La Raza - Page 2
Hatred of America  -  Why are they here?
-- English eviction ends with rescue
-- Aye Carumba! Spanish ads on U.S. English TV stations
-- Judge Tells Illegal Alien He is "Unwelcome Undesirable"
-- Hundreds of safety violations documented for Mexican rigs
-- Mexican truck drivers take English exam in Spanish
-- Bilingual, pro-American book 'unfit' for L.A. schools
-- Lawsuit Dismissed In LAPD Immigration Status Questions Case
Home    Back

 English eviction ends with rescue - Man forced out 'for no Spanish' sells biz, defiantly flies U.S. flag

Posted: August 29, 2007    By Joe Kovacs

STUART, Fla. – The South Florida man who says he was forced out of his office because he speaks English and no Spanish has sold his water-conditioning business to a nearby company that is keeping everyone on the payroll.

Tom McKenna has closed up shop at his Dixie Highway location and is now flying an American flag from the top of his former office until Friday, the last day of legal occupancy at the location he's held for seven years.

An American flag flies atop the former location of Seacoast Water Care in Stuart, Fla., Aug. 29, 2007. The former tenant, Tom McKenna, has sold his business, claiming he was forced out of the location because he speaks English and no Spanish. (WND photo)

McKenna has been rescued in a sense by Peter Wernick, president of Ecowater Systems of Stuart, Fla., who says he's purchased the assets of Seacoast Water Care and American Water Technologies.

"I've retained his employees and have hired Tom, putting him to work," Wernick told WND today. "Tom hasn't lost a single customer nor a day of work."

"It's been a very good arrangement for the both of us. It's been a seamless transition," he added.

As WND reported earlier this month, McKenna became the focus of national debates over illegal immigration and property rights.

He said his landlord at the Ellendale Center in Stuart wanted him out of his office space by the end of the month to "complete [his] vision of converting the center to quality tenants serving the Spanish need in the area."

Seacoast Water Care shared the same building as a check-cashing store and a Mexican restaurant, both of which feature signs in Spanish.

Ralph Lassise peers into the vacated office of Seacoast Water Care in Stuart, Fla., Aug. 29, 2007. The former tenant, Tom McKenna, has sold his business, claiming he was forced out of the location because he speaks English and no Spanish. (WND photo)

The day after Independence Day, McKenna received a letter from landlord Ivan Munroe telling him to consider another location, even offering McKenna other space he owns.

Then in another letter dated Aug. 1, Munroe informed McKenna his rental contract was being terminated.

"Please remove all of your possessions by August 31," the second letter stated.

When asked about his initial letter's statement about his "vision of converting the center to quality tenants serving the Spanish need in the area," Munroe told the Stuart News, "I can have a vision, can't I? And his business just doesn't fit there."

Spanish signage for a business in the same plaza as Seacoast Water Care in Stuart, Fla. The owner of Seacoast, Tom McKenna, says he was forced out because he does not speak Spanish (WND photo)

At this point, numerous Seacoast signs have already been taken down from the building, and a U.S. flag has been posted atop the office by McKenna.

"It's his last dig at me," Munroe told WND, not wishing to make any other comment based on the advice of counsel.

Since WND gave the story national prominence, McKenna has been featured on numerous radio and television programs, including "Fox & Friends" on the Fox News Channel.

One reader of the Stuart News commented: "How sad that he had to sell his business! When will we Americans stand up to this kind of racism – yes racism? If this would have been any other ethnic group, they would have been picketing on Dixie Hwy. having the street closed until 'justice' had prevailed!"

 Aye Carumba! Spanish ads on U.S. English TV stations

Firestorm erupts as car dealer accused of destroying America

Posted: August 30, 2007    By Joe Kovacs

LAKE PARK, Fla. – A South Florida car dealer says he has no plans to stop airing Spanish commercials on English-language TV stations, despite furious complaints from outraged viewers who believe he's catering to illegal aliens and destroying American culture.

Car dealer Earl Stewart speaks Spanish in ads on English-language TV stations, creating controversy in South Florida

"I'm enjoying this crazy situation because I know I'm right," says Earl Stewart, owner of Earl Stewart Toyota of North Palm Beach.

Stewart has become a lightning rod of controversy for pitching Toyotas in his basic Spanish, while English subtitles are shown on screen.

The ads are featured not on typical Spanish-language stations, but rather the Big Three network affiliates in Palm Beach County as well local Comcast Cable channels like CNN and MSNBC.

The commercial opens with Stewart standing in his showroom as he introduces himself in Spanish.

The English subtitles provide the translation, stating, "I'm Earl Stewart. I'm sorry I don't speak Spanish, that is the reason I can't answer the red phone in your language. But many members of our team in all departments do speak Spanish."

The "red phone" refers to four red telephones at his dealership that provide direct access to Stewart's personal cell phone, one of the marketing points of his dealership.

"We are a family operated dealership," the ad continues, "and we all appreciate the importance of the Latin culture and its economic impact in our community."

Car dealer Earl Stewart speaks Spanish in ads on English-language TV stations, creating controversy in South Florida

The fact that Spanish ads are now being aired on English-language TV has ignited a firestorm.

One WND reader who saw the commercial said, "The whole issue is that this is America and Spanish ads should not be running on English TV stations, period. We are not a bilingual country. Run them on the Spanish stations, no problem. But Spanish ads thrown in with English programming – he's got [testicular fortitude] and so do the stations that allow them to run."

Stewart writes a weekly column, where other critics have flayed his campaign with comments including:

The idea of making profits is fine, but America isn't just about making money. There is a nationalistic pride that far outweighs "going for the gold." In your case, your timing is terrible considering you decided to run the ads at a time when many Americans have had it with do-nothing lawmakers who want to disguise amnesty proposals for illegal immigrants as comprehensive immigration reform. I think the reason you have had such a negative reaction is because the ads can be construed by white, English-speaking Americans to mean you are either indifferent to their concerns or support the misguided argument that illegal immigrants should be extended the same legal rights as full-fledged citizens.

Earl, You really hit a nerve with this. I do not like you at all and feel you are very dishonest. I feel the only reason why you are doing this is to create more attention to your already massive EGO. You have hit new heights with your money-making agenda. You totally go against your countrymen and do something like this.
Stewart thrashed back at the above "anonymous" post by saying, "Anonymous? A person who criticizes me but is afraid to tell me his name, phone number or e-mail has no credibility. You are either afraid that your opinions won't stand up to intelligent debate or you have a secret agenda to do me harm ... such as a sales manager or salesman for a competing dealership. The KKK Klansman has a good reason for his anonymity ... what's yours?"

Stewart told WND he's not marketing cars to illegal aliens, but rather U.S. Hispanic citizens who happen to make up a large percentage of residents in the local market.

He thinks critics are misinterpreting the spot as "Spanish commercial equals some guy that wants a bunch of illegal aliens."

Stewart calls the ad innovation in advertising, as he was looking to get attention.

"Boy, did I ever get their attention!" he said. "Nobody else has ever done this to my knowledge."

He says cost is also another reason why he's on the English-language stations, spending just $350 per spot on top-rated NBC affiliate WPTV, compared to $5,000 on the Miami-based Spanish language stations covering all of South Florida.

Stewart claims only one West Palm Beach station, CBS affiliate WPEC, initially offered resistance to running the ad, but backed off after he threatened to publicize its opposition.

"They now totally deny any of this ever happened," he said.

When the ad was first created earlier this summer, it comprised 100 percent of Stewart's television campaign. He says it's now 50 percent and that will drop to 25 percent by next week. But he maintains the Spanish spot "will be a staple in my arsenal. I've made a very dramatic impact. My business has been great, one of my best Augusts in terms of sales."

Stewart says favorable comments are now flooding in, and outpace negative ones by a 10 to 1 margin.

"I have gone to worrying about whether this ad would harm my business to actually wondering if this may not be the most effective advertisement I ever ran," he writes on his blog.

The ad campaign comes as another South Floridian, Tom McKenna of Stuart, claims he was forced out of his office he rented for seven years because he does not speak Spanish.

As WND reported yesterday, a nearby business has purchased McKenna's water-conditioning company and is keeping all employees on the payroll.

 Judge Tells Illegal Alien He is "Unwelcome Undesirable"

posted August 26, 2007

General Sessions Court Judge Bob Moon said the man charged with setting a fire in a downtown hotel is "an unwelcome undesirable" illegal alien.   Judge Moon told Bario Gomez, "Undesirables like you are not welcome in this country.   You are a Latino terrorist who entered this country illegally and soon plotted significant personal injury and damage to the people and businesses in our community."

Authorities said Gomez is an illegal alien with no proof of identification. Officials also said he gave police a false name.

The INS placed a hold on Gomez, 20, after charges of aggravated arson and aggravated vandalism were filed against him.

Bario Gomez  Judge Moon told him, "It is undesirables like you who create many unjustifiable problems and prejudices upon the good people who enter this country legally in chasing a dream for a better life for themselves and their families.

"Mr. Gomez, you nor any other citizen from a foreign land has a right to enter this country; you simply have a privilege to enter this country through the proper legal channels.

"You are a domestic terrorist who is an imminent threat to the safety of our people and their property.  You are also a supreme flight risk from justice.  It is with duty, comfort and ease that I increase your bond significantly in an appropriate amount to insure your appearance in further proceedings and to insure the safety of this community."   The bond was raised from $30,000 to $1 million.  The previous bond was set by Magistrate James Purple, which Judge Moon described as "another ludicrously low bond."

According to Arson Investigator James Whitmire, Gomez checked into the hotel with his girlfriend. Testimony by Whitmire and management officials indicated that Gomez placed a toaster filled with matches in a microwave oven in his room intending a massive "delayed burn."

Proof also showed that multiple towels were stuffed into the toilet in order to retard the water supply. The hotel manager testified that the towels were stuffed so deeply that the pipes had to be disassembled to remove them. She also stated that the room was severely damaged and vandalized.

Capt. Whitmire testified that "hundreds of people were evacuated, including children."

He said, "If the fire had established itself many families and children would have most likely lost their lives or been severely injured. Being on the fourth floor, the fire would have been difficult to contain."

 Hundreds of safety violations documented for Mexican rigs

'Clear double standard' subs foreign limits for U.S. laws

Posted: December 5, 2007 By Jerome R. Corsi 2007

Members of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association say they have documented hundreds of safety violations by Mexican trucks rolling on U.S. roads under the Department of Transportation's Mexican truck demonstration project.

"The Department of Transportation is allowing Mexican long-haul rigs to operate in the United States without requiring U.S. rules and regulations to be enforced," Rick Craig, the director of regulatory affairs for the group, told WND in a telephone interview yesterday.

"The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is providing exemptions from U.S. safety rules that the FMCSA claim are covered in a Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Mexico," Craig continued.

"It's a clear double standard," he said. "Mexican truck safety regulations are being accepted by the FMCSA as equivalent to U.S. rules, even though the FMCSA refuses to provide any real detail about how or why the decision was made."

The association has filed a lawsuit against the DOT and FMCSA in San Francisco, challenging that the Mexican trucks the government is allowing into the U.S. under the DOT demonstration project are unsafe when tested by U.S. safety rules and regulations.

(Story continues below)

Catherine O'Mara, a paralegal at the Cullen Law Firm which is representing OOIDA, has provided the court with documentation of her research on safety violations by the Mexican trucks.

She searched the FMCSA database looking for all safety violations cited for four of the Mexican trucking companies currently in the DOT test for the year preceding the start of the demonstration project on Sept. 21, 2007.

The largest number of safety violations, 1,123 in total, was found for Trinity Industries De Mexico S de R L de CV.

Second on the list was GCC Transporte SA de CV, with 372 violations, followed by Avomex Internacional SA DE CV with 206 violations and Fidepal S de RL de IP y CV with 11 violations.

WND examined the FMCSA violation records O'Mara provided the court.

Among the safety violations listed on the FMCSA database for the four carriers were multiple infractions for inoperative or defective brakes, faulty suspension, defective systems to secure loads, defective lighting devices, tension bars cracked and/or broken, axle positioning parts defective or missing, tires with less than adequate tread depth, various parts and accessories needing repair, inoperable required lamps including headlights and tail lights, wheel fasteners loose and/or missing, and defective power steering systems.

Other violations in the OOIDA database included drivers who were not licensed for the type of vehicle being operated.

Each violation in the database was identified by the vehicle description and license plate number, as well as the time, date, report number and inspection facility location where the infraction was documented.

"Our search of the FMCSA records indicates the FMCSA should know the Mexican trucking companies in their test have unsafe safety inspection records according to U.S. standards," Craig told WND.

The FMCSA is also accepting the Mexican commercial driver's license, or CDL, as equivalent to the U.S. CDL," he added, "even though Mexico has no CDL database that is reliable. There is no way, for instance, to track driving violations in Mexico that Mexican drivers are cited for."

Craig also pointed out that the FMCSA is operating under a 1991 MOU with Mexico regarding commercial driver's licenses.

"This is a problem," Craig told WND, "because U.S. CDL regulations have changed a lot since 1991. Now, U.S. drivers who are cited for violations in non-commercial vehicles, for instance DUI or driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs violations, that can go toward disqualifying a CDL, even if the driver is driving the family car on their own time when they are cited for the DUI."

The legal brief filed by the Cullen Law Firm objects to the FMCSA argument that Mexican regulations will provide the same level of safety as compliance that corresponds with U.S. safety regulations.

Under the current terms of the DOT Mexican truck demonstration project, the Cullen Law Firm argues, the FMCSA has decided to substitute compliance with Mexican regulations with compliance of FMCSA regulations.

Under FMCSA's own admission there is no drug or alcohol testing facility in the entire country that is certified," Craig pointed out. "The current FMCSA plan is for Mexican drivers to send drug and alcohol testing specimens to a U.S. certified testing facility, even though there is no reliable way to determine who the specimen came from in Mexico."

"In light of the empirical data set forth in Mr. Craig's declaration"” the brief argues, "there is no question that the harm faced by American truckers is concrete, particularized, and imminent."

The brief contends the safety violations noted for the Mexican truck should have prompted out-of-service orders.

"In examining the records of violations for these Mexican operators, we found many cases where the same truck comes back over the border and is cited again for the same types of violation," Craig told WND.

The brief also points out that the terms of NAFTA had specified the border would be open to the extent that Mexico-domiciled carriers are willing and able to abide by the same laws and regulations as are applicable to U.S.-domiciled motor carriers.

The OOIDA lawsuit seeks an order from the federal court to halt the DOT Mexican trucking demonstration project until the FMCSA is able to demonstrate its ability to enforce the standards of U.S. safety rules and regulation upon the Mexican trucks given access to U.S. roads.

On Nov. 14, the House of Representatives passed the DOT Fiscal Year 2008 appropriations bill by an overwhelming bi-paritsan 270-147 vote.

WND reported at the time Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., offered an amendment to the DOT Fiscal Year 2008 appropriations bill to block DOT funding for the Mexican trucks, which passed by a voice vote.

WND also reported Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-North Dakota, successfully offered in the Senate an amendment comparable to DeFazio's.

The House bill emerging from the conference committee included language to de-fund the DOT Mexican trucking demonstration project.

The Senate version of the DOT Fiscal Year 2008 appropriations bill also contains the language which emerged from the conference committee to de-fund the DOT Mexican trucking project.

President Bush has threatened to veto the bill if it reaches his desk with these provisions in place.

To view this item online, visit

 Mexican truck drivers take English exam in Spanish

DOT chief's admission to Senate panel contradicts administration's assurances

Posted: March 14, 2008    By Jerome R. Corsi    WorldNetDaily

Mexican truck drivers allowed to travel throughout the U.S. under a Bush administration demonstration project may not be proficient in English, despite Department of Transportation assurances to the contrary.

A brochure on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's website instructs Mexican truck drivers, "Did you know … You MUST be able to read and speak English to drive trucks in the United States."

Still, at the Senate Commerce Committee oversight hearing Tuesday, Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters and DOT Inspector General Calvin L. Scovel III reluctantly admitted under intense questioning from Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., that Mexican drivers were being designated at the border as "proficient in English" even though they could explain U.S. traffic signs only in Spanish.

In the tense hearing, Dorgan accused Peters of being "arrogant" and in reckless disregard of a congressional vote to stop the Mexican trucking demonstration project by taking away funds to continue the project. Toward the end, the senator asked if it were true Mexican truckers could explain U.S. traffic signs only in Spanish when given English proficiency tests at the border.

"Does the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration test for English proficiency at the border include questions about U.S. highway signs?" Dorgan asked.

"Yes," Scovel replied. "The FMCSA English proficiency test at the border did not originally include U.S. highway signs, but now it does."

"Do you show a driver an octagonal 'STOP' sign at the border and qualify him if he explains the sign means 'ALTO'?" an incredulous Dorgan pressed.

"Alto" is the Spanish word for "Stop."

"Yes," Scovel answered reluctantly. "If the stop sign is identified as 'alto,' the driver is considered English proficient."

Dorgan drew the obvious conclusion, "In other words the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is allowing Mexican drivers in the demonstration project to prove their proficiency in English by responding to the examiner's questions in Spanish"

Peters responded, "U.S. highway signs comply with international standards. I drive frequently in Mexico and I always recognize the octagonal 'ALTO' signs as 'STOP' signs."

Dorgan interrupted.

"Excuse me, Madame Secretary," he interjected. "The question is not whether you understand Mexican highway signs when driving in Mexico but whether Mexican drivers entering the U.S. in your demonstration project can pass an English proficiency test by answering questions totally in Spanish."

Peters persisted: "But answering in Spanish, the drivers explain they understand the English-language highway signs."

Dorgan appeared astounded at the explanation.

"If you answer in Spanish, you're not English proficient," he insisted.

"My main concern is safety," Dorgan emphasized. "We've established that there are no equivalencies between Mexican trucks and U.S. trucks. There are no equivalent safety standards. Mexico has no reliable database for vehicle inspections, accident reports or driver's records.

"Now you tell us Mexican drivers can pass their English proficiency tests in Spanish," the senator continued, obviously outraged. "The Department of Transportation is telling Congress, 'We're doing this and we don't care.'

"I've treated you respectfully today, Secretary Peters, but I don't respect your decision," Dorgan said. "You have angered me further with your testimony and you reflect a Bush administration that obviously doesn't care what Congress thinks."

As WND reported yesterday, Dorgan accused Peters of defying Congress by parsing words to continue to allow Mexican trucks into the U.S. under the demonstration project, despite the clear intent of Congress to take away funds to bring the program to a halt.

WND also has reported Dorgan joined with Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and Reps. Jim Oberstar, D-Minn, and Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., in a bipartisan, bicameral request for the General Accountability Office to investigate the DOT's decision to continue the project.

 Bilingual, pro-American book 'unfit' for L.A. schools

'Joey Gonzalez' about 3rd-grader who rebels against affirmative action

Posted: June 11, 2008    WorldNetDaily

A new bilingual children's book is being deemed "unfit" for the L.A. schools because of its position opposing affirmative action.

"Joey Gonzalez, Great American" is a new release from WND Books by Tony Robles, who offered to donate copies to the Los Angeles Unified School District.

The book revolves around the main character Joey, a Hispanic 3rd grader committed to one goal – to be a "great American." His dream is derailed by his teacher who tells him that he is different because he is a minority and will need extra help to succeed. But the teacher tells him not to worry because that's exactly what affirmative action is for. With the advice of his mom, Joey confronts his teacher and stands up for what he believes truly makes a great America – and it doesn't include the assistance of affirmative action.

Bookends, a non-profit organization that provides used children's books to LAUSD inner-city schools rejected the donation of Tony Robles' books.

"I suspect that Bookends, and by extension the LAUSD, simply doesn't like the book's message about the destructive nature of affirmative action," the author said.

"'Joey Gonzalez' is a sweet little children's story with lovable characters that kids can identify with," Robles told WND. "It’s a story about ethnic pride, self reliance and courage, with a positive and affirmative message. But it is also a political commentary about one of the most controversial issues of our time: affirmative action."

"Minority kids have learned that there's no reason to try and succeed in school since the specter of affirmative action inevitably taints their efforts," Robles, who grew up on the streets of Brooklyn, said. "It's truly sad that an organization like Bookends, which works closely with the L.A. public schools and is supposed to help kids, is doing just the opposite."

The book's protagonist has a group of friends who also are minorities. At one point, Joey gets in a heated fight with his peer who says that it's OK to "pull the race card."

Robles wrote the book in hopes of explaining to children that they can achieve their dreams with hard work and perseverance not with special preference programs and government assistance.

"It's a story intended to provoke serious thought and hopefully encourage the notion of self-help, a conservative value and one that is quintessentially American," Robles added.

To view this item online, visit

 Lawsuit Dismissed In LAPD Immigration Status Questions Case

POSTED: June 25, 2008  -  UPDATED: June 25, 2008

LOS ANGELES -- A Los Angeles judge dismissed a taxpayer lawsuit Wednesday that sought to repeal a long-standing directive prohibiting Los Angeles police officers from asking arrestees about their immigration status.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Rolf M. Treu sided with the city and the American Civil Liberties Union, which claimed there were no triable issues raised in the suit. He heard arguments on the motion June 10 and had the case under submission since then.

Los Angeles resident Harold P. Sturgeon filed suit in May 2006 against police Chief William J. Bratton and members of the Police Commission, seeking to have Special Order 40 declared unlawful.

In court papers, Sturgeon's lawyers called Special Order 40 "essentially a 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy regarding illegal aliens."

Sturgeon asked for a permanent injunction preventing taxpayer money from being used to enforce it. He and other critics said the 28-year-old mandate from the Los Angeles City Council hampers the LAPD's ability to exchange information with federal immigration officials.

The order is intended to avoid discouraging illegal immigrants from reporting crimes and assisting police.

In their court papers, lawyers for the City Attorney's Office maintained the directive does not prevent the LAPD from working closely with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials.

"There is no evidence ... to show that ICE has ever complained that they have not had the assistance of LAPD, or that LAPD has not come when they are called," the city's court papers state.

In their court papers, ACLU lawyers maintained that Special Order 40 is consistent with federal law and not in conflict with it.

Paul J. Orfanedes of Judicial Watch Inc., one of Sturgeon's lawyers, maintains the order is a misapplication of his client's taxpayer dollars. He also contends the order is being applied in a broader way than the text of it allows.

"State and local governments can't restrict an officer's ability to communicate with federal officers about someone's immigration status. So we think that was a direct conflict," Orfanedes said.

Deputy City Attorney Vibiana M. Andrade said Sturgeon's lawyers have not shown any pattern of unconstitutional enforcement of Special Order 40.

Treu ruled in September 2006 that four groups that assist undocumented immigrants can intervene as defendants in the case. They are working with the City Attorney's Office to keep Special Order 40 on the books.

The ACLU of Southern California represents the four community groups: Break the Cycle; Los Jornaleros (The Day Laborers); El Comite de Jornaleros (The Committee of Day Laborers); and El Instituto de Educacion Popular del Sur de California (The Institute of Popular Education of Southern California).

ACLU attorney Hector O. Villagra said after the June 10 hearing that he was encouraged by the tenor of Treu's questions, many of which focused on conflicts in law and whether Sturgeon believes the order as a whole is unconstitutional, or only when applied in certain instances.

"Hopefully, this will put to rest any challenges to Special Order 40," Villagra said.

The lawsuit had been tentatively set to go to trial on Monday.

Last year, the Los Angeles City Council went on record against any future federal legislation that would force the Los Angeles Police Department to change its policy on identifying undocumented immigrants.

Debate over the issue was reignited earlier this year when Jamiel Shaw Jr., a high school football star, was killed -- allegedly by a reputed gang member who was in the country illegally. The suspect, Pedro Espinoza, had been released from county jail the day before the slaying.

Special Order 40 did not apply in that case because Espinoza's original arrest was outside the city of Los Angeles and he was housed in a Los Angeles County jail. However, the killing prompted Councilman Dennis Zine to introduce a motion to amend the policy, allowing police to investigate the immigration status of gang members they think may be in the country illegally, whether or not they are suspected of other crimes.

Los Angeles was the first major city to enact the Special Order 40 policy in 1979.

Home   -   Top