I have obtained this document sent by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. It appears the Washington Post is about to push the bounds of intelligence reporting. The intelligence agency seems concerned.

Be sure to head on over to the Times’ site and read the letter from ODNI.

38. Some people have called for a boycott until the Arizona government repeals this law. People who participate in the boycott would not buy products made in Arizona or travel to Arizona for vacations or conferences. Do you think you would or would not participate in this boycott?

May 21-23
2010

Would participate in boycott          17%
Would not                                                82%
No opinion                                                   1%

They clearly think it’s a bad idea, which is not surprising since the same poll says 57% of the American people support the new law. With this in mind, why would these state and city governments continue with the boycotts? Evidently, these government officials feel insulated enough from their constituents that they believe they can do as they wish without suffering consequences.

Andrew Malcolm at Top of the Ticket has more on the poll.

Columbus Mayor Michael B. Coleman has banned city-worker travel to Arizona because of that state’s new law allowing police to demand documentation from people they suspect are in the country illegally.

“The mayor will not be approving any travel to Arizona,” spokesman Dan Williamson said this morning.

“He agrees with those who want to send a message to the state of Arizona that this is not the American way.”

Already, he has rejected a request from the city’s technology director to attend a seminar in Phoenix, Williamson said.

The order was issued in a recent meeting with city department heads.

The Arizona law says local officers should, when practical after a stop, detention or arrest related to other laws, seek proof of a person’s immigration status if they suspect that the “person is an alien and unlawfully present in the United States.”

It would take hours to read all 2,500 comments at the article, time I don’t have, but of the several hundred I did read, virtually all of them were in support of the Arizona law and critical of Mayor Coleman’s ban. He certainly didn’t win any friends with this move.

Mexican President Calderone also thinks the United States is nothing more than a land mass without borders and criticized the Arizona immigration law because it makes the lives of Mexican citizens living in the US illegally more difficult. Meanwhile, he keeps the borders of Mexico buttoned up nice and tight.

I received your message; please receive mine.  As a state-wide elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission overseeing Arizona’s electric and water utilities, I too am keenly aware of the “resources and ties” we share with the City of Los Angeles. In fact, approximately twenty-five percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.

If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona’s utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona’s economy.

Nice job, Mr. Pierce.

I have a feeling the citizens of Los Angeles won’t be quite as committed to the cause of punishing Arizona as the mayor and city council are, especially since it will be the citizens who will be living with the blackouts, and just as the heat of summer is ramping up.  If Mr. Villaraigosa had considered the consequences of trashing the hand that feeds his city’s air conditioners and lights before publicly supporting the boycott of Arizona (especially since Arizona’s new law reads very similarly to California’s), he wouldn’t be in the awkward position of trying to find a way to extricate himself and his city from this difficult situation.

So, I’d like to know where his outrage is regarding his own state of California’s immigration law, which Kerry dug up and provided for us:

(a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws. (b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following: (1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status. (2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or leave the United States. (3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal status and provide any additional information that may be requested by any other public entity. (c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city, county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly prohibited.

Well, golly, what do you know. It reads a lot like SB 1070, Arizona’s new immigration law, which, by the way, does not give state law enforcement the authority to deport anyone, as Mr. Reyes asserts in his interview with Ms. Pickett. That is in the purview of federal government only:

14 11-1051. Cooperation and assistance in enforcement of

15 immigration laws; indemnification

16 A. NO OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR

17 OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY ADOPT A POLICY THAT LIMITS OR

18 RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL

19 EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW.

20 B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY

21 OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS

22 STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS

23 UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE,

24 WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE

25 PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

26 PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

27 C. IF AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES IS

28 CONVICTED OF A VIOLATION OF STATE OR LOCAL LAW, ON DISCHARGE FROM

29 IMPRISONMENT OR ASSESSMENT OF ANY FINE THAT IS IMPOSED, THE ALIEN SHALL BE

30 TRANSFERRED IMMEDIATELY TO THE CUSTODY OF THE UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND

31 CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT OR THE UNITED STATES CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION.

32 D. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER LAW, A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY MAY

33 SECURELY TRANSPORT AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES

34 AND WHO IS IN THE AGENCY’S CUSTODY TO A FEDERAL FACILITY IN THIS STATE OR TO

35 ANY OTHER POINT OF TRANSFER INTO FEDERAL CUSTODY THAT IS OUTSIDE THE

36 JURISDICTION OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.

So, Councilman Reyes, when can we expect to hear you call for a boycott of your own state of California?

I would say to the House, as I said to those who have joined this government: “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat.”

We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I can say: It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival. Let that be realised; no survival for the British Empire, no survival for all that the British Empire has stood for, no survival for the urge and impulse of the ages, that mankind will move forward towards its goal. But I take up my task with buoyancy and hope. I feel sure that our cause will not be suffered to fail among men. At this time I feel entitled to claim the aid of all, and I say, “come then, let us go forward together with our united strength.”

And that is just what Winston Churchill and the British people did, with America at their side, in their fight against Hitler and his National Socialist Party zealots.

Contrast Churchill’s words and actions to Obama’s actions today, eleven days after radical Islamist Faisal Shahzad tried to detonate a car bomb in the middle of Times Square on a busy Saturday afternoon:

Eleven days after the botched plot to bomb Times Square, the Obama administration on Wednesday slashed some $53 million from the city’s terror-fighting budget.

“For the administration to announce these cuts two weeks after the attempted Times Square bombing shows they just don’t get it and are not doing right by New York City,” fumed Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

To top it off, the news arrives as President Obama comes to town today amid buzz he will meet with the very cops who helped thwart the bombing.

Obama will also be tapping the city’s deep pockets for the Democratic Party.

“The President seems more interested in raising money for political campaigns than providing New York the money it needs to defend itself against Islamic terrorism,” said Rep. Pete King (R-L.I.), the top Republican on the Homeland Security Committee.

Indeed. Sadly, instead of Winston Churchill, we’ve got Neville Chamberlain.

Governor Jan Brewer and the Arizona state legislature were left with no other choice but to take control of the situation themselves. The legislature wrote and the governor signed SB 1070, Arizona’s new illegal immigration law that does nothing more than mirror the federal government’s law. This allows the state’s law enforcement personnel to do what federal government has refused to do.

The federal government reacted to Arizona’s movement toward border self-determination with anger and disdain. President Obama criticized the law and directed Attorney General Holder to look into it and determine if it will violates anyone’s civil rights. But Governor Brewer isn’t backing down. Instead, she has sent President Obama a message he would be wise to heed:

Faisal Shahzad seemed to be following the roadmap for a typical American life, not the blueprint for a domestic terrorist attack.

Shahzad, the man accused of trying to detonate a car bomb in Times Square, spent a decade on the path to respectability before abandoning his house in Connecticut and deciding to supplement his business degrees with explosives training in Pakistan, authorities say.

Law enforcement sources tell CBS News motives pursued include religion (did he attend a mosque frequently?), hatred of Americans and money. The source said investigators are trying to figure it out as they continue to track his movements including where he was following the incident and who may have helped him and think there are those they helped Shahzad unwittingly.

If he hated Americans so much, why would he want to become one himself?  He probably felt that US citizenship offered him a strategic advantage in carrying out his plot.  Note how  Shahzad’s behavior radically changed after he was awarded American citizenship:

Until recently, his life in the U.S. appeared enviable. He had a master’s degree from the University of Bridgeport in Connecticut, a job as a budget analyst for a marketing firm in Norwalk, Conn., two children and a well-educated wife who posted his smiling picture and lovingly called him “my everything” on a social networking website.

But shortly after becoming a U.S. citizen a year ago, he gave up his job, stopped paying his mortgage and told a real estate agent to let the bank take the house because he was returning to Pakistan.

Once there, according to investigators, he traveled to the lawless Waziristan region and learned bomb making at a terrorist training camp.

It wouldn’t be the first time terrorists used our immigration laws as a means to kill us. Michelle Malkin lists the various jihadis who have entered into sham marriages in order to gain US citizenship in her latest column:

– El Sayyid A. Nosair wed Karen Ann Mills Sweeney to avoid deportation for overstaying his visa. He acquired U.S. citizenship, allowing him to remain in the country, and was later convicted for conspiracy in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that claimed six lives.

– Ali Mohamed became an American citizen after marrying a woman he met on a plane trip from Egypt to New York. Recently divorced, Linda Lee Sanchez wed Mohamed in Reno, Nev., after a six-week “courtship.” Mohamed became a top aide to Osama bin Laden and was later convicted for his role in the 1998 United States embassy bombings in Africa that killed 12 Americans and more than 200 others.

– Embassy bombing plotter Khalid Abu al Dahab obtained citizenship after marrying three different American women.

– Embassy bombing plotter Wadih el Hage, Osama bin Laden’s personal secretary, married April Ray in 1985 and became a naturalized citizen in 1989. Ray knew of her husband’s employment with bin Laden, but like many of these women in bogus marriages, she pleaded ignorance about the nature of her husband’s work. El Hage, she says, was a sweet man, and bin Laden “was a great boss.”

And those are only a few. Read all of Michelle’s column. It’s an eye-opener.

Shahzad may have taken his citizenship oath, but his loyalties were always with the Taliban:

It was payback.

The Connecticut man charged yesterday with the botched Times Square car bombing confessed to trying to slaughter innocent people in retaliation for US drone attacks that wiped out the leadership of his beloved Taliban, The Post has learned.

Admitted terrorist Faisal Shahzad – who copped to training in explosives in the past year with Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, the leading extremist Islamic group in his native Pakistan — said he was driven to evil by the slew of deaths among leaders of the terror group, law-enforcement sources revealed yesterday.

The American people heard the name Faisal Shahzad for the first time on May 4th, but US intelligence officials have been familiar with him since 1999.

Sources tell CBS News that would-be Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad appeared on a Department of Homeland Security travel lookout list – Traveler Enforcement Compliance System (TECS) – between 1999 and 2008 because he brought approximately $80,000 cash or cash instruments into the United States.

TECS is a major law enforcement computer system that allows its approximately 120,000 users from 20 federal agencies to share information. The database is designed to identify individuals suspected of or involved in violation of federal law.

Now we know US intelligence officials had Shahzad on a DHS travel list from 1999 to 2008.  And according to a report in The New York Times investigators from the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) were actively tracking him in 2004:

George LaMonica, a 35-year-old computer consultant, said he bought his two-bedroom condominium in Norwalk, Conn., from Mr. Shahzad for $261,000 in May 2004. A few weeks after he moved in, Mr. LaMonica said, investigators from the national Joint Terrorism Task Force interviewed him, asking for details of the transaction and for information about Mr. Shahzad. It struck Mr. LaMonica as unusual, but he said detectives told him they were simply “checking everything out.”

So what happened after 2008 that caused DHS to lose track of Shahzad? AJ Strata suspects that Shahzad’s case may have been one of a number of Bush administration investigations that AG Holder began shutting down in early 2009 as the Obama administration moved away from Bush’s more aggressive strategy of terrorism prevention and toward a defensive stance where terrorism is treated as a law enforcement issue:

We all know AG Eric Holder’s ‘Justice’ Department (sort of a oxymoron these days) closed down Bush era terrorist investigations into Major Nidal Hasan (killer in the Ft Hood Massacre) and probably also into radical US-born cleric al Aulaqi (see here, here and here for details). It is pretty obvious that shutting down the surveillance of these American traitors working with our enemies also gave Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab an opening to nearly bring down a plane full of passengers on Christmas Day as it landed in Detroit, MI.

[...]

Mr. Shahzad only recently became a US citizen last year, around the time Holder started closing down investigations. This act of resisting terrorists leads linked to Americans fits the pre 9-11 pattern of incompetence in the Obama administration. An administration filled with people who think President Bush went too far in protecting Americans from terrorist attack. Of course, all of us we avoided death and mutilation, pain and loss, would disagree that there was too much protection under Bush. I am sure the families of the victims in the Ft Hood massacre would have preferred Hasan and al Aulaqi were monitored instead of ignored.

We don’t know exactly how many investigations Mr. Holder shut down. Let’s hope we don’t find out in the same manner we learned about Shahzad.

Update: AJ Strata notes today that JTTF investigations of US citizens almost always require a FIS Court authorization that must be renewed by the Attorney General every 90 days. We know Shahzad was surveilled from 1999 – 2008, which means that he behaved suspiciously enough that a FIS Court judge renewed the authorization for his investigation many, many times over those nine years.

Enter Barack Obama and Eric Holder in 2008. Some time in 2009 Faisal Shahzad’s whereabouts are no longer being tracked.

A real estate broker says the Times Square bombing suspect told him years ago he disliked President George W. Bush and the Iraq war.

Igor Djuric (JOOR-itch) represented Faisal Shahzad (FY’-sul shah-ZAHD’) when he was buying a home in 2004. Djuric says he could not remember the exact words but said Shahzad made clear he didn’t like Bush or his policy in Iraq. He says the comments were not hateful, but he was surprised to hear them because they hardly knew each other.

Djuric says Shahzad also asked him if he was Muslim.

So what happened to Obama’s new beginning with the Muslim world? Just a few weeks ago he even ordered national security personnel no longer use words such as “Islamic radicalism” in order to show how much he cared about the feelings of Muslims all over the world.

I guess Faisal Shahzad didn’t get the memo.