Artegal

Well the other big "reason" why they must hire foreign nationals or move plant and offices overseas is that American schools suck--and therefore do not produce an educated labor force. Well why are there so many people coming to the USA for an education if our schools suck so bad? To record levels:

To support the need for an increased flow of two-way exchange, the State Department issued a record number of student visas in our Embassies around the world this past year. The total number of student and exchange visas reached an all-time high of 591,000 during 2006. In China, we've recorded very substantial increases and the number of student visas increased thirty-seven percent over last year.

43K in 2001 to 21K in 2005.

Looking back at a few of my past Long Distance bills I see where I have paid about $1.35 on average for this tax. So the refund counts from March of 2003 to July of 2006--40 months--which is 54 dollars for me if the average for the past few months is indicative of the whole 40 month term--they should have taken the refund back even further, but oh well. 50 Dollars would be my standard deduction on this refund--not sure if requesting copies of all of my previous long distance bills would be worth it.

Having worked in IT for over 10 years I can definitely attest that there indeed no shortage in labor--real wages have decreased--while educational, skill sets, certification and experience requirements have increased.

The problem is the current business model is forget US America (A Mature Economy) and focus on India, China and other rapidly developing markets (Emerging Economies)--in simpler terms: GREED.

If you have (or want to go through the trouble of procuring) your telephone bill statements from March 2003 to July 2006, you can get a refund based on amounts you were actually charged. In most cases, this can amount to a lot more than the standard refund -- perhaps as much as $100 to $300 for many of us. You'll need to fill out IRS Form 8913 for this.

Funny Form 8913 does not exist or is not present on the IRS Form library--I guess they want to make it really hard for us to get our money back.

Ah ha! But you can order for delivery by US Mail to your address:

Thank You for Ordering from the IRS!

Typically orders take 7 to 15 days for delivery.

The following order has been received:

Items Ordered:

Item Description Revision Quantity

Form 8913 - Credit for Federal Telephone Excise Tax Paid Current 2

Okay its not doing it now. It seems to be letting me submiit a post in invisible mode in the News forum. Not sure what happened earlier--perhaps I lost my cookie or something--not sure, but when I signed in again to post before I was no longer in invisible (anonymous) mode.

It stated that I did not have permission to submit a post and then prompted me with the logon screen for user name and password. Stating that I was not logged on. Then let me logon but it didn't submit the post. So then I hit the back button until I got to the initial post creation screen and copy and pasted the post back into a new post creation window and then it took the post sending it to the Moderator for approval. The difference was that the second time I submitted the post I was no longer logged on anonymously.

Wasn't there a story about a Scientist that was going to or had revealed that Israel has Nukes that then was subsequently silenced by unknown but presumably Israeli agents? I can't remember the story it was in the past decade.

Yeah I tried to submit an immigration news article in the immigration news forum and it would not allow me to do so while signed in anonymously. I had to resign in normally and resubmit the post. Is this a new feature of the new forum?

High court: Immigrants with minor offenses can stay

POSTED: 6:07 p.m. EST, December 5, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Tuesday increased the chances for some immigrants to remain in the United States even if they have been convicted of drug possession under state laws.

The justices' 8-1 ruling came on the same day the court heard arguments in another immigrant case in which a man in California is trying to avoid deportation after pleading guilty to a theft charge.

The ruling came in the case of Jose Antonio Lopez, a 16-year permanent U.S. resident who pleaded guilty in a South Dakota court to telling someone where to obtain cocaine.

The crime, aiding and abetting possession of drugs, is a felony in South Dakota. Most first-time simple possession offenses are punished as misdemeanors under the federal Controlled Substances Act.

Conduct that is a felony under state law but a misdemeanor under the Controlled Substances Act is not an aggravated felony for purposes of immigration, Justice David Souter wrote.

Lopez was deported to Mexico in January 2006, but will come back to the United States, where an immigration judge will decide whether he may remain in the country.

Lopez wants to return to the United States to be with his family, which includes his 11-year-old son and 6-year-old daughter. His legal prospects have improved greatly because of the court ruling, his lawyers said.

Lopez, who had operated a grocery store in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, still could face deportation, but an immigration judge would have discretion to allow him to remain in the United States.

In opposing the immigrant's legal position, the Bush administration said that Congress left the door open to counting state felonies under the federal Controlled Substances Act. That would trigger deportation under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Reading the law "the government's way ... would often turn simple possession into trafficking, just what the English language tells us not to expect and that result makes us very wary of the government's position," Souter wrote. Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, declaring his colleagues' approach "unpersuasive."

Ruling could affect thousands

The decision could affect thousands of immigrants with minor drug-related convictions, said Benita Jain, a staff attorney with the Immigrant Defense Project of the New York State Defenders Association.

After the justices issued the decision, they turned to the case of Luis Alexander Duenas-Alvarez, a Peruvian immigrant in California who pleaded guilty to unlawfully taking a car, prompting the government to file removal proceedings against him.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Duenas-Alvarez's conviction did not qualify as an aggravated felony under immigration law. The federal government appealed to the Supreme Court.

In other action, the court dismissed the case of a third immigrant, whose case had been consolidated with that of Lopez. The court said its decision to accept the case of Reymundo Toledo-Flores had been improvidently granted.

Toledo-Flores is a Mexican national who objected to having his latest conviction for illegally entering the United States classified as an aggravated felony. Toledo-Flores was contesting his prison term, not his deportation, and he had already served it.

The cases are Lopez v. Gonzales, 05-7664, and Toledo-Flores v. U.S., 05-493

SOURCE CNN

A K3 can't take over a year--if it does then is converted to a CR1. The timelines are too inconsistent to really say which is faster--added that if you pursue a K3 you have to be married--and it can take at least 1 month extra to get married in Peru, plus lots of extra paperwork etc. You also have now the IMBRA requirements for the K1 so this could also add a delay. The real question should be what is better to get married in Peru or in the USA--and that decision you should base on your personal family situation and if you want family and friends to be at your wedding or not--as the US Family and Friends more easily travel to Peru than can Peruvian family and friends travel to the USA. Otherwise there is a lot less paperwork generally involved in getting married in the USA vs Peru which can be a huge red-tape nightmare. The actual processing time of the K1 or K3 is I would say more or less over the long run equal.

This post probably belongs in Off-Topic.

WSBTV.com

SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT: Living Legal

POSTED: 5:42 pm EST December 5, 2006

UPDATED: 6:34 pm EST December 5, 2006

ATLANTA -- We’ve all heard the stories associated with more than 400,000 illegal immigrants now living in Georgia. Now, you will hear from a legal immigrant who says trying to function in Georgia the legal way is nearly impossible – because the system doesn’t recognize his paperwork.

You may have been following our stories lately about how illegals have found ways to gain access to our most vulnerable public services – all by creating fake documentation. Hector Marquez is completely legal, but tells us it has made his stay here nearly unlivable.

In the competitive world of Georgia small business, Hector Marquez is an MVP.

“If Hector was not here working in the United States with our company, 15 Americans would lose their jobs,” explains James Lakeman.

But the Mexican native says it’s nearly impossible to succeed in the states when you’re legal.

“I feel frustrated, really frustrated. We have tried to make it the right way,” explains Marquez.

His story starts out in Pueblo, Mexico – where Hector had developed a global reputation.

“We needed a chemical engineer who had knowledge of application of glass to steel and that’s where Hector came in. Hector and I met in Mexico and we began the process to bring Hector to the United States legally. The process, the paperwork, took us over 2 years,” says Lakeman.

But Lakeman tells Channel 2 – that was only the beginning.

“What we have found is that Hector practically lives in a no man’s land here in the United States,” says Lakeman. “It’s difficult for him to acquire a Driver’s License, purchase a house, even open a bank account.”

Consider what happened when Hector applied for his Driver’s License.

“I have my Mexican Driver’s License and I have my Visa H1B type, she checked my papers and said, ‘No, you cannot obtain your Driver’s License because you are not a citizen,” says Hector.

Compare that to what Channel 2’s undercover cameras found at a business in Cobb County -- a broker who caters to illegal immigrants, buying them car tags that get them on the road – never even bothering with a license.

“I think it’s, to me, it’s a tragedy,” says Lakeman.

Here’s what Hector says happened when he went to a bank for a home loan.

“I talked with this lady and she said, ‘Are you legal or illegal?’ and I said, “Legal.’ She said, “I can’t help you, I’m working with illegal people.’ I said, ‘What?’

“And several times when we were going through this dilemma we were told, ‘Hey, just pay $60 and you can have a Social Security Card and a Driver’s License and everything will be fine.’ We didn’t what to do that, we wanted to go legal. We knew that we needed to do it legally. The last thing we wanted to do is build a company, have 10, 20, 30 employees, then Hector’s sent back to Mexico – then where are we? Everybody’s out of a job – you just can’t do it that way,” says Lakeman.

State officials tell Channel 2’s Dale Cardwell that Hector should have been able to get a Driver’s License by presenting his Visa, but acknowledge some state employees are likely unfamiliar with what to do when presented with one. Hector’s current Visa expires in two years.

After the non-existent Hurricane season this year--this week is the coldest day in December ever recorded in Atlanta. I guess I will worry about Al Qada, or that Asteroid that is coming in 2029. Global Warming fear/fiasco up there with the past threats of Killer Bees, Spontaneous Combustion, MadCow Disease, SARS, West Nile Virus, Bird Flu, and Y2K bug.

http://www.flexyourrights.org/

7. When do I have to show ID?

This is a tricky issue. As a general principle, citizens who are minding their own business are not obligated to "show their papers" to police. In fact, there is no law requiring citizens to carry identification of any kind.

Nonetheless, carrying an ID is required when you’re driving or flying. Driving without a license is a crime, and no one is allowed to board an airplane without first presenting an ID. These requirements have been upheld on the premise that individuals who prefer not to carry ID can choose not to drive or fly.

From here, ID laws only get more complicated. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, the Supreme Court upheld state laws requiring citizens to disclose their identity to police when officers have reasonable suspicion to believe criminal activity may be taking place. Commonly known as 'stop and identify' statutes, these laws permit police to arrest criminal suspects who refuse to identify themselves.

Currently the following states have stop and identify laws: AL, AR, CO, DE, FL, GA, IL, KS, LA, MO, MT, NE, NH, NM, NV, NY, ND, RI, UT, VT, WI

Regardless of your state's law, keep in mind that police can never compel you to identify yourself without reasonable suspicion to believe you're involved in criminal activity. Rather than asking the officer if he/she has reasonable suspicion, test it yourself by asking if you're free to go.

If the officer says you’re free to go, leave immediately and refrain from answering any additional questions.

If the officer detains you, you'll have to decide whether withholding your identity is worth the possibility of arrest or a prolonged detention. In cases of mistaken identity, revealing who you are might help to resolve the situation quickly. On the other hand, if you're on parole in California, for example, revealing your identity could lead to a legal search. Knowing your state's laws can help you make the best choice.

Keep in mind that the officer's decision to detain you will not always hold up in court. ‘Reasonable suspicion' is a vague evidentiary standard, which lends itself to mistakes on the officer's part. If you're searched or arrested following an officer's ID request, always contact an attorney to discuss the incident and explore your legal options.

So this Victim of Immigration Fraud supposedly by this Notorio person will get her Citizenship probably well before my wife does--who came here legally and meets all the conditions of her residency status etc.

This case really stinks--the way I understand it she Sasha Herrera came to the US on a Tourist visa, asked for an over stay extension, got the extension then asked for an Refugee/Asylum visa but then having enrolled in Kennesaw State, then gets a Student Visa, and now she is married to Surprise a State Senator who is also a Immigration Rights advocate--and now she wants to have a CR1/K3 visa. Whoa! And she beats the rap for the first round on Deportation hearing!

Okay so it looks like Ms. Herrera--why she didn't change her last name to that of her so-called-husband--is like a bona fide expert on all the various visa options. Well she does lack the Work Visa I suppose--if she joins VJ I guess she could make Yodrak and Aussiewench look like Newbies with her vast knowledge of the visa process!

Too bad Ms. Herrera is not a world class Canadian Ice Skater or a Cuban Baseball Pitcher that has a 99 mph fast ball--she would have a Green Card immediately--or better yet her US Passport quicker than even a native born citizen.

I don't see how that puts her ahead of your wife? Unless her I-485 was filed before yours. I thought the only thing the judge's decision did was allow her I-485 to be adjudicated. She never had a K-3/CR-1; she met and married her husband while in the US legally on a student visa and filed for AOS from the F-1 or J-1. Which many, many people here on VJ did.

If you'd ever had the misfortune to meet a notario you'd know how much fraud they perpetrate. Working in the courts, it was a nightmare trying to sort out all the trouble they cause--normally the problem was charging people hundreds of dollars, doing the paperwork all wrong, and then absconding and refusing to fix their mistakes, but there were all sorts of things they did and I have no trouble believing at all that there are some who steal the personal data of their clients. And there are many cultures where women do not change their names upon marriage--including in parts of the United States. In New Jersey I hardly knew anyone who changed their name after marriage.

I bet if your wife was accidentally put into removal proceedings because someone filed a change of address without her knowledge [and there have been people on this board who have had that done to them] you'd be raising holy hell about it. But no, just because it happened to someone else--someone who was here legally and followed all the rules and regs, but was unfortunately a victim of identity theft, and someone who is married to someone whose politics you disagree with--you're against it.

Where did I make an objection to anyone's politics--and this case has little to do with politics, its a case of a young woman from Colombia trying to Visa Shop in order to live in the USA with her parents. I mean come on, first you try to extend your tourist visa, then try an asylum visa, then a student visa, and then you get married and try and stay here by virtue of your marriage to an American citizen. And of all the possible men in the USA she just happens to meet a State Senator that is also a Immigration Rights Advocate--this is clearly a case of someone playing the system--and getting a way with it--and she will because she is now connected, oh and not bad looking--don't forget about that ugly and the poor get deported--and beautiful, talented, and rich um well they are held to a different standard.

So this Victim of Immigration Fraud supposedly by this Notorio person will get her Citizenship probably well before my wife does--who came here legally and meets all the conditions of her residency status etc.

This case really stinks--the way I understand it she Sasha Herrera came to the US on a Tourist visa, asked for an over stay extension, got the extension then asked for an Refugee/Asylum visa but then having enrolled in Kennesaw State, then gets a Student Visa, and now she is married to Surprise a State Senator who is also a Immigration Rights advocate--and now she wants to have a CR1/K3 visa. Whoa! And she beats the rap for the first round on Deportation hearing!

Okay so it looks like Ms. Herrera--why she didn't change her last name to that of her so-called-husband--is like a bona fide expert on all the various visa options. Well she does lack the Work Visa I suppose--if she joins VJ I guess she could make Yodrak and Aussiewench look like Newbies with her vast knowledge of the visa process!

Too bad Ms. Herrera is not a world class Canadian Ice Skater or a Cuban Baseball Pitcher that has a 99 mph fast ball--she would have a Green Card immediately--or better yet her US Passport quicker than even a native born citizen.

well i think it's up to the cops mood how to interpret if a 'suspect' wants to show or not ID..

that sucks.. how do u use the 4th then?

pedroh, the police enforce the law, the judges interpret the law

But its the Police that are entrusted to defend, support, and protect the constitution--and therefore they the police have a higher calling then simply interpreting the constitution!

Florida Statute mandates that Police Officers take and subscribe to the Oath of Office, and a Loyalty Oath, prior to appointment and before undertaking the duties of office.

PROCEDURE

2.01.1 It shall be the policy of the Police Department to comply with State and Federal law and to preserve and protect the constitutional rights of the community. It shall further be the policy of the Department that all sworn personnel will abide by the Canon of Ethics as set forth in policy directive 2.02.

PROCEDURE

OATH OF OFFICE

2.01.2 Oath of Office State of Florida:

I do solemnly swear that I will support, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, the State of Florida and the Ordinances of the City of ______________: that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of Police Officer of the City of ______________.

The Public Employees (Loyalty) Oath is mandated in Chapter 876.05, of the Florida State Statutes. The following oath shall be sworn and subscribed to by all Department personnel, and filed prior to the approval of any salary, expenses, or compensation:

LOYALTY OATH

2.01.3 Loyalty Oath:

I,_____, a citizen of the State of Florida and of the United States of America, and being employed by or an official of the City of ___________ and a recipient of public funds as such employee or officer, do hereby solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Florida.

"Of the more than 180 countries that issue paper currency, only the United States prints bills that are identical in size and color in all their denominations," Robertson wrote.

This story is bogus--180 countries issue paper currency not likely when you consider this:

Other nations besides the United States use the U.S. dollar as their official currency, a process known as official dollarization. Ecuador (2000), El Salvador (2001), and East Timor (2000) all adopted the currency independently. The former members of the U.S.-administered Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, which included Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands, chose not to issue their own currency after becoming independent, having all used the U.S. dollar since 1944. Panama also uses the U.S. dollar (since 1904), although it issues its own currency (coins only). Two British dependencies also use the U.S. dollar: the British Virgin Islands (1959) and Turks and Caicos Islands (1973).

Additionally, the local currencies of Bermuda, the Bahamas, Panama, and a few other states can be freely exchanged at a 1:1 ratio for USD. The currencies of Barbados and Belize are similarly convertible at an approximate 2:1 ratio. Argentina used a fixed 1:1 exchange rate between the Argentine peso and the U.S. dollar from 1991 until 2002. In Lebanon, one dollar is equal to 1500 Lebanese pound, and is used inter­changeably with local currency as de facto legal tender. The exchange rate between the Hong Kong dollar and the United States dollar has also been linked since 1983 at HK$7.8/USD , and pataca of Macau, pegged to Hong Kong dollar at MOP1.03/HKD, indirectly linked to the U.S. dollar at roughly MOP8/USD. Several oil-producing Gulf Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, peg their currencies to the dollar, since the dollar is the currency used in the international oil trade.

The renminbi used by the People's Republic of China was informally and controversially pegged to the dollar in the mid-1990s at Y8.28/USD. Likewise, Malaysia pegged its ringgit at RM3.8/USD in 1997. On July 21, 2005 both countries removed their pegs and adopted managed floats against a basket of currencies.

The dollar is also used as the standard unit of currency in international markets for commodities such as gold and petroleum. Even foreign companies with little direct presence in the United States, such as the European company Airbus, list and sell their products in dollars, although some argue this is attributed to the aerospace market being dominated by American companies.

At the present time, the U.S. dollar remains the world's foremost reserve currency, primarily held in $100 denominations. The majority of U.S. notes are actually held outside the United States.

In Peru and in Korea the US Dollar was the de facto legal tender--as I am sure it is in many other countries. And I might add that in both Korea and Peru the bills were all the same dimensions--though different in Color. But blind people would not be able to see color anyway--and I don't want a bunch of different shaped bills.

The middle class will not actually find a friend in either party. When will people learn?

Clearly not all Republicans or conservatives buy into the "free trade at any cost" camp. It amazes me that as these trade deficits get bigger and bigger each year...the same pundits continue to crow about broadbased prosperity for all is just around the corner, but the reality proves otherwise. Yes...if we export jobs and import more foreign labor everyone will prosper, but it will happen in the mythical future. Globalism is the new mantra.

It reminds me of the S&L debacle that cost the taxpayer $1/2 trillion. Yes...the new age of deregulation was all the rage and mantra. Any naysayers were ignorant hayseeds behind the times. In the end...the bandits made out like bandits and the little guy is left holding the sh!tty end of the stick.

Ditto for the .com / Enron / WorldCom crowd. The old fundementals didn't apply. The world was reinvented and the naysayers were ignorant rubes.

When will the people learn? When pigs grow wings and fly.

Many bought into Milton Friedman's contention that the market can regulate itself through competition. His fatal optimism didn't see how corporitism would undermine that very principle (competition). It doesn't help to have a sitting President who favors corporations over small business, and profits above all else. The fox is watching over the hen house.

So Steveninky you would favor the Central government owning everything as opposed to say AT&T, Exxon, Aetna, Coca-Cola, Kimberly-Clarke, etc?

Of course the market could never regulate itself through competition because the market was never unregulated--so Milton Friedman's contention and those of Adam Smith for that matter could never be realized.

I heard this was an urban myth about microwaving the baby--and What type of microwave do they have, because I look at the dimension of mine and there is no way my baby could fit inside of it--and it won't run with the door open--so

I wonder will Steveninky post his opposition to any free trade aggreement--not likely as he likes to hijack threads--he will probably post about the lack of WMD in Iraq, the State of Israel, Globalization, or his all-time favorite: Anti-Globalization--which is like trying to be Anti-Earthling--I mean we live on one planet and it is shrinking you can't stop Globalization--and why would you? Travel and Communication makes it where you know your neighbor across the ocean or in Instanbul better than you know the neighbor right next door or just across the street.

Update:

Informant in shooting says he never bought drugs at house

He says police asked him to lie

By RHONDA COOK

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 11/27/06

An informant who narcotics officers say led them to the house where an elderly woman was killed in a drug raid is accusing the officers of asking him to lie about his role, Atlanta police Chief Richard Pennington said Monday.

The informant, who has not been identified, complained to department officials that the drug investigators involved in the bust had asked him to go along with a story they concocted after the shooting, said Pennington. He said the informant had been placed in protective custody.

The informant told an Atlanta television station that the officers asked him to lie to provide them cover in the shooting.

Pennington confirmed the television station's account of what the informant had claimed and said it mirrored what the informant had told his Internal Affairs Unit over the weekend.

"The informant said he had no knowledge of going into that house and purchasing drugs," Pennington said. "We don't know if he's telling the truth."

All seven narcotics investigators involved in the raid have been suspended with pay pending the outcome of the investigation, Pennington said. Their names were not made public.

"The complete truth will be known," Pennington said.

After nearly a week of unanswered questions prompted by the northwest Atlanta shooting of Kathryn Johnston, the chief on Monday called for an unusual multi-agency review of the incident.

Pennington announced the investigation at a news conference that featured officials from the U.S. attorney's office, the FBI, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and the Fulton County district attorney.

David Nahmias, the U.S. attorney in Atlanta, said federal agents "come to this investigation with an open mind" but he cautioned that anyone who lies could face federal charges.

"No one should get in the way of the truth," Nahmias said.

Johnston was shot to death last Tuesday night as the drug investigators burst into her house at 933 Neal Street. Johnston was shot twice in the chest by the officers, who have said that they were returning her fire. The 88-year-old woman - whose age was originally thought to be 92 - wounded three of the officers with a rusty revolver her niece had bought for her aunt's protection. One officer was hit three times, including once in the center of his bullet-proof vest, while the other two where shot once each. None of their wounds were life threatening.

Police officials have said the officers went to Johnston's small brick house after the informant purchased drugs there from a man identified only as "Sam." Police have obtained an arrest warrant for Sam.

In a court affidavit released Monday, Jason R. Smith, an Atlanta narcotics officer, said that the informant had used $50 of city money to buy crack cocaine from Sam at the house at 933 Neal Street. Smith, who could not be reached for comment Monday night, described the informant as a reliable source of information who has helped police make drug arrests in the past.

In the affidavit, Smith said Sam greeted the informant at the front door and spoke briefly to him on the porch. Sam disappeared into the house and reappeared with two bags of crack cocaine, which the informant later turned over to the officers, according to the affidavit. Smith's statement also said that the informant had alleged that Sam had installed surveillance cameras at the house and monitored them constantly.

Smith's affidavit was sufficient to persuade Fulton County Magistrate Kimberly Warden to sign a warrant allowing the officers to enter the house without knocking on the door. Smith asked for the special "no knock" authorization because of the possibility that officers would be injured or evidence would be destroyed. Warden signed the warrant shortly before 6 p.m., about an hour before the shooting.

However, the informant has since denied to police and a local television station that he purchased the drugs. He also said there was no person named Sam.

The informant, who said he worked with Atlanta police for four years, also told WAGA-TV that he hadn't been to 933 Neal Street. His identity hidden, he told the TV station that one of the drug officers called him soon after the shooting with instructions.

Quoting the police officers, the informant told Fox 5 News: " 'This is what you need to do. You need to cover our (rear). ... It's all on you man. ... You need to tell them about this Sam dude.' "

Pennington said investigators were trying to determine the truth. "I don't know if he went in or not," he said.

Many questions and conflicting accounts have surfaced since police shot the woman, described by neighbors as feeble and afraid to open her door after dark. At first police said that the drug buy was made by undercover police, but later they said the purchase was made by an informant. Early on, police said narcotics were found at the house after the shooting, but on Sunday investigators said they had found only a small amount of marijuana, which police don't consider narcotics.

Also, even though the affidavit said that the house was outfitted with surveillance cameras, Pennington said the informant had told internal affairs investigators that police officers had asked him to lie about the cameras. Pennington could not confirm whether the cameras existed.

From the beginning, it has been unclear why police targeted the house on Neal Street, and the affidavit and warrant documents shed little light. The documents do not suggest that police had been keeping the house under surveillance and provide no rationale for entering it other than the informant's alleged buy earlier in the afternoon. The raid did not produce the cocaine, money, computers and other equipment related to the drug business alleged in the affidavit. The documents listed the only resident as Sam, who was described as at least 6 feet tall and 250 to 260 pounds. Johnston's family said she lived alone.

Court officials initially refused to release the affidavits and search warrant even though state law makes such records available immediately. The documents were made public Monday, nearly a week after the incident.

"There are many unanswered questions," said Pennington, who returned Sunday after being out of town for the Thanksgiving holiday when the shooting occurred.

Mayor Shirley Franklin, who has said little about the shooting, said she had discussed the allegations with Pennington. Franklin said the chief has "my confidence that they will be transparent and honest and very thorough in their review. ...

"I certainly share the concern that all of us have on the loss of life," Franklin said. "We were not expecting something like that could happen in the city of Atlanta."

Maybe if Steveninky would buy some of those Silver Laced Socks and clothing that he posted in another thread then he could solve Mexico's problems as Mexico is the world's largest producer of silver and one of the five major producers of oil. And buy more gas too.

Anyway here is another thread hijacked by Steveninky as if he don't start enough of his own threads.

Anyway Global Warming, Free Trade Aggreements have little to do with Illegal Immigration. But Steveninky likes to bring those up in any forum, anyway as some of you have said it is Mexico policy to dump their population on the USA, considering:

Remittances, or contributions made by Mexicans living abroad both legally and illegally, mostly in the United States, to their families at home in Mexico, are a substantial and growing part of the Mexican economy; they comprised $18 billion in 2005. [4] In 2003, President Vicente Fox said remittances were Mexico's "biggest source of foreign income, bigger than oil, tourism or foreign investment." [5]

It has been suggested that Mexico's reliance on remittances from emigrants is responsible for its pro-U.S.-immigration policies, including attacking a proposed U.S. plan to put up a fence along the United States–Mexico border.

So you are saying screw the people we have here in the USA living in poverty and empathize for those living in underdeveloped economies outside the USA? Sounds like some of the people you see on Dr. Phil who ignore there own family problems but gladly armchair quarterback/backseat driver, etc for problems of others. You know fix poverty and provide services and jobs for the people we have living in the USA and let the other Freely elected and capable governments around the world provide for their own people.

Its not nationalist to care for one's own people first--its the role of our government and society to do so--it does not make us less empathetic.

We don't want to be the world's policeman--nor should we be the world's teddybear!

Start your own thread if you want to yet again Rally against NAFTA-- and any free trade pact which is really meaningless since its the law. Not like you are asking for its repeal.