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.
A recent Fox News poll suggests that citizens are sick of immigration anarchy and want the system made into an orderly procedure. Fifty-five percent of voters want fewer legal immigrants admitted. Only 3 percent think border security is too strict, while 60 percent regard it as too lax. Sixty-eight percent want adequate border control before other immigration measures are enacted.
Curiously, a strong majority supports a “path to citizenship” as long as certain requirements are in place, the usual list of paying back taxes, learning English, and passing a background check. The 1986 amnesty had requirements too, but an estimated third of those admitted made fraudulent applications. If persons being polled were aware of the Reagan Amnesty’s many failures, it’s likely fewer would want a replay of rewarding lawbreakers with nothing to benefit Americans at all.
Seriously, the current “requirements” are a joke. If the Senate amnesty is passed, there will be a boom in the rubber stamp industry.
While most voters favor citizenship for illegal immigrants who meet certain requirements, there is widespread agreement that new border security should come first.
In addition, more than half say we should cut the number of legal immigrants allowed into the United States.
A just-released Fox News poll finds 55 percent of voters think fewer legal immigrants should be accepted into the U.S. That’s up from 43 percent in 2010.
Majorities of Republicans (67 percent) and independents (53 percent) as well as a plurality of Democrats (47 percent) want to decrease legal immigration.
Overall, 28 percent of voters say the U.S. should increase legal immigration.
The U.S. Senate took up immigration reform this month. The debate took a turn with the Boston Marathon Bombings. The suspected terrorist who was killed in a police shootout was a legal permanent resident, while his still-hospitalized younger brother became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2011. Continue reading this article
Is sanity breaking out after the Boston Marathon terror bombings about the foolishness of admitting Muslims to the US? There are tiny signs.
Nobody doubts the liberal cred of Democrat operative Bob Beckel. On Monday, he caused many a far-left jaw to drop with his suggestion on the Fox News show The Five that Muslim students are potentially dangerous characters and we should suspend visas for a couple years to sort things out. (Why not forever?)
“There are 75,000 Muslim students on visas in this country,” he said. “A student visa is easiest thing to get. One of people in 9/11 was on a student visa, and there have been others on student visas.
“How many of those have been looked at very carefully? That is one of problems. We can say only a few have gotten in on student visas but we have a lot of students here who may themselves harbor some feelings [of] resentment toward the United States. They come from countries where they are frankly brainwashed about the United States from the beginning. Their leaders don’t like the United States.”
Bringing Muslim students to this country is feel-good foreign policy on the cheap for the government, spreading the liberal ideals of the State Department while endangering Americans. There’s no evidence that educating enemies helps this country, yet the program soldiers on with little opposition.
Beckel also mentioned that 20 percent of the Muslims who entered by student visas never show up for class. Finding and expelling those visa violaters would be an intelligent thing to do from a public safety viewpoint.
Interestingly, radio host Laura Ingraham had an expanded version of the idea this week, that admitting asylees and even tourists, from hostile Islamic regions is a bad idea.
Are people finally waking up to the fact that Muslim immigration is a dangerous public policy and should end? Islam is the most powerful propaganda system in world history, with its promise of eternal heavenly virgins for jihadists and five-times-daily reinforcement ritual (aka prayers to Allah). The Boston bomber brothers seemed to be assimilating normally, but at some point the call of Islam took hold of their minds, and we know the rest.
The article below answers a question I’ve been mulling, in particular since a Saudi student was early named as a possible Boston bomber — just how many Saudis are lurking in the nation’s colleges these days?
(Interestingly, the foreigner who was an early person of interest in the Boston bombing investigation, Abdulrahman Ali Al-Harbi, turned out to be a national security threat who would be deported, but then curiously wouldn’t be deported — a disturbing mystery that remains unexplained.)
The graph shown is from last year and doesn’t reflect the new high number of Saudi students: 34,139 enrolled. That figure doesn’t show any who may have dropped out to pursue jihad, a behavior which has been known to happen.
The article below has the relevant numbers but fails to note the origin of the program. Following the 9/11 attack, in which 15 of 19 hijackers were Saudi nationals, Prince Abdullah leaned on his pal President George Bush to allow a scholarship program in America to promote mutual understanding etc., which they agreed upon in 2005. In that year, just 2500 Saudis were studying in the US. The program has been growing like crazy ever since, despite some notable failures, e.g. the Saudi national Khalid Aldawsari who was convicted last June of plotting a bomb attack in west Texas. He had come originally as an engineering student to Texas Tech on a generous Abdullah scholarship.
Of course, a little thing like a terrorist conviction wouldn’t shut down an important diversity-promoting cross-cultural program that also brought fat tuition checks to money-scrounging American universities.
Remember, President Obama was determined to gut the Second Amendment “If there’s even one life that can be saved” but the clear danger of Muslim immigration, not so much. Liberal America has priorities, and public safety is not one of them.
(CNSNews.com) – The number of Saudi Arabian students in the United States has increased by more than 500 percent since Sept. 11, 2001–when Hani Hanjour, a Saudi national who came here on a student visa flew American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon, killing 189 people.
According to the Institute of International Education–whose numbers on foreign students in the United States are used in official reports published by the U.S. Department of Education–there were 5,579 Saudi nationals enrolled in U.S. institutions of higher education in the 2001-2002 school year. The Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks took place near the beginning of that school year.
In the 2011-2012 school year, the most recent year for which data are available, there were 34,139 Saudi nationals enrolled in institutions of higher education in the United States.
The 34,139 Saudi Arabian students in the United States for the 2011-2012 school year was more than the total of 30,256 undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in the University of Connecticut this school year.
From the 2001-2002 school year to the 2011-2012 school year, the number of Saudi nationals enrolled in U.S. institutions of higher education increased by 28,560.
He wrote an opinion piece for the Monday Wall Street Journal, emphasizing that the Boston Marathon bombing was not the twisted expression of disaffected youth, but a true example of jihad. Naturally the judge has gotten powerful disagreement from the left, like the President who doesn’t want to use the word “jihad” because it violates his favored narrative of personally defeating jihad by killing bin Laden. But events like the Benghazi attack and the Boston bombing indicate that murderous soldiers of Allah are still active.
Not that there is any doubt among even casual observers because a lot of the usual signs were evident: the family was Muslim from ultra-violent Chechnya, Tamarlan had a Youtube channel with extreme Islamist videos, the bombs were built to Qaeda online instructions, friends reported the older brother had started wearing Muslim-style clothing for a time and he had spent six months in the Russia-Chechnya region, which is a good length of time to get trained up in the Muslim art of death.
Mukasey also chatted up the topic on Fox News the same day:
Let’s hope the administration gets over its reluctance to recognize attacks on the U.S. for what they are.
If your concern about the threat posed by the Tsarnaev brothers is limited to assuring that they will never be in a position to repeat their grisly acts, rest easy.
The elder, Tamerlan—apparently named for the 14th-century Muslim conqueror famous for building pyramids of his victims’ skulls to commemorate his triumphs over infidels—is dead. The younger, Dzhokhar, will stand trial when his wounds heal, in a proceeding where the most likely uncertainty will be the penalty. No doubt there will be some legal swordplay over his interrogation by the FBI’s High-Value Interrogation Group without receiving Miranda warnings. But the only downside for the government in that duel is that his statements may not be used against him at trial. This is not much of a risk when you consider the other available evidence, including photo images of him at the scene of the bombings and his own reported confession to the victim whose car he helped hijack during last week’s terror in Boston.
But if your concern is over the larger threat that inheres in who the Tsarnaev brothers were and are, what they did, and what they represent, then worry—a lot. Continue reading this article
It’s been two years of below-average rainfall in the Golden (Brown) State, so water supply is concerning. The snowpack is only about half of historic levels, but new water users keep coming from around the world. How will newbies wash their lowriders if water use is restricted?
Below, California Department of Water Resources hydrologists measure the snowpack in the Sierras.
Nevertheless, Washington elites plan to shoehorn in millions more foreigners into our crowded land. The Senate amnesty bill would add a 50 percent increase in legal immigration even though America already has the most generous legal system in the world.
Today — Earth Day — the Judiciary Committee presented its immigration hearing circus with 20 witnesses that did not have a single speaker to explain the pressure of increased population on finite resources.
Modern environmentalists are too politically correct to link population growth with environmental damage, in particular resource use beyond what the earth can normally replenish, aka sustainability. When Senator Gaylord Nelson began Earth Day, he and other environmentalists like David Brower honestly discussed the connection between immigration-fueled overpopulation and the overuse of natural resources, like water.
These days, the public doesn’t hear much about overpopulation reality.
The sprinklings of rain and dustings of snow that will fall on California over the next few days are not going to make up for three of the most remarkably dry months in state history, water resources officials said Thursday.
The mountains of the Sierra, which were buried in giant mounds of snow as the new year began, are now comparatively bare. The monthly measurement of the state’s frozen water supply Thursday found 52 percent of the normal snowpack for April 1.
“This is more gloomy news for our summer water supply,” said Mark Cowin, director of the California Department of Water Resources.
The amount of water in the snowpack at this time of year is extremely important, he said, because the largest proportion of the ice that melts in the Sierra after April 1 is captured in nearby reservoirs. That water used to irrigate millions of acres of farmland and quench the thirst of most of California’s 37.8 million people.
Paltry precipitation has been a statewide issue over the past three months, which is unusual because those 90 days are normally the rainiest time of the year, said Jan Null, a meteorologist for Golden Gate Weather Services and an adjunct professor of meteorology at San Francisco State University.
Driest on record Null, a former lead forecaster for the National Weather Service, said that as of Thursday, a total of 1.72 inches of rain had fallen in San Francisco in January, February and March, the driest first three months of the year in the city since records began in 1850. That’s compared with a long-term average of 12.39 inches for those three months, which accounts for more than half of San Francisco’s average annual rainfall of 23.65 inches, he said. Continue reading this article
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.