July 4th was the tenth anniversary of the LAX terrorist attack by Egyptian Hesham Mohamed Hadayet who wanted to end his failure of a life in a blaze of jihadist murders, an event which was recalled on Los Angeles television.
[. . .] Upon hearing the news of the attack, Gov. Gray Davis remarked: “Like all Californians, I am outraged and deeply saddened to learn of today’s shooting…. That it happened on the day on which we honor what America stands for–liberty, security and diversity–makes this particularly more tragic.” [. . .]
Have we as a nation learned anything in the last ten years? I think so, but mostly in spite of the media rather than because of its reporting, which is still dangerously PC despite the growing pile of dead bodies.
Continued jihadist attacks by hostile Muslims have shown Americans that Islam is not your normal religion that teaches peace and brotherly love, but is instead a supremacist political ideology bent on world domination.
In the Tom Bradley International Terminal at LAX, passengers bustle under tight security, watched on camera and by armed officers. It’s the new normal in the wake of the 9/11 attacks and the shooting that happened at the El Al Airline counter on July 4, 2002.
Vicky Hen, a ticket agent for the Israeli airline, was shot and killed, along with a traveler, 46-year-old Yaakov Aminov, a father of eight. Four others were wounded before an El Al air marshal shot 41-year-old Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, an Egyptian national living in Irvine. Continue reading this article
The relentlessly open-borders President can hardly stand to let an occasion go by without twisting it into an amnesty plug.
On Independence Day, he welcomed a couple dozen immigrants serving in the military in a naturalization ceremony. Nice optics, but he couldn’t resist talking up his unlawful administrative amnesty and pushing for the whole enchilada of very expensive citizenship for millions of lawbreaking foreigners.
Interestingly, the Daily Caller noticed that Obama’s high-profile amnesty message appeared on the hispanic section of the campaign website, but was not similarly featured for black citizens, who are suffering record unemployment under the current President, who was supposed a friend but treats African-Americans like a doormat.
President Barack Obama used the White House’s Independence Day celebrations to tout his June 15 amnesty for at least 800,000 illegal immigrants, and to suggest that the sweeping change is more important to the nation than compliance with the law.
“Just as we remain a nation of laws, we have to remain a nation of immigrants,” he told his audience.
“That’s why… we’re lifting the shadow of deportation from … deserving young people who were brought to this country as children,” he said at a citizenship ceremony for 10 Latinos and 15 other people from Russia, the Philippines and Africa who have served in the U.S. armed forces.
Many legislators and lawyers say Obama’s decision to stop enforcing established immigration laws is a violation of federal law, which he is legally obliged to enforce. The Obama administration has claimed “prosecutorial discretion” as its means for ignoring the law.
Though the campaign denies an election-year relationship with the change, Obama is trying to maximize November turnout among Hispanics, which his campaign staff say is vital to victory in several states, including Florida, Colorado, and Virginia.
Obama’s June 15 de-facto amnesty offers work-permits to people who show documents saying they arrived as children. The White House’s July 4 citizenship ceremony included at least one Latino who was brought into the country as a child. Continue reading this article
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
–That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Continue reading this article
The President hasn’t lost any time in getting his no-deport program up and running. After all, the election is just 125 days off and Obama has some serious hispandering to accomplish in order to make up for not passing a comprehensive amnesty for millions of future Democrats.
Below, possible beneficiaries of Obama’s slightly limited amnesty.
But if any Americans think that the foreigners will be satisfied with their little work permits and assurance they won’t be booted out, forget about it. They don’t care to become Americans culturally, but they do want open borders for all the relatives and maximum free stuff — all benefits and no responsibility, in other words.
In San Antonio, for example, the foreigners are set to march around on Independence Day to make further demands. They certainly know how to be annoying by using an American patriotic holiday to clamor for their unworthy desires. The July 4th demand-o-fest is just the beginning of a series of such events, one of which is a September 15 march on Lincoln Memorial to demand the whole enchilada:
[. . .] “We’re not asking for the sky,” he said. “We’re asking for a just pathway to citizenship and legalization. Reuniting family is very key, and protection of civil and constitutional rights, which is what America is all about.” [. . .]
Right. Foreign thieves and brigands claim the right to everything honest citizens have built.
Federal immigration authorities have begun granting tentative legal status to illegal immigrants under President Obama’s deportation halt — and in some cases are even ignoring the administration’s eligibility rules to stop deportations for those who shouldn’t qualify, according to the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican, said he’s learned some illegal immigrants who have been in the U.S. less than five years have had their deportations canceled, even though Mr. Obama and Homeland Security Secretary Janet A. Napolitano had listed the five-year mark as one of their criteria.
Mr. Smith also obtained documents laying out how U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) officers should actively search for illegal immigrants who are “apparently eligible” to have their cases dropped. Those illegal immigrants then would be granted tentative status.
“President Obama is granting amnesty to illegal immigrants behind Americans’ backs,” Mr. Smith said. “Although administration officials told congressional offices that it would take 60 days to implement the president’s amnesty plan, internal ICE documents show that illegal immigrants have already benefited from it, even though there are no standards in place.” Continue reading this article
The San Francisco Chronicle’s online portal (SFGate.com) featured a story about sturgeon poaching in the Delta in which the not-so-brite lawbreakers posted their illegal activities on Youtube:
You don’t have to watch very long to notice the language being spoken is not English, but rather something Asian, perhaps Vietnamese. No mention of the diversity angle from the outdoors reporter though, even though cultures without a conservationist tradition (most of them) are often poacher perps, although one sees many Russians in the sturgeon trade rather than Asians.
They see America’s limits on hunting and fishing as laws for citizens only, sucker stuff. When species are about to be wiped out, foreign foragers’ urge is to grab what they can get before everything is gone. Protected natural spaces, like national parks, are likewise disrespected by illegal pickers and Mexican cartel marijuana growers.
–Keeping a protected species out of the water for at least five minutes
–Apparently killing the fish, since it is never shown being released
–[on the deck of the boat in the background, there also appears to be undersize white sturgeon]
As is often the case in diversity subjects, the comments on SFGate.com can be more informative than the official text. yzer observed (7/2):
I go onto the California Delta for days at a time on my small cruiser. I’ve done this for many years. I’ve seen Asian fishermen on the water during just about every trip.
These guys are commercial fishermen. Fishing on the Delta is their livelihood. I see them out there every day, day after day. The fish (and crawdads) end up in the mom and pop Asian food markets in the SF Bay and Sacramento/Stockton regions. They keep and sell just about every species they catch.
Commercial fishing in the CA Delta has been outlawed since the late 1950’s.
Look, poaching in the California Delta is nothing new. It’s gone on for years. I remember a group of sturgeon poachers who were going after roe (for caviar). They were busted several years ago. This group was made up of Russian immigrants. They we supplying wealthy customers in the SF Bay area.
Enforcement of fishing laws are undermined by constant budget cuts to CA Fish and Game.
Was Ramos protected by more than San Francisco’s crime-friendly sanctuary policy — was he also a federal informant? Or were he and other gangsters allowed to continue their criminal activities until they were arrested in a dramatic sweep that would make federal authorities look effective? (There was a lengthy federal trial of numerous MS-13 thugs in San Francisco last year that might have indicated the master schedule.)
The exact backstory is unclear. But it appears that moral guilt for the deaths of the Bolognas extends beyond liberal San Francisco.
An informant told the FBI in 2006 that Edwin Ramos had killed a gang rival in the Mission District, records show, raising questions about why Ramos wasn’t taken off the streets before his infamous slaying of a man and his two sons in San Francisco in 2008.
Documents filed in a separate San Francisco murder case say Jaime Martinez, a leader of the MS-13 gang who became a paid government informant – and whose niece was once married to Ramos – met with FBI agents in April 2006.
Martinez told the agents that Ramos, also an MS-13 member, had killed a rival Norteño nicknamed “Chino,” using a disguise to sneak up on him and shoot him at 25th and Capp streets, according to the legal filing last week by attorney Dennis Riordan.
Riordan said the information is in an FBI report summarizing an interview by an agent, filed April 11, 2006.
Two weeks before the FBI interview, Rolando “Chino” Valladares, 21, had been gunned down at the Mission District intersection. No one has ever been arrested in the killing, and a police spokesman declined to discuss it, citing the “open investigation.”
Ramos’ attorney did not return calls seeking comment.
Valladares’ father, Jose Marquez Jr., said the warehouse worker at Macy’s had been shot while walking with his wife, who saw an SUV drive away but little more. Valladares was a Norteño in his youth, his father said, but left the gang after the birth of his two sons, who are now 5 and 6.
Marquez said police had never told the family anything about the investigation.
“It brings hope,” he said of the information about Ramos, “that somebody might know something that we haven’t known for years.”
Mistaken identity A jury convicted Ramos in May of murdering San Francisco residents Tony Bologna, 48, and his sons Michael, 20, and Matthew, 16, on an Excelsior neighborhood street after mistaking at least one of the sons for a gang rival. Ramos, 25, was sentenced last month to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
The killings on June 22, 2008, gained national attention after The Chronicle reported that city juvenile-justice officials, relying on San Francisco’s sanctuary-city policy, had twice shielded Ramos, a suspected illegal immigrant from El Salvador, from possible deportation after he committed a gang-related assault and an attempted robbery as a minor.
Since then, questions have also been raised about what federal authorities knew about Ramos as they built a racketeering case against MS-13 – and why they did not either arrest or deport Ramos before the Bologna killings.
Family frustrated Marti McKee, a Bologna family friend and spokeswoman, said the family had never been told that Ramos was fingered by a government informant for the killing of Valladares in 2006.
“It’s been very frustrating for the family to know that Ramos may have committed other crimes, and had been the subject of a federal investigation prior to the (Bologna) murders, and yet he was left on the streets,” McKee said. “There’s no question that’s been very upsetting news for them to hear.” Continue reading this article
U.S. states with immigration laws modeled after Arizona say they hope to implement their own legislation soon after a mixed Supreme Court ruling let stand the most controversial element of Arizona’s crackdown on illegal immigrants.
Five states followed Arizona’s example in crafting laws requiring police to notify federal authorities when they have reasonable suspicion that someone is in the country illegally, and sometimes imposed other strictures as well.
Those states – Alabama, Georgia, Utah, Indiana and South Carolina – have found themselves in federal court just like Arizona, facing lawsuits, either from immigrant rights groups, the Department of Justice, or both.
Now that the Supreme Court has weighed in on Arizona’s law, upholding police checks on immigration status while throwing out three other provisions, lawsuits that hinged on that ruling are moving forward, with no sign from the states that they will soften parts of their laws.
In South Carolina, state officials are moving full steam ahead with preparations to implement their law, which provides for a special Immigration Enforcement Unit of the state police, complete with special uniforms and marked cars.
The state police began hiring and training officers for the unit in January, and will be ready to start enforcing the “legal stop” provision in mid-July if an injunction is lifted, Department of Public Safety spokeswoman Sherri Iocabelli said. Continue reading this article
Four-year-old Christopher “Buddy” Rowe was killed last August as he walked with his mom and two sisters on the way to soccer practice. He lagged a bit behind the others and was struck in the marked crosswalk and flew 80 feet when hit by illegal alien Marcos Lopez Garcia.
The illegal then sped off and switched cars to evade authorities, but was seen by a concerned citizen, Leroy Flach, who contacted police. Otherwise the killer might have successfully reached Mexico, as he was planning, and thereby escaped justice entirely. Garcia was arrested later on the day of the crash.
The AP story below about Friday’s sentencing as well as the local Santa Rosa Democrat both soft-pedaled the harsh illegal alien aspect of the crime, namely that it might have been prevented with proper law enforcement strategies. Neither mentioned that Garcia had been arrested twice before for unlicensed driving but was released rather than deported. As the San Francisco Chronicle noted (Boy, 4, killed in Santa Rosa hit-run; suspect held, August 19, 2011):
Garcia does not have a driver’s license and has two previous arrests for driving without a license. The most recent incident happened just five days before the crash, when he was told not to drive until a court appearance in October, Celli said.
Below, illegal alien Marcos Lopez Garcia awaits his sentence for killing a little boy in Santa Rosa, California.
Four years seems a terribly short sentence for killing a little boy, particularly when the perp is an illegal alien.
SANTA ROSA — At an emotional hearing, a Sonoma County Superior Court judge sentenced a Santa Rosa man this morning to four years in prison for the felony hit-and-run death of a 4-year-old boy in a crosswalk last August.
Marcos Lopez-Garcia, 23, was also sentenced by Judge Kenneth Gnoss to one year for misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter without gross negligence and six months for misdemeanor driving without a license, but will serve those sentences concurrent to the four-year term.
Garcia pleaded guilty to all three charges in May after striking Christopher “Buddy” Rowe in the crosswalk of West Ninth Street and Rockwell Place in Santa Rosa on Aug. 18, 2011, and then fleeing the scene. Rowe died 13 hours later at Children’s Hospital and Research Center in Oakland.
Garcia was in the country illegally and will be deported after he serves his term, his attorney Walter Rubenstein said.
Rowe’s bereaved parents, Jim and Michelle Rowe, asked the judge to impose the maximum term of five and a half years that Garcia faced.
Gnoss acknowledged that as a parent, he would like the stiffer term, but said he already imposed the maximum term for the hit-and-run charge and was bound by rules of the court to impose the concurrent terms. Continue reading this article
Sadly, the murder of 73-year-old Lois Decker (pictured) was entirely preventable. Her killer, Shafiqul Islam of Bangladesh, had been convicted of child sex abuse in 2008 and was supposed to be deported, but was eventually released instead:
[. . .] Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials are said to have detained Islam for one year after he was convicted in 2008 of promoting a sexual performance by a child. An immigration judge in December 2008 ordered that Islam be deported to Bangladesh, but he was allowed to stay in the country and was released after a year of detainment.
“I can’t explain” why ICE officials released Islam and did not deport him, Nichols said. The judge added that the agency should look at this case and at least consider reforming the way it deports dangerous individuals from the U.S.
District Attorney Paul Czajka said after Tuesday’s sentencing that immigration officials excuse their conduct in releasing Islam due to the slow response in paperwork coming from the Bangladeshi side of the deportation transaction.
“It’s an excuse that doesn’t hold water,” Czajka said. [. . .]
If America can’t deport a convicted child sex abuser, then something is seriously wrong with the criminal justice system. A clearly dangerous foreign criminal was turned loose on the streets, and a beloved grandmother, Sunday school teacher and member of her community was cruelly murdered as a result.
HUDSON — The daughter of a retired school cook and Elvis fan who was strangled and robbed last winter in her Columbia County home said there will be no forgiveness for the killer in this life or the next.
She was one of the relatives of Lois Decker, 73, who read victim impact statements before Shafiqul Islam, 22, was sentenced Tuesday to 20 years to life in prison.
Islam, a level 2 sex offender from a previous conviction, was sentenced by Columbia County Judge Jonathan Nichols for the Nov. 20 murder of Decker, who was called Foofie by her family.
“Murdering my innocent and kind mother is unforgivable,” said Diane Demarest of Oregon. “There is a black mark on his soul that will follow him all of his days in this life and beyond. My mother’s light cannot be extinguished by her death, not even the senseless death caused by this coward.” Continue reading this article
In less than two hours on Wednesday, an Amarillo jury found a Middle Eastern man guilty of trying to build a weapon of mass destruction. Saudi national Khalid Aldawsari (pictured) came to the United States as a student to study chemical engineering at Texas Tech, but his interests turned to jihad instead of science.
AMARILLO, Texas (AP) — In the months before his arrest, authorities said, Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari collected bomb-making supplies and instructional videos and made a list of targets, from nuclear power plants to the home of a former president. His goal, they said, was to carry out jihad.
Despite his attorney’s protestations that he was a harmless “failure,” Aldawsari was convicted Wednesday of attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction. He faces up to life in prison and is scheduled to be sentenced Oct. 9.
Aldawsari, a 22-year-old former Texas Tech University student, closed his eyes as the verdict was read. It took the jury fewer than two hours to convict him.
Aldawsari was arrested in February 2011 after federal agents secretly searched his West Texas apartment and found bomb-making chemicals, wiring, a hazmat suit and clocks. He also researched possible targets: nuclear power plants, the homes of three former soldiers that were stationed at Abu Ghraib prison and the Dallas home of former President George W. Bush.
Videos found in his apartment showed how to prepare TNP, a chemical explosive. FBI bomb experts have said the amounts in this case would have yielded almost 15 pounds of explosive — about the same amount used per bomb in the 2005 London subway attacks. He also tried to order phenol, a chemical that can be used to make explosives. Continue reading this article
Islamic diversity has not worked out well for the US military, as illustrated most tragically by the preventable jihadist mass murder at Fort Hood in which 13 soldiers and personnel (shown below) were killed by Army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan as he shouted, “Allah ackbar.” Dozens more were wounded.
The FBI has conducted more than 100 investigations into suspected Islamic extremists within the military, NPR has learned. About a dozen of those cases are considered serious.
Officials define that as a case requiring a formal investigation to gather information against suspects who appear to have demonstrated a strong intent to attack military targets. This is the first time the figures have been publicly disclosed.
The FBI and Department of Defense call these cases “insider threats.” They include not just active and reserve military personnel but also individuals who have access to military facilities such as contractors and close family members with dependent ID cards.
Officials would not provide details about the cases and the FBI would not confirm the numbers, but they did say that cases seen as serious could include, among others things, suspects who seem to be planning an attack or were in touch with “dangerous individuals” who were goading them to attack.
Details Revealed At Closed Congressional Hearing
The FBI and the Department of Defense declined to discuss the figures on the record, but three sources with direct knowledge confirmed that the numbers were revealed in a closed session of a House-Senate committee hearing in December. The FBI also declined to say whether it has compiled more up-to-date figures since that time.
“I was surprised and struck by the numbers; they were larger than I expected,” Sen. Joseph Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut and chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security, told NPR. He stopped short of confirming the numbers.
“I know one can say that as a percentage of the millions of people in active military service or working with contractors, the numbers you talk about are a small percentage of the total, but the reality is it only took one man, Nidal Hasan, to kill 13 people at Fort Hood and injure a lot more,” Lieberman said.
Hasan was an Army major at Fort Hood in Texas who is charged with opening fire on soldiers in the base’s processing center in November 2009. The rampage is considered the most serious terrorist attack on U.S. soil since the Sept. 11 attacks. Continue reading this article
Monday’s events are a dreary testament to the friends of sovereignty about the weakened strength of a nation of laws. The Supreme Court told Arizona police they could ask about immigration status during lawful encounters, but the DHS quickly announced that it would no longer pick up those illegal aliens to be deported unless they are dangerous felons already on the books.
So Arizona authorities get to identify illegal alien infiltrators, but have no way to get rid of them. It’s a demonstration of power to show who’s boss.
Once again, the feds show that public safety is simply not an important issue when compared with coddling foreign lawbreakers. Highly questionable complaints about ethnic profiling are given higher value than actual crimes by aliens against citizens (e.g. murders of rancher Rob Krentz and Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry) near the border and beyond. Catch and release is now the operative law of the land.
Arizonans who live in the vicinity of the border must feel hung out to dry. Obama’s declaration of open borders and no deportations puts citizens in even more danger than they were before — or at least it seems so from here.
The Obama administration said Monday it is suspending existing agreements with Arizona police over enforcement of federal immigration laws, and said it has issued a directive telling federal authorities to decline many of the calls reporting illegal immigrants that the Homeland Security Department may get from Arizona police.
Administration officials, speaking on condition they not be named, told reporters they expect to see an increase in the number of calls they get from Arizona police — but that won’t change President Obama’s decision to limit whom the government actually tries to detain and deport.
“We will not be issuing detainers on individuals unless they clearly meet our defined priorities,” one official said in a telephone briefing.
The official said that despite the increased number of calls, which presumably means more illegal immigrants being reported, the Homeland Security Department is unlikely to detain a significantly higher number of people and won’t be boosting personnel to handle the new calls.
“We do not plan on putting additional staff on the ground in Arizona,” the official said.
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that Arizona may not impose its own penalties for immigration violations, but it said state and local police could check the legal status of those they have reasonable suspicion to believe are in the country illegally.
That means police statewide can immediately begin calling to check immigration status — but federal officials are likely to reject most of those calls.
Federal officials said they’ll still perform the checks as required by law but will respond only when someone has a felony conviction on his or her record. Absent that, ICE will tell the local police to release the person. 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.