Immigration Clearinghouse

After months of trying to distance himself and his border vigilante movement, from Minuteman Shawna Forde, who is under capital indictment for the cold blooded murder of 9 year old Brisenia Flores and her father Raul, Jim Gilchrist seems full of contradictions in a recent interview with a member of the Committee for Justice for Shawna Forde.

The CJSF is a small band of right wing extremist whackos who are trying to rationalize and justify the actions of Shawna Forde, Jason “Gunny” Bush and Albert Gaxiola on the night of May 30, 2009 in the small Arizona town of Arivaca.

Most of the interview is the same tired claims from CJSF as before. Forde being a victim of a government conspiracy because she “knew too much”. Horseshit!

One would imagine that the government would go after some of the players in the border vigilante movement, instead of a petty thief, street corner hooker and pathological liar, such as Shawna Forde.

We contacted Gilchrist and he was courteous in his reply.

The story appears to be roughly what I said to Laine Lawless during a telephone interview last week.
I did not record the interview, so I cannot verify every word, but there was nothing in the story that seemed to be fabricated.

Some questions from the interview:

JSF: Shawna indicates she knows who’s dirty, who’s taking bribes, and turning a blind eye. Do you think they nailed her because she knew certain things and they didn’t want it to come out?

JG: Now that is interesting! She sent me a couple of emails about getting in deep undercover, and she asked, “please contact law enforcement and get me some protection.” I remember thinking, she’s getting too close to some really bad people, if she’s worried about her life, about being murdered. And I was wondering, why would she go to that extent? I was confused; she was getting that close to bandits like that without the help of law enforcement, unless she was working with law enforcement.

WE have it from a credible source who has seen the emails in question that Forde did not ask anyone to contact law enforcement. To the contrary, he “orders” to those receiving the emails were along the lines of ………. “hold your shit, because if word gets out they will kill me!” (insert 12 more exclamation points here).

Concerning his opinion of Fordes guilt or innocence”

JSF: Do you have any feeling about whether she’s innocent?

JG: I would lean toward innocence. I never pictured her doing something like this. I never saw her as being violent. The 3 or 4 times I saw her, she was always very personable with everybody

You never do picture someone you know or think you know doing something this heinous. But the evidence is damning. Her own words and actions.

It goes on and on. He mentions Johnny Sutton, who got a righteous conviction against Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, although Gilchrist side of the aisle will never accept it. They should read the 4000 page trial transcript. I have and it was a good conviction. But I digress…

He also makes reference to the jabbering jackass William Gheen of ALIPAC and his “good buddy”, Jeff “Bikini Boy” Schwilk.

Now there were people who didn’t like her, like Jeff Schwilk, or William Gheen. She refused to work (raising money or recruiting members) for Gheen in Washington state. As soon as he found out she was communicating with the Minuteman Project, every time she posted something or emailed, he’d beat up on her. Gheen and Schwilk repeatedly assaulted her in their internet postings from December 2008 through about March or April of 2009. After she was beaten and raped and then shot, everyone—Gheen, Schwilk, Nightingale, and Simcox were posting all sorts of propaganda and bogus stuff, and I came to her defense. Nobody ever proved that she shot herself, or that she had anything to do with her husband getting shot.

The dysfunctional duo of Gheen and Schwilk continued their attacks with fervor in June of 2009, pronouncing her guilty without a trial. Gheen and Schwilk, in my opinion, are predators, possible sociopaths, and without any semblance of conscience.

There are three more points where Gilchrist is way off base but it reflects their “poor me” philosophy.

JSF: Who will profit if Shawna is convicted?

JG: The open borders fanatics will prosper. It could stall the immigration law enforcement movement, and our opponents will use any incident to stop us. Up until a couple of years ago, I was concerned that someone wanted to frame me.

To the contrary, Justice will be served and the murderers will receive the “Justice” they demand and the family of a 9 year old child and her father can begin to see some closure. And again, to the contrary, the Pro-Reform movement is not an “open borders lobby”. While philosophically opposed, the Pro-Reform movement seeks secure borders and a solution to our broken immigration system.

All in all, an interesting interview, although Lawless seems to put her warped spin on some of it. Check it out for yourself.