C-SPAN’s morning call-in program Washington Journal had Dan Stein (Federation for American Immigration Reform) and Ali Noorani (National Immigration Forum) to debate the merits of the Arizona immigration enforcement law Tuesday, since the Supreme Court is about to hear the case challenging the legislation’s constitutionality.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday on the controversial immigration law first passed in Arizona two years ago, and a majority of voters nationwide still agree with one of the law’s chief provisions.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 59% believe police should automatically check the immigration status of individuals they pull over for a traffic violation. One-in-three (32%) opposes such a rule.
Independents favor the law by a 40 percentage-point margin (67-27 percent). That’s good news for presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who has said he thinks Arizona’s law would be a good model for the rest of the country.
The Arizona law took effect in July 2010. It makes illegal immigration a state crime and allows local law enforcement to question the legal status of anyone stopped on suspicion of a crime and detain anyone who cannot prove his or her immigration status.
The Justice Department filed suit challenging it, and the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments next Wednesday on whether many of the law’s key provisions are constitutional.
Voters who live in the West (72 percent) and the Midwest (69 percent) are more likely than those living in other regions (61 percent) to approve of the Arizona law.
The Fox News poll is based on landline and cellphone interviews with 910 randomly-chosen registered voters nationwide and is conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from April 9-11. For the total sample, it has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
In a London courtroom, several Muslim men were assigned various prison terms of up to 11 years for kidnapping and raping two teenaged girls as a part of the males’ Eid festivities.
Muslim immigration practically guarantees diminished safety for women and girls. As feminist Hege Storhaug observed when asked about the effects of Muslim immigration:
“There is no doubt that the freedom, the level of freedom I had as a young woman, young women in Norway will not have, and don’t have actually today and they will not have it in the future, as far as I can see. So the freedom for women in Europe is going backwards.”
“Girls in school, they are mocked by Muslim boys and they dye their hair black, yes. Blondes are dying their hair black, that is correct. And some of them also move to other parts of Oslo to be let alone.”
A group of Muslim men who abducted and raped two teenage girls as part of their Eid celebrations laughed in court yesterday as they were jailed for a total of 38 years.
The girls, aged 15 and 16, were lured miles from their home to a dingy hostel.
In a horrifying weekend-long ordeal, they were plied with alcohol and repeatedly raped by two men, Shamrez Rashid and Amar Hussain, before being offered to a number of others who also ‘used them for sex’.
The 16-year old was forced to have sex six times with four different men.
The younger victim was raped by one man and then sexually assaulted by another.
One defendant, Rashid, 20, was said to have claimed the girls had enjoyed the sex, which he said had taken place as they celebrated the Muslim festival of Eid.
‘It was Eid,’ he said. ‘We treated them as our guests. OK, so they gave us [sex] but we were buying them food and drink.
‘They could have anything they wanted. They enjoyed it.’
His accomplice Amar Hussain, 22, claimed the girls were ‘slags’.
But Judge Melbourne Inman QC said the girls had still been children at the time of the offences.
He said it was quite obvious they had been frightened of the men, but this had had ‘no effect at all’ on their attackers’ behaviour.
‘They were still children and still living with their families,’ Judge Inman said. ‘In a civilised society, such people should be helped. You all abused them.
‘They were extremely vulnerable and you took advantage of that.’
The five defendants laughed and smirked as the horrifying details of their offences were described in court yesterday.
Rashid – who had already been found guilty of two rapes, an attempted rape, child abduction and an attempted sexual assault – grinned, laughed and made gun gestures in the dock. Continue reading this article
As many as 100,000 women in Britain have undergone female genital mutilations with medics in the UK offering to carry out the illegal procedure on girls as young as 10, it has been reported.
Investigators from The Sunday Times said they secretly filmed a doctor, dentist and alternative medicine practitioner who were allegedly willing to perform circumcisions or arrange for the operation to be carried out. The doctor and dentist deny any wrongdoing.
The practice, which involves the surgical removal of external genitalia and in some cases the stitching of the vaginal opening, is illegal in Britain and carries up to a 14 year prison sentence.
It is also against the law to arrange FGM.
Known as “cutting”, the procedure is traditionally carried out for cultural reasons and is widespread across Africa.
It is thought to be needed as proof of a girl’s “purity” for when she marries, but victims are rarely given anaesthetic and frequently suffer long-term damage and pain. Continue reading this article
Demography is merciless, as we well know in Mexifornia. France is facing a presidential election, and Muslim immigrant voters may tip the prize to the socialist candidate, a diversity-friendly leftist.
France has had a terrible immigration experience, even considered in a European context, that it’s amazing the multiculti racket still has any appeal at all. Muslim “youth” engaged in a major civil insurrection in 2005 that lasted for weeks in dozens of cities and caused enormous destruction of property.
PARIS — France’s Muslim community is mobilizing voters to reject President Nicolas Sarkozy in Sunday’s election to punish the conservative leader for his anti-immigrant and anti-Islam rhetoric.
“[French] Muslims can’t stand it anymore. They are fed up with these debates about national identity, halal meat, the veil or fundamentalism all over the place,” said Francoise Lorcerie, a sociologist with the Institute of Studies on the Arab and Muslim World near Marseille.
“The terms [Islam, immigration and fundamentalism] are being used interchangeably, without care, with people being targeted, denigrated and used for [votes].”
The debates and rhetoric aren’t new and have been at the heart of French political campaigns for the past decade.
Muslims – especially those living in the “banlieues,” France’s poor immigrant suburbs – sometimes have been courted by candidates with promises of jobs and better living conditions, but they mostly have been stigmatized as threats to the French identity, analysts say.
The rhetoric escalated last month after Mohammed Merah, a French-born Muslim who claimed to be inspired by al Qaeda, killed seven people in a shooting spree.
Mr. Sarkozy, of the conservative Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) party, called for tightening immigration because there are “too many foreigners” in France.
Marine Le Pen, the presidential candidate of the far-right National Front party, talked about “green fascism” (a reference to the color of Islam) and wondered “how many Mohammed Merahs are arriving on boats and planes each day, filling France with immigrants.”
In the banlieues The speeches infuriated French Muslims and reignited the debate over origins and identity. As Europe’s largest Islamic community, French Muslims account for as much as 10 percent of the country’s 65 million people. Continue reading this article
In the White House, the re-election brain trust is gearing up to promote Obama as the great friend of hispanics, even though his promise to enact a mass amnesty in the first year of his Presidency never happened. In fact, he was busy with other things that he thought more important, in particular jamming through a government healthcare system that the American people didn’t want.
President Obama’s re-election campaign has released four new Spanish-language ads, each ending with the phrase: “Esta eleccion si importa,” which in English means, “This election does matter.”
In 2008, Barack Obama captured two-thirds of the Hispanic vote, winning in crucial swing states with large Hispanic populations like Colorado, Nevada and Florida.
The president’s re-election campaign is attempting to replicate that success for 2012, targeting those same states with this week’s launch of its first set of Spanish-language television and radio ads.
In four separate ads, Latino campaign organizers recount personal stories as reasons for supporting the president, focusing on education.
In one ad, Obama volunteer Lynette Acosta explains the importance of a college degree to her and her family: “Without the help of loans, I would not have been able to study,” Acosta says in the ad. “That’s why everything the president has done to increase access to funding is so important. … My mother says, ‘The best gift you could give me is a diploma that I can hang on the living room wall.’ ” Continue reading this article
In any case, the accumulation of decades of extreme levels of immigration has been noticed by the Census. Now those young unskilled immigrants and illegal aliens from the early wave after 1965 have become old. What a surprise. And the aging immigrants need more expensive social services, particularly medical.
Below, the Census announced the official results of its 2010 enumeration.
In addition, younger immigrants bring aging parents, who can get welfare benefits in a few years with citizenship without ever paying a penny into the system. H-1b expert Prof. Norm Matloff reported in 1996 that “approximately 55% of elderly Chinese immigrants were on welfare” and it’s doubtful the number has decreased since then.
Naturally California is leading the way with immigration bad news, although no dollar estimates are provided in the following article, presumably because nobody wants to know how much all this diversity will cost the taxpayers in the near future and going forward.
The number of older Asians and Hispanics in California is rising more than three times faster than that of whites, creating a need for more health and social services for these populations, according to census data and interviews.
Overall Asians and Hispanics are the fastest growing groups in the state, but the rise in adults 55 years and older in those groups is particularly pronounced, the Associated Press found by analyzing census data released Thursday.
Experts say the increase in older Asian and Hispanic adults is partly due to the aging of immigrants who came to the U.S. for jobs or to seek refuge from war. Another reason is that some established immigrants are bringing parents from their native country. Also, some Asians and Hispanics have especially long life expectancies.
Whites remain the largest group of older people. But growth in the 55-plus population between 2000 and 2010 for Asians was 74 percent and for Hispanics 73 percent. That compares with only an 18 percent growth rate for whites and 34 percent for blacks.
Advocates and providers say these rapidly growing older populations, comprised of large numbers of immigrants, are increasing the need for culturally-specific services and putting a strain on already thin financial resources. Continue reading this article
Interestingly, a look at the poll’s wording and breakdown of results shows strong opinion among Tea Party members. While 70 percent of registered voters overall thought that photo IDs are needed in elections to prevent fraud, 91 percent of Tea Party voters believed that idea.
Most Americans think voter identification laws are needed to stop voter fraud, according to a Fox News poll released Wednesday.
Overall, 70 percent of Americans say voter ID laws are needed to stop illegal voting. That’s far more than the 26 percent who see the laws as a hindrance to legal voting.
An overwhelming 87-percent majority of Republicans say voter ID laws are necessary to ensure only eligible voters participate in elections. Some 74 percent of independents and 52 percent of Democrats agree.
Democrats (44 percent) are four times as likely as Republicans (10 percent) to consider these laws an unnecessary deterrent to law-abiding citizens casting their ballot.
The poll was conducted in connection with a new documentary to air on Fox News Channel this weekend. Hosted by Eric Shawn, it’s called “Fox News Reporting: Stealing Your Vote.”
In their increasingly heated battle, many supporters and opponents of voter ID laws are accusing the other of acting in bad faith.
The poll finds 34 percent of voters believe supporters of voter ID laws are trying to “steal” elections by keeping eligible voters away from the polls. Yet more people — 50 percent — think opponents of the laws are acting in bad faith by trying to increase participation from ineligible voters. Some 17 percent think both supporters and opponents of voter ID laws are playing dirty.
The federal “Help America Vote Act” says all states must require identification from first-time voters who registered by mail and did not provide verification of their identification with their mail-in voter registration. Thirty-two states have passed voter identification laws that are broader than the federal mandates. Of these, nine states have passed the strictest legislation, which includes a requirement for voters to show a photo ID in order to vote. Continue reading this article
The liberal press is full of helpful ideas to sink Republican Presidential hopes, like when border-buster Jeb Bush was suggested by the media as a swell choice to be the candidate. (Generous editors want only the best from taxpayers for their dirt-cheap Mexican maids and gardeners.)
The latest from the electron-stained wretches is support for Marco Rubio’s twisted scheme to pretty up the DREAM Act somehow, which if enacted would be the beginning of the long march to perdition: no borders, no sovereignty, no America.
Earlier DREAM Acts have been gushing with loopholes galore. Rather than merely establishing bright valedictorian kiddies (heh) as advanced anchor babies, the various versions of the legislation have been a history of bad faith with no checks of the weak “requirements.” The most recent DREAM included non-student gang criminals as well as drunk drivers and other diverse undesirables.
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s push for a Republican version of immigration legislation looks like the answer to the election-year prayers of the GOP — and Mitt Romney.
Rubio — telegenic son of Cuban exiles and potential vice presidential pick — is pulling together a bill that would allow young illegal immigrants to remain in the United States but denies them citizenship, an initial step in the drawn-out, divisive fight over immigration policy and the fate of the 11 million people here illegally.
The freshman senator calls his evolving legislation a conservative alternative to the DREAM Act — the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors measure. That Democratic-backed bill, which is overwhelmingly popular with Hispanics, would provide a pathway to citizenship to children in the United States illegally if they attend college or join the military. The measure came close to passage in December 2010 but has languished since then.
“We have to come up with an immigration system that honors both our legacy as a nation of laws and also our legacy as a nation of immigrants,” Rubio told The Associated Press on Tuesday.
An immigration plan from Rubio, the GOP’s best-known Hispanic, could help Republicans make some headway with the fastest growing minority group and its 21 million eligible voters, many concentrated in the contested presidential battleground states of Florida, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and Colorado.
Democrats maintain a significant political advantage with Hispanics, numbers that were only strengthened by the harsh rhetoric from Republican presidential candidates in this year’s primary. Hispanics overwhelmingly backed Barack Obama over Republican presidential nominee John McCain, 67-31 percent, in the 2008 presidential race and they favored Democratic congressional candidates 60-38 percent in 2010, according to exit polling. A Pew Research Center survey out Tuesday showed Obama with a solid edge over Romney among Hispanic registered voters, 67-27 percent.
It’s a reality the likely Republican presidential nominee clearly recognizes.
“We have to get Hispanic voters to vote for our party,” Romney told a private fundraiser in Florida on Sunday in which he insisted the GOP needs an alternative to the DREAM Act. He warned that a significant number of Hispanics backing Obama “spells doom for us,” according to NBC News.
Rubio, who notably called on his party to tone down the anti-immigrant talk earlier this year, is working on a plan that would allow young illegal immigrants who came to the United States with their parents to apply for non-immigrant visas. They would be permitted to stay in the country to study or work, could obtain a driver’s license but would not be able to vote. They later could apply for residency, but they would not have a special path to citizenship. Continue reading this article
More recently, however, millions of Muslims have flocked to Europe and America for “a better life” (material comforts) or to advance the cause of a worldwide caliphate ruled by Islamic sharia law.
So it’s almost a relief to see an old-fashioned imam calling for the faithful to exit the West and return to dar al-Islam. Perhaps he thinks too many Muslims are adopting ideas of the despised infidels (although I haven’t noticed such shifts).
Whatever the cause, Imam Omar al-Haddouchi believes that Muslim immigration is a bad idea — we agree!
Omar al-Haddouchi, ideological leader of the Jihadist movement in Morocco, published a fatwa saying all Muslims should leave France for North Africa.
Al-Haddouchi says Muslims have no reason to stay in France, listing as reasons the burqa ban, the limits on the call to Friday prayers, and the stricter controls on Muslim radicals following the terror attack in Toulouse. He said non-Muslim countries where like a toilet, where you do your thing and then leave.
His 14-minute long video fatwa is currently circulating on Jihadi websites. Al-Haddouchi was sentenced to 30 years for his links to the attack in Casablanca, May 2003, but was pardoned last year by King Mohammed VI.
Despite his insistence that voter fraud is not a serious problem, Attorney General Eric Holder was embarrassed last week when a video surfaced of someone illegally obtaining a ballot to vote under Holder’s name in his home precinct in Washington, D.C. Most voters consider voter fraud a problem in America today and continue to overwhelmingly support laws requiring people to show photo identification before being allowed to vote.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 64% of Likely U.S. Voters rate voter fraud at least a somewhat serious problem in the United States today, and just 24% disagree. This includes 35% who consider it a Very Serious problem and seven percent (7%) who view it as Not At All Serious. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on April 12-13, 2012 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
The current occupant of the White House is so consumed with his re-election campaign that he cannot let it rest even during an overseas trip that is supposed to be about expanding trade.
President Obama must believe that the word “Arizona” is a magic talisman that will enthrall hispanic voters (legal and illegal) and make them forget his earlier unfulfilled promises of amnesty which was supposed to occur in the first year of his Presidency. He surely thinks that hopeful hispanics will be sucker enough to vote for him despite his failure to deliver the big enchilada. It doesn’t seem like much of a re-election strategy, but it’s what he has.
CARTAGENA, Colombia — President Obama, on a three-day trip to South America, attacked GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney’s stance on immigration reform today, saying his support for Arizona’s tough immigration law is “very troublesome.”
“We now have a Republican nominee who said that the Arizona laws are a model for the country … and these are laws that potentially would allow someone to be stopped and picked up and asked where their citizenship papers are based on an assumption,” Obama told Univision during an interview in Cartagena, where the president is attending the Summit of the Americas.
The three-day trip gives the president an opportunity to showcase his interest in the region and court Latino voters back home, whose support will be crucial in the upcoming election. Obama won a majority of the Latino vote in 2008 and his campaign is hoping for similar results come November.
If reelected, Obama vowed to tackle immigration reform.
“I can promise that I will try to do it in the first year of my second term. I want to try this year,” Obama told Univision.
During his 2008 campaign, then-candidate Obama promised to produce an immigration reform bill within a year of taking office. The problem now, the president told Univision, is resistance from Republicans.
“The challenge we’ve got on immigration reform is very simple. I’ve got a majority of Democrats who are prepared to vote for it, and I’ve got no Republicans who are prepared to vote for it,” he said.
“What we need is a change either of Congress or we need Republicans to change their mind, and I think this has to be an important debate during — throughout the country,” he said.
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.