Judicial Watch has just released a Border Patrol document, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, reporting Mexican border incursions during Fiscal Year 2006:

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released a U.S. Border Patrol report titled, “Mexican Government Incidents — 2006 Fiscal Year Report,” obtained under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). But for Judicial Watch’s September, 2007 FOIA request, this information would not have been made public. The report describes 29 confirmed incidents in 2006 along the U.S. - Mexican border involving Mexican military and/or law enforcement personnel, 17 of which involved armed Mexican government agents.

You can read a summary of the document here and view the actual document here .
And, if anybody has the opportunity, ask the presidential candidates, of both parties, what they think of this and what they intend to do about it .

The Spanish word of the day from Spanish On Patrol, dedicated to teaching police and correctional officers Spanish, is macana. They translate that as “billy club.” This kind of basic glossary for police or military doesn’t include etymology, et cetera.

Actually, the word macana is a Mexican Indian word which comes from the wooden sword of the Incas, and it seems to be related to macahuitl, the club with inset sharpened stones that’s on the insignia of MECha. (The founders of MECha spelled it “macahuittle,” but that’s because college kids can’t spell.

The original Spanish word for billy club would be porra. according to the Spanish Royal Academy dictionary online, Spanish having a number of branches the way English does.

The point here is that the police are not learning Spanish, but rather learning Mexican. This is fine for street work, because Mexicans will inevitably make up the majority of their Spanish-speaking clients. And the reason for that is that there’s an invasion going on, and it’s mostly from Mexico.

Funny how the mainstream media have such a hard time using the word “spy” or “espionage” when there are immigrants involved: neither of those words appear in the Associated Press news story: U.S. to deport relatives of Chinese-born engineer in export case [San Jose Mercury News, Jan 9, 2008].

Instead we read about “export control laws” and other ambiguities. The press does not want to alarm us that enemies are here from hostile regimes, particularly Red China, who are working to undermine this nation by stealing secrets with military applications. And many of the most dangerous are here with legal standing as students or workers in high tech industry.

SANTA ANA, Calif.—Federal immigration officials said Wednesday that they have arrested the sister-in-law and nephew of a Chinese-born engineer convicted of conspiring to export U.S. defense technology to China and intend to deport them to China.

Fuk Li, 50, and her son, Billy Mak, 27, both pleaded guilty to federal offenses last year when they were arrested during an investigation into their relative, engineer Chi Mak.

Because of their guilty pleas, they are eligible for deportation and will remain in custody until a hearing before a federal immigration judge, according to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Both came to the United States in 2001 from China.

I described the Chi Mak spy case in plain language in Mentioning The Unmentionable About The Chinese “Model Minority”…

With the power of Red China on the rise, questions about national allegiance are sure to increase. And rightly so. Lou Dobbs reported in March that the Chi Mak spy case had revealed that there are 3000 Chinese front companies here to steal American military and industrial secrets. Chi Mak was a naturalized U.S. citizen who was accused of spying for the PRC as part of his job as an engineer. “Prosecutors say the 66-year-old Mak was acting out of loyalty to his Chinese homeland and had plans to retire there,” the show reported. He was later convicted, and several family members pleaded guilty to espionage charges.

These people are enemy spies, pure and simple. How hard would it be for the press say that?

Editors are afraid of being smacked around by Chinese ethnic interest groups who raise a stink whenever some tribal member gets bad press, like the Wen Ho Lee case.

I’ve received a number of nice comments and dreadful anecdotes to supplement the noncitizen voting scams mentioned in my VDARE.com article. [Abolishing America (contd.): Supremes Hear Indiana Anti-Illegal Voter Case]Here’s one example:

In a March 2002 article in the Arizona Republic, the paper reported that Romelia Calderon was arrested for voter fraud (voting while not a citizen). She only found out that she was unqualified to participate in U.S. elections when she herself tried to run for office in the municipality of El Mirage in Maricopa County. The memorable quote from Ms. Calderon was: “Non-documented people [illegal aliens] get registered left and right. Some people know they can’t, but they get convinced to do it.“[Candidate admits fraud, quits race Arizona Republic, March 28 2002.(Pay archive)]

Who convinces them? How? Why?

These scenarios would make for a long running TV series, “VoteBusters.”

Sigh.

After reading James Kirchick’s article in The New Republic, which bashes Ron Paul as a racist, homophobic, anti-semitic nutjob conspiracy theorist, I couldn’t be more bored. (Angry White Man, The New Republic, 1-08-08)

First of all, the article itself is almost 4,000 words (where is the editor?) Secondly, the nasty newsletter accusations have already been in on wikipedia and in the New York Times for months. And even the New York Times retracted the story after a while because there was so little there. Thirdly, is it too much to ask for some creative muckraking now and again? How many times do expect us to hear “racist!!!” before we fall asleep?

The only new development in Kirchick’s article is the fact that he’s posted .pdf copies of the newsletters he supposedly dug up. However, given that these newsletter have already been combed over by the most malignant reporters for several years, I don’t see the point. They will show, as they have already shown before, that there are no bylines and are not characteristic of Paul’s style.

Appropriately, only about 10% of the first 80 or so comments posted on the New Republic’s website are impressed with the article. I didn’t look much further than that (there are 1285 comments so far). The other 90% call it what it is: stale, hollow propaganda.

PS: The New Republic has already had to post three corrections to misstated fact from the original article. Surprise, surprise.