Sunday, November 13


The Houston Chronicle (registration required for online edition) carries a story in the Sunday "Outlook" section of its print edition by Heather MacDonald, a contributing editor for City Journal. Ms. MacDonald's piece first appeared in the Los Angeles Times.

In it, she writes about the purposeful meddling of Mexico's U.S.-based consulates (and, indeed, those overseas as well) in the internal affairs and sovereignty of the United States government.

DIPLOMACY may be the art of lying for one's country, but Mexican diplomacy requires taking that art to virtuosic heights. Sitting in his expansive office in Mexico's Los Angeles consulate, Deputy Consul General Mario Velazquez-Suarez insists that he and his peers do not interfere in U.S. internal affairs, including immigration matters. "Immigration is an internal discussion," he says.

But it's not quite true. Mexican officials in the United States and abroad interfere almost daily in U.S. sovereignty.

MacDonald goes on to point to "Mexico's comic book-style guide to breaching" the U.S.-Mexico border safely "and evading detection once across," as an egregious example of Mexico meddling in a soveriegn nation's immigration policies.

She continues:

Consulates exist to promote the commercial interests of their nations abroad and to help nationals if they have lost passports, been robbed or fallen ill. They are not supposed to connive at breaking a host country's laws.

Assisted border-breaking is just the tip of the iceberg.

Mexican consulates, like those of other countries, have traditionally offered consular cards to their nationals for registration purposes. But after 9/11, consulates began to promote the card as a way for illegals to obtain privileges that the U.S. United States usually reserves for legal residents.

Consulates aggressively lobbied U.S. governmental officials and banks to accept the matriculas consular as valid IDs for driver's licenses, checking accounts and other privileges. Only illegals need this identification — legal aliens already have sufficient documentation to get driver's licenses or bank accounts.

The matriculas flew off the shelf — more than 4.7 million have been issued since 2000. Every day, illegals seeking matriculas swamp the consulates. Though a consulate's right to issue such a card is indisputable, Mexico is pushing the envelope when it lobbies governments to accept the card as an official ID.

As she reveals, the Mexican government has resisted the efforts of the U.S. Congress to pass "real I.D." legislation to eliminate the deleterious impact of matriculas consular.

Back in Mexico, politicians blast any hint that U.S. legislators might obstruct illegals' free pass.

In May, the U.S. Congress passed the Real ID Act, which rendered driver's licenses issued to illegal aliens inadmissible for aircraft boarding and at other federal security checkpoints. Then-Mexican Interior Minister Santiago Creel lashed out. The law, he said, is "absurd; it is not understandable in light of any criteria."

But this sort of interference pales against the following, as the author descibes:

The gall of Mexican officials goes further.

After pressing us to educate Mexico's citizens, give them food stamps, deliver their babies, provide them with hospital beds and police their neighborhoods, the Mexican government also expects us to help preserve their loyalty — to Mexico.

Each of Mexico's 47 consulates in the United States has a mandate to introduce Mexican textbooks into schools with significant Hispanic populations. The Mexican Consulate in Los Angeles showered nearly 100,000 textbooks on 1,500 schools in the L.A. Unified School District this year alone.

"If people are living in the U.S., of course they need to become excellent citizens of this place," said Mireya Magana Galvez, a press attaché with the Los Angeles consulate. "If we can help in their education, they will understand better."

The Mexican sixth-grade history book celebrates the troops who fought the Americans during the Mexican-American War. But "all the sacrifices and heroism of the Mexican people were useless," recounts the chronicle. The "Mexican people saw the enemy flag wave at the National Palace." The war's consequences were "disastrous," notes the primer: "To end the occupation, Mexico was obligated to sign the treaty of Guadeloupe-Hidalgo," by which the country lost half its territory to the United States.

This points directly to what this blogger has written about in countless posts -- namely, el Plan De Atzlan. Our equivalent of the rioting in France may be just around the corner if Mexico and its open border apologists here in the States have their way. And that, dear readers, is not hyperbole.

Heather MacDonald concludes by rightly chastizing President Bush and his administration for the lackluster enforcement of border security and for George W. Bush's unwillingness to push back on Vicente Fox and the corrupt Mexican government:

The Bush administration winks at such Mexican intrusions with the same insouciance with which it refuses to enforce the immigration laws.

The result: an immigration policy that often appears to emanate as much from Mexico City as from Washington.

That's a good closing line, Ms. MacDonald. You're spot on. And I'm not holding my breath that there will be an epiphany in the White House anytime soon on what constitues bona fide homeland security.

If this whole scenario infuriates you, then please read this post of mine on proposed border enforcement legislation with real teeth in it that you can get behind. You'll find the specific reference by scrolling down to the bottom of the post and a "follow-up" linking to a Dan Stein Report post.