Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

“Diplomat Deane” Meets With A Dozen Foreign Agents

By Greg L | 29 March 2008 | Prince William County | 140 Comments

The Washington Post reports today that Prince William County Police Chief Charles Deane has met with “nearly a dozen” foreign government officials since last June when the county’s Rule of Law Resolution was being discussed, confirming reports that I’ve received this week. The Post fails to mention that never were our elected officials informed about these meetings, many of which occurred at the same time the police department was determining what actions they would take to implement the Rule of Law Resolution that unanimously passed the Board on July 10th. Although Deane is quoted in the article as saying that no one objected to these meetings, he never informed the Board that he would be conducting them, making it impossible for them to object.

No one seems to have been aware that these meetings were happening, which certainly would have raised eyebrows particularly in that they have every appearance of an effort by foreign governments to influence the implementation plan for the Rule of Law Resolution during the 90 day period during which it was drafted. It is entirely inappropriate for the governments of Mexico, El Salvador, and other Central American nations to attempt to influence public policy and the implementation of public policy in Prince William County, and absolutely outrageous that Chief Deane would not only allow this to happen but hide from our elected officials the fact that this was going on. What possible benefit would it be for foreign governments to breach diplomatic protocols and inject themselves into the sovereign affairs of a locality in a deliberate attempt to subvert the democratic process?

Deane continues to hold that this is no big deal. In addition to possibly being a violation of the Logan Act, this could also put in jeopardy Deane’s ability to participate in regional Homeland Security initiatives. Since 9-11, it has been common for the chief law enforcement officers to be granted a security clearance in order to receive briefings and information from the Department of Homeland Security about potential terrorist threats. Those who hold security clearances are required to report contacts with agents of any foreign government to their sponsoring agency in order to track potential foreign espionage efforts and assess the ongoing suitability of a clearance holder to receive classified information. If Deane was given a security clearance, and failed to report these contacts with agents of foreign governments to the sponsoring agency, just as he failed to report these contacts to his superiors in the Prince William County Government, this would be serious grounds for a revocation of that clearance and a permanent exclusion of the Chief from access to any further classified information. If Deane’s ability to receive critical national security information regarding potential terrorist threats to our county is revoked, it makes it extremely difficult for him to effectively perform his job.

Chief Deane continues his refusal to disclose the specifics of these meetings with foreign agents to our elected officials and the citizens of Prince William County. We don’t know the full details of who Deane met with, when these meetings occurred, what happened at these meetings, nor whether Deane sought any authorization to conduct these meetings. The secrecy that surrounds all of this, and the disturbing strong potential that the enforcement plan for the Rule of Law Resolution may have been influenced by foreign governments that are hostile to our efforts to combat illegal immigration in Prince William County make it even more imperative that Deane provide a full accounting of his activities involving foreign governments. The citizens have the right to know whether our public officials have been compromised in their official duties by foreign agents.
As the full story about this outrageous behavior slowly gets exposed, it hopefully will cause Supervisors who have been so eager to come to Deane’s defense to start realizing that the instant immunity they are trying to provide him with is reckless and irresponsible. The Board of Supervisors needs to know what our public officials have been doing before they grant their approval, and rubber-stamping these actions without knowing what the facts are creates an environment where our public officials can assume that no matter how wrongful their actions are, the Board will never hold them accountable. Our public officials have quite clearly been given a very long leash by the Board of Supervisors, and instead of dropping that leash the Board of Supervisors would be well advised to think about whether their lack of effective oversight is serving the public interest. So far it’s clear that oversight has allowed foreign governments an opportunity to subvert our democratic process, and ultimately the responsibility for that outrage falls upon the Board of County Supervisors.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.

140 Comments

  1. Patty said on 29 Mar 2008 at 1:47 pm:
    Flag comment

    From Supervisor Jenkins comments in the Post today, it looks like the County Executive, Chief of Police and County staff are an independent government entity that do not need to be accountable to anyone - to the BOCS - to the citizens.

    Supervisor Jenkins in his own words:

    “The chairman cannot unilaterlly issue a directive to staff. He is not the spokesman for the county,” Jenkins said. “It’s inappropriate. THE CHIEF DOES NOT WORK FOR ANY BOARD MEMBER; HE WORKS FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE (emphasis mine).” The Washington Post, Metro Section, page B5, March 29, 2008.

    I think that says it all.

  2. Rick Bentley said on 29 Mar 2008 at 2:09 pm:
    Flag comment

    Stewart should present the Mexican consulate with a bill for all the money expended on their citizens.

  3. me-n-u said on 29 Mar 2008 at 2:17 pm:
    Flag comment

    Maybe the Mexican Government should also pay for Deane’s time at these meetings instead of us taxpayers!

  4. Bayberry resident said on 29 Mar 2008 at 3:29 pm:
    Flag comment

    While I don’t agree with meeting of other countries reps in this way, I do agree with the stance that Supervisor Jenkins has taken. The County or any other jurisdiction could not run properly if employees were taken orders from any board member. Things like this have to be have order and having any board member just walking into an employees office and giving orders just does not work. High ranking employees are hired to run the City/County. Polititions are elected to make decisions, but not everyday decisions such as this situation. This is the reason why the gov’t has smart capable people running them, and I mean the employees because I find personally that most polititions are just that, polititions. Now if the polititions disagree with the decision, they could always fire the person who made the decision and hire one who is more in line with their thinking.

  5. Chris Royse said on 29 Mar 2008 at 3:43 pm:
    Flag comment

    Why is the chief homeland security official for the second largest county in VA and the seventh wealthiest county in the nation conducting secret meetings with foreign officials? Because he’s being coerced, whether he wants to believe it or not. My hope is that the arrogance we are witnessing is based upon ignorance of the true dangers of this type of behavior vs. ego. Ignorance is forgivable, ego leads to big falls, e.g. former Gov. Spitzer.

    We’ve so far seen an appropriate response by two of our elected officials once presented with this surprise, others, not so much. If the majority of our elected officials don’t retract their complacency and get this under control, the only “crackdown” that will be going on around here of notice will be the Federal Government investigating our local government for overstepping its authority by meeting with agents of foreign countries without appropriate coordination, resignations will occur. This was avoidable, it is still manageable, but only if taken as seriously as it should be.

  6. Greg L said on 29 Mar 2008 at 3:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    So Bayberry, is the only opportunity by the Board to exercise oversight over our public officials a demand to the County Executive to fire them, or to fire the County Executive? If every other opportunity to exercise oversight is improper, as you suggest, the only thing the board can do is employ the equivalent of a “nuclear option” and start firing senior public officials.

    Yeah, that’ll work. No wonder they won’t even answer questions.

  7. Bob Wills said on 29 Mar 2008 at 3:56 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg said

    So far it’s clear that oversight has allowed foreign governments an opportunity to subvert our democratic process, and ultimately the responsibility for that outrage falls upon the Board of County Supervisors.

    Our democratic process is the election of officials to uphold the Constitution of the US and the Commenwealth of Virginia. That is what the elected BOCS took an oath to do. Please show a specific action that has happened to change that oath or interfear with the election process in this county. Why are people afraid to have someone talk about what the police or the head of any other agency which is enforceing the Laws of the County or the Country is doing toward this enforcement. It seems that every time Deane talks there are more illegals who become afraid and do not believe him. If that keeps more illegals out of the county then let him talk to anyone from Mexico or anyother county every day.

    When people want to repress talk that is a very scary thing to think about and what freedon do they want to stop next.

  8. Bob Wills said on 29 Mar 2008 at 4:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg L said on 29 Mar 2008 at 3:53 pm:
    So Bayberry, is the only opportunity by the Board to exercise oversight over our public officials a demand to the County Executive to fire them, or to fire the County Executive? If every other opportunity to exercise oversight is improper, as you suggest, the only thing the board can do is employ the equivalent of a “nuclear option” and start firing senior public officials.

    Yeah, that’ll work. No wonder they won’t even answer questions.

    Well Greg now you understand the form of government we operate under when you have an County Executive form of government. It is no different then stockholders demanding the firing of the CEO of a company for only the Board can fire them not the masses. If you believe in the Rule of Law then you have to abide by it and cannot changes the rules to suit you and your wants.

    We have seen counties in the past that tried to have the Supervisors run the county and that was and always will be a total disaster. You want a 7 headed monster who know nothing about what they are doing to run PWC ?

  9. starryflights said on 29 Mar 2008 at 4:06 pm:
    Flag comment

    I no longer have any confidence in Deane. How can the citizens of PWC expect Deane’s full cooperation in implementing the Rule of Law Resolution when he is meeting with all these foreign government agents? We have no idea what shady deals, if any are going on behind closed doors. The BOCS needs to get a handle on this or they stand to look like fools. If it takes firing the County Executive and Deane to get rid I Deane, I say DO IT!

  10. Had Enough said on 29 Mar 2008 at 4:17 pm:
    Flag comment

    Jim Fotis for PWC Chief of Police!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  11. starryflights said on 29 Mar 2008 at 4:17 pm:
    Flag comment

    It might be time to report this to the State Attorney General.

  12. Anonymous said on 29 Mar 2008 at 4:44 pm:
    Flag comment

    I think we all need to remember that the action of the Board last summer started when Greg could not get information about a General Order by chief Dean that was written in concert with Mexican Without Borders. At the time, I seem to remember that Chief Deane didn’t want to discuss that issue either.

    If people have an issue with the BOCS demanding answers, then let’s have the County Executive ask the questions. It doesn’t really matter who asks, we all should demand an answer. Do you want foreign governments to make public policy in PWC through means that none of us have? When was the last time that you had a personal meeting with the Chief to draft General Orders for the police department? I’m guessing that it was never.

    I think all we need to know about the Chief is that he goes to a meeting with illegals and takes a question from a man that is illegal and drives without a driver’s license. That should tell you something about his true feelings on the issue.

  13. Greg L said on 29 Mar 2008 at 4:48 pm:
    Flag comment

    Bob, citizens have a voice in our democratic process. We even listen to non-citizen residents, because they have a stake in our community while they’re here.

    Agents of foreign governments have NO LEGITIMATE VOICE in our local affairs. Such activity is prohibited under international law and is proscribed under the Vienna Convention on Consular Affairs. Such activity is reason for the United States to removed a diplomat from our country for activity inconsistent with their diplomatic status.

  14. Bayberry resident said on 29 Mar 2008 at 4:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    Thank you Mr. Wils, I couldn’t have said it better. So, Greg, when one supervisor wals into Mr. Deanes ofices and says to meet with the Mexican gov’t and then another walks in and say don’t met with them, what is he to do? This is why there is a county executive. They are paid alot of money to run the county, let them do their job. I will admit there are a lot of problems in the City and County, in fact many, but I am not going to go as far and say the sky is falling. I think it is a pretty nice area to live. I will admit, it could be nicer with a lot less illegals. Starryflights 4:17, report what? No one has said what Chief Deans did that was wrong. Do you know, because if you do I would like to know myself. I am not saying he didn’t, I just would like to know what law, if any he violated.

  15. starryflights said on 29 Mar 2008 at 5:30 pm:
    Flag comment

    I think there needs to be an investigation opened to find out exactly what transpired during these meetings between Deane and all of these foreign government agents. We as citizens need to know what occurred and what influence if any, have these foreign government agents had with our Chief of Police and the Rule of Law Resolution. For the BOCS to ignore this would be very troubling.

  16. Advocator said on 29 Mar 2008 at 6:37 pm:
    Flag comment

    You’re right, starryflights. There needs to be an investigation. Call the FBI. If you don’t, “it’s clear that [you’re] allowing foreign governments an opportunity to subvert our democratic process.”

    Twisted rhetoric and too-clever-by-half sophistry is not going to get the Chief fired, folks. Show me some beef.

  17. Bob Wills said on 29 Mar 2008 at 6:41 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg L said on 29 Mar 2008 at 4:48 pm:
    Bob, citizens have a voice in our democratic process. We even listen to non-citizen residents, because they have a stake in our community while they’re here.

    Agents of foreign governments have NO LEGITIMATE VOICE in our local affairs. Such activity is prohibited under international law and is proscribed under the Vienna Convention on Consular Affairs. Such activity is reason for the United States to removed a diplomat from our country for activity inconsistent with their diplomatic status.

    So what voice did anyone have in PWC affairs? I hope you are not afraid of someone having an open public meeting. Not one elected official listened to the Mexican nor did any laws get offered. The best thing I got out of reading about this meeting is that more illegals are afraid to be in PWC then there were before the meeting. you have a problem with that?

    I say let anyone talk all they want and Deane is nothing more then an employee of the county though he heads up a department that has a hugh impact on the illegal situation. If he was afraid to talk then I would be concerned. You are starting to believe your power to influence a bit much Greg.

  18. me said on 29 Mar 2008 at 6:59 pm:
    Flag comment

    Had Enough said on 29 Mar 2008 at 4:17 pm:
    Jim Fotis for PWC Chief of Police!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    There had been rumors about that for some time now. I don’t know if Chris Royce or Trent Barton who have posted about their issues with Chief Dean might have anything to share about this since they are also part of a company with Jim Fotis. Tom Kopko is also part of that same company but I haven’t seen him posting here

  19. Advocator said on 29 Mar 2008 at 7:00 pm:
    Flag comment

    I say let the Chief talk all he wants. Egos like his eventually bring their own selves down.

  20. AWCheney said on 29 Mar 2008 at 7:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    Had Enough said on 29 Mar 2008 at 4:17 pm:
    “Jim Fotis for PWC Chief of Police!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

    You MUST be joking!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  21. starryflights said on 29 Mar 2008 at 7:31 pm:
    Flag comment

    If someone has the newspaper article, I would suggest they send it to the FBI with concerns over these meetings between our Police Chief and foreign government agents.

  22. Krutis said on 29 Mar 2008 at 7:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    starryflights - Why do you tell others to do things for you?
    If you are so terribly anxious about sending the article to the FBI, surely you can find a way to do it.

  23. starryflights said on 29 Mar 2008 at 7:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    If I had the newspaper article in my hands, I would.

  24. me said on 29 Mar 2008 at 8:10 pm:
    Flag comment

    Was there a comment written by Mom just a little bit ago or did I loose it on another thread? I wanted to reread it and I cant find it anymore.

  25. Lafayette said on 29 Mar 2008 at 8:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    me,
    Mom had a comment up, but only for a short while. I wish I’d copied that one before it got taken down. It was posted as “mom” and NOT “anonymous” signed by “mom.
    I didn’t think it would last long when I first read it.

  26. Krutis said on 29 Mar 2008 at 8:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    starryflights - I assume you’re talking about the Washington Post article. If so, you shouldn’t have any problem finding it on the net or at your neighborhood grocery or drug store. If not, contact the Post.

  27. Wdg. taxpayer said on 29 Mar 2008 at 8:32 pm:
    Flag comment

    The last thing we need is a Jim Fotis,for anything.

    His association with several others and their ties as a company is not in the best interest of our County.

    So down with Fotis.

  28. Luckyduck said on 29 Mar 2008 at 8:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    Starryflights, you’ve been all over this thread for an investigation and wild accusations and both Advocator and I have asked you for your proof and you never back up your statements. And now you can’t find the article on your own to send in to demand an investigation???

    Come on Starryflights, get some beef or get gone….

  29. me said on 29 Mar 2008 at 8:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    Lafayette,

    Thanks I thought it was me loosing things again. I had never seen first hand when Greg doesn’t like what it written how he can zap it out of there so quick hahahaha. Oh well his blog his rules.

  30. Patty said on 29 Mar 2008 at 9:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    Advocator,

    I believe a meeting that was sponsored by the Mexican Consulate as reported by Channel 9 news is something to be concerned about. You don’t need a newspaper article to prove it. This event has been plastered all over the news the last couple of days.

    To the other poster,

    I think that Chief needs to explain this event. I also believe that foreign governments need to get their big fat noses out of our local government period. This is not day to day operation of the police department. Please, I think we all have enough inteligence to realize that. This is out of the ordinary and the Chief should be accountable to the Board. Come on now. Remember government class in high school or did you skip that class.

    Since when do we bow down to foreign powers?

  31. Lafayette said on 29 Mar 2008 at 9:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    me,
    I really was looking forward to rereading that post. I don’t agree mom for the most part. However, every once and a while he does hit on something. I have several comments copied that have been taken some by me and some by others.

  32. Patty said on 29 Mar 2008 at 10:22 pm:
    Flag comment

    Lafayette,

    I can now see why he deleted Mom’s message. What a mouth!

  33. PWConservative said on 29 Mar 2008 at 10:47 pm:
    Flag comment

    Me-Thinks there is a plot to scare the Legal Immigrants and spark a race war. Paranoid has Spoken

  34. Anonymous said on 30 Mar 2008 at 12:42 am:
    Flag comment

    Did we make a mistake when we (the people) turned over law enforcement to the county government instead of keeping it answering to us?

    If you look at how government runs things, you wouldn’t want anything turned over to them.

  35. monticup said on 30 Mar 2008 at 1:28 am:
    Flag comment

    Deane sounds like he’s a loose cannon. A rogue police chief whose grandiose behavior is worrisome. What next? I say a psychiatric evaluation is in order.

  36. me said on 30 Mar 2008 at 2:16 am:
    Flag comment

    I can’t take it anymore. The Rule of Law resolution was passed and the Chief of Police has embarked in a public outreach campaign in attempts to let the truth about the resolution be known. Now some of the same people who wanted the Rule of Law passed and who continue to tell us about the outrageous lies the illegal alien apologists are saying about it are putting wild accusations about behind the scenes negotiations and accusing the Chief of breaking the law.

    If continued outreach campaign will do something to dispel the lies then I am for it!!!!!!

    During the last ice storm I was called down the street by my child to assist an elderly woman who had fallen. After cancelling the first call in for assistance (to the ambulance service) another person tried to help her into my car to take her home as she was begging for us not to call the ambulance but she couldn’t walk and could not get into my vehicle. I gave her my coat to her to try and keep the freezing rain off her. We stood there 20 minutes trying to reassure her it would be ok to call the ambulance, she was absolutely terrified crying and begging us not to call for help. That 2nd call was made and as I held her I promised her it would be ok and I would make sure she was ok.

    After the ambulance arrived I had to drive my child around the corner and get a dry coat for myself and on the way back to check on the woman and trying to keep my promise to her I fell victim to the ice with an injury as well and as unable to make sure she was ok.

    Someone put that fear in her, and because of that she was terrified to call for help when she needed it…that should NEVER happen and it is completely unacceptable!

    Someone and I don’t care who it is needs to try to put those rumors to rest and if it is the police chief then so be it!!!

  37. Greg L said on 30 Mar 2008 at 3:09 am:
    Flag comment

    Those concerns about Deane meeting with foreign governments during the design of the implementation plan have been confirmed by the Washington Post.

    Deane is free to conduct a public outreach campaign with as many illegal aliens and legal residents as he can. No one is disputing that. It was terribly dumb to meet with them in a joint meeting requested and sponsored by the Mexican Consulate, but what is more disturbing are the meetings which lead up to this meeting, and not the public meeting that resulted.

    What folks are complaining about are his unauthorized meetings with agents of foreign governments. What happened during these meetings? Deane won’t say. Who did he inform about these meetings? He won’t say. Did these foreign governments lobby him about the implementation plan for the Rule of Law Resolution? He won’t say. That’s unacceptable.

    Local public officials simply cannot conduct secret meetings with agents of foreign governments. It’s just so wrong on so many levels.

  38. Pat.Herve said on 30 Mar 2008 at 7:39 am:
    Flag comment

    If Deane did not meet with these groups, you would be complaining that he had his head in the sand and was not aware of the problems. A county the size of PWC - A county with an Immigrant population the size of ours - I would expect the PD to be in contact with representitives of foreign countries. Deane is tasked with getting information out there - well, shouldn’t the Illegal Immigrant also be told what the Resolution is all about? How it is to be enforced? Deane needs to understand the culture of the people who are going to be affected by the resolution - would you prefer that he go on a week junket to El Salvador, or meet with a representitive?

    Greg, you are loosing credibility by rehashing this one.

    I would be more concerned with members of our BOCS who feel the need to respond to a FOIA request while the email trail is alive - while ignoring other requests at the same time. In fact, It is very very rare for a FOIA request to be filled instantly. I have half a mind to file a FOIA request myself on Monday, with a request to see the FOIA request that was requested and responed to on Thursday (like instantly responded to ) - and see how long it takes them to respond. While at the same time, an email question I sent to a BOCS on Thursday is still unanswered.

  39. Pragmatic said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:18 am:
    Flag comment

    After thinking about it, I have come to the conclusion that it is reasonable for a foreign Government to become involved in the repatriation of large numbers of its citizens to ensure that they return home in a safe and orderly manner. Mexico is a bordering neighbor. It is in our military and economic interests to cooperate with them wherever possible. I would expect no less of our Government should something similar happen to a group of U.S. Citizens living overseas (like the thousands of retired Americans living in Mexico). It is also reasonable that representatives of the foreign Government work with the local Government to facilitate the evacuation. The Chief of Police is a logical choice among many who should be involved in this dialog.

    We (PWC) created this problem by enticing Illegal Immigrants here with jobs. Now that we “fixed” the problem, we should show a little compassion in helping the illegal immigrants leave without causing panic among the legal residents who are victims of misinformation and hysteria created by elements intent upon using this as an excuse to destabilize our Government.

    The best thing PWC can do is work with all stakeholder parties to help the Illegal Immigrants leave in an orderly manner while enforcing the Illegal Immigrant Resolution for those that chose not to go (“Walk softly but carry a big stick“). Chief Deane understands this. He is attempting to maintain the peace. If your goal is to get illegals out of PWC, let Chief Deane do his job.

    I really don’t understand why some wish to give those who advocate the violent overthrow of our Government the justification they need for action.

  40. Patty said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:23 am:
    Flag comment

    I think any time a foreign government gets involved in our local government that should be questioned. I’m sure it would be a different story if one of our supervisors went to a town in Mexico and started conducting meetings with local law enforcement. I don’t feel sorry for anyone willfully breaking our laws.

    Are there some short memories here? Just two springs ago we had illegal aliens running around here protesting and asking for entitlements. I personally witnessed a Prince William County school bus carting these protesters to Manassas Mall.

    Community outreach is absolutely necessary but meetings with foreign governments is totally outside the scope of community education.

    It seems like some don’t care that we are losing our soveriegnty little by little everyday to foreign interests.

  41. Patty said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:28 am:
    Flag comment

    Anytime someone enters this country unlawfully they fully know that they run the risk of capture. Yes they should have fear because they broke the law. There are consequences for breaking the law and they know it. The fear they are experiencing is a quilty conscience.

  42. Patty said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:31 am:
    Flag comment

    Pragmatic,

    You’ve got to be kidding me. Do you really think the Mexican Consulate is going to take illegals back?

  43. Pragmatic said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:43 am:
    Flag comment

    .
    What Patty said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:31 am Do you really think the Mexican Consulate is going to take illegal’s back?

    I don’t understand the question. Why wouldn’t Mexico take its own citizens back? Are you implying that the Mexican Government has no interests in its citizens in this Country? I would think less of the Mexican Government if they DIDN’T care.

    A new “out of the box” idea. How about declaring a 30 day amnesty for Illegal Immigrants to help them get their affairs in order (families, finances, homes, etc.) before they leave the county. After 30 days, the Illegal Immigration policy would be put in place and arrests/deportations begin. PWC could than enforce the policy with a clear conscience and perhaps create another model based upon Christian principles for other communities to follow in dealing with this problem.

    Like it or not, Illegal Immigrants have legitimate concerns that we (PWC policy in the past) helped create. I would say that Christian compassion dictates we give Illegal Immigrants a chance to leave with a bit of dignity. Those that don’t may suffer the consequences of disobeying the law. This also takes the “teeth” out of the arguement by some that we lack compassion.

    If we really want to rid PWC of illegal immigrants, we should do so with compassion and a plan. The Illegal Immigration Resolution wasn’t the end, it was just the beginning.

  44. Loudoun said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:50 am:
    Flag comment

    Today’s Post has an article about Deane and the meeting with the Mexican consul, see the following link:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/28/AR2008032804102.html

    Maureen Caddigan has the following to say:

    Caddigan said that members of the anti-illegal-immigrant group Help Save Manassas “dictated” the illegal immigration resolution to the board, but that the group will not determine how the chief carries it out.

    “That’s not going to happen,” she said. “They’ve gone over the line.”

    Maureen Caddigan is way out of line here. Help Save Manassas didn’t dictacte anything and her verb choice is entirely inappropriate. I would venture a guess that she specifically chose that verb for its connotations.

    The Board unanimously approved the resolution put forth by Gainesville Supervisor John Stirrup. Is Ms. Caddigan saying that a grass roots citizen group can “dictate” BOCS policy? If that is the case, what does that make her? Did she not vote for each step of the resolution?

    Maureen Caddigan’s regular snipes at Corey Stewart at BOCS meetings are extremely unprofessional and embarrassing to watch. She lacks decorum. It is entirely obvious that she doesn’t like Corey Stewart. She should not air her jibes in public or in the media, but discuss these things in private with Chairman Stewart. The BOCS is running our county and we expect them to act rationally and professionally.

    I am a member of Help Save Manassas. We are a group of American citizens who want to improve our community. Members of Help Save Manassas wants the Rule of Law Resolution enforced - and we want illegal aliens to leave PWC.

    However, it is NOT the intention of Help Save Manassas to tell the police how to do their job. We DO want the police to enforce the law.

    I do not believe that Chief Deane should have legitimized the Mexican government by coordinating a meeting to assuage the fears of Mexican nationals (illegal aliens). The fact is that if you are an illegal alien - you can and will be deported if you are found guilty of committing a jailable criminal offense. If you are an illegal alien you can and will be deported if ICE catches you.

    BVBL is a blog and Help Save Manassas is a grass roots citizens group. The two should not be confused. Help Save Manassas is not calling for Chief Deane to be fired. Help Save Manassas does not get involved in politics.

    Do not confuse Greg’s opinion with those of the members of Help Save Manassas. Do I think Chief Deane needs to go? Yes. But this is my opinion and not the opinion of Help Save Manassas.

    Help Save Manassas has almost 2,000 members and I am sure that those members all have different opinions on Chief Deane. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

    Help Save Manassas does not and will not have an official position on whether Chief Deane stays or goes.

  45. Pragmatic said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:55 am:
    Flag comment

    Actually, the amnesty that I mentioned earlier is worth considering. Any Illegal who reports his presence to an authority TBD would have 30 days to take care of his/her personal affairs (home, car, children, etc.) before leaving the County. This would put their identity on PWC radar so we could monitor their departure. It would also prevent several negative consequences on the County such as abandoned houses, cars, etc. The amnesty (I’m sure that word will cause a lot of comments… but think about it in the context ot this suggestion) would have a defined expiration date. After that, aggressive enforcement begins.

    This wouldn’t be a bad idea for a State level policy.

  46. Anonymous said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:59 am:
    Flag comment

    What Loudoun said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:50 am I do not believe that Chief Deane should have legitimized the Mexican government

    WOW! I didn’t know Chief Deane was so powerful. I always assumed that the Mexican Government was in fact the legitimate Government of that Country and that they don’t need to be legitimized by a local Police Chief. I wonder who gave him that awesome power? Will he legitimize other Governments in the world? Will he use his power wisely and only for good?

  47. Loudoun said on 30 Mar 2008 at 9:08 am:
    Flag comment

    Anonymous @ 8:59 am

    Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear, Anonymous. The police chief should not have legitimized the Mexican government’s power in the U.S. They have no power here - and they certainly don’t have any power in PWC. The Mexican government has no business interfering with the way law enforcement is carried out in the U.S. and PWC.

    Do you have any other sarcastic statements that you would like me to clarify for you?

  48. Krutis said on 30 Mar 2008 at 9:19 am:
    Flag comment

    Patty @ 8:23 am

    If there were a group of PWC citizens living in a town in Mexico, and they were suddenly faced with new laws and regulations they were not sure of, they would contact the nearest US Consulate. Best case scenario would be that a representative of the US would go to the town in question, confer with the powers that be and then have an informational meeting.

    The PWC supervisors would have nothing to do with this case; it would be a strictly consular affair. I don’t understand why you think Mexico is interfering in PWC’s affairs. Its consulate is doing exactly what any consulate would do, which is to look after its own citizens and keep them informed to the bests of its ability.

    Sending PWC supervisors to Mexico…..!!!!!!!!!!

  49. Anonymous said on 30 Mar 2008 at 9:23 am:
    Flag comment

    What Loudoun said on 30 Mar 2008 at 9:08 am:

    Actually, your words were pretty clear… ergo the sarcasm. It’s the price of a public presence.

    There is one more thing I would like you to clarify. You stated that “I am a member of Help Save Manassas. We are a group of American citizens …” I thought legal residents could also become members. Just a slip (Freudian, perhaps)?

  50. Lafayette said on 30 Mar 2008 at 9:25 am:
    Flag comment

    Do not confuse Greg’s opinion with those of the members of Help Save Manassas. Do I think Chief Deane needs to go? Yes. But this is my opinion and not the opinion of Help Save Manassas.

    Help Save Manassas has almost 2,000 members and I am sure that those members all have different opinions on Chief Deane. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

    *****************************

    You are exactly right the MEMBERS of HSM, all have their own indivual minds and opinions. HSM has one and only one “spokesperson” and therefore the the entire group is portrayed as having those exact same thoughts. I have my own mind and mouth and I will speak for ME!!

  51. Krutis said on 30 Mar 2008 at 9:29 am:
    Flag comment

    Loudoun @ 9:08 am

    You’re absolutely correct. The Mexican government has no power in PWC. The Mexican government DOES have the right to keep its citizens in other countries informed with regard to laws and regulations. The fact that it was done through the PWC police department shows to me that it was no sub rosa deal. It was open, and I believe, telecast. Where’s the beef?

    If you think that Chief Deane is following orders from a Mexican consular official or one from any other country, then get proof!

  52. Loudoun said on 30 Mar 2008 at 9:34 am:
    Flag comment

    Point noted - Anonymous. Legal residents are also members of Help Save Manassas. This was not, however, a Freudian slip.

    Perhaps I should have said a group of “legal” persons instead of American ctizens? I do hate to be PC but at your request - my point being a group of people legally entitled to be in the U.S. are members of Help Save Manassas.

    Thank you for ensuring that I be PC (politically correct).

  53. Loudoun said on 30 Mar 2008 at 9:37 am:
    Flag comment

    Ah Krutis - I was wondering how long it would take you to come after me.

    I did not say that Chief Deane was following orders from a Mexican consular official. Therefore, I don’t need any proof.

    I gave my opinion and clarified that HSM has no official position on this matter.

  54. Loudoun said on 30 Mar 2008 at 9:44 am:
    Flag comment

    One more thing - I was given an account of the meeting by Maureen Wood who did attend the meeting. She said Chief Deane handled the meeting very well and that he did an excellent job.

    She also said that the Mexican consul member made multiple statements in Spanish that were not translated into English.

  55. Lafayette said on 30 Mar 2008 at 9:54 am:
    Flag comment

    I think it fitting to repost Ms. Wood’s comments on this thread. They are on a thread a few back.

    Maureen Wood said on 29 Mar 2008 at 7:50 pm:
    Lafayette- thought I already posted this, I must be getting old.

    I attended the meeting last night. I have some concerns about the Chief having a meeting with the Mexican Consul, but Chief Deane was impressive and above board last night. He did not placate the crowd there. He was honest and told them like it was.
    The question of the drunken driving road block came up and Deane told the crowd that if they are pulled over in this, and they don’t have a license, don’t speak English or they have questionable documents they WILL be asked their legal status.
    The crowd tried many times to corner Chief Deane into promising them something and he wouldn’t have any of it. He told them that there might even be certain circumstances that the police would question their legal status even when they are witnesses to a crime. That went over well with the crowd. (sarcasm)
    The Mexican Consul started the meeting off in Spanish when there were clearly many non-Hispanic’s in the group. The thing that disturbed me about this was, it was NEVER translated into English, so I have to wonder what he said to the crowd. This happened several times during the meeting.
    As for Chief Deane being against the resolutions implementation, he has NO option but to enforce it. He might not be happy about it but after hearing him speak last night, I do believe he WILL and that he will honestly put forth a concerted effort to enforce the “Rule of Law” resolution.
    I too have questions about Chief Deane’s dealings with the Mexican government but I am willing to reserve judgment until we get those answers.

  56. Benton said on 30 Mar 2008 at 11:05 am:
    Flag comment

    So, Greg, what is the next step. You have accused, backed it up with statute and printed it. So, what do you do next? What is the follow up and with whom? What happens next?

  57. Dolph said on 30 Mar 2008 at 11:24 am:
    Flag comment

    Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your point of view and regardless of organization, when the president of an organization speaks, he/she speaks for the entire organization. That is just the way it works. You may have your own mind on things, but to the rest of the world, your president has just voiced your opinion.

    Perception is everything. And on this topic, if you put your thumb on the pulse of the community, it is not a good perception.

  58. monticup said on 30 Mar 2008 at 12:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    It’s the APPEARANCE of IMPROPRIETY.

    This whole fiasco needs an independent prosecutor. I would think Deane would want the review–if he’s done nothing wrong, he should be cleared. Let’s get this clarified and let the law run its course.

  59. Benton said on 30 Mar 2008 at 12:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    So now we have to pay for this? When will this nonsense end? How much more money should we spend?

    Fire everyone and put Greg in charge of everything.

  60. starryflights said on 30 Mar 2008 at 1:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    Be careful what you ask for. ;-) This does need to be investigated. I hope Stewart can get to the bottom of it. Like another poster said, if Deane did nothing wrong, he should welcome the investigation, so that this is cleared up. We need to know what transpired in these closed door meetings with foreign government agents and our Chief of Police. I am very concerned about these meetings. I am also disappointed in Caddigan’s remarks about the PWC citizens that are worried about these meetings. It is clear how she feels about the Rule of Law Resolution and those that don’t abide criminals (illegal aliens) that have no business or legal right to be in PWC and the fact that we want them to get out and go back home to their own countries! I don’t want one penny of my tax money going to support illegal aliens, unless it is used to send them OUT of this country.

  61. Dolph said on 30 Mar 2008 at 1:36 pm:
    Flag comment

    Do you all just like creating problems and wasting money? Why on earth do we need an independent prosecutor?

    What is it that you think is happening behind closed doors? For 2 days I have been reading this conspiracy theory crap. No one has said what it is that they suspect–just all this chicken little scenario.

    I keep waiting for the mystery to be revealed.

  62. starryflights said on 30 Mar 2008 at 1:47 pm:
    Flag comment

    ….and THAT is why we need an investigation.

  63. monticup said on 30 Mar 2008 at 1:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    Wasting money is exactly what Deane was doing. He created the problem by playing diplomat. The Chief of Police is not above the law.

  64. anonymoustoo said on 30 Mar 2008 at 1:56 pm:
    Flag comment

    Starryflights, you obviously have a computer. Have you downloaded the newspaper article yet and sent it to the FBI or do you just like to blow a lot of hot air?

  65. Benton said on 30 Mar 2008 at 2:09 pm:
    Flag comment

    Check with the State Department. See what they say. Might save us all big bucks that you are all obviously happy to spend.

  66. starryflights said on 30 Mar 2008 at 2:09 pm:
    Flag comment

    Monticup, I agree.

  67. Benton said on 30 Mar 2008 at 2:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    Talk talk talk…..

  68. Patty said on 30 Mar 2008 at 2:33 pm:
    Flag comment

    Krusty,

    There are not millions of U.S. citizens illegally residing in Mexico. I suppose you either missed the post about what Mexicans do to those who enter their country illegally or you conveniently decided to pass over it. You need to go back to the other thread and get educated.

  69. Patty said on 30 Mar 2008 at 2:38 pm:
    Flag comment

    Those who don’t question what their government does are doomed to be led by a dictator.

  70. Benton said on 30 Mar 2008 at 2:39 pm:
    Flag comment

    There is a difference between questioning and accusing. Accusing is how they do it in third world countries. You want to be like them?

  71. Patty said on 30 Mar 2008 at 2:57 pm:
    Flag comment

    The Mexican consulate should not be conducting meetings with the Chief of Police. If he has a concern let him contact the State Department and our ELECTED officials. It amazes me that some people are not concerned that a foreign government agent is involved in our local government.

  72. Dolph said on 30 Mar 2008 at 3:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    Actually many Americans live in Mexico as foreign nationals. The cost of living is so much less and there are ways to get around the coastal laws. AARP had a very large article and links to other sources a year or 2 ago.

    Here is part of the series:

    http://www.aarpmagazine.org/books/gringosinparadise.html

    There are also religious enclaves living in Mexico for religious freedom, odd as that might sound.

    I am not at all concerned that Chief Deane is talking to a consul from Mexico. I understand from some of the people at the meeting that Chief did an excellent job of spelling out our policy here in this county. The man has been our Chief of Police for several decades. I trust him to handle things well. I have found him to be fair and to not show favoritism to one group over another.

    To put it bluntly, I trust him more than I do some of our elected officials. Operative word here, SOME.

  73. Freedom said on 30 Mar 2008 at 3:22 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’m with you, Patty….

    …and on the other hand, our Chief of Police AND County Executive should know that it is NOT their role to be meeting with representatives of foreign governments, particularly SECRET meetings, without prior coordination, training if necessary, and approval. I don’t believe either of them were hired for that purpose.

    Another thing, the Chairman of the Board asked questions of Chief Deane which he apparently “blew off”….at least, he didn’t answer them. I have no use nor appetite for insubordination and any member of the BOCS should be able to ask a county employee questions and expect honest and forthright answers.

  74. Freedom said on 30 Mar 2008 at 3:23 pm:
    Flag comment

    Dolph, trust though YOU might, your trust is not the only concern to be considered.

  75. Lafayette said on 30 Mar 2008 at 3:24 pm:
    Flag comment

    Patty said on 30 Mar 2008 at 2:38 pm:
    Those who don’t question what their government does are doomed to be led by a dictator.

    This same statement could be said about questioning any person try to lead anything. Think about that for a minute.

  76. Dolph said on 30 Mar 2008 at 3:29 pm:
    Flag comment

    Lafayette,

    Point very well taken here. Didn’t go zooming overhead over here.

  77. Patty said on 30 Mar 2008 at 3:37 pm:
    Flag comment

    If there is no accountability in government, corruptness looms around the corner. Why don’t you come and speak with my neighbor about what it is like to live in a communist country? It is a dangerous thing to be complacent. Why don’t you talk to my husband and his family about what happens to a country when complacency takes hold?

  78. monticup said on 30 Mar 2008 at 3:48 pm:
    Flag comment

    The Chief of Police works for US, the citizens. We shouldn’t have to file FOIA papers to get to the bottom of this.

    To all those of you who don’t get it, the reason I’m concerned about this is because McCain/Kennedy consulted with LaRaza, MeCCHA, etc. when crafting the amnesty legislation but didn’t consult with citizens who are against amnesty.

    This Deane stunt smells the same. Who has he been consulting with?

  79. Benton said on 30 Mar 2008 at 3:48 pm:
    Flag comment

    Patty
    No one is disagreeing on this. It’s just that nasty old “how” that is surfacing. Which side of the inquiry do you want to be on? We all have our own personal experiences and neighbors and certainly understand communist countries and complacancy.

    I for one am not interested in becoming a facist to prevent that.

  80. Patty said on 30 Mar 2008 at 4:03 pm:
    Flag comment

    I just think citizens need to be involved in their government. My goverment teacher always told us that apathy would destroy our nation. No one should ever stop asking questions no matter what your party affiliation. In the history of this nation hasn’t there been corruption from both Republicans and Democrats? Of course! That is why there should always be accountability.

    Looked at what happened to Vietnam:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

    Pay particular attention to the section entitled “Diem Era” and “Rule”. Also look at the sections entitled “Aftermath” and “Effects on Vietnam”

  81. Benton said on 30 Mar 2008 at 4:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    Did you have an philosophy or ethics professor that taught effective debate and disagreement? Again, it’s not what you say that I am disagreeing with it is how this is being done here.

  82. Patty said on 30 Mar 2008 at 4:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    I understood this to be blog where I can post my comments and opinions.

  83. Benton said on 30 Mar 2008 at 4:25 pm:
    Flag comment

    I understood this to be a blog where we engage in lively discussion. Not just listen to a few. Apologies.

  84. Bob Wills said on 30 Mar 2008 at 6:47 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg L said on 30 Mar 2008 at 3:09 am:
    Those concerns about Deane meeting with foreign governments during the design of the implementation plan have been confirmed by the Washington Post.

    Deane is free to conduct a public outreach campaign with as many illegal aliens and legal residents as he can. No one is disputing that. It was terribly dumb to meet with them in a joint meeting requested and sponsored by the Mexican Consulate, but what is more disturbing are the meetings which lead up to this meeting, and not the public meeting that resulted.

    What folks are complaining about are his unauthorized meetings with agents of foreign governments. What happened during these meetings? Deane won’t say. Who did he inform about these meetings? He won’t say. Did these foreign governments lobby him about the implementation plan for the Rule of Law Resolution? He won’t say. That’s unacceptable.

    Local public officials simply cannot conduct secret meetings with agents of foreign governments. It’s just so wrong on so many levels.

    Greg

    Are you saying that no employee of any county is allowed to talk to any one that has diplomatic imunity of any country about any of the laws of that county/city or even the commonwealth? What would be your procedure? Does the Diplomat have to call the State Dapartment first to get Federal Permission to ask about trash pick up or when the Landfill is open and what it accepts when the Government runs that service. Would you fire that employee for answering thoes questions without having the BOCS approve the right for that phone conversation of to meet with them if they walked into the county building? If it is required for the Chief of Police then it would be required of every other employee. That is right you are a conservative Republican who wants more and more government and to spend more and more money.

    What is good for the goose is good for the gander but you you do not apply the Rule of Law Resolution to everyone just one group in your Blog

  85. monticup said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:35 pm:
    Flag comment

    Benton: Are you saying you’re into process, not substance?

  86. manassascityresident said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    Benton said on 30 Mar 2008 at 4:25 pm:
    I understood this to be a blog where we engage in lively discussion. Not just listen to a few. Apologies.

    Patty is part of the “lively” discussion.
    So Benton, are you part of the “few” we’re to listen to?

  87. Greg L said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:54 pm:
    Flag comment

    Bob, that is pretty much exactly what I am saying. Discussions with foreign government representatives about state or local laws and their implementation should not occur. Should a foreign government wish to make official inquiries about the laws of the United States or it’s political subdivisions, the U.S. Department of State is wholly qualified to answer them, and the sole entity of the United States Government empowered to do so pursuant to Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution.

    Foreign government agents are duty-bound to represent the interests of the foreign governments that employ them as diplomats, spies, or whatever else they may happen to be. The job is to seek whatever advantage for their nations they can manage to steal, cajole, coerce, bribe or otherwise obtain. Unless Chief Deane can represent to us that he has the expertise and resources to go head-to-head with professional spies, which is what most of these consuls actually are, he should leave this duty to the professionals who are equipped to deal with this.

    And also, don’t get yourself too confused here. I do not implement the Rule of Law Resolution. I do not enforce the law, nor do I determine eligibility for public benefits.

  88. Krutis said on 30 Mar 2008 at 10:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg + Your obsession is showing again. “…professional spies which is what most of these consuls actually are..” You really BELIEVE that this is an international spy affair, don’t you? What on earth would a spy find out from a PWC employee, especially the Chief of Police. Please, Greg, take a pill and chill!

  89. monticup said on 30 Mar 2008 at 10:35 pm:
    Flag comment

    Krutis: You can’t possibly be as naive as you’re pretending to be. Do YOU believe that we are a sovereign nation and that there are rules, laws and protocol when the Chief of Police deals with a consular official?

  90. Greg L said on 30 Mar 2008 at 10:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    Krutis, when the second largest source of foreign revenue for Mexico (foreign remittances) is at stake, don’t you think that any consul worth his salt would try to do everything possible to try to put roadblocks in front of any effort anywhere that would put that in jeopardy? If the Mexican Consul wasn’t trying as hard as he could to stop local efforts to reduce the number of illegal aliens in the United States who contribute to this remittance stream, they should be fired for incompetence and dereliction of duty.

    They rightly see the potential here that other localities will follow in the lead of Prince William County. Stopping this effort here would be a major career opportunity for anyone working for the Mexican foreign service, and demonstrably enhance the foreign policy objectives of Mexico.

    If you think the Mexican Government is not doing everything possible to get the Rule of Law Resolution rescinded, naive wouldn’t begin to explain your problem here.

  91. MdMan said on 30 Mar 2008 at 10:54 pm:
    Flag comment

    It is completely inappropriate for a police chief to unilaterally involve himself in discussions with foriegn officials unless it is done in conjunction with the State Department - bottom line.

    Even Sheriff Taylor knew that.

  92. MdMan said on 30 Mar 2008 at 11:03 pm:
    Flag comment

    One thing is certain - this type of back-channel diplomacy on behalf of Mexico (and they are clearly trying to manipulate a stupid police chief who is way out of his league here) is more evidence of the insurrection they are attempting in America. This act alone should be a wake up call to any doubters about the clear and present danger that Latin America poses to our sovreignty, and is absolute justification that the ROLR was necessary.

    God Save America.

  93. Bob Wills said on 31 Mar 2008 at 12:17 am:
    Flag comment

    Greg L said on 30 Mar 2008 at 8:54 pm:
    Bob, that is pretty much exactly what I am saying. Discussions with foreign government representatives about state or local laws and their implementation should not occur. Should a foreign government wish to make official inquiries about the laws of the United States or it’s political subdivisions, the U.S. Department of State is wholly qualified to answer them, and the sole entity of the United States Government empowered to do so pursuant to Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution.

    Greg

    If you want to take that position then you have to say the same about each and every law on the books no matter what it might impact. One can not pick and choose what laws you can discuse with a person who has a Diplomatic Passport and what laws you can not. Was the Diplomat trying to change the LAW and if he was he was talking to the wrong person for the Chief of Police can not change the law and Deane did not say he was going to change the implementation of the law any different that day then what he is saying on Chanel 23 or other meetings. If Deane can not talk to that status of a person then no other government employee can do it either. you do not get to pick and choose whom or what rules or laws apply.

    You think the State Department is qualified to answer the questions of the laws of every county and city and town in the United States? Greg think about what you just said. We had best get rid of all the SEnatore adn congress persons who travel oversees and talk about the laws of the US to foreign government officials.

    Foreign government agents are duty-bound to represent the interests of the foreign governments that employ them as diplomats, spies, or whatever else they may happen to be. The job is to seek whatever advantage for their nations they can manage to steal, cajole, coerce, bribe or otherwise obtain. Unless Chief Deane can represent to us that he has the expertise and resources to go head-to-head with professional spies, which is what most of these consuls actually are, he should leave this duty to the professionals who are equipped to deal with this.

    And also, don’t get yourself too confused here. I do not implement the Rule of Law Resolution. I do not enforce the law, nor do I determine eligibility for public benefits.

    Where have I ever said you implement the Rule of Law or enforce it or determine eligibility for public bevefits or even hinted that you did? I would like to see that or are you the one who is confused ?

    Who do you want to talk about the police implementing the Rule of Law and how it will be done? Stewart? Stirrup ? Maybe May What do they know about the policies and how police work and what they do ?

    Would you want no one to talk to any diplomat about any thing? Not communicating is the worse thing you can do to quell unrest.

    There was an incedent that I was directly involved in where the BOCS had to move a public meeting to a High School Autitourm in order to accomidate all the people in the county who were really mad at me for what I implemented. It was all leagl and done properly by the law at that time. The public spoke first and I was raked over the coals worse then any thing this BOCS has ever experienced. After the public had spoken against what I had done I got up to speak. You should have heard the cat calls and yelling and everything else. I explainded that they would either give me the same courtisy of listening with out interuption that I gave them or I would walked out and nothing would be resolved. They did and I answered every question put to me and there was no more problem or any action taken by the BOCS. Talking is cheap and easy. When you will not talk is when there are major problems.

    What change has Deane tried to make to the rule of law that was passed? If none done, then no matter what anyone has said to him he has been on the same path of implementing the law everytime he is asked about it. To bad our politicians can not say the same thing time after time when asked the same question.

  94. Greg L said on 31 Mar 2008 at 12:41 am:
    Flag comment

    Sure you can. You refer these folks to the State Department, and they figure out whether it’s worth discussing with a consul directly, and they’ll provide support for the effort if that ends up being appropriate. Dealing directly with foreign governments without State Department support is just plain stupid.

    Hell, why WOULDN’T a local government not get the State Department involved any time a foreign government contacts them? Is the State Department going to do a WORSE job than a local public official with no diplomatic training or experience?

  95. Anonymous said on 31 Mar 2008 at 8:36 am:
    Flag comment

    Have you ever worked with the State Department? Do you know there’s a war on? I assure you that they don’t have the time or interest in working with local officials who want to meet with representatives of foreign Governments to discuss purely local community matters.

    The State Department, my its nature, is not chartered to get involved in State or local affairs (and I’m not sure I want to invite the Feds into our “tent”).

  96. Bob Wills said on 31 Mar 2008 at 8:52 am:
    Flag comment

    Greg L said on 31 Mar 2008 at 12:41 am:
    Sure you can. You refer these folks to the State Department, and they figure out whether it’s worth discussing with a consul directly, and they’ll provide support for the effort if that ends up being appropriate. Dealing directly with foreign governments without State Department support is just plain stupid.

    Did I miss read you before in your statements that talking with foreign governments was a violation of the Logan Act ? so now you have gone from Deane meeting with the Mexican as being illegal to stupid? Greg you can not have it both ways. It is either breaking the law or it is stupid.

    Hell, why WOULDN’T a local government not get the State Department involved any time a foreign government contacts them?

    Well no wonder our taxes go up for in your mind we have enought people to call and meet and deal with the State Department !!!!!!!! The State Department employee can not and will not tell illegals to get out of the county or country so why would you want their advise ???

    Is the State Department going to do a WORSE job than a local public official with no diplomatic training or experience?

    a BIG YES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    You have lost it Greg

  97. k. o'toole said on 31 Mar 2008 at 9:07 am:
    Flag comment

    Loudoun @ 8:50 am, 30 March. I have to agree with you. I also have noticed the snotty remarks Caddigan makes to the Chairman on a regular basis. Her dislike of Mr. Stewart is apparent. I immediately recalled a local radio show wherein a senior lady asked why anyone would want a menopausal woman in the White House (where she would have access to the *red button*)? Good point.

  98. Dolph said on 31 Mar 2008 at 9:17 am:
    Flag comment

    k.o’toole,

    I really hope that you know what a sexist remark you just made. I hope it was intentional and not an act of ….nah…I won’t say it. I just don’t want you to go to work and make remarks like that. You would be fired, in all probability.

  99. k. o'toole said on 31 Mar 2008 at 9:23 am:
    Flag comment

    Fortunately, as a woman, I am a protected entity. You are now on “ignore”. Reciprocity is certainly welcomed and encouraged.

  100. manassascityresident said on 31 Mar 2008 at 9:24 am:
    Flag comment

    Dolph said on 31 Mar 2008 at 9:17 am:

    You can’t be serious! Go blast the senior lady! O’Toole was only repeating what she heard her say on a radio show! MY GOODNESS! PLEASE tell me you were being sarcastic!

  101. Dolph said on 31 Mar 2008 at 9:37 am:
    Flag comment

    I still think it is sexist. Sorry k. o’toole for accusing you of being a man. Surely you understand why I thought that.

    I don’t think middle aged menopausal women are nearly as dangerous as some of the middle aged horndogs running around Congress.

    You ladies will have to pardon me, as a female, I try not to make comments that contribute to my own oppression. I will leave that job to others.

  102. jfk said on 31 Mar 2008 at 10:02 am:
    Flag comment

    Typical Dolph: get offended if a man makes a comment, however it’s no problem if a woman says it. Don’t worry, I doubt you have anything to fear from horndogs of any age.

    I remember the good old days when Dolph swam out to sea for a few weeks. I only wish we could bring those days back again. The diatribes and chest beating routines are wearing thin; you are beyond annoying.

  103. Patty said on 31 Mar 2008 at 10:10 am:
    Flag comment

    Anonymous said on 31 Mar 2008 at 8:36 am:

    “The State Department, my its nature, is not chartered to get involved in State or local affairs (and I’m not sure I want to invite the Feds into our “tent”).”

    I would rather have the Feds involved than foreign governments. Who do you work for Osama bin Laden?

    You bet I want the Feds to come back and do more ICE raids. CMC is the tip of the iceberg.

  104. Freedom said on 31 Mar 2008 at 10:40 am:
    Flag comment

    Bob Wills said: “You think the State Department is qualified to answer the questions of the laws of every county and city and town in the United States?”

    With consultation with that county, city or town, yes.

    Bob Wills also said: “We had best get rid of all the SEnatore adn congress persons who travel oversees and talk about the laws of the US to foreign government officials.”

    If they do it in secret, without coordination and collaboration you’re absolutely correct.

  105. Anonymous said on 31 Mar 2008 at 10:42 am:
    Flag comment

    Patty, have you looked at their web site? http://www.state.gov/ Why not contact them and ask (although I’ll admit I already know the answer). You may contact them through their on-line form at http://contact-us.state.gov/cgi-bin/state.cfg/php/enduser/std_alp.php although calling their legal advisor, John Billinger, or a member of his staff might get you a quicker answer. You can probably contact John’s office through the main switchboard: 202-647-4000.

    The State Department manages our affairs overseas to include treaties, issues involving U.S. Citizens, etc. By their nature, they do not involve themselves in matters within the United States borders.

    This is a very academic conversation that may be cleared up by a phone call. It doesn’t have to be an official request, just a citizen inquiry.

    So… call.

  106. Dolph said on 31 Mar 2008 at 10:58 am:
    Flag comment

    jfk,

    Actually, I am growing tired of your harrassment. And that is exactly what you are doing. I am not seeking you out to pick a fight, yet you are doing that to me.

    Perhaps you should re-read my comments. I do not find sexists remarks acceptable by either gender.

  107. k. o'toole said on 31 Mar 2008 at 11:54 am:
    Flag comment

    jfk, dolph seeks out random commenters with whom to pick a fight. It is annoying but keeps her off the streets.

  108. Luckyduck said on 31 Mar 2008 at 12:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    I, for one, find Dolph’s comments interesting and to the point and even handed, which is more than some can say about their own. Keep up the good work Dolph.

  109. Dolph said on 31 Mar 2008 at 1:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    k.o’toole, try outrageous comments. I could care less about the gnomes behind the screen names. I thought I was on your ignore button? That was over quickly. You going to join the harrassment ranks?

    Luckyduck, Thanks. I enjoy reading the sanity you bring to the blogs also.

  110. jfk said on 31 Mar 2008 at 1:49 pm:
    Flag comment

    k.o’toole, Another Dolph tactic is to post under other names, so that she can give support to herself. I would not be surprised if Lucky Duck is actually Dolph. OneVoice informed in a post a couple of months ago that both she and Dolph had done this when they were attacking Liela.

    I have no interest in picking a fight with you, Dolph. You are accusing me of what you actually do. I can think of many times you have insulted or fought with other people on this site. You’ve insulted me before, calling me a redneck, racist, and other assorted names. I have also seen you turn on your friends AWCheney and Medic64.

  111. Rebel Yell said on 31 Mar 2008 at 1:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    BVBL Middle School!

  112. Lafayette said on 31 Mar 2008 at 2:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    jfk,
    I don’t think Dolph turned on her friends AWC and M64. True she may have disagreed with them, but to use “turned on your friends” is not true. I am friends with Dolph, we don’t agree on everything. We have had a couple of battles ourselves right here on bvbl. I never once thought she turned on me.

    Name calling is childish, but it still happens with a posters. I really don’t throw Dolph in the name calling bunch. When one chooses to name call they loose credibiltiy. I try not to name call and it has happened a time or two. I was NOT proud of myself after having acted like a kid.

    Dolph has one and only one other screen name and that is rarely unleashed. I think a fair many use other names from time to time. I myself have and do used other names and even then I am always mindful of what I say. How about you? ;)

  113. Bob Wills said on 31 Mar 2008 at 3:41 pm:
    Flag comment

    Freedom said on 31 Mar 2008 at 10:40 am:
    Bob Wills said: “You think the State Department is qualified to answer the questions of the laws of every county and city and town in the United States?”

    With consultation with that county, city or town, yes.

    And how large an increase in government employment would it take for the State Department as well as the increase in every county.city. and town do you think this would create for these consultations? I hope that there are not that many people just sitting around on the payrolls to do the job you suggest.

    I bet you complain about the growth of government and waste but now you want to increase it more ?

  114. Greg L said on 31 Mar 2008 at 3:51 pm:
    Flag comment

    The State Department already handles inquiries from foreign nations regarding laws and policies at the local level. They’ve been doing this for years and already have departments whose job it is to field these sorts of inquiries, and coordinate with state and local governments on diplomatic issues.

    Is the alternative to allow every state and locality to set up their own mini-state department? Or send local officials to foreign service training at local taxpayer expense so they will have the training and experience to handle diplomatic activity with every foreign nation that contacts them?

    Here’s the cost effective way for local governments to deal with this, which has been long-standing federal policy:

    Dear Mr. Consul-General

    We are in receipt of your request for a meeting regarding our local policies to combat illegal immigration in our community. We are forwarding your request on to the State Department, which is properly equipped to handle your inquiry. Please find attached several press releases we have issued on this matter over the course of the last year which may be helpful in partially answering your questions.

    Please don’t hesitate to contact the U.S. Department of State should you have any further concerns.

    Regards,

    A LOYAL AMERICAN GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL

  115. Advocator said on 31 Mar 2008 at 4:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    Do we know that PWCPD did not do this when contacted by representatives of foreign nations?

  116. jfk said on 31 Mar 2008 at 5:46 pm:
    Flag comment

    Have to disagree with you, Lafayette. When M64 was being called a racist, she piled on. I can also recall other run-ins between her and MWC.

    She is just as guilty of name calling as anyone else. It’s admirable that you are her friend and support her. How do you know how many names she uses, just out of curiosity????

  117. Luckyduck said on 31 Mar 2008 at 6:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    jfk, I AM not Dolph and I believe that can be verified by my IP address. I just think you tend to jump on Dolph an awful lot from what I’ve read. Its great to have a debate, but nobody tells you to get lost do they? So why not keep it civil, or is your point of view the only correct one?

  118. Lafayette said on 31 Mar 2008 at 6:33 pm:
    Flag comment

    jfk,
    I tried posting earlier, but it didn’t show up. Grrrr!

    Dolph has told me the other name. She knows the other names I use. We are friends and trust one another.

    See how we just disagreed and did not DISRESPECT or NAME CALL the other one. We must be more tolerant of those that don’t see eye to eye with us. We are all are own individual person, are we not.

    Hmm, I noticed you did mention how many other names you use, sir? ;)

    Chris

  119. Lafayette said on 31 Mar 2008 at 6:40 pm:
    Flag comment

    corr: We are all are own individual person, and WE ARE NOT ALL THE SAME.

    Hmm, I noticed you did NOT mention how many other names you use, sir?

    Chris

  120. manassascityresident said on 31 Mar 2008 at 6:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    Luckyduck-
    All is fair in love and on blogs.
    Dolph does tell people to “get lost” when she “dismisses” them (in her oh so queenly way), particularly when she disagrees with them.
    I find it funny that you ask JFK…. “or is your point of view the only correct one?” …. Because that most definitely is Dolph’s M.O.
    Have you been blinded by the light?
    Just try to keep it fair, OK?

  121. Lafayette said on 31 Mar 2008 at 6:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    mcr,
    I see you are live and well this evening. :)
    Missed you last week!

  122. manassascityresident said on 31 Mar 2008 at 6:59 pm:
    Flag comment

    Laf -
    Yes, indeed! :-) Alive and well!
    Sorry I missed you - I had EVERY intention of going, but something unavoidable came up!
    Hope all is well on your end!

  123. Benton said on 31 Mar 2008 at 7:11 pm:
    Flag comment

    The problem here is everyone wants to or thinks they need to be top dog. From what I’ve observed, no one here would win a pulitzer so I would try to keep it a bit lighter and maybe learn something.

  124. monticup said on 31 Mar 2008 at 7:25 pm:
    Flag comment

    Actually, Benton, many of the posters here are first-rate writers. They could teach the MSM journalists a thing or two.
    Pearls before swine.

  125. jfk said on 31 Mar 2008 at 9:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’ve said many times, and it bears repeating, that I come to this site to learn. I don’t presuppose that I am a great writer, or that I am an expert on any subject. The thing about Dolph and others like her that angers me is that they tend to stifle others. I never see in any of her posts a desire to continue the debate or learn anything. It’s seems like it’s all about winning, as Benton implied.

  126. Lafayette said on 31 Mar 2008 at 9:40 pm:
    Flag comment

    jfk,
    I come here too learn as well.
    Oh, isn’t it better to be a winner than a wiener? Thought, I’d LIGHTEN things up a bit. ;)

  127. jfk said on 31 Mar 2008 at 10:51 pm:
    Flag comment

    Or a whiner….

  128. k. o'toole said on 1 Apr 2008 at 10:44 am:
    Flag comment

    jfk@9:12 pm - Well said :-) (I will again address you with the expectation that D doesn’t know when she’s not being addressed (ignored) - she does like to stifle. She just needs try to understand the point people make, instead of looking for a fight/getting defensive). Manassascityresident understood immediately the difference between the msg and the messenger.

  129. Dolph said on 1 Apr 2008 at 12:32 pm:
    Flag comment

    You are only stifled if you allow yourself to be. I most certainly do understand the point people are making, and that is what I find so disturbing on so many levels.

  130. manassascityresident said on 1 Apr 2008 at 3:58 pm:
    Flag comment

    jfk said on 31 Mar 2008 at 1:49 pm:
    k.o’toole, Another Dolph tactic is to post under other names, so that she can give support to herself. I would not be surprised if Lucky Duck is actually Dolph.

    And watch out for “Purple”…… just a feeling … all wrapped into one package!

  131. ateacher said on 1 Apr 2008 at 8:44 pm:
    Flag comment

    ack..I don’t believe that claim. Dolph is pretty good with being what Dolph needs to say. Dolph is very straight forward, but even handed. I really believe Dolph is what Dolph claims to be…Dolph. Not once have I thought Dolph was some one else, or posted under other names. I admire Dolph for his/her ability to either accept what I say or question my thought process. Dolph is real. Blog on…..

  132. AWCheney said on 1 Apr 2008 at 8:46 pm:
    Flag comment

    MCR and jfk…you are both delusional and obviously deeply “in hate” of Dolph. First of all, she is in no way, shape or form an illegal alien apologist. She wants them out of her neighborhood as badly as you do. Secondly, as others have done, if she inadvertently posts “anonymous” (or under a different pseudonym), she comes back to let everyone know it was her (happened when her grandkids used the computer one time that I can definitely recall). You two tend to be the most free with unsubstantiated accusations against folks around here.

  133. AWCheney said on 1 Apr 2008 at 8:48 pm:
    Flag comment

    Addition to last sentence: except, perhaps, for a number of the illegal aliens and their apologists.

  134. CitizenofManassas said on 1 Apr 2008 at 11:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    AW,

    Dolph does not mix bones about her hatred of NCLB. To her NCLB should be ended tomorrow, no but or ifs of lets take a look, nothing but ending it will satisfy her. Yet, when it comes to illegals, she has the complete different reaction. She has waffled on the issue of illegal immigration more than once, and that is what causes people to question her on the issue.

    The fact she is attempting to defend Deane when he was against the program is just one more reason to question if she truly is against illegal immigration.

    The fact she does not have a problem with a foreign Government, who is not only openly supportive of illegal immigration, is also openly pushing for the border between America and Mexico to disappear, is another reason to question her true feelings on illegal immigration.

  135. AWCheney said on 1 Apr 2008 at 11:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    Whatever her opinion COM, it is HER opinion. I may not agree with her on some things, but we absolutely agree on the issue of illegal aliens…that they have no place here. She’s made that quite clear. And, by the way, she and I also agree on NCLB. I’m surprised that YOU would support a program thrust on us by Teddy Kennedy, even if it was also supported by George W. Of course, George W. is no more a conservative than Teddy, so I suppose THAT would make sense.

  136. manassascityresident said on 2 Apr 2008 at 7:45 am:
    Flag comment

    AWC –
    “In hate” of Dolph? “Delusional?” I’d say that’s a tad over the top and a little dramatic don’t you think? I detect nothing but calm discourse above. But we must have hit on something to make you jump on over to protect your friend. I guess we’re not allowed to protect other posters from her cyber-slapping (her words).
    Forgive me if I’m wrong, but aren’t we ALL entitled to express our opinions? Oh, that’s right, how could I forget….this is a one way street I’m traveling on – where it’s Dolph’s way, or the highway. I’ll try to remember to bow down to all that Dolph posts on BVBL from now on. Now that makes sense, and I’m sure it will make her oh so happy! :-)
    BTW – I have never called Dolph an illegal alien apologist. You may want to reread all posts!
    End of story.

  137. AWCheney said on 2 Apr 2008 at 8:50 am:
    Flag comment

    Accusing Dolph of posting anonymously and/or under different pseudonyms is, of itself, rather over the top and grossly unfair. THAT’S what you “hit (up)on” which brought me into the melee. Insofar as the numerous accusations from numerous commenters that she is supportive of illegal aliens, that happens to her all the time. I’ve actually been accused of that myself when I dare to inject a bit of reason into the debate. I’m not going to go back through all the comments on all the illegal alien threads to determine if I perhaps confused you with someone else (COM, for instance) in maligning Dolph as an “illegal alien apologist,” so I’ll just take your word for it that you realize she is not, despite occasional disagreements in approach. Fact is, we’re all basically on the same side…but we all need to remember that we’re not ALWAYS going to agree on everything.

  138. CitizenofManassas said on 2 Apr 2008 at 8:59 am:
    Flag comment

    Aw,

    First off, I do not support NCLB. I just used it as an example of where Dolph does not compromise and does not want to listen to any type of reason, for why the program should continue.

    If she does not want illegals, why has she defended a person who clearly is not in favor of removing them from the Community?

    She admitted that Deane is only doing the program because the BOS passed it, and not because he showed true leadership by pushing it to the BOS.

    Opinions are fine, but I suppose I could say in my opinion the sun sets in the East and no matter what people said I was right and they were wrong. Opinions need to be based on some sort of logic and fact, not just well that is my opinion and I am sticking to it, even though it flies in the face of facts.

  139. AWCheney said on 3 Apr 2008 at 1:45 am:
    Flag comment

    “If she does not want illegals, why has she defended a person who clearly is not in favor of removing them from the Community?”

    Perhaps, COM, because that is not the ONLY responsibility he has? And by the way, pushing ANY policy on the BOS is NOT one of his responsibilities. If he’s “doing the program” as you say, then he is doing his job with regard to the illegal aliens.

    This meeting with official representatives of foreign governments, secretly, behind closed doors is a completely different issue. The fact that he was non-responsive to a request from the Chairman of the BOS for information disclosing the purpose and substance of those meetings (which was a wholly appropriate request) is what actually concerned me. Dolph disagreed, and I’ve got no problem with that…because it’s her opinion, to which she is entitled as much as I, or you for that matter.

    “Opinions need to be based on some sort of logic and fact, not just well that is my opinion and I am sticking to it, even though it flies in the face of facts.”

    My question to you, COM, is what YOUR basis in logic and fact for your opinion might be? I have yet to see it. It’s rather unfair to hold someone to a higher standard than that to which you hold yourself.

  140. CitizenofManassas said on 3 Apr 2008 at 1:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    AW,

    There are plenty of examples were law enforcement officers and or chiefs, and even sheriffs have exercised their powers to go after illegals without having to be asked or ordered to do so by the local Governments.

    It is not as if the illegal alien issue has only cropped up in the last year.

    Recall the 7-11 compromise the department did with the ACLU and other illegal alien supporters. Surely Deane had a say in that.

    The facts I refer to are that Deane was not for the program. Deane had not taken a hard stance on illegals before the program. If it was left to him the department would not have started the program.

Comments are closed.


Views: 3686