It is always a disquieting psychological exercise to try to engage mindless advocates of a lawless, borderless society in Arizona, particularly the likes of Senator John McCain and Governor Janet Napolitano. In those two examples (and there are many others), self interest has closed off all clear-channel access to reason and common sense. Were I to debate one or both, I would need only to point out facts. For example, over 50% of all violent crime and over 70% of all property crime in the State of Arizona are directly attributable to illegal aliens; AZ has the highest auto theft rate in the nation and most stolen vehicles wind up in Mexico; drugs are being “muled" overland or inside tunnels across the border which directly harms AZ society and particularly our children; 50% of taxpayer funding of healthcare is being diverted to medical care for illegal aliens; 50% of state education dollars are being diverted to the education of illegal aliens; illegal aliens receive free education (no federal or state income and property taxes paid); illegal aliens receive taxpayer-subsidized instate tuition at universities; Phoenix has set up two court systems (one for Americans and one for Mexicans), the documented result of which is that Mexicans (illegal aliens) are receiving less punishment than American citizens for the same civil or criminal infractions; many illegal immigrants bring diseases that were mostly eradicated years ago; the next terrorist attack will likely be attributable to illegal entry across an unsecured border; and on and on - all facts, not opinions. Is there any counter argument that would justify continuation of the current border enforcement arrangement?

Does anybody think it is any different anywhere else, in another state? Because politicians intentionally obscure the huge burden illegal aliens impose by their disproportionate criminality, those politicians would feign surprise to learn that 95 percent of all outstanding warrants for murder in Los Angeles target illegal aliens. 75% of the people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens. Up to two-thirds of all fugitive felony warrants in L.A. are for illegal aliens. A California Department of Justice study reported in 1995, more than ten years ago, that the infamous 18th Street Gang (20,000 strong) is at least 60 percent illegal. Those numbers are far worse in LA today and growing in Arizona. Do you need more? According the LA Times, 40% of all workers in L.A. County (L.A. County has 10 million people) are working for cash and not paying taxes. This is because they are predominantly illegal immigrants, working without a green card. Over 60% of all births in Los Angeles County are to Hispanic females, most of which were subsidized by Medi-Cal and paid for by dwindling numbers of by taxpayers. Nearly 25% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal aliens. 21 radio stations in L.A. are Spanish speaking. In Los Angeles County, 5.1 million people speak English and 3.9 million speak Spanish (10.2 million people in LA County). Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops but 29% are on welfare. Over 70% of the United States annual population growth (and over 90% of California, Florida, and New York) results from immigration. The cost of immigration to the American taxpayer in 1997 was a NET (after subtracting taxes immigrants pay) $70 BILLION a year. That was ten years ago. Imagine what it is today! The lifetime fiscal impact (taxes paid minus services used) for the average adult Mexican immigrant is a huge budget-busting NEGATIVE.

It is estimated that 29% of the inmate population of Federal prisons are illegal aliens and 50% of those are active MS-13 members. In Arizona, as of March 2006, Mexican nationals totaled 11.6% of the inmate population of the AZ Department of Corrections. The inmate health care cost alone, per inmate to taxpayers, was in excess of $3000 each, added to the $50-$100 in expenditures per inmate per day, depending on the level of security needed at the prison or jail facility.

What do we have to look forward to? Mexico ranks number one in the world for disappearances of women, number two in the world for kidnappings for ransom (number one of countries not at war), number two in the world for the number of narco-cartels, and number three in the world for murders per capita. In 2004, 300,000 people rallied in Mexico City to protest kidnappings by criminal gangs, kidnappings that typically resulted in death to the captive even after a ransom had been paid. The police resolved less than one percent of these cases. Even when the criminals were jailed, they easily bought their way out of prison with collusion of prison officials. According to the World Economic Freedom Index, Mexico ranks 58th out of 123 nations in economic liberty (behind 10 other Latin American countries) and 88th in measures of legal structures and property rights.

Is this the future for Arizona citizens envisioned by Governor Janet Napolitano and Senator John McCain? How many victims of criminal rampage committed by illegal aliens will be enough? Would somebody please ask these two Mensa International rejects? (Mensa International is an organization for persons with high IQ’s.)

Few Americans who grasp the magnitude of the harm from illegal immigration being inflicted daily on America would argue with the assertion: Not one state or federal government priority should exist that is more important than stemming illegal immigration. To argue otherwise would be to dismiss a literal invasion and the incredible victimization of American citizens, not to mention the destruction of the American culture. Compounding the problem is weak national security (and none at the borders), desecration of the rule of law, and impediments to the War on Terror. To Governor Janet Napalitano, all of this is somehow less important than renaming Squaw Peak because the term "squaw" is offensive to the Native American population. The AZ State Legislature, while disgracefully asleep at the helm of state for a decade, finally awoke and passed numerous bills to counter illegal immigration in 2005 and 2006, only to have them vetoed or circumvented by Governor Janet Napolitano and her man-servant, the AZ Attorney General. Even voter initiatives limiting social services to illegal aliens has been ignored by the Governor and her staff. Phoenix Valley police departments, presumably at the behest of the state government and city councils, have mindlessly turned a blind eye to illegal immigration and associated crime for a decade, abandoning their own citizens in the process.

The welfare of American citizens should be paramount to every law enforcement officer and every elected citizen representative at every level of government. Were it not for self interest, it would be. Think of it this way – the best interests of every Arizona citizen is by definition what is in the best interests of the State of Arizona. Illegal immigration victimizes Arizona citizens. Since this is not difficult to understand, then realize that AZ citizens are being brutally sacrificed to illegal aliens, tortured both by taxation and crime, and discarded by their own elected representatives in exchange for Hispanic votes.

The AZ state government could divert literally millions, if not billions, to the issue of a wall construction and border enforcement if they wanted to, using only a tiny fraction of the monies currently expended on social services given to illegal aliens. However, the Governor and too many AZ politicians hope to be the beneficiary of 12 million votes of Hispanic illegal aliens - illegal votes today - but votes that will soon become legal votes through amnesty programs. Illegal immigration may victimize Americans, but it benefits Janet Napolitano and John McCain and many AZ legislators. If AZ citizens and their families were anything more than an irritant to the Governor, border enforcement would have begun when she first took office years ago.

Politicians want you to believe illegal immigration is a complex issue requiring thoughtful debate and decades of study. WHAT COULD BE DONE and should be done is to stop illegal immigration over night. According to the retired Deputy Director of the United States Maritime Defense Zone, Southern California, illegal immigration in the States of AZ and CA could be stopped in 24 hours, shut down tight, locked down, and without additional monies and without violence toward illegal aliens. He went on to say, “It's elementary school simple if AZ politicians wanted to stop deceiving their constituency and put the welfare of Arizona citizens and the United States ahead of themselves.”

However, I think you would agree that since past performance is an excellent predictor of future actions, it’s not going to happen anytime soon, and definitely not before another visit or two to the ballot box. Judging from the behavior of Governor Napolitano and President George Bush, it will take a citizen insurrection to stop illegal immigration. I suspect it is coming if the will of the people is not heard.

I would not be surprised to see both Senator John McCain and Governor Janet Napolitano be the first elected officials in the history of the United States to seek residency (political asylum) in another state after their term in office.

Remember this above all else. It is said we are a nation of immigrants. That is not remotely close to the truth. We are a nation of descendants of immigrants, and we are a nation of descendants of legal immigrants. We are a nation with a Constitution and laws. WE ARE NOT A NATION OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, nor are we a nation of descendants of illegal immigrants, nor are we descendants of immigration anarchists.

With illegal immigration so goes the U.S. Constitution and any possibility of the rule of law in America. It is that simple and those are the stakes in this “game” being played. Most Americans have not yet realized that politicians are playing for keeps and have no intention of allowing Americans to win – at anything except servitude and paying taxes.

There is very little difference between the French who collaborated with the invading Germans in World War II and AZ politicians today who are unwilling to protect their homeland and fellow citizens, and seek only to garner wealth and votes by selling their influence and votes to a hoard of Mexican invaders.

Red State Patriot

« Close It

James Bradley just happened to be in Washington, D.C. to speak at the memorial the following day. He was there that night to say good-night to his dad, who had previously passed away, but whose image is part of the statue. He was just about to leave when he saw the buses pull up. I videotaped him as he spoke to us, and received his permission to share what he said from my videotape. It is one thing to tour the incredible monuments filled with history in Washington, D.C. but it is quite another to get the kind of insight we received that night. When all had gathered around he reverently began to speak. Here are his words from that night:

"My name is James Bradley and I'm from Antigo, Wisconsin. My dad is on that statue, and I just wrote a book called Flags of Our Fathers which is #5 on the New York Times Best Seller list right now. It is the story of the six boys you see behind me. Six boys raised the flag. The first guy putting the pole in the ground is Harlon Block. Harlon was an all-state football player. He enlisted in the Marine Corps with all the senior members of his football team. They were off to play another type of game, a game called "War." But it didn't turn out to be a game. Harlon, at the age of twenty-one, died with his intestines in his hands. I don't say that to gross you out; I say that because there are generals who stand in front of this statue and talk about the glory of war. You guys need to know that most of the boys in Iwo Jima were seventeen, eighteen, and nineteen years old.

(He pointed to the statue) You see this next guy? That's Rene Gagnon from New Hampshire. If you took Rene's helmet off at the moment this photo was taken, and looked in the webbing of that helmet, you would find a photograph. A photograph of his girlfriend. Rene put that in there for protection, because he was scared. He was eighteen years old. Boys won the battle of Iwo Jima. Boys. Not old men.

The next guy here, the third guy in this tableau, was Sergeant Mike Strank. Mike is my hero. He was the hero of all these guys. They called him the "old man" because he was so old. He was already twenty-four. When Mike would motivate his boys in training camp, he didn't say, "Let's go kill the enemy" or "Let's die for our country." He knew he was talking to little boys. Instead he would say, "You do what I say, and I'll get you home to your mothers."

The last guy on this side of the statue is Ira Hayes, a Pima Indian from Arizona. Ira Hayes walked off Iwo Jima. He went into the White House with my dad. President Truman told him, "You're a hero." He told reporters, "How can I feel like a hero when 250 of my buddies hit the island with me and only twenty-seven of us walked off alive?"

So you take your class at school. 250 of you spending a year together having fun, doing everything together. Then all 250 of you hit the beach, but only twenty-seven of your classmates walk off alive. That was Ira Hayes. He had images of horror in his mind. Ira Hayes died dead drunk, face down at the age of thirty-two, ten years after this picture was taken.

The next guy, going around the statue, is Franklin Sousley from Hilltop, Kentucky, a fun-lovin' hillbilly boy. His best friend, who is now 70, told me, "Yeah, you know, we took two cows up on the porch of the Hilltop General Store. Then we strung wire across the stairs so the cows couldn't get down. Then we fed them Epson salts. Those cows crapped all night."

Yes, he was a fun-lovin' hillbilly boy. Franklin died on Iwo Jima at the age of nineteen. When the telegram came to tell his mother that he was dead, it went to the Hilltop General Store. A barefoot boy ran that telegram up to his mother's farm. The neighbors could hear her scream all night and into the morning. The neighbors lived a quarter of a mile away.

The next guy, as we continue to go around the statue, is my dad, John Bradley from Antigo, Wisconsin, where I was raised. My dad lived until 1994, but he would never give interviews. When Walter Cronkite's producers, or the New York Times would call, we were trained as little kids to say, "No, I'm sorry sir, my dad's not here. He is in Canada fishing. No, there is no phone there, sir. No, we don't know when he is coming back."

My dad never fished or even went to Canada. Usually he was sitting right there at the table eating his Campbell's soup, but we had to tell the press that he was out fishing. He didn't want to talk to the press. You see, my dad didn't see himself as a hero. Everyone thinks these guys are heroes, 'cause they are in a photo and a monument. My dad knew better. He was a medic. John Bradley from Wisconsin was a caregiver. In Iwo Jima he probably held over 200 boys as they died, and when boys died in Iwo Jima, they writhed and screamed in pain.

When I was a little boy, my third grade teacher told me that my dad was a hero. When I went home and told my dad that, he looked at me and said, "I want you always to remember that the heroes of Iwo Jima are the guys who did not come back. DID NOT come back."

So that's the story about six nice young boys. Three died on Iwo Jima, and three came back as national heroes. Overall, 7000 boys died on Iwo Jima in the worst battle in the history of the Marine Corps. My voice is giving out, so I will end here. Thank you for your time."

Suddenly the monument wasn't just a big old piece of metal with a flag sticking out of the top. It came to life before our eyes with the heartfelt words of a son who did indeed have a father who was a hero. Maybe not a hero in his own eyes, but a hero nonetheless.

The above-quoted article was first written in October 2000 by Wisconsin resident Michael T. Powers (whose name has been omitted from most of the Internet-circulated versions), transcribed from a videotape he made of a talk given by author James Bradley at the Marine Corps War Memorial in Arlington, Virginia. Bradley, whose father, John, was one of the six men pictured in the famous photograph of the flag-raising on Mt. Suribachi in February 1945 (and is thus depicted in the monument's sculpture), had earlier that year published Flags of Our Fathers, an account of the life stories of those six men.

This piece has been published in a number of books, including Powers' own Heart Touchers, as well as the compilations Chicken Soup for the Grandparent's Soul, God Allows U-Turns: American Moments, and Stories from a Soldier's Heart.

« Close It

While immigration was part of the population boom affecting all of the United States, Oregon suffered twofold, both from rising human migration and migration to the State of Oregon. The biggest part of the Oregon influx was the exodus of Americans from other states and localities (especially California) where 40 years of mass illegal alien migration created a gridlock congestion and catastrophic deterioration of lifestyle (crime and drugs) that Americans (and even immigrants) wanted out.

It was not an overstatement in 2006 to say that every community in America was in grave danger. Since then, the U.S. Senate, and Senator John McCain in particular, have succeeded in adding nearly 3 million people a year (new illegal alien migrants and births to migrants) in addition to the pre-existing 12-20 million illegal migrants, in a veritable tidal wave of humanity en route to participate in amnesty programs. California, Arizona, Illinois, Texas, Florida, New Jersey, New York and Washington DC, the prime destinations for immigrants, simply will no longer be able to provide the quality of life that most Americans crave. American citizens and immigrants will both seek relief in places like Oregon. In the process, states like Oregon have already deteriorated to the point that they no longer exist in a form that would be familiar to somebody who lived there at the time of the first Earth Day in 1970. The environmental trajectory in Oregon, and all other states as a result of unrestrained immigration, is that of a gliding anvil.

One only has to drive down the Oregon central valley during the middle of a weekday, or drive the highways of Phoenix, Arizona and experience clogged traffic and endless new subdivisions. If you have not visited Oregon for some time, imagine Portland, Salem and Eugene being connected into one long suburban mass, like the ugly megalopolises of California and the Mid-Atlantic corridor.

If you are of an environmental persuasion, you would be incredibly saddened to see the march of sub-divisions in Oregon that is as breathtaking in its scale as are the timber clear-cuts that are part of your view from the highway much of the time. It should be relatively clear to anyone that was not born brain-dead at birth that Oregon will continue to lose its heritage, if it isn’t already gone.

Make no mistake, the population of Oregon, and the population of every other state, will continue to explode as long as the federal government “forces” massive legal and illegal immigration into the country “into the face” and “onto the backs” of American citizens. It is a mathematical certainty, as is the environmental and quality of life outcome.

What may be the most amazing is, like Senator John McCain (R-AZ), Oregon’s two Senators enthusiastically back their own state’s environmental destruction. Oregon’s two Senators act as if they have no concept of the connection between the environment and immigration. Putting names to the faces, Oregon Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) has done almost nothing that would slow immigration-fueled population growth. Similarly, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) is no better. Sen. Wyden twice voted for procedural motions designed to pass bills that would allow around 30 million permanent green cards to foreign workers, immigrants and dependents over the next decade alone, compared to the 10 million that would be extended under current obscenely bloated numbers.

A sad thing about Oregon’s Senators and John McCain (R-AZ) is that they all tout themselves as ardent protectors and champions of environmental resources. Yet, all have been part of the process of forcing massive increases in the current level of immigration. The result is the destruction of around 1 million acres of natural habitat and farmland each year in Oregon. But this level of destruction apparently is still not high enough as Wyden has been pushing these giant increases of immigration that would force today's 300 million population over the half-BILLION mark around mid-century.

In fact, Oregonians have overwhelmingly chosen representatives in Congress who will hasten the destruction of the very qualities they claim to love about their state. The roll call of shame includes Rep. Blumenauer (D-OR), Rep. Wu (D-OR) and Rep. Hooley. The only officials working to protect Oregon from the population explosion are Rep. DeFazio (D-OR) and Rep. Walden (R-OR). Even so, there is not a true environmental champion among the whole delegation. When time permits, Oregonians should pause long enough to thank Senator John McCain for what he and Senator Kennedy have helped to inflict on their once pristine State of Oregon.

For years, commentators have accurately said that no matter how many Americans get worked up about out-of-control immigration, politicians would be unlikely to respond to them. The reason given was that immigration wasn't one of the top three issues named as the No. 1 concern by Americans in nationwide polls. Immigration for years barely made it into the top ten concerns mentioned. Unfortunately, politicians have used poll numbers to deflect and manipulate the issue and conceal from the public the reality that increases in both legal and illegal immigration only serve the self-interest of politicians, buying votes for re-election by selling American citizenship (which should not be for sale at any price), and buying those votes with every imaginable form of income redistribution from tax-paying American citizens.

Never-the-less a month ago, 6% of Americans (about as high as it has ever risen) finally named it as the nation’s No. 1 most important issue. Last week, 19% of Americans said "immigration" is their top concern. Only the Iraq war at 25% was mentioned by more people. "Fuel cost" also shot up out of nowhere to place third with 11%. "General economy" concerns were mentioned by 10%; "Dissatisfaction with government" by 8%; "Unemployment" by 6% as were "Education," "Terrorism," and "Health Care."

Immigration is the second most important No. 1 issue among:
• Whites
• Non-Whites
• Easterners
• Midwesterners
• Southerners
• Urbanites
• Suburbanites
• Rural Residents

Immigration is the top No. 1 issue among Westerners. Immigration should have been the No. 1 issue among Congressmen for 30 years. Even so, Senators still defiantly refuse to protect the needs of American citizens and resources of America, choosing instead their own self-interest. Once again Congress has proven irrefutably that self-interest is all that counts and far more important than either polls or their own American citizenship.
Senators know only too well that Americans are not nearly as educated and prepared to know what they should do about immigration.

If media integrity were not an oxymoron, the polls showed for years that the majority of Americans supported some kind of path to citizenship for illegal aliens, while at the same time saying we need to get tougher on illegal immigration. Those polls were a sign of how the news media, with an agenda, primarily gave only carefully contrived options between mass roundups and deportations on the one hand and some kind of amnesty on the other hand. Professional polling (that hasn't gotten much media publicity) has always shown that most Americans oppose amnesty when the poll questions were worded in a more legitimate way.

Most Americans don't understand that most of our nation’s most serious problems stem from immigration and are related to the fact that since 1990 the Unites States has averaged about 1 million legal immigrants a year -- compared to only about 250,000 a year traditionally (from 1776 to 1976) and fairly recently (the 1950s and 1960s).

It is true that legalizing illegal aliens won't solve the problem, but that depends on the definition of the problem which tends to be different to those who are selling citizenship for votes. Certainly, increasing legal immigration won't solve the problem. While stopping illegal immigration dead in its tracks would bring some relief, even that won’t be enough to save Oregon and most other states. So what is the real “problem?”

The natural resources and the human quality of life in this country won't get any relief until Congress first stops illegal immigration and then begins dramatically cutting permissible immigration numbers. That’s right, not only stopping illegal immigration, but reducing currently ridiculous levels of legal immigration. In addition, legal immigrants should meet a variant of the standard once set out by President John F. Kennedy - ask not what the country can do for immigrants, but what each individual immigrant can do for America. Getting a job does not cut it. What exceptionally desirable education, knowledge or skill does each immigrant bring with him or her that would differentiate that person from all others who want to come to America? America should be selective and decide who becomes the "immigrant." The decision of who becomes an immigrant should not be the choice of the immigrant, the media, the pandering church or any political party. The Constitution is quite clear on the issue, assuming that still means anything.

The interests of the United States should come before the needs of any potential individual immigrant. To do otherwise would place the interests of the immigrant ahead of American citizens, which is the case today. And the interests of the citizens of the United States should come before the self-interests of Congressmen, which is not the case today.

The Census Bureau projects that even if we are successful in moving “net illegal immigration” to zero, current legal immigration numbers will still add another 100 million people to our communities over the next several decades – 100 million more people who reject assimilation, mostly indigent and unskilled, and all candidates for social services funded by taxpayers. Put this into perspective by considering that Americans today struggle with 12-20 million illegal immigrants.

Try not to be confused by rhetoric intended to sway the most ignorant among us. What America needs is not only no illegal immigration, but no immigration increases of any kind. What America needs in addition to elimination of illegal immigration is huge reductions of legal immigration.

Members of Congress who are insisting on using immigration to force population growth that is scraping and paving more than 1 million acres of open space a year have no environmental ethic or a concern for future generations. If you get a chance, ask Senator John McCain (R-AZ) why he so despises future generations of Americans?

It appears true that on any given day, there is always a Congressman on sale, willing to sell out his birthright and the rest of America for self-interest.

Red State Patriot

« Close It

The Mexican constitution: Unfriendly to immigrants

The Mexican constitution expressly forbids non-citizens to participate in the country’s political life. Non-citizens are forbidden to participate in demonstrations or express opinions in public about domestic politics. Article 9 states, “only citizens of the Republic may do so to take part in the political affairs of the country.” Article 33 is unambiguous: “Foreigners may not in any way participate in the political affairs of the country.”

The Mexican constitution denies fundamental property rights to foreigners. If foreigners wish to have certain property rights, they must renounce the protection of their own governments or risk confiscation. Foreigners are forbidden to own land in Mexico within 100 kilometers of land borders or within 50 kilometers of the coast. Article 27 states, “Only Mexicans by birth or naturalization and Mexican companies have the right to acquire ownership of lands, waters, and their appurtenances, or to obtain concessions for the exploitation of mines or of waters. The State may grant the same right to foreigners, provided they agree before the Ministry of Foreign Relations to consider themselves as nationals in respect to such property, and bind themselves not to invoke the protection of their governments in matters relating thereto; under penalty, in case of noncompliance with this agreement, of forfeiture of the property acquired to the Nation. Under no circumstances may foreigners acquire direct ownership of lands or waters within a zone of one hundred kilometers along the frontiers and of fifty kilometers along the shores of the country.” (Emphasis added)

The Mexican constitution denies equal employment rights to immigrants, even legal ones, in the public sector. Article 32: “Mexicans shall have priority over foreigners under equality of circumstances for all classes of concessions and for all employment, positions, or commissions of the Government in which the status of citizenship is not indispensable. In time of peace no foreigner can serve in the Army nor in the police or public security forces.”

The Mexican constitution guarantees that immigrants will never be treated as real Mexican citizens, even if they are legally naturalized. Article 32 bans foreigners, immigrants, and even naturalized citizens of Mexico from serving as military officers, Mexican-flagged ship and airline crew, and chiefs of seaports and airports: “In order to belong to the National Navy or the Air Force, and to discharge any office or commission, it is required to be a Mexican by birth. This same status is indispensable for captains, pilots, masters, engineers, mechanics, and in general, for all personnel of the crew of any vessel or airship protected by the Mexican merchant flag or insignia. It is also necessary to be Mexican by birth to discharge the position of captain of the port and all services of practique and airport commandant, as well as all functions of customs agent in the Republic.”

An immigrant who becomes a naturalized Mexican citizen can be stripped of his Mexican citizenship if he lives again in the country of his origin for more than five years, under Article 37. Mexican-born citizens risk no such loss. Foreign-born, naturalized Mexican citizens may not become federal lawmakers (Article 55), cabinet secretaries (Article 91) or supreme court justices (Article 95).

The president of Mexico, like the president of the United States, constitutionally must be a citizen by birth, but Article 82 of the Mexican constitution mandates that the president’s parents also be Mexican-born citizens, thus according secondary status to Mexican-born citizens born of immigrants.

The Mexican constitution forbids immigrants and naturalized citizens to become members of the clergy. Article 130 says, “To practice the ministry of any denomination in the United Mexican States it is necessary to be a Mexican by birth.”

The Mexican constitution singles out “undesirable aliens.” Article 11 guarantees federal protection against “undesirable aliens resident in the country.”

The Mexican constitution provides the right of private individuals to make citizen’s arrests. Article 16 states, “in cases of flagrante delicto, any person may arrest the offender and his accomplices, turning them over without delay to the nearest authorities.” Therefore, the Mexican constitution appears to grant Mexican citizens the right to arrest illegal aliens and hand them over to police for prosecution.

The Mexican constitution states that foreigners may be expelled for any reason and without due process. According to Article 33, “the Federal Executive shall have the exclusive power to compel any foreigner whose remaining he may deem inexpedient to abandon the national territory immediately and without the necessity of previous legal action.”

Notional policy options
Mexico and the United States have much to learn from one another’s laws and practices on immigration and naturalization. A study of the immigration and citizenship portions of the Mexican constitution leads to a search for new policy options to find a fair and equitable solution to the immigration problem in the United States.

Two contrary options would require reciprocity, while doing the utmost to harmonize U.S. - Mexican relations:

1. Mexico should amend its constitution to guarantee immigrants to Mexico the same rights it demands the United States give to immigrants from Mexico; or
2. The United States should impose the same restrictions on Mexican immigrants that Mexico imposes on American immigrants.

These options are only notional, of course. They are intended only to help push the immigration debate in a more sensible direction. They simply illustrate the hypocrisy of the Mexican government’s current immigration demands on the United States – as well as the emptiness of most Democrat and Republican proposals for immigration reform.

Mexico certainly has every right to control who enters its borders, and to expel foreigners who break its laws. The Mexican constitution is designed to give the strongest protections possible to the country’s national security. Mexico’s internal immigration policy is Mexico’s business. However, since Mexican political leaders from the ruling party and the opposition have been demanding that the United States ignore, alter or abolish its own immigration laws, they have opened their own internal affairs to American scrutiny. The time has come to examine Mexico’s own glass house.
- - -
Please see the original document for footnotes and references which is posted at:
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/Mexicos_Glass_House.pdf
Center for Security Policy 1920 L Street NW, Suite 210 • Washington, DC 20036 • (202) 835-9077 www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org

« Close It