It’s hard not to think the Swedes are getting their just desserts with the current wave of migrant violence and chaos. It’s Sweden’s snotty arrogance that got them into this mess, calling itself a “moral superpower” because of its stupid generosity in welcoming dangerous people inside the gates.
In 2013, Sweden granted blanket asylum to any and all Syrian refugees, surely one of most foolish policy choices ever made by a government. Liberals seem not to accept the concept of Enemy, even though Muslims have been beheading infidels for 1400 years, which reveals a persistent pattern of hostile behavior.
Even the PBS Newshour noticed that open borders diversity has brought trouble to the (alleged) socialist paradise. But the network upheld its liberal cred when its reporter asked a Swedish patriot whether he was a Nazi because he expressed concern about public safety. And PBS managed not to use the word “Muslim” a single time but utilized the phrase “right wing” four times, suggesting that citizens resisting the chaos are the problem.
Things are so bad that the “moral superpower” is considering deportation! But wait, isn’t diversity always enriching?
JUDY WOODRUFF: Sweden is struggling to accommodate 165,000 people who’ve applied for asylum there amid the refugee crisis. Now, in a reversal of its open door policy, the government says as many as half could face deportation.
A growing right-wing reaction to the migrant influx has fueled tensions.
From Stockholm, special correspondent Malcolm Brabant reports.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Sweden fashions itself as the world’s humanitarian conscience and safe harbor for more refugees per capita than any other European nation, but it has been shaken by a series of incidents that have ruptured that image.
MAGNUS RANSTORP, Sweden National Defense College: I would say that Sweden’s social structures are under severe stress.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Magnus Ranstorp is an expert on extremism in Scandinavia.
MAGNUS RANSTORP: It’s a cocktail of various ingredients which makes society extremely polarized. And the government is having a really difficult time dealing with this.
TINA MORAD, Refugees Welcome Stockholm: As a refugee here, I would say it’s pretty hostile.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Tina Morad is a Kurdish political scientist who fled from Northern Iraq as a child, and now advocates on behalf of fellow refugees.
TINA MORAD: We have noticed a lot of activities for the past week at least where you have Nazis and racists crossing the street and demonstrating against the refugees arriving in Sweden.
MALCOLM BRABANT: These are right-wing vigilantes, including football hooligans, apparently attacking immigrants. This precinct is where young Moroccans hang out. Many have acquired a reputation as petty criminals and troublemakers.
The attack happened a few days after a murder at a young asylum seeker’s hostel in Western Sweden. A 22-year-old worker, Alexandra Mezher, originally from Lebanon, was stabbed to death, allegedly by a young Somali, after trying to intervene in a fight. The murder intensified pressure on Prime Minister Stefan Loven, whose popularity has slumped despite U-turns over his open door migration policy.
STEFAN LOVEN, Prime Minister, Sweden (through interpreter): I believe quite a few people here in Sweden now feel a great worry there will be more similar cases, as Sweden accepts so many unaccompanied minors. Many of those who come here to Sweden have had traumatic experiences, and there are no simple answers.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Fredrik Hagberg is a leading member of a far-right activist group called Nordic Youth. He admits to feeling sympathetic towards the vigilantes.
FREDRIK HAGBERG, Nordic Youth: It’s chaos in Sweden. It’s getting worse by the minute. It’s like the gates of hell is open. More and more immigrants than we can take care of is coming every day. The violence is getting more and more. Hatred against Swedes, people are getting bigger and bigger. The women and children are getting harassed every day.
The police can’t be everywhere at once. The people need to do something by themselves if something is going to change.
MALCOLM BRABANT: It sounds like you might be advocating violence?
FREDRIK HAGBERG: No, not at all, not at all. Our movement has always stood against violence, political violence, but I believe in self-defense.
MALCOLM BRABANT: And this is one of his organization’s videos.
Are you Nazis?
FREDRIK HAGBERG: No, not at all.
MALCOLM BRABANT: How can you prove that?
FREDRIK HAGBERG: It’s proved by my actions, or you just walk around. Look at our Web site. We have a program there, manifest.
MAGNUS RANSTORP: I think the greatest threat Sweden is facing is that we have an equal amount of extremism. We have a lot of right-wing extremism and, of course, left-wing extremism. There’s a sort of reciprocal radicalization going on. They are feeding and fueling each other. Continue reading this article
Two Iraqi refugees were arrested on Thursday for terror-related charges, one in Sacramento and one in Houston. Keep in mind that the US presence in Iraq over years has given our government plenty of access to information about Iraqis entering this country. Even so, these jihadists were able to slip through any alleged screening — just like earlier Iraqi refugees such as Waad Ramadan Alwan (a former Iraq soldier who planted bombs against Americans) and Abdullatif Aldosary (a convicted felon who was nevertheless allowed to remain in the US and eventually bomb the Casa Grande AZ Social Security office).
Below, Texas Governor Greg Abbott remarked about the arrests, “This is precisely why I called for a halt to refugees entering the U.S. from countries substantially controlled by terrorists.” He has been vocal in his opposition to Syrian refugees, along with at least 29 other governors.
Fox Business’ Stuart Varney observes, “You think ISIS isn’t already in this country? Well, you better think again.”
Cases could hurt Obama plans to take Syrians seeking asylum
Authorities arrested two Iraqi refugees on terrorism-related charges Thursday, in a move that undercuts President Obama’s plans to bring 10,000 Syrian refugees to the U.S. this year.
Prosecutors said Aws Mohammed Younis Al-Jayab, a Palestinian born in Iraq who came to the U.S. as a refugee from Syria in October 2012, later traveled back to Syria to train with terrorists, then lied to immigration officials about it later.
Even as he arrived in the U.S., he was plotting to join the fight with terrorists in Syria, according to government documents that said he talked about having killed Syrian security officers.
Investigators also indicted Omar Faraj Saeed Al Hardan, a Palestinian man born in Iraq, on three counts of attempting to provide material support to the Islamic State.
The revelations are a major blow to Mr. Obama, who had insisted the Iraqi refugee program was a success and it proved the U.S. could properly screen out would-be bad actors from the Syrian refugee population as well. Continue reading this article
The mainstream media sees the holiday season of Christmas and New Years as a perfect time for sob stories about the suffering of diverse immigrants. The articles are easy and formulaic to write, plus they function as a liberal scolding to Americans about how mean-spirited we are to deny the foreigners amnesty and/or our enthusiastic welcome even to potential enemies.
Seriously, the threat is getting worse: (At least 60 people charged with terrorism-linked crimes this year — a record, Washington Post, Dec 25). The government should be tightening up, not flinging open the doors to the enemy tribe of 1400 years standing. America is hugely endangered by Washington’s continuing immigration permissiveness toward Muslims, and we citizens are supposed to shut up and take it.
In a New York Times sob story, it followed Kamal, a Syrian Muslim, as he picked up cupcakes for his kid’s school Christmas party — he’s become so well adjusted after arriving in January, yet some mean-spirited Americans don’t want Syrians (Thriving in Texas Amid Appeals to Reject Syrian Refugees, Dec 25). Maybe Kamal is a decent guy, but what happens when junior goes through his teen rebellion and perhaps decides America is the problem? The second generation is often where the problems occur.
Earlier this week, the Washington Post tried for a standard sniffler approach for profiling Mostafa Hassoun, a young man struggling to adjust (Isolated Syrian refugee finds support, suspicion, Dec 26). Immigration even in the best circumstances is a highly stressful endeavor, and when cultures are vastly different, adjusting is much harder.
The Washington Post’s Sunday front pager featured the kids as a ploy to highlight a Syrian family’s “apprehensions” and “fear” about entering unfriendly America. Poor long-suffering Muslims! Why would anyone in the United States be suspicious of members of the mass-murdering political cult?
The newbie Aldobai family with six kids (!) is headed by daddy Sarhan whose work experience is described as “shepherd” and he does not speak English. Furthermore, the family preferred to stay in the Middle East and did not want to live in America at all.
What could possibly go wrong with such stupid and suicidal public policy?
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (Tribune News Service)- America’s newest family of Syrian refugees flew in late at night, and Sarhan Aldobai, 36, looked down from the plane at the distant lights of his new home. His wife was nursing their baby in the next seat.
His five other children had fallen asleep. Sarhan took out the small world map he had carried since leaving Syria in 2012 and tried to trace the plane’s path.
They were flying over the United States, where polls showed that a majority of residents said they didn’t want more Syrian refugees. They descended into Kentucky, where the new governor had vowed to block arrivals because of “risks to our citizens.” They landed in Louisville, where at that moment in late December a Republican presidential debate was being broadcast live on airport TVs.
“What would you do with these people?” a moderator was asking the candidates about the 2,000 Syrians who had already been admitted into the United States in the past four years, since the war in Syria began. “Do they pose a terror threat? Would you send them back?”
Sarhan walked off the plane and stopped to wash his face and wipe his shoes. His three sons were dressed in winter jackets donated for their trip by the United Nations. His oldest daughter was carrying an American flag she’d been given during a pre-departure cultural orientation for refugees. They had been taught that Americans believed in wearing seat belts, that girls and boys attended school together, and that recent terrorist attacks in Paris and California had caused a backlash against Muslims. They’d been told about Donald Trump, and how his supporters talked of shutting down mosques, banning Arabic and creating a government registry of Muslims. These were some of the things Sarhan knew about the United States.
What the United States knew about him was collected in his refugee case file. “Reason for resettlement: Physical protection needs.” “U.S. ties: none.” “Prior occupation: Shepherd.”
“English ability: Reads none, writes none, speaks none.” “FBI screening: Cleared.” “Department of Homeland Security: Approved.” Continue reading this article
La Times practically shrieked in joy with a featured story at how California has become less American, less law-abiding and more Mexican, er diverse. The arrogance of liberals knows no bounds.
Behold the Tuesday headline, right below the Times banner:
It’s not exactly a good time to be doing cartwheels about California’s rebellion against law and sovereignty when another murder victim of an undeported illegal alien criminal has been in the news. This time the victim is a 64-year-old woman veteran of the Air Force, Marilyn Pharis, who was bludgeoned to death in her own home in Santa Maria.
Nevertheless, the preventable murders of Californians are just so much road kill to la Times, which apparently believes that liberals’ open-borders utopia is worth all the death and suffering. Citizenship, law and sovereignty are just so 20th century.
Interestingly, the online title of the celebratory article was slightly less confrontational than the print version. I think. Note that energized Democrats have more goodies planned for foreign moochers.
It started with in-state tuition. Then came driver’s licenses, new rules designed to limit deportations and state-funded healthcare for children. And on Monday, in a gesture heavy with symbolism, came a new law to erase the word “alien” from California’s labor code.
Together, these piecemeal measures have taken on a significance greater than their individual parts — a fundamental shift in the relationship between California and its residents who live in the country illegally. The various benefits, rights and protections add up to something experts liken to a kind of California citizenship.
The changes have occurred with relatively little political rancor, which is all the more remarkable given the heated national debate about illegal immigration that has been inflamed by GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump.
“We’ve passed the Rubicon here,” said Mike Madrid, a Republican strategist. “This is not an academic debate on the U.S. Senate floor about legal and illegal and how high you want to build the wall…. [The state] doesn’t have the luxury of being ideological…. The undocumented are not going anywhere.”
Democratic lawmakers and immigration activists, with diminishing opposition from the GOP, continue to seek new laws and protections. These measures include cracking down on employers withholding pay from low-wage workers and expanding state-subsidized healthcare to adult immigrants without papers.
These new initiatives face obstacles, but backers say such hurdles center on the hefty price tags of the programs, not political fallout from the immigration debate. Continue reading this article
It’s mid-summer and the weather is pleasant, a perfect time for third worlders to flood into Europe more easily. There has been a lot of reporting about the rickety boats headed north from Africa, but it’s also possible for the intruders, some number of whom are unfriendly Muslims, to walk to the first world, just like Mexicans do to get here.
On Sunday, the New York Times reported on the walkers, and interestingly didn’t call them “refugees” at every opportunity. Perhaps the brilliant reporters there figured out that when all of the relocators are young males (as in the photo below), then they are likely economic migrants looking for “a better life” i.e. more money, rather than families forced from their homes by war or natural disaster.
Below, Syrian men traverse Serbia on the way to Hungary and points beyond in Europe.
Unsurprisingly, pockets of resistance are forming up among Europeans. Hungary is building a fence to block the intruders, which supposedly will be finished by November. Naturally the invaders are miffed, with some declaring ”This wall, we will not accept it”, showing their aim to conquer rather than immigrate.
“For us, today Europe is at stake,” Orban said. “The survival, disappearance or, more precisely, the transformation beyond recognition of the European citizen’s lifestyle, European values and the European nations.”
“The question now is not only what kind of Europe we Hungarians would like to live in,” Orban said. “Rather, will all that we now call Europe exist at all?”
Below is a cheerful video item from Deutche Welle that follows the journey of one invader, a Syrian named Ahmad Shelabi, as he travels to Germany to start his “new life.” No mention that any job he finds will be one not available for a German citizen — unpleasant facts can ruin a diverse puff piece!
A lot more resistance from the people of Europe will be required for Brussels to come around to defending their culture from demographic defeat via illegal immigration, the 21st century’s more polite form of war.
SUBOTICA, Serbia. — They call it “the jungle,” but it’s really just a tangle of dirt paths through stunted trees near an abandoned brick factory.
Between 150 and 200 people — mostly men, with a smattering of young families — cluster in discrete groups in scattered campsites, most resting on dusty blankets, the earth blackened here and there by the remains of the previous night’s fires.
“We have people from Iraq, Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, Eritrea, Somalia, Morocco,” said Mohamd, 42, a former truck driver for a factory near Aleppo, Syria, who hopes to reach the Netherlands. “Am I forgetting anyone?”
His cousin, Walid, 45, scratched his well-worn sandal into the hard clay. “Algeria?”
Mohamd waved him off. “That group went into Hungary two nights ago,” he said. “We have not seen them back yet.”
With war continuing to plague the Middle East and Afghanistan, and thousands trying to flee Africa’s grinding poverty, the swell of refugees and migrants hoping to reach Western Europe shows no signs of abating this summer.
For the last few years, the most popular route has been across the Mediterranean on boats run by Libyan smugglers that aimed for the nearest islands off the Italian coast. But as that route has become increasingly dangerous — the range of threats include drowning, abandonment by unscrupulous smugglers and crackdowns by European border patrols — the human tide is shifting. Increasingly, migrants are following a land-based route into Europe by way of Greece and the West Balkans.
But with the alternative crossing come other perils: violence, exploitation, intolerance. Though most European countries are overwhelmed by the tide, fueling an anti-immigrant backlash in many places, Eastern European countries like Hungary, Serbia and Bulgaria are considered particularly hostile.
It is a rare thing for a poll to ask the difficult questions of Islam people, so the recent effort from the Center for Security Policy is appreciated. The survey shows a supremacist group that has not come to join the American community, but to prevail over it. An observation of the late Lee Kuan Yew, the founder of modern Singapore, is appropriate: “I think we were progressing very nicely until the surge of Islam came. . . I would say today, we can integrate all religions and races except Islam.”
A majority of the Muslims polled thought they should be allowed to be governed by Islamic sharia law in this country. (So why didn’t they remain in Islamistan??)
A substantial minority believe attacks on Americans are justified because that’s what jihad requires.
The results of the survey show the extreme folly of Washington continuing to admit Muslim immigrants. Not all are active headchoppers, but America used to recognize that welcoming declared enemies is not something a prudent nation should do. For example, Democrat President Franklin Roosevelt didn’t admit Germans or Japanese during WWII. And Osama bin Laden declared war on the US in 1996, a war that continues to this day.
Admitting Muslim immigrants is welcoming enemies, statistically speaking, and highly unwise. We should stop.
Survey of Muslims Living in the United States June 2015
I. Overview: Troubling Results
From June 1-10, 2015, The Polling Company, Inc. conducted a nationwide online survey of 600 Muslims living in the United States on behalf of the Center for Security Policy (CSP). The results, many of which are troubling, are presented below.
Overall, the survey suggests that a substantial number of Muslims living in the U.S. see the country very differently than does the rest of the population. Nearly one in ten of those Muslims polled accurately agree that the beliefs of Al Qaeda and Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) are correct and consistent with Islamic law (shariah).
Between a quarter and a third think that violence is called for when their faith is insulted, and that it is legitimate to attack Americans here in the U.S. as part of the Global Jihad. By contrast, in an earlier poll of the broader U.S. population, CSP found that a 63% majority of those surveyed said that “the freedom to engage in expression that offends Muslims or anybody else is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be restricted.”
Although a majority of Muslims living in the U.S. is not disposed to violence, a majority does embrace shariah and wants the American legal system – and Americans themselves – to approve and accommodate it. More than half (51%) of US Muslims polled believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts. And a majority of those surveyed (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.” When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, overwhelming majorities held that sharia should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%), and that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S. (92% to 2%). Continue reading this article
According to the United Nations, June 20 is World Refugee Day, an event designed to draw attention to the many people cast adrift by war and calamity. That’s the idea at least. Many of the current crop of Africans fleeing to Europe are economic migrants — otherwise they wouldn’t be mostly young men under 30.
The BBC had a story in April that tracked African aliens; one was a Gambian Muslim who journeyed over 4500 miles to reach the first-world opportunities in Europe in order to support his large polygamous family. But Europe has opened its borders wide for “refugees” so people like the Gambian are taking advantage of a situation.
Malick Touray, 30, The Gambia
Malick, a 30-year-old mobile phone technician, describes how he began his journey across Africa to Europe in October 2012 because of his financial situation, struggling to support his extended family.
He had finished school early and started work because his father – who has three wives – could no longer pay school fees for Malick and his 18 other children. [. . .]
Erie Pennsylvania is having a Refugee Celebration as are Jacksonville Florida and Wakefield Oregon. Isn’t that like having an Ebola Celebration? Don’t people feel un-celebratory about being forced to leave their ancestral homes and be resettled in an alien culture?
But the point is that resettlement workers want to display their liberal virtue of extreme diversity and inclusion as well as promote the importation of refugees in a positive way — hey, let’s have some foreign people on welfare do their native dances!
The festivities constitute another version of celebrating diversity, which seems to be the highly enforced prime directive in these days of open borders.
The celebrations also distract attention away from what’s causing all the refugee turmoil: Islam doing its traditional thing of conquering infidel lands for Allah as well as killing other Muslims who aren’t sufficiently Islamic in the mind of the jihadists.
Check out the chart of top refugee sources, compiled by the New York Times. Like last year, the top refugee creators are Islamic, namely Syria, Afghanistan and Somalia. See my report from 2014: World Refugee Day: Jihad on the March,
But elite media promotes emotion, not analysis, about refugees so we rich first-worlders will feel guilty and willing to rescue lots more historic enemies. It’s ugly to watch, but the pattern we see today is precisely how conquering Islam destroyed Christianity in northern Africa and the Middle East over centuries. Western nations should not admit potential enemies within our gates: Muslim refugees should go to Muslim nations, period.
In fact, America would be a lot safer if Muslim immigration were ended immediately.
UNITED NATIONS — Nearly 60 million people have been driven from their homes by war and persecution, an unprecedented global exodus that has burdened fragile countries with waves of newcomers and littered deserts and seas with the bodies of those who died trying to reach safety.
The new figures, released Thursday by the United Nations refugee agency, paint a staggering picture of a world where new conflicts are erupting and old ones are refusing to subside, driving up the total number of displaced people to a record 59.5 million by the end of 2014, the most recent year tallied. Continue reading this article
The New York Times is fascinated with the ongoing cultural squabble in San Francisco, where two liberal groups have squared off over territory. Hispanics residing in the Mission neighborhood are angry that young tech workers are moving into “their” turf and taking scarce and increasingly expensive housing. (See my VDARE.com article from a year ago Liberal Civil War in San Francisco: Immigrants And Hipsters Attack Tech Workers.)
The paper has been there before, calling it the “Backlash by the bay” in 2013, when it surveyed the mix of prosperity and hostility that tech growth has brought to the city.
Below, the Times featured some of the Mission’s famous mural art that complained about gentrification and rising housing costs.
Despite being a former tenant lawyer, Mayor Ed Lee in 2012 at least visited a tech company every week as a sign of his interest in the ongoing success of the businesses in his town. He wants that tax money to keep flowing into city coffers to keep his big liberal government funded. He is in a politically difficult spot but has made his choice.
Below, another Mission mural, suitable for meditations on diversity or scaring the children.
The piece has quotes from whiney local hispanics about the Mission being the “heart and soul of San Francisco” including similar blather from Supervisor David Campos, who is not identified as being a former illegal alien. It would be better if they didn’t claim cultural superiority for their colorful gang-infested neighborhood and merely said they don’t want to move, which is more understandable.
Toward the end, there is mention that the hated gentrification has brought “a drop in crime.” Wait, don’t liberals lecture us daily that diversity is 100 percent wonderful and a total improvement over our boring white-bread American lives? Apparently we are permitted to imagine that it’s not.
SAN FRANCISCO — Luxury condominiums, organic ice cream stores, cafes that serve soy lattes and chocolate shops that offer samples from Ecuador and Madagascar are rapidly replacing 99-cent stores, bodegas and rent-controlled apartments in the Mission District, this city’s working-class Latino neighborhood.
As San Francisco has become the preferred bedroom community for Silicon Valley, the Mission, with its urban edginess, has become the hottest location. Close to the center of the city, it has historically been home to Mexican and Central American immigrants whose large families live in small apartments in narrow Victorians and older buildings. Taquerias, bakeries, bars and auto mechanic shops line the streets where Spanish is spoken. Like Chinatown, this distinctive neighborhood helps define San Francisco, but the gentrification — fueled by technology workers and the popularity of Airbnb — is faster and more drastic here than elsewhere.
The local color is still here: Splashy murals, many with political themes, provide open-air art on numerous buildings. But the housing prices have risen well beyond the reach of the average artist: Studio apartments in the Mission are listed on Zillow, the real estate site, for $2,700 a month, and one-bedrooms for $3,800. When a family in a rent-controlled apartment leaves or is forced out, the rent is jacked up to market rate, apartments become condominiums or are advertised by the landlord on Airbnb as a good place for short-term visits.
While gentrification has been a longstanding issue in the Mission, it now seems to be accelerating in its pace and scope.
“It’s a war zone here,” said Paula Tejeda, a Mission resident who owns an empanada shop in the neighborhood, describing the clash between older residents and newer ones. “This is not like the Lower East Side” of Manhattan, where she used to live, she said. “This is happening a lot faster.” Continue reading this article
American universities are highly invested in the globalist enterprise and ideology as shown by their policies of welcoming foreign students to the detriment of Americans. Many state schools are broke, and their practice of admitting more foreigners (and out-of-staters) is based upon those students paying full tuition rather than the subsidized in-state tuition rate: the colleges drone on about the benefits of experiencing different cultures, but it’s the dollars.
Today, foreign students are at an all time high on US campuses. Over one million international students take slots at American schools, up nearly 50 percent since 2010.
In 2009, University of California administrators told the San Diego campus to reduce its number of in-state freshmen by 500 to about 3,400 and fill the spots with out-of-state and international students, said Mae Brown, the school’s admissions director. California residents pay $13,234 in annual tuition while nonresidents pay $22,878.
Another fact: the number of nonresident students enrolled at the University of California’s 10 campuses rose from 22,984 to 31,991 between 2009 and 2012, an increase of nearly 33 percent. No wonder parents residing in the highly taxed state are angry when their kids cannot get admitted to the schools they have supported financially for years.
It’s one thing for private universities to choose the sort of students they want, but state schools need to dial back on diversity. The story following notes, “The University of California system recently announced it will cap the percentage of out-of-state and foreign undergraduate students at the Los Angeles and Berkeley campuses at the current level, 22%” but that’s not good enough. California taxpaying residents should demand a far lower percentage, say three to five percent.
American universities are enrolling unprecedented numbers of foreign students, prompted by the rise of an affluent class in China and generous scholarships offered by oil-rich Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia.
Cash-strapped public universities also are driving the trend, aggressively recruiting students from abroad, especially undergraduates who pay a premium compared with in-state students.
There are 1.13 million foreign students in the U.S., the vast majority in college-degree programs, according to a report to be released Wednesday by the Department of Homeland Security. That represents a 14% increase over last year, nearly 50% more than in 2010 and 85% more than in 2005.
Students from China account for the largest share—331,371 of all international students, or 29%. Nearly 81,000 subjects of the Saudi kingdom are studying in the U.S. this school year, up from about 5,000 in 2000-01. Nearly three-quarters of Saudi students are enrolled in bachelor’s programs or English-language programs that precede starting undergraduate studies here.
Of the top five campuses for international students, two are public universities: Purdue, at No. 2, and the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, at No. 4. The No. 1 school is the University of Southern California, with 12,480 students, according to the report. Columbia ranks No. 3. and New York University comes in at No. 5.
Amid rising costs, shrinking state support and student resistance to tuition increases, foreign students have become crucial to many public universities. Some hire foreign consultants to recruit students overseas, while others send their own staff on scouting missions. Officials at many state universities say the higher-paying students essentially subsidize in-state students.
But the perception that foreign students, in addition to out-of-state Americans, displace state residents has fueled a backlash in some states.
The University of California system recently announced it will cap the percentage of out-of-state and foreign undergraduate students at the Los Angeles and Berkeley campuses at the current level, 22%. University of Iowa regents last year adopted a plan to tie state funding of public universities to the number of in-state students enrolled.
Brenda Nard of Salem, Ore., said she encountered many out-of-state and foreign students during her daughter’s recent college search. “You wrestle with it because you want your kids to have the most opportunity,” she said. “I understand the state needs the money yet I also wonder if it eliminates opportunities for some Oregonians.” Continue reading this article
A couple years ago, Sweden’s liberal political elites went completely bonkers by offering their nation as a home for unlimited Syrian refugees at a time when two million had been driven out by the Islamic civil war. There’s no way that one-tenth that number of Muslim Middle Easterners could be successfully settled in Sweden (population 9.6 million), which still has a semblance of European culture even though Swedo-elites worship diversity with a scary intensity.
But objections from concerned Swedes about the unraveling of their society have only influenced the stubborn left government to ratchet up diversity such that there is no escape from it: a law is being written that would spread refugees all over the country. No town would be safe from immigrants. No Swede would be permitted to live in a traditional manner, away from Muslim diversity.
Resistance is futile! All will be assimilated into the perfect utopian Diversistan!
UPDATED: Sweden’s integration minister Ylva Johansson is preparing a new law that would force all regions to take in asylum seekers. Meanwhile, opposition leader Anna Kinberg Batra has announced plans to strengthen income requirements for immigrants.
While Sweden has made global headlines for taking in more refugees per capita than any other EU nation, these immigrants are largely clustered on the outskirts of major cities in the south, with some parts of the country currently taking in just a handful of newcomers.
Sweden’s Social Democrat integration minister Ylva Johansson has announced that she is drafting a new law designed to make sure all regions take in asylum seekers and offer help with jobs and housing.
“The distribution is unreasonable. We need to make changes in the law for everyone to take responsibility,” she told Swedish newspaper Sydsvenskan on Thursday. Continue reading this article
Sergeant Alonzo Lunsford was shot seven times by Hasan and appeared on Fox News Saturday morning, remarking, “As service members, we put our life on the line so that we can live free in life with the pursuit of happiness, but to be treated the way we were treated in the aftermath, that’s just not right. But we’re trained to be focused, disciplined with the result that we won this battle.”
The change of status for the victims is a small victory against the Obama administration that has insisted that the mass murder was “workplace violence” despite the Allahu Ackbar shrieks of Hasan (a son of Palestinian immigrants) as he shot down the unarmed soldiers.
General George Casey Jr. [pictured], the Army chief of staff, said on Sunday that he was concerned that speculation about the religious beliefs of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, accused of killing 12 fellow soldiers and one civilian and wounding dozens of others in a shooting rampage at Fort Hood, could “cause a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers.”
“I’ve asked our Army leaders to be on the lookout for that,” General Casey said in an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union. “It would be a shame — as great a tragedy as this was — it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well.”
General Casey, who was appeared on three Sunday news programs, used almost the same language during an interview on ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” an indication of the Army’s effort to ward off bias against the more than 3,000 Muslims in its ranks.
“A diverse Army gives us strength,” General Casey, who visited Fort Hood Friday, said on “This Week.”
Along that line, the Pentagon’s own report in 2011 of the mass murder was a shameful whitewash based on the “workplace violence” meme.
Senator Lieberman stated, “…our investigation found that employees of the Department of Defense and the FBI had compelling evidence of Nidal Hasan’s growing embrace of violent Islamist extremism in the years before the attack should have caused them to discharge him from the U.S. military and make him the subject of an aggressive counter-terrorism investigation.”
Has the military learned anything from this terrible jihad attack on the homeland, in one of their own bases? Maybe. But the administration is sticking to its policies of support for Islam despite its 1400 years of mayhem and conquest.
At least the For Hood victims are getting a little justice at a late date, no thanks to the Pentagon. The jihad massacre shows that not only is Muslim immigration a very bad idea, but admitting Muslims to our military as soldiers is even worse.
FORT HOOD — Victims of the 2009 post shooting will finally get Purple Hearts, the Army announced Friday.
“This is a long time coming. It’s a day we’re going to celebrate,” said U.S. Rep. John Carter, R-Round Rock, during a news conference Friday outside Fort Hood’s main gate.
A policy change to the National Defense Authorization Act, signed into law Dec. 19, deems service members who are victims of an attack that was inspired or motivated by a U.S. State Department-designated foreign terrorist organization eligible to receive the Purple Heart Medal.
The provision is retroactively effective as of Sept. 11, 2001.
“We awarded it on 9/11 to the people attacked at the Pentagon. That, in my opinion, set the precedent that you don’t have to be on the battlefield,” Carter said.
Secretary of the Army John McHugh said Friday he approved awarding the Purple Heart and its civilian counterpart, the Secretary of Defense Medal for the Defense of Freedom, to victims of the Nov. 5, 2009, shooting at Fort Hood, following the change in the medals’ eligibility criteria mandated by Congress. Thirteen people were killed and more than 30 wounded in the attack by Nidal Hasan, who was convicted in August 2013, of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted murder. Continue reading this article
Hostile Muslims seem to enjoy poking Americans in the eye, probably because they think they can. Washington has increased Muslim immigration to this country, which may incite even worse behavior among the those who see a friend in the White House. They never miss an opportunity to insult treasured American institutions, like free speech and freedom of religion, the latter which benefits them because Islam is treated as a faith rather than a totalitarian political system.
Now obnoxious Muslims are back, complaining about free speech that’s critical of their backward system. Just a week after many of the staff of Charlie Hebdo were slaughtered by jihadists in Paris, an Islam group rented a hall owned by the public schools in Garland, Texas, to “Stand with the Prophet” against America.
Interestingly, the Free Beacon reported that their journalist and others were prevented from entering the evening forum of Muslim speakers: ‘Free Beacon’ Banned From Stand with the Prophet Event. Some reporters were allowed to stay for only 20 minutes, then were made to leave. Free expression, Muslim style!
GARLAND, Texas — Pamela Geller told a crowd of nearly one thousand protestors that “we’re living in an age where evil is good, and good is evil.” Her remarks came during a free speech rally staged to protest the “Follow the Prophet” assembly underway in a Garland Independent School District convention center.
She cautioned the audience to be careful with the mainstream media covering the event and the protest. “This is theater,” Geller said, “and the media is the director. They’re coming here to film a narrative. They’re coming here to make you look bad.”
Geller encouraged the group to speak their mind but to do so in a way that brought credit to the movement. “Never give them what they’re looking for,” she explained. “They want you to say something wrong. They want you to have a bad sign. Because that becomes the front page.” 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.