As James Fulford says below, Heather Mac Donald’s Mexico’s Undiplomatic Diplomats certainly deserves recognition as the definitive and exhaustive (5,800 words!) statement on the outrage of Mexican Consular behaviour in this country. Having it appear in as conventional a venue as the City Journal will be useful in getting the subject into the media food chain.

Mac Donald particularly deserves credit for placing the blame where it belongs:

The Mexican government will push to control as much U.S. immigration policy as it can get away with. It’s up to American officials to stop such interference, but the Bush administration simply winks at foreign attacks on immigration laws that it itself refuses to enforce. President Bush should worry less about upsetting his friends at [the Mexican Presidential palace] and more about listening to the American people: illegal immigration, they believe, is an affront to the rule of law and a threat to American security. It can and must be stopped.

[Experienced readers of Heather Mac Donald, though, are reeling in shock. She actually acknowledges a source!!! In this case, former U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Jeffrey Davidow and his interesting book about his experience there, The Bear and The Porcupine. She must consider Davidow to be on the same social plane.]

But more interesting is the jarring anomaly arising from the fact that City Journal is the magazine project of the Establishment Neo Conservative stronghold the Manhattan Institute, lair of notorious pro immigration flack Tamar Jacoby. In fact this outfit featured here only last month, when James Fulford amplified on a devastating attack on a dubious pro immigration poll commissioned and publicised by the Manhattan Institute [MI: Turning Corporate Cash Into Influence - Craig Nelsen]

Civil War amongst the NeoCons? On my left, Tamar Jacoby. On my right, Heather MacDonald. May the best man win!

Heather Mac Donald has an excellent article in City Journal about Mexico’s undiplomatic diplomats, well worth reading, although much of the ground covered will already be familiar to VDARE.com readers, (see links)

The audacity of Mexico’s interference in U.S. immigration policy stands in sharp contrast to Mexico’s own jealous sense of sovereignty. It is difficult to imagine a country touchier about interference in its domestic affairs or less tolerant of immigrants. In 2002, for example, Mexico deported a dozen American college students (all in the country legally) who had joined a protest in Mexico City against a planned airport. Such participation, said Mexico, constituted illegal domestic interference. (It would be interesting to know how many Mexican students–legal and illegal– have participated with impunity in demonstrations in the U.S. against American immigration and educational policies.) During his confirmation hearings, U.S. ambassador Jeffrey Davidow said innocuously that the U.S. would encourage high participation in Mexico’s 2000 presidential election. A magazine editor rebuked him for “intromission in Mexico’s internal affairs.” Davidow didn’t even dare visit the troubled state of Chiapas early in his tenure, knowing that the press would condemn it as illegal meddling.

Imagine if U.S. diplomats yowled constantly about Mexico’s unfair policies toward illegal Americans. Mexico would expel them instantly. This summer, U.S. ambassador to Mexico Tony Garza closed the U.S. consulate in Nuevo Laredo after a particularly bloody period of drug violence that included the assassination of the town’s police chief. Garza admitted to a reporter that he shut the consulate “in part” to punish Mexico for its failure to control the mayhem. Such measured language, in response to a public threat, provoked a sharp correction from Mexico’s deputy foreign secretary, Geronimo Gutierrez. Garza’s words, fumed Gutierrez, do “not correspond to the role of an ambassador.” City Journal Autumn 2005 | Mexico’s Undiplomatic Diplomats by Heather Mac Donald

Since Steve Sailer’s correspondent encourages VDARE.COM readers to ask the FBI why it counts Hispanic crime as “white”, we need to supply a contact: try this.