Friday, October 30, 2009
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer
(CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)(CNSNews.com) – The Department of Homeland Security is gagging local law enforcement agencies around the country to protect the privacy of illegal aliens.
Under "revised" 287(g) agreements between the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement division and state and local law enforcement agencies, any information about local police efforts to enforce federal immigration law must be cleared through ICE before it can be released to the media or the public. DHS says it is doing this to protect the privacy of illegal aliens.
“The Privacy Act and the privacy policy provide protections for U.S. citizens, legal permanent residents and, in the case of the privacy policy, illegal aliens,” Kelly Nantel, press secretary for ICE, told CNSNews.com, referring to the Privacy Act of 1974.
Nantel said that although illegal aliens are not protected under the Privacy Act, it is the policy of the Department of Homeland Security to extend the privacy protection to individuals who are in the country illegally, a policy she said was put into place by former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff, who served under President Bush.
“Any information regarding individuals encountered through the enforcement of federal law is ultimately protected,” Nantel said. “We need to be sure that prior to the release of information, an appropriate determination is made regarding those protections.”
The DHS's agreements with local law enforcement agencies--known as Memorandums of Agreement (MOA)--guide the 287(g) program, which was created in 2003 as an amendment to the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. The 287(g) program trains and certifies state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal immigration law.
In July, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that the existing agreements with local law enforcement agencies would be “standardized” and reviewed. In a speech in August, Napolitano said the MOAs had been “rewritten and reprioritized to focus on using them in jails and prisons.”
Illegal immigrants handcuffed together are moved into a separate area of Tent City in Phoenix, Ariz., on Feb. 4, 2009 by orders of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. They will be incarcerated there until their sentences are served and they are deported to their home countries (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)The Obama administration says the priority for local law enforcers should be illegal aliens arrested for or convicted of crimes -- not people arrested in task force sweeps simply for being in the U.S. illegally.
As CNSNews.com reported earlier, the controvery over task force sweeps erupted earlier this year when ICE stripped the Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff's Department of its authority to conduct such sweeps.
The man who heads that department, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, claims to have removed more than 30,000 illegal aliens from the streets in task force operations since he signed on to the 287(g) program in 2007. Complaints of racial profiling have prompted the Obama Justice Department to investigate Arpaio and his department.
The revised MOAs given to all of DHS's local law enforcement “partners” includes the following language governing the “release of information to the media and other third parties.”
“The [state or local agency] hereby agrees to coordinate with ICE prior to releasing any information relating to, or exchanged under, this MOA, including any SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) developed for the implementation of this MOA. Information obtained or developed as a result of this MOA is under the control of ICE and shall be subject to public disclosure only pursuant to the provisions of applicable federal laws, regulations, and executive orders. Insofar as any documents created by the [state or local agency] contain information developed or obtained as a result of this MOA, such documents shall not be considered public records.”
Reporters or members of the public who want information arising from a local law enforcement agency's efforts to enforce immigration law will be forced to file a Freedom of Information Act request to gain access to information that is not classified and which the public is entitled to see.
“The standardized 287(g) Memorandums of Agreement include provisions designed to protect information whose (sic) release would violate privacy laws or hamper the outcome of a law enforcement investigation,” Nantel said. “However, information defined as not public record can be released through a Freedom of Information Act request as long as the release does not violate other laws and DHS policies.”
DHS and ICE officials said enforcement of federal immigration law will concentrate on “criminal aliens” and not on individuals who are simply in the country illegally. Nantel said the treatment of illegal aliens without a criminal record will be handled on a case-by-case basis.
The MOA spells out that policy as follows:
“ICE will assume custody of an alien 1) who has been convicted of a State, local or Federal offense only after being informed by the alien’s custodian that such alien has concluded service of any sentence of incarceration; 2) who has prior criminal convictions and when immigration detention is required by statute; and 3) when the ICE Detention and Removal Field Office Director or his designee decides on a case-by-case basis to assume custody of an alien who does not meet the above criteria.”
CNSNews.com asked Nantel if the Obama administration, DHS, and ICE support the arrest and deportation of individuals who are in the country illegally, regardless of whether they have committed a crime. Nantel did not give a simple yes-or-no answer to this question, saying instead that the administration will remove illegal aliens according to "DHS priorities."
“ICE is first and foremost focused on identifying and removing dangerous criminal aliens who pose a threat to local communities," Nantel said. "ICE will arrest and process for removal any individuals who are found to be in this country illegally in a manner consistent with immigration law and DHS priorities.”
Friday, October 30, 2009
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
The Difference between Conservatives and Liberals
If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't` eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.
If a liberal sees a foreign threat, he wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.
If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a person of color is conservative, they see themselves as independently successful.
Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced. (Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a conservative slips and falls in a store, he gets up, laughs and is embarrassed.
If a liberal slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like he's in labor and then sues.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't` eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.
If a liberal sees a foreign threat, he wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.
If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a person of color is conservative, they see themselves as independently successful.
Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced. (Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a conservative slips and falls in a store, he gets up, laughs and is embarrassed.
If a liberal slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like he's in labor and then sues.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
The REAL Cost of a Date
From a former Air Force Colonel....
First, let me say that I've moved three presidents up to now and I've seen incredible waste. But, the "new" guy really takes the cake. I don't have an issue with the President promising his wife dinner and a show or that he even takes his wife out. But, when I saw the news say that the date cost $24,000, here's what you DON'T know.
Three days before "dinner" a C-17 flew Marines and the helicopter maintenance equipment to JFK Airport . The day before "dinner" I flew the USSS (Secret Service) and the motorcade to JFK Airport.
Our crew of 5 spent two days and nights at the Hilton in Times Square . My hotel bill: $621.66 plus $64 a day in per diem. The USSS guys were at a different Hilton in NYC, so figure that cost another $14,000 (or so) plus per diem. The Marines had to have cost as much and were there four days, so figure another $55,000 plus per diem (for 44 Marines).
We were supposed to fly the motorcade back and go home, but the Air Force was so short of C-17's that we were re-tasked to take the motorcade back, return to JFK and take the helicopter back to Quantico.
When we got back to JFK, while the pilot was turning the plane around to park, he noticed a rotor blade sticking out of the hangar where the helicopter was parked and informed me that either it wasn't ready to transport or it was flying home. After shutting down I walked over to the hangar and to my surprise I find FIVE helicopters, not ONE.
We're obviously not transporting five big helicopters. I went and talked to the Marines guarding the "fleet" and found that they were flying all five helicopters home and we were only transporting the Marines and the maintenance equipment. After talking to the Marine(s) in charge, I was told that the White House requested FIVE helicopters. The Marines told me that they spent all morning trying to figure out how much it cost them to come and said they figured it cost them $140,000 to stay there (I don't know where they came up with that) and the trip's total had to be about $1,000,000. We heard that the President didn't use Air Force One (the 747) so I asked if he came in on one of the 757's. I was told that he came in on THREE Air Force Lear jets.
So, date night consisted of:
2 C-17's flying three missions, 3 Lear jets, 5 Helicopters, Presidential Motorcade, 44 Marines, more than 20 USSS personnel on our plane. Who knows what it cost the NYPD and NY Port Authority (at the airport) in overtime.
These are the same people that chastised the automobile CEO's for using their aircraft. It further proves that the media only use the facts that make the President look good and hide any facts that will detract from his persona. Is this the 'change' we expected?
Talk with friends and those who are not blinded by charisma. Many folks I know who voted for Obama are very disappointed and sorry they did so. The Emperor's clothes on a grand scale. "Transparency"? Remember, 2010 is just around the corner. All we have to do is survive long enough.
First, let me say that I've moved three presidents up to now and I've seen incredible waste. But, the "new" guy really takes the cake. I don't have an issue with the President promising his wife dinner and a show or that he even takes his wife out. But, when I saw the news say that the date cost $24,000, here's what you DON'T know.
Three days before "dinner" a C-17 flew Marines and the helicopter maintenance equipment to JFK Airport . The day before "dinner" I flew the USSS (Secret Service) and the motorcade to JFK Airport.
Our crew of 5 spent two days and nights at the Hilton in Times Square . My hotel bill: $621.66 plus $64 a day in per diem. The USSS guys were at a different Hilton in NYC, so figure that cost another $14,000 (or so) plus per diem. The Marines had to have cost as much and were there four days, so figure another $55,000 plus per diem (for 44 Marines).
We were supposed to fly the motorcade back and go home, but the Air Force was so short of C-17's that we were re-tasked to take the motorcade back, return to JFK and take the helicopter back to Quantico.
When we got back to JFK, while the pilot was turning the plane around to park, he noticed a rotor blade sticking out of the hangar where the helicopter was parked and informed me that either it wasn't ready to transport or it was flying home. After shutting down I walked over to the hangar and to my surprise I find FIVE helicopters, not ONE.
We're obviously not transporting five big helicopters. I went and talked to the Marines guarding the "fleet" and found that they were flying all five helicopters home and we were only transporting the Marines and the maintenance equipment. After talking to the Marine(s) in charge, I was told that the White House requested FIVE helicopters. The Marines told me that they spent all morning trying to figure out how much it cost them to come and said they figured it cost them $140,000 to stay there (I don't know where they came up with that) and the trip's total had to be about $1,000,000. We heard that the President didn't use Air Force One (the 747) so I asked if he came in on one of the 757's. I was told that he came in on THREE Air Force Lear jets.
So, date night consisted of:
2 C-17's flying three missions, 3 Lear jets, 5 Helicopters, Presidential Motorcade, 44 Marines, more than 20 USSS personnel on our plane. Who knows what it cost the NYPD and NY Port Authority (at the airport) in overtime.
These are the same people that chastised the automobile CEO's for using their aircraft. It further proves that the media only use the facts that make the President look good and hide any facts that will detract from his persona. Is this the 'change' we expected?
Talk with friends and those who are not blinded by charisma. Many folks I know who voted for Obama are very disappointed and sorry they did so. The Emperor's clothes on a grand scale. "Transparency"? Remember, 2010 is just around the corner. All we have to do is survive long enough.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
