UN experts condemn new Arizona law

The UN doesn't exactly have a bang-up track record when it comes to human rights. In fact, some have started raising a stink about the UN's own pitiful record. (There are numerous stories -- Story after story after story after story after story -- available on the Internet detailing the sex abuse scandals perpetrated by UN peacekeepers, and the attempts by the UN to cover them up.)

But now this ineffective, corrupt, and outdated organization is b*tching about Arizona's new immigration law. And just like every other critic out there, it's apparent they haven't read the bloody thing:

Arizona's new law on illegal immigration could violate international standards that are binding in the United States, six U.N. human rights experts said Tuesday.

The basic human rights regulations, signed by the U.S. and many other nations, regard issues such as discrimination and the terms under which a person can be detained, the experts said.

"A disturbing pattern of legislative activity hostile to ethnic minorities and immigrants has been established with the adoption of an immigration law that may allow for police action targeting individuals on the basis of their perceived ethnic origin," the experts said.

Arizona's new sweeping law targeting illegal immigration has provisions that include requiring police enforcing another law to question a person about his or her immigration status, if there is "reasonable suspicion" that the person is in the United States illegally. It also makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally.

In America, critics have said the law violates the U.S. Constitution's provisions against unreasonable search and seizure and will result in racial profiling of Hispanics. Supporters deny that and say the law will pressure illegal immigrants to leave the country on their own.

In their statement, the six U.N. experts said: "States are required to respect and ensure the human rights of all persons subject to their jurisdiction, without discrimination."

"Relevant international standards require that detention be used only as an exceptional measure, justified, narrowly tailored and proportional in each individual case, and that it be subject to judicial review," the experts said.

The law could result in potential discrimination against Mexicans, indigenous peoples and other minorities in Arizona, the U.N. officials said.

They also said they are concerned about the enactment of a law prohibiting Arizona school programs featuring the histories and cultures of ethnic minorities because everyone has the right to learn about his own cultural and linguistic heritage.

The six U.N. human rights experts, who are unpaid, are

--Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants Jorge Bustamante of Mexico;

--Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance Githu Muigai of Kenya;

--Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people James Anaya of the United States;

--Independent Expert in the field of cultural rights Farida Shaheed of Pakistan;

--Special Rapporteur on the right to education Vernor Munos Villalobos of Costa Rica; and

--Independent Expert on minority issues Gay McDougall of the United States.

Let me go point by point here ...

First, I could give a rat's @$$ about the "binding" international standards. Know why? Because the Arizona law reinforces FEDERAL LAW! All this law did was extend to local law enforcement the ability to check on a person's immigration status at their discretion. It's the officer's call as to whether or not they check. They're not told to do it, compelled to do it, and they won't be doing it on everyone they stop. That's especially true if the person in question happens to have ID on them. That is basically what our new law says: IF you have ID, you're OK.

Second, the law specifically forbids police from stopping anyone based solely on perceived ethnicity or race. Period. The police won't be using racial profiling. This law doesn't allow such a thing. And if the UN, along with the rest of the critics, had read the bloody law they'd know this, especially since we're basically backing up US federal law; laws that the federal government hasn't enforced!

Then there's this little tidbit above: "Arizona's new sweeping law targeting illegal immigration has provisions that include requiring police enforcing another law to question a person about his or her immigration status ..." That's an outright lie! There is NOTHING in the law "requiring" police officers to do this. Police have the right and ability to check on that if they have reasonable suspicion that the person they have stopped may be here illegally. BUT, the law explicitly states that if the person has a legal ID (driver's license, state-issued ID card, Mexican consular card, Mexican electoral card, passport, etc; basically any valid ID accepted by the state of Arizona) then they're fine. Write them their ticket for the infraction, and they're on their way. They won't be detained.

Fourth, the critics who claim this violates the Fourth Amendment clearly don't understand the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment reads [emphasis mine]:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Now because the UN dislikes our Constitution (see the Second Amendment for reason #1 why they don't like it) it's clear that, as in the case of Arizona's new law, they haven't read the US Constitution either. At the very least they don't seem to understand it. The Fourth Amendment precisely refers to the protections against unlawful and unreasonable searches and/or seizures. In other words, the government can't come into our homes with the intent to search and/or seize anything we own without a warrant, based on probable cause. In the case of the new immigration law, that is also distinctively detailed within the provisions of the law. Law enforcement must have probable cause (or reasonable suspicion) that the person in question is here illegally before they can check on their immigration status.

Now I'm going to touch on the other law that these six morons are referring to. There has been another law passed that has quite a few knickers in a twist. That law bans the teaching of certain ethnic studies. What are those studies exactly? The sort perpetuated by La Raza, of course, and they seem to be the main group with their panties in a wad:

After making national headlines for a new law on illegal immigrants, the Arizona Legislature passed a bill Thursday that would ban ethnic studies programs in the state that critics say currently advocate separatism and racial preferences.

The bill, which passed 32-26 in the state House, had been approved by the Senate a day earlier. It now goes to Gov. Jan Brewer for her signature.

The new bill would make it illegal for a school district to teach any courses that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, promote resentment of a particular race or class of people, are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group or “advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.”

Michelle Malkin has done yeoman's work documenting the Reconquista movement perpetuated by groups like La Raza, MECHa and Aztlan. Back in 2008, Ms. Malkin highlighted the details behind a La Raza-backed history class in Tucson. A Tucson high school teacher recounts exactly what was going on in his class with his students:

During the 2002-2003 school year, I taught a U.S. history course with a Mexican-American perspective. The course was part of the Raza/Chicano studies department.Within one week of the course beginning, I was told that I was a “teacher of record,” meaning that I was expected only to assign grades. The Raza studies department staff would teach the class.

I was assigned to be a “teacher of record” because some members of the Raza studies staff lacked teaching certificates. It was a convenient way of circumventing the rules.I stated that I expected to do more than assign grades. I expected to be involved in teaching the class. The department was less than enthusiastic but agreed.Immediately it was clear that the class was not a U.S. history course, which the state of Arizona requires for graduation. The class was similar to a sociology course one expects to see at a university.

Where history was missing from the course, it was filled by controversial and biased curriculum.

The basic theme of the curriculum was that Mexican-Americans were and continue to be victims of a racist American society driven by the interests of middle and upper-class whites. In this narrative, whites are able to maintain their influence only if minorities are held down. Thus, social, political and economic events in America must be understood through this lens.This biased and sole paradigm justified teaching that our community police officers are an extension of the white power structure and that they are the strongmen used “to keep minorities in their ghettos.”

It justified telling the class that there are fewer Mexican-Americans in Tucson Magnet High School’s advanced placement courses because their “white teachers” do not believe they are capable and do not want them to get ahead.

It justified teaching that the Southwestern United States was taken from Mexicans because of the insatiable greed of the Yankee who acquired his values from the corrupted ethos of Western civilization.

It was taught that the Southwest is “Atzlan,” the ancient homeland of the Aztecs, and still rightfully belongs to their descendants – to all people of indigenous Mexican heritage.

As an educator, I refused to be complicit in a curriculum that engendered racial hostility, irresponsibly demeaned America’s civil institutions, undermined our public servants, discounted any virtues in Western civilization and taught disdain for American sovereignty.

When I raised these concerns, I was told that I was a “racist,” despite being Hispanic. Acknowledging my heritage, the Raza studies staff also informed me that I was a vendido, the Spanish term for “sellout.”

THIS is the sort of education that is now banned in the state of Arizona. We have no problem touching on other cultures, but we will no longer support, encourage, or condone the sort of education La Raza supports. They teach racial divide. They teach animosity. They teach hostility towards America. They don't teach the real history when it comes to America and Mexico. No, they want to incite hostility, and at times they encourage violence. This is the sort of "ethnic studies" we have ended.

If the UN has a problem with this, tough sh*t. This is America, and we have a right to do what we see fit to protect ourselves. And because the federal government has continuously dropped the ball when it comes to immigration enforcement, the state of Arizona has asserted it's Tenth Amendment rights to take steps to protect the citizens of the state. We have recurring incursions across our Southern border by drug gangs, human smugglers, and even the Mexican military. We're facing a shooting war on our border, and all the federal government can do is yawn about it.

The UN can pound sand. Take their six "experts'" opinions and stick it where the sun doesn't shine. We didn't ask for their opinion, and it's not wanted. I'll tell readers this: When the UN actually starts doing it's job, cleans up it's act, and respects the sovereignty of ALL nations, then we might pay attention to the crap they're shoveling.



Publius II