Mexico: Stop Sending Back Our Criminals

Mexico: Stop Sending Back Our Criminals

September 27th, 2010

Judicial Watch

In a flabbergasting request, a coalition of Mexican lawmakers has asked the United States to stop deporting illegal immigrants who have been convicted of serious crimes in American courts.

The preposterous demand was made at a recent southern California conference in which the mayors of four Mexican cities that border the U.S. gathered to discuss cross-border issues. The only American mayor who attended the biannual event was San Diego’s Jerry Sanders, evidently because his city hosted it this year at a fancy downtown hotel.

Among the cross-border topics that were addressed at the conference was the deportation of Mexican citizens who have committed violent crimes in the U.S. The felons are persona non grata in their communities, say the mayors of Tijuana, Ciudad Juarez, Nogales, and Nuevo Laredo. They want U.S. officials to stem the deportation of such convicts to their cities, according to a local newspaper report that covered the conference.

Read more.

A Mexican drug cartel has threatened Nogales police officers, saying they will be targeted for retribution if they conduct off-duty busts

Posted by Jim Hoft on Tuesday, June 22, 2010, 5:43 AM

The Mexican drug cartel warned Arizona police officers this week to look the other way when they are off duty or face sniper fire.
These foreign criminals are now openly threatening our law enforcement officers here in America.

Mexican Drug Cartel Threatens Nogales, AZ Police Officers with Snipers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RWtW0AjO7M&feature=player_embedded

The Sierra Vista Herald reported, via Free Republic:

A Mexican drug cartel has threatened Nogales police officers, saying they will be targeted for retribution if they conduct off-duty busts.

Nogales Police Chief Jeffrey Kirkham told the Nogales International late last week that the threats stemmed from an incident approximately two weeks ago, when off-duty officers surprised marijuana smugglers while riding horseback in an unincorporated border area east of town. The officers seized part of the drug load, and the smugglers were able to flee back into Mexico with the other part.

“As a result of that,” Kirkham said, “our officers have received threats from the cartel that they are to look the other way if they are off duty, or they will be targeted by a sniper or by other means.

NPD learned of the threats through informants, he said.

Following the threats, Kirkham said, NPD notified the Border Patrol and other federal law enforcement agencies, which responded by stepping up manpower and surveillance in the area where the off-duty bust occurred. In addition, Kirkham met with his officers to advise them of the threats and to authorize them to take precautions, including wearing firearms while off duty.

“The Nogales Police Department will not be intimidated,” he said.

Kirkham said the threats highlighted the need for more federal law enforcement at the border. “This has nothing to do with SB 1070 or illegal immigration,” he said, “it has to do with narco-trafficking and the violence of the cartels.”

Can’t control the criminal? Control the law-abiding

Can’t control the criminal? Control the law-abiding

Isaac Martin

It  was an edge-of-the-radar-screen news story that I happen to notice, surfing the Fox News web site. The story was about the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge, which is located west of Douglas, Arizona and its southern boundary is adjacent to the Mexican border.

According to the report, and refuge website, 3500 acres have been posted off limits to visitors, due to the presence of drug and human smuggling. Rather than dealing effectively to secure the border, Federal officials have ceded 3500 acres to drug cartels and smugglers. Granted, that acreage is only three percent of the 118,000 acre park and no doubt a small area which no one will really miss viewing.  

This off-limits must also infer it’s OK for illegal aliens and criminals to tramp through a wildlife refuge, destroying the pristine environment with dead bodies, discarded clothes, empty food packages and bathroom tissue, because the government won’t enforce environmental laws, let alone border security.

However, if a U.S. citizen left trash behind, you can be sure government agents and prosecutors would work diligently to identify and charge that person or group with environment crimes. Prosecutors, I guess, aren’t afraid of U.S. citizens, but drug smugglers are seen as live-and-let live. Why?

Furthermore, this closure makes me wonder, how much more land will be placed off-limits to visitors? Ten thousand acres? A smuggling corridor up to Interstate 8? According to the refuge website, officials suggested that visitors plan their outdoor activities north of I-8. How much sovernity will the U.S. cede until it does something? Maybe they can negotiate an accommodation with drug cartels, although I often wonder how do you negotiate with murders.

What ultimately is annoying is that as a U.S. Citizen, I am kept from going where I please on land that isn’t marked with red, white and blue Property of the U.S. Government shields or posted against trespassing. All of which illustrates the saying, when the government can’t control the criminal, they control the law-abiding.

I have personal experience regarding that, and it illustrates how long this problem has existed. In 1993, I, my wife and 3-year old daughter traveled down by Douglas, Arizona. One of the area attractions was the John Slaughter Ranch, 15 miles east of town, about a mile or two from the border. The ranch has been restored as a historical site.

After touring it, I asked the guide, if the dirt road led down to the border. I wanted to drive to it and do touristy things. Like step across and enter Mexico “illegally”. Or stand with one foot in the U.S. and one in Mexico. If there was border marker, take a photo standing next to it. Also, I would have stood there and pondered what it would be like to have lived in this area in Slaughter’s day . 

Upon my query, the guide told me that the DEA said the area was off-limits because of drug smuggling and you couldn’t go without prior permission. I thought then, as I do now, that a bunch of narco criminals were defining where I could or could not travel.

As a practical matter, we were traveling armed, so we would not have been easily victimized. But with my daughter, I thought better of it and we didn’t travel to the border.

Today, that would be different. My daughter is a little bigger now and we would  again exercise our 2A right. In our border jaunt, it would be the height of irony, if we were stopped by Federal law enforcement and asked what were we doing there. To which I would reply, we were just sight seeing. No doubt, we would be asked to show our “papers”. Isn’t that the law that the President thinks is wrong? Sorry, my mistake; it’s the Arizona law he opposes.

Ultimately, if Federal border officials viewed a vehicle crossing the Mexican border northbound, I wonder if they would stop it to check “papers”, although that could be construed as profiling. Or would that illegal entry be in an area negotiated off limits to U.S. Citizens? Does anyone in Homeland Security realize that when the enemy restricts your movement in your sovereign territory, they’re winning?

Things, I suspect, will only get uglier.

Invading the U.S.A.

Invading the U.S.A.

Posted By Mike Finch On May 25, 2010 @ 12:30 am In FrontPage | 33 Comments

Pirates prowling the shores, kidnappings and abductions, the murdering of American citizens on our own soil.  A borderland in chaos, full scale anarchy, lawlessness and armed gangs ruling the borderlands.

Such a description certainly fits today with our border with Mexico.  Stories of murder, mayhem, abductions, drugs and trafficking fill the news on a daily basis.  The border area and the cities of Juarez, Tijuana and Nogales are war zones, the violence spreading across the border at a frightening rate.

But the description is not for today alone.  In the aftermath of the War of 1812, with the defeat of the British and New Orleans secure, only Spanish Florida remained out of American hands, the last European colony east of the Mississippi.

But Spain was weak, its once great Global Empire a faded memory as it struggled to hold on to its prize colonies in the Western Hemisphere.  Florida however, like most of Spain’s other colonies in the present day United States, was not considered significant.  Outside of a few military outposts and scattered missions, the disease infested swamps and marshlands were left uninhabited.

By the early 19th century, Florida had become the home of ruffians, outlaws, buccaneers, runaway slaves, and Indian bandits.  The Spanish garrisons in Pensacola were hard pressed to protect their own settlers, much less patrol the anarchy on the border of the U.S.  By 1817, with Americans being attacked and murdered on our side of the border, the crisis had reached a boiling point.  It was one thing to have chaos across a border, but when it spilled over to our side, endangering American lives and property, it became a crisis that had to be dealt with.

Fortunately, America at that time had the strength of General Andrew Jackson, fresh off his victory at the Battle of New Orleans. He was a national hero.  Politicians in Washington, as is often the case, were hesitant and adverse to conflict, even in the case of protecting American lives.  But President James Monroe, sensing that something had to be done, gave orders to U.S. troops to chase raiders across the border.  Jackson took his cue, and within a short period of time, Florida was cleared of trouble. Spain meekly retreated and paved the way for annexation and later statehood for the territory.  Most critical, Americans were safe.

What is the lesson?  There are many and though history never runs a straight line to the present, we can draw from the parallels.  The first and most important lesson of course, is that the protection of American lives and property is paramount over any other consideration.  All options go on the table in the defense of protecting our citizens against harm.  Second, we should not be afraid, averse, or even hesitant to use force, including military force to interdict, across the border if necessary, those committing crimes against American sovereignty.

If the Mexican government cannot control the border, much as the Spanish government could not control Florida in 1817, it is incumbent on the Federal Government of the United States to take whatever steps are necessary to curb the violence.  And let’s call this what it is.  When foreign nationals with weapons cross a border and murder, destroy property and kidnap Americans, that is an invasion.  We have every right to defend ourselves; now the only relevant question is where has America’s pride gone when we don’t care enough for protecting Americans from violence being committed across an international border.  That is singly the Federal Government’s responsibility.

Does this mean we should invade northern Mexico?  Probably not yet, but we do need to militarize the border and prepare for whatever actions become necessary.  As history shows, the precedent is there.

America can and should not stand by and allow a lawless borderland to continue.  The drug cartels have taken control of the border and murdered thousands of Mexicans and now that violence has come north.  Call it what you want, but it is a war.  And if Mexico won’t or can’t fight this war, we will.  If we can send hundreds of thousands of American troops to protect the life and liberty of Iraqis, Afghans, Vietnamese, Koreans, Bosnians, and millions of others, then we can surely do the same for our own American citizens.

It is time to heed the call of Andrew Jackson. “The conduct of this banditti is such as will not be tolerated by our government, and if not put down by Spanish authority will compel us in self-defense to destroy them.”  Such were the words given by Jackson to the Spanish Governor at Pensacola.  Such words should have been spoken by our President instead of the cowardly and treacherous apology that he gave President Calderon last week in Washington and his arrogant elitist blather about shopping for ice cream cones.  Has he forgotten the oath that he took just a year and a half ago?

A message needs to be sent to Washington and to Mexico City.  American lives deserved to be protected from foreign invasion.  It is the one duty of the Federal Government above all others.  It is time this warning is heeded.

Is This Just a Nightmare, or Did It Really Happen?

Is This Just a Nightmare, or Did It Really Happen?

By Jared E. Peterson

Over the past week we witnessed presidential and congressional disloyalty without precedent in American history, events that should be indelibly imprinted on the American electorate’s collective memory. For the first time (at least to this writer’s knowledge), a foreign head of state who is promoting an ongoing, aggressive, illegal, and often violent invasion of America came to our country, met with our president, and, from the White House itself, received our president’s implicit but obvious public support for that invasion; and that same foreign leader spoke to Congress and received a standing ovation from its Democrat members’ for his country’s war on America’s borders.

Is this just a nightmare, or did it really happen? 
During Barrack Hussein Obama’s May 19, 2010 joint press conference with Mexican President Felipe Calderón, our president — constitutionally charged with the duty to defend America from all enemies, foreign and domestic — earned the scarlet “D”: By silence he aligned himself with the invaders of our country and their leader against the citizens of America’s own state of Arizona who have been forced by his dereliction to defend themselves.
Nearly as amazing, on Thursday, May 20, 2010, that same foreign president, speaking from where Churchill stood during World War II, received a standing ovation from the Democrat members of Congress when he reviled the citizens of Arizona for daring to try to fashion a defense of their part of the American-Mexican border. And the Republicans did not walk out or offer any other visible, dramatic objection. 
An aside: The feckless Republican non-response to the Mexican President’s May 20 congressional rant is probably the least astounding of the week’s events. Our stodgy Republican opposition, with a few exceptions (e.g., see Congressman Tom McClintock’s superlative speech) is notable for its lack of leadership, courage, eloquence, timing, and political prescience. That a foreign head of state who insults the overwhelming majority of America’s citizens from a congressional podium might require a dramatic response from them, and at the same time might present a perfect opportunity to make clear which party is aligned with the American people on illegal immigration, would not occur to most of the timid and unimaginative mediocrities in this bunch.
But to return to the point: Consider carefully the stain of disloyalty that President Obama indelibly affixed to himself during the week just past.
On Wednesday, May 19, 2010, Felipe Calderón, President of politically and economically failed Mexico, stood on the South Lawn of the White House as a guest of America. He proceeded to claim that Arizona’s recently enacted immigration law “is forcing our people there to face discrimination,” and thereby he publicly trashed the State of Arizona, its legislators and governor, and, if polls are accurate, about 70% of its residents (and probably nearly the same percentage of all Americans) who unambiguously want the border sealed and support Arizona’s benign efforts to accomplish that goal. He said more, but that was enough. 
Standing next to this boor, the President of the United States (sic) responded to the tirade against America with silence. Or as the rest of the world will interpret Obama’s muteness, “I agree with everything you just said.” Can anyone imagine similar complicit disloyalty from Lincoln, Roosevelt (T. or F.D.), Truman, Kennedy, or Reagan? 
Rather than defend the reasonable actions of his countrymen, our president joined in the foreigner’s indictment of them. Later, on television, while the offensive Mexican president was still in the country, Obama added his own condemnation of those vile Americans he risibly claims to lead and protect: Of the Arizona statute, he said, “The Justice Department is looking at the legislation to make sure it’s consistent with ‘our core values’ and ‘existing legal precedent.'” Again, code-speak for “I agree with El Presedente. The people of Arizona, their legislators and governor, and all those who support them are despicable bigots.”
When America is being invaded by a foreign power, one expects the President of the United States to be on America’s side. That’s how it’s worked in the past, anyway. If that’s too steep a demand, could we ask that our president not publicly endorse the enemy’s characterization of modest defensive efforts as “discriminatory”? If even that decent silence is too much, could our president at least not provide the invaders’ leader with a White House venue to denounce our people and our laws?
Note to those Americans who have not yet noticed: Barrack Hussein Obama does not like or sympathize with this country.
His instinctual affinities are with others, particularly if they come from the southern hemisphere or call themselves Muslims, and especially if they vote Democrat when they get here. For a long time, some have known this about America’s first anti-American president. Many have not yet perceived it. Had most Republican members of Congress not been asleep, confused, or afraid, the events of last week could have cast a brilliant light on this awful truth.
But exposing the charlatan when he allows the truth to spill out, as he did last week, requires a courageous, clear-thinking, and articulate opposition. Other than Representative McClintock and a few more, who among key GOP officeholders possesses these traits?
An effective, courageous, and astute opposition lacking, the only course for loyal Americans is never to let last week’s outrages be forgotten. 
Any Republican candidate who fails to remind the November electorate that Barrack Hussein Obama, and the congressional Democrats en masse, endorsed and applauded America’s invaders and condemned its defenders, does not have the requisite qualities of intellect and courage to be helpful in the struggle to reclaim our country.   
Jared E. Peterson graduated from the University of California at Berkeley in Political Philosophy, and from the Harvard Law School. He has been a practicing lawyer for more than thirty-five years. 

Barry and Brewer’s Border Brouhaha

Barry and Brewer’s Border Brouhaha

Jeannie DeAngelis

Governor Jan Brewer has requested President Obama help secure the border with Mexico by reassigning National Guard helicopters from other states and training missions to Arizona.

Governor Brewer’s Border Security Plan calls for additional covert National Guard reconnaissance, increased National Guard aerial patrolling, annual National Guard military exercises conducted in regions along the border, increased economic and logistical support for local law enforcement, and improved border county interaction and federal agency partnership.  The Governor’s plan also calls for substantial expansion of the Joint Counter Narco-Terrorism Task Force (JCNTF).

Governor Brewer made the request in a letter to Obama, dated the day after the state dinner for Mexican president Felipe Calderón. Brewer must have felt if 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue could be so heavily guarded by security, secret service and ID checkers for a state dinner and after party, why not some choppers to keep drug runners, gangs, illegals and violent criminals out of Arizona?

While attempting to enforce immigration law in Arizona the governor claims to have only, “…four OH-58 Kiowa helicopters available for border missions,” at her disposal.  Apparently, “choppers are deployed overseas and others are reserved for training missions.” 

Maybe there are extra helicopters hanging around the premises left over from Beyonce’s Margarita and Felipe performance on the South Lawn of the White House that could be freed up for border reconnaissance missions

In addition to recently requesting air support Governor Jan Brewer also took the disingenuous, inappropriate nature of Obama’s immigration statements and sentiments to task. 

Daily Jan Brewer stares down Mexican banditos, so publicly spanking Barry for misstatements, bad attitudes and misrepresentation of the Arizona bill, was no big deal for a governor determined to protect a border state and uphold the rule of law, and well she should.

The Obama administration has distorted and politicized the Arizona law, as well as using a serious issue to divide the nation along racial lines.   The President also incorporated Arizona’s attempt to close unsecured borders into the butt of juvenile jokes.

And while Barack Obama may host a great party, and even graciously share the stage with a rat, the Arizona governor felt Barry’s obnoxious jocularity when referring to situations where drug runners murder American citizens, should be addressed.

Soon after Jan Brewer publicly pointed out Barack’s less than stellar performance as a national leader, the governor then “requested additional helicopters be freed up from training missions or taken from other states and assigned to the southwestern border.”

Now that’s a lady with chutzpah!

However, after going toe-to-toe with Barack, who seems more willing to agree with foreign leaders, criticizing American laws and statutes, than supporting a governor whose state is overrun with illegal criminals – the additional helicopter appeal doesn’t look hopeful.

 “The governor acknowledges her request may be unpopular with other governors, but she says she believes there are legitimate national interests in sending more aircraft to Arizona.” 

Governor Jan Brewer’s request will not only be “unpopular” with other governors, but detested by the Secretary of Homeland Security, likely mocked by the “misdirected” Barack Obama and if given a platform, Mexican border enforcer, Felipe de Jesús Calderón Hinojos could add his two cents. 

Reality is, chances are better for Tareq and Michaele Salahi getting into a White House function a second time then Jan Brewer getting one scintilla of assistance from the federal government. It’s unlikely the Arizona governor’s letter, request or existence will be acknowledged by the President, let alone one additional OH-58 Kiowa granted to assist in Jan Brewer’s endeavor to secure the United States border.


Author’s content: www.jeannie-ology.com

Mexico’s President Has Some Nerve Lecturing His U.S. ‘Amigos’

Mexico’s President Has Some Nerve Lecturing His U.S. ‘Amigos’

By Bradley Blakeman

 – FOXNews.com

 The fact that an American administration would invite and incite a head of state to disrespect our nation is unconscionable. 

Reuters

The Democrats thought that if they invited Mexican President Calderon to address a Joint Meeting of Congress this week that they could encourage him to use that solemn opportunity to take a swipe at Arizona’s new immigration law. Well it backfired.

The fact that an American administration would invite and incite a head of state to disrespect our nation is unconscionable. This is what the President of Mexico said about an American law from the podium of the United States House of Representatives:

“It introduces a terrible idea using racial profiling as a basis for law enforcement.” He went on to say, “I agree with the president (Barack Obama) who says the new law carries a great amount of risk with the core values that we all care about are breached.”

It was no secret what President Calderon would say. Here is what Time Correspondent Tim Padgett wrote on Wednesday as he anticipated Thursday’s speech:

 

“So perhaps we deserve some of the lecturing we’re bound to get from President Felipe Calderón when he climbs Capitol Hill on Thursday. He’ll point out, as the Obama administration has conceded, that much of the blame for Mexico’s horrible narcoviolence lies with our insatiable demand for drugs and our lame-brained refusal in 2004 to renew a ban on assault weapons that are being smuggled into Mexico. He’ll insist, rightly, that we comply with NAFTA and give Mexican trucks access to U.S. highways. And he’ll rail at Arizona’s hysterical new anti-immigration law, which allows police to detain anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant and which critics call carte blanche for racial profiling of Mexicans and other Hispanics. ‘It opens the door to intolerance, hate and discrimination,’ Calderon said recently.”

Calderon’s dissatisfaction with American immigration policy is as much an indictment on President Obama as it is with the House and Senate — all of which are controlled by Democrats, by the way. President Obama promised that in his first year he would make immigration reforms a top priority. Well, a year has come and gone and the president and the Democratically-controlled House and Senate did absolutely nothing with regard to immigration. Their inaction forced the State of Arizona, out of frustration, to take action through legislation.

Arizona law’s, (which our Attorney General and Homeland Security Secretary seem to have no trouble criticizing even though they haven’t bothered to read it), mirrors federal law — almost verbatim.

How can Mexico’s president rail against American immigration law when Mexican law is almost identical to law in the United States and Arizona?

Mexico has become a narco-terrorist state. More than 15,000 people have been killed in drug- related violence since Calderon took office in 2006. President Calderon and his government are not in control. Who is he to come here and lecture to us when he has surrendered his nation to drug dealers and thugs? Mexico is rife with corruption and it has a jobless rate that dwarfs our own.

Calderon’s country does not have Americans, by the millions, flooding into Mexico to take jobs, and use services they are not contributing to.
America needs to enforce its immigration laws, period. Arizona taxpayers, like those from other border states, are required to spend billions of dollars every year as a direct result of our nation’s failed immigration policy. It show up in higher costs for law enforcement, health care, schooling, housing, jobs, etc. States are not reimbursed from the federal government for the federal government’s inability or desire to enforce federal law. Enough is enough!

Now is the time to deal with immigration in a real, just and equitable way for all parties. Immigration reform starts with enforcing existing laws and securing our borders.

As far as President Calderon is concerned: Hasta la vista, sir.

Bradley A. Blakeman served as deputy assistant to President George W. Bush from 2001-04. He is currently a professor of Politics and Public Policy at Georgetown University and a frequent contributor to the Fox  News

Illegal Immigration = Human Smuggling/Trafficking (And That’s Just Fine For Progressives)

Set aside the national security issue for a minute, and consider the fact that illegal immigration into this nation is the life blood for human smugglers and traffickers.

This has been the case for a very long time and is the fault of both major parties. One example comes to us from USA Today back in 2005, but we can hardly believe this is an uncommon tale:

Now a cashier at a discount store, Molina was enticed to California by a woman back home in Mexico’s Puebla state who promised a job and free housing.

“I came to the United States with lots of dreams, but when I got here, my dreams were stolen,” said Molina, 33, who left three children behind in Mexico.

On Jan. 1, 2002, she worked her first shift at the dressmaker’s, sewing roughly 200 party dresses over 12 hours.

Later, the shifts stretched to 17 hours. Molina was locked into the shop at night — sleeping in a small storage room. The shop manager confiscated her identify documents.

Does anyone want to make the argument that the human smuggling business isn’t a violent enterprise, wherein people are raped, robbed, enslaved, and murdered?

This one is obvious kids. Even without having to worry about Hezbollah Jihadis coming across our unsecured border from Hugostan, the moral position here is to cut off the human smuggling routes because they devastate lives. Excusing this black market in human beings is disgusting.

America should have a generous immigration posture which encourages legal and documented entry for an abundance of people. Ironically, for some reason Progressives are very invested in maintaining the status quo when it comes to the human smuggling and trafficking industry on our Southern border.

Why are America’s Progressives not advocating on behalf of the welfare and safety of those who fall prey to the coyotes who traffic them over the border, by encouraging legal immigration and discouraging illegal immigration?

It isn’t as though they don’t know that there is a problem here. From President Obama’s own State Department:

Mexico is a large source, transit, and destination country for persons trafficked for the purposes of commercial sexual exploitation and forced labor. Groups considered most vulnerable to human trafficking in Mexico include women and children, indigenous persons, and undocumented migrants. A significant number of Mexican women, girls, and boys are trafficked within the country for commercial sexual exploitation, lured by false job offers from poor rural regions to urban, border, and tourist areas. According to the government, more than 20,000 Mexican children are victims of sex trafficking every year, especially in tourist and border areas. The vast majority of foreign victims trafficked into the country for commercial sexual exploitation are from Central America, particularly Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador; many transit Mexico en route to the United States and, to a lesser extent, Canada and Western Europe.

For all of the Left’s characterization of Republicans as simply being the “party of no” while offering no credible alternative, it’s hard not to note the hypocrisy of their position on this issue.

In the absence of the Federal Government living up to its constitutional mandate to secure our borders, what do the Progressive-Democrats have to offer besides outrage and violence against the police?

596 immigrants convicted of crimes nabbed in South

596 immigrants convicted of crimes nabbed in South
Apr 30 12:51 PM US/Eastern
By GREG BLUESTEIN
Associated Press Writer
ATLANTA (AP) – Federal agents say they have arrested 596 immigrants with criminal records during a three-day immigration enforcement sweep across the Southeast.U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said Friday that the operation, dubbed Operation Cross Check, was the largest ever conducted by the agency targeting foreign nationals convicted of crimes. They said the immigrants have already served their sentences and authorities will now seek to deport them.

Atlanta ICE Field Director Felicia Skinner says that “communities around the Southeast are safer than they were before” as a result. She said three of the people arrested this week had been convicted of murder and 144 were convicted on assault charges.

___

On the Net:

http://www.ice.gov

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 55 other followers