But big mushroom clouds aren’t necessary; hostile Muslims can go small ball and send in a few suicide bombers to explode infidel sports fans. That should mute Olympic enthusiasm considerably.
In short, this is a major European city after Muslim immigration, spending $2 billion on security for a two-week event and hoping to get through it without some Islam-based horror. Pre-Islam-London hosted the summer games in 1948, where spectators experienced world-class athletic excellence with no threat to safety.
Organizers of the 2012 London Olympics have said the games will be a “symphony of inspiration” — uplifting and unifying.
For Britain’s Islamic radicals, however, the Olympics are providing inspiration of a different sort.
During the past month, British authorities have made a series of arrests in connection with terror plots against the Olympics.
Others, like Islamic convert Richard Dart, were arrested for separate plots against London targets. Dart is reportedly a follower of London-based cleric Anjem Choudary, who leads frequent demonstrations calling for Great Britain to be ruled by Islamic Sharia law.
“The Olympics is about division. It’s about separation,” Choudary told CBN News.
When asked if he and his followers would have a presence at the games, Choudary answered, “We will have a huge presence, wherever the people are gathering for the celebrations or watching the events.”
Choudary said that true Muslims should oppose the Olympics. British authorities are concerned that some will do much more than that.
Among those they’ve been monitoring is a suspected al Qaeda terrorist who’s visited the Olympic site at least five times. Continue reading this article
On Tuesday Rep. King appeared on Fox News and explained that the court case was about the powers belonging to Congress should not be usurped by the President via executive order. King has argued that if the President is allowed to get away with this overreach then he may well act beyond his Constitutional powers in other areas as well.
Iowa Republican Rep. Steve King told The Daily Caller that the immigration lawsuit he is leading against President Barack Obama should be filed within weeks.
King’s lawsuit is a response to Obama’s new immigration policy announced in June under executive order, an order he believes is unconstitutional.
“If the president can just pick and choose the laws he wants to enforce, you get a breakdown in the constitutional order because he’s charged with enforcing the laws,” said Steven Camarota, Director of the Research Center for Immigration Studies, to Fox News in support of King’s argument.
Though Camarota said, “it’s very tough” to win – unless he can show that an act of Congress is being nullified by the president than you might have standing or the right to sue.
Obama laid out details of his new immigration policy that will stop deporting and will issue work permits to up to 800,000 young undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children and have never committed a crime.
The congressman detailed a meeting held last Tuesday with “potential co-plaintiffs” interest in signing on to King’s lawsuit.
According to King, “If the case is heard on the merits, we’re in an excellent position to succeed.”
The House Republicans have been disappointing in various ways, but particularly regarding immigration enforcement and also Obama’s increasing encroachment into powers of the legislative branch. Certainly the do-nothing no-budget Democrat Senate is a daunting roadblock, but more can be done, and Congressman King is showing one way forward.
Iowa Republican Rep. Steve King says he expects that the immigration lawsuit he is spearheading against President Obama will be filed in a court within weeks.
“I think we’re talking weeks rather than months,” King told The Daily Caller in an interview Friday about the planned legal action against Obama.
King’s lawsuit is in response to the Obama administration’s divisive announcement last month that the government would stop deporting certain illegal immigrants who arrived in the United States as children.
The congressman said a meeting was held last Tuesday with potential co-plaintiffs interested in signing on to the lawsuit to prevent the Obama administration from going through with its plan.
King, who would likely be the lead plaintiff, would not specifically name who else attended, but he said one U.S. senator, four state executive offices and five non-governmental organizations were represented at the meeting. Continue reading this article
In Lowell, Massachusetts, a group of energetic teens are pushing a proposal to lower the voting age to 17 for local elections. They have their own Facebook page (Vote17) and have gotten national media attention from Fox:
In this age of voter apathy, a group of teenagers in one of Massachusetts’ oldest Mill towns is fighting for the right to weigh-in on city business and cast ballots before they turn 18. The ‘Vote 17′ movement looks like a well-organized campaign, with office space in downtown Lowell where the teens involved spent Tuesday morning creating information packets and prepping for a trip to the state capitol — where they’re trying to get state lawmakers to support their cause.
Carline Kirksey just graduated from Lowell High School. She’s heading off to college in the fall but remains passionate about ensuring the next generation of classmates will get a say when it comes to school and City Council elections.
“I feel like if we were able to vote at 17 we’d be able to create civic habits and increase engagement and increase voter turnout and increase youth voices in Lowell and a lot of the youth in Lowell are really engaged,” said Kirksey from the organization’s busy office. “We just come here every day and shoot emails to the representatives, senators and make sure we get to talk to them about why we want this to happen.” [. . .]
If anything, the voting age should be raised to 25. Allowing emotion-propelled children to vote just because they want to is not the way to go. Our civic life needs more educated voters, not the unfocused brains of immature teens.
In addition, lowering the voting age would benefit liberal candidates and causes because many schools are little indoctrination factories, spewing left-wing ideas like open borders. As generally happens, life teaches more conservative values, so older voters are wiser in the ways of the world and how diversity decreases trust, among other aspects of human nature.
When adolescence hit Frances Jensen’s sons, she often found herself wondering, like all parents of teenagers, “What were you thinking?”
“It’s a resounding mantra of parents and teachers,” says Jensen, who’s a pediatric neurologist at Children’s Hospital in Boston.
Like when son number one, Andrew, turned 16, dyed his hair black with red stripes and went off to school wearing studded leather and platform shoes. And his grades went south.
“I watched my child morph into another being, and yet I knew deep down inside it was the same Andrew,” Jensen says. Suddenly her own children seemed like an alien species.
Jensen is a Harvard expert on epilepsy, not adolescent brain development. As she coped with her boys’ sour moods and their exasperating assumption that somebody else will pick up their dirty clothes, she decided to investigate what neuroscientists are discovering about teenagers’ brains that makes them behave that way.
Teenage Brains Are Different She learned that that it’s not so much what teens are thinking — it’s how.
Jensen says scientists used to think human brain development was pretty complete by age 10. Or as she puts it, that “a teenage brain is just an adult brain with fewer miles on it.”
But it’s not. To begin with, she says, a crucial part of the brain — the frontal lobes — are not fully connected. Really. Continue reading this article
There are areas that cry out for serious investigation by a curious reporter. In particular, how did Ulugbek Kodirov get a student visa claiming to be enrolled at Columbia medical school when he wasn’t? A Columbia spokesman said, “From the immediately available records we have no knowledge of this individual and no record of him being an accepted student.”
A couple of student visa terrorists come quickly to mind: Saudi national Khalid Aldawsari who was found guilty in June of a jihadist bomb plot and Faisal Shahzad the would-be Times Square bomber.
Another aspect how a Muslim immigrant, with few social connections in Alabama, spent his spare time exploring Islamist websites which are full of anti-American lies. Young Muslim males anywhere are susceptible to being drawn into jihadist activities by such means, like US-born Betim Kaziu.
Plus the case is yet another example of why Muslim immigration and temporary visas of any sort are are threat to national security and must end.
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – An Uzbek man who came to America pursuing an Ivy League medical degree but wound up working seven days a week at a mall kiosk in Alabama was sentenced to more than 15 years in prison Friday for plotting to kill President Barack Obama.
U.S. District Judge Abdul K. Kallon imposed the sentence on Ulugbek Kodirov, 22. He had faced up to 30 years in prison.
Written and oral court pleadings showed Kodirov, whose parents are professionals who worked for the government in his native Uzbekistan, was accepted to study medicine at Columbia University in New York but never enrolled because his English was too poor.
He later moved to Alabama for a job and worked at the massive Riverchase Galleria in suburban Hoover, where the defense said he used his laptop and free wi-fi service to connect with extremists who turned him against the United States.
Wearing an orange jail uniforms and leg chains, Kodirov apologized in halting English.
As Robert Caro wonderfully recounts the story in Means of Ascent, in 1948, Johnson was trailing six days after the election, and seemed certain to lose, when a protégé of George Parr, the “Duke of Duval” and political boss of the heavily Hispanic counties in southern Texas, “discovered” 200 allegedly uncounted ballots in Box 13, Alice, Texas. These 200 “voters” cast their ballots 198 to 2 for Johnson, putting him over the top. The election, of course, was stolen: the added 200 names were written in a different colored ink, and Stevenson’s attorneys tracked down the final name on the original voter list, who affirmed that he had voted just as the polls were closing.
It’s another sad testament to Americans’ lack of knowledge about their own history that Holder can portray voter fraud as a non-event in a state where a major election scam is part of a Texas President’s lore.
The president was a no-show, Joe Biden exhorted the crowd to stick with Obama and Mitt Romney gave a frank address to the nation’s oldest civil-rights organization in which he vowed to repeal ObamaCare.
But the most important news out of the NAACP in Houston this week came from Attorney General Eric Holder, who vowed to continue the Justice Department’s war on states trying to ensure the integrity of the electoral system.
“The arc of American history has always moved toward expanding the electorate,” said Holder.
True enough. A series of constitutional amendments, buttressed by acts of Congress and Supreme Court decisions, has expanded the franchise to include blacks, women and young people.
Yet that doesn’t mean it ought to include foreigners, felons or the deceased.
But how else to interpret the Justice Department’s war on in-state efforts to tighten voter-ID requirements and prevent ballot-box fraud?
Whether it’s trying to block Florida from purging its rolls of noncitizens or taking Texas to federal court over its new photo-ID requirement, Holder has signaled an unseemly coziness with potential fraud in pursuit of political advantage. Continue reading this article
Below, diverse Latin grifters rest up in a shelter near Mexico City as they travel to the US to steal American jobs.
The focus of the problem is a flop house for illegals run by the Catholic church in Lecheria, near the capital city, where locals are sick and tired of the problems the foreigners bring.
The Hondurans, Salvadorans et al have earned their disapproval by the usual undesirable behavior common to criminal opportunists with no roots in the place. They get drunk in public, beg for money, litter, attack women and rob each other as well as Mexicans. “Almost everybody gets assaulted” is a description of the shelter.
As a result of the complaints of townspeople, the Catholics closed the shelter — but promise to be back with a new improved version in the future. In the meantime, local folks are happy with the peace and quiet.
Many Americans would agree with Mexicans in this case that an alien-free community is preferable.
Tultitlan, Mexico (CNN) — Neighbors on this tiny, sun-soaked street know each other’s names. They pray together at a church with stained-glass windows that they can see from their front steps.
But for years, they say, immigrants have been pushing their community apart.
Residents here say they stopped feeling safe when strangers started lingering on street corners and leering at locals. They created neighborhood watch patrols to keep crime in check.
“It’s not that we’re against immigrants,” Osvaldo Espinosa says. “We just want them to get rid of that house.”
It’s the kind of complaint heard often these days in small-town America or on blocks in big U.S. cities struggling with a flood of foreign residents.
But this house is in Mexico, where activists warn that fierce anti-immigrant sentiment in some places has become just as strong as it is north of the border.
More than 100 immigrants from Central America arrive daily in Lecheria, this working-class neighborhood outside the country’s capital. Most are Guatemalans, Hondurans and Salvadorans who don’t stay long; they are stowaways on cargo trains heading north to the United States.
But for more than three years, many of them have stopped on Espinosa’s street for warm meals and a few nights’ sleep at an immigrant shelter. It is one of dozens in Mexico run by the Roman Catholic Church.
Priests said the Casa del Migrante — the immigrant’s house — was a safe haven for vulnerable people on an increasingly perilous journey.
Residents told public officials, reporters and police that people living near the shelter were the ones who were in danger.
Black and white banners went up outside homes. “Residents of Lecheria demand the closing of the Casa del Migrante.”
Inside the shelter, words were painted on a wall beside a map of Mexico: “If the immigrant is not your brother, God is not your father.” Continue reading this article
TULTITLAN, Mexico (AP) — Deported from the United States after years working construction in New Jersey, Hector Augusto Lopez decided to rebuild his life in his hometown in eastern Honduras.
He found a steady job in a shoe store in Catacamas. Then, in March, he watched horrified as robbers shot three customers to death before his eyes. Soon after, he decided to make the hard and dangerous journey north again.
“In Honduras there is a lot of violence, a lot of robberies and a lot of poverty,” Lopez, 28, said as he waited to jump a cargo train just outside Mexico City on a recent afternoon. “There is no future there.”
Half a block away, dozens more U.S.-bound Central American migrants waited outside an overflowing one-story, crammed shelter, napping on pieces of cardboard, wrapping themselves in garbage bags against the cold and trading stories about their journeys north.
While the number of Mexicans heading to the U.S. has dropped dramatically, a surge of Central American migrants is making the 1,000-mile northbound journey this year, fueled in large part by the rising violence brought by the spread of Mexican drug cartels. Other factors, experts say, are an easing in migration enforcement by Mexican authorities, and a false perception that Mexican criminal gangs are not preying on migrants as much as they had been.
Central American migration remains small compared to the numbers of Mexicans still headed north, but their steeply rising numbers speak starkly to the violence and poverty at home. The perils of the journey have pushed smuggling fees as high as $7,000, as much as double the earlier rates, for a trip that takes weeks, or even months for those delayed by robberies, health problems or difficulties finding transportation.
Honduras, with a population of 8.3 million, had the world’s highest homicide rate in 2010, with 6,200 killings, or 82.1 murders per 100,000 inhabitants. That’s up from 57 murders per 100,000 inhabitants in 2008. Neighboring El Salvador had 66 homicides per 100,000 in 2010. The U.S., by comparison, saw about 5 homicides per 100,000 people. Continue reading this article
When John Morton (he of the infamous Morton Memo proto-amnesty) testified before a Congressional committee on Tuesday and said he would take action against communities that protect illegal alien criminals, I wondered what strange switcheroo had happened among Obama acolytes. The proximity of elections does focus minds in Washington as little else can on issues the little citizens care about, like public safety.
It’s hard to believe that the Obama crew has turned over a new leaf on enforcing immigration law, based on previous behavior.
While Obama has crowed about deporting a lot of bad guys, he admitted to an audience of hispanic journalists that the high numbers were “deceptive” because of phony baloney counting.
After eviscerating most of Arizona’s strict immigration law in court last month, the Obama administration is now considering going after the other side by suing sanctuary cities to force them to cooperate with federal deportation efforts, an agency chief told Congress on Monday.
John Morton, director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said he’s asked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to take legal action against Cook County, President Obama’s home county in Illinois, to force it to turn over illegal immigrants for removal. He said he’s now awaiting a final answer from the Justice Department.
“They wanted to see how certain pieces of court decisions came out. I expect to hear from them shortly, and I can tell you that resolving the issue in Cook County is very important for me,” Mr. Morton testified to the House Homeland Security subcommittee on the border.
Cook County officials decided several years ago they did not want to cooperate with federal authorities’ immigration efforts and stopped providing them information that could help with deportations of those booked into county jails.
Last year, the county enacted an ordinance officially halting compliance except in the most major of cases, and then only after they reached a financial agreement with the federal government to cover the costs.
Mr. Morton said that’s effectively dried up all cooperation.
“Right now, it’s not a question of Cook County releasing some individuals to us,” he said. “They are releasing no individuals to us, including very violent offenders, and I just don’t think that’s good policy.” Continue reading this article
Yet another poll shows that the American people still approve of Arizona’s state approach to immigration enforcement, in which law and sovereignty are taken seriously. Not only that, they wish their state was more like Arizona in cracking down on immigration anarchy.
Perhaps the average citizen knows that legal immigrants are required to carry their green cards at all times by law, yet liberal scribblers continue to fret over the possibility that illegals might face a similar requirement.
(e) Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d). Any alien who fails to comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined not to exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than thirty days, or both.
Regarding the issue of what to do with the millions of existing illegal infiltrators, which concerns the anti-sovereignty cadres so thoroughly, nearly half of those polled (49%) thought the foreigners should be sent along home.
After the Supreme Court upheld Arizona’s law allowing police to check immigration status of those they stop in the course of their duties, an overwhelming majority of Americans say they want to see their own states enact the same kinds of laws.
The latest The Washington Times/JZ Analytics survey, released Monday night, found about two-thirds of all likely voters would like to see their own police be able to check status during routine traffic stops. Support was high across most demographics, including self-identified Republicans and independents, and even Hispanics favored the policy by a 55 percent to 41 percent margin.
After a challenge by the Obama administration, the Supreme Court last month struck down most of Arizona’s 2010 law that tried to create state penalties for illegal immigration, but the high court said states and localities do have the authority to empower their police to check the immigration status of those they detain during their routine duties.
All of the justices agreed the checks were legal in theory, though they said that could change if police use them in a way that violates other rights, such as detaining someone for too long.
In the poll, voters were told arguments for and against the law, then asked if they wanted to see their own communities enact something similar. Overall, 50 percent of voters said they “strongly” agreed with enacting that law, and another 17 percent “somewhat” agreed. Just 29 percent strongly or somewhat disagreed, and the rest were uncertain. Continue reading this article
In Italy, the criminal behavior of immigrants on public transportation has become so extreme that a politician has called for separate coaches for women and Italians. Violence against the public is a way that the increasing Muslim population shows that it is taking over, neighborhood by neighborhood, or bus by bus.
The need for such segregation demonstrates the failure of diverse immigration in Europe. Attacks on passengers are reported, although it’s likely that the media keeps the lid on such incidents so the populace will not further doubt the imposed ideology of “diversity” in the form of Islamic immigration.
Below is a video from 2010 illustrating a diverse public transportation experience in France — Muslims On Board!
A delegate from the Italian Northern League in Milan proposes to keep subway coaches only for italians due to the bad behavior of immigrants
The Northern League delegate Matteo Salvini proposed today to keep some subway coaches in Milan only for Italians and women due to what he called “bad behavior of immigrants”.
Salvini had no doubts in linking the rising lack of safety in the streets with the immigration phenomenon, to the point of declaring that “in ten years, natives from Milan will be a minority” and they will end up traveling separately in the subway just like crippled and disabled veterans in past times.
“If immigration is not stopped, then we will reach this point”, he assured. Meanwhile, “we ask for one or two coaches to be reserved for women, taking into consideration those hundreds of denounces for aggressions, sexual molestations, insults and bothering comments they have to endure every day”, he specified. 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.