Please Look Up Everything I Say About History, Plants, etc. I Always Give Names That Can Be Found Online.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Trump's DHS "Border Security Memo"

Everyone should begin protesting at County lines in order to bring Venue and Jurisdiction to the forefront of all local courts' attentions.



Baltimore


Ferguson

El Gasolinazo



MEMORANDUM FOR:
Kevin McAleenan Acting Commissioner Secretary U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Thomas D. Homan Acting Director U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Lori Scialabba Acting Director U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

Joseph B. Maher Acting General Counsel

Dimple Shah Acting Assistant Secretary for International Affairs

Chip Fulghum Acting Undersecretary for Management

John Kelly Secretary

February 17, 2017
SUBJECT:
Implementing the President's Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements Policies
This memorandum implements the Executive Order entitled "Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements," issued by the President on January 25, 2017, which establishes the President's policy regarding effective border security and immigration enforcement through faithful execution of the laws of the United States. It implements new policies designed to stem illegal immigration and facilitate the detection, apprehension, detention, and removal of aliens who have no lawful basis to enter or remain in the United States. It constitutes guidance to all Department personnel, and supersedes all existing conflicting policy, directives, memoranda, and other guidance regarding this subject matter, except as otherwise expressly stated in this memorandum.

A. Policies Regarding the Apprehension and Detention of Aliens Described in Section 235 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The President has determined that the lawful detention of aliens arriving in the United States or otherwise described in section 235(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) pending a final determination of whether to order them removed, including determining eligibility for immigration relief, is the most efficient means by which to enforce the immigration laws at our borders. Detention also prevents such aliens from committing crimes while at large in the United States, ensures that aliens will appear for their removal proceedings, and substantially increases the likelihood that aliens lawfully ordered removed will be removed.
These policies are consistent with INA provisions that mandate detention of such aliens and allow me or my designee to exercise discretionary parole authority pursuant to section 212(d)(5) of the INA only on a case-by-case basis, and only for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit. Policies that facilitate the release of removable aliens apprehended at and between the ports of entry, which allow them to abscond and fail to appear at their removal hearings, undermine the border security mission. Such policies, collectively referred to as "catchand-release," shall end.
Accordingly, effective upon my determination of: (1) the establishment and deployment of a joint plan with the Department of Justice to surge the deployment of immigration judges and asylum officers to interview and adjudicate claims asserted by recent border entrants; and, (2) the establishment of appropriate processing and detention facilities, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel should only release from detention an alien detained pursuant to section 235(b) of the INA, who was apprehended or encountered after illegally entering or attempting to illegally enter the United States, in the following situations on a case-by-case basis, to the extent consistent with applicable statutes and regulations:

1. When removing the alien from the United States pursuant to statute or regulation;

2. When the alien obtains an order granting relief or protection from removal or the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) determines that the individual is a U.S. citizen, national of the United States, or an alien who is a lawful permanent resident, refugee, asylee, holds temporary protected status, or holds a valid immigration status in the United States;

3. When an ICE Field Office Director, ICE Special Agent-in-Charge, U.S. Border Patrol Sector Chief, CBP Director of Field Operations, or CBP Air & Marine Operations Director consents to the alien's withdrawal of an application for admission, and the alien contemporaneously departs from the United States;

4. When required to do so by statute, or to comply with a binding settlement agreement or order issued by a competent judicial or administrative authority;

5. When an ICE Field Office Director, ICE Special Agent-in-Charge, U.S. Border Patrol Sector Chief, CBP Director of Field Operations, or CBP Air & Marine Operations Director authorizes the alien's parole pursuant to section 212(d)(5) of the INA with the written concurrence of the Deputy Director ofICE or the Deputy Commissioner of CBP, except in exigent circumstances such as medical emergencies where seeking prior approval is not practicable. In those exceptional instances, any such parole will be reported to the Deputy Director or Deputy Commissioner as expeditiously as possible; or

6. When an arriving alien processed under the expedited removal provisions of section 235(b) has been found to have established a "credible fear" of persecution or torture by an asylum officer or an immigration judge, provided that such an alien affirmatively establishes to the satisfaction of an ICE immigration officer his or her identity, that he or she presents neither a security risk nor a risk of absconding, and provided that he or she agrees to comply with any additional conditions of release imposed by ICE to ensure public safety and appearance at any removal hearings.

To the extent current regulations are inconsistent with this guidance, components will develop or revise regulations as appropriate.
As the Department works to expand detention capabilities, detention of all such individuals may not be immediately possible, and detention resources should be prioritized based upon potential danger and risk of flight if an individual alien is not detained, and parole determinations will be made in accordance with current regulations and guidance. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 212.5, 235.3. This guidance does not prohibit the return of an alien who is arriving on land to the foreign territory contiguous to the United States from which the alien is arriving pending a removal proceeding under section 240 of the INA consistent with the direction of an ICE Field Office Director, ICE Special Agent-in-Charge, CBP Chief Patrol Agent, or CBP Director of Field Operations.

B. Hiring More CBP Agents/Officers
CBP has insufficient agents/officers to effectively detect, track, and apprehend all aliens illegally entering the United States. The United States needs additional agents and officers to ensure complete operational control of the border. Accordingly, the Commissioner of CBP shall-while ensuring consistency in training and standards- immediately begin the process of hiring 5,000 additional Border Patrol agents, as well as 500 Air & Marine Agents/Officers, and take all actions necessary to ensure that such agents/officers enter on duty and are assigned to appropriate duty stations, including providing for the attendant resources and additional personnel necessary to support such agents, as soon as practicable.
Human Capital leadership in CBP and ICE, in coordination with the Under Secretary for Management, Chief Financial Officer, and Chief Human Capital Officer, shall develop hiring plans that balance growth and interagency attrition by integrating workforce shaping and career paths for incumbents and new hires.

C. Identifying and Quantifying Sources of Aid to Mexico
The President has directed the heads of all executive departments to identify and quantify all sources of direct and indirect Federal aid or assistance to the Government of Mexico. Accordingly, the Under Secretary for Management shall identify all sources of direct or indirect aid and assistance, excluding intelligence activities, from every departmental component to the Government of Mexico on an annual basis, for the last five fiscal years, and quantify such aid or assistance. The Under Secretary for Management shall submit a report to me reflecting historic levels of such aid or assistance provided annually within 30 days of the date of this memorandum.

D. Expansion of the 287(g) Program in the Border Region
Section 287(g) of the INA authorizes me to enter into a written agreement with a state or political subdivision thereof, for the purpose of authorizing qualified officers or employees of the state or subdivision to perform the functions of an immigration officer in relation to the investigation, apprehension, or detention of aliens in the United States. This grant of authority, known as the 287(g) Program, has been a highly successful force multiplier that authorizes state or local law enforcement personnel to perform all law enforcement functions specified in section 287(a) of the INA, including the authority to investigate, identify, apprehend, arrest, detain, transport and conduct searches of an alien for the purposes of enforcing the immigration laws. From January 2006 through September 2015, the 287(g) Program led to the identification of more than 402,000 removable aliens, primarily through encounters at local jails.
Empowering state and local law enforcement agencies to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration law is critical to an effective enforcement strategy. Aliens who engage in criminal conduct are priorities for arrest and removal and will often be encountered by state and local law enforcement officers during the course of their routine duties. It is in the interest of the Department to partner with those state and local jurisdictions through 287(g) agreements to assist in the arrest and removal of criminal aliens.
To maximize participation by state and local jurisdictions in the enforcement of federal immigration law near the southern border, I am directing the Director of ICE and the Commissioner of CBP to engage immediately with all willing and qualified law enforcement jurisdictions that meet all program requirements for the purpose of entering into agreements under 287(g) of the INA.
The Commissioner of CBP and the Director of ICE should consider the operational functions and capabilities of the jurisdictions willing to enter into 287(g) agreements and structure such agreements in a manner that employs the most effective enforcement model for that jurisdiction, including the jail enforcement model, task force officer model, or joint jail enforcement-task force officer model. In furtherance of my direction herein, the Commissioner of CBP is authorized, in addition to the Director of ICE, to accept state services and take other actions as appropriate to carry out immigration enforcement pursuant to 287(g).

E. Commissioning a Comprehensive Study of Border Security
The Under Secretary for Management, in consultation with the Commissioner of CBP, Joint Task Force (Border), and Commandant of the Coast Guard, is directed to commission an immediate, comprehensive study of the security of the southern border (air, land and maritime) to identify vulnerabilities and provide recommendations to enhance border security. The study should include all aspects of the current border security environment, including the availability of federal and state resources to develop and implement an effective border security strategy that will achieve complete operational control of the border.

F. Border Wall Construction and Funding
A wall along the southern border is necessary to deter and prevent the illegal entry of aliens and is a critical component of the President's overall border security strategy. Congress has authorized the construction of physical barriers and roads at the border to prevent illegal immigration in several statutory provisions, including section 102 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, as amended, 8 U.S.C. § 1103 note.
Consistent with the President's Executive Order, the will of Congress and the need to secure the border in the national interest, CBP, in consultation with the appropriate executive departments and agencies, and nongovernmental entities having relevant expertise- and using materials originating in the United States to the maximum extent permitted by law- shall immediately begin planning, design, construction and maintenance of a wall, including the attendant lighting, technology (including sensors), as well as patrol and access roads, along the land border with Mexico in accordance with existing law, in the most appropriate locations and utilizing appropriate materials and technology to most effectively achieve operational control of the border.
The Under Secretary for Management, in consultation with the Commissioner of CBP shall immediately identify and allocate all sources of available funding for the planning, design, construction and maintenance of a wall, including the attendant lighting, technology (including sensors), as well as patrol and access roads, and develop requirements for total ownership cost of this project, including preparing Congressional budget requests for the current fiscal year ( e.g., supplemental budget requests) and subsequent fiscal years.

G. Expanding Expedited Removal Pursuant to Section 235(b)(l)(A)(iii)(I) of the INA
It is in the national interest to detain and expeditiously remove from the United States aliens apprehended at the border, who have been ordered removed after consideration and denial of their claims for relief or protection. Pursuant to section 235(b )(I )(A)(i) of the INA, if an immigration officer determines that an arriving alien is inadmissible to the United States under section 2I2(a)(6)(C) or section 212(a)(7) of the INA, the officer shall, consistent with all applicable laws, order the alien removed from the United States without further hearing or review, unless the alien is an unaccompanied alien child as defined in 6 U.S.C. § 279(g)(2), indicates an intention to apply for asylum or a fear of persecution or torture or a fear of return to his or her country, or claims to have a valid immigration status within the United States or to be a citizen or national of the United States.
Pursuant to section 235(b)(l)(A)(iii)(I) of the INA and other provisions of law, I have been granted the authority to apply, by designation in my sole and umeviewable discretion, the expedited removal provisions in section 235(b)(l)(A)(i) and (ii) of the INA to aliens who have not been admitted or paroled into the United States, who are inadmissible to the United States under section 212(a)(6)(C) or section 212(a)(7) of the INA, and who have not affirmatively shown, to the satisfaction of an immigration officer, that they have been continuously physically present in the United States for the two-year period immediately prior to the determination of their inadmissibility. To date, this authority has only been exercised to designate for application of expedited removal, aliens encountered within 100 air miles of the border and 14 days of entry, and aliens who arrived in the United States by sea other than at a port of entry.
The surge of illegal immigration at the southern border has overwhelmed federal agencies and resources and has created a significant national security vulnerability to the United States. Thousands of aliens apprehended at the border, placed in removal proceedings, and released from custody have absconded and failed to appear at their removal hearings. Immigration courts are experiencing a historic backlog ofremoval cases, primarily proceedings under section 240 of the INA for individuals who are not currently detained.
During October 20 I 6 and November 20 I 6, there were 46,184 and 47,215 apprehensions, respectively, between ports of entry on our southern border. In comparison, during October 2015 and November 2015 there were 32,724 and 32,838 apprehensions, respectively, between ports of entry on our southern border. This increase of 10,000- 15,000 apprehensions per month has significantly strained OHS resources.
Furthermore, according to EOIR information provided to OHS, there are more than 534,000 cases currently pending on immigration court dockets nationwide-a record high. By contrast, according to some reports, there were nearly 168,000 cases pending at the end of fiscal year (FY) 2004 when section 235(b)(l)(A)(i) was last expanded.2 This represents an increase of more than 200% in the number of cases pending completion. The average removal case for an alien who is not detained has been pending for more than two years before an immigration judge. 3 In some immigration courts, aliens who are not detained will not have their cases heard by an immigration judge for as long as five years. This unacceptable delay affords removable aliens with no plausible claim for relief to remain unlawfully in the United States for many years.
To ensure the prompt removal of aliens apprehended at or near the border, the Department will publish in the Federal Register a new Notice Designating Aliens Subject to Expedited Removal Under Section 235(b)(l)(a)(iii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. I direct the Commissioner of CBP and the Director of ICE to conform the use of expedited removal procedures to the designations made in this notice upon its publication.

H. Implementing the Provisions of Section 235(b)(2)(C) of the INA to Return Aliens to Contiguous Countries
Section 235(b)(2)(C) of the INA authorizes the Department to return aliens arriving on land from a foreign territory contiguous to the United States, to the territory from which they arrived, pending a formal removal proceeding under section 240 of the INA. When aliens so apprehended do not pose a risk of a subsequent illegal entry or attempted illegal entry, returning them to the foreign contiguous territory from which they arrived, pending the outcome of removal proceedings saves the Department's detention and adjudication resources for other priority aliens.
Accordingly, subject to the requirements of section 1232, Title 8, United States Code, related to unaccompanied alien children and to the extent otherwise consistent with the law and U.S. international treaty obligations, CBP and ICE personnel shall, to the extent appropriate and reasonably practicable, return aliens described in section 235(b)(2)(A) of the INA, who are placed in removal proceedings under section 240 of the INA- and who, consistent with the guidance of an ICE Field Office Director, CBP Chief Patrol Agent, or CBP Director of Field Operations, pose no risk of recidivism- to the territory of the foreign contiguous country from which they arrived pending such removal proceedings.
To facilitate the completion of removal proceedings for aliens so returned to the contiguous country, ICE Field Office Directors, ICE Special Agents-in-Charge, CBP Chief Patrol Agent, and CBP Directors of Field Operations shall make available facilities for such aliens to appear via video teleconference. The Director of ICE and the Commissioner of CBP shall consult with the Director of EOIR to establish a functional, interoperable video teleconference system to ensure maximum capability to conduct video teleconference removal hearings for those aliens so returned to the contiguous country.

I. Enhancing Asylum Referrals and Credible Fear Determinations Pursuant to Section 235(b)(l) of the INA

With certain exceptions, any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien's status, may apply for asylum. For those aliens who are subject to expedited removal under section 235(b) of the INA, aliens who claim a fear of return must be referred to an asylum officer to determine whether they have established a credible fear of persecution or torture.4 To establish a credible fear of persecution, an alien must demonstrate that there is a "significant possibility" that the alien could establish eligibility for asylum, taking into account the credibility of the statements made by the alien in support of the claim and such other facts as are known to the officer.
The Director of USCIS shall ensure that asylum officers conduct credible fear interviews in a manner that allows the interviewing officer to elicit all relevant information from the alien as is necessary to make a legally sufficient determination. In determining whether the alien has demonstrated a significant possibility that the alien could establish eligibility for asylum, or for withholding or deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture, the asylum officer shall consider the statements of the alien and determine the credibility of the alien's statements made in support of his or her claim and shall consider other facts known to the officer, as required by statute.
The asylum officer shall make a positive credible fear finding only after the officer has considered all relevant evidence and determined, based on credible evidence, that the alien has a significant possibility of establishing eligibility for asylum, or for withholding or deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture, based on established legal authority. 7
The Director of USCIS shall also increase the operational capacity of the Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS) Directorate and continue to strengthen the integration of its operations to support the Field Operations, Refugee, Asylum, and International Operations, and Service Center Operations Directorate, to detect and prevent fraud in the asylum and benefits adjudication processes, and in consultation with the USC IS Office of Policy and Strategy as operationally appropriate.
The Director ofUSCIS, the Commissioner of CBP, and the Director of ICE shall review fraud detection, deterrence, and prevention measures throughout their respective agencies and provide me with a consolidated report within 90 days of the date of this memorandum regarding fraud vulnerabilities in the asylum and benefits adjudication processes, and propose measures to enhance fraud detection, deterrence, and prevention in these processes.

J. Allocation of Resources and Personnel to the Southern Border for Detention of Aliens and Adjudication of Claims
The detention of aliens apprehended at the border is critical to the effective enforcement of the immigration laws. Aliens who are released from custody pending a determination of their removability are highly likely to abscond and fail to attend their removal hearings. Moreover, the screening of credible fear claims by USC IS and adjudication of asylum claims by EOIR at detention facilities located at or near the point of apprehension will facilitate an expedited resolution of those claims and result in lower detention and transportation costs.
Accordingly, the Director of ICE and the Commissioner of CBP should take all necessary action and allocate all available resources to expand their detention capabilities and capacities at or near the border with Mexico to the greatest extent practicable. CBP shall focus these actions on expansion of "short-term detention" (defined as 72 hours or less under 6 U.S.C. § 21 l(m)) capability, and ICE will focus these actions on expansion of all other detention capabilities. CBP and ICE should also explore options for joint temporary structures that meet appropriate standards for detention given the length of stay in those facilities.
In addition, to the greatest extent practicable, the Director of USC IS is directed to increase the number of asylum officers and FDNS officers assigned to detention facilities located at or near the border with Mexico to properly and efficiently adjudicate credible fear and reasonable fear claims and to counter asylum-related fraud.

K. Proper Use of Parole Authority Pursuant to Section 212(d)(S) of the INA
The authority to parole aliens into the United States is set forth in section 212(d)(5) of the INA, which provides that the Secretary may, in his discretion and on a case-by-case basis, temporarily parole into the United States any alien who is an applicant for admission for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit. Upon careful scrutiny, the statutory language appears to strongly counsel in favor of using the parole authority sparingly and only in individual cases where, after careful consideration of the circumstances, parole is necessary because of demonstrated urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.
The practice of granting parole to certain aliens in pre-designated categories in order to create immigration programs not established by Congress, has contributed to a border security crisis, undermined the integrity of the immigration laws and the parole process, and created an incentive for additional illegal immigration.
Therefore, the Director of USC IS, the Commissioner of CBP, and the Director of ICE shall ensure that, pending the issuance of final regulations clarifying the appropriate use of the parole power, appropriate written policy guidance and training is provided to employees within those agencies exercising parole authority, including advance parole, so that such employees are familiar with the proper exercise of parole under section 212( d)( 5) of the INA and exercise such parole authority only on a case-by-case basis, consistent with the law and written policy guidance.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this memorandum, pending my further review and evaluation of the impact of operational changes to implement the Executive Order, and additional guidance on the issue by the Director of ICE, the ICE policy directive establishing standards and procedures for the parole of certain arriving aliens found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture shall remain in full force and effect.8 The ICE policy directive shall be implemented in a manner consistent with its plain language. In every case, the burden to establish that his or her release would neither pose a danger to the community, nor a risk of flight remains on the individual alien, and ICE retains ultimate discretion whether it grants parole in a particular case.

L. Proper Processing and Treatment of Unaccompanied Alien Minors Encountered at the Border
In accordance with section 235 of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (codified in part at 8 U.S.C. § 1232) and section 462 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. § 279), unaccompanied alien children are provided special protections to ensure that they are properly processed and receive the appropriate care and placement when they are encountered by an immigration officer. An unaccompanied alien child, as defined in section 279(g)(2), Title 6, United States Code, is an alien who has no lawful immigration status in the United States, has not attained 18 years of age; and with respect to whom, (1) there is no parent or legal guardian in the United States, or (2) no parent of legal guardian in the United States is available to provide care and physical custody.
Approximately 155,000 unaccompanied alien children have been apprehended at the southern border in the last three years. Most of these minors are from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala, many of whom travel overland to the southern border with the assistance of a smuggler who is paid several thousand dollars by one or both parents, who reside illegally in the United States.
With limited exceptions, upon apprehension, CBP or ICE must promptly determine if a child meets the definition of an "unaccompanied alien child" and, if so, the child must be transferred to the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) within 72 hours, absent exceptional circumstances.9 The determination that the child is an "unaccompanied alien child" entitles the child to special protections, including placement in a suitable care facility, access to social services, removal proceedings before an immigration judge under section 240 of the INA, rather than expedited removal proceedings under section 235(b) of the INA, and initial adjudication of any asylum claim by USCIS. 10
Approximately 60% of minors initially determined to be "unaccompanied alien children" are placed in the care of one or more parents illegally residing in the United States. However, by Department policy and practice, such minors maintained their status as "unaccompanied alien children," notwithstanding that they may no longer meet the statutory definition once they have been placed by HHS in the custody of a parent in the United States who can care for the minor. Exploitation of that policy led to abuses by many of the parents and legal guardians of those minors and has contributed to significant administrative delays in adjudications by immigration courts and users.
To ensure identification of abuses and the processing of unaccompanied alien children consistent with the statutory framework and any applicable court order, the Director of USCIS, the Commissioner of CBP, and the Director of ICE are directed to develop uniform written guidance and training for all employees and contractors of those agencies regarding the proper processing of unaccompanied alien children, the timely and fair adjudication of their claims for relief from removal, and, if appropriate, their safe repatriation at the conclusion of removal proceedings. In developing such guidance and training, they shall establish standardized review procedures to confirm that alien children who are initially determined to be "unaccompanied alien child[ren]," as defined in section 279(g)(2), Title 6, United States Code, continue to fall within the statutory definition when being considered for the legal protections afforded to such children as they go through the removal process.

M. Accountability Measures to Protect Alien Children from Exploitation and Prevent Abuses of Our Immigration Laws
Although the Department's personnel must process unaccompanied alien children pursuant to the requirements described above, we have an obligation to ensure that those who conspire to violate our immigration laws do not do so with impunity- particularly in light of the unique vulnerabilities of alien children who are smuggled or trafficked into the United States.
The parents and family members of these children, who are often illegally present in the United States, often pay smugglers several thousand dollars to bring their children into this country. Tragically, many of these children fall victim to robbery, extortion, kidnapping, sexual assault, and other crimes of violence by the smugglers and other criminal elements along the dangerous journey through Mexico to the United States. Regardless of the desires for family reunification, or conditions in other countries, the smuggling or trafficking of alien children is intolerable.
Accordingly, the Director of ICE and the Commissioner of CBP shall ensure the proper enforcement of our immigration laws against those who facilitate the smuggling or trafficking of alien children into the United States. Proper enforcement includes, but is not limited to, placing such individuals who are removable aliens into removal proceedings, or referring such individuals for criminal prosecution, as appropriate.

N. Prioritizing Criminal Prosecutions for Immigration Offenses Committed at the Border
The surge of illegal immigration at the southern border has produced a significant increase in organized criminal activity in the border region. Mexican drug cartels, Central American gangs, and other violent transnational criminal organizations have established sophisticated criminal enterprises on both sides of the border. The large-scale movement of Central Americans, Mexicans, and other foreign nationals into the border area has significantly strained federal agencies and resources dedicated to border security. These criminal organizations have monopolized the human trafficking, human smuggling, and drug trafficking trades in the border region.
It is in the national interest of the United States to prevent criminals and criminal organizations from destabilizing border security through the proliferation of illicit transactions and violence perpetrated by criminal organizations.
To counter this substantial and ongoing threat to the security of the southern borderincluding threats to our maritime border and the approaches- the Directors of the Joint Task Forces-West, -East, and -Investigations, as well as the ICE-led Border Enforcement Security Task Forces (BESTs), are directed to plan and implement enhanced counternetwork operations directed at disrupting transnational criminal organizations, focused on those involved in human smuggling. The Department will support this work through the Office oflntelligence and Analysis, CBP's National Targeting Center, and the DHS Human Smuggling Cell.
In addition, the task forces should include participants from other federal, state, and local agencies, and should target individuals and organizations whose criminal conduct undermines border security or the integrity of the immigration system, including offenses related to alien smuggling or trafficking, drug trafficking, illegal entry and reentry, visa fraud, identity theft, unlawful possession or use of official documents, and acts of violence committed against persons or property at or near the border.
In order to support the efforts of the BES Ts and counter network operations of the Joint Task Forces, the Director oflCE shall increase of the number of special agents and analysts in the Northern Triangle ICE Attache Offices and increase the number of vetted  Transnational Criminal Investigative Unit international partners. This expansion of lCE's international footprint will focus both domestic and international efforts to dismantle transnational criminal organizations that are facilitating and profiting from the smuggling routes to the United States.

O. Public Reporting of Border Apprehensions Data
The Department has an obligation to perform its mission in a transparent and forthright manner. The public is entitled to know, with a reasonable degree of detail, information pertaining to the aliens unlawfully entering at our borders.
Therefore, consistent with law, in an effort to promote transparency and renew confidence in the Department's border security mission, the Commissioner of CBP and the Director oflCE shall develop a standardized method for public reporting of statistical data regarding aliens apprehended at or near the border for violating the immigration law. The reporting method shall include uniform terminology and shall utilize a format that is easily understandable by the public in a medium that can be readily accessed.
At a minimum, in addition to statistical information currently being publicly reported regarding apprehended aliens, the following information must be included: the number of convicted criminals and the nature of their offenses; the prevalence of gang members and prior immigration violators; the custody status of aliens and, if released, the reason for release and location of that release; and the number of aliens ordered removed and those aliens physically removed.

P. No Private Right of Action
This document provides only internal DHS policy guidance, which may be modified, rescinded, or superseded at any time without notice. This guidance is not intended to, does not, and may not be relied upon to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by any party in any administrative, civil, or criminal matter. Likewise, no limitations are placed by this guidance on the otherwise lawful enforcement or litigation prerogatives of DHS.
In implementing this guidance, I direct DHS Components to consult with legal counsel to ensure compliance with all applicable laws, including the Administrative Procedure Act.

Saturday, February 18, 2017

The Multitude

Baltimore


Ferguson

El Gasolinazo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORq_QB2YM3k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26zzcPPjLOI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yE7Fxo81Obc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IUlhEk5Gl0

“Differences between the conduct of the multitude and the conduct of the princes do not derive from differences in their nature, that being the same in both (though if there be some superiority either way, it will be found on the side of the people); rather, they derive from differences in their respect for the laws under which they live.”  -Machiavelli

"The state is suffering from two opposite vices, avarice and luxury; two plagues which, in the past, have been the ruin of every great empire." -Livy

"It is when fortune is the most propitious that she is least to be trusted." -Livy

"Nowhere are our calculations more frequently upset than in war." -Livy

"He would not anticipate those counsels which are rather bestowed by circumstances on men, than by men on circumstances." -Livy

"I observe that while several modern writers deal with particular wars and certain matters connected with them, no one, as far as I am aware, has even attempted to inquire critically when and whence the general and comprehensive scheme of events originated and how it led up to the end. I therefore thought it quite necessary not to leave unnoticed or allow to pass into oblivion this the finest and most beneficent of the performances of Fortune. For though she is ever producing something new and ever playing a part in the lives of men, she has not in a single instance ever accomplished such a work, ever achieved such a triumph, as in our own times. We can no more hope to perceive this from histories dealing with particular events than to get at once a notion of the form of the whole world, its disposition and order, by visiting, each in turn, the most famous cities, or indeed by looking at separate plans of each: a result by no means likely. He indeed who believes that by studying isolated histories he can acquire a fairly just view of history as a whole, is, as it seems to me, much in the case of one, who, after having looked at the dissevered limbs of an animal once alive and beautiful, fancies he has been as good as an eyewitness of the creature itself in all its action and grace." -Polybius

"It is a course which perhaps would not have been necessary had it been possible to form a state composed of wise men, but as every multitude is fickle, full of lawless desires, unreasoned passion, and violent anger, the multitude must be held in by invisible terrors and suchlike pageantry. For this reason I think, not that the ancients acted rashly and at haphazard in introducing among the people notions concerning the gods and beliefs in the terrors of hell, but that the moderns are most rash and foolish in banishing such beliefs." -Polybius

"Had previous chroniclers neglected to speak in praise of History in general, it might perhaps have been necessary for me to recommend everyone to choose for study and welcome such treatises as the present, since men have no more ready corrective of conduct than knowledge of the past. But all historians, one may say without exception, and in no half-hearted manner, but making this the beginning and end of their labour, have impressed on us that the soundest education and training for a life of active politics is the study of History, and that surest and indeed the only method of learning how to bear bravely the vicissitudes of fortune, is to recall the calamities of others. Evidently therefore no one, and least of all myself, would think it his duty at this day to repeat what has been so well and so often said. For the very element of unexpectedness in the events I have chosen as my theme will be sufficient to challenge and incite everyone, young and old alike, to peruse my systematic history. For who is so worthless or indolent as not to wish to know by what means and under what system of polity the Romans in less than fifty-three years have succeeded in subjecting nearly the whole inhabited world to their sole government — a thing unique in history? Or who again is there so passionately devoted to other spectacles or studies as to regard anything as of greater moment than the acquisition of this knowledge?" -Polybius

"How striking and grand is the spectacle presented by the period with which I purpose to deal, will be most clearly apparent if we set beside and compare with the Roman dominion the most famous empires of the past, those which have formed the chief theme of historians. Those worthy of being thus set beside it and compared are these. The Persians for a certain period possessed a great rule and dominion, but so often as they ventured to overstep the boundaries of Asia they imperilled not only the security of this empire, but their own existence. The Lacedaemonians, after having for many years disputed the hegemony of Greece, at length attained it but to hold it uncontested for scarce twelve years. The Macedonian rule in Europe extended but from the Adriatic region to the Danube, which would appear a quite insignificant portion of the continent. Subsequently, by overthrowing the Persian empire they became supreme in Asia also. But though their empire was now regarded as the greatest geographically and politically that had ever existed, they left the larger part of the inhabited world as yet outside it. For they never even made a single attempt to dispute possession of Sicily, Sardinia, or Libya, and the most warlike nations of Western Europe were, to speak the simple truth, unknown to them. But the Romans have subjected to their rule not portions, but nearly the whole of the world and possess an empire which is not only immeasurably greater than any which preceded it, but need not fear rivalry in the future. In the course of this work it will become more clearly intelligible by what steps this power was acquired, and it will also be seen how many and how great advantages accrue to the student from the systematic treatment of history" -Polybius

"When a state after having passed with safety through many and great dangers arrives at the higher degree of power, and possesses an entire and undisputed sovereignty, it is manifest that the long continuance of prosperity must give birth to costly and luxurious manners, and that the minds of men will be heated with ambitious contests, and become too eager and aspiring in the pursuit of dignities. And as those evils are continually increased, the desire of power and rule, along with the imagined ignominy of remaining in a subject state, will first begin to work the ruin of the republic; arrogance and luxury will afterwards advance it; and in the end the change will be completed by the people; when the avarice of some is found to injure and oppress them, and the ambition of others swells their vanity, and poisons them with flattering hopes. For then, being inflamed with rage, and following only the dictates of their passions, they no longer will submit to any control, or be contented with an equal share of the administration, in conjunction with their rules; but will draw to themselves the entire sovereignty and supreme direction of all affairs. When this is done, the government will assume indeed the fairest of all names, that of a free and popular state; but will in truth be the greatest of all evils, the government of the multitude." -Polybius

Multitude is a term for a group of people who cannot be classed under any other distinct category, except for their shared fact of existence. The term has a history of use reaching back to antiquity, but took on a strictly political concept when it was first used by Machiavelli and reiterated by Spinoza. The multitude is a concept of a population that has not entered into a social contract with a sovereign political body, such that individuals retain the capacity for political self-determination. A multitude typically classified as a quantity exceeding 100. For Hobbes the multitude was a rabble that needed to enact a social contract with a monarch, thus turning them from a multitude into a people. For Machiavelli and Spinoza both, the role of the multitude vacillates between admiration and contempt. Recently the term has returned to prominence as a new model of resistance against global systems of power as described by political theorists Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in their international best-seller Empire (2000) and expanded upon in their Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire (2004). Other theorists recently began to use the term include political thinkers associated with Autonomist Marxism and its sequelae, including Sylvère Lotringer, Paolo Virno, and thinkers connected with the eponymous review Multitudes.

"The Spirit of the people is greater than all of the [Government]'s Technology. It's greater than all of its Committees, all of its Boards of Regents and all of everything its about. Because it's not the buildings, it's not the Congress, the physical structure, that's oppressing the people. It's not the physical structure of the county courthouse... It's not the physical structure, it's the psychological structure of these racists who have control of this country and have had control of it from its very beginning... We didn't want to come up here and talk about hanging Reagan, we don't want to hang that punk, I want to challenge him to a duel and I want him to accept it." -Eldridge Cleaver (1968)

Friday, February 17, 2017

The Revolution Will Not Be Televized


A few things to know when protesting:
Choose your targets carefully. A few examples would be in the 30s people loved it when Banks were robbed because of the Great Depression, in the 60s and 70s people wanted to see the Military dismantled because of Vietnam. The CIA wrote a manual about choosing targets and mentioned that with the support of the people even assassination of judges, etc, can be seen as the right option by the community.

Before protesting, email local news outlets and end the message with "###" at the bottom in the middle of the page. This is called a Press Release.

Find a lawyer or group of lawyers that is down, and write his/her number on your wrist and spread the number to others.

Pass out a flyer or slip with a list of reasons that everyone is there, or a list of demands, so everyone knows why they are there.

Police will do something called a "Show of force" which always includes a line, but can also include stomping and banging on shields. Improvised musical instruments (large trash cans, etc) can be brought to use as a counter show of force.

Mineral Oil can inhibit the effects of Mace Pellets.

Gloves can be used to throw gas back at Police.

Hand Chops/Judo Chops can be used more effectively than fists when getting out of Police custody, and when someone frees themselves or is freed from Police custody it is called a "de-arrest".

If a ring of people with arms locked is created behind the mass of the crowd, they can not run when the Police confront them.
Smoke bombs can be created using Sugar and Potassium Nitrate, 1 lb or more can fill a whole city block.

When protests move towards jails, it makes the Police nervous because they are already outnumbered by the people in there.
Tasers, Mace, etc (things Police use) can be brought by both sides, Police are not the only people with access to these things. Sling shots can also be useful.

You can not have a Revolution without education

Books and Essays to Read:
Our Word is Our Weapon -Subcommandante Marcos
Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus Garvey
Steal This Book -Abbie Hoffman
Rules for Radicals -Saul Alinski
Psychological Operations in Guerilla Warfare -CIA
On Guerilla Warfare -Mao Tse Tung
The Art of War -Sun Tzu
Civil Disobedience -Henry David Thoreau
The Federalist Papers -Alexander Hamilton
The Anti-Federalist Papers -Anonymous
The Prince -Niccolo Machiavelli
Polybius
Josephus
Livy
The Republic -Plato
Politics -Aristotle


https://i.ytimg.com/vi/KzXji1y5c9s/maxresdefault.jpg
United States v. Brignoni-Ponce (1975)

"Whenever an officer restrains the freedom of a person to walk away, he has seized that person."

Protestors need to start carrying Shotguns and Rifles, and at the very least there should be a group or various groups that travel around the country to bear arms at protests. You can openly carry, non-threateningly, a long arm (Rifle or Shotgun) in most states.

States that Prohibit Open Carrying of Long Guns:
California
District of Columbia
Florida
Illinois
Massachusetts
Minnesota
New Jersey

States that Restrict, But Do Not Prohibit, the Open Carrying of Long Guns:
Iowa
Michigan
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Utah
Virginia

If anyone wants to transport a shotgun or rifle between states to bear arms in protest, there is the Firearm Owner's Protection Act (18 U.S. Code § 926A - Interstate transportation of firearms). You can transport a Shotgun or Rifle in your trunk or in a locked box, unloaded, out of reach if you have no trunk. And you can ignore any laws of any jurisdictions you pass through as long as you do that. Just make sure the place you are going allows open carry of long arms.

"You can't form this with no education. Let me give you an example. Jomo Kenyatta formed the [Kenyan] Revolution with no education, and in the end Jomo told those motherfuckers "I'm your brother I'll help you lead the Revolution but now I'm gonna oppress you". Another example Papa Doc in Haiti hated everything white, you couldn't put this white piece of paper in front of Papa Doc's face. But he moved all the white people out then he took over to be the oppressor, because of no education. If the people had been educated they would have said, we don't hate the white people we hate the oppressor, whether he be white, black, brown or yellow. So we need an educational program to find out what it's going to be in the finale. Jomo Kenyatta is called not a Revolutionary but an Ex-Revolutionary, so is Papa Doc, they brought on successful Revolutions. That thing in the Mau Maus and Bantu Freedom Fighters, all that kind of action. What we are talking about is the end, you don't judge Castro now, no one in this room can judge if Castro is going to be a Revolutionary. We're talking about things with China, the People's Republic, and even at the stage they're in now talking about going further into a Communistic State. Without education the people will take this local foundation and start stealing money because they won't understand how it is the people's thing anyway. You might get people caught up because they are poor and they want something, and if they aren't educated they'll want more, and before you know it they'll be capitalists and before you know it we'll have black imperialists" -Fred Hampton

With the Hispanic ban and the Wall coming, actual tactics should start being put into circulation. This is separate from Revolutionary Education, the Education is what ensures that the Revolution is prepared for more than just battling.

The Police are not very tactical. They are to an extent, but as a modern example, they will stand behind the doors of their cars when in a shootout, and Veterans overrun them all the time because they will actually fire bullets just to get the cops to duck, and move forward and side to side, advancing on them.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=veteran+v+cop+shootout

So tactics can be useful, and Police have limited tactical ability:

In simple terms, Ambushing, but it's really bigger than that. If you are protesting and set up different things in different places, such as armed protesters, Guerilla theater displays, sit-ins in Public buildings, road blocks, people chanting/picket lines, smoke bombs, at various locations spread out over a half mile, then plan the largest action at a random one of those locations, the Police won't know where the central activity is happening when they come out in the riot gear.

Lead the Police. Before the protest, figure out where you want the Police to be standing at the peak of tension. A lake, a river, a fountain, a large staircase, a parking garage, a bus/train station, etc, somewhere that isn't just a flat road with 2 or 4 directions to turn. Choose a place that will make them uncomfortable, or provide less light, or conditions that don't allow helicopters to film, etc. And an open field is better than a street corner, as they can't protect their backs by blocking people from going beside them.

Do not get caught in a siege. Examples of a siege are the 2nd Bundy standoff, the Davidians in Waco, Occupy, etc, if there is a siege, you do not want to be the defenders, it doesn't go well.

Use distractions/Make Police have too much to deal with.
Ex: A 1 lb smoke bomb filling a city block where nothing is happening, cars parked on sidewalks in front of Government property, people blocking rails at stations where trains are stopped, float the word "looting" around.

Call 911, and the White House (202-456-9451, 202-456-9453, or 202-456-9431) to let them know why it is happening, what force the Police have used, how many people and who they have wrongly arrested, and to mention previous uprisings in other towns around America. As many people as possible. Spread the numbers around.

Put up flags at different buildings and properties.

Protest at county lines to add confusion between jurisdictions in order to raise questions of jurisdiction and venue in court.

List of US Sanctuary Cities (Cities that will no longer be subject to the Federal Government if Trump gets his way)

Alabama
Birmingham, AL (Added 2-2-17, Source: Birmingham passes Sanctuary Resolution)
Arizona
Chandler, AZ               (Added 5/30/07, Congressional Research Service Report, 2006. The city disputes its listing. )
Mesa, AZ                    (Added 10-18-09, Sources: Judicial Watch; East Valley Tribune article,1-4-2008)*
Phoenix, AZ
South Tucson, AZ        (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Tucson, A Z                (Added 11-12-07, Source: 11-11-07 story by Brady McCombs, Arizona Daily Star. See note below.)
California
Alameda Co., CA          (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Amador Co., CA            (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Bell Gardens, CA
Berkeley, CA                    (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report which points to Berkeley's General Order J-1)
Butte Co., CA                    (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Calaveras Co., CA            (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)         
City of Industry, CA
City of Commerce, CA
Coachella, CA               (Added 7-23-12, Source: La Voz de Aztlan. Passed in 2006 and existence supported by quotes in city's 9-12-07 council meeting minutes.)
Colusa Co., CA                 (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)  (1-18-17 Supervisor disputes listing.  OJJPAC has requested Co. forward its policy for review.)
Contra Costa Co., CA    (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Cypress, CA
Davis CA
Downey, CA
El Dorado, CA                (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Fresno, CA                       (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service.  City disputes its listing claiming CRS could not provide source of its research. )
Fresno Co., CA                (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Glenn Co., CA                    (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Greenfield, CA                   (Added 7-23-12, Source: Battle at the ballot box in Greenfield, Monterey County, The Herald, 6-1-12)
Humboldt Co., CA            (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Imperial Co., CA                 (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Kern Co., CA                    (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Kings Co., CA                    (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Lake Co., CA                     (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Lassen Co., CA                 (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Los Angeles, CA               (Sources:  Congressional Research Service; 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Los Angeles Co., CA        (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Long Beach, CA
Lynwood, CA
Marin Co., CA                (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Madera Co., CA             (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Maywood, CA
Mendocino Co., CA         (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Merced Co., CA                (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Modoc Co. CA                 (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Montebello, CA
Monterey Co., CA            (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Napa Co., CA                   (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)    
National City, CA
Nevada Co., CA                 (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Norwalk, CA
Oakland, CA                     (Added 8-27-07. Source: 4/25/07 story by KCBS 740 AM. Link here.)
Orange Co., CA                (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Palm Springs, CA                (Added 1-31-17, Source: Palm Springs has been an unofficial sanctuary city for years, By Gustavo Solis, The Desert Sun, 1-19-17)
Paramount, CA
Pico Rivera, CA
Placer Co., CA                    (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Richmond, CA                  (Added 11-5-09. Sources:  Mayor Gayle McLaughlin's campaign website from 2004, 2006)
Riverside Co., CA            (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Sacramento Co.                (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
San Benito Co., CA                 (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
San Bernardino, CA               (Added 6/7/07, reader submitted /  9/5/08 Listing disputed by the city administration* See addl. notes)
San Bernardino Co., CA        (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
San Diego, CA                      (Sources: Congressional Research Service; SDPD chief endorses controversial immigration bill, Fox-TV 5, 9-2-13
San Diego Co., CA                (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
San Joaquin Co., CA             (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
San Luis Obispo Co., CA        (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
San Mateo Co., CA                (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Santa Ana, CA                        (added 1-31-17, Source:  http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Santa-Ana-sanctuary-city-immigration-Orange-County-411044565.html
Santa Barbara Co., CA            (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Santa Clara County, CA          (Added 11-29-10, source:  Forced into Immigration Enforcement, A County Considers Plan B, 10-21-10, Huffington Post.; 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Santa Cruz, CA                      (Added 5/30/07, documented by KSBW news)
Santa Cruz Co., CA             (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report; 12-17-16 letter from Jim Hart, Sheriff-Coroner, Co. of Santa Cruz )  
San Francisco, CA                 (Congressional Research Service)
San Francisco Co.                  (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
San Jose, CA                        (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
Santa Maria, CA                   (11-18-08 Submitted research from local activist/ Listing disputed by the city administration)
Sacramento Co., CA            (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Shasta Co., CA                     (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Solano Co., CA                    (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Sonoma Co., CA                  (Source: Congressional Research Service; 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
South Gate, CA
Stanislaus Co., CA                (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Sutter Co., CA                      (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Tehama Co., CA                   (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Trinity Co., CA                      (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Tulare Co., CA                    (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Ventura, Co., CA                (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Vernon, CA
Watsonville, CA                    (Added 5/30/07, documented by KSBW news)
Wilmington, CA
Yolo Co., CA                    (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Yuba Co., CA                     (Added 7-30-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Colorado     
 All 64 Counties in CO   (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Aurora, CO
 Commerce City, CO
 Denver, CO                     (Source: Congressional Research Service)
 Durango, CO                   (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
 Federal Heights, CO
 Fort Collins, CO
 Lafayette, CO                 (Added 6/3/07, documented by reader)
 Thornton, CO                  (City disputes its listing.  However, the city did not forward a copy of its policy regarding illegal aliens)
 Westminster, CO
Connecticut  
Fairfield Co., CT                (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Hartford, CT                     (Added 5/4/10.  Sources: [Ordinance passed in 2008]; NEWS 21 Blog, by Amy Crawford, Hartford, CT; 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Hartford Co., CT                (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
New Haven, CT                (Added 6/4/07.  Source: TV News 8: City council votes 25-1 to issue ID cards to illegal aliens)
New Haven Co., CT        (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
New London Co., CT        (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Tolland Co., CT                (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Windham Co., CT            (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Florida
Broward Co., FL                Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.       
* Correction                       *3/26/16 DeLeon Springs is being removed because it is a census-designated place (CDP) and has no formal municipal government.
Deltona, FL                        * Disputed
Hendry Co., FL                    (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
Herando Co.                       Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.                       
Hillsborough Co., FL           Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.
Jupiter, FL                           Added 4-13-09. Previously on watch list.
Lake Worth, FL                  Added 4-13-09. OJJPAC given tour of city by local activists.
Lee Co., FL                        (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
*Miami, FL                         (*1-28-17 Miami mayor rescinds sanctuary policy. Miami will be removed from the sanctuary cities list as soon as DHS confirms city is in full compliance.)
Monroe Co., FL                    (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
Miami-Dade Co., FL           Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.
Okaloosa Co., FL                (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
Orange Co., FL                    (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
Oscelola Co., FL                    (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
Palm Beach Co., FL            Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.
Pasco Co., FL                     Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.
Pinellas Co., FL                   Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.
Santa Rosa Co., FL             (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
St. Lucie Co., FL                    (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
Sunrise, FL                         Added 12-12-15,  Source:  City support for Obama's unconstitutional DAPA and DACA exec. orders.
Tampa, FL                          Added 12-12-15,  Source:  City support for Obama's unconstitutional DAPA and DACA exec. orders. 
Washington Co., FL                (Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)                        
Georgia
Dalton, GA        (Added 5/30/07. 6/18/07 Listing disputed by the City of Dalton, GA. City's written policy requested, not received as of 1-28-12. )
Illinois
Champaign Co., IL        (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.  Will not honor ICE detainer.)
Chicago, IL                   (Sources: Congressional Research Service; 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Cicero, IL                     (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
Cook Co., IL                (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Requires written agreement from ICE reimbursing costs of honoring detainer.)
Urbana, IL                    (Added 1-15-17 Source: Sanctuary City Measure Passes Urbana council On 5-1 Vote, Illinois Public Media, University of Illinois, 12-20-16)
Evanston, IL                  (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
Iowa
The following Iowa counties will not honor ICE detainers without a court order or unless a judge has approved a probable cause warrant:
Allamakee, Benton, Cass, Clinton, Delaware, Dubuque, Franklin, Freemont, Greene, Ida, Iowa, Jefferson, Johnson, Linn, Marion, Monona, Montgomery, Polk, Pottawattamie, Sioux, Story, Wapello, Winneshiek Co.  (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Iowa City                (Added 1-18-17, Source: Iowa City Adopts limited role in immigration enforcement, by Andy Davis, Iowa City Press-Citizen, 1-17-17)
        Kansas
Butler Co.             (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)        
Finney Co.            (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Harvey Co.           (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)     
Johnson Co.          (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Sedgwick Co.       (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Shawnee Co.        (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)            
Wichita                 (Source: Police department policy exposed after the death of Lola Jayne, KSN TV-3, 12-19-08)
        Louisiana
New Orleans, LA      (Source: Police department announced policy of "don't ask, don't tell"  by Police superintendent Warren Riley, WWL-TV; 9-9-09)
Orleans Parish Co., LA    (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
        Maine
Portland    (Added 5/31/07 Note: Maine resident reported that Portland city council passed sanctuary legislation)
State of Maine   (Added 5/31/07 Note: Governor of Maine initiated de facto protections for illegal aliens by Executive Order in 2004)*
        Maryland
Baltimore, MD               (Sources: Congressional Research Service; 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)   
Charles Co., MD              Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
Gaithersburg, MD     (Disputed by city 7-10-15. As of 9-8-15, the city has not forwarded a copy of its policy regarding illegal alien in Gaithersburg.)
Mt. Rainier, MD        (Added 1-20-08, Source: The Washington D.C. Examiner, 1-19-08)
Montgomery Co., MD  (Added 11-3-09, Source: Frederick County sheriff worried about MontCo gangs, The Washington D.C. Examiner, 11-2-09. Also DDO.)
Prince George's Co., MD    Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
Takoma Park, MD      (Reported that City ordinance passed some 20 years ago; Congressional Research Service)
        Massachusetts
Amherst, MA         (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)   
Boston, MA           (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report citing the Boston Trust Act)
Cambridge, MA     (Source: Boston Globe. First passed resolution in 1985; 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Chelsea, MA          (Added: 8-14-07 Source: Chelsea government website with text of sanctuary policy.)
Northampton, MA  (Added 6-20-12 Source: City of Northampton Resolution dated 8-18-2011.  Resolution limits cooperation with ICE but does not use the term "sanctuary." )
Orleans, MA          (Added 6/13/07 Source: Congressional Research Service) Township disputes that it is a sanctuary.
Somerville, MA   (Added 7-23-12 Original resolution passed in 1987, later repealed and replaced with Safe City Resolution. Source: Somerville News Blog, 10-15-2007;10-8-14 DHS DDO Report) )
Springfield, MA      (Disputed)
Worchester, MA    (Added: 2-5-17, Source: Mayor Petty blasts Councilor Gaffney's sanctuary city resolution, By Nick Kotsopoulos, Telegram & Gazette, 1-27-17)
        Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI      (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)      
Detroit, MI            (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
Minnesota
Anoka Co., MN            Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
Austin, MN               (Added 11-1-11 Source: Protecting illegal immigrants to catch criminals, Star Tribune, 10-27-11)*
Hennepin Co., MN            (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Maplewood, MN      Added 12-12-15, Source: Maplewood City Pages, 12-9-15
Minneapolis, MN      (Congressional Research Service)
Ramsey Co., MN     (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
St. Paul, MN
Worthington, MN      (Added 5-30-07 Note: This is where a Swift plant was raided by ICE in December, 2006.  Worthington disputes its listing.)
        Nebraska
Douglas Co., NE        Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.)
Hall Co., NE              (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Lancaster Co., NE     (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Omaha, NE                (Added 2-18-16, Source: News)
Sarpy Co., NE           (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Nevada
Clark Co.                   (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)                
Washoe Co.               (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Reno                          (Added 5-31-07; 2-18-08 Disputed by city; OJJPAC has requested a copy of city policies. Copy of policies never received as of 1-28-12) 
New Jersey
Camden, NJ                   (Added in 2007. Latest source: Camden, Immigrant Haven?, By Lauren Feeney, City Paper, 7-16-08)
Freehold, NJ                  (Added 11-5-15.  Local resident; Ground Zero For A Hot Topic, 10-19-15, Asbury Park Press)
*                                 * (The Borough of Fort Lee removed pending review of its compliance with IIRIRA). The city disputes its listing as a sanctuary.)
Middlesex Co., NJ          (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)        
Hightstown, NJ               (Added 5-30-07  The city disputes its listing as a sanctuary.)
Jersey City, NJ
Newark, NJ                    (Added 6-3-07)
North Bergen, NJ               
Trenton, NJ
Union City, NJ
Union Co., NJ               (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)    
West New York, NJ
New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM*            6/13/07 Congressional Research Service; 8-14-07 KOB-TV 4 Eyewitness News report.  *[5-14-10 Mayor claims city no longer a sanctuary.]
Aztec, NM                       Added 5-8-10, Identified by CRS in 2006 report to Congress.  (The city disputes its listing. However it has not forwarded a copy of its policy.)
Bernalillo Co. NM            (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)         
Dona Ana Co., NM          (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Lea Co., NM                    Added 8-1-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report. Declines but report identifies no policy.)
Luna Co., NM                  (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Otero Co., NM                (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Rio Ariba Co., NM    (Added 6/13/07 Congressional Research Service;  Also 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.)
San Miguel Co., NM                (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.  Requires reimbursement of costs by ICE in honoring detainer.)
Santa Fe, NM                  6/13/07 Congressional Research Service; 1-26-12 AP story, Santa Fe Mayor David Coss opposes taking drivers licenses away from illegal aliens.
Santa Fe Co., NM        (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Taos, NM                    (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.  Illegal alien must be convicted of at least one felony or two misdemeanors.)
New York
Albany, NY                   (Added 7-22-09 Source: Council adopts don't ask policy, Times Union report by Jordan Carleo-Evangelist)
Bay Shore, NY
Brentwood, NY
Bronx Co., NY               (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Central Islip, NY
Farmingville, NY
Franklin Co., NY            (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Ithica, NY                       (Added 2-2-17, Source: Ithica officially declared a sanctuary city, Central New York News, 2-1-17)
Kings Co., NY               (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Nassau Co., NY             (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)               
New York City, NY       (Originally added in 2006; (Source added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Onondaga Co., NY         (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Queens Co., NY             (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Rensselaer Co., NY        (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report) 
Richmond Co., NY         (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)   
Riverhead, NY
Rochester, NY                    (Added 1-18-17, Source:  City of Rochester Sanctuary City Resolution, 1-17-17)
Saratoga Co., NY               (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)         
*                                          *The hamlets of Shirly/Mastic were removed because they are unincorporated areas within Suffolk Co. (already listed).
Spring Valley Village, NY    (Added 7-25-07)
St. Lawrence Co., NY         (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)           
Suffolk Co., NY                  (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)        
Uniondale, NY
Wayne Co., NY                  (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)                  
Westbury, NY
North Carolina
Carrboro, NC               (Added 11-12-07 Source: Towns differ on illegal aliens by Patrick Winn, The News & Observer)
Chapel Hill, NC            (Added 11-12-07 Source: Towns differ on illegal aliens by Patrick Winn, The News & Observer)
Charlotte, NC
Chatham County, NC    (Added 1-14-09 Source: Chatham rejects immigration program, The News & Observer; Chatham County Commissioners Board Minutes, 1-5--09)
Durham, NC                 (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
Raleigh
Winston-Salem
        North Dakota
State of North Dakota       (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.  ND State Penitentiary will not honor ICE detainers)
SWMCCC                        (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)   
     Ohio
Cincinnati, OH        (Added 2-2-17) Source: Mayor Mark Mallory supports immigration reform [amnesty], By Amanda Lee Myers, San Francisco Chronicle, 5-30-13)
Cleveland, OH        (Added 11-30-16 Source:  WKYC-TV-3, Tom Meyer interview,11-30-16; Cleveland passed a Sanctuary Resolution in 1987 (No. 777-87) Cleveland Scene, 2-6-17)
Columbus, OH        Added 7/5/07 Source: 5/10/07 Columbus Dispatch article stating illegal aliens in misdemeanor cases are not reported to ICE)  See more below.
Dayton, OH            Added 1-11-10 Source:  Dayton Daily News story by Lucas Sullivan.  Police chief prohibits officers from asking about immigration status.
Lake County, OH   Added 7-23-15 Source:  Lake County accepts fraudulent Mexican Matricula Counsular ID cards used by illegal aliens.
Lima, OH                    Added 10-28-08 Source:  City administration opposes County Sheriff's efforts to remove illegal aliens.
Lorain, OH             Added 4-21-14 Source:  Lorain Police Chief Celestino Rivera's written policy of non-cooperation with ICE.  See addl. notes below.
Lucas County, OH  Added 7-23-15 Source:  Lucas County accepts fraudulent Mexican Matricula Counsular ID cards used by illegal aliens.
Oberlin, OH           Added 1-25-09. Source: City Resolution adopted January 20, 2009.   
Painesville, OH       Added 7-19-07 Source: In 2006, the city of Painesville in an official letter called illegal aliens (they used the word "undocumented" a valuable asset to the city and opposed immigration law enforcement legislation. I have a copy of that letter in my file.  Although the city of Painesville passed a Resolution in support of immigration law enforcement as a result of public pressure, the city remains in opposition to aggressive immigration law enforcement and the deportation of the illegal alien population in the community.  We will be looking into the past actions of the Painesville Municipal Court too, regarding its role in preventing the deportation of deportable aliens.
    Oklahoma
Oklahoma City         (de facto) 
Tulsa                        (6-3-07 Note: Tulsa city council is discussing changing its sanctuary policy.  8-15-10 Update:  See note below.)
    Oregon
The following Oregon counties will not honor ICE detainers without a court order or warrant:  Clackamas, Curry, Douglas, Deschutes, Gilliam, Grant, Hood River, Jefferson, Josephine, Linn, Malheur, Multnomah, Marion, Tillamook, Union, Wallowa, Wasco, Washington, and Yamhill.     (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Ashland, OR                   (8-9-07 Congressional Research Service)
Baker Co., OR                (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Beaverton, OR                (Added 1-18-17, Source: Beaverton becomes sanctuary city, by Mandy Feder-Sawyer, Pamplin Media, 1-11-17)
Clackamas Co., OR        (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Clatsop Co., OR            (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Corvallis, OR                  (Added 1-18-17, Source: Corvallis Declares Itself Sanctuary City, by Conrad Wilson, Oregon Public Broadcasting, 12-13-16)
Gaston, OR                    (8-9-07 Congressional Research Service)
Jackson Co., OR            (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Lane Co., OR                (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Marion Co., OR             (8-9-07 Congressional Research Service; Also 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Multnomah Co., OR      (Added 11-9-13 Source: Sheriff's office says 'no' to ICE, By Kirsten Lock, Fox TV-12, 4-25-13)
Portland, OR
State of Oregon *           (8-9-07 Congressional Research Service)  *(See note below)
    Pennsylvania
Allentown, PA (Rescinded)  7-23-12 Note: Allentown city council passed a sanctuary resolution in 1986 but voted 4-3 to rescind it in 1991.
Chester Co., PA            (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Delaware Co., PA        (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Lehigh Co., PA            (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Montgomery, PA        (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Philadelphia, PA*          (7-15-10 Source:  Policy Concerning Access of Immigrants to City Services ; 10-8-14  DHS DDO Report)  
Philadelphia Co., PA      (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report) 
Pittsburgh, PA  (Added 5-29-14 Source: Pittsburg Post Gazette: Pittsburg launches effort to woo more immigrants, 5-29-14)    
      Rhode Island
State of Rhode Island    (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report.  Dept. of Corrections won't honor detainers without a warrant.)
Providence         (Added 5-17-11 Source: Providence wants to opt out of 'Secure Communities' database, by Gregory Smith, Providence Journal, 2-23-11).    
    Texas
Austin, TX                (Congressional Research Service)
Baytown, TX            (6-13-07 Local reader observation;  12-9-15 Note: The City of Baytown disputes it's listing as a sanctuary. Status is currently under review.)
Brownsville, TX
Channelview, TX      (6-13-07 Local reader observation)
Denton, TX
Dallas, TX
Dallas Co., TX         (Added 8-2-16, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
El Cenizo, TX          (6-13-07 Congressional Research Service)
Ft. Worth, TX
Houston, TX            (Congressional Research Service)
Katy, TX                 (Congressional Research Service)
Laredo, TX             (Entry added in 2007. Source added 7-25-15   Breitbart.com article by Brandon Darby, 7-6-15, regarding Laredo PD critical of officers calling Border Patrol. )
Mcallen, TX
Port Arthur, TX       (6-13-07 Reader/resident observation)
Travis Co., TX        (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report; and Houston Chronicle article by Mike Ward, 1-23-17)
Utah
State of Utah                (Added 5-15-11  Source:  Utah Approves Guest Worker Program for Illegal Immigrants, ABC New, 5-7-11) 
Provo, UT*                (* 8-27-2010  Provo Utah contacted OJJPAC and indicated that it has no desire to be a sanctuary city.
                                    *5-16-11Update:  Pending removal of Provo, UT  upon verification of city's full participation/cooperation with ICE.)
Salt Lake City, UT
Virginia
Alexandria, VA*            (Added 10-6-08. Source: City Resolution No. 2246 adopted 10-9-07)
Arlington, VA                (Added 11-3-15.   Source:  Arlington, VA opts out of federal immigration program, 9-28-2010; 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Fairfax County, VA       
Virginia Beach, VA         (Added 6/3/07.  Note: The city adopted an administrative directive on 8-1-08 allowing VBPD limited authority to inquire about immigration status. Based on this directive, the city disputes its sanctuary status. Despite the directive, the city has not provided statistical evidence of enforcement to date. )
        Vermont
Burlington, VT            (Added 5-14-09  Source: 5-13-09 Associated Press story by Wilson Ring)
Middlebury, VT          (Added 5-14-09  Source: 5-13-09 Associated Press story by Wilson Ring)
State of Vermont*        (Added 11-29-10  Source: 11-21-10 Vermont AG proposes bias-free policing policy, Burlington Free Press)
        Washington (State)
The following Washington counties do not honor ICE detainers:  Benton, Chelan, Clallam, Clark, Cowlitz, Franklin, Jefferson, King, Kitsap, Pierce, Skagit, Snohomish, Spokane, Thurston, Walla Walla, Whatcom, Yakima.    (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Burien, WA                       (Added 1-26-17 Source: City of Burien Ordinance No. 651)
King Co. Council, WA     (Added as a de facto sanctuary on 6-28-09 Source: The Seattle Times; and on 11-9-09 Ordinance passed;10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)
Olympia, WA    (Added 2-5-17, Source: Olympia adopts 'sanctuary city' resolution in response to presidential election, By Andy Hobbs, The Olympian, 12-14-16)
Seattle, WA                      (Added 5/30/07; Congressional Research Service)
Spokane, WA                   (Added 6-22-15; City Council passed Ordinances C35164 and C-35167)
Wisconsin
Madison, WI                    (Congressional Research Service)  Update: In June, 2010, the city council passed a resolution reaffirming its policy.
Milwaukee Co., WI            (Added 10-13-15, Source: 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report citing Resolution 12-135; Milwaukee Co. supervisors pass sanctuary resolution, Wrn.com)
Milwaukee., WI    (Added 6-10-12 Source article: County Board Resolution on Immigration on target, Opinion, Journal Sentinel News., 6-9-12)                                   
Wyoming
Jackson Hole, WY     (10-19-15 Sheriff of Teton County disputes the county's sanctuary status. A status review of Jackson Hole is in progress.
    Washington D.C. 
(The Washington D. C. city council has voted to prohibit its police department from participating in the Secure Communities program in July, 2010 according to an AP story by Ivan Moreno dated 7-26-10;   10-19-11 D.C. Examiner story which states that Mayor Vincent Gray signed an order prohibiting the city's police dept. from inquiring about a person's immigration status. Also included in the 10-8-14 DHS DDO Report)

La quema de Judas is going to be celebrated in the US this year, April 14-16
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdrBLXlSY50


Peroxides
Chlorates
Nitrates
Perchlorates
Dichromates

Dust Explosives-
Lycopodium Powder
Nondairy Creamer
Flour
Sawdust

Nitrogen Triiodide (Iodine & Lye)
Gun Powder (Sulfur, Activated Charcoal & Potassium Nitrate)
Thermite (Aluminum & Iron Oxide)
Acetone Peroxide (Hydrogen Peroxide, Acetone, Hydrochloric Acid & Ammonia)
TNT (Sulfuric Acid, Sulfur Oxide & Nitric Acid)
Silver Fulminate (Silver Nitrate, Nitric Acid & Ethanol)
Napalm/Jellied Gasoline (Styrofoam & Gasoline)
Isopropyl Nitrate/Jet Fuel (Isopropyl Alcohol, Sodium Nitrite & Sulfuric Acid)
Tannerite (Ammonium Nitrate & Aluminum)
Astrolite G (Ammonium Nitrate & Hydrazine, 2:1)
Astrolite A (G +Aluminum)
Armstrong's Mixture (Phosphorus + Oxidizer or Boron Carbide)
H3 (1/4 Charcoal, 3/4 Potassium Chlorate + extra 2% Dextrin)
MTV (Magnesium, Teflon, Vitron)
Thermate (Aluminum, Metal Oxide, Sulfur + sometimes Barium Nitrate)
Whistle Mix (7/10 Potassium Perchlorate, 3/10 Sodium Benzoate + Organic Acid Salt)
Sprengel Explosives (Oxidizer: Nitric Acid/Nitrates/Chlorates + Fuel: Nitrobenzene)
Rackarock (Potassium Chlorate & Nitrobenzene)
Cheddite (Inorganic Chlorates, Nitroaromatics & Paraffin or Castor Oil) or (90% Potassium Chlorate, 7% Paraffin, 3% Petroleum Jelly)
Panclastite (Dinitrogen Tetroxide & Carbon Disulfide, 3:2 + Nitrobenzene)
Aluminum, Hydrogen Peroxide & Guar Gum
Tang & Peroxide
Ammonium Nitrate & Icing
Potassium Nitrate & Sugar
ANFO
PLX
Kinestik
RDX or Cyclonite
Composition C (Mainly RDX, ex: C-4 or PE4)
Composition B (Mainly RDX & TNT)
Composition H6 (Similar to B & C)
IMX-101
HMX
PETN
HNS
CL-20 or HNIN
TATNB
DDF
TNA or Trinitroaniline
TNP or Picric Acid
FOX-7 or DADNE
EGDN or Nitroglycerol
NG or Nitroglycerine
MHN or Mannitol Hexanitrate
ETN or Erythritol Tetranitrate
EDNA or Ethylenedinitramine
NQ or Nitroguanidine
Sorguyl
ONC or Octanitrocubane
NC or Nitrocellulose
UN or Urea Nitrate
MEKP or Methly Ethyl Ketone Peroxide
HMTD or Hexamethylene Triperoxide Diamine
AN or Ammonium Nitrate
TATB
Lead Azide
Silver Azide
Mercury Fulminate
Tovex or Trenchrite
ETN or Erythritol Tetranitrate
EGDN or Nitroglycol
MHN or Mannitol Hexanitrate
Xylitol Pentanitrate
BTTN or Butanetroil Trinitrate
Diethylene Glycol Dinitrate
Methyl Nitrate
Nitroethane
Nitromethane
PGDN or Propylene Glycol Dinitrate
Tetranitromethane
TEGDN or Triethylene Glycol Dinitrate
TMETN or Trimethyloethane Trinitrate
Acetyl Nitrate
Ammonium Dinitramide
Ammonium Permanganate
Benzvalene
Chlorine Azide
Diacetyl Peroxide
Diazomethane
Ethylene Glycol Dinitrate
Flourine Perchlorate
HBT
HHTDD
Hydrazoic Acid
Methylammonium Nitrate
Mononitrotoluene
Nitramex
Nitrogen Trichloride
Nitrostarch
Nitrourea
Pentazole
Urea Perchlorate
TEX
PNNM
MIEDZIANKIT
A-IX-2
Amatex
Amatol
Carbonite
Cordtex
G22T
Gelignite
Goma-2
Hexanite
Kinetite
LX-14
Minol
Octol
Pentolite
PNNM
Semtex
Shellite
Titadine
Tonite
Torpex
Tritonal

Zinc
Copper
Sodium
Barium
Stontium
Ammonium Chloride
Calcium Nitrate
Chromium Oxide
Hexamine
Dextrin
Potassium Chlorate
PVC
Corn Cobb
Rice Hulls
Heat Pellets
Heat Paper
Sugar
Magnesium
Iron
Lactose
Dye
Hexachloroethane
Terephthalic Acid

Pentolite
Cyclotol
Blasting Caps
Low Energy Detonating Cord
M200A1 fuses

Delay Composition-
Fuels: Silicon, Boron, Manganese, Tungsten, Antimony, Antimony Trisulfide, Zirconium, Zirconium Nickle, Zinc, Magnesium
Oxidizers: Lead Dioxide, Iron Oxides, Barium Chromate, Lead Chromate, Tin Oxide, Bismuth Oxide, Barium Sulfate, Potassium Perchlorate
Additives: Titanium Dioxide, Chalk, Sodium Bicarbonate

Thermites-
Fuels: Aluminum, Magnesium, Titanium, Zinc, Silicon, Boron
Oxidizers: Bismuth Oxide, Boron Oxide, Silicon Oxide, Chromium Oxide, Magnesium Oxide, Iron Oxide, Copper Oxide, Lead Oxide

Flares-
Base: Strontium Nitrate, Potassium Nitrate, Potassium Perchlorate, Cacium Phosphide, Ammonium Perchlorate, Red Phosphorus
Fuel: Charcoal, Sulfur, Sawdust, Aluminum, Magnesium

Flash Powder-
Aluminum & Chlorate/Perchloate
Aluminum, Nitrate, Sulfur
Magnesium & Nitrate
Magnesium & PTFE
Antimony Trisulfide & Chlorate

Pyrotechnic Initiators-
ZPP
BPN or BKNO3
ZHPP
THPP
Titanium Boron
Nickle-Aluminum
BNCP
Lead Azide
HMTD
Aluminum Potassium Perchlorate
Titanium Aluminum Potassium Perchlorate
Tetrazine Explosive

Smoke Composition-
Zinc, Chloride, Hexachloroethane, Grained Aluminum, Zinc Oxide
White Phosphorus
Dye, Oxidizer, Lactose & Sodium Bicarbonate

Rocket Fuels-
RP-1 (LOX & Kerosene)
LOX & Liquid Hydrogen
Nitrogen Tetroxide & Hydrazine, MMH or UDMH
Syntin

Propellants-
Gasoline/Jet fuel/Rocket fuel & Oxidizer
Cordite
Ballistite
LOX & Ethanol
LOX & Methanol
Hydrogen Peroxides & Ethanol
RFNA & Kerosene
RFNA & UDMH
Dinitrogen Teroxide & UDMH/MMH and/or Hydrazine
Hydrogen Peroxide

Fuel Air Explosives-
Hydrocarbon Oxides
Hexane
Heptane
Ethylene Oxide
Propylene Oxide

If Donald Trump actually tries to build a wall, not only will there be protests at the construction sites on both the American and Mexican sides, cartel attacks on the sites and probably shootings (the border patrol already reports snipers at the border), there will probably be attacks on the supply lines to the wall. There are two sides. "The Border" has two countries that can both access it.

Volleyball at the border
https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/imagebuzz/web03/2010/5/14/14/usa-vs-mexico-border-volleyball-32258-1273862509-35.jpg

And the cartels are not some small little groups, many of them are larger than the Trump organization, with Ranches, Farms, Labs and tens of thousands of employees each. Sometimes they even supply more social services to the people of a region than the Mexican Federal or local Governments. And the way they make their money is by utilizing American drug laws (which ban people from selling drugs in most States) allowing them to control the prices and stock. As long as the Police/Congress/etc protect the cartels interests (restricting drug trade to only illegal markets), the cartels will have funding.

Cartel Guns made of Gold (the Cartels are so large they even have rich spoiled heirs that post their guns on Instagram)
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/de/1d/b9/de1db9074476c7f9346957c9c25b20a1.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/13/article-2202763-14FB31B6000005DC-502_634x848.jpg

At the border it gets crazy and the border itself (an imaginary line) shouldn't even really exist, there are cars at the bottom of the Rio Grande right now because people drove their cars across the border so that Police couldn't chase them, and that's not even getting in to the Cartel activity or anything like that. And in Mexico, the cartel has open gun battles with the Police, you can find tons of videos from Mexico where there are people just driving somewhere and they are caught in a zone where there is crossfire between the Federales and the Cartels.

The cartels go to people's houses and ask them "Bala o Plata" which means "Bullet or Silver" and they will either take your land/services and give you money or take your land/equipment and kill you. And this all exists because of the drug laws in America, without the drug laws in America there would not be the inflated price on drugs, meaning there would be no money for the cartel in drugs. The border actually keeps the cartel alive. A wall is not going to do anything to stop the cartels from doing anything.

There is a Cartel called Los Zetas (the Zetas). At one point the US sent Black Ops troops to Mexico to train some Mexican soldiers. The Mexican Government wasn't paying them enough, and Los Zetas offered them more, so they joined the Zetas and now the Zetas have those troops working for them. Often times it is hard to tell the difference between the cartels and the Federales.

The cartels have submarines that they ship cocaine in, and they run much of the Government, Mexico is known by everyone there to have a very corrupt Government. In America when someone talks about conspiracies, it's like "Maybe, but who knows" or "That's far fetched" in Mexico it's like "Yeah, we all know". You can't just build a wall and say "Now stay out", it just gets worse from there.

Here are the Mexican Marines fighting the Cartel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRI6ZWFJDOg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMVltZQRzLw

Federales fighting the Cartel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ICGQvR2tKk

Cartel and Police
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uTIbaXmGIA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1yW55SQo10

More videos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIj_YuEISgA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsSXJ6HHpUw

For the most part, this stays out of the US and is a Mexican phenomenon. But if America builds a wall, the border is going to erupt into a war zone.


This is a Soap Opera on Telemundo, they are called Novelas in Spanish
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loK6GuGpQyw
It is about corruption and conflict between the Cartels and the Government.

Building a Wall is not a way to solve anything. If anything, trying to build a wall will make things much worse.