It was announced this week in Chicago that a plea deal has been worked out between prosecutors and would-be terror bomber Sami Samir Hassoun (pictured), a Lebanese citizen. He had deposited a backpack containing a bomb (he thought) near Wrigley Field during a Dave Matthews concert in 2010, hoping to murder hundreds (Plea deal in works for Wrigley Field bomb suspect, Chicago Tribune, Dec 20).
It’s troubling that so many terror crimes are swept under the rug via plea deals. The usual explanation is that it saves the government money to forego the costs of a full-blown trial. The report below notes that only five percent of federal cases actually go to trial.
But trials are public events in which citizens learn more about the nefarious activity occurring in their communities. Terror trials in particular are vital to reveal the extent of the mostly immigrant fifth columnists who endeavor to mass-murder Americans. The Holy Land Foundation trial in 2007 uncovered a network of jihadists posing as Muslim charities, and the organization’s founders were given life sentences.
Two high-profile terrorism cases in Chicago are headed toward plea bargains, according to court records obtained by the I-Team and attorneys for the accused.
The terrorism cases are unrelated and both men were arrested by the FBI at different times last year. Raja Khan was a cab driver the feds say was connected to top foreign terrorists. Sami Hassoun was the so-called “Wrigleyville bomber.”
Now with Khan and Hassoun cutting deals, the men and the government will avoid lengthy and costly prosecutions.
The Dave Matthews band was playing in Wrigley Field on September 19th, 2010. That is the night federal authorities claim Sami Samir Hassoun chose to detonate a bomb in Wrigleyville.
The 22-year old Lebanese national was charged with placing a backpack inside a trash can outside Sluggers sports bar across from the ballpark.
According to prosecutors, Hassoun thought it was a fully functional bomb in his pack, capable of leveling the city block.
“His intent was to kill as many people as he could in an area of town that was highly populated at that time of night, to create as much destruction as possible,” said the FBI’s agent in charge, Robert Grant. Continue reading this article
Over in Pakistan, the Allah-bots are marching to declare their hatred of the United States.
“Peace with Jihad” reads one sign in the Lahore rally (shown below in the video). We know what that means — submission for infidels under Islamic sharia law. Muslims are all for peace, as long as it is according to their Islo-supremacist terms.
Stopping foreign aid sent to hostiles countries is a good idea, but why stop there? Why not end immigration from Pakistan and other unfriendlies while Washington is at it? There were more than 210,000 Pakistanis residing in the US as of 2005, according to the Census.
(KCEN) — Tension between Pakistan and the United States rose Sunday when a rally led by 30,000 protesters took place in the city of Lahore. The anti-US protest was in support of the 24 Pakistani soldiers killed in a November NATO attack.
Smaller protests also took place in other Pakistan cities.
Despite condolences offered by the United States, Pakistan decided recently to close its Afghanistan border to any crossing NATO supplies. It also banned U.S. involvement at a Pakistani airbase.
Pakistan has been criticized by the U.S. in the past for not aggressively going after Taliban fighters habitating in the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Foreign relations between the United States and Pakistan have been shaky since the U.S. capture of Osama Bin Laden in a populated region, a feat the Pakistani army was unable to accomplish.
Pakistan has also been previously accused of helping the militant Haqqani network attack U.S. troops stationed in Afghanistan.
It’s common sense that both legal and illegal immigration should be decreased by the government during the crushing jobs depression, but the open-borders lobby is mounting a determined effort to convince the public of a monstrous falsehood: Who you gonna believe — La Raza or your lyin’ eyes?
Plus the open-borders left has successfully recruited the foolish NAACP to attack the Alabama law, even though illegal immigration arguably harms black citizens more than any other group: Immigrant and civil rights leaders to rally in Montgomery against immigration law (WAFF News, Dec 17). Forming a political alliance with illegal alien hispanics is apparently more important for the NAACP than improving the lives of actual black Americans.
Here’s the encouraging employment update from Alabama:
Alabama’s unemployment rate fell at a record pace in November amid stepped-up efforts by President Barack Obama’s deputies to frustrate enforcement of the state’s popular new immigration reform.
The state’s unemployment rate fell 0.6 percent in November to 8.7 percent, according to new state reports, partly because the state’s employers opened up jobs to Americans after shedding illegal immigrants.
The unemployment rate is far below October’s rate of 9.3 percent and September’s rate of 9.8 percent.
“The continued drop is proof that people — American Citizens [and] legal migrants, have suffered at the hands of politicians who choose politics over economics,” said Chuck Ellis, a council member in Northern Alabama’s Marshall County.
“What’s really amazing is that in Marshall County, a county of 95,000 residents, 30,000 workforce eligible, there are over 600 people who now have jobs that they didn’t have 6 months ago,” he said.
In November the county’s unemployment rate dropped 0.7 percent, from 8.1 percent to 7.4 percent.
“Is that a difference of great significance? Ask those families for an answer as they undertake the Christmas season,” Ellis said. Continue reading this article
The Washington Post reports that some important suits in the Republican Party are getting antsy about Mitt Romney’s message of immigration enforcement. And even though the WP presents a rather extreme liberal worldview, and has no dissenting views (like what the citizens want), we already know that the growth of hispanic demography is a scary topic to elite GOPers.
Illegal-friendly Republican George Bush comes up for a nostalgia paragraph from the WP, where he is fondly remembered for having an “I love you” attitude toward lawbreaking Mexicans, made memorable by an image of him waving a Mexican flag which was promoted to hispanics.
Those were the days, sigh the suits.
Nobody mentions that loyalty based on rewards for lawbreaking behavior would not be very dependable. Plus it would set up an additional precedent for more demands in exchange for votes in the future. Foreign invaders plead for pardons precisely because of the 1986 Reagan Amnesty, famous for all carrot, no stick. And that boondoggle only passed because it was promised as one time only.
Plus, the Mexicans are so obsessed with their imagined importance that they appear oblivious to the principle that illegal is not a tribe, but a behavior. Illegal Irish are just as worthy of a one-way ticket home as the tiresome Mexicans, who love to blow steam about race.
Gov. Romney has an upbeat message for hispanics, that America is a nation of laws which is welcoming to those willing to respect them:
Republicans are increasingly worried that their party’s efforts to win a competitive slice of the fast-growing Hispanic vote in important presidential battleground states are being undermined by Mitt Romney’s heated rhetoric on illegal immigration.
Several leading GOP strategists say Romney’s sharp-tongued attacks have gained wide attention in Hispanic media and are eroding the party’s already fragile standing in that community.
The leaders of one Republican-leaning group, the Hispanic Leadership Fund, are so upset with Romney that if he wins the nomination, they might withhold an endorsement and curtail plans for an extensive voter-contact campaign in Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Florida to bolster the GOP presidential ticket.
Several Republican groups have spent the past three years trying to repair damage from the 2008 campaign, when GOP nominee John McCain won just 31 percent of the Hispanic vote after a bruising primary season in which he was forced to back off his support for a plan that would have put many illegal immigrants on a path to legalization.
Romney, one of McCain’s 2008 rivals, attacked McCain as being soft on the issue. Now party strategists are fretting as Romney — once again — stakes out conservative turf by accusing his opponents of supporting policies that go easy on illegal immigration.
“Romney’s tin ear on this topic, on immigration, will hurt him should he be the nominee, is hurting the Republican Party and is hurting every conservative who cares about passing conservative legislation in the future,” said Mario H. Lopez, president of the Hispanic Leadership Fund. Continue reading this article
I was sorry to learn of the death of Christopher Hitchens, the brilliant author, enthusiastic drinker and a fierce defender of free speech.
His finest hour, in my opinion, was his response to the Danish cartoon dust-up, in which Muslims insisted that their religious prohibition against images of Mohammed should supercede the West’s principle of free speech. Hitch used his powerful voice in defense of the First Amendment to demolish ridiculous arguments about sensitivity and “Islamophobia”, as in the CNN appearance below.
Cancer weakened but did not soften Christopher Hitchens. He did not repent or forgive or ask for pity. As if granted diplomatic immunity, his mind’s eye looked plainly upon the attack and counterattack of disease and treatments that robbed him of his hair, his stamina, his speaking voice and eventually his life.
“I love the imagery of struggle,” he wrote about his illness in an August 2010 essay in Vanity Fair. “I sometimes wish I were suffering in a good cause, or risking my life for the good of others, instead of just being a gravely endangered patient.”
Hitchens, a Washington, D.C.-based author, essayist and polemicist who waged verbal and occasional physical battle on behalf of causes left and right, died Thursday night at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston of pneumonia, a complication of his esophageal cancer, according to a statement from Vanity Fair magazine. He was 62.
“There will never be another like Christopher. A man of ferocious intellect, who was as vibrant on the page as he was at the bar,” said Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter. “Those who read him felt they knew him, and those who knew him were profoundly fortunate souls.”
He had enjoyed his drink (enough to “to kill or stun the average mule”) and cigarettes, until he announced in June 2010 that he was being treated for cancer of the esophagus.
He was a most engaged, prolific and public intellectual who wrote numerous books, was a frequent television commentator and a contributor to Vanity Fair, Slate and other publications. He became a popular author in 2007 thanks to “God Is Not Great,” a manifesto for atheists.
“Christopher Hitchens was everything a great essayist should be: infuriating, brilliant, highly provocative and yet intensely serious,” said Britain’s Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg. “I worked as an intern for him years ago. My job was to fact check his articles. Since he had a photographic memory and an encyclopedic mind, it was the easiest job I’ve ever done.”
Long after his diagnosis, his columns and essays appeared regularly, savaging the royal family, reveling in the death of Osama bin Laden or pondering the letters of poet Philip Larkin. He was intolerant of nonsense, including about his own health. In a piece that appeared in the January 2012 issue of Vanity Fair, he dismissed the old saying that what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.
“So far, I have decided to take whatever my disease can throw at me, and to stay combative even while taking the measure of my inevitable decline. I repeat, this is no more than what a healthy person has to do in slower motion,” he wrote. “It is our common fate. In either case, though, one can dispense with facile maxims that don’t live up to their apparent billing.” Continue reading this article
Today’s example of extreme immigration enthusiasm is Democrat Senator Charles Schumer, along with cronies Leahy and Durbin, who has brewed up a visa program that would admit 10,000 Irish workers annually.
Unemployment in Ireland is high — 14.5 percent as of November — so many Irish want to avail themselves of American jobs in what they regard as their spare country.
Americans should well ask why their own elected officials are working to import thousands of foreign excess workers to compete with them in a flooded job market.
The correct number of immigrants during a jobs depression is ZERO.
If passed as is, undocumented Irish already in the U.S. may be eligible to apply for the program
New York Senator Charles Schumer introduced an immigration bill to the Senate on Tuesday which will potentially permit 10,000 Irish citizens, per year, to live and work in the U.S. on a new E-3 non-immigrant visa.
Described by Schumer as a “common sense bill,” if it is passed as it is currently written, undocumented Irish already in the U.S. may be eligible to apply for the program.
Schumer and Democratic Senate colleagues Pat Leahy and Dick Durbin co-sponsored the legislation, which was unveiled to the Senate on Tuesday afternoon. It was introduced as an amendment to the bill that passed the House last month which would allow for better access to employment and family-based visas for natives of Mexico, the Philippines, China and India.
“We are eager to work in a bi-partisan fashion to pass this bill at the earliest opportunity,” Schumer commented on Tuesday. Continue reading this article
When it come to priorities in today’s Mexifornia, public safety takes a distant second place (or less) compared with removing discomfort for lawbreaking illegal aliens. The latest example is the end to LA’s policy of impounding cars driven by unlicensed drivers.
The idea of equal justice for all under the law takes quite a battering also, as shown by the headline of the ultra-liberal Los Angeles Times (below), clearly revealing that a punishment was removed to suit foreign lawbreakers. More Americans will be endangered and possibly killed because of hispandering to illegal aliens.
The change would let unlicensed drivers summon someone with a license, who would then be allowed to drive the car away. Chief Charlie Beck calls it a fairness issue. The police union opposes the plan.
Unlicensed drivers without prior convictions would be given the chance to avoid having their vehicles impounded under new rules outlined Tuesday by the Los Angeles Police Department.
The proposed changes to the impound procedures are a potentially explosive issue because LAPD Chief Charlie Beck designed the reforms to remedy what he believes is the unfair burden that impounds place on illegal immigrants. Since immigrants who are in the country illegally cannot get driver’s licenses in California and most other states, they make up the majority of the drivers who have their cars impounded for the infraction.
Beck contends that the hundreds of dollars in fees and fines that must be paid to retrieve an impounded car and the disruption to illegal immigrants’ often tenuous hold on jobs deal a disproportionate blow to people “who are a valuable asset to our community and who have very limited resources.”
In an interview Tuesday, Beck amplified his position: “It’s a fairness issue. There is a vast difference between someone driving without a license because they cannot legally be issued one and someone driving after having their license revoked.”
The city’s influential police union, which is leading the opposition to the plan, has criticized Beck and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa for trying what they see as an effort to score political points through reforms that the union warns could hurt public safety.
Under the current rules, L.A. police are instructed to impound cars driven by people who either do not have a license or who have had their license revoked or suspended, said Assistant Chief Michel Moore.
Under the new rules, police would let an unlicensed driver who has not been convicted previously of driving without a valid license summon someone with a license, who would then be allowed to drive the car away. Continue reading this article
Bilingualism with a legal underpinning as it exists in Canada is a disastrous policy and America should avoid it at all costs. Unfortunately, we seem headed inexorably in that direction due to the Mexican invasion, er immigration. America does not have official bilingualism (where people have to speak both perfectly) although in some regions a de facto Spanish requirement exists. For example: Texas Woman Suffers Job Discrimination for Not Speaking Spanish.
In former Governor Richard Lamm’s ironic opinion piece, “I Have a Plan to Destroy America,” his first to-do item is to make the country bi-lingual and bicultural: “History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual,” he observed.
The video below shows Sun TV host Michael Coren interviewing Jurgen Vollrath, an activist for English language rights in Canada, particularly problematic in places where very few Francophones reside. For example, if a French speaker demands service in French in an overwhelmingly English-speaking region, workers get fired if they cannot comply. A few demanding people, backed by government policy, can upset the lives of many, it seems. Language diversity is one of the worst situations ever.
AG Holder has announced he will take up arms against the dozen states which have instituted reforms tightening identification requirements for voting. (Apparently he has plenty of time NOT investigating the Fast & Furious gunwalking to Mexico scandal.)
Photo identification for voting is now more necessary than ever in America due to increased immigration diversity. Legalized non-citizen voting is one strategy of the left, pushed in places like crazy-liberal San Francisco. One scheme they had in the city was proposing that illegal aliens could vote in school board elections — as if foreigners wouldn’t also vote in American elections once they were in the polling place. Fortunately the initiative failed to pass.
In the Chicago style of Democratic politics which spawned Barack Hussein Obama, deceased and non-existent voters are standard operating procedure. Modern voter fraud now encompasses illegal aliens to cover the popular diversity angle.
As November gets closer, I can imagine lots of hints on Spanish-language radio that Obama has kept his amnesty promise as much as was possible given the pesky Republicans blocking the big enchilada. The message in espanol may well be that Mexicans should therefore show their gratitude at the polls: Vote early, vote often! After all, ballots in many places are printed in Spanish. E-Z!
Perhaps the cartoonist below meant “Near-Future Democrat Voters.”
The Obama administration on Tuesday will wade into the increasingly divisive national debate over new voting laws in several states that could depress turnout among minorities and others who helped elect the president in 2008.
A dozen states this year tightened rules requiring voters to present state-issued photo identification at the polls, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Although Democratic governors vetoed four of the measures, liberal and civil rights groups have been raising alarms about the remaining laws, calling them an “assault on democracy” and an attempt to depress minority voter turnout.
Supporters of the tighter laws say they are needed to combat voter fraud.
With the presidential campaign heating up, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. will deliver a speech Tuesday expressing concerns about the voter-identification laws, along with a Texas redistricting plan before the Supreme Court that fails to take into account the state’s burgeoning Hispanic population, he said in an interview Monday. Continue reading this article
Here’s Peter Brimelow, the author of Alien Nation, appearing on Canadian television discussing immigration, something you don’t see on American TV, even the so-called conservative one. Let’s hope there is more to come.
On Sunday, the Simpsons show had an episode portraying a wacky future in which Bart is a layabout bum, Lisa is married to Milhouse with a snotty teenaged daughter and Maggie is an international rock star. For a brief moment, there was an offhand reference to Michigan being a sharia state, with Milhouse in a burqa.
Naturally, the fifth columnists at the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) jumped on the mention, trying to frame it to their advantage. A Twitter burp from CAIR proclaimed, Video: Simpsons Episode Mocks Anti-Sharia Hysteria. That was hardly my impression, but check it out.
But a California Democrat, Senator Ted Lieu, has threatened to pursue unspecified “legislative action” if one advertiser who pulled advertising — Lowe’s home improvement stores — doesn’t apologize to the sensitive Muslims and reinstate its ads.
As an immigrant, perhaps Sen. Lieu hasn’t yet heard of the First Amendment which protects free expression by both individuals and businesses. Whatever the reason, his authoritarian meddling is unwelcome and completely improper. Contact info for Lieu is here.
Below, the characters in TLC’s “All-American Muslim” are presented as bomb-free, diverse and wholesome.
A state senator from Southern California was considering calling for a boycott of Lowe’s stores after the home improvement chain pulled its advertising from a reality show about Muslim-Americans.
Calling the retail giant’s decision “un-American” and “naked religious bigotry,” Sen. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, told The Associated Press on Sunday that he would also consider legislative action if Lowe’s doesn’t apologize to Muslims and reinstate its ads. The senator sent a letter outlining his complaints to Lowe’s Chief Executive Officer Robert A. Niblock.
The retail giant stopped advertising on TLC’s “All-American Muslim” after a group called the Florida Family Association complained the show was “propaganda that riskily hides the Islamic agenda’s clear and present danger to American liberties and traditional values.”
The program premiered last month and chronicles the lives of five families from Dearborn, Mich., a Detroit suburb with a large Muslim and Arab-American population.
“The show is about what it’s like to be a Muslim in America, and it touches on the discrimination they sometimes face. And that kind of discrimination is exactly what’s happening here with Lowe’s,” Lieu said. 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.