Senator Jeff Sessions remains the indispensable man in defending American sovereignty from the open-borders gangsters. He recently revealed his population-increase estimates for the Senate’s enforcement-free amnesty legislation which is overly complex to hide its destructive elements.
The debate over what to do with the official 11 million illegal aliens has camouflaged the huge increase in legal immigration that political elites and business desire. For more detail on this topic, see the written analysis from Sessions’ office: Analysis Of Future Immigration Flow In Gang Of Eight Plan.
An analysis of future immigration flow released Friday by Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions shows that more than 32 million immigrants would receive legal status over the next decade and an additional 25 million would be granted non-immigrant work visas under the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill.
On a conference call with reporters about the analysis Sessions explained that number of legal immigrants over the next decade “exceeds the population of California, our largest state, and will have a very significant impact on our economy and the American people.”
According to the analysis presented by the senator, the high immigration estimate derived from visa program proposals in a revised 867-page bill crafted by a bipartisan group of eight senators shows that the bill would vastly increase the level of future “low-skill” immigration.
“[O]ver the first decade, the total number [of legal status] granted will be well over 32 million (not taking into account chain migration from increased legal flow),” the analysis reads. “Adding in all the various categories of nonimmigrant work visas, the number climbs to more than 57 million.”
The 57 million estimate includes the 11.1 million illegal immigrants already in the country, who would receive legal status under the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill.
On the increase of new workers, Sessions did not mince words.
“This large flow of workers will impact working Americans significantly. It will reduce their salaries; dynamic scoring will not change that,” Sessions said, addressing one of the criticisms leveled against past immigration analyses.
“We have a time in this country when there is a growing failure of working Americans wages to keep up with inflation. That has been going on for more than a decade, some say 15, 30 years. And a large flow of low-skilled workers does impact the wages of Americans,” Sessions added.
Sessions noted that while the bill attempts to deal with the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the country by offering them legal status, the problem of illegal immigration will not end as he believes the border and visa enforcement aspect is not strong enough.
“We think this is a matter of humanitarian interest and even civil rights and the obligation we have as American policy makers in Congress is to consider what is in the long term national interest of America, at a time when we have 90 million people outside the work force, 47 million on food stamps. Shouldn’t we be working to make sure every single American citizen now dependent on the social services of the government be provided the first opportunity to achieve a good job with decent pay with a retirement plan and a healthcare plan?” Sessions asked. Continue reading this article
On Tuesday, Somali national Omar Mohamed Kalmio (pictured) got life in prison for a 2011 mass murder in two parts. First he shot his girlfriend, then drove across town to murder her 13-year-old brother, her mother and the mother’s boyfriend.
Kalmio has two criminal convictions from 2006 in Minnesota. He was convicted of second-degree assault with a dangerous weapon, a felony, and sentenced to one year and one day in prison, court records show. A criminal complaint in the case said Kalmio and a group of other Somali men attacked a man in Minneapolis in January 2006, and Kalmio stabbed him three times in the back with a knife. The victim also was stabbed in the face and shoulder and suffered a collapsed lung and concussion.
A criminal background of such determined diversity made Kalmio an ideal prospect for deportation. But Somalia at that time was considered too ungoverned to accept deported thugs, so Kalmio remained in this country.
In 2011, Congressman Ted Poe became alarmed at the thousands of foreign criminals released onto American streets because their dirtbag homelands refuse to take them back. He authored a bill that would require the State Department to deny visas to embassy and consular support staff if they do not accept the criminals within 90 days. Of course the legislation went nowhere. Public safety doesn’t appear on the government’s to-do list.
And anyway, wouldn’t it make more sense to end visas and immigration entirely for any nation not accepting its criminals? We can start with Somalia.
MINOT, N.D. — A Somali national was sentenced to life in prison Tuesday for killing the mother of his child and three other people in North Dakota two years ago.
Omar Mohamed Kalmio, 28, declined to comment following the 30-minute sentencing hearing, the Minot Daily News reported (http://bit.ly/ZxYxSA ). Judge Douglas Mattson sentenced Kalmio to four consecutive terms of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Kalmio was convicted of fatally shooting 19-year-old Sabrina Zephier on Jan. 28, 2011, at her Minot home. Authorities said he then killed her 13-year-old brother, Dillon Zephier; her mother Jolene Zephier, 38; and Jolene’s 22-year-old boyfriend, Jeremy Longie, at the mother’s nearby mobile home. The baby girl was found unharmed in Sabrina Zephier’s home. They were members of the Yankton Sioux Tribe.
Kalmio, who had a history of violent crime, was working in North Dakota’s oil patch at the time of the killings and said he was in the U.S. under political asylum. Continue reading this article
Funny, when candidate Mitt Romney suggested that illegal aliens might self-deport themselves, the open-borders gangsters shrieked that such a policy was offensive to sensitive hispanic lawbreakers. But when ABC News reports how numerous Mexicans chose to self-deport because of America’s crappy economy, that’s merely descriptive.
And guess what — the Mexicans are more comfortable to be among la raza and in their own country speaking their favorite language. I love a good happy-at-home deportation story.
The cobblestone streets of El Cargadero, Mexico, are eerily empty. The houses in this small northern Mexican town are bolted shut, the windows boarded, their residents living and working across the border in the United States.
“I would say that two thirds of the people from here, they reside in Southern California,” Joaquin Fernandez, an El Cargadero resident who lives in California most of the year, told ABC News.
But that is changing. After desperately and dangerously crossing the border for work in the U.S., many Mexican immigrants now find the land from which they fled holds more opportunity and economic promise.
“When the economy [in the U.S.] started going down, it was hard, especially my work,” Erika Felix said. “It was just so much stress and my parents tell me, ‘Why don’t you come back and continue education here?’ So I did.”
Self-deportation is a trend not often mentioned in the debate over immigration reform. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, since 2005 migration between the U.S. and Mexico has been net zero.
Roughly 1.4 million Mexicans came into and out of the United States during that time.
After living undocumented in the U.S. for nine years, Felix decided to move home to El Cargadero.
“I heard some people say we’re even better here in Mexico, and I think so, too,” she said.
On a day when thousands of foreigners in America took to the streets to demand amnesty, Singapore citizens rallied against the government’s plan to import foreign workers to support the city-state’s aging population. The people don’t want the social engineering; they want to maintain their own culture. This behavior is a normal expression of human nature, to like their own tribe the best and want to preserve it.
Mass immigration is not a popular public policy the world over, as shown by polls like Ipsos and Pew, which is why the liberal press promotes it daily to bend the public will.
A huge crowd turned up at the Speaker’s Corner at Hong Lim Park Wednesday afternoon to again protest the government’s plans to let in more immigrants to counter Singapore’s ageing population. Wire agency AFP estimated the crowd reached 3,000 people though event organiser Gilbert Goh eventually put the final number between 5,000 and 6,000.
The protest on the grey-cast, drizzly day was organised as a sequel to the first protest in February, which was one of the largest protests held in the city-state. That event held in a light drizzle drew about 4,000.
In his opening speech at about 4pm, Goh of transitioning.org, a support site for the unemployed and the event organiser, said more protests would be held at the park.
As the crowd swelled, he also asked attendees to wave their pink identification cards to show they were not foreigners, as non-Singaporeans were discouraged from attending the event.
Foreign labour issue
He explained that he felt he had to organise the protest after seeing well-educated Singaporeans reach their 40s and 50s without good job prospects.
“I am not against foreigners but we are against the policy of allowing a company to hire 100 per cent foreigners,” he said.
“The employment pass allows companies to hire 100 per cent foreigners, and I don’t think this is right. There is a quota for S pass. Why don’t they put a quota for the employment pass? They are the greatest competition for educated Singaporeans,” Goh asserted.
Anti-foreigner sentiment has been rising in Singapore with many citizens blaming immigrants for pushing up the cost of living, taking jobs away from locals and straining infrastructure.The first protest in February was a backlash to a government white paper projecting that Singapore’s population could increase to as much as 6.9 million in 2030 with almost half of the number made up of foreigners. Continue reading this article
Anyway, wouldn’t it be better for Mexicans to dislike America, particularly if the feeling dissuaded them from relocating here? A report of positive attitudes on the part of Mexicans is not reassuring.
When U.S. President Barack Obama travels to Mexico this week, he will encounter a Mexican public that has far more positive attitudes about the United States than at any time in the last several years.
America’s image south of the border fell sharply in 2010, when Arizona passed a “show me your papers” law aimed at identifying, prosecuting and deporting immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally. But Mexican views have rebounded since then, and U.S. favorability ratings are now at their highest point since 2009. The prospects for U.S. immigration reform may be, at least in part, the source of renewed Mexican approval of their neighbor to the north.
A new Pew Research Center poll found that 66 percent of Mexicans have a favorable opinion of the U.S., up 10 percentage points from a year ago and up 22 points from May 2010, immediately following the enactment of Arizona’s immigration law. The last time America’s image was as strong among Mexicans was in 2009, when 69 percent said they had a favorable opinion. [. . .]
Doesn’t anyone in the polling universe care about what Americans think of Mexico and its demanding inhabitants? Particularly since Mexico is largest sending country of immigrants by far. A search of the handy internet turned up a survey from the National Journal last November, expressed rather cleverly.
The word cloud below answers the survey question, “Now, thinking about Mexico, what are three words that come to mind?”
As the newly elected Mexican president travels to Washington next week, a new survey released by consulting firm Vianovo on Monday underscores the startling challenges Mexico faces with its international image, especially in the U.S.
The survey highlights what has been widely assumed: that Americans have a generally unfavorable view of Mexico. But while illegal immigration and border crossings may be at the forefront of concerns in the Southwest, drugs and corruption are the ringing concerns of most Americans.
“Drugs” was the word most often used to describe Mexico by those surveyed, as is stunningly illustrated by the survey’s word cloud. Additionally, 72 percent cited drug cartels and traffickers as the main reason behind their negative perception of their neighbors to the south.
Of those surveyed, an astounding 72 percent of Americans think Mexico is unsafe for travel and only 17 percent consider the country to be modern. Continue reading this article
The newbies are supposed to be self-sufficient, and not go from the point of entry to the welfare office, but enforcement of that taxpayer protection has become lax like so many others. Illegal aliens are really not supposed to get welfare freebies, but they do.
Now the nation’s attention is focused on the sinister Tsarnaev family: not only were they stone-cold killers for Allah in the Boston Marathon bombing, their evil behavior was assisted by mooching off the unwilling American taxpayers. Immigrant welfare ripoffs, particularly food stamp fraud, have been burbling along in the back pages for years. In this case, Judicial Watch has found someone who worked in the bureaucracy and was willing to describe the depth of corruption firsthand.
For decades the U.S. government has knowingly given illegal immigrants food stamps, according to a former certification case worker who denounced the costly practice back in the 1980s but was essentially ordered to keep a lid on it.
The retired assistant case manager, Craig McNees, was in charge of vetting food-stamp applicants in north Florida and Indiana in the ’80s and says the program was infested with fraud and corruption that was perpetually ignored by management. “Illegals would come in by the vanload and we were told to give them their stuff,” McNees said. “Management knew very well they were illegal. It was so rampant that some employees would tell their illegal relatives to come get food stamps.”
McNees contacted Judicial Watch after reading documents obtained by JW from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) detailing how the agency is working with the Mexican government to promote participation by illegal aliens in the U.S. food stamp program. The effort includes a Spanish-language flyer provided to the Mexican Embassy by the USDA ensuring that Mexicans in the U.S. don’t need to declare their immigration status to get financial assistance from Uncle Sam.
The documents ignited outrage considering the nation’s food stamp program has exploded under President Obama, who claims there are too many “food insecure households” in America. To correct the problem the administration has spent millions on ad campaigns promoting food stamps and has rewarded states with multi-million-dollar bonuses for signing up recipients. It’s been quite effective because American taxpayers spent an astounding $80.4 billion on the program in 2012 and a record number of people—46 million and growing—get free groceries from Uncle Sam.
The retired case worker who contacted JW says in the three years he worked in a Sarasota food-stamp office, he found more than 500 cases of fraud but management ignored them all instead pushing a yearly quota. “They just said that if we don’t give out as many as last year, we don’t get our money,” McNees said. “It was crazy, like a three-ring circus; like the inmates were running the asylum.” Continue reading this article
The central sales pitch for the Gang of Eight’s immigration legislation has been the claim of strong border security triggers that are supposed to be the “toughest border immigration enforcement measures in U.S. history.” But a close examination of the legislation reveals that the promised enforcement is nowhere to be found. The triggers aren’t triggers at all—and in fact would actually weaken requirements previously enacted by Congress—while granting extraordinary new discretion to the Department of Homeland Security to waive security protocols, removal proceedings, and denials of entry.
The day the bill passes, there will be an effective amnesty for the vast majority of illegal immigrants—abandoning the Gang of Eight’s public promise of enforcement first. All that needs to occur to make this legal status official is for Sec. Napolitano to submit to Congress, within six months of enactment, a mere “fencing strategy” and a plan on how to achieve and maintain “effective control” in just 3 out of 9 border sectors.
· “Effective control” is defined as “persistent surveillance”—which is not defined—and “an effectiveness rate of 90 percent or higher.” Sec. Napolitano all but acknowledged during her recent testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the effectiveness rate is meaningless because by definition, DHS has no idea how many border crossings go completely undetected. As such, the measure is subject to almost limitless manipulation. By contrast, the rejected 2007 immigration bill set a stronger target of 100 percent operational control of the entire border as the ultimate goal.
· No language in the bill requires the Secretary to construct any fence at all. Given that Sec. Napolitano has said multiple times that no further fencing is necessary, Americans can be certain that very little fencing will ever be built. (In effect, this legislation further weakens a 2006 law which required 700 miles of double-layer fencing, only 36 miles of which were constructed.)
The second so-called trigger, the “Southern Border Security Commission,” is not even formed unless the Secretary determines, five years after legalization has already been granted, that she failed to meet the bill’s weak targets. It is entirely up to the Secretary whether her plans are “substantially completed” and “substantially implemented”—both undefined. Thus, the existence of the Commission is entirely up to her, and the Commission itself only issues recommendations (if it chooses) with no enforcement power.
The bill also repeals the proven E-Verify workplace enforcement system. That system is then replaced with a new, untested system from which day laborers appear to be exempt—and which does not even have to be fully in place for five years, leaving a huge gap for new illegal workers to enter the workforce. Continue reading this article
Now we see Attorney General Eric Holder lecture Americans that they should reject retaliation against Muslim immigrants in our midst. Isn’t he supposed to be enforcing the law and investigating the Boston terror attack? Instead of doing his job, he is following the political jihad agenda of portraying Muslims as the victims, even though the followers of Allah routinely murder infidels daily in the name of their religion.
Attorney General Eric Holder declared Monday that the Justice Department is on the lookout for acts of violence or discrimination that signal a backlash to the Boston Marathon bombings earlier this month in which three people were killed and scores wounded.
“Our investigation into this matter remains ongoing – and I want to assure you that my colleagues and I are determined to hold accountable, to the fullest extent of the law, all of those who were responsible for this attack,” Holder said, according to the prepared text of a speech delivered Monday to the Anti-Defamation League. “But I also want to make clear that – just as we will pursue relentlessly anyone who would target our people or attempt to terrorize our cities – the Justice Department is firmly committed to protecting innocent people against misguided acts of retaliation.” (continues)
It’s certainly true that Muslims started squealing about their fear of backlash after the Boston terror bombing as soon as the perps were identified:
However, when lynch mobs of Islamophobic Americans were not forthcoming, even the liberal Associated Press had to admit that the backlash was pretty slim. Plus, the cases cited sound squirrelly, which is not surprising since the jihad-friendly Council on American Islamic Relations encourages Muslims to report and exaggerate the slightest unpleasantry from infidels.
NEW YORK—It looked like the backlash was starting even before the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing were identified as Muslim.
Hours after the explosions, a Bangladeshi man told police he was dubbed an “Arab” and beaten in New York. A veiled Muslim woman in a city near Boston said she was struck in the shoulder and called a terrorist. When the public learned days later that the FBI was pursuing two Muslim men of Chechen descent, American Muslims feared the worst.
But the worst didn’t happen.
Muslim civil rights leaders say the anti-Islam reaction has been more muted this time than after other attacks since Sept. 11, which had sparked outbursts of vandalism, harassment and violence. Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which monitors bias and hate crimes against Muslims, said his organization has seen no uptick in reports of harassment, assaults or damage to mosques since the April 15 bombings. Leaders noted a larger, broader chorus of Americans warning against placing collective blame. Continue reading this article
Attorney General Eric Holder recently voiced a belief that many liberals hold — that entering this country illegally is a human right — but mostly refrain from saying. These days, the extreme anti-borders ideology of the anarchist left is becoming mainstream, at least under the Obama administration.
Still, the idea of national sovereignty has many defenders among the little citizens who continue to revere the Constitution despite the globalist future pushed by elites in government and in the press.
Nevertheless, the top law enforcement officer in the nation spoke openly in support of the anti-borders, anti-law agenda:
Holder was addressing a friendly crowd (“committed partners”), the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) on the occasion of their annual awards banquet last Wednesday. You can WATCH the entire 18-minute speech on C-SPAN. He discussed a medley of topics close to raza hearts, like the voting rights act, but the major theme was the redefinition of immigration from a lawful procedure controlled by the government to a lifestyle choice appropriately made by the billions of poor people on earth to relocate at will to any country they want.
HOLDER: Creating a pathway to earned citizenship for the 11 million unauthorized immigrants in this country is absolutely essential. The way we treat our friends and neighbors who are undocumented by creating a mechanism for them to earn citizenship and to move out of the shadows transcends the issue of immigration status. This is a matter of civil and human rights. It’s about who we are as a nation, and it goes to the core of our treasured American principle of equal opportunity.
So how is all that diversity hectoring in schools working out?
Not very well. In fact, it is having the reverse effect of what is said to be intended, according to recent research. Emphasizing human tribal differences apparently makes kids dwell on those characteristics to a degree that becomes negative for normal social interaction. Human nature is inherently tribal, so promoting themes of ethnic dissimilarity among young minds is a dicey undertaking.
Children who are given anti-racism lessons in school are more likely to be intolerant outside the classroom, a major study found yesterday.
It said accusing white pupils of racism causes animosity, and discussing sensitive ethnic concerns such as honour killings paints minority group children in a bad light.
The survey said children who live in mixed neighbourhoods are often free of hostility towards other racial groups.
But it found that ‘when more attention in class is being paid to the multicultural society, the liberalising effect of positive contact in class on youngsters’ xenophobic attitude decreases’.
The project carried out in the Netherlands comes at a time of controversy over the place of multiculturalism – which blames Britain for historic racism and demands the encouragement of minority cultures – in the national curriculum and teaching in British schools.
Education Secretary Michael Gove has been under fire from Left-wing academics over plans to stop teaching teenagers about topics such as ‘the wide cultural, social and ethnic diversity of Britain from the Middle Ages to the twentieth century and how this has helped shape Britain’s identity’.
Instead, in future pupils will be taught much more British history. The study, published in the European Sociological Review, was based on a survey of 1,444 pupils aged 14 and 15 in ten schools in the city of Nijmegen. Continue reading this article
The always diligent Judicial Watch has pried loose some incriminating documents from the government showing the USDA plotting with Mexico to distribute US-taxpayer-funded food stamps to Mexicans residing in this country.
We can see by the chart below that the illegal use of food stamps by foreigners residing in this country has been growing by leaps and bounds for years. The program’s abuse is not limited to the Obama administration, although the corruption has become more extreme under the current leadership.
The clip following has some decent explanation and background from Bill O’Reilly and Lou Dobbs, including the reappearance of the North American Union as an issue. Dobbs reminds viewers that any non-citizen who becomes a “public charge” is supposed to be deported. But today’s Washington is more interested in trans-national social justice than in enforcing American laws.
Documents Reveal that Mexican Government Encourages Maximum Participation in U.S.-Funded Program
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released documents detailing how the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is working with the Mexican government to promote participation by illegal aliens in the U.S. food stamp program.
The promotion of the food stamp program, now known as “SNAP” (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), includes a Spanish-language flyer provided to the Mexican Embassy by the USDA with a statement advising Mexicans in the U.S. that they do not need to declare their immigration status in order to receive financial assistance. Emphasized in bold and underlined, the statement reads, “You need not divulge information regarding your immigration status in seeking this benefit for your children.”
The documents came in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made to USDA on July 20, 2012. The FOIA request sought: “Any and all records of communication relating to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals, and migrant communities, including but not limited to, communications with the Mexican government.” Continue reading this article
In short, Islam is a supremacist religion which preaches that its followers deserve everything they can mooch from inferior infidels. There’s even a special Islam vocabulary word: jizya which historically referred to the tax non-Muslims were forced to pay to Muslim rulers in dar al-Islam. The money is part of a whole system of second-class citizenship to keep infidels subservient and in their place, like Coptic Christians in Egypt today.
Radical Muslim pest Anjem Choudary was recently recorded exhorting his co-religionists to soak British taxpayer for a “jihad-seekers allowance.” Work is for suckers, he said, and Muslims should use the welfare cash to promote the destruction of western civilization and setting up a global caliphate.
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.