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
Buchanan in particular disabused Hannity’s idea that the poor foreign lawbreakers are suffering “in the shadows.”
SEAN HANNITY: Now the question is if we are to follow the laws that we presently have and don’t pass an immigration bill, you still have 11 or 12 million people that are in here illegally and —
PAT BUCHANAN: Why do you have to do anything? What is this nonsense of they’re in the shadows? With due respect, they ought to be in the shadows. They’ve broken the law to get into the country….
HANNITY: But I’m asking you — they didn’t respect our laws of sovereignty, so what happens when they get in the system in someway?
BUCHANAN: Well, there’s no doubt I’m sure when I drive by some of these construction workers, you drive by them. A lot of them are hard-working people, I don’t deny that. Many of them are very friendly people. I don’t know whether folks or legal or illegal, but do nothing. You don’t have to bribe — you don’t have to give up your principled positions —
We can add the Boston Marathon terrorism to the list of failures from America’s permissive immigration system: screening is abominably loose on the entry side and the government refuses to deport undesirables when they break the law. If the country did not rubber stamp immigrants so casually, and in this case admit a questionable refugee case, then public safety and national security would not be a pathetic joke of cleaning up preventable messes. The Tsarnaev family was accepted as refugees based on a sad story. But their life in Kazakhstan cannot have been so tough since the father moved back, leaving two sons to assault the country that generously welcomed them.
Below, the three people killed in the Boston Marathon bombing,: Martin Richard, Krystle Campbell and Lu Lingzi.
Sean Collier (pictured right) was a 26-year-old security officer for MIT who was shot and killed by the Boston bomber brothers from Chechnya. Stupid immigration policy is behind all these deaths.
CIS has posted a nice list of recent wanna-be terrorists, with the reminder that 95 percent of persons on the US terrorist watchlist are foreign born, along with recent examples of immigrant terrorists in America. If the United States is screening potential immigrants for possible jihadist sympathies at all, then it’s not working.
Washington runs immigration as if the United States has no enemies on earth, when in fact there are millions who would love to murder Americans and destroy the country. Yet the politicians voting for open borders and extreme diversity refuse to admit the connection between Muslim immigration and threats to national security. The fable of universal immigration is far too costly in human and financial terms to continue. It must stop.
Islam has been at war with all non-Muslims for the last 1400 years. It’s crazy to believe otherwise just because liberals preach that “diversity is our strength.” It isn’t. Mainstream European leaders Cameron, Sarkozy and Merkel have all admitted that multicultural immigration (meaning Muslims) has been a huge mistake. We Americans should be smart enough to learn from Europe’s blunder while there is still time.
In the current case, the Boston Marathon deaths could have been prevented had authorities done their duty by deporting the older Tsarnaev brother after he was convicted for domestic violence. Interestingly, this non-enforcement occurred under the Obama administration, which presents itself as being a defender of women’s rights.
One of the Chechen terrorists who carried out the Boston Marathon bombings could have been deported years ago after a criminal conviction and the other was granted American citizenship on the 11th anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil.
Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the 26-year-old killed in a wild shootout with police, was a legal U.S. resident who nevertheless could have been removed from the country after a 2009 domestic violence conviction, according to a Judicial Watch source. That means the Obama administration missed an opportunity to deport Tsarnaev but evidently didn’t feel he represented a big enough threat.
Adding insult to injury, the other bomber, little brother Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, was rewarded with American Citizenship on September 11, 2012 in Boston, according to JW’s source. The 19-year-old, who is still on the run, was granted asylum in Arlington Virginia on September 27, 2002, JW’s source reveals.
Years before these Chechen terrorists carried out the Boston Marathon bombings Judicial Watch uncovered critical intelligence documents detailing al Qaeda’s activities in Chechnya, including the creation of a 1995 camp—ordered by Osama bin Laden—to train “international terrorists” to carry out plots against Americans and westerners.
The goal, according to the once-classified documents obtained by JW in 2011, was to “establish a worldwide Islamic state capable of directly challenging the U.S., China, Russia, and what it views as Judeo-Christian and Confucian domination.” Further, radical Islamic regimes were to be established and supported everywhere possible, from “sea to sea,” including Chechnya. “Terrorist activities are to be conducted against Americans and westerners…” according to the report issued by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). Continue reading this article
Thursday saw an instance of dueling press conferences in the big capitol city. On one side was 7/8 of the Gang of Eight Senators, plus an assortment of other high-profile open-borders enthusiasts in suits, from friend-of-hostile-Islam Grover Norquist to AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka, and representatives from the Chamber of Commerce and la Raza (“the Race”).
On the other side were concerned law enforcement officers engaged in border security, along with Senators Jeff Sessions and David Vitter plus Congressman Lou Barletta.
Senator Sessions noted, “Like 2007, this bill is amnesty before enforcement. It’s immediate legality with the promise of enforcement. And the promises of enforcement in the future appear to be even weaker than they were in 2007. The day the bill passes, illegal immigrants will have the presumption of amnesty and all Secretary Napolitano has to do is submit a vague plan within six months that may never be implemented.”
ICE Union Director Chris Crane spoke, saying “Almost a month ago we asked for a meeting with the Gang of 8 to discuss law enforcement concerns. They told us they weren’t taking meetings, but they were meeting all along with the special interests and pro-amnesty interests. Finally after public pressure grew, I got a late Monday night meeting with Sen. Rubio before this almost 1000-page bill was introduced. I raised my many public safety concerns and pleaded with them not to drop the bill until these public safety concerns from law enforcement were addressed. They dropped it anyway.”
He continued, “This bill will put the public safety at risk without doubt. It fails on interior enforcement; it’s amnesty first, enforcement perhaps never. Under the Obama administration, immigration agents could no longer arrest those who violate US immigration law; immigration agents cannot arrest an individual for entering the US illegally. We can’t arrest an individual who illegally overstays a visa. Immigration agents are prohibited from enforcing laws regarding fraudulent documents and identity theft by illegal aliens. Agents are forced to apply the DREAM Act not to children in schools but to adult inmates in jails, releasing criminals back into the communities throughout the nation, criminals who have committed felonies, who have assaulted our officers and who prey on children.”
Elsewhere in Washington the Gang of 8 enemies of American sovereignty regaled the stenographer press with self-congratulatory descriptions of their 844-page bill, negotiated in secret.
“Yes, we offer a path to citizenship to people who didn’t come here legally,” said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., anticipating opposition to that provision. “They’re here, and realistically there is nothing we can do to induce them all to return to their countries of origin.”
Apparently he snoozed through the positive effects of his own state’s immigration enforcement laws, where 100,000 illegal immigrants left Arizona after the state passed a law in 2007 that penalized businesses that hired them.
FYI to Juan McCain: It’s called “attrition” when the welcome mat is removed through tough enforcement and the illegal aliens then self-deport.
Below, a group photo of the nation shredders at the Gang of 8 presser. The G8 Senators are in the front, with a gaggle of other interested parties in the rear. Grover Norquist and top union guy Richard Trumka (w/moustache) can be seen on the far left.
WASHINGTON—U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, issued the following statement today regarding the Gang of Eight immigration proposal:
“The bill produced by the Gang of Eight is nearly 1,000 pages long and will impact every aspect of our society and every single American worker and taxpayer. It will take months—not days or weeks as the Majority proposes—to review this legislation.
Already, we know that the bill’s sponsors have abandoned their core promise to the American people that enforcement would come first. This bill is legalization first, not enforcement first. The day the bill passes there will be effective amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants, with only the same promises we have heard before of enforcement to occur at some later date. That amnesty will then become official in a matter of months—once DHS merely submits a plan for border security in the future. That’s not a trigger—that’s the honor system. DHS develops the metrics and DHS decides when those metrics are met. Why should we trust DHS to follow through—after amnesty is granted—when this administration has aggressively defied those laws already in place?
In recent years interior enforcement has been significantly undermined. And yet our interior enforcement needs are almost totally neglected in the Gang’s proposal. Alarmingly, the bill leaves intact the single greatest obstacle to immigration reform: the Administration’s abuse of prosecutorial discretion to prevent the enforcement of federal law. It will also provide safe harbor to those who have committed a variety of offenses—ranging from identity theft, to multiple immigration violations, and even those with criminal records.
This bill opens up citizenship to recent arrivals and, remarkably, millions who overstayed their visas. If adopted, this bill would send the following message to the world: if you get a U.S. visa and it expires, never leave—just stay put and evade detection. It even opens up citizenship to those who have been deported from the country.
Economic concerns abound as well. Once illegal immigrants are granted green cards, they will become eligible for generous welfare and entitlement programs. Because of how these benefits are structured, low-wage illegal immigrants who are legalized will ultimately receive trillions more in benefits than they contribute to these programs. Obamacare alone, over the long term, will see its unfunded liability grow by $2 trillion. The unfunded obligation for Medicare and Social Security, together, would likely increase by $2.5 trillion.
Most importantly, this proposal would economically devastate low-income American citizens and current legal immigrants. It will pull down their wages and reduce their job prospects. Including those legalized, this bill would result in at least 30 million new foreign workers over a 10-year period—more than the entire population of the state of Texas. This at a time when 90 million Americans are outside the labor force and a record number of our citizens are on welfare. Continue reading this article
How could an amnesty bill negotiated in secret by open-borders extremists NOT be a disaster for national security and citizen employment? It’s what we expected, right?
Fortunately for defenders of American sovereignty, Senator Jeff Sessions has learned more details, which he can knowledgeably compare with earlier amnesties. (See his memo from 2007, 20 Loopholes in the Senate Immigration Bill, a record of treachery from our lawmakers.)
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said the border-security requirements in legislation drafted by the Senate’s Gang of Eight appear weaker than those included in the 2007 immigration reform legislation that failed. Sessions attended a briefing on the bill Monday evening by the Republican members of the Gang of Eight.
“I’m not going to quote what they said in there but how the trigger works and the way it would be effected in some ways appears weaker than the one in 2007,” he said.
The Senate debated a comprehensive immigration reform bill for weeks in the late spring of 2007. It failed to muster enough votes to overcome a filibuster.
The legislation creates a pathway to citizenship for an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants who meet certain qualifications would be able to obtain green cards after a 10-year probationary period but could not receive the document until the federal government met criteria for securing the border.
The border fence would have to be completed, a mandatory e-verify system would have to be set up to allow workers to check the legal status of applicants, and the entire U.S.-Mexico border would have to be under surveillance, according to The New York Times.
Sessions, a member of the Judiciary Committee, who has said he will delay the panel’s mark-up of the bill for at least one week, said that it is likely more than 11 million people will be put on the pathway to citizenship.
“I think people are very much uninformed about the numbers we’re talking about. It maybe 13 million or 14 million,” said he said.
Sessions said the backlog of family members of newly minted citizens eligible for immigration could be as high as 4 million or 5 million.
“They’ll be able to immediately apply for much better jobs than they currently have,” Sessions warned of illegal immigrants set to join the pathway to citizenship. “Maybe they were working at a restaurant part time. Now they’re going to be truck drivers, heavy-equipment operators competing at the factories and plants and we’ve got an unemployment rate that’s very high.” Continue reading this article
Saudis have not been friends of America, most particularly in the 9/11 terror attacks where 15 of 19 of the hijackers were citizens of the Kingdom. So if one or more Muslims from Saudi Arabia were behind this terror attack, it would be no surprise.
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.