Now investigative reporter Lichtblau is back, detailing how the Nazis were comfortable in using the American benefits system. Why were Nazis admitted in the first place? Isn’t the first duty of government to keep enemies out?
WASHINGTON — The American government paid $20.2 million in Social Security benefits to more than 130 United States residents linked to Nazi atrocities over the course of more than a half-century, with some of the payments made as recently as this year, according to a federal investigation.
The millions of dollars paid out, a total far higher than officials had previously believed, indicate the ease with which thousands of former Nazis managed to settle into new lives in the United States with little scrutiny after the end of World War II.
A report due to be released this week by the Social Security Administration’s inspector general concludes that virtually all of the payments were proper under policies in place at the time, and that federal officials did not have the legal authority to prohibit benefits until a Nazi suspect was deported, according to officials briefed on the report. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because the report has not yet been made public.
In the 1960s and 1970s, as dozens of aging former Nazis in the United States were beginning to collect Social Security benefits, there was little investigation by federal authorities into possible links of immigrants to atrocities committed in wartime Germany.
It was not until the early 1980s, under pressure from Congress, that the Justice Department began investigating hundreds of suspects in the United States and started deportation proceedings against former Nazi officers, concentration camp guards, execution-squad leaders and others.
The report found that more than three dozen former Nazis received a total of $5.7 million in Social Security benefits before they were ultimately deported, the officials said.
Another 95 suspected former Nazis who received a total of $14.5 million in Social Security benefits were never deported and continued receiving benefits. Some died before they could be deported, others fled the country and still others settled their investigations and were allowed to remain in the country. Continue reading this article
Here’s an item for the “They Keep Coming” file. Illegal aliens from Somalia and Pakistan and Ghana are traipsing through a rather hazardous Panamanian jungle to reach the first-world free stuff of Uncle Sucker. Among the dangers they face in their tropical transit are malaria, blood-sucking bats, snakes and carnivorous jaguars. But Obamaphones and food stamps beckon, so they make their way through the roadless Darien Gap region. The number of would-be illegal aliens has quadrupled this year compared with 2014 so somebody likes it.
Third worlders keep flocking, assured that they will have better lives in stupid-generous America than in their backward homelands. And it’s certainly true that being a jobless welfare recipient in Minneapolis is cushier than living in a dirt-floor hut in Somalia. A Somali man in the video below hopes he can find peace, but a future son might want to explore his tribal background via traditional Islamic jihad some day, as so many others have done. Assimilation of the Islo-diverse has been a failure.
Africans, Asians, Cubans cross the treacherous jungle of the Darien Gap
METETÍ, Panama—Ahmed Hassan staggered through dense Panamanian jungle, crazy with thirst, his rubber sandals sliding in the mud, fearing he would die thousands of miles from his homeland in Somalia.
“I told my family I would go to the U.S., that was the plan,” said the 26-year-old truck driver, who said he fled late last year when al-Shabaab militants took his village. He flew to Brazil and made a cross-continental bus trip to Colombia.
In March came his biggest test: crossing the Darien Gap that connects South America with Panama and Mr. Hassan’s ultimate goal, the U.S.
“There was no water. There were snakes,” he said in a small holding center in Metetí, north of the jungle, gashes and bites covering his legs under his traditional sarong. “I thought I might die in that jungle.”
Migrants go to extremes for new beginnings. Honduran families put children on northbound trains. Hundreds of Africans recently drowned braving the Mediterranean in an overcrowded boat. People cross the deadly Sonoran Desert to get from Mexico to Arizona.
The untamed Darien Gap has become a new route for travelers from as near as Cuba and as far as Nepal. The surge reflects the difficulty of entering the U.S. by traditional paths like arriving on a visa and overstaying, said Marc Rosenblum, a deputy director at the Migration Policy Institute, a Washington think tank.
“These people are willing to take this risky and complicated route,” he said, “and they are lining up to take it.”
U.S. justice and immigration officials say they are working to combat human smuggling on such routes. “We will continue using all of our investigative authorities to identify and dismantle these transnational criminal organizations,” said Barbara Gonzalez, Senior Adviser to Latin America at the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.
The circuitous Panama route has become more attractive, say migration experts, thanks to the easing of visa and asylum requirements in some South American countries and an unwillingness by some governments on the route to carry out mass deportations. Continue reading this article
The pollsters at Rasmussen have quizzed American voters and found that 53 percent of the Obama’s Democrat party think illegal aliens are good to go in the voting booth, equal to us citizens. Only 21 percent of Republicans agree with that idea. The idea is another slice in the death by a thousand cuts to national sovereignty and the rule of law.
Also noteworthy is the topic of how legislative districts are determined, a case that will be examined by the Supreme Court. At present, the total number of residents is used to draw the boundaries, but that includes millions of illegal aliens, giving more representation to states like California that are loaded up with foreigners. In the poll, two-thirds agreed with the idea that only eligible voters should be counted for purposes of determining districts. This case is worth watching for the outcome, since a change might be advantageous for Republican candidates.
Are voters ready to let illegal immigrants vote? A sizable number, including most Democrats, are.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that one-out-of-three Likely U.S. Voters (35%) now believes that illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote if they can prove they live in this country and pay taxes. Sixty percent (60%) disagree, while five percent (5%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Fifty-three percent (53%) of Democrats think tax-paying illegal immigrants should have the right to vote. Twenty-one percent (21%) of Republicans and 30% of voters not affiliated with either major political party agree.
Sixty-six percent (66%) of voters agree with the legal challenge and say states should only count eligible voters when setting the size of legislative districts for voting purposes. Just 23% favor the current system in Texas that counts all residents including illegal immigrants. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure. Continue reading this article
Wed, May 27 2015 – 6:00pm Martin Ford, Author; Software Developer; Computer Designer: Artificial intelligence is already well on its way to making “good jobs” obsolete: many paralegals, physicians and even – ironically – computer programmers are poised to be replaced by robots. As technology continues to develop, more and more traditional jobs will be shed. Unless we radically reassess our economic and political systems, some fear that this transition to extreme automation could result in massive unemployment, stark inequality and the implosion of the economy itself. Martin Ford, a successful Silicon Valley entrepreneur, offers both a vision of this new technology and a call to arms to face its implications, made more potent by Ford’s own integral role in creating the automated future he describes. His warning rings clearly: robots are coming, and we must decide now what course our future will take.
You can listen to the audio here, or at the Commonwealth link above. The whole event lasted around an hour, with a thirty-minute talk to start and then Q&A for the remainder. I didn’t find the question segment to be that interesting, but the talk itself is worth a listen.
Ford started out directly with the central theme of his book, that robots and automation are going to cause an enormous disruption in society by making many jobs obsolete. He cited the Oxford University study of 2013 (The Future of Employment) that forecast around half of occupations in the United States could be lost to automation with in 20 years. The effect of that on society would be “dramatic” he thought. The point of the book is to initiate a conversation about the critical issue of the automated future. Continue reading this article
While the world’s most advanced robots are still trying to master stairs (and karate), there will come a time when many jobs currently held by humans are done by robot workers. Quartz met four robots at the RoboUniverse conference in New York earlier this month that are already doing some jobs that previously would have been done by humans.
Every other assembly line worker
Rethink Robotics’ Baxter robot can be programmed to perform a range of complex manual tasks on the assembly line. Rather like a small child or a dog, someone can show Baxter how to do a task and then it will copy the actions. There could soon be a future where the only humans needed on the factory floor are the ones who teach the robots to complete tasks—until the robots can teach themselves. Rethink told Quartz its next generation robot, called Sawyer, will take up less space and won’t have such a disinterested look on its face. Continue reading this article
An interesting item from PBS Newshour described an aspect of Islam’s inherent cruelty as reflected in the sharia version of adoption, if it can be called that. When a western couple adopts, the commitment is total just as if the child were the natural offspring. But what’s called adoption in Islam — “kafala” — actually resembles a foster family arrangement. The child retains the biological family name and is never seen as a full part of the new family.
The most important thing is that the child remain Muslim. Sharia values dictate that abandoned children must remain in dreary Islamic orphanages rather than be given to non-Muslim families ready to welcome and love the boy or girl. The only way a non-Muslim couple can enter into a kafala relationship is to convert to Islam. Nice religion.
The Newshour reported on how adoption in Morocco has reverted to kafala under the Islamist government as of 2012. That change has condemned many orphans to an institutionalized childhood since 24 children are abandoned in the country each day. Being born Muslim is hard to escape, by design.
The cruelty of Islam toward innocent children vis-a-vis adoption should be another reminder that our cultures are not compatible and Muslim immigration should end immediately.
Orphanages in Morocco face a unique challenge in trying to find permanent homes for children in their care. A recent law has made it nearly impossible for many would-be parents, especially under the Islamist government. Special correspondent Kira Kay reports as part of a partnership with the Bureau for International Reporting.
GWEN IFILL: We turn now to Morocco and a story about a government ruling that has left many children without families.
Special correspondent Kira Kay reports. Her story is produced in partnership with the Bureau for International Reporting.
KIRA KAY: It’s noon on a school day in Fes, Morocco and these children are home for lunch. They’re a rowdy bunch, 138 in all, ranging in age from 5 to 15. Later in the day, they will do their homework, play some ball, clean their rooms, normal routine in most households, but these are orphans, some of the estimated 24 children abandoned every day in Morocco.
Nadia Bennis is this orphanage’s director.
NADIA BENNIS, Director, Association Dar al Atfal Al Wafae (through interpreter): Moroccan society doesn’t accept unwed mothers, so many prefer to get rid of the child at birth. For the children we find who are older than age 2, we believe their mothers tried to keep their babies with them, but because they are rejected by their families and are unable to find a job, they decided to abandon the child.
KIRA KAY: The children here are clearly well cared for. They have tutors to help them with homework and several nurses who run daily life, almost as a mother would.
But Bennis says concerns beneath the surface need tending.
NADIA BENNIS (through interpreter): We try with the psychologists to handle certain problems. A lot of work is required to convince the child that he’s not worthless, that there are people who love him.
Also, speech therapy — in an institution, the children have fewer chances to express themselves, so their language skills are poor.
KIRA KAY: The long-term goal of this orphanage is to find these children permanent homes. But that’s not so simple here in Morocco. Morocco, as a Muslim country, doesn’t permit traditional adoption. Instead, there is an alternative system called kafala, translated as custody or guardianship, that can last until the child turns 18. Continue reading this article
Fox News’ resident expert on legal opinions of the courts discussed Tuesday’s decision of the Fifth Circuit to deny the administration’s request to lift a hold on Obama’s unconstitutional executive amnesty.
The judge appeared with Neil Cavuto for a chat about the law and politics. Unfortunately, it will be a chilly day in hell before the squishy Republican Congress will adequately defend the Constitution from the lawless black President. Anything as harsh as the impeachment remedy suggested by the judge wouldn’t celebrate diversity or appreciate the historic nature of America’s first black President. (The legislators should also read Daniel Horowitz’s informative list: 6 Reasons Congress Can’t Rely on Courts to Stop Executive Amnesty.)
NAPOLITANO: When the case is finally tried in district court, the government will probably lose, the President will probably lose, and for that reason they’re going to keep the injunction in place.
I cannot tell you how rare this is in American history for a succession of federal judges to stop the President of the United States from doing what he says he has the authority to do, but we saw it happen today.
CAVUTO: But what changes if the President is still freezing these deportations? He’s still doing it.
NAPOLITANO: The President is breaking the law. That’s what two judges said in United States courts.
CAVUTO: He’s gotta ship ‘em back in that event? Or let the deportation process continue?
NAPOLITANO: What’s the remedy when the President doesn’t do what he took an oath to do? It’s a Congressional remedy, it’s the “I” word that nobody wants to talk about — it’s impeachment.
But we now have three out of four federal judges who have looked at this have said the President is breaking the law, the President is acting outside that box of the Constitution gives him in which Presidential discretion [crosstalk] . . .
I would think that the White House will have to appeal this to the Supreme Court. The initial appeal is to Justice Scalia of all people because he happens to be the circuit justice, the member of the Supreme Court who hears emergency appeals from that part of the United States, the Fifth Circuit which is Louisiana and Texas and the surrounding states. So it would be up to the President if he wants to dispatch his lawyers there. This does not look good for him.
The Washington Times provided details on the decision.
A federal appeals court refused to lift an injunction against President Obama’s deportation amnesty in a ruling Tuesday that delivers a second major legal setback to the administration and keeps millions of illegal immigrants on hold.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit sided with a lower court that ruled Mr. Obama probably broke the law in taking unilateral action last year to grant an amnesty from deportation. The three-judge panel, ruling 2-1, shot down Mr. Obama’s hopes of quickly restarting the amnesty, and make it likely he’ll have to go to the Supreme Court to try to win his case. Continue reading this article
But little is learned in Washington, where the liberal propaganda machine preaches the gospel of equality of all diverse cultures, no matter how barbaric their behavior.
On the other hand, Mike McCaul (R-TX), the Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee, has shown signs of intelligence regarding the hostile Islam onslaught. In a February hearing titled “Countering Violent Islamic Extremism” he remarked:
McCAUL: I recently sent a letter to the White House expressing my concerns over the Department’s desire to resettle tens of thousands of Syrian refugees in the United States. I am worried ISIS could exploit this effort in order to deploy operatives to America via a federally funded jihadi pipeline.
Last Thursday, Chairman McCaul participated in a Christian Science Monitor breakfast chat with reporters that made some news because he called the Syrian refugee plan a “serious mistake.” At around 11:40 in, a journalist asked about the earlier “federally funded jihadi pipeline” remark, and the discussion stayed with refugees for several minutes.
Hey, McCaul, nobody wants Syrian Muslims moved into America — how about some legislation against? And why allow Muslim immigration at all? It’s crazy to admit historic enemies.
The head of the House Homeland Security Committee says an Obama administration plan to resettle Syrian refugees in the U.S. is a “serious mistake” and should be stopped until safeguards are in place.
“We have no way… to know who these people are and so I think bringing them in is a serious mistake,” Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) said during a Christian Science Monitor breakfast on Thursday.
McCaul said the U.S. has “no intelligence footprint or capability” inside Syria to ensure refugees mean no harm.
“We don’t have databases on these individuals so we can’t properly vet them,” he added, “to know where they came from, to know what threat they pose, because we don’t have the data to cross-reference them with.”
McCaul, who has visited Syrian refugee camps overseas, said that while there are “a lot of mothers and kids, there are [also] a lot of males of the age that could conduct terrorist operations.”
“That concerns me,” he added.
The U.S. could resettle around 2,000 Syrian refugees this fiscal year and potentially thousands more in fiscal 2016 under the State Department-led effort. The Department of Homeland Security has authority to approve the admissions. 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
The PBS Newshour had a segment on the automation threat to jobs this week, a good sign that the workplace revolution is becoming more widely recognized and discussed.
On the down side, I’ve seen almost no debate of how the economy is supposed to work when human workers are rapidly becoming obsolete, from strawberry pickers to financial analysts. Business will have far fewer shoppers to buy their machine-produced goods when millions of citizens no longer have paychecks.
Also, few have noticed that additional immigrants are totally superfluous when smart machines are taking over employment like gangbusters. Unskilled foreigners will mostly end up in the permanent underclass where many will engage in crime and welfare use.
Yet each year, the United States adds another million mostly low-wage permanent legal immigrants who can work, draw benefits and become voting citizens. Legal immigration is the primary source of low-wage immigration into the United States. In other words, as a matter of federal policy — which can be adjusted at any time — millions of low-wage foreign workers are legally made available to substitute for higher-paid Americans.
This federal policy continues at a time when robotics and computerization are slashing demand for workers. One Oxford University professor estimates that as many as half of all jobs will be automated in 20 years. We don’t have enough jobs for our lower-skilled workers now. What sense does it make to bring in millions more?
We already see the automation problem emerging in the jobless recovery, where productivity and jobs no longer track together, as shown in the chart below:
The PBS segment wasn’t bad, and helpfully includes a brief clip of Martin Ford, author of the new book Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future. However the piece is marred by the formulaic denial of the revolutionary nature of workplace changes, with assertions that the technology will also give rise to new employment opportunities: true, but the numbers don’t work. The new jobs won’t begin to make up for the millions lost to the machines, which are getting smarter, cheaper and more dexterous.
GWEN IFILL: Have you ever worried you might lose your job to a robot? I have.
Hari Sreenivasan finds it could well happen with advances in artificial intelligence, or A.I., transforming the work force.
That’s the latest report in our series on invention and innovation, Breakthroughs.
MAN: Oh, all in?
HARI SREENIVASAN: In a closely watched brains vs. artificial intelligence poker match held in Pittsburgh earlier this month, humans pulled off a slim win over a computer program called Claudico.
MAN: All right. Good job.
MAN: Good game, guys. Good game.
MAN: Good game.
HARI SREENIVASAN: Tuomas Sandholm, a computer scientist at Carnegie Mellon University, created the algorithms that run Claudico’s A.I.
TUOMAS SANDHOLM, Carnegie Mellon University: Those algorithms figure out how you should act strategically, how do you avoid or deal with humans trying to deceive you, and how do you deceive humans?
HARI SREENIVASAN: Sandholm predicts Claudico will be able to beat its human opponents within one to five years, much to the chagrin of Bjorn Li, the leading poker player in this tournament.
BJORN LI: When that happens, poker will pretty much be dead.
HARI SREENIVASAN: But putting pro poker players out of work is not what Sandholm focuses all his time on. There are other things that Claudico can already do better than humans. Continue reading this article
The crash and tragic loss of life are reminders that the automation earthquake sweeping the industrialized world is not without its problems. How much longer will passenger planes be flown by humans anyway? We hear of self-driving cars and trucks in the works, but self-flying planes (aka drones) aren’t being discussed in public — yet.
Still, the job of airline pilot is no longer a recommended job choice, though it was thought very desirable until recently. It’s hard to keep up with jobs falling off the table these days.
Pilot and journalist are not big immigration categories for visas, still the general trend is toward systemic job loss across the skills spectrum caused by smart machines, and therefore immigrant workers are no longer needed in America given the economy of the future.
Most of us watched as automation displaced factory workers and other laborers; but now many “skilled” workers are getting anxious as the robot overlords come for us.
When automated factories started erasing jobs at manufacturing companies, most of us shrugged: Great, better products cheaper, was the general line of thinking.
But as automation keeps creeping up the stack, taking over more of what most would call “skilled” positions, well that’s getting some folks—who consider themselves skilled professionals—nervous.
Take airplane pilots for example. That’s now a dead-end job according to Mary “Missy” Cummings, director of the Humans and Autonomy Lab (HAL) at Duke University (and a former Naval fighter pilot.) She said that “in all honesty” she could not recommend that anyone become a commercial airline pilot going forward, given the current state of the art.
“Commercial pilots today touch the stick for three to seven minutes per flight—and that’s on a tough day,” she told an audience at the MIT CIO Symposium on Wednesday. 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.