Additional Titles









Chick-Fil-A Versus the Radical Gay Agenda

In Mexico, The Body Count Continues to Mount









By Allan Wall
July 9, 2013

I write from Mexico, where my family and I are visiting on our annual summer visit to Mexico, and of course the ongoing amnesty deliberations in the U.S. Congress are being closely followed by Mexico’s political and media elite.

The disastrous, nation-wrecking amnesty bill S. 744 has passed the Senate but hopefully a comparable bill will not pass the House. But Mexicans are sure interested in what’s going on and U.S. immigration policy is of great interest to them.

Their reactions to what is going on, and even what is proposed, are very telling. For example, the Corker-Hoeven Amendment, which was added to S. 744 to make it more palatable to border security hawks. It sounds very secure. However, Senator Jeff Sessions has pointed out, Corker-Hoeven doesn’t secure the border, doesn’t require more fencing, and doesn’t change the fact that S. 744 is an amnesty. (See here and here).

But down here in Mexico, where I’ve been visiting, the political/media class went ballistic over Corker-Hoeven. They thought it was horrible. They hate the very idea of us fencing off the border, even though such a construction would not even affect the legal crossing stations. Why would anybody oppose it unless what he really wanted was an open border? Hmmm.

So, regardless of the fraudulent nature of the Corker-Hoeven Amendment, the hysterical reaction of the Mexican chattering classes to it was very telling.

Mexico’s foreign minister Jose Antonio Meade, of whom I’ve written before, actually met with the U.S. ambassador to Mexico on June 25. After this, the Mexican foreign minister made a statement to the media . Here are some things he said:

“Good afternoon, the purpose of this encounter is to make a series of comments with the respect to the recent development of some important aspects of the bilateral Mexico-U.S. relationship.”

Hold it right there. U.S. immigration policy is NOT a bilateral issue, it is a U.S. domestic policy issue, and as such is no business of Mexico and its government.

“In the government of President Enrique Pena Nieto we have the firm conviction that North America has all the elements to be a more dynamic and competitive region. The president himself has expressed this in distinct occasions. Mexico works actively with the government, Congress and actors of the civil society of the United States to impulse a broad agenda, in benefit to both countries, a broad agenda, a multi-issue agenda.”

Meade talked about “our common border”, and said that it should be “a prosperous, secure, sustainable and development-promoting region.” Meade says the Mexican government wants “safe passage of goods and persons...” Well, then why object to the fence then?

In the statement, Mexican Foreign Minister Meade openly supports S. 744:

“Since the beginning of the legislative process on immigration was announced, the government of Mexico has sustained a permanent and purposeful dialogue with all the relevant actors in this process. The government of Mexico is convinced that this reform can benefit the millions of Mexican migrants that daily contribute with their work and effort to the development of the united States, as was recognized by President Obama during his recent visit to our country. “

Once again, here we have the Mexican foreign minister openly meddling in our legislation. Why doesn’t anybody in Congress complain about it? Meade continues...

“The embassy and consulates of our country have always been attentive to the defense of the human and labor rights, in the protection of our fellow Mexicans..."

Mexican diplomats in their 50 consulates meddle in our country. Do your congressional representatives and senators care?

Meade says this about the fence:

"We are convinced that fences do not unite. Fences are not the solution to the migratory phenomenon and they are not compatible with a modern and secure border."

Mensaje a Medios de comunicación del Secretario de Relaciones Exteriores, José Antonio Meade, Sobre la Relación México-Estados Unidos SRE (MexicanForeignMinistry) Bulletin 016, June 25, 2013.

On the contrary, Foreign Minister Meade. Fences are an important part of a secure border. And that’s why you don’t want us to have them, isn’t it?

Mexico is not our partner in securing the border, because the Mexican government does not want the border secured.

Two days later, the Mexican foreign ministry released an official statement welcoming “the advance that the approval by the U.S. Senate of a comprehensive immigration reform represents...” The statement declared that “The government of Mexico has transmitted to the key actors of the United States its conviction that the legal framework in this field should reflect the demographic reality of the region. “ In other words, move many Mexicans into the United States illegally, and U.S. law has to change.

The document ends with a promise to meddle:

“The government of Mexico will follow this internal process in the United States and maintain its close dialogue with those involved. At the same time, it will re-inforce the communication programs and consular assistance in support of Mexicans abroad, regardless of their migratory status.”

Declaración del Gobierno de México sobre el avance legislativo de una iniciativa de reforma migratoria en el Congreso de Estados Unidos SRE Communicado 225, June 27, 2013

Besides the official statements from the foreign ministry, there were some very interesting comments made by a former Mexican foreign minister, Jorge Castaneda, still an oft-quoted globalist mover and shaker.

Castaneda appeared on Univision with host Jorge Ramos, and, as reported by Jerry Kammer:

"In an interview …on Univision's 'Al Punto' program, former Mexican Foreign Minister Jorge Castaneda sharply criticized the just-passed U.S. Senate bill's provisions to lengthen the border fence and limit the number of temporary worker visas. His comments, together with those of Univision anchor Jorge Ramos, contradicted the claim by many advocates of the Senate bill that emigration from Mexico is declining rapidly."

Castaneda Blasts Border Fence Center for Immigration Studies, June 20, 2013

I love this part. Get a load of what Castaneda said about a border fence. It ought to win some sort of award for sheer hypocritical chutzpah:

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

“It is very adverse for Mexico. ... All the Central Americans who come from Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador, fleeing from violence, pass through Mexico. If they're not able to cross the border, what are they going to do? Are they going to return to their countries. No. They're going to stay in Mexico, creating a burden for us that we have to carry.”

Wait a second, Jorge. Aren’t we constantly lectured about how great it is for us to receive all these illegal alien Mexicans? So why isn’t it great for Mexico to receive all these illegal alien Central Americans? Why do you call them a burden? Aren’t they a benefit for your country?

As Americans, we need to craft our own immigration policy, and we shouldn’t give a hoot what elitist Mexicans think about it.

� 2013 Allan Wall - All Rights Reserved

Share This Article

Click Here For Mass E-mailing

Allan Wall recently returned to the U.S. after residing many years in Mexico.












Besides the official statements from the foreign ministry, there were some very interesting comments made by a former Mexican foreign minister, Jorge Castaneda, still an oft-quoted globalist mover and shaker.