There’s nothing like a good list of facts to elucidate a topic, and the flurry of recent hate crimes untruthfully claimed by Muslims indicates the rarity of the real thing. But victimhood is a major value of the left, so emotive, colorful lies continue to be spewed.
There were no Nazi visas during WWII because even the Democrat President Franklin Roosevelt understood that importing enemies as immigrants would be unwise. But today, Islam has declared war on the west, although many politicians pretend otherwise. The sensible policy should therefore be NO Muslim immigration for the duration.
Islam book author and JihadWatch blogger Robert Spencer has a little list that shows a pattern about hate crime hoaxes and how they are political tools…
As Trump’s inauguration approaches, the fake hate crime industry has kicked into high gear. A rash of widely reported “anti-Muslim hate crimes” have turned out to be hoaxes perpetrated by Muslims.
Hate crimes are political capital in our petulant, victimhood-idolizing society: when real incidents don’t exist, there is incentive to invent them. The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) andotherMuslimshaveonmanyoccasionsnothesitated to fabricate hate crimes, including attacks on mosques. For CAIR and its allies, this is part of a larger agenda. They wish to deflect attention away from jihad terror attacks and plots, and to end law enforcement scrutiny of what is supposedly an unjustly despised and harassed group.
1. On Saturday, Washington’s Bellevue Reporter noted regarding the arrest of Isaac Wayne Wilson — who is suspected of an arson attack on the Islamic Center of Eastside — that “law enforcement officials are shying away from calling it a hate crime.” But why? Especially since Wilson “reportedly has a history of contentious interactions at the mosque — including a conviction for malicious mischief”?
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Mike Hogan said:
At this point, we haven’t seen any evidence that this is a hate crime. A hate crime is proven by words or actions that the perpetrator was targeting a community because of feelings of animosity towards them.
If Isaac Wayne Wilson has “a history of contentious interactions at the mosque,” wouldn’t law enforcement officials have ample evidence of “words or actions” showing “that the perpetrator was targeting a community because of feelings of animosity towards them”?
Logically, they only would not have such evidence if his “contentious interactions” at the mosque had nothing to do with it being a mosque or with the Muslim identity of the people who go there. Is Isaac Wayne Wilson himself a Muslim? Is this yet another fake anti-Muslim hate crime? Continue reading this article
Rep. John Lewis’ recent disparagement of President-elect Trump as not ”legitimate” has brought a minor flurry of histories of the congressman’s bogus racism accusations against political foes. Rush Limbaugh called him a Democrat Party hack and John Hinderaker defined the Georgia representative as ”an utter fraud” in a recent Powerline column.
One of the most effective was Joel Pollak’s excellent list of lies:
Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) is a civil rights hero. He is also one of the most partisan members of the Democratic Party, and frequently accuses his political opponents, falsely, of racism.
Lewis also uses his iconic stature to deflect criticism when he is called out for these false attacks, exploiting — and, arguably, demeaning — the civil rights movement.
Here are five of the worst recent examples of what has become, for Rep. Lewis, a shamefully routine practice.
2008: Falsely accused Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Gov. Sarah Palin of racism. Lewis attacked McCain and Palin, then running against Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) for president: “Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin are sowing the seeds of hatred and division,” he said, going on to suggest that the Republican ticket were creating the climate for racist terrorism. “[Democrat] George Wallace never threw a bomb … but he created the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans … four little girls were killed on Sunday morning when a church was bombed in Birmingham, Alabama.” Years later, McCain still had not forgiven him: “I’ll never forgive John Lewis,” he told AL.com in 2013.
2010:Falsely claimed that Tea Party demonstrators said the “N-word” during anti-Obamacare rally. Lewis joined several other members of the Congressional Black Caucus in claiming that a crowd of thousands of Tea Party protesters on the steps of Capitol Hill had shouted the “N-word” at them when they walked through the crowd — apparently in the hope of provoking a reaction. “It surprised me that people are so mean and we can’t engage in a civil dialogue and debate,” Lewis claimed. But he never proved the accusation — and when Andrew Breitbart offered to donate $10,000, then $100,000, to the United Negro College Fund for any video evidence of the “N-word,” none surfaced — despite hundreds of cameras present.
2012: Falsely accused Republicans of wanting to take Americans back to Jim Crow. Lewis gave a speech at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina in which he recalled being beaten by white racists, along with fellow Freedom Riders, in 1961. He concluded by implying that Republicans wanted to bring back those days of blood and hatred: “Brothers and sisters, do you want to go back? Or do you want to keep America moving forward?”
2016: Falsely compared Donald Trump to George Wallace. Reviving his theme from 2008, Lewis said that Trump reminded him of the governors of the Jim Crow South and the police who let dogs loose on demonstrators: “I’ve been around a while and Trump reminds me so much of a lot of the things that George Wallace said and did … Sometimes I feel like I am reliving part of my past. I heard it so much growing up in the South…I heard it so much during the days of the civil rights movement. As a people, I just think we could do much better,” he told the Los Angeles Timesin an interview.
2017: Falsely claimed Trump is “illegitimate” because of a Russian “conspiracy.” Joining the tin foil hat brigade, Lewis claimed that Trump was a kind of “Manchurian Candidate” put in place by Russia: “I don’t see the president-elect as a legitimate president. … I think there was a conspiracy on the part of the Russians, and others, that helped him get elected.”
2016: Falsely claimed Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) played no role in the civil rights movement. Lewis, a supporter of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s bid for the presidency, tried to trash Sanders’s civil rights credentials. “I never saw him. I never met him,” Lewis said. Proof later emerged of Sanders’s arrest in civil rights protests in Chicago in the 1960s.
Rep. Lewis is clearly a Democrat Party man, who uses his status as a civil rights “icon” to make the most outrageous allegations of racism about political opponents without receiving public condemnation.
But he’s arguably worse than that because he has worked against the welfare of his constituents, black Americans and citizens in general by his amazingly hard-core advocacy of mass amnesty for millions of job-stealing illegal aliens.
Plus, Lewis is not just an amnesty voter and chatterbox from hell — he has applied his civil rights pixie dust to illegal immigration by using the historic style of marches, civil disobedience and arrests to the issue. In doing so, he equates black Americans’ pursuit of long-denied civil rights with invasive foreigners’ demands for equality with citizens. In 2013, he was one of eight uber-left Democrats who were arrested in a pro-amnesty action in DC when they blocked a street.
Below, in 2013 Congressmen Charlie Rangel, Luis Gutierrez, Al Green, Keith Ellison and John Lewis marched in Washington DC to promote mass amnesty for illegal aliens.
John Lewis was later arrested in an act of civil disobedience when he blocked a street near the capitol demonstrating his support for illegal alien amnesty for millions of foreign job-stealers.
Carlson has a new prime-time show on Fox News, and he has apparently been given a degree of freedom about topics to explore, although he has not hit immigration much thus far. On the morning show he once inhabited, he showed a fair amount of interest in mass immigration and how it has affected many areas of American life.
Tom Friedman has lately turned his fuzzy gaze toward technology and the crazy speed-up of society, and even for a liberal columnist, he is a shallow thinker. I watched a C-SPAN video of a recent book talk he gave about the new work and found it to be remarkably boring, particularly for an important and fascinating subject. In his talk with Tucker regarding technology and employment, he chattered on with his little stories of a few new jobs developing in the more automated economy, as if those minuscule examples have anything to do with the economic tsunami we are facing.
Tucker Carlson does seem to have sniffed out this logical progression, but Friedman appeared nervous to have his trite ideas about immigration challenged even a tiny bit.
TUCKER CARLSON: When a lot of us were born, personal computers didn’t even exist; today of course they’re totally ubiquitous, and they’re making more and more jobs obsolete. Today it’s McDonald’s employees, tomorrow it’ll be millions of truck and taxi drivers with self-driving cars. Eventually it will be lawyers and physicians and so on. Will it ever be newspaper columnists and cable news anchors? We’re praying not!
TOM FRIEDMAN: There’s no question Tucker that what’s going on in globalization, in technology in particular, is now faster than the average rate at which humans and societies can adapt. I think people are feeling that sense of acceleration. One of my favorite quotes in the book is from John Kelly around the IBM Watson project, and he said to me when I was working on the book. he said you know Tom, when you buy a car, it comes with a sticker on the rear view mirror. It says objects in your rear-view may be closer than they appear that actually belongs in your front windshield out because it’s the stuff coming at us is actually coming faster than you think. In fact I had an experience in this book I’ve never had before — I felt I had a butterfly net and I was chasing a butterfly and every time I got close, it moved. I had to interview the head of Intel at least three times in writing this book just to make sure nothing changed from six months earlier. So I was actually living that pace of change.
CARLSON: So I mean it’s no one person’s fault of course, though I do think a lot of us are very insensitive to its consequences, among them the political consequences. The last time we had a big technological disruption — the Industrial Revolution — we got 70 years of totalitarian Marxism out of that, our response to that. This is a more profound change, I mean how can you be hopeful about the political consequences? Continue reading this article
President-elect Donald Trump has a busy Inauguration Day ahead of him — in between the oath of office and the inaugural balls, he’s pledged to take some “big league” actions as part of a Day One agenda that will set the tone for his presidency.
Incoming presidents often set sights high for their first day in office, with mixed results. President Obama promised to shut down Guantanamo Bay at the start of his presidency; yet the detention center remains open, albeit with far fewer inmates.
What Trump says he’ll do — and actually achieves — likewise could differ. But here’s an overview of what Trump may have in store for his first day.
Trump’s presidential campaign centered on illegal immigration. It is perhaps not surprising many of his “Day One” promises fall under the immigration banner.
During the campaign, he outlined a series of steps he could take immediately, largely using executive power.
He repeatedly promised to “eliminate every unconstitutional executive order” — referring specifically to Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA), which granted legal status to illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children, or who have children who are citizens or legal residents.
Additionally, he has pledged to suspend immigration from terror-prone regions where vetting cannot be properly done. And he’s vowed to instruct the State Department to “immediately suspend the Syrian refugee resettlement program” and develop a plan for a safe zone in the region.
Trump also says he intends to ask Congress to pass “Kate’s Law” – after Kate Steinle, who was killed in 2015 by an illegal immigrant – to ensure criminal aliens convicted of illegal reentry receive “strong mandatory minimum sentences.” In a speech in Gettysburg, Pa., in October, he promised to yank federal funding from so-called “sanctuary cities” on his first day.
In a transition video in November, he also pledged to direct the Department of Labor to investigate “all abuses of visa programs that undercut the American worker” on his first day in office.
His most famous campaign promise — a wall on the southern border — also has been supposedly slated for Day One action. In a speech in September in Phoenix, Ariz., Trump said on his first day, “we will begin working on an impenetrable, physical, tall, power, beautiful southern border wall.” Though Trump still is vowing to build the wall, it’s unclear what he could actually do on the first day.
He also promised the U.S. will begin deporting the approximately 2 million criminal illegal immigrants in the country — though here, too, it’s unclear what he could do on his first day.
Back to Germany, property crimes and violence against women (part of the Muslim diversity package) have risen enormously. The following report includes some shocking crime statistics, e.g. in Berlin, 86 percent of burglaries are carried out by the aliens. Nationwide, the foreigners commit 800 crimes per day.
Germany is far less safe because of Merkel inviting the Muslim world into the heart of Europe.
ANNOUNCER: Germany does not want migrants anymore. The German government intends to deny developmental aid to countries that refuse to take back deported migrants. It seems that the first one to get into trouble will be Tunisia. The security and political expert Georg Spöttle and Barna Fábián discuss the topic. Good morning.
BARNA FÁBIÁN: Good morning. I am thinking that these Arab migrants were not needed in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, so the richest countries in the Middle East want none of them. Now the countries where they actually come from also do not want them back. Where they will go?
GEORG SPÖTTLE: We found out that around 5,000 Tunisians joined the international jihad, mostly they went to fight for ISIS, and these endangerers (German: gefährdend) the German government would like to deport as fast as possible to Tunisia, and also the serious perpetrators and the infamous Nafris, who only went to Germany to sell drugs, who under 4-5-6-7-8 false identities get social benefits, we are talking about getting thousands of Euros monthly. Now Merkel and the government would like to get rid of them real fast, the elections are “ante portas” [at the gate] this year, in the fall especially, when we vote for a new Chancellor.
Sunday there was a protest in Tunisia against the possible return of jihadists. They marched through the city with a large sign saying, “We are not Germany’s garbage bag.” This is a wee bit strange, because these people did not hatch out from some eggs here, but came from Tunisia using the migration wave. It is very interesting that the Tunisian government was not in a hurry in the past, either, to take these people back. We could see it in the case of terrorists, for example in the Berlin terror attack. He was not even alive when his re-admission papers finally arrived. They could not provide that in two years. The North African countries: Tunisia, the Kingdom of Morocco are not really motivated or in a hurry to get these serious perpetrators or dangerous jihadists accepted back into their country. Continue reading this article
In fall 2016, about 50.4 million students will attend public elementary and secondary schools. Of these, 35.4 million will be in prekindergarten through grade 8 and 15.0 million will be in grades 9 through 12. An additional 5.2 million students are expected to attend private elementary and secondary schools (source). The fall 2016 public school enrollment is expected to be slightly higher than the 50.3 million enrolled in fall 2015.
Sadly, the civic education many Americans experienced as kids is disappearing.
In its place, globalism and its values are being taught.
BRIAN KILMEADE: Our universities and colleges around the country are turning their classrooms into cash registers by selling out and trading academics in favor of activism. You have a recent survey of over 400 universities: they found that nearly all are offering courses — it was called “new civics.” Our next guest says those courses designed to turn institutions of higher learning away from scholarships and towards left wing advocacy. Professor Frank H Buckley is a professor at George Mason University; he’s at the Scalia Law School and he’s the author of ”The Way Back”. Frank, first off, do you think this is organized?
FRANK H. BUCKLEY: Well it’s more like astroturf. What’s happening is the federal government is supporting a great deal of money into colleges that have programs that train students to be student activists, and the ultimate goal is to make this a part of every course and indeed a condition for tenure for university professors so it’s really a takeover of scholarship in the direction of making little community organizers out of all of our students.
KILMEADE: And when do you think this infiltration took place?
BUCKLEY: It’s happened over the last 20-odd years, I mean it certainly increased over the last eight years, let’s say, but it’s really remarkable: it’s under the radar screen. It’s well hidden it’s there, but it took an organization called the National Association of Scholars to go out and actually see what was happening and the results are shocking. Continue reading this article
Syed Rizwan Farook and his immigrant wife Tashfeen Malik murdered 14 of his fellow workers for Allah on December 2, 2015, during an office Christmas party. The two were shot dead in a gunfight with police a few hours later.
The following photo shows the jihad family: mass murderer Syed Rizwan Farook (far left) and family members at the time of arrest (from left to right): brother Syed Raheel Farook, brother-in-law Farhan Khan and mother Rafia Farook.
LOS ANGELES — The brother of one of the shooters in the San Bernardino terror attack pleaded guilty Tuesday in an immigration fraud case stemming from the probe into the killings.
Syed Raheel Farook entered the plea in federal court in Riverside to one count of conspiracy to commit immigration fraud, the U.S. attorney’s office said.
The 31-year-old is the brother of Syed Rizwan Farook, who was killed along with his wife in a shootout with police after the Dec. 2, 2015 attack in which 14 people were slain and 22 injured.
Syed Raheel Farook, his wife and Russian sister-in-law were accused last year of conspiring to arrange a fraudulent marriage between the sister-in-law and Enrique Marquez Jr., who is charged with plotting with Syed Rizwan Farook to carry out earlier attacks and with supplying guns used in the 2015 killings. Continue reading this article
In Tuesday’s hearing, details of the conversation between Senators Sasse and Sessions illustrate what an unworkable mess immigration enforcement has become after eight years of its dismantling by Obama.
SENATOR BEN SASSE: Senator Sessions, I’d like to talk a little bit about the Sarah Root case: I know that you and I have discussed it briefly last summer. Sarah Root was woman who was killed a year ago this month in Omaha; she’d just graduated from college and she was killed by a drunken street racer. Omaha authorities believe that this guy had been engaged in similar activity many times in the past. He was an illegal immigrant, he ran into her car, killed her right after her graduation, he was detained by Omaha police, they ultimately notified the department of Homeland Security.
This guy is a flight risk — he was able to post a fairly insignificant bond and he disappeared. The Department of Homeland Security did nothing to detain the guy despite the fact that the Douglas County Sheriff and the Omaha Police Department asked that he be detained. The Obama administration determined that it wasn’t an enforcement priority. Continue reading this article
Did the Democrats learn anything remotely realistic from the whipping they got November 8 and over the Obama regime generally? Under the cool hipster president, Dem influence continued falling to historic lows, particularly at the state level, where they lost over 900 legislative seats over four years. Meanwhile, Hillary ran an inept campaign and didn’t even visit Wisconsin, arrogantly believing the state was in the bag, but Democrats blame everyone but the top perp for the White House loss.
Tucker Carlson discussed the upcoming Jeff Sessions nomination as being opposed because of his strong enforcement position on immigration, though that reason will not be discussed much in the hearing, Carlson thinks.
TUCKER CARLSON: This is really about Jeff Sessions, make no mistake at all: it’s about the Attorney General which is the most significant appointment the new president will make for a bunch of different reasons, and Jeff Sessions, of course, has been vetted; he’s been in the Senate a long time, he’s been in public life for more than 30 years, the FBI has vetted him, so there’s no question about his bona fides, there’s no question that he’s not some secret Russian agent.
They just don’t like his views and they especially don’t like his views on immigration, but they’re not going to attack on immigration because his views are actually pretty close to where the public is on immigration: secure the borders, don’t undercut American labor with low-wage immigrants etc. I mean people agree with him, so they’re going to attack him as they always do — wait for it — as a racist and that’s what they’re doing now but there’s no evidence of that at all, and it’s a slur and it lowers the tone dramatically, it’s bad for the country but that’s all they’ve got, so that’s what you’re going to hear.
STEVE DUCEY: Of course the Democrats are bringing up some what that has been depicted as a joke like 30 years ago that he made as as an example that he’s racist, but here’s the thing, Tucker, because the Democrats changed the rules a number of years ago, all these guys are gonna get through and the Democrats have only themselves to blame. . .
CARLSON: (2:45) What bothers me about this is I think the country could use a debate on immigration and trade, and those are the two issues that people are actually upset about but again, we’re not getting that. Instead you’re going to hear all kinds of implications about the character of these people — let’s debate the issues. These are real issues and I think all of us would benefit from from an adult conversation about them but we’re not going to get it.
Below, Kate Steinle, left, her heartbroken parents, right. The inset shows Francisco Sanchez, the illegal alien killer. Kate was shot and killed by Sanchez (who confessed) as she and her father strolled on a popular San Francisco pier on July 1, 2015.
The parents of Kathryn Steinle, who was shot to death on a San Francisco pier in July 2015 by an immigrant with a record of deportations, can sue the federal government for negligence because a ranger allegedly left the gun used in the shooting in his unlocked car, a federal magistrate ruled Friday.
U.S. Magistrate Joseph Spero dismissed the parents’ claims against the city of San Francisco, which had released Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez from custody less than three months before the shooting without notifying immigration authorities. But Spero said the parents may be able to prove that the federal government was at fault for Steinle’s death because its employee’s apparent carelessness led to the shooting.
“Leaving a gun loaded makes (its) capability for harm readily accessible in the same way as leaving the key in the ignition of a vehicle,” Spero said. Continue reading this article
Elections have consequences, so they say. The Associated Press reports that farmers in California fear that Trump’s promise of mass deportations means they won’t have enough cheapie Mexicans to pick the crops and are therefore investing in agricultural automation.
But police were not able to stop the violence against women in Europe despite a one-year warning. To hostile muslims, it’s a way to show their strength over the despised infidel. Islam expert Robert Spencer explained what passes for Islam logic in a recent blog:
This was a clear declaration of supremacism. The Qur’an teaches that Infidel women can be lawfully taken for sexual use (cf. its allowance for a man to take “captives of the right hand,” 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (33:59) The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused, and that such abuse would be justified. The Muslim migrants in Cologne meant to put their European hosts on notice that this was how their women would be treated henceforth. . .
New Year’s mob attacks are now beginning to be reported from Europe. Hamburg was hit by fireworks used as weapons — a hint that muslims should not be allowed around explosives of any kind. Or better yet, don’t admit them as immigrants in the first place.
A CROWD of more than 1,000 men shot fireworks at riot police and women were attacked by migrants as New Year’s Eve celebrations spiralled out of control across Germany, despite heightened security due to terror fears.
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.