One measure would be the Karachi dentist who has 24/7 armed security, shown below (from the Saturday front page of the Washington Post).
Even though Obama declared al Qaeda to be “on the run” before his 2012 election, the various jihad franchises have going gangbusters of late, except for Egypt where the Muslim Brotherhood was rejected by the people. The Taliban in particular in on the march with its growing strength in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
The worsening violence in Karachi has prompted locals to purchase armored vehicles and weapons to protect families from kidnapping and robbery. It sounds like Mexico City, only with jihadists being the actors, plus nuclear weapons lurking in the background.
The upcoming pullout of American troops from Afghanistan is seen as a victory by the most extreme of Allah’s gangsters the Taliban. As tiresome to Americans as the seemingly endless Afghan war has been, the removal of US forces from that very dangerous neighborhood may have an explosive result.
Is there a foreign policy plan in Washington at all?
KARACHI, Pakistan — Armored car sales have soared, and some new luxury apartments feature bulletproof glass. Local police officers, slain this year at an average rate of one per day, are demoralized. And now even the journalists are trying to arm themselves.
Pakistan’s biggest city has been plagued by crime and political violence for decades, with Urdu- and Pashto-speaking groups battling for influence. But the bloodshed is worsening as the domestic Taliban insurgency expands.
The militant group was largely responsible for a 90 percent spike in terrorist attacks in Karachi last year, according to the Pak Institute for Peace Studies, which monitors violence. In the latest such attack, an explosion tore through a bus carrying police Thursday morning, killing a dozen officers. The Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility.
The bloodshed in this city reflects the Pakistani Taliban’s growing national offensive against the government and religious minorities. But the insurgents are also using violence to take control of some city neighborhoods, where ordinary residents are forced to contribute to their cause, analysts said.
The mayhem is raising concerns that one of the world’s most populous cities is teetering on the brink of lawlessness.
“Something must be done soon, if Pakistan is to be saved,” said Nasir Jamal, a deputy director of Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), a major political party.
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif insists that Karachi can be tamed through targeted security operations and peace talks launched last month with the Pakistani Taliban. But residents of the country’s economic and cultural hub are deeply worried.
“Everyone is just waiting their turn to be killed,” said Zamin Ali, son of a prominent Shiite attorney who was fatally shot outside a Karachi courthouse in July, part of a surge of sectarian killings being carried out by the Taliban and other Sunni-dominated militant groups. Continue reading this article
A bad refugee kid gone wrong has reappeared, after pleading guilty as a 17-year-old to the murder of Mary Bethell (pictured), 47, a substance-abuse counselor in Aurora, Illinois, three years earlier. Now Garang Deng, formerly of Sudan, regrets confessing to the murder and wants a new trial. It was a long strange trip getting to this point, and the story is again being thrust upon the public, unfortunately.
Do-gooders love to rescue diverse children from troubled areas of the world, even youngsters deeply damaged by exposure to terrible violence. By the time the little kiddies grow up imitating the sort of behavior they experienced, the noble rescuers have gone on to other projects, and local law enforcement has to pick up the pieces.
When three young African refugees were being sentenced in 2009 for the attempted kidnapping of a Virginia woman for ransom, a retired resettlement professional testified, “They went through terror themselves, so I couldn’t imagine them inflicting that on anyone else.”
That’s the naive attitude of elite do-gooders. They don’t understand how the imprinting of violence on young minds often overwhelms any revulsion to it, just as an abused child of an alcoholic hates the condition but may succumb to it.
However Deng’s legal situation plays out, he was a human time bomb of the sort unwise to import to this country as a refugee. As a boy in Sudan, he experienced terrible brutality and when he was relocated to America he began committing increasingly violent crimes as a young teenager, culminating in murder. It shouldn’t be a surprise.
New trial possible for man whose plea in Aurora woman’s shooting death was tossed out
When Garang Deng pleaded guilty to murder more than four years ago, it seemed like the final act of a tale that stretched from war-torn Sudan to a peaceful Kane County bike path.
After breaking into the home of Marilyn Bethell of Aurora in October 2005, Deng took her to the Illinois Prairie Path and shot her once in the head, Kane County prosecutors said.
Almost immediately after his guilty plea in 2009, Deng regretted it and began the legal process to withdraw the plea. An appeals court ruled in his favor in June.
Deng is scheduled to return to Kane County on Tuesday in his first court appearance in legal proceedings that eventually could lead to a new trial.
“We’re preparing as if we’re going to trial,” State’s Attorney Joe McMahon said.
Deng, who was 14 at the time of the slaying, was a Sudanese refugee whose family had left the African nation when he was a young boy to seek a more peaceful life. But Deng accumulated a history of juvenile offenses in DuPage County beginning at age 11, authorities said. Continue reading this article
There has been a debate going about whether an entitlement culture is being created by ObamaCare and other liberal programs of freebies. One such discussion occurred on Fox News, asking whether the healthcare law was a “disincentive to work.”
Certainly the current regime is engaged in behavioral training to encourage dependence on government, a liberal value. But the larger picture over decades is one of the economic system being less friendly to the needs of average folks. Perhaps they are hedging their bets by taking whatever is available.
The latest blow to American hopes for economic survival has been the rapid rise of smart machines, from office automation to actual robots, which now can perform complex tasks formerly done only by humans. Who needs a secretary to take dictation when software can turn speech into written words on a computer?
There has been some incidence of manufacturing returning to the US, but the small print reveals that the new plants will be increasingly automated, with far fewer humans being needed than in the previous era.
Foxconn’s plans to open a high-tech plant in the US may be part of the larger revival of US manufacturing. But don’t expect American jobs to come with the boom in business. [. . .]
What does that do for US jobs? Not much. A new study by McKinsey argues that manufacturers will increasingly turn to ”next-shoring,” or locating production closer to where their customers are located to satisfy local tastes and eliminate potentially damaging supply shortages. In theory, this should play well to the US economy, the mothership of global consumerism. But workers will still lose out to advanced robotics, which can perform increasingly sophisticated manufacturing operations, and 3D printers, which will be able to replace component suppliers. ”Cheaper, more proficient robots that can substitute for a wider variety of human tasks are another reason companies may locate more manufacturing closer to major demand markets, even where wage rates are higher,” the report says.
A more upbeat report came from CBS, touting a robot that is “helping” the human workers by doing repetitive boring tasks. But a machine that cost only $22,000 and can work 24/7 has got to be very appealing to CEOs, who would probably like lots more like that.
On Monday, a Guatemalan ex-soldier, Jorge Sosa (pictured), was sentenced to ten years in prison for lying about his past in order to enter this country and become an American citizen. The jail time sounds pretty slim for a man who took part in the massacre of at least 160 people in the village of Dos Erres in 1982, but the real accounting will hopefully occur when he is deported to Guatemala where wartime atrocities are still remembered.
Sosa is a perfect example of how the worst war criminals on earth can waltz in to stupid-generous America and make themselves at home. The details about the massacre makes for gruesome testimony, such as how villagers thrown into a well, followed by a grenade. But Sosa lied on his asylum application that he was a morally upstanding fellow, suitable for American admittance, and he got it.
Some of the diverse war criminals admitted to America include:
● Bosnian Sulejman Mujagic, was accused of murder and torture while an Army commander during the ethnic war in the former Yugoslavia. He was arrested in Utica in 2012, where 6500 Bosnians reside in one of the largest settlements of that tribe in the country.
● Gonzalo Guevara Cerritos was arrested in 2006 for being an illegal alien and also a member of the Salvadoran military death squad that brutally murdered six priests in 1989.
● Kelbessa Negewo was an Ethiopian government official who participated in torture of political enemies who objected to the marxist regime. After immigrating to the US, he was later recognized in a New York City elevator by one of his torture victims.
● Marko Boskic was a Serb militia triggerman who helped execute thousands of residents of Srebrenica in the 1995 massacre. Even so, he entered the US in 2000 using his real name and settled in Peabody Massachusetts where he had numerous arrests for drunk driving and such, but was only tracked down when Boston Globe reporter Elizabeth Neuffer investigated him. In 2010, the US extradited Boskic to Bosnia where he was tried and imprisoned.
In fact, this nation has a terrible history of letting bad guys in, whether they are categorized as terrorists or mass-murdering war criminals. The idea that US screening is too tough is ludicrous, given the record.
As despicable as ordinary war criminals are, most lead quiet lives in the United States where they seek to hide from their shameful pasts. But the jihadists that the administration will most certainly admit with its new permissive policy are active, willful enemies who want to kill infidel Americans.
RIVERSIDE, Calif. (AP) — A former Guatemalan special forces soldier was sentenced Monday to a decade in an American prison for lying on a U.S. citizenship application about his role in a civil war massacre that decimated a village more than three decades ago.
Jorge Sosa, 55, who taught martial arts in Riverside County, was also stripped of his American citizenship after being convicted of failing to disclose his alleged participation in the killing of at least 160 people in the village of Dos Erres.
The former second lieutenant was not formally tried in California for war crimes, but U.S. District Court Judge Virginia A. Phillips noted that a jury found Sosa committed crimes in Dos Erres after comrades testified that he fired a weapon into a well filled with screaming villagers and stood by as soldiers under his command raped and killed women.
“These are the crimes the defendant lied about and didn’t disclose,” Phillips told the court before handing down the maximum 10-year sentence. “The particular facts of what occurred on Dec. 7, 1982, at Dos Erres cannot be characterized in any other way than as crimes.”
The case is one of several aimed at perpetrators of the massacre that took place at the height of Guatemala’s 36-year civil war. In that nation, five former soldiers have each been sentenced to more than 6,000 years in prison for the killings, while one of Sosa’s former comrades is also serving a decade-long sentence in a U.S. prison for lying on his immigration forms. Continue reading this article
Swiss elites were disappointed in the voters’ rejection of the EU vision of open borders that has been such a failure in Europe, at least in the minds of many citizens. The vote was hailed by eurosceptics, like UKIP’s Nigel Farage who described the outcome as “wonderful news for national sovereignty and freedom lovers throughout Europe.”
However, the Swiss government was not happy with the results:
Euro-sceptic parties hail a blow for ‘people power’ as Swiss vote to scrap deal allowing EU workers in
Switzerland voted yesterday to reimpose curbs on immigration from the European Union, in a referendum that is likely to cause anger in Brussels.
The nation of eight million voted by a 50.3 majority in favour of a “Stop Mass Immigration” proposal pushed by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party (SVP). The decision means the government will have to renegotiate a deal struck with Brussels seven years ago that gave most EU citizens free access to the Swiss labour market.
The SVP had said that the 80,000 EU citizens who were now coming in every year was roughly ten times the initial predictions back in 2007, and that it had overburned the education and health systems. Public transport was also struggling to cope, as was the housing market.
Switzerland’s seven-member multiparty government, the Federal Council, in which the SVP has one cabinet post, had opposed the reintroduction of curbs, saying it could hit the economy and undermine the country’s relationship with the EU.
But under Switzerland’s highly devolved system of rule, where most key decisions are taken by popular referendum, the government has no choice but to respect the result. Continue reading this article
Jeh Johnson, the new guy who replaced Janet Napolitano as head of the Department of Homeland Security, remarked recently about illegal aliens, “Everyone knows we have millions of undocumented immigrants in this country, and they’re not going away; they’re not going to self-deport.” His comments came during a February 7 speaking event at the Woodrow Wilson Center with former Congresswoman Jane Harman, now CEO of the place.
That observation is simply not true. When tough enforcement measures were applied following passage of Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law, illegals packed up and left en masse for more permissive locales. Despite their obnoxious lawbreaking, lawbreaking foreigners are rational creatures who come to make lots of American dollars and act according to that goal.
If the nation as a whole enforced borders and the workplace, most of the foreign job thieves would go back to where they came from. Self-deport, in other words.
That’s right. They go to other, less law-abiding states to steal American jobs. All states should emulate Arizona to limit jobs to citizens and legal immigrants, as well as keep their dollars in America and avoid billions being shipped offshore as remittances.
What’s the rush? Have citizens forgotten how loose standards of who gets into America was a major contributor to the 9/11 terror attacks? Why isn’t the protection of the American people the top priority of the government? Open borders for jihadists is a really bad idea these days.
On Fox News Sunday, House Homeland Security Committee Chair Mike McCaul said, “Syria is probably the largest and most significant threat to the homeland security of the United States today.” [Watch.] He was responding to a question about US residents participating in jihad in Syria, but the effect of admitting thousands of permissively screened refugees could be similarly dangerous.
Tucker Carlson broached the policy change on a Fox show, and his mind was obviously spinning with the concept of “limited terror ties” being acceptable to Washington. His guest was retired INS Senior Special Agent Mike Cutler, who analyzed the difficulties, noting, “When someone comes from a country involved with terrorism, it’s almost impossible to adequately vet them quickly.”
The New York Times covered the important national security issue — on page A10:
Republican lawmakers are assailing new exemptions from antiterrorism laws the Obama administration issued this week for war zone refugees seeking to come to the United States, saying the rules are examples of unilateral action by President Obama that weaken immigration security.
The administration, under pressure to respond to the crisis of more than 2.3 million Syrians who have fled the civil war in their country, published two rules on Wednesday that will exempt refugees from provisions banning terrorists. The exemptions apply if the refugees provided only minor material support, such as meals or medical aid, to armed groups that have not been officially designated as terrorist organizations, or if they gave such support under pressure.
The Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Robert W. Goodlatte of Virginia, said the administration was “yet again abusing the powers granted to it” by Congress.
“With today’s national security threats,” Mr. Goodlatte asked, “why would we ever willingly loosen our immigration laws to allow those who have helped terrorists game the system?” [ . . . ]
Officials said the exemptions, which would immediately affect some 3,000 asylum applicants, had been in the works for years. They said the administration was acting under authority it was granted in a bipartisan compromise adopted in 2007 under President George W. Bush. That deal was struck by Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee who has a keen interest in refugee issues, and John Kyl of Arizona, a Republican senator at the time.
The unilateral action by the administration to make jihadist admittance easier is a dangerous piece of work, even for the current bunch. See White House Orders Relaxed Standards for Refugees for background, including cases of serious bad guys being welcomed.
WASHINGTON—U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, commented on the Administration’s latest executive immigration decree which loosens immigration screening standards for those who may pose a threat to national security:
“Kenneth Palinkas, who represents our nation’s immigration officers at USCIS, recently charged that our immigration processing system has become a ‘visa clearinghouse for the world.’ Now, a newly disclosed internal audit of immigration procedures reveals that at least 70% of asylum applications contained warning signs of fraud. We also know that asylum-seekers at the southwest border have exploited a glaring enforcement loophole by simply asserting they face a ‘credible fear’ in their home countries. The frequent result is that those making the assertion, instead of being promptly removed or detained, are instead released into the U.S. pending a determination on their claims that may occur years into the future, and do not show up for the hearings.
In light of these and other facts, it is thus deeply alarming that the Obama Administration would move unilaterally to relax admissions standards for asylum-seekers and potentially numerous other applicants for admission who have possible connections to insurgent or terrorist groups. This includes terror groups not yet designated: Al Qaeda was not designated by the Department of State as a foreign terrorist organization until 1999—long after the first attack on the World Trade Center. The 2011 case of suspected terror operatives from Iraq being admitted to the U.S. only further underscores that our immigration system lacks the safeguards necessary to protect our country. We need to tighten security standards for asylum, not relax them even further. Continue reading this article
The current administration apparently believes that welcoming Muslim refugees is more important than national security. Otherwise it wouldn’t have unilaterally loosened the rules by which persons having terrorist ties are kept out. Now they can get in.
Apparently, the reduction of standards was done to enable more Syrians to enter the US (something that has been in the pipeline for a while):
President Barack Obama’s administration announced on Wednesday that it had eased some immigration rules to allow more of the millions of Syrians forced from their homes during the country’s three-year civil war to come to the United States.
Their suffering is regrettable, but importing more thousands more unfriendlies into America is not the answer. Why don’t majority Muslim nations take them — why is the West supposed to admit likely enemies?
CIS’s Jessica Vaughan pointed out that the executive order removes the burden of proof from the applicant, even though the political asylum program has a 70 percent fraud rate already. One example discussed was the Tsarnaev family who received asylum without a background check, the two sons of whom bombed the Boston Marathon, killing three:
Note to White House: the country needs tighter standards on who is admitted into America, not a loosening during this dangerous time. National security must be the top concern of government, not generosity toward sketchy foreigners.
The Obama administration has unilaterally eased restrictions on asylum seekers with loose or incidental ties to terror and insurgent groups, in a move one senator called “deeply alarming.”
The change, approved by Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Secretary of State John Kerry, was announced Wednesday in the Federal Register. It would allow some individuals who provided “limited material support” to terror groups to be considered for entry into the U.S.
Supporters of the change, including Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., argued that the current ban on anyone who has ever aided terrorists has unfairly blocked thousands of refugees.
“The existing interpretation was so broad as to be unworkable,” Leahy said in a statement. “It resulted in deserving refugees and asylees being barred from the United States for actions so tangential and minimal that no rational person would consider them supporters of terrorist activities.”
But critics say despite the good intentions, the change raises security concerns, particularly after a report published Thursday on asylum fraud.
“In light of these and other facts, it is thus deeply alarming that the Obama administration would move unilaterally to relax admissions standards for asylum seekers and potentially numerous other applicants for admission who have possible connections to insurgent or terrorist groups,” Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said in a statement on Thursday. “We need to tighten security standards for asylum, not relax them even further.”
Sessions also complained that the administration was, on its own, altering the Immigration and Nationality Act. “What is the point of Congress passing a law if the administration abuses its ‘discretion’ to say that law simply no longer applies?” he said. Continue reading this article
When the slightest snow flurry or lost puppy occurs in the broadcast center of New York City, the event is broadcast loud and long to the world. But a terrorist attack on a California power substation near San Jose, not so much.
Nope, in the California incident, communication cables to the power substation were cut and snipers fired over 100 shots at the plant, knocking out 17 transformers. No arrests have been made in the April 16 assault.
April Sniper Attack Knocked Out Substation, Raises Concern for Country’s Power Grid
SAN JOSE, Calif.—The attack began just before 1 a.m. on April 16 last year, when someone slipped into an underground vault not far from a busy freeway and cut telephone cables.
Within half an hour, snipers opened fire on a nearby electrical substation. Shooting for 19 minutes, they surgically knocked out 17 giant transformers that funnel power to Silicon Valley. A minute before a police car arrived, the shooters disappeared into the night.
To avoid a blackout, electric-grid officials rerouted power around the site and asked power plants in Silicon Valley to produce more electricity. But it took utility workers 27 days to make repairs and bring the substation back to life.
Nobody has been arrested or charged in the attack at PG&E Corp.’s Metcalf transmission substation. It is an incident of which few Americans are aware. But one former federal regulator is calling it a terrorist act that, if it were widely replicated across the country, could take down the U.S. electric grid and black out much of the country.
The attack was “the most significant incident of domestic terrorism involving the grid that has ever occurred” in the U.S., said Jon Wellinghoff, who was chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at the time.
The Wall Street Journal assembled a chronology of the Metcalf attack from filings PG&E made to state and federal regulators; from other documents including a video released by the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Department; and from interviews, including with Mr. Wellinghoff.
The 64-year-old Nevadan, who was appointed to FERC in 2006 by President George W. Bush and stepped down in November, said he gave closed-door, high-level briefings to federal agencies, Congress and the White House last year. As months have passed without arrests, he said, he has grown increasingly concerned that an even larger attack could be in the works. He said he was going public about the incident out of concern that national security is at risk and critical electric-grid sites aren’t adequately protected.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation doesn’t think a terrorist organization caused the Metcalf attack, said a spokesman for the FBI in San Francisco. Investigators are “continuing to sift through the evidence,” he said.
Some people in the utility industry share Mr. Wellinghoff’s concerns, including a former official at PG&E, Metcalf’s owner, who told an industry gathering in November he feared the incident could have been a dress rehearsal for a larger event.
“This wasn’t an incident where Billy-Bob and Joe decided, after a few brewskis, to come in and shoot up a substation,” Mark Johnson, retired vice president of transmission for PG&E, told the utility security conference, according to a video of his presentation. “This was an event that was well thought out, well planned and they targeted certain components.” When reached, Mr. Johnson declined to comment further. Continue reading this article
Young jihadist fellows can learn combat and bombing techniques when they volunteer to kill for Allah on the Syrian front. It’s not a bad thing when hostile Muslims are energetically blasting each other, but the survivors from Europe and the United States will have deadly new skills to employ when they return home.
Has anyone noticed yet that Muslim immigration in the name of total diversity has been a really bad idea? Not every Muslim is a murderous Soldier of Allah, but some are, so why admit any?
Fox News’ Greg Palkot reported on Tuesday that the number of fighters in Syria from America is estimated to be 70, but that’s nothing compared to the nearly 2,000 trained jihad killers who may head back to Europe after Syria is done.
One of the reasons this subject has come up has been intelligence hearings in the House and Senate in recent days. You can watch Tuesday’s House Intelligence Committee hearing Global Threats to the U.S. on C-SPAN that includes the new FBI Director Comey, as well as CIA Director Brennan and DNI Director Clapper.
For the second time in a week, the nation’s top intelligence chiefs Tuesday issued a scathing assessment of the global threats facing the United States, warning that Syria is becoming a base from which extremist, Al Qaeda-linked groups could attack the U.S.
“We are concerned about the use of Syrian territory by the Al Qaeda organization to recruit individuals and develop the capability to be able not just to carry out attacks inside of Syria, but also to use Syria as a launching pad,” said CIA Director John Brennan at a hearing before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
“There are camps inside of both Iraq and Syria that are used by Al Qaeda to develop capabilities that are applicable, both in the theater, as well as beyond.”
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper put the threat assessment in stark terms: “Looking back over my more than half a century in intelligence, I have not experienced a time when we’ve been beset by more crises and threats around the globe,” he said. Continue reading this article
As Coulter observes, “Citing surveys from the Pew Research Center, the Pew Hispanic Center, Gallup, NBC News, Harris polling, the Annenberg Policy Center, Latino Decisions, the Center for Immigration Studies and the Hudson Institute, Schlafly’s report overwhelmingly demonstrates that merely continuing our current immigration policies spells doom for the Republican Party. ”
Every House Republican should be strongly educated to the fact that the big-government preference of Latin cultures does not go away: hispanics are ready-made Democrats, so don’t import millions more of them. The following Pew graphic gets a full-page redesign by Eagle Forum shown further below.
Eagle’s presentation clarifies the cultural difference over generations:
The Eagle Forum report is a double-barreled blast of accumulated knowledge about the stubbornness of diverse culture. Friends of American sovereignty could use its helpful polling data should they phone House Republicans with their concerns:
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.