Honduran Illegal Admits Sexually Assaulting 8 yr old
We are dedicated to fighting against illegal immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens and seek a peaceful solution to the crisis that involves Americans of every race, Party, and denomination working together.
Wednesday, October 21 @ 02:05:12 EDT by illegal_immigration (57 reads)
An undocumented Honduran immigrant, whose bail became the subject of a New Jersey Supreme Court case earlier this year, pleaded guilty today to sexually-assaulting a 8-year-old girl.
Manuel Fajardo-Santos, 31, admitted today to sexually assaulting his girlfriend's younger sister in Wharton on Aug. 24, 2008 after returning home from a party. Superior Court Judge John Dangler set sentencing for Jan. 29.
Topics: Illegal Immigrant, Manuel Fajardo-Santos, sexual assault, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, New Jersey Supreme Court
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Throughout my professional career (as an educator, communicator, social services provider, civil servant and government employee) I have always felt that success in any of these endeavors required establishing strong lines of communication. It was my belief (and still is) that the more informed a person was, the easier it became to make sound and positive decisions, those (which hopefully) benefitted all concerns.
I have always felt that having discussions (especially if conducted in a civilized manner) afforded all involved with the most positive approach to arrive at decisions (and or conclusions) that make the most common sense. One would like to think that our elected officials (at the local and national levels) would use this approach, too; but by observation their discussions become more debate than discussions, I would say primarily due to the imposed time constraints. And that’s not all bad, either.
One good thing about debates (as well as discussions, too) is they provide the opportunity to present a variety of facts and data pertinent to the subject under discussion. For example, when discussing funding for local education, school administrators present corroborating data such as student-to-teacher ratio, salaries, books and other administrative costs, and funders usually discuss budget allocation and limitations, and fiscal responsibilities to the tax payers (this is a generalized example).
Right now, our country is facing two major (and possibly societal and cultural-changing) issues: healthcare and immigration reform. It appears that immigration reform is being pushed onto the back burner by the Obama administration so it can focus more so on the healthcare issue. And one can understand why due to the fact that immigration reform is probably much more volatile than healthcare. Immigration reform has touched America’s main nerve center more than any other issue since whether we should have bombed Iraq or not, which we did.
During that imbroglio, much data was being presented back and forth by the CIA and other governmental entities, making claims that Iraq did possess Weapons of Mass Destruction, as well as the State Department and other government departments to justify the action taken by the George W. Bush Administration, amid the hue and cry by anti-war protests. This issue was most definitely important because it could have thrown us into Word War lll.
However, the immigration issue isn’t really as threatening to our national security as many people make it out to be. Yes, we are definitely concerned about terrorists crossing the Mexican border and officials at both sides have implemented their best respective security measures to prevent that, and have had these systems in place for years. Since 911, pressure from paranoids has increased. However, the hue and cry for security from terrorists coming through the Mexican borders are actually smokescreens to hide the fact that paranoids are mostly fearful that immigrants will consume America and change its National Identity, therefore the mantra employed is “let’s build the highest fence we can to keep the rift raft out!" Fine! This is all well and good and (trust me) many Latinos understand this psychosis.
However, what would appear strange and rather disconcerting, as each side prepares the evidence it wants to use in their respective positions concerning immigration, is the inclusion of data that has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue at hand. For example, during the great Iraq debate (as to whether this country should invade and bomb), as it was before the national stage, if in a CIA paper to the President would find information that an Iraqi citizen had raped a little girl, ostensibly justifying we should bomb Iraq, I’m certain that many eye brows would be raised. Most certainly, all crimes against any society must be solved by capturing the individual perpetrator and meting out the appropriate justice. But, should this particular crime (as horrible as it is) be considered as sufficient rationale to bomb Iraq?
Also, if additional data were included in an NSC (National Security Council) memorandum to the President that it had information about drug cartels in Iraq kidnapping and murdering Iraqi citizens near the borders of Syria, Lebanon and Iran, should this information be considered as evidence that supports the contention that Iraq possesses Weapons of Mass Destruction? If anything this innocuous data would add nothing to the debate but in fact would result solely in agitating and igniting the emotions of certain segments of society to get upset and holler: “Yea! Let’s nuke those suckers! Yea! Nuke the bastards!”
Well, guess what? ALIPAC (Americans for Legal Immigration), who claim they are dedicated to fighting against illegal immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens, and seek a peaceful solution to the crisis that involves Americans of every race, party, and denomination working together, have injected stories on their web site that can do nothing else but incite its constituents to respond to their cause by using data that is not even remotely connected to the issue of solving the immigration problem.
ALIPAC does not provide any empirical data concerning the positive economic impact that immigrants (legal or otherwise) have had throughout history. No mention of the fact that employers deduct all the taxes (social security, state, federal et al) from immigrant payroll checks, no mention of the fact that their mostly disposable income is tossed back into the economy on a 24 hour basis, no mention of fact that they take on and perform work that no natural citizen would accept at the (cheap) prevailing wages employers get away with, nor about how the stoop labor community provides the lettuce on the millions of McDonald’s sandwiches we gulp down each day. Well, why should (or would) they, they oppose immigration!
But, let some Latino in a faraway country rape a little girl and ALIPAC will make certain it gets front page attention. No mention is ever made by the ALIPAC's of the world about the nineteen hundred Latina woman that have been murdered in 2009, alone, along the Mexican border; but yet news about a missing white female college student in Virginia recently created media swarm on all networks, causing Amber alerts going off and creating alarm and fear throughout our caring nation.
Read the news items ALIPAC posts on its web site for its constituents, and then let the rest of America know how these contribute to the discussion or the debate as to how we (a united America) can find an equitable solution to the immigration debate:
As we indicated at the beginning, a united America can solve the immigration problem in a truly honest, thoughtful and productive manner through calm discussions, and or by debating meaningful and statistically-proven data, or it can continue in the vicious, mean-spirited and vitriolic manner it has evolved into. But, most of all, in cannot continue in the dishonest and inciting fear tactics employed by ALIPAC, who claims in its web site that it “seeks a peaceful solution to the crisis that involves Americans of every race, party, and denomination working together.”
Joe Ortiz is the author of two books that challenge the Left Behind and Pre-Tribulation Rapture doctrines, being promulgated by right-wing evangelicals who support military solutions to an historical conflict in the Middle East. For more information about his books, The End Times Passover and Why Christians Will Suffer Great Tribulation, visit his web site at: The End Times Passover
Posted by Joe Ortiz at 11:57 AM