The Washington Post is a big supporter of extreme diversity and other liberal causes like refugee resettlement. On Monday, it presented a curiously mixed smorgasbord on French politics. The front page below the fold had a piece on France’s Marine Le Pen, noting her “gentler nationalism” in the headline. The photo was quite flattering — and the media can smear anyone they dislike with a crappy picture, but didn’t in this case.
The article contained the usual liberal assumptions that those on the right are xenophobic and suffer from “Islamophobia” (an accusation created by Islamists to smear Westerners who understand the threat of jihadists).
Still, the biased article was balanced by a Q & A with Le Pen where she could respond to the various charges (included below). She wants national sovereignty returned to France and believes immigration should be ended because of the conflict it engenders.
PARIS — From her nondescript offices in the Paris suburbs, Marine Le Pen — the blond, hazel-eyed face of France’s far right — is leading the charge to build a new alliance of European nationalists, this time by blitzing the ballot box.
A 45-year-old lawyer who wants to halt immigration, Le Pen led France’s National Front to historic gains in local elections last month. She did it by destigmatizing the party co-founded by Jean-Marie Le Pen, her 85-year-old father, who once called the Nazi gas chambers a mere ”detail” of history and lost five bids for the French presidency.
In appearances across the country, the younger Le Pen is rolling out a more tempered brand of nationalism that has become a new model across Europe, rejecting her father’s overt racism and playing down the party’s former links to Nazi collaborators. All the while, she is tapping into the rising economic despair of a nation as well as a backlash against the European Union, the 28-country bloc headquartered in Brussels.
Now she is training her sights on a larger prize. From Sweden to Austria, Britain to Italy, nationalist and far-right parties are poised to make record gains next month in elections for the European Parliament. Rather than see their power diluted, Le Pen is seeking to unite a variety of such parties into an extraordinary coalition of anti-E.U. nationalists.
Together, she said, they would work to turn back the clock on the integration and open borders that have defined post-World War II Europe. “You judge a tree by its fruit,” she said last week in her office, a statuette of the Greek goddess of justice resting on a shelf above her. “And the fruits of the E.U. are rotten.”
But these are, after all, nationalists, and forging an international alliance of xenophobes is proving to be just as hard as it sounds. On a continent riddled with old grudges and the ghosts of battles past, working together — for some, anyway — means setting aside centuries-old animosities. Continue reading this article
The “anti-gentrification” activists have gotten media attention by blocking the private Google buses that carry SF-residing workers to headquarters in Silicon Valley, supposedly because the shuttles use city bus stops. The pests show up with signs like “F Off Google” and “Eviction Free San Francisco” (shown below) as a shakedown strategy.
Judging by the media accounts, one might think that San Francisco is a crazed outpost of success-hating anarchists. To be sure, the city is extremely liberal and spends a huge amount of money on goofy big-government programs, like ethnically correct coddling of hispanic crack dealers. But a recent poll shows residents are more sensible about the Google bus issue at least than commie activists might have hoped.
So the perfect diversity Avalon that San Francisco has hoped to create still needs some negotiation it seems.
SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) — A new poll reveals something that may surprise you about those controversial shuttle buses which carry employees from San Francisco to Silicon Valley. The survey reveals the protesters don’t reflect the feelings of most San Franciscans.
The Bay Area Council paid for the poll and members told ABC7 News they were surprised by the results.
We have all seen the protests that have happened around these shuttle buses. Protesters have said they’re angry about the buses using Muni bus stops and about the fact that the increase of tech workers has created a housing crisis in the city.
The Bay Area Council wanted to find out if the majority of the city had these negative feelings toward tech and say they found the opposite. But they say people do want some regulation.
The survey revealed that at least 57 percent of people have a favorable view of the shuttles and 67 percent support letting the buses use some Muni stops. However, 72 percent do want the city to recover the cost of using those stops. They would like them to charge those companies. Continue reading this article
House Judiciary Chairman Robert W. Goodlatte, R-Va., is scheduled to hold a high-dollar fundraiser in Silicon Valley next week — but frustrated tech donors are already grumbling about the event, disappointed by the lack of progress from House Republicans on one of their top policy priorities: immigration legislation.
According to an invitation obtained by CQ Roll Call, the Goodlatte fundraiser is organized by TechNet, which bills itself as the “preeminent bipartisan political network of CEOs and Seniors Executives that promotes the growth of technology-led innovation.” Suggested contribution levels for Wednesday’s round table and reception with the powerful chairman range between $10,000 and $40,000 for the Goodlatte Victory Committee.
Not every big-time tech donor, however, is ready to cut a check, because Goodlatte’s Judiciary Committee has jurisdiction over immigration legislation.
“In this case, because there’s been mixed messages from the Republicans, before I write my check, I wanted some assurances that Bob Goodlatte would be prepared to discuss immigration reform and what the timetable is for immigration reform, because we’re coming down the wire here with the [midterm] elections [approaching] and we need accountability,” said Ron Conway, a top angel investor and venture capitalist, adding that he had contacted TechNet via email with his concerns.
As CQ Roll Call reported last week, Republicans are risking political retribution from their most prominent donors if they do not pursue immigration legislation — and soon.
According to Political MoneyLine, Conway and his wife have already donated more than $140,000 this cycle to Republican and Democratic candidates. That’s enough to earn them a spot just within the top 100 individual contributors, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
“I’m waiting to hear back from TechNet, that they can assure us that Bob Goodlatte can give us a tangible schedule … then it’s worth it for us to cut the big checks,” Conway said. “Bob Goodlatte is a huge gatekeeper in this regard, and we need his help.” Continue reading this article
SPENCER: This is an increasing confrontation in Britain between the people who want to bring Islamic law to Britain and to radically change British society and people who believe things are okay as they are, and not only that, immigrants should essentially accept the mores of the country they are coming to rather than try to change the format. This confrontation is only going to grow, it’s not going to go away. This is just one more step toward what is unfortunately looking like an inevitable conflict, because while the British government is anxious to accommodate Islamic supremacist groups, at the same time when they start demanding that bars stop selling alcohol and close down and essentially alcohol be banned, there’s going to be a backlash.
In fact, several dozen did show up on Friday to threaten bar and restaurant owners with 40 lashes if they continued to serve alcoholic beverages.
Loudmouth pest Anjem Choudary led the mob in a march, shrieking Islamic threats.
Violent behavior of this sort and worse is what happens when diverse Muslim immigrants reach a level of population where they can exert their will to create a sharia state by force. Britain has exacerbated the problem by coddling hostile Muslims in the vain hope that they will respond to nice.
Too many Muslim immigrants are soldiers of Islam who believe they have the right to force their religion on unwilling others, as has happened in nearly all of the Middle East, which used to be Christian. The West is crazy to continue admitting Muslim immigrants when many despise the freedoms we value.
Dozens of Muslim protestors gathered to demand that businesses stop selling alcohol in a popular East London area yesterday.
The group, led by former Al-Muhajiroun leader Anjem Choudary, warned restaurants and shops in the Brick Lane area that they face 40 lashes if they continue to sell the product, which is banned under Sharia Law.
Around 60 men and women in burkhas handed over warning letters to Muslim-owned businesses in the area after the protest was initially delayed by a small number of English Defence League members staging a counter-protest.
Controversial cleric Choudary was at the forefront of the protest. The Al-Muhajiroun group he formerly led has been banned under terrorism laws.
Organisers told The Times the protest was held yesterday to coincide with the large number of office workers who would be in the area for Christmas parties.
Choudary told the crowd: ‘The shops are run by Muslims and they know they are selling alcohol and they know the sale and consumption of alcohol is completely prohibited.
‘We cannot live among the non-Muslims and see this evil take place.’
He told those gathered it was his wish that Sharia law, banning alcohol, should be enforced in Britain. [. . .]
Monday’s New York Times had a page 1 feature about culture clash in San Francisco. The tech industry has been roaring back in the city and multicultural toes are being trod upon by young IT workers with iPhones full of money.
The Times’ front-page photo focused on the largely hispanic Mission district, where housing costs are going up.
Next time you bite into your cinnamon horchata cupcake at Mission Minis you can rest assured you’re slightly outside of gangland, west of the edge of a Sureno-claimed chunk of the Mission. Or that families with fewer children area tend toward microhoods with more doggy stores, boarding and veterinary care. [. . .]
Let me stipulate that young tech workers can be insufferable with their hipster arrogance. However, they have jobs, pay taxes and don’t sell drugs on street corners.
But the whole kerfuffle shows what a mess diversity can be. Far from creating a rainbow paradise, immigration and other rapid movements of tribes merely generate new flavors of conflict.
[. . .] While the technology boom has bred hostility, it has also brought San Francisco undeniable benefits. Mayor Edwin M Lee credits the technology sector with helping to pull the city out of the recession, creating jobs and nourishing a thriving economy that is the envy of cash-starved cities across the country.
The industry is “not so much taking over but complementing the job creation we want in the city,” Lee said while giving a tour of middle Market Street to show off its “renaissance” from a seedy skid row to a tech district where Twitter, Square and other companies have made their home.
Yet city officials must grapple with the arithmetic of squeezing more people into the limited space afforded by San Francisco’s 49 square miles. And it is the housing shortage that underlies much of the sniping about tech workers. [. . .]
Nowhere are the changes starker than in the Mission District, once a working-class Hispanic neighborhood, now a destination for the tech elite.
Evan Williams of Twitter and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook have bought homes near there.
Longtime residents of the Mission District complain that high-end apartments, expensive restaurants and exclusive boutiques are crowding out the bodegas, bookstores and Mexican bars. They complain about workers who, like residents of a bedroom community, board company buses every morning and return every evening to drink and dine on Valencia Street.
And they grumble about less tangible things: an insensitivity in interactions in stores and on the street, or a seeming disregard for neighborhood traditions. The annual Day of the Dead procession, meant to be solemn, has turned into a rowdy affair that many newcomers seem to view as a kind of Mexican Halloween. Continue reading this article
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) announced Thursday that it would ask the Department of Justice to pursue charges against the Northern Virginia businessman accused of assaulting a Muslim cab driver after going on a profane rant attacking his religion.
All Fairfax County charges against Ed Dahlberg were dropped Thursday morning. Prosecutors said the story cab driver Mohammad Salim told authorities didn’t match the evidence presented in the case.
Salim said that after he picked up passenger Ed Dahlberg from a Fairfax County Country Club in April, Dahlberg became verbally abusive, criticized his Muslim faith and called him a terrorist. Salim recorded the confrontation on his cell phone.
Salim claimed right after he dropped Dahlberg off, the businessman returned and hit him, breaking his jaw.
The prosecution said there wasn’t enough time between the cell phone recording and a 911 call placed immediately after the recording for an assault to have occurred. Commonwealth’s Attorney Raymond Morrogh says they also found inconsistencies in Salim’s version of events.
“At first he claimed he was assaulted in the cab and had the whole assalt on film. He later changed that to say the defendant left the cab and came back and assaulted him a second time knocking him unconscious for several minutes. That’s inconsistent with the physcial evidence,” said Morrogh.
Dahlberg’s lawyers accuse Salim of making up the assault story to try to later make money through a civil lawsuit.
“The complainant, it appears, was trying to egg him on, putting a video camera in his face, pushing it at him and then he made up the story about the assault and punch in jaw,” said defense attorney John Kenneth Zwerling. “It was all disprovable. So this nightmare has ended for Mr. Dahlberg.” Continue reading this article
Over at the New York Times, sensitive scribblers are concerned that Somali immigrants may have been part of the jihad team that mass murdered over 60 shoppers at a Nairobi mall last week, and US-residers fear a backlash. The immigrants worry that Americans will utilize pattern recognition to surmise that Islam is a religion of murder (as instructed by their holy book), not peace, as the propaganda insists.
The flagship newspaper of liberalism is once again defending the failed ideology of multiculturalism rather than telling the truth about the danger posed to this country by the immigration of foreigners with a hostile belief system. Why would any sane nation welcome potential enemies? Democrat President Franklin Roosevelt didn’t hold cultural celebrations with Germans and Japanese during WWII, but Obama (and his predecessor Bush) have held Ramadan dinners at the White House.
Moreover, the author characterizes violence as being a norm throughout Somali society. Physical force is used to enforce conformity in the family, at school, and in society generally. “Violence as you will have guessed by now, was an integral part of my upbringing,” she observed and said that was “typical.” There is a chapter titled “Violence and the Closing of the Muslim Mind,” which is an eye-opener even for those deeply critical of Somali culture. Near the end of that chapter she reflected, “Islam is not just a belief; it is a way of life, a violent way of life. Islam is imbued with violence, and it encourages violence.”
So is Somali diversity the sort Americans want to accept?
MINNEAPOLIS — As American law enforcement agents pored over evidence collected from the deadly siege at a Nairobi shopping mall to learn, in part, whether those responsible had any ties to the United States, people of Somali descent here braced for what they fear could result in a new wave of stigmatization and scrutiny.
“Everyone is scared,” said Ahmed Hirsi, who helps lead a youth group in the Twin Cities, the heart of the nation’s largest Somali-American population. “The community is holding its breath — all over again.”
In an investigation that has unfolded since 2007, federal authorities concluded that more than 20 young men from Minnesota left for Somalia to join the Shabab, a Somali Islamist group that has been deemed a terrorist organization and linked to suicide bombings.
Now the Shabab have claimed responsibility for the attack that killed more than 60 people in the Westgate mall in Nairobi. A Kenyan official suggested on Monday that some of the attackers may have been from Minnesota, though American officials say they have not determined whether there is any link.
“If this sort of recruitment has somehow happened again, it takes us way back,” Mr. Hirsi said, adding that most in the community were vehemently opposed to the Shabab, revolted by the attack in Nairobi and appalled at the suggestion of a Minnesota connection. Continue reading this article
Closer to home, terror expert Erick Stakelbeck discussed al Shabaab, pointing out the large number of hostile Somalis who reside in Minneapolis, which is not far from the Mall of America, the largest shopping center in the country.
In Nairobi, the pile of bodies (all non-Muslims by design of the killers) is still being sorted out, but local Muslims are worried only about how the jihadist murder of more than 60 innocents will affect the Somalis.
Hopefully the Kenyan authorities will use the attack to at least do some roundups and deport the illegal aliens and Shabaabers.
In the shabby “Little Mogadishu” quarter of Kenya’s capital, Somalis feared the militant attack on a Nairobi shopping mall could trigger a violent backlash against them.
Islamist group al Shabaab said it carried out the raid on the Westgate center, that killed at least 59 people, in revenge for Kenya’s military campaign against its fighters in Somalia.
In the congested Eastleigh neighborhood, memories were still fresh of the mobs who targeted homes and shops in November after a suspected al Shabaab attack on a minibus killed nine.
“A mob of youths can … attack us like last time,” said Mohamed Warsame, sitting next to a stall selling “khat” leaves, which are chewed as a stimulant across the Horn of Africa.
The elderly man said he expected the police would at least mount more raids to round up illegal immigrants and suspected militants.
Groups of Somali men talked in hushed tones and at one electronics shop, the owner changed channel to switch from the live coverage of the mall assault drama to a tennis match.
“I don’t think those people who attacked the mall are true Muslims. Islam does not support killing of the innocent. Anyone who kills an innocent person has killed humanity,” said a woman in her 40s who would only gave her first name, Zuleka.
She said she had lived in Kenya for more than a decade, one of thousands of ethnic Somalis who have fled years of war and turmoil to seek a better life in east Africa’s biggest economy. Continue reading this article
But Speaker Boehner and his leadership cronies stupidly think they can sneak through an amnesty and pro-sovereignty citizens won’t notice. One part of that strategy is to keep the issue as quiet as possible and avoid voter fury as Republicans visit their constituents over the next month. Leadership doesn’t want the members to get a clear understanding of how voters are enraged about amnesty for millions of foreign lawbreakers and triple legal immigration of workers during a jobs depression.
Hopefully, concerned citizens won’t allow Boehner’s avoid-the-amnesty-topic strategy and will give their visiting congressman the full brunt of anti-amnesty anger.
House leaders put off immigration votes until after August recess, seeing delay as the best way to pass reform.
House Republicans head home for the August break having done little to pass immigration reform, falling well short of Speaker John Boehner’s goal to vote on legislation before next week’s monthlong recess begins. But far from a failure of leadership, top House Republicans are casting the inaction as a tactical play designed to boost reform’s chances.
Keeping immigration on the back-burner helps avoid a recess filled with angry town-hall meetings reminiscent of the heated August 2009 protests where the backlash against health care reform coalesced. Doing nothing also starves Democrats of a target, Republicans argue.
“August was a central part of our discussions. People don’t want to go home and get screamed at,” a House GOP leadership aide said.
Instead, they’ll go home and talk about the need to stop government overreach, trying to draw voters’ attention back to the now largely dormant IRS controversy and the dismantling of Obamacare, a message that plays well with the Republican base. Continue reading this article
In Washington, the Congressional offices are not reporting much activity from citizens opposing the massive Senate amnesty bill and that the phone calls are nothing like what happened during the 2007 victory against anarchy.
On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal gave the subject a page-top treatment with a photo of citizens speaking out against amnesty in Phoenix:
Part of the problem is likely the buying off of talk radio “conservatives” with big-money ad purchases (paid by Facebook billionaire Mark Zuckerberg), particularly of Senator Rubio lying up a storm about how conservative the bill is, how filled with enforcement it is, blah blah. Those ads have run heavily on Rush Limbaugh’s show, among others. Limbaugh has recently begun speaking of amnesty again, but such a death threat to traditional America needs constant reinforcement, does it not? Perhaps he heard from enough irate listeners that buying into the Rubio snake oil is not acceptable.
RUSH: By the way, Chris Cillizza’s point, that piece that I was sharing with you about how all of these scandals are distracting everybody away from amnesty, not here. And I just want to reiterate with all of these things that are going on, amnesty is the biggie, folks, because if amnesty is achieved, then all the rest of this is academic, and we basically have a one-party government and country for at least a generation. By the way, Chris Cillizza, even in his story, Chris Cillizza’s point was that the IRS scandals were distracting talk radio from raising the alarm about amnesty. He admitted that it was talk radio that stopped amnesty in 2007.
Chris Cillizza, the Washington Post. And he said all these other scandals — Benghazi, IRS — are providing cover for amnesty, got talk radio distracted, so they know where their real problems lie. Cillizza admits it. But here’s the point. The amnesty bill, as it’s written, or the pathway to citizenship bill, delays citizenship for a number of years. That’s why you’re hearing pathway to citizenship. Well, what’ll happen, the theory is — and it’s a good one — what’ll happen is if the law is passed, then it’ll immediately be challenged, that this citizenship provision is unconstitutional. You can’t bring these people out of shadows. You can’t grant them this. You can’t do that. They’re citizens now, and all you need is one Obama judge, one liberal judge, and they’re not hard to find these days, and, bammo, you’ve got instant citizenship, instant voting.
Fierce Backlash That Derailed 2007 Overhaul Bid Has Yet to Materialize, Though Opponents Vow to Intensify Campaign
Grass-roots activists were instrumental in derailing the previous attempt by Congress to overhaul immigration laws, in 2007. This time, they have yet to ignite a similar fire.
Coordinated rallies last week to oppose the current bipartisan immigration legislation drew sparse crowds, with fewer than 10 people showing up for a protest in Dover, Del. The number of phone calls to lawmakers’ offices opposing the bill has been a fraction of what it was six years ago. As a discussion topic on conservative talk radio in recent weeks, immigration has ranked behind issues such as Syria-Israel tensions and President Barack Obama’s speech on counterterrorism.
“This time I am getting this sense of resignation,” said Rusty Childress, a veteran opponent of illegal immigration in Phoenix. “We have to awaken the sleeping giant.”
The current immigration bill, introduced by a group of senators known as the “Gang of Eight,” would provide a pathway to citizenship to about 11 million people illegally in the U.S. and create new work-visa programs. It also would require beefed-up border security and employment verification before steps to legalize undocumented immigrants could kick in. Continue reading this article
On a day when thousands of foreigners in America took to the streets to demand amnesty, Singapore citizens rallied against the government’s plan to import foreign workers to support the city-state’s aging population. The people don’t want the social engineering; they want to maintain their own culture. This behavior is a normal expression of human nature, to like their own tribe the best and want to preserve it.
Mass immigration is not a popular public policy the world over, as shown by polls like Ipsos and Pew, which is why the liberal press promotes it daily to bend the public will.
A huge crowd turned up at the Speaker’s Corner at Hong Lim Park Wednesday afternoon to again protest the government’s plans to let in more immigrants to counter Singapore’s ageing population. Wire agency AFP estimated the crowd reached 3,000 people though event organiser Gilbert Goh eventually put the final number between 5,000 and 6,000.
The protest on the grey-cast, drizzly day was organised as a sequel to the first protest in February, which was one of the largest protests held in the city-state. That event held in a light drizzle drew about 4,000.
In his opening speech at about 4pm, Goh of transitioning.org, a support site for the unemployed and the event organiser, said more protests would be held at the park.
As the crowd swelled, he also asked attendees to wave their pink identification cards to show they were not foreigners, as non-Singaporeans were discouraged from attending the event.
Foreign labour issue
He explained that he felt he had to organise the protest after seeing well-educated Singaporeans reach their 40s and 50s without good job prospects.
“I am not against foreigners but we are against the policy of allowing a company to hire 100 per cent foreigners,” he said.
“The employment pass allows companies to hire 100 per cent foreigners, and I don’t think this is right. There is a quota for S pass. Why don’t they put a quota for the employment pass? They are the greatest competition for educated Singaporeans,” Goh asserted.
Anti-foreigner sentiment has been rising in Singapore with many citizens blaming immigrants for pushing up the cost of living, taking jobs away from locals and straining infrastructure.The first protest in February was a backlash to a government white paper projecting that Singapore’s population could increase to as much as 6.9 million in 2030 with almost half of the number made up of foreigners. Continue reading this article
Now we see Attorney General Eric Holder lecture Americans that they should reject retaliation against Muslim immigrants in our midst. Isn’t he supposed to be enforcing the law and investigating the Boston terror attack? Instead of doing his job, he is following the political jihad agenda of portraying Muslims as the victims, even though the followers of Allah routinely murder infidels daily in the name of their religion.
Attorney General Eric Holder declared Monday that the Justice Department is on the lookout for acts of violence or discrimination that signal a backlash to the Boston Marathon bombings earlier this month in which three people were killed and scores wounded.
“Our investigation into this matter remains ongoing – and I want to assure you that my colleagues and I are determined to hold accountable, to the fullest extent of the law, all of those who were responsible for this attack,” Holder said, according to the prepared text of a speech delivered Monday to the Anti-Defamation League. “But I also want to make clear that – just as we will pursue relentlessly anyone who would target our people or attempt to terrorize our cities – the Justice Department is firmly committed to protecting innocent people against misguided acts of retaliation.” (continues)
It’s certainly true that Muslims started squealing about their fear of backlash after the Boston terror bombing as soon as the perps were identified:
However, when lynch mobs of Islamophobic Americans were not forthcoming, even the liberal Associated Press had to admit that the backlash was pretty slim. Plus, the cases cited sound squirrelly, which is not surprising since the jihad-friendly Council on American Islamic Relations encourages Muslims to report and exaggerate the slightest unpleasantry from infidels.
NEW YORK—It looked like the backlash was starting even before the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing were identified as Muslim.
Hours after the explosions, a Bangladeshi man told police he was dubbed an “Arab” and beaten in New York. A veiled Muslim woman in a city near Boston said she was struck in the shoulder and called a terrorist. When the public learned days later that the FBI was pursuing two Muslim men of Chechen descent, American Muslims feared the worst.
But the worst didn’t happen.
Muslim civil rights leaders say the anti-Islam reaction has been more muted this time than after other attacks since Sept. 11, which had sparked outbursts of vandalism, harassment and violence. Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which monitors bias and hate crimes against Muslims, said his organization has seen no uptick in reports of harassment, assaults or damage to mosques since the April 15 bombings. Leaders noted a larger, broader chorus of Americans warning against placing collective blame. Continue reading this article
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.