hand, the crime rate among Hispanics in the U.S. is high. Age-specific incarceration rates (prisoners per 100,000 residents in the same age group in the general population) among Hispanics in federal and state prisons are two to two-and-a-half times higher than among non-Hispanic whites.[41] Relatively little of this difference appears to be due to immigration violations.[42] Illegal immigrants are overwhelmingly Hispanic. It is possible that, over time, Hispanic immigrants and their children may assimilate the higher crime rates that characterize the low-income Hispanic population in the U.S. as a whole.[43] If this were to occur, then policies that would give illegal immigrants permanent residence through amnesty, as well as policies which would permit a continuing influx of hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants each year, would increase crime in the long term. The Fiscal Impact of Immigration One important question is the fiscal impact of immigration (both legal and illegal). Policymakers must ensure that the interaction of welfare and immigration policy does not expand the welfare-dependent popula_?tion, which would hinder rather than help immi_?grants and impose large costs on American society. This means that immigrants should be net contributors to government: the taxes they pay should exceed the cost of the benefits they receive. In calculating the fiscal impact of an individual or family, it is necessary to distinguish between public goods and private goods. Public goods do not require additional spending to accommodate new residents.[44] The clearest examples of government public goods are national defense and medical and scientific research. The entry of millions of immigrants will not raise costs or diminish the value of these public goods to the general population. Other government services are private goods; use of these by one person precludes or limits use by another. Government private goods include direct personal benefits such as welfare, Social Security benefits, Medicare, and education. Other government private goods are “congestible” goods.[45] These are services that must be expanded in proportion to the population. Government congestible goods include police and fire protection, roads and sewers, parks, libraries, and courts. If these services do not expand as the population expands, there will be a decrease in the quality of service. An individual makes a positive fiscal contribution when his total taxes paid exceed the direct benefits and congestible goods received by himself and his family.[46] The Fiscal Impact of Low Skill Immigration The 1997 New Americans study by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) examined the fiscal impact of immigration.[47] It found that, within in a single year, the fiscal impact of foreign-born households was negative in the two states studied, New Jersey and California.[48] Measured over the course of a lifetime, the fiscal impact of first-generation immigrants nationwide was also slightly negative.[49] However, when the future earnings and taxes paid by the offspring of the immigrant were counted, the long-term fiscal impact was positive. One commonly cited figure from the report is that the net present value (NPV) of the fiscal impact of the average recent immigrant and his descendents is $83,000.[50] There are five important caveats about the NAS longitudinal study and its conclusion that in the long term the fiscal impact of immigration is positive. First, the study applies to all recent immigration, not just illegal immigration. Second, the finding that the long-term fiscal impact of immigration is positive applies to the population of immigrants as a whole, not to low-skill immigrants alone. Third, the $83,000 figure is based on the predicted earnings, tax payments, and benefits of an immigrant’s descendents over the next 300 years.[51] Fourth, the study does not take into account the growth in out-of-wedlock childbearing among the foreign-born population, which will increase future welfare costs and limit the upward mobility of future generations. Fifth, the assumed educational attainment of the children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren of immigrants who are high school dropouts or high school graduates seems unreasonably high given the actual attainment of the offspring of recent Mexican and Hispanic immigrants.[52] The NAS study’s 300-year time horizon is highly problematic. Three hundred years ago, the United States did not even exist and British colonists had barely reached the Appalachian Mountains. We cannot reasonably estimate what taxes and benefits will be even 30 years from now, let alone 300. The NAS study assumes that most people’s descendents will eventually regress to the social and economic mean, and thus may make a positive fiscal contribution, if the time horizon is long enough. With similar methods, it seems likely that out-of-wedlock childbearing could be found to have a net positive fiscal value as long as assumed future earnings are projected out 500 or 600 years. Slight variations to NAS’s assumptions used by NAS greatly affect the projected outcomes. For example, limiting the time horizon to 50 years and raising the assumed interest rate from 3 percent to 4 percent drops the NPV of the average immigrant from around $80,000 to $8,000.[53] Critically, the NAS projections assumed very large tax increases and benefits cuts would begin in 2016 to prevent the federal deficit from rising further relative to GDP. This assumption makes it far easier for future generations to be scored as fiscal contributors. If these large tax hikes and benefit cuts do not occur, then the long-term positive fiscal value of immigration evaporates.[54] Moreover, if future tax hikes and benefit cuts do occur, the exact nature of those changes would likely have a large impact on the findings; this issue is not explored in the NAS study. Critically, the estimated net fiscal impact of the whole immigrant population has little bearing on the fiscal impact of illegal immigrants, who are primarily low-skilled. As noted, at least 50 percent of illegal immigrants do not have a high school degree. As the NAS report states, “[S]ome groups of immigrants bring net fiscal benefits to natives and others impose net fiscal costs [I]mmigrants with certain characteristics, such as the elderly and those with little education, may be quite costly.”[55] The NAS report shows that the long-term fiscal impact of immigrants varies dramatically according to the education level of the immigrant. The fiscal impact of immigrants with some college education is positive. The fiscal impact of immigrants with a high school degree varies according to the time horizon used. The fiscal impact of immigrants without a high school degree is negative: benefits received will exceed taxes paid. The net present value of the future fiscal impact of immigrants without a high school degree is negative even when the assumed earnings and taxes of descendents over the next 300 years are included in the calculation.[56] A final point is that the NAS study’s estimates assume that low skill immigration does not reduce the wages of native-born low-skill workers. If low-skill immigration does, in fact, reduce the wages of native-born labor, this would reduce taxes paid and increase welfare expenditures for that group. The fiscal, social, and political implications could be quite large. The Cost of Amnesty Federal and state governments currently spend over $500 billion per year on means-tested welfare benefits.[57] Illegal aliens are ineligible for most federal welfare benefits but can receive some assistance through programs such as Medicaid, In addition, native-born children of illegal immigrant parents are citizens and are eligible for all relevant federal welfare benefits. Granting amnesty to illegal aliens would have two opposing fiscal effects. On the one hand, it may raise wages and taxes paid by broadening the labor market individuals compete in; it would also increase tax compliance and tax receipts as more work would be performed “on the books,”[58] On the other hand, amnesty would greatly increase the receipt of welfare, government benefits, and social services. Because illegal immigrant households tend to be low-skill and low-wage, the cost to government could be considerable. The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has performed a thorough study of the federal fiscal impacts of amnesty.[59] This study found that illegal immigrant households have low education levels and low wages and currently pay little in taxes. Illegal immigrant households also receive lower levels of federal government benefits. Nonetheless, the study also found that, on average, illegal immigrant families received more in federal benefits than they paid in taxes.[60] Granting amnesty would render illegal immigrants eligible for federal benefit programs. The CIS study estimated the additional taxes that would be paid and the additional government costs that would occur as a result of amnesty. It assumed that welfare utilization and tax payment among current illegal immigrants would rise to equal the levels among legally-admitted immigrants of similar national, educational, and demographic backgrounds. If all illegal immigrants were granted amnesty, federal tax payments would increase by some $3,000 per household, but federal benefits and social services would increase by $8,000 per household. Total federal welfare benefits would reach around $9,500 per household, or $35 billion per year total. The study estimates that the net cost to the federal government of granting amnesty to some 3.8 million illegal alien households would be around $5,000 per household, for a total federal fiscal cost of $19 billion per year.[61] preference for entry visas. The current visa allotments for family members (other than spouses and minor children) should be eliminated, and quotas for employment- and skill-based entry increased proportionately.



CHINA'S ASSAULT ON TIBET - CONTACT CHINA'S AGENT IN CONGRESS, WAR PROFITEER, DIANNE FEINSTEIN OF SAN FRANSICO OR HIER HUSBAND, RICHARD C BLUM, CHINA'S MAN IN U.S.

Posted on Wed, Mar. 09, 2011




Commentary: China's atheist rulers plot endgame for Tibet

Tim Johnson
McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: March 08, 2011 02:44:56 PM



March is typically a tense month for Tibetans under the yoke of their Chinese rulers. It marks the anniversary of the Dalai Lama's 1959 flight into exile. Protests, like ones in 2008, typically erupt this month.



If any unrest occurs this year, few foreigners will be present. As in past years, China has shut the door to foreign tourism to Tibet this month, keeping the world’s eyes away. It wants no witnesses.



In reality, something more sinister is unfolding. China’s ruling party quietly plots the endgame for Tibet, scheming to handpick a docile reincarnation to the actual Dalai Lama and crush any hopes for greater freedom.



The current Dalai Lama, whom Tibetans believe is 14th in a line of reincarnations, will be 76 this year. He enjoys good health. His physicians tell him he has the body of a man in his 60s.



Yet the Dalai Lama is entering the twilight of a life of extraordinary achievement — and a measure of failure. From humble beginnings in a nomadic home, the Dalai Lama has arisen as a universal moral figure transcending Tibetan Buddhism.



He encourages interfaith harmony, preaching a message of warm-hearted, loving compassion for family and community. Millions of people flock to hear him speak. His charisma unsettles China’s leaders.



Despite his renown, and the publicity he has brought to the plight of the world’s 5.5 million Tibetans, the Dalai Lama has failed to improve the lives of Tibetans under China’s stranglehold, living in conditions that ensure their identity will grow evermore diluted and weak.



China’s Communist leaders struggle to block the revolutions shaking the Arab world from infecting their own restive minorities, particularly the Tibetans, whose high-mountain homeland holds precious water in the form of glaciers that feed Asia’s mightiest rivers.



And they patiently await the Dalai Lama’s death. Once he dies, their plan is to dictate the terms of reincarnation, handpicking a youngster as a reincarnated Dalai Lama compliant to their interests.



Party leaders announced in mid-2007 that they held sole power to approve any reincarnation of the Dalai Lama. They offered no religious basis, saying only that it was important to halt the influence of people from “outside the country.”



Clearly they do not want Tibetan exiles, including the Dalai Lama, to have a say in his own reincarnation or for a future Dalai Lama to be born outside of China’s borders.



For his part, the Dalai Lama says Tibetans are free to break with tradition. They may decide if a reincarnation should occur, even if it might be a girl. In another twist, he says an obscure esoteric practice might allow a reincarnation to be found before he himself dies. The only condition is that the reincarnation must be born in freedom outside China.



On Monday (March 7), the party’s governor in Tibet, Padma Choling, shed new light on Beijing’s plans. During the annual meeting of the Chinese legislature, he said the Dalai Lama would not be allowed to break with tradition or single-handedly abolish the institution of reincarnation.



“It's impossible, that's what I think,” Padma Choling said, according to Reuters. “We must respect the historical institutions and religious rituals of Tibetan Buddhism.”



Party leaders claim that one of those rituals involves drawing lots from a golden urn with the names of candidates to serve as the 15th Dalai Lama. Some versions say the names will be held in sealed silk purses. Others suggest that the names will be on slips of paper inside molded balls of roasted barley. How easy will it be to ensure that China’s favored candidate is selected? China is a space-faring nation, and it won’t be rocket science.



When Padma Choling says Tibetans must “respect … religious rituals,” what he means is that China must be allowed to rig the process.



China’s atheist Communist leaders now view themselves as arbiters of religious rituals as esoteric as reincarnation — as if they had meditated on Buddhist texts while reading Marx’s Das Kapital and Mao’s Little Red Book.



In the end, it’s all about control. The party wants to dilute Tibetan culture, and ensure that all Tibetan high lamas, particularly the Dalai Lama, no longer represent a threat to its monopoly on power.



You can bet a molded ball of roasted barley on that.



ABOUT THE WRITER



Tim Johnson, a former Beijing bureau chief for McClatchy Newspapers, is the author of the recently released Tragedy in Crimson: How the Dalai Lama Conquered the World but Lost the Battle with China (Nation Books).

FORECLOSURES - Obama & His Bankster Donors Assault on America

FEW POLITICIANS IN AMERICAN HISTORY HAVE TAKEN MORE BRIBES FROM BANKSTERS THAN OBAMA!


THEN HE SURROUNDED HIMSELF WITH THE BANKSTERS’ SERVANTS, LIKE TIM GEITHNER, CHRIS DODD, BARNEY FRANK, AND HIS BIG DONOR, BUSH WAR PROFITEER, DIANNE FEINSTEIN!

OBAMA IS THE CULTURE OF CORRUPTION, AND THIS ONLY THING THIS MAN DOES WELL IS DRESS UP TO PLAY A LATTER DAY RONNIE REAGAN, “POPULIST” MAN OF “CHANGE”.

OBAMA IS A FRAUD!





Posted on Tue, Mar. 08, 2011

House Republicans: Failing mortgage-aid programs should go

Barbara Barrett
McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: March 08, 2011 06:00:37 PM

WASHINGTON — A handful of foreclosure prevention measures run by the Obama administration are so ineffectual, inefficient and complicated that, according to Republicans in the House of Representatives, the programs should be killed outright.

The House is scheduled to vote this week on getting rid of a refinance program for Federal Housing Administration loans and another program, scheduled to begin next month, that would help homeowners with delinquent payments.

The House Financial Services Committee is expected to vote Wednesday morning on ending two other measures: One of them is a massive effort that was designed to adjust up to 4 million mortgages but so far has tackled just half a million successfully. The other is the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, which steers money to communities hit hard by foreclosures.

The Treasury Department and many Democrats argue, though, that the programs — though flawed — are fixable, and consumer advocates say the measures offer the last, best hope for many struggling families.

"It's all we have," said Hazel Mack-Hilliard, the director of the mortgage foreclosure project with Legal Aid of North Carolina. "To have nothing and just say let the lenders do it, that's worse than nothing."

The bills' chances of becoming law are slight, because Democrats control the Senate and the Obama administration supports the programs. But Republicans say their effort will shine a light on inefficient programs that they say aren't working and, in the worst cases, do more harm than good.

Altogether, killing the programs could save the federal government a few billion dollars. But the real problem, said Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., is that families sometimes are hurt more than they're helped. McHenry will read from constituents' stories at Wednesday's committee meeting, telling of how homeowners were strung out on the hope of receiving mortgage modifications only to be told eventually that they didn't qualify.

In the meantime, he said, they've exhausted their savings, killed their credit and lost places to live.

"It's just heartbreaking stuff," McHenry said. He's sponsored the HAMP Termination Act, which aims to kill the Home Affordable Modification Program.

Through that program, the government pays banks and other servicers to adjust mortgages voluntarily. But of nearly $30 billion allocated to HAMP, only $1 billion has been spent.

Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the modification programs through the Troubled Asset Relief Program, told Congress last week that "HAMP has been beset by problems from the outset and, despite frequent retooling, continues to fall woefully short of meeting its original expectations."

He blamed the Treasury Department for refusing to adopt "meaningful goals and benchmarks" for the program, but he stopped short of saying the Home Affordable Modification Program should be shuttered altogether.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told Congress in separate testimony last week that he wants to keep the program.

The mortgage crisis isn't going away. Despite other signs of economic recovery, foreclosure filings across the country continue at a record pace. RealtyTrac, which tracks foreclosures around the U.S., predicts that filings will increase another 20 percent this year, topping 3 million, according to Barofsky's testimony.

Republicans' efforts to kill the assistance programs come as mortgage servicers are under congressional investigation for what Democrats describe as foreclosure fraud, robo-signing and other abuses.

At a hearing Tuesday in his home city of Baltimore, Rep. Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the House oversight committee, described the foreclosure crisis as a "wrecking ball" through the nation's communities.

Cummings said he was seeking documents from 10 mortgage-servicing companies: Bank of America, Wells Fargo & Co., JPMorgan Chase & Co., CitiMortgage Inc., Ally Bank/Residential Capital LLC, U.S. Bank Home Mortgage, SunTrust Bank, PHH Mortgage, PNC Mortgage/National City and MetLife Home Loans.

A report last month from the Congressional Research Service said servicers often had financial incentives to move ahead with foreclosures rather than modify mortgages, even when it wasn't in the best interests of the investors in the mortgages.

On Wednesday, the House is scheduled to begin debate on two measures: to kill the FHA Refinance Program and the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program.

The first, designed to refinance homes purchased under FHA loans, has resulted in the refinancings of just 22 homes as of the end of December, according to the Congressional Research Service. The second, meant to help homeowners who face delinquent payments, is scheduled to begin next month.

Votes in the full House are expected by the end of the week.

The other two bills — the HAMP Termination Act and the National Stabilization Program Termination Act — are expected to pass committee votes Wednesday. They could come to the House floor within a month.

*

The economic crisis was an 'inside job'

By Kathleen Parker

Wednesday, October 13, 2010; A19

If you haven't been humming tunes from "Les Misérables," you haven't seen "Inside Job," the new documentary about how our economic crisis evolved.

The most forgiving American will want to seize a pitchfork and march on Wall Street. Or Harvard Square. Or in front of the White House. There are so many despicable parties, it's hard to pick a favorite. Is it time to reconsider the Axis of Evil?

The film, written and directed by Charles Ferguson (and narrated by Matt Damon), will be opening in select cities this week. Although much of the story is familiar, Ferguson manages to weave together decades of bits and pieces into a dramatic narrative that plays like a whodunit. Names have faces, and storytelling combined with graphic illustrations helps explain the complex series of events that led to the global meltdown. Here are a few takeaways:

One, trying to assign blame to either Democrats or Republicans is pointless. Everyone is culpable. From the early 1980s, when Ronald Reagan deregulated banks, through the two Bushes, Bill Clinton and now Barack Obama, each administration has endorsed -- and each Congress has helped tweak -- laws and rules that made systemic abuses and the meltdown not only possible but, looking back, inevitable.

Two, many investment bankers knew the mortgage loans they were packaging and selling were junk. They knew because their own analysts told them so. Tens of thousands of loans failed to meet basic underwriting standards, according to recent testimony before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, a bipartisan group created to examine the causes of the meltdown. Not only that, Wall Street insiders were betting against their own customers and institutions.

Throughout the system, from the lending institutions to federal regulators to congressional overseers, those charged with protecting consumers averted their eyes.

Three, the cozy relationship between Wall Street and Ivy League academia, wherein economists push policies that benefit them financially, is eye-opening. In some cases, business professors and economists at America's top schools were shown to have conflicts of interest as they advanced policies for which they had been paid directly or that otherwise benefited them.

In other instances, we see that the same people who created policies that ultimately led to these abuses are still -- or were until recently -- running the show. Notably missing from the film, declining to be interviewed, are Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, Hank Paulson, Alan Greenspan and Robert Rubin.

This is not to say that what benefits Wall Street necessarily hurts average Americans or that all bankers are corrupt, but the system clearly enabled the abuses that have led to current circumstances. The attitude seemed to be that everyone was doing it.

When the big banks failed, of course, taxpayers were left holding the bag. Even though there was wide consensus that the bailouts were necessary to get credit moving again, there is simply no justification for the bonuses and golden parachutes that went to the very people who drove their institutions -- and us -- off a cliff. Reward for failure was the best gig in town.

Although most of what the movie highlights is familiar, there's something jarring about seeing the culprits up close in all their taxpayer-subsidized, suntanned splendor -- their multiple estates and private jets juxtaposed against shuttered homes and unemployed Americans living in tents. Obscene is the word that comes to mind.

I'm not one to advance class warfare, and most Americans still want to preserve a market system that leaves open the possibility that they, too, can work hard and achieve wealth. But it's clear from "Inside Job" that the game has been rigged so that only a few were in positions to get rich at the expense of the middle class, not just here but globally.

The movie isn't perfect. One wonders what was left on the editing floor. Some of those interviewed, who dodged questions or gave unacceptable answers, also looked stupid. None of these guys is stupid.

And, at the end, Ferguson couldn't resist making an editorial comment as the camera panned the Statue of Liberty. "Some things are worth fighting for."

We get it. The film is so well done and presented so factually that no Hollywood prodding was needed. Anyone who sees this movie will be furious. Thus, the only remaining question is why some of these people aren't being prosecuted for fraud or at least shirking fiduciary duty.

It would seem as never before that the White House should hire a special prosecutor. Ferguson's movie, which the president and his economic team had best watch -- and soon -- could use a sequel: "The Perp Walk."



*

“Wells Fargo, for instance, which has leeched $25 billion in bailout money, bought an inadvertently hilarious full-page ad in The Times to whine about the junkets to Las Vegas and elsewhere it was forced to cancel because of public outrage.” --- Maureen Dowd, NYTimes



*

*

Obama’s phony banking “reform”

27 April 2010

Debate on the Senate version of the Obama administration’s bank regulatory overhaul is expected to begin shortly. The House of Representatives passed its banking bill last December.

Neither bill does anything to curb the power of the banks or limit their parasitic and socially destructive activities. What the media is calling the “most sweeping overhaul” of the banking system since the Great Depression in reality sanctions the ever greater monopolization of the financial system by a handful of Wall Street giants, imposes no limits on executive pay, and allows the banks and hedge funds to continue gambling on exotic and largely unregulated securities such as collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps.

The so-called bank “reform” is an exercise in mass deception—an attempt to placate popular hostility to the banks and provide the government with political cover while it continues to do the bidding of Wall Street.

The bills have been drawn up in the closest consultation with bankers and bank lobbyists. This collusion has been widely reported in the press and presented as a perfectly normal and acceptable fact of political life. The front-page lead article in Monday’s Wall Street Journal describes the intensive lobbying being carried out by billionaire investor Warren Buffet to alter the Senate bill’s provisions on derivatives.

Buffet, an Obama supporter, wants to exempt existing derivatives deals from collateral requirements in the current language of the bill—a change that would save him billions on his $63 billion derivatives portfolio. Both senators from his home state of Nebraska, one Democrat and one Republican, are championing his cause.

This is just one example of the web of corruption and bribery that extends from Wall Street to the White House and Capitol Hill. The banks have thus far spent $455 million lobbying Congress on the overhaul and handed out $34 million in 2010 election campaign donations, most of it to Democrats.

The circle of corruption includes the ratings companies such as Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s, which blessed toxic subprime mortgage-backed securities with triple-A ratings in return for fees from the banks they were rating, and government regulators who move seamlessly from regulatory offices to lucrative posts at the banks they were supposedly overseeing.

The colossuses of Wall Street amass their huge profits by means of fraud and swindling. Over the past few weeks systematic accounting fraud at Lehman Brothers has been exposed and the Securities and Exchange Commission has indicted Goldman Sachs for defrauding its clients in the run-up to the subprime mortgage crash. This is only the tip of the iceberg.

Obama’s so-called reform will do nothing to hold accountable the criminals at the head of the banks and hedge funds or break up the financial behemoths that exert a stranglehold on the economy. Instead, it will set up a mechanism to institutionalize government rescue operations of big financial firms to protect the interests of bank executives, shareholders and creditors, ultimately at public expense.

The lawless and reckless actions of Wall Street CEOs have had devastating consequences for tens of millions of people in the US and around the world. The wreckage left in the wake of the financial tsunami of 2008 is registered in millions of lost jobs, home foreclosures, utility shutoffs, and rising hunger, disease and poverty.

With the help of trillions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts, the bankers are making more money today than ever, even as schools are closed, libraries disappear and museums and opera houses are shuttered. There is, the people are told, “no money” for jobs or basic social services.

There is plenty of money. The problem is that it is concentrated in the hands of a financial aristocracy. The immense concentration of wealth among these individuals is not only morally repugnant, it is a menace to society. It is the result of the plundering of the social wealth to feed criminal appetites, at the direct cost of the productive forces.

During the rise of American capitalism as an industrial power, the vast fortunes of the corporate elite, while achieved through ruthless exploitation of the working class, were associated with the expansion of industry and the production of useful products. That is not the case with today’s financial elite. Its wealth is amassed on the basis of financial manipulation and outright fraud, linked to the destruction of the social infrastructure and industry.

The Socialist Equality Party advocates a policy that proceeds from the needs of the people and society as a whole, not the personal fortunes of the bankers and big investors. We call for:

• The criminal prosecution of bankers and speculators whose illegal actions contributed to the deepest economic crisis since the Great Depression. They must be held legally accountable and given appropriate sentences to prevent a recurrence of such practices.

• The expropriation of the wealth of the top bankers, hedge fund managers, traders and speculators. This would immediately free up several trillion dollars, money that could go to a public works program to provide jobs and rebuild the social infrastructure—schools, housing, clinics, libraries, cultural facilities, the energy system. This money could also be used to help provide relief to the victims of the economic crisis—to maintain full wages for those laid off, put a stop to foreclosures and utility shutoffs, provide full medical coverage.

• The nationalization of the banks and major financial institutions and their transformation into public utilities under the democratic control of the working population. This is a prerequisite for the rational and planned development of the economy and the allocation of resources to rebuild the social infrastructure, end poverty, raise living standards and overcome social inequality.

Only such a socialist program can break the grip of the financial aristocracy and liberate the productive forces for the benefit of society as a whole. It can be achieved only through the independent political mobilization of the working class against Obama, the two parties and big business, and the capitalist system that they defend.

Barry Grey

WSWS.org

Get on their free NO ADS E-NEWS!

*



MOVING TO MEXICO - THE VIEW FROM THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION

Title: MOVING TO MEXICO - MUST READ!




Read this today. Thought I'd share it with you. I'm sure pyrostevo won't mind, since he probably didn't make it up either.



Moving to Mexico



Dear Mr. President, Senate and House of Representatives:



I'm planning to move my family and extended family (18-20 mouths) into Mexico for my health, and I would like to ask you to assist me.



We're planning to simply walk across the border from the U.S. into Mexico , and we'll need your help to make a few arrangements.



We plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration quotas and laws. I'm sure they handle those things the same way you do here.



So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Calderon, that I'm on my way over? Please let him know that I will be expecting the following:



1. Free medical care for my entire family.



2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might need, whether I use them or not.



3. All Mexico government forms need to also be printed in English.



4. I want my kids to be taught Spanish by English-speaking (bi-lingual) teachers.



5. Schools need to include classes on American culture and history.



6. I want my kids to see the American flag on one of the flag poles at their school.



7. Please plan to feed my kids at school for both breakfast and lunch.



8. I will need a local Mexican driver's license so I can get easy access to government services.



9. I do plan to get a car and drive in Mexico, but, I don't plan to purchase car insurance, and I probably won't make any special effort to learn local traffic laws.



10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from their president to leave me alone, please be sure that every patrol car has at least one English-speaking officer.



11. I plan to fly the U.S. flag from my house top, put U S. flag decals on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any complaints or negative comments from the locals.



12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, or have any labor or tax laws enforced on any business I may start.



13. Please have the president tell all the Mexican people to be extremely nice and never say a critical things about me or my family, or about the strain we might place on their economy.



I know this is an easy request because you already do all these things for all his people who come to the U.S. from Mexico .

I am sure that President Calderon won't mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely.



Thank you so much for your kind help,



Sincerely, US Citizen & Taxpayer





Pyro.... PRICELESS.



The Mexican Army and the MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS - PARTNERED FOR OPEN BORDERS




Mexican Army corrupted and now largest Drug Cartel in Mexico

The Mexican Army is known to be corrupt and now is believed by many to be the biggest Mexican Drug Cartel of all.



Most U.S. law-enforcement officials working alongside of the Mexican Army and other Mexican law enforcement believe they are corrupt and very much involved in drug and human trafficking. Those same sources acknowledge the involvement at the highest levels of the Mexican military and lower level officers and the troops on the ground are being paid off by the other cartels and are directly now trafficking in the lucrative narcotics and migrant smuggling business on a national bases. In addition some human-rights organizations charge that Mexican soldiers, lacking in police training, have been increasingly involved in abuses including murder, rape, and forced disappearances. New York-based Human Rights Watch says accusations of abuse lodged with Mexico's National Human Rights Commission, an autonomous government agency, skyrocketed to over 2500 complaints in 2010 from just 182 complaints in 2006.



The Calderon administration now admits that corruption in Mexico's military has become an increasing problem as the army took the lead in fighting the country's powerful and rich Mexican Drug Cartels (MDC's), but stops short of acknowledging that the Mexican Army has become a Mexican Drug Cartel . President Felipe Calderón put the military on the front lines of the nation's drug war when he came to power in 2006. Since then, Mr. Calderón tried to quell a wave of violence using the army by taking over policing duties from corrupt police departments in parts of the country.



“Many Mexican police agencies along the border are in the pay of the narcotraficantes and the corruption extends to high-ranking key Mexican military officers.”



And “Drug cartels spend $500 million a year to pay off corrupt Mexican generals and police officials.”



Former Congressman Tancredo went on to say: “There’s no doubt Mexican military units along the border are being controlled by drug cartels, and not by Mexico City. The military units operate freely, with little or no direction, and several of them have made numerous incursions into the United States.”



Just recently the Laguna Journal and the U.S. Border Fire Report learned from a U.S. diplomatic cable, that a Mexican officer assigned to guard President Felipe Calderón was accused of leaking information to drug cartels in exchange for bribes, training hit men through a private security firm, and supplying military weapons to groups like the Los Zetas.



The document also said another official who worked for Calderón leaked a copy of the president's medical file to one of the cartels.



Concerning the accused military officer, "the cartels were using the information to avoid heightened security around the president, not to target him personally," said the document disclosed by online whistleblower Wiki Leaks.



The arrest represents the most serious security breach to date in the Calderon Administration and the Mexican Army. However, this news gathering organization has been told by U.S. Law enforcement that a full fledged investigation by the United States which involves the strong possibility that information leaked to the Zetas cartel by high ranking military personal within the inner circles of the Calderon administration may have lead and made it possible for the ambush and brutal murder and wounding of ICE's two agents last week.



The document classified secret identified the suspected officer as Mexican army Maj. Arturo González Rodríguez.



González also stands accused of leaking military intelligence, training MDC's hit men through a private security company and supplying military weapons to other MDC's, including los Zetas."



The Zetas are suspected of being involved in the Feb. 15 shooting assault on two Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in central Mexico, according to sources close to the investigation.



ICE Special Agent Victor Avila of El Paso was wounded, while ICE Special Agent Jaime Zapata of Brownsville died at the scene. They were assigned to liaison duties in Mexico.



Former ICE official Miguel Contreras said he was not surprised by the infiltration of cartel assets in Mexico's military and law enforcement.



"I was at a gathering in Mexico more than 20 years ago when the first commander of the Mexican Federal Judicial Police pulled out a copy of a DEA report that was about him and read it to us," Contreras said. "He told us he knew the DEA agent who wrote the report, and he also told us that 'whatever you do or write, we are going to know about it.' The DEA report he had was a sensitive document that someone had leaked to him."



The U.S. diplomatic cable dated Jan. 20, 2009, said that Mexican officials tried to downplay "the seriousness of the breach" related to the army officer's bribery case.



"The second unsettling aspect of the case is that González apparently had been on the cartel payroll since 2005, during which time he held different positions in the government," the U.S. cable said. "As he changed assignments, he was kept on as a cartel asset, and the nature of his involvement with the cartels changed."



The cable that originated in the U.S. Embassy in Mexico.



Also, "One source advised that Calderón's medical file was passed to a (drug cartel) by a corrupt member of Calderón's inner circle," according to the U.S. diplomatic cable.



This isn't the first time army officers have been linked to MDC's.



Despite such incidents, many Mexicans believe Mr. Calderón had little choice but to use the armed forces. Many of the country's 1,600 municipal and state police forces are corrupt and act as armed branches of Mexico's warring drug cartels, government officials say. Retraining Mexico's police to better deal with the threat will take at least a decade, officials say, during which soldiers will have to bear the main burden in the war against the drug cartels.



In the past, when the military has become involved in counternarcotics policy, it hasn't proved immune to corruption or human-rights abuses. Twelve years ago, Gen. Jesus Gutiérrez Rebollo, Mexico's newly named drug czar, was found to be working for a top drug trafficker; he is now in jail. A decade earlier, top Mexican military officials were implicated in a vast marijuana-trafficking operation whose discovery led to the torture and murder of U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agent Enrique Camarena.



The army, with its low salaries and high desertion rate, also has proved as vulnerable to corruption as police, who often have acted as hired guns for smugglers. Five Mexican soldiers, including a major, were indicted on charges of leaking information on their unit's movements to members of the Sinaloa drug cartel.



"The amount of money is huge," said Luis Garfias, a retired three-star general who said he fended off entreaties while stationed on the border in Mexicali . "You like women? You like alcohol? It's free for you. Completely free, and dangerous."



In the 1990s, then-President Ernesto Zedillo ordered the air force to chase drug flights and named an army general as the nation's top anti-drug officer.



That general, Jose de Jesus Gutierrez Rebollo, was later convicted on charges that he helped Amado Carrillo Fuentes, reputed head of the Juarez cartel.



"Mid-level Mexican Army Major Arturo González Rodríguez was arrested the week of December 21, 2008, for allegedly assisting Mexican drug trafficking organizations for ($100,000 U.S. dollars) a month.



"Based on statements from a former cartel member turned witness code-named 'Jennifer,' PGR (federal attorney general's office) has accused González of passing information related to the activities and travel plans of Mexican President Felipe Calderón to the Arturo Beltran Levya organization (ABLO).



http://www.allvoices.com/contributed...rtel-in-mexico



The Mexican Fascist Party of LA RAZA - AGENDA IS MEXICAN SUPREMACY, EXPANDED MEX WELFARE STATE, AND JOBS TO LA RAZA FIRST!


MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com

Go to http://www.MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com

*

“Wherever there’s a Mexican, there is Mexico!”... President Calderone. As an American living under Spanish speaking Mexican occupation, I would add to this “Where there’s a Mexican, there’s a violent Mexican gang!”

*

LA RAZA AGENDA: 3 Examples

Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council "They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over. . We are here to stay."



Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by Bill Clinton "California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave."



Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General We are practicing "La Reconquista" in California."

*

THE LA RAZA AGENDA

TAKEN FROM TRANSCRIPTS DATED 1995. MANY OF THESE LA RAZA POLITICIANS HAVE WON HIGHER OFFICES WITH THE VOTES OF ILLEGALS.



“WE WILL TAKE CONTROL OF OUR COUNTRY (U.S.) BY VOTE IF POSSIBLE AND VIOLENCE IF NECESSARY!”

Agendas of MEChA, La Raza, MALDEF, and Southwest Voter Registration Projects These are transcripts of live, recorded statements by elected U.S. politicians, college professors, and pro-illegal alien activists whose objective is to take control of our country "by vote if possible and violence if necessary!" 1. Armando Navarro, Prof. Ethnic Studies, UC Riverside at Latino Summit Response to Prop 187, UC Riverside, 1/1995

"These are the critical years for us as a Latino community. We're in a state of transition. And that transformation is called 'the browning of America'. Latinos are now becoming the majority. Because I know that time and history is on the side of the Chicano/Latino community. It is changing in the future and in the present the balance of power of this nation. It's a game - it's a game of power - who controls it. You (to MEChA students) are like the generals that command armies. We're in a state of war. This Proposition 187 is a declaration of war against the Latino/Chicano community of this country. They know the demographics. They know that history and time is on our side. As one community, as one people, as one nation within a nation as the community that we are, the Chicano/Latino community of this nation. What this means is a transfer of power. It means control."



“THE NEW LEADERSHIP OF THE AMERICAS... IS MEXICAN!”

“REMEMBER: (PROPOSITION) 187 IS THE LAST GASP OF WHITE AMERICA IN CALIFORNIA!”



2. ART TORRES

Art Torres, former CA state senator, currently Chair of California Democrat Party at UC Riverside 1/1995 "Que viva la causa! It is an honor to be with the new leadership of the Americas, here meeting at UC Riverside. So with 187 on the ballot, what is it going to take for our people to vote - to see us walking into the gas ovens? It is electoral power that is going to make the determination of where we go as a community. And power is not given to you -- you have to take it. Remember: 187 is the last gasp of white America in California. Understand that. And people say to me on the Senate floor when I was in the Senate, 'Why do you fight so hard for affirmative action programs?' And I tell my white colleagues, 'because you're going to need them.'"



“WE ARE NOT IMMIGRANTS THAT CAME FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY TO ANOTHER COUNTRY....WE ARE FREE TO TRAVEL THE LENGTH AND BREADTH OF THE AMERICAS BECAUSE WE BELONG HERE.”



3. Jose Angel Gutierrez, Prof. Univ. Texas at Arlington, founder La Raza Unida Party at UC Riverside 1/1995 "The border remains a military zone. We remain a hunted people. Now you think you have a destiny to fulfill in the land that historically has been ours for forty thousand years. And we're a new Mestizo nation. And they want us to discuss civil rights. Civil rights. What law made by white men to oppress all of us of color, female and male. This is our homeland. We cannot - we will not- and we must not be made illegal in our own homeland. We are not immigrants that came from another country to another country. We are migrants, free to travel the length and breadth of the Americas because we belong here. We are millions. We just have to survive. We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It's a matter of time. The explosion is in our population."



“WE HAVE TO BAND TOGETHER, AND THAT MEANS LATINOS IN FLORIDA, CUBAN-AMERICANS, MEXICAN-AMERICAS, PUERTO RICANS, SOUTH AMERICANS, WE HAVE TO NETWORK BETTER......”

BILL RICHARDSON. WE ALL WERE WITNESS TO OBAMA, ALWAYS THE HISPANDERER, ATTEMPT TO PUT RICHARDSON IN HIS CABINET TO SIGNAL THE ILLEGALS THAT AMNESTY WAS COMING. LIKE MOST HISPANIC POLITICIANS, RICHARDSON WAS TOO CORRUPT TO PASS EVEN THE CORRUPT CONGRESS AND WITHDREW HIS NOMINATION.

4. Bill Richardson, New Mexico Governor, former U.S. Congressman, U.N. Ambassador, U.S. Secretary of Energy interviewed on radio Latino USA responding to Congressional Immigration Reform legislation in 1996 "There are changing political times where our basic foundations and programs are being attacked, illegal and legal immigration are being unfairly attacked. We have to band together, and that means Latinos in Florida, Cuban-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Puerto Ricans, South Americans, we have to network better - we have to be more politically minded, we have to put aside party and think of ourselves as Latinos, as Hispanics more than we have in the past."





“WE’RE GOING TO TAKE OVER ALL THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS IN CALIFORNIA. IN FIVE YEARS THE HISPANICS ARE GOING TO BE THE MAJORITY POPULATION OF THIS STATE.... ANYONE THAT DOESN’T LIKE IT SHOULD LEAVE IT!”, Mario Obledo,

Mario Obledo, founding member/former national director of Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), former CA Secretary Health/Welfare on Tom Leikus radio talk show "We're going to take over all the political institutions in California. In five years the Hispanics are going to be the majority population of this state." Caller: "You also made the statement that California is going to become a Hispanic state and if anyone doesn't like it they should leave - did you say that?" Obledo: "I did. They ought to go back to Europe."



“WELCOME TO CALIFORNIA.. THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION STATE!”

6. Mario Obledo CCIR commentary on Mario Obledo: When CCIR, the California Coalition for Immigration Reform, erected a billboard on the California/Arizona border reading, "WELCOME TO CALIFORNIA, THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION STATE", Mario Obledo, infuriated, went to the billboard location and threatened to blow it up or burn it down. Even after this threat to deny American citizens their freedom of speech, President Clinton awarded Obledo the Presidential Medal of Freedom, America's highest civilian honor. CCIR question to Obledo: "Jose Angel Gutierrez said, 'We have an aging white America, they are dying, I love it.' How would you translate that statement?" Obledo: "He's a good friend of mine. A very smart person."



“THEY’RE AFRAID THAT WE’RE GOING TO TAKE OVER THE GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS AND OTHER INSTITUTIONS. THEY ARE RIGHT, WE WILL TAKE THEM OVER....”

7. Richard Alatorre, former Los Angeles City Councilman at Latino Summit conference in Los Angeles opposing CA Prop. 209 ending affirmative action in 9/1996 "Because our numbers are growing, they're afraid about this great mass of minorities that now live in our community. They're afraid that we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They are right, we will take them over, and we are not going to go away - we are here to stay, and we are saying 'ya basta' (enough!) and we are going to turn... and de... not elect or re-elect people that believe that they are going to advance their political careers on the backs of immigrants and the backs of minorities."



MEXICAN SUPREMACIST LA RAZA PARTY REP. FROM INLAND EMPIRE WHERE HE WORKS HARD TO THE EXPANSION OF THE MEXICAN OCCUPATION AND WELFARE SYSTEM.





“THE LATINOS ARE COMING... THE LATINOS ARE COMING!!! AND THEY’RE GOING TO VOTE!”



8. Joe Baca, former CA Assemblymember, currently member of Congress at Latino Summit Response to Prop 187 UC Riverside 1/1995 and Southwest Voter Registration Project annual conference in Los Angeles, 6/1996 "We need more Latinos out there. We must stand up and be counted. We must be together, We must be united. Because if we're not united you know what's going to happen? We're like sticks - we're broken to pieces. Divided we're not together. But as a unit they can't break us. So we've got to come together, and if we're united, si se puede (it can be done) and we will make the changes that are necessary. But we've got to do it. We've got to stand together, and dammit, don't let them divide us because that's what they want to do, is to divide us. And once we're divided we're conquered. But when we look out at the audience and we see, you know, la familia, La Raza (the family, our race), you know, it's a great feeling, isn't it a good feeling? And you know, I started to think about that and it reminded me of a book that we all read and we all heard about, you know, Paul Revere, and when he was saying, 'The British are coming, the British are coming!' Well, the Latinos are coming, the Latinos are coming! And the Latinos are going to vote. So our voices will be heard. So that's what this agenda is about. It's about insuring that we increase our numbers. That we increase our numbers at every level. We talk about the Congressional, we talk about the Senate, we talk about board of supervisors, board of education, city councils, commissions, we have got to increase out numbers because the Latinos are coming. Because what's going on right now, with 187, the CCRI (CA Civil Rights Initiative against affirmative action), and let me tell you, we can't go back, you know, we're in a civil war. But we need to be solidified, we need to come together, we must be strong, because united we form a strong body. United we become solidified, united we make a difference, united we make the changes, united Latinos will win throughout California, let's stick together, que si se puede, que no? (it can be done, right?)



“IF THEY’RE SUPPORTING LEGISLATION THAT DENIES THE UNDOCUMENTED DRIVER’S LICENSE, THEY DON’T BELONG IN OFFICE, FRIENDS. THEY DON’T BELONG HERE!”

9. Antonio Villaraigosa, Chair of MEChA (student wing of Aztlan movement) at UCLA, former CA assemblymember, former CA Assembly speaker, currently Los Angeles City Mayor, and formerly Councilman at Southwest Voter Registration Project Conference in Los Angeles, 6/1997 "Part of today's reality has been propositions like 187 (to deny public benefits to illegal aliens, 1994), propositions like 209 (to abolish affirmative action, 1996), the welfare reform bill, which targeted legal immigrants and targeted us as a community. That's been the midnight. We know that the sunny side of midnight has been the election of a Latino speaker - was the election of Loretta Sanchez, against an arch-conservative, reactionary hate-mongering politician like Congressman Dornan! Today in California in the legislature, we're engaged in a great debate, where not only were we talking about denying education to the children of undocumented workers, but now we're talking about whether or not we should provide prenatal care to undocumented mothers. It's not enough to elect Latino leadership. If they're supporting legislation that denies the undocumented driver's licenses, they don't belong in office, friends. They don't belong here. If they can't stand up and say, 'You know what? I'm not ever going to support a policy that denies prenatal care to the children of undocumented mothers', they don't belong here."





GLORIA MOLINA, RACIST MEXICAN SUPREMACIST IS NOW ON THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. A HUGE PORTION OF THE COUNTY’S REVENUES ARE PAID OUT TO ILLEGALS. LOS ANGELES COUNTY CALCULATES THAT THE TAX-FREE MEXICAN UNDERGROUND ECONOMY IS ABOUT $2 BILLION PER YEAR AND GROWING FAST.



“I’M GONNA GO OUT THERE AN VOTE BECAUSE I WANT TO PAY THEM BACK!”

10. Gloria Molina, one of the five in Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors at Southwest Voter Registration Project Conference, 6/1996 "This community is no longer going to stand for it. Because tonight we are organizing across this country in a single mission, in a plan. We are going to organize like we've never organized before. We are going to go into our neighborhoods. We are going to register voters. We are going to talk to all of those young people that need to become registered voters and go out to vote and we're are politicizing every single one of those new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country. And what we are saying is by November we will have one million additional Latino voters in this country, and we're gonna march, and our vote is going to be important. But I gotta tell you, there's a lot of people that are saying, 'I'm gonna go out there and vote because I want to pay them back!' And this November we are going to remember those that stood with us and we are also going to remember those that have stood against us on the issues of immigration, on the issues of education, on the issues of health care, on the issues of the minimum wage."



“LONG LIVE OUR RACE!”



11. Vicky Castro, former member of Los Angeles Board of Education at Southwest Voter Registration Project Conference, 6/1996 "Que viva la raza, que viva la raza (long live our race)! I'm here to welcome all the new voters of 18 years old that we're registering now in our schools. Welcome, you're going to make a difference for Los Angeles, for San Antonio, for New York, and I thank Southwest for taking that challenge. And to the Mechistas (MEChA students) across this nation, you're going to make that difference for us, too. But when we register one more million voters I will not be the only Latina on the Board of Education of Los Angeles. And let me tell you here, no one will dismantle bilingual education in the United States of America. No one will deny an education to any child, especially Latino children. As you know, in Los Angeles we make up 70% of this school district. Of 600,000 -- 400,000 are Latinos, and our parents are not heard and they're going to be heard because in Los Angeles, San Antonio and Texas we have just classified 53,000 new citizens in one year that are going to be felt in November!"



“I STARTED THIS VERY QUIETLY BECAUSE THERE ARE THOSE THAT IF THEY KNEW THAT WE WERE CREATING A WHOLE NEW CADRE OF BRAND NEW CITIZENS IT WOULD HAVE TREMENDOUS POLITICAL IMPACT.”





“WE HAVE PROCESSED A LITTLE OVER 78,000 BRAND NEW CITZENS.”



12. Ruben Zacarias, former superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School District at Southwest Voter Registration Project Conference, 6/1997 "We have 27 centers now throughout LAUSD. Every one of them has trained people, clerks to take the fingerprints. Each one has the camera, that special camera. We have the application forms. And I'll tell you what we've done with I.N.S. Now we're even doing the testing that usually people had to go to INS to take, and pretty soon, hopefully, we'll do the final interviews in our schools. Incidentally, I started this very quietly because there are those that if they knew that we were creating a whole new cadre of brand new citizens it would have tremendous political impact. We will change the political panorama not only of L.A., but L.A. County and the State. And we do that we've changed the panorama of the nation. I'm proud to stand here and tell you that in those close to three years we have processed a little over 78,000 brand new citizens. That is the largest citizenship program in the entire nation."



“I HAVE PROUDLY AFFIRMED THAT THE MEXICAN NATIONAL EXTENDS BEYOND THE TERRITORY ENCLOSED BY ITS BORDERS....”



13. Ernesto Zedillo, former president of Mexico announcing the Mexican constitutional amendment allowing for dual citizenship on 6/23/97 "I have proudly affirmed that the Mexican national extends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders, and that Mexican migrants are an important - a very important part of it. For that reason my government proposed a constitutional amendment to allow any Mexican with the right as he desires to acquire another nationality to do so without being forced to first give up his or her Mexican nationality. Fortunately, the amendment was passed almost unanimously by our federal Congress and is now part of our constitution. I am also here today to tell you that we want you to take pride in what each and every one of your Mexican brothers and sisters are doing back home.



“WE’RE HERE... TO SHOW THE WHITE ANGLO-SAXON PROTESTANT L.A., THE FEW OF YOU WHO REMAIN, THAT WE ARE THE MAJORITY, AND WE CLAIM THIS LAND AS OURS, IT’S ALWAYS BEEN OURS, AND WE’RE STILL HERE, AND NONE OF THE TALK ABOUT DEPORTING. IF ANYONE’S GOING TO BE DEPORTED IT’S GOING TO BE YOU!”



“WE ARE THE MAJORITY IN L.A. THERE’S OVER SEVEN MILLION MEXICANS IN L.A. COUNTY ALONE.”

LA RAZA – “THE (MEXICAN) RACE”….

THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LA RAZA

1126 16th Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C.

202-785 1670

Get on La Raza’s email list to find out what this fascist party is doing to expand the Mexican occupation. NCLR.org

FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE MEXICAN WELFARE STATE, AND MEXICAN SUPREMACY

LA RAZA is the virulently racist political party for ILLEGALS (only Mexicans) and the corporations that benefit from illegals, and the employers of illegals. IT IS ILLEGAL TO HIRE AN ILLEGAL.

LA RAZA IS THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of AMERICA and has contempt for AMERICANS, AMERICAN PEOPLE, AMERICAN LANGUAGE, AMERICAN BORDERS, AMERICAN FLAG

LA RAZA does like the AMERICAN WELFARE SYSTEM. The welfare system in the country is so good that Mexico has dumped 38 million of their poor, illiterate , criminal and frequently pregnant over our border.





OBAMA'S ASSAULT ON THE AMERICAN WORKER - It's All About Keeping Wages Depressed With Hordes of Illegals


FROM HIS FIRST DAY, OBAMA HAS PUSHED FOR AMNESTY, NON-ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS PROHIBITING THE EMPLOYMENT OF ILLEGALS, SABOTAGED E-VERIFY, TAKEN BORDER GUARDS OFF OUR OPEN AND UNDEFENDED BORDERS, AND ASSAULTED LEGALS IN ARIZONA… all to keep the hordes of illegals flooding our borders which keep wages depressed.

BESIDES OBAMA, IT IS CORPORATE FASCIST, THE U.S. CHAMBER of COMMERCE along with LA RAZA DONORS IN THE FORTUNE 500 THAT WANT OBAMA’S AMENSTY OPEN BORDERS!

THE REASON WHY OBAMA WANTED DALEY AS CHIEF OF STAFF, IS THAT THE J.P. MORGAN BANKSTER CAN OPERATE BANKSTER BIZ OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE, JUST AS BUSH CHENEY OPERATED BIG BUSH-SAUDIS OIL, AND HALLIBURTION OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE, AND DALEY IS AN ADVOCATE FOR OPEN BORDERS!

IT’S ALL ABOUT KEEPING WAGES DEPRESSED.

*

WHICH SIDE OF THIS EQUATION DO YOU SEE OBAMA ON? THE AMERICAN WORKER, OR HIS WALL ST. BANKSTER DONORS AND LA RAZA?

*

“It is, instead, about power. What Mr. Walker and his backers are trying to do is to make Wisconsin — and eventually, America — less of a functioning democracy and more of a third-world-style oligarchy. And that’s why anyone who believes that we need some counterweight to the political power of big money should be on the demonstrators’ side.” PAUL KRUGMAN, NY TIMES

*



Wisconsin - it's about democracy

By Katrina vanden Heuvel

Tuesday, February 22, 2011;

As demonstrators in the tens of thousands flooded the Capitol in Madison, Wis., a sign captured the spirit: "I didn't think Cairo would be this cold." Even conservative Republican Rep. Paul Ryan saw the parallel: "It's like Cairo moved to Madison."

Got that right. As the demonstrations for workers' rights head into their second week, Madison has become ground zero in the battle for democracy in this country.

Don't fall for the dodge that this is about money, the pay and perks of public employees. This is about basic democratic rights, and the balance of power in America. This is a fight in which every U.S. worker has a direct stake.

Wisconsin faces budget deficits in the wake of the Great Recession, although not nearly as severe as in many states. In the 2010 election, Republicans captured control of the statehouse and both houses of the legislature. Scott Walker, the newly elected, self-declared "Tea Party" governor, signed off on tax cuts for businesses and then demanded harsh concessions from public employees, forcing them to pay more for pensions and health care. He coupled this with a direct attack on teacher and public employee unions, seeking to ram through legislation curtailing their right to bargain collectively, limiting any pay raise to the increase in the cost of living, and requiring an annual vote of members to continue the union. These measures aren't about the budget crisis; they are about eliminating the unions. And to make the power grab blatant, Walker exempted those unions - police and firefighters - that supported him in the last election. This is straight ugly, folks.

And it isn't limited to Wisconsin. Corporations and their right-wing allies have launched a final offensive against America's unions. With unions representing less than 7 percent of the private workforce, the target is public employee unions. With Republicans now in control of 21 states, hundreds of bills have been introduced seeking to cripple unions, if not ban them completely. States that are considering either weakening or removing entirely the ability of public-sector workers to bargain collectively include not only Wisconsin but also Ohio, South Dakota, Colorado, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire and Oklahoma. (See "Labor's Last Stand", Jane MacAlevey, the Nation, March 7-14, 2011.)

Unions, described by right-wing gadfly Grover Norquist as one of the "five pillars" of Democratic strength, have been central to the rise and fall of the American middle class. There is a strong correlation between states with right-to-work laws that outlaw majority rule on unionization, a worse quality of life for workers and a more hostile climate to any progressive cause. The average worker in a right-to-work state earns $5,333 less than his or her counterpart in a pro-worker state. Twenty-one percent more people lack health insurance in right-to-work states. In a country which, by some measures, suffers greater inequality than Egypt or Tunisia, the stakes in Wisconsin are high.

But they are more than economic. At stake is the strength of our democracy itself. The Supreme Court decision in Citizens United opened the floodgates for the money of corporations and billionaires to corrupt our elections. The unions provide virtually the only counterbalance for working Americans. It is no coincidence that America has grown more unequal and the middle class has declined as union representation has been weakened.

In Wisconsin, stunningly, workers drew the line. The public employee unions agreed to accept Walker's economic demands, but rallied against the union-busting provisions. State Democrats joined, leaving the state to block the vote on Walker's legislation and allowing the demonstrations to gain traction. Students and activists rallied to the workers' side. The demonstrations swelled to levels not seen since the Vietnam War protests. Yet other than former House speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), joined by the President Obama, national Democrats have been virtually invisible. More Green Bay Packers have spoken in support of the demonstrators than national Democrats.

The alternative press, the social media, MSNBC and other outposts of progressive journalism have been aflame with stories of the resistance. MoveOn, Organizing for America, the Campaign for America's Future and US Uncut, a new protest movement inspired by a recent article in the Nation, have called on activists to join.The resistance has spread. On Feb. 26, a national Day of Action is planned. The goal is to go after corporations - symbolized by Bank of America - whose tax avoidance contributes to the squeeze on basic social programs.

The teachers, nurses, police officers and public workers in Wisconsin, in the spirit of their progressive and populist forebears, have stood up against the assault on basic rights. Their fight poses a classic question: Whose side are you on? With basic rights at stake, it is time for outrage.

Katrina vanden Heuvel is editor and publisher of The Nation. She writes a weekly online column for The Post.

*

Obama Quietly Erasing Borders (Article)





Article Link:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=240045





CONTACT THE HISPANDERING LA RAZA PARTY PRESIDENT HERE:



You can contact President Obama and let him know of your opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/



*

UCLA PROFESSOR CALLS FOR MEXICAN REVOLT IN UNITED STATES

http://video.yahoo.com/watch/7165215?fr=yvmtf



*

Wake up America!!! Illegal Immigration has to be stopped. Take a look at this website and see where all your tax dollars are going: http://immigrationcounters.com/



See: CFR’s Plan to Integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada

http://www.proliberty.com/observer/20050816.htm The Great Alien Invasion - What's Happening Now http://www.rense.com/general69/inva.htm



*

WHEN BARACK OBAMA IS NOT SERVICING HS BANKSTER DONORS, WALL ST. INTERESTS, BENDING TO THE U.S. CHAMBER of COMMERCE, HE’S KISSING UP TO THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA!

No president has ever sold out the American worker for illegals than HISPANDERING BARACK OBAMA!

HE HAS ENDLESSLY PUSHED FOR DIFFERENT AMNESTY PLOYS, TALKED THAT ANTI-AMNESTY FORCES ARE “OUR ENEMY”, AND PROMISED ILLEGALS AMNESTY OR AT LEAST CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT, AS HE SABOTAGED E-VERIFY ALONG WITH HIS LA RAZA DEMS, REID, PELOSI, FEINSTEIN, AND BOXER… ALL ELECTED WITH THE VOTES OF ILLEGALS!

*



“PUNISH OUR ENEMIES”… does that mean assault the legals of Arizona that must fend off the Mexican invasion, occupation, growing criminal and welfare state, as well as Mex Drug cartels???



OBAMA TELLS ILLEGALS “PUNISH OUR ENEMIES”

Friends of ALIPAC,



Each day new reports come in from across the nation that our movement is surging and more incumbents, mostly Democrats, are about to fall on Election Day. Obama's approval ratings are falling to new lows as he makes highly inappropriate statements to Spanish language audiences asking illegal alien supporters to help him "punish our enemies."





*



The fastest growing political party in America is NOT the tea baggers! It is the Mexican Fascist Party of LA RAZA… “The Race”. .. The House now as 90 members, nearly one-quarter, that are CONGRESSIONAL HISPANIC CAUCUS pushing for AMNESTY, no e-verify, expanded sanctuary cities, open borders, and illegals voting!





*

WHY OBAMA WANTS WILLIAM DAILY…. OPEN BORDERS!



OBAMA HAS INFESTED HIS ADMINISTRATION WITH LA RAZA PARTY MEMBERS TO PUSH FOR AMNESTY, “CHEAP” MEX LABOR IN OUR JOBS TO KEEP HIS CORPORATE PAYMASTERS HAPPY AND GENEROUS, AND HAS TURNED OUR NATION’S SECURITY INTO Dept. Homeland Security = PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP!

ANYTHING TO KEEP THE HORDES OF ILLEGALS CLIMBING OUR BORDERS!

WILLIAM DAILY IS CLOSELY IDENTIFIED WITH BIG OBAMA DONOR, BANKSTER CRIMINALS J.P. MORGAN!

WHEN OBAMA GETS OUT OF BED, HE MARCHES FOR HIS BANKSTERS AND LA RAZA!

*

FROM CREOLE FOLKS



Obama Seeks Brother of "Chicago Mob Boss" for Top White House Post

The roaches and con-artist, fake journalist on cable news are all lying about William Daley being all this and all that, this man is an open borders, down with America, free trade globalist. MSNBC and Gretta "the Scientology" Van Susteren from Fox News are knowingly deceiving the public about D. Issa & his letter to "business owners"=which they made into such a BIG DAM DEAL, but no one says anything whenBarrack Hussein Obama, comes around with all of these shady bankers, hedge fund managers and Wall St. Tycoons, which he puts in his cabinet. All of Obama's meeting with Wall Street asking, "What can I do for you?" is never something covered by Keith Oberman or Rachel Maddow.

(Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama is considering naming William Daley, a JPMorgan Chase & Co. executive and former U.S. Commerce secretary, to a high-level administration post, possibly White House chief of staff, people familiar with the matter said.

Such a move, which is still under discussion, would bring a Washington veteran -- and someone with strong business ties -- into the administration as Obama sets out an agenda for the second half of his term while dealing with a Republican majority in the House of Representatives.

*

OBAMA’S PAYMASTERS:



Records show that four out of Obama's top five contributors are employees of financial industry giants - Goldman Sachs ($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207) and Citigroup ($358,054).

WILL THE BANKSTER-OWNED HISPANDERING PRESIDENT TURN AMERICAN INTO A THIRD WORLD NATION FOR EASIER EXPLOITATION OF WORKERS AND EVEN GREATER CONTROL OF THE ECONOMY BY HIS CORPORATE PAYMASTERS?

WHEN HAS OBAMA EVER STOOD UP TO HIS CORPORATE DONORS? IT SIMPLY HASN’T HAPPEN, NOR WILL IT!

*



http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/02/what_americans_think_about_inc.html



WHO SHOLD PAY FOR THE CRIMES OF BANKSTERS & THEIR BOUGHT POLITICIANS? - South Carolina governor threatens state workers’ pensions and health care

South Carolina governor threatens state workers’ pensions and health care

South Carolina governor threatens state workers’ pensions and health care


By Rosa Shahnazarian

9 March 2011

Republican Governor Nikki Haley announced her intention to cut state employee pension and health care benefits in a town hall meeting in Lexington, South Carolina last week. An attack of this nature has been a long time in preparation. Haley’s predecessor, Republican Governor Mark Sanford, proposed on multiple occasions the total elimination of the state’s pension system.





Haley did not outline a specific proposal, but claimed the $14 billion in retirement benefits due to state workers is unfunded. She said that under her plan existing retirees will continue to receive their promised benefits, but for new workers, she declared ominously, “We’re going to have to make some changes.”





“Everybody else is having to sacrifice and cut and, unfortunately, government employees are going to have to be part of that mix,” she claimed.





This declaration is a transparent attempt at dividing public and private sector workers to justify placing the burden of the state’s budget shortfall of $829 million on the working class as a whole. It is part of a broader assault on workers taking place in states across the country in the form of drastic cuts to the wages, health benefits and pensions of public employees, on top of devastating reductions in funding for education, health care and other vital social services.





South Carolina state workers have already been under sustained attack since the beginning of the recession in 2008 brought on by reckless Wall Street speculation. State workers have received no pay raises, and many have been laid off or have received pay cuts in the form of furloughs.





Traditionally state workers in South Carolina have received lower pay on average than workers in the private sector, in exchange for job security and superior benefits. For instance, between 2006 and 2008 private sector workers made 9.7 percent more than public sector workers, who were paid an average of $27,000; college educated state workers earned an average of $44,652, 18.8 percent less than their private-sector counterparts. However, most private-sector workers do not have pension plans at all, and at least 16.4 percent of state residents have no health insurance.





State workers pay between 29.8 and 33.5 percent of their health insurance costs, depending on whether they select family or individual plans, and 6.5 percent of their pay is automatically deducted and placed in the state pension fund.





The cost of the state health insurance plan is projected to increase by over $55 million in each of the next three years, and the retirement system has only 69.3 percent of what has been promised to state workers. The question is: who is responsible for these rising costs and who should pay the price?





As a recent perspective on the World Socialist Web Site demonstrates (The US states’ budget crisis: Where should the money come from?), the wealthy in the United States have more than enough wealth to cover the cost of all of the state budget shortfalls combined.





In South Carolina alone, a vast gulf separates state workers from the wealthy and corporate beneficiaries of state tax incentives. Early last year, the state Budget and Control Board unanimously supported a tax break and $270 loan package for Boeing Inc. to build an aircraft assembly plant in North Charleston. The loan is the largest the state has ever awarded to a private company.





Among the tax breaks awarded to Boeing is a 30-year fixed property tax rate of 4 percent, which is less than half the rate paid by most manufacturers in the state. Half of what the company pays in property taxes, or an estimated $50 million over the next 15 years alone, will be returned for site improvements.



This is in addition to $5.1 million in site improvement grants to be administered by Charleston County, and a $150,000 Charleston County traffic study for the area around Boeing’s 400-acre site. Local incentives will allow Boeing to claim a $2,500-per-employee break on its annual corporate tax bill, amounting to as much as $9.5 million per year when the plant is fully operational.





The Economic Development Competitiveness Act, a piece of legislation signed into law by Governor Sanford in June 2010, eliminated obstacles in the way of awarding similar windfall tax break packages to other corporations that bring their business to South Carolina.



On taking office, Governor Haley deemed several members of her staff worthy of pay raises. She awarded her chief of staff, Tim Pearson, an annual salary of $125,000, an increase of $27,000 compared to what Sanford paid his chief of staff. Swati Patel, Haley’s top lawyer, will receive a salary of $102,000 a year, an increase of 36 percent over the $75,000 a year that Sanford paid his top lawyer.





Wisconsin’s Governor Scott Walker, like South Carolina’s governor, is demanding huge cuts in state workers’ benefits, as well as the elimination most of their collective bargaining rights as part of his $3.6 billion deficit reduction program. South Carolina state workers already pay substantially larger portions of their income toward health care and retirement than Wisconsin state workers.





South Carolina has an overall unionization rate of 4.6 percent. Public sector workers are only 7.4 percent unionized and public sector unions do not have collective bargaining rights. Regardless of these differences, the attacks on state workers’ pensions and health care benefits are motivated by the same class interests in both states.







In response to a report on Haley’s plan in the online version of Columbia, South Carolina’s newspaper the State, one worker said, “Nikki Haley is a pawn of big business and corporations and will do for South Carolina what Governor Walker is trying to do for Wisconsin.”





Another worker said the attacks on state workers were “not working in Wisconsin, [and] won’t work in South Carolina.”





A third commented, “The pay sucks and the benefits often do too, but when you talk about cutting the benefit that is my own money this is going to be a fight.”





A rally in opposition to the attack on state workers’ benefits will take place at 1 p.m. this Saturday, March 12, outside the State House in Columbia.



.