And Our Politicians Want Amnesty…………

by: Dan Springer

One woman is dead and two others were raped recently and police say each crime was committed by a different illegal immigrant. One of the sexual assaults happened just hours before the Seattle city council passed an ordinance boycotting Arizona over its new immigration law.

Gregorio Luna Luna had a history of beating up his live-in girlfriend Griselda Ocampo Meza. He was also in the U.S. illegally. On May 1, Luna Luna was deported to Mexico. Three weeks later Meza was murdered in her apartment in a violent knife attack.

Franklin County prosecutors say Luna Luna slipped past the border again and killed Meza in front of their five year old son. He’s in the county jail awaiting trial.

A suspected rapist in Edmonds, Washington has been deported at least 4 times according to Snohomish County prosecutors. Jose Lopez Madrigal has been charged with raping a woman next to a dumpster behind a Safeway store. A witness to the attack alerted police and Madrigal was taken into custody.

An illegal immigrant just convicted of his possible 3rd strike in Whatcom county- a rape of a homeless woman- has been deported to Mexico five times.

Washington State ranks 11th in the nation in the number of illegal immigrants with an estimated 150,000. They make up 2% of the state’s population, but account for 4.5% of those in Washington prisons. In Franklin county, 14% of the jail bookings are illegal immigrants.

Currently, over half of the individuals on the Washington State Patrol’s Most Wanted List are suspected illegal immigrants. 18 of the 26 on the list are Hispanic with no place of birth identified. Most are wanted for vehicular homicide and they have languished on the Most Wanted list for several years.

There are about 50,000 felony warrants currently issued in Washington State and according to a source in the U.S. Marshall’s office between 30-40 percent are believed to be illegal immigrants.

We asked the State Patrol about the immigration status of the most wanted suspects and they told us they didn’t know. Officials say that information is not important in trying to locate the individuals.

The U.S. Marshall’s Service disagrees. Leaders of the region’s fugitive task force say knowing immigration status can be very important to an investigation. In fact, the Marshall’s have an office in Mexico to help with cross-border cases.

Last week, the city of Tacoma joined Seattle in admonishing Arizona for its immigration law. While the council did not go so far as passing a boycott, the ordinance does criticize Arizona for its stand against illegal immigration.

ABC: Conservative Filmmaker James O’Keefe Goes Undercover to Target Census Bureau

ABC: Conservative Filmmaker James O’Keefe Goes Undercover to Target Census Bureau.

Unforgivable

Christian Ashby, of Portland, Ore., holds an American flag that was vandalized outside of his home sometime late Saturday or early Sunday.

By Joshua Rhett Miller

From Oregon to Minnesota to Ohio, vandals trampled on Old Glory over the Memorial Day weekend. In one Ohio town alone, approximately 25 American flags were found set ablaze on Monday.

At least one national veterans group called for those responsible for the “shocking and reprehensible” acts of vandalism to be quickly arrested and prosecuted.

Police in Wooster, Ohio, were going door-to-door early Tuesday in search of the people who torched roughly 25 flags and flagpoles along Saunders Drive and Morgan Street, Capt. John Quicci said.

“They were set on fire,” Quicci told FoxNews.com, adding that an investigation is ongoing.

No suspects or motives had been identified, according to Quicci, who was unable to estimate damages to the 3-by-5-foot flags and the 10-foot metal poles placed outside of residents’ homes by the annual Wooster Rotary Parade of Flags project.

The people who torched the flags face charges of criminal damaging and arson, Quicci said.

“We’re treating this very seriously,” he said.

In Minneapolis, a fire was set late last week to an American flag hanging outside a Marine veteran’s home. The residence was spared and no injuries were reported, but the flag was destroyed.

Elizabeth Hawley said she found the ashes Thursday morning and called the act “very disturbing.” She said her husband is keeping his feelings reserved, but she knows he’s upset.

Hawley told the Minneapolis Star Tribune that she thinks the flag-burning was a random act of vandalism.

In Portland, Ore., Christian Ashby and his wife awoke Sunday to find their American flag torn down, covered in obscenities and burned outside their home, KPTV.com reported. Flying the flag has special meaning to his family, Ashby said.

“Well, we have some close relatives, especially my wife, who had a cousin who suffered from [post-traumatic stress disorder] and took his own life,” Ashby told the website. “So, we have some very dedicated family to veterans of the United States services. So, it means a lot to us to fly the flag.”

Ashby said a local man who served two tours in Vietnam loaned him another flag after posting news of the vandalism online.

Ryan Gallucci, a spokesman for AMVETS, a national organization representing 200,000 veterans, said he found the acts of vandalism “shocking and reprehensible,” particularly on Memorial Day weekend.

“We absolutely condemn it,” Gallucci told FoxNews.com. “Memorial Day is one of our country’s most significant holidays and a chance to honor the men and women who sacrificed their lives for our freedom. For someone to desecrate the American flag on Memorial Day, it’s unconscionable, it’s unforgivable.”

Gallucci called for quick closure to the ongoing investigations in at least three states.

“The people who are responsible for this need to be apprehended and held accountable for their actions,” he said. “We shouldn’t tolerate it, regardless of what the excuse is. We need to get to the bottom of it.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

The Turkish Power

BY Matthew Continetti

The most ominous aspect of the flotilla incident is Turkey’s involvement. The flotilla bound for Gaza, in violation of the blockade, was allowed to leave a Turkish port. The main sponsor was a Turkish charity known for ties to jihadist groups. The Turkish diplomatic and governmental apparatus sprung into action at the first sign of trouble — which of course there was, since the “peace activists” onboard the flotilla were masked and armed with lead pipes and knives.

Why is this troubling? Because Turkey is a member of NATO. It’s sought to join the European Union for years. For decades, it’s been a key military ally of the United States. Now it’s at the forefront of a global movement to delegitimize America’s ally Israel.

The main factor behind these developments is the rise of Recip Tayipp Erdogan’s AKP. Some years ago, Christopher Caldwell pointed out in our pages that as Turkey democratized, it would also become more Islamic. And that means certain elements, influential elements, of its government and society would become more Islamist. The trend that few have noticed is that these elements are pulling Turkey out of the Western alliance structure and toward the Middle East. The break began in 2003 when the Turks denied the U.S. Fourth Infantry the ability to invade Iraq from the north.

Since 2005, Americans have been worrying about Iran’s ambitions for regional hegemony. Maybe it’s time we started worrying about Turkey’s regional ambitions as well. The Turks ruled the region from 1453 to 1922, after all. A renascence of Turkish power, in an Islamist guise, would cause all sorts of troubles no one can anticipate.

Pro-Terrorists Continue With Their Death Wish…

JERUSALEM (AP) – Pro-Palestinian activists sent another boat to challenge Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip on Tuesday and Egypt declared it was temporarily opening a crossing into the Palestinian territory after a botched raid on an aid flotilla that ended with Israeli soldiers killing nine activists.

The raid provoked ferocious international condemnation of Israel, raised questions at home, and appeared likely to increase pressure to end the blockade that has deepened the poverty of the 1.5 million Palestinians living in the strip. Turkey, which unofficially supported the flotilla, has led the criticism, calling the Israeli raid a “bloody massacre.”

The pro-Palestinian flotilla had been headed to Gaza with tens of thousands of tons of aid that Israel bans from Gaza. After days of warnings, Israel intercepted the flotilla under the cover of darkness early Monday, setting off a violent melee that left nine activists dead and dozens of people, including seven soldiers, wounded. Most of the dead were believed to be Turks.

Israel said 679 people were arrested, and about 50 of those had left the country voluntarily. Hundreds who refused to cooperate remained jailed and subject to deportation.

Israel says the Gaza blockade is needed to prevent the Iranian-backed Hamas, which has fired thousands of rockets into the Jewish state, from building up its arsenal. It also wants to pressure Hamas to free an Israeli soldier it has held for four years.

Critics say the blockade has failed to weaken Hamas but further strapped an already impoverished economy. It also has prevented Gaza from rebuilding after a devastating Israeli military offensive early last year.

Egypt, which has enforced the blockade with Israel since Hamas militants seized control of Gaza three years ago, said it was opening the border for several days to allow aid into the area.

The governor of Egyptian’s northern Sinai district, Murad Muwafi, said it was a humanitarian gesture meant to “alleviate the suffering of our Palestinian brothers after the Israeli attack.”

Hundreds of Gaza residents quickly gathered at the border. A steady stream of cars with suitcases on roof racks headed toward the border. Some families carrying packed luggage headed to the border by foot. Hamas police with assault rifles patrolled nearby to maintain order.

“We are working to help residents take advantage of this opportunity,” said Hamas Interior Ministry spokesman Ihab Ghussein. “We hope it will be open all the time, not just as a response to yesterday’s events.”

Greta Berlin said the Free Gaza Movement, which organized the flotilla, would not be deterred and that another cargo boat was off the coast of Italy en route to Gaza. A second boat carrying about three dozen passengers is expected to join it, Berlin said. She said the two boats would arrive in the region late this week or early next week.

“This initiative is not going to stop,” she said from the group’s base in Cyprus. “We think eventually Israel will get some kind of common sense. They’re going to have to stop the blockade of Gaza, and one of the ways to do this is for us to continue to send the boats.”

Undercover Census Fraud Investigation–NJ

by James O’Keefe

On April 27, 2010, I got a job with the United States Census Bureau in New Jersey. With a hidden camera, I caught four Census supervisors encouraging enumerators to falsify information on their time sheets. Over the course of two days of training, I was paid for four hours of work I never did. I was told to take a 70 minute lunch break, was given an hour of travel time to drive 10 minutes, and was told to leave work at 3:30pm. I resigned prior to doing any data collection but confronted Census supervisors who assured me, “no one is going to be auditing that that level,” and “nobody is going to be questioning it except for you.” Another Census supervisor only said he’d adjust my pay after I gave him a letter recanting my hours.

As to whether this is an “isolated incident” or if there are more Census videos showing more waste, fraud, and corruption, we’ll let you take a wild guess.

America, real journalism has been dead for a long time now. With $1500 Hannah Giles and I were able to break a story that the New York Times couldn’t have broken no matter how many times they mortgaged their building. The government took our camera, so I bought another. The government put us in jail and deleted our tapes, but we got out and we’ll just make more. My travel was restricted to the state of New Jersey, so that’s where I got back to work. The media establishment is busy doing character assassinations on my friends and me but time and truth is on our side. Congress answered to our ACORN videos, now it will be up to the Department of Justice to explain why it edited out of a press release their admission we had no intent to tamper with Senator Landrieu’s phones. More importantly, it will be up to the Census Bureau to explain why their supervisors are systematically falsifying time sheets.

Exposing corruption requires standing up to power, because power hates sunlight. We should have known they would try and ruin the reputations of those who try and expose them. But in response, we are going to build an army of citizen investigators. There’s hundreds more where I came from. You have awakened a sleeping giant. And you can’t ruin us all. In fact, in the coming months you will see this army expanding into every state, every statehouse, every city council, every school board, and everywhere people are conspiring to keep themselves in power, practice favoritism, or line their pockets with tax dollars.

This isn’t a political movement. This is a movement to clean up society through transparency and accountability. Corruption, dishonesty, waste, and secrecy are anathema to all Americans. I happen to love liberty but I will happily expose Democrats and Republicans, public and private sector… anyone who deserves it.

These days, Americans know that people in backrooms are taking advantage of their power. And they’re fed up with it. We are sunlight. All we’re going to do is continue to expose the truth, and then it’s up to democracy to decide the verdict. Have faith in Americans armed with the facts.

Every dishonest politician, bureaucrat, and business in America is now on notice. You are being watched. Next time you try and take advantage of honest Americans, remember the person sitting in front of you just may have a camera or a microphone. America is watching. And if you’re cheating, stealing, or scamming, we will find you, we will film you, and we will make you an unwilling celebrity.

Flotillas and the Wars of Public Opinion

By George Friedman

On Sunday, Israeli naval forces intercepted the ships of a Turkish nongovernmental organization (NGO) delivering humanitarian supplies to Gaza. Israel had demanded that the vessels not go directly to Gaza but instead dock in Israeli ports, where the supplies would be offloaded and delivered to Gaza. The Turkish NGO refused, insisting on going directly to Gaza. Gunfire ensued when Israeli naval personnel boarded one of the vessels, and a significant number of the passengers and crew on the ship were killed or wounded.

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon charged that the mission was simply an attempt to provoke the Israelis. That was certainly the case. The mission was designed to demonstrate that the Israelis were unreasonable and brutal. The hope was that Israel would be provoked to extreme action, further alienating Israel from the global community and possibly driving a wedge between Israel and the United States. The operation’s planners also hoped this would trigger a political crisis in Israel.

A logical Israeli response would have been avoiding falling into the provocation trap and suffering the political repercussions the Turkish NGO was trying to trigger. Instead, the Israelis decided to make a show of force. The Israelis appear to have reasoned that backing down would demonstrate weakness and encourage further flotillas to Gaza, unraveling the Israeli position vis-à-vis Hamas. In this thinking, a violent interception was a superior strategy to accommodation regardless of political consequences. Thus, the Israelis accepted the bait and were provoked.

The ‘Exodus’ Scenario

In the 1950s, an author named Leon Uris published a book called “Exodus.” Later made into a major motion picture, Exodus told the story of a Zionist provocation against the British. In the wake of World War II, the British – who controlled Palestine, as it was then known – maintained limits on Jewish immigration there. Would-be immigrants captured trying to run the blockade were detained in camps in Cyprus. In the book and movie, Zionists planned a propaganda exercise involving a breakout of Jews – mostly children – from the camp, who would then board a ship renamed the Exodus. When the Royal Navy intercepted the ship, the passengers would mount a hunger strike. The goal was to portray the British as brutes finishing the work of the Nazis. The image of children potentially dying of hunger would force the British to permit the ship to go to Palestine, to reconsider British policy on immigration, and ultimately to decide to abandon Palestine and turn the matter over to the United Nations.

There was in fact a ship called Exodus, but the affair did not play out precisely as portrayed by Uris, who used an amalgam of incidents to display the propaganda war waged by the Jews. Those carrying out this war had two goals. The first was to create sympathy in Britain and throughout the world for Jews who, just a couple of years after German concentration camps, were now being held in British camps. Second, they sought to portray their struggle as being against the British. The British were portrayed as continuing Nazi policies toward the Jews in order to maintain their empire. The Jews were portrayed as anti-imperialists, fighting the British much as the Americans had.

It was a brilliant strategy. By focusing on Jewish victimhood and on the British, the Zionists defined the battle as being against the British, with the Arabs playing the role of people trying to create the second phase of the Holocaust. The British were portrayed as pro-Arab for economic and imperial reasons, indifferent at best to the survivors of the Holocaust. Rather than restraining the Arabs, the British were arming them. The goal was not to vilify the Arabs but the British, and to position the Jews with other nationalist groups whether in India or Egypt rising against the British.

The precise truth or falsehood of this portrayal didn’t particularly matter. For most of the world, the Palestine issue was poorly understood and not a matter of immediate concern. The Zionists intended to shape the perceptions of a global public with limited interest in or understanding of the issues, filling in the blanks with their own narrative. And they succeeded.

The success was rooted in a political reality. Where knowledge is limited, and the desire to learn the complex reality doesn’t exist, public opinion can be shaped by whoever generates the most powerful symbols. And on a matter of only tangential interest, governments tend to follow their publics’ wishes, however they originate. There is little to be gained for governments in resisting public opinion and much to be gained by giving in. By shaping the battlefield of public perception, it is thus possible to get governments to change positions.

In this way, the Zionists’ ability to shape global public perceptions of what was happening in Palestine – to demonize the British and turn the question of Palestine into a Jewish-British issue – shaped the political decisions of a range of governments. It was not the truth or falsehood of the narrative that mattered. What mattered was the ability to identify the victim and victimizer such that global opinion caused both London and governments not directly involved in the issue to adopt political stances advantageous to the Zionists. It is in this context that we need to view the Turkish flotilla.

The Turkish Flotilla to Gaza

The Palestinians have long argued that they are the victims of Israel, an invention of British and American imperialism. Since 1967, they have focused not so much on the existence of the state of Israel (at least in messages geared toward the West) as on the oppression of Palestinians in the occupied territories. Since the split between Hamas and Fatah and the Gaza War, the focus has been on the plight of the citizens of Gaza, who have been portrayed as the dispossessed victims of Israeli violence.

The bid to shape global perceptions by portraying the Palestinians as victims of Israel was the first prong of a longtime two-part campaign. The second part of this campaign involved armed resistance against the Israelis. The way this resistance was carried out, from airplane hijackings to stone-throwing children to suicide bombers, interfered with the first part of the campaign, however. The Israelis could point to suicide bombings or the use of children against soldiers as symbols of Palestinian inhumanity. This in turn was used to justify conditions in Gaza. While the Palestinians had made significant inroads in placing Israel on the defensive in global public opinion, they thus consistently gave the Israelis the opportunity to turn the tables. And this is where the flotilla comes in.

The Turkish flotilla aimed to replicate the Exodus story or, more precisely, to define the global image of Israel in the same way the Zionists defined the image that they wanted to project. As with the Zionist portrayal of the situation in 1947, the Gaza situation is far more complicated than as portrayed by the Palestinians. The moral question is also far more ambiguous. But as in 1947, when the Zionist portrayal was not intended to be a scholarly analysis of the situation but a political weapon designed to define perceptions, the Turkish flotilla was not designed to carry out a moral inquest.

Instead, the flotilla was designed to achieve two ends. The first is to divide Israel and Western governments by shifting public opinion against Israel. The second is to create a political crisis inside Israel between those who feel that Israel’s increasing isolation over the Gaza issue is dangerous versus those who think any weakening of resolve is dangerous.

The Geopolitical Fallout for Israel

It is vital that the Israelis succeed in portraying the flotilla as an extremist plot. Whether extremist or not, the plot has generated an image of Israel quite damaging to Israeli political interests. Israel is increasingly isolated internationally, with heavy pressure on its relationship with Europe and the United States.

In all of these countries, politicians are extremely sensitive to public opinion. It is difficult to imagine circumstances under which public opinion will see Israel as the victim. The general response in the Western public is likely to be that the Israelis probably should have allowed the ships to go to Gaza and offload rather than to precipitate bloodshed. Israel’s enemies will fan these flames by arguing that the Israelis prefer bloodshed to reasonable accommodation. And as Western public opinion shifts against Israel, Western political leaders will track with this shift.

The incident also wrecks Israeli relations with Turkey, historically an Israeli ally in the Muslim world with longstanding military cooperation with Israel. The Turkish government undoubtedly has wanted to move away from this relationship, but it faced resistance within the Turkish military and among secularists. The new Israeli action makes a break with Israel easy, and indeed almost necessary for Ankara.

With roughly the population of Houston, Texas, Israel is just not large enough to withstand extended isolation, meaning this event has profound geopolitical implications.

Public opinion matters where issues are not of fundamental interest to a nation. Israel is not a fundamental interest to other nations. The ability to generate public antipathy to Israel can therefore reshape Israeli relations with countries critical to Israel. For example, a redefinition of U.S.-Israeli relations will have much less effect on the United States than on Israel. The Obama administration, already irritated by the Israelis, might now see a shift in U.S. public opinion that will open the way to a new U.S.-Israeli relationship disadvantageous to Israel.

The Israelis will argue that this is all unfair, as they were provoked. Like the British, they seem to think that the issue is whose logic is correct. But the issue actually is, whose logic will be heard? As with a tank battle or an airstrike, this sort of warfare has nothing to do with fairness. It has to do with controlling public perception and using that public perception to shape foreign policy around the world. In this case, the issue will be whether the deaths were necessary. The Israeli argument of provocation will have limited traction.

Internationally, there is little doubt that the incident will generate a firestorm. Certainly, Turkey will break cooperation with Israel. Opinion in Europe will likely harden. And public opinion in the United States – by far the most important in the equation – might shift to a “plague-on-both-your-houses” position.

While the international reaction is predictable, the interesting question is whether this evolution will cause a political crisis in Israel. Those in Israel who feel that international isolation is preferable to accommodation with the Palestinians are in control now. Many in the opposition see Israel’s isolation as a strategic threat. Economically and militarily, they argue, Israel cannot survive in isolation. The current regime will respond that there will be no isolation. The flotilla aimed to generate what the government has said would not happen.

The tougher Israel is, the more the flotilla’s narrative takes hold. As the Zionists knew in 1947 and the Palestinians are learning, controlling public opinion requires subtlety, a selective narrative and cynicism. As they also knew, losing the battle can be catastrophic. It cost Britain the Mandate and allowed Israel to survive. Israel’s enemies are now turning the tables. This maneuver was far more effective than suicide bombings or the Intifada in challenging Israel’s public perception and therefore its geopolitical position (though if the Palestinians return to some of their more distasteful tactics like suicide bombing, the Turkish strategy of portraying Israel as the instigator of violence will be undermined).

Israel is now in uncharted waters. It does not know how to respond. It is not clear that the Palestinians know how to take full advantage of the situation, either. But even so, this places the battle on a new field, far more fluid and uncontrollable than what went before. The next steps will involve calls for sanctions against Israel. The Israeli threats against Iran will be seen in a different context, and Israeli portrayal of Iran will hold less sway over the world.

And this will cause a political crisis in Israel. If this government survives, then Israel is locked into a course that gives it freedom of action but international isolation. If the government falls, then Israel enters a period of domestic uncertainty. In either case, the flotilla achieved its strategic mission. It got Israel to take violent action against it. In doing so, Israel ran into its own fist.

The Agitator-in-Chief

By Chad Stafko

After nearly eighteen months in office, the president of the United States has finally encountered his first unforeseen crisis. A gushing oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico combined with seething anger from residents, business owners, and politicians along the coastline has produced a toxic mix of political corrosion that is eroding the president’s political capital. The response to the disaster that we have seen from President Barack Obama should have been expected, as it is simply a byproduct of his experience, or lack thereof.

On Friday, May 28, the president finally managed to make his second trip to the oil-plagued area nearly forty days after the disaster occurred. The president spent only about three hours on site. Three hours! Where were the meetings with the families of those who were killed when the oil rig exploded? Could not a precious hour or two have been spent with those grieving and those who were angry over the explosion?

Why did the president not take a few hours and meet with Governor Jindal, Kevin Costner, and others who are attempting to limit the damage the existing oil may cause to the coastline through innovative means but whose efforts have been limited by the need for government approval? While Jindal has received recent approval for the makeshift sandbars that could help alleviate some damage, the president could be the ultimate red tape eliminator.

But President Obama passed on the opportunity.

Apparently, he was too busy, as he needed to make the trip back to his hometown of Chicago for the Memorial Day weekend. The president’s lack of interest and lack of concern, as evidenced by his lack of actions, is irritating even his fellow Democrats and, in some cases, some of his most ardent supporters. Louisiana Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu said of the president’s lack of visibility on the oil disaster, “He’s going to pay a political price for it.”

Add to the fray Louisiana resident and longtime Democratic strategist and talking head James Carville, who said earlier in the week of Obama, “This President needs to tell BP: ‘I’m your Daddy, I’m in charge’ … We need some action here, and we need to get this thing moving quickly.”

If President Obama’s perceived and actual lack of action weren’t enough to stoke the anger of coastline residents among other Americans, Obama’s actions on the evening of Tuesday, May 25, at the height of the crisis, fanned the flame. The president of the United States could be found that evening in California at a fundraising dinner and reception for embattled Senator Barbara Boxer. The amount of time President Obama spent in California raising money for a career politician was nearly identical to the amount of time he spent on the frontlines of the worst oil disaster and possibly the worst ecological disaster this country has ever known.

Should we expect more out of our president? Yes. Should we expect more out of this president? No. This is exactly what we should expect from him based on his past behavior.

As you may recall, before ascending to the presidency, Barack Obama was a community organizer. He was not the president of a non-profit group, the leader of a civic organization, or head of a sanitation district, nor did he have any other leadership experience prior to his brief tenure as a senator from Illinois. He had never led an organization through the ups and downs of its existence or had any experience in crisis management. Instead, his experience — most of it in fact — was to gather a group of individuals together and get them irritated toward their city councils, regulatory board, or some other target. Now, he’s on the other side. He and his administration have agitated the people, and they are not happy.

What has been the president’s reaction to the outrage of the people? At times he has stated that the government is responsible and will fix the mess, while at the same time those within the government who are on the frontlines of the oil spill have acknowledged that the government does not have the skill, equipment, or expertise to clean up the spill or cap the leak.

Other times, President Obama simply says that those who are critical of the administration’s response are ignorant of the situation. That’s the mantra for a community organizer — talk first, think later.

This disaster indicates to us as to what we have: a community organizer with little leadership experience or skill as President of the United States.