The polls keep rolling in and mounting up with the same message: Americans want an enforcement approach to solve border anarchy, and reject the craven surrender to Mexico that Obama prefers.
Today’s example notes that just over a third of voters (34%) agree with President Obama, while 56% prefer Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, who met with the President in the White House last Friday. They discussed her state’s new legislation that has caused so much alarm among open-borders types that immigration laws were actually going to be effectively enforced.
The curious headline below refers to an imaginary 2012 Presidential match-up between the two politicians:
Fifty-six percent (56%) of U.S. voters say their views on illegal immigration are closer to those of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer than to the views of President Obama. The two finally met last Friday at the White House to discuss Arizona’s tough new immigration law which the president opposes.
A new Rasmussen Reports nationwide telephone survey finds that only 34% say their views on illegal immigration are closer to the president’s. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure.
Eighty-one percent (81%) of the Political Class say their views are closer to Obama’s, while 72% of Mainstream voters say they think more like Brewer.
Given a 2012 election contest for president between Obama as the Democratic candidate and Brewer as the Republican, 44% of all voters support the incumbent, while 39% prefer the governor. Nine percent (9%) like some other candidate, while eight percent (8%) more are undecided.
But since 54% of voters don’t know enough about Brewer to venture any kind of opinion of her, this finding is more of a reflection on the president than any possible match-up with Brewer.
Twenty-six percent (26%) of voters have a favorable opinion of Brewer, while 20% view her unfavorably. These figures includes 12% with a Very Favorable opinion and nine percent (9%) with a Very Unfavorable opinion. The question about Brewer did not indicate that she was Governor of Arizona and was asked before the question about a possible match-up with President Obama.
Sixty-four percent (64%) believe the federal government by failing to enforce immigration law is more to blame for the current controversy over Arizona’s new statute than state officials are for passing it. Only 27% blame Arizona officials more for passing the law. [...]
Since signing it in late April, Brewer has strongly championed the law which requires local police to check the immigration status of anyone stopped for a traffic violation or some other kind of violation if the officer suspects the person is an illegal immigrant. Supporters of the law say it’s necessary because the federal government is not enforcing immigration policy and illegal immigrants are an increasing budget and public safety burden on the state.
The president and others, including Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard who is the likely Democratic nominee for governor this year, oppose the law, saying it encourages racial profiling. The U.S. Justice Department is considering challenging the Arizona law in court, and a high-level official with the Department of Homeland Security has said the department may not process any illegal immigrants arrested by Arizona police.
This video (Polygamy in France) tells a lot about Muslim immigration math: one husband, two wives, 17 children. The first wife came legally as a spouse, while the second came via a tourist visa and remained unlawfully. Polygamy is illegal in France, but families like the one profiled get all the benefits of the French welfare state while breaking its laws.
Interestingly, the French authorities in this case are disturbed because the mega-family has inadequate housing, according to government standards.
In 2005, when French cities were being torched by angry Muslim “youth” roaming the boulevards, one report noted that in overpopulated polygamous families the “kids sleep in shifts, and when others are asleep, they are on the streets because there is nowhere else to go” (In France, Malaise Tops the Dish).
Interestingly, in 2008 NPR (!) reported on multi-wifing in this country, although it hedged by emphasizing the colorful aspect of diversity:
Although polygamy is illegal in the U.S. and most mosques try to discourage plural marriages, some Muslim men in America have quietly married multiple wives.
No one knows how many Muslims in the U.S. live in polygamous families. But according to academics researching the issue, estimates range from 50,000 to 100,000 people.
You can see some of the women involved in polygamous marriages in the lobby of Sanctuary for Families, a nonprofit women’s center in New York City. It bursts with color as a dozen women in bright African dresses and head wraps gather for a weekly noon meeting for West African immigrants. The women come each week to this support group where they discuss hard issues, such as domestic abuse, medical problems, immigration hurdles and polygamy.
Sometimes it’s hard not to think that the current government isn’t one big criminal enterprise.
Today’s example is all the more remarkable because it came from the Obama-worshipping New York Times. Apparently the Obama henchmen are frightened that Americans might somehow connect criminal drugs with Mexico (!) We wouldn’t want anyone to think ill of Mexico after all, since it is such a loyal friend and never asks anything of America.
Mexico is only one of the most violent countries on earth because of its drug cartels warring with each other over influence and territory, which has caused the violent deaths of more than 20,000 in the last three years.
WASHINGTON — In an apparent effort to minimize diplomatic turbulence with the Mexican government, the Obama administration has been delaying for weeks the release of a Justice Department report that describes a “high and increasing” availability of methamphetamine mainly because of large-scale drug production in Mexico.
The report, obtained by The New York Times, is called the 2010 National Methamphetamine Threat Assessment by the National Drug Intelligence Center of the Justice Department. It portrays drug cartels as easily able to circumvent the Mexican government’s restrictions on the importing of chemicals used to manufacture meth, which has reached its highest purity and lowest price in the United States since 2005.
Completed in mid-May, the report — which in previous years has been distributed to state and local police forces and posted online without fanfare or controversy — has not yet been released, partly because of the increasingly delicate politics of the United States-Mexico border and drugs.
At one point, copies of the report were printed and boxes of it were shipped to San Diego to be distributed to law enforcement officials at a meth conference. But White House officials raised concerns because that same week President Felipe Calderón of Mexico was coming to Washington for a state visit. The release of the report has since been repeatedly delayed.
The report was particularly touchy because it came less than two months after the distribution of another National Drug Intelligence Center study that had portrayed the drug trafficking situation in Mexico in stark terms, prompting complaints from the Mexican government. [...]
The internal wrangling over the center’s Mexico-related drug reports traces back to March 23, when a delegation of top Obama administration officials — including Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton — went to Mexico City for a show of solidarity in fighting drug cartels.
But the positive diplomatic feelings that resulted from that meeting were soon marred by an apparent coincidence. On March 25, two days after the trip, the National Drug Intelligence Center — which is based in Johnstown, Pa., and led by a career official, Michael Walther — publicly distributed its annual National Drug Threat Assessment.
It portrayed the Mexican drug cartel situation in a harsh light, describing a surge in production of heroin and marijuana due to “greatly reduced efforts to eradicate drug crops” in Mexico. An Obama administration official and an official in the Mexican government each said that Mexico raised concerns with the United States about the report.
And so it goes. The Times story delves at length into the diplomatic intricacies and in doing so misses the bigger picture: Obama’s fear of offending Mexico only serves to make like easier for Mexican organized crime. A bracing shot of plain talk might possibly wake up Mexico’s somnambulant rulers.
Instead, Washington thinks it should help uphold the fantasy that Mexico City is fighting the drug cartels. But to what end? Kicking the can down the road for a few months longer? Obama would be wise to lay out a Plan B of what to do in case the Mexican state collapses under the onslaught of its failing drug war.
And what about the American people? Don’t we need to know how dangerous a neighbor lies right next door? As usual, the well being of the American people is ignored by the Obama gang in favor of political machinations.
In New York City, June 6 (a date chosen for being D-Day) was observed by a rally against the construction of a territory-marking mega-mosque near Ground Zero. Organizers Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer expected a turn-out of 500 or so, and were thrilled when more than 10 times that number showed up.
Robert Spencer, the director of JihadWatch, pointed out that the man behind the mosque does not have a history of promoting tolerance, but instead is an anti-American sharia subversive:
More than 5,000 people from all over the United States gathered in the Big Apple to protest the building of a 13-story mega-mosque two blocks from Ground Zero.
Organizers say the man behind the mosque – Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf – is not the man of peace he claims to be.
“He says he advocates for tolerance, but in his book he advocates for Sharia law which is radically intolerant,” said Pamela Gellar, who leads the organization Stop Islamization of America. “We have no idea where the funding is coming from. We know his father built an Islamic Center on 96th street and was funded by 49 Muslim countries. Who’s funding this $50 million monster? We want to know.”
Several members of families who lost loved ones in the World Trade Center attacks on September 11, 2001, were among the protestors. They displayed photos of their family members who died. They said building a mosque so close to their loved ones graves is an insult.
“This is my only son,” said Eileen Tallon, who lost her son in the attack. “He was a firefighter and he went into rescue people that day. I’m upset about the building of the mosque, because Muslim terrorists murdered my son and 3,000 Americans at this site.”
“Such was the violence on 9-11 that my brother’s remains were never found,” said Christina Regenhard said. “He was killed by Islamist and now they want to build a mosque on his grave. Their victory will be complete.” […]
The proposed mosque is slated to be built in the old Burlington Coat Factory building, just 600 feet from where the towers fell. Mosque supporters say their hope is to bring something good out of 9-11.
But for people like Lee Henson – who lost his son, daughter-in-law and granddaughter that day – a mosque near Ground Zero is unacceptable.
“They were on United Airlines Flight 175,” Henson said. “My son called, he said, ‘Don’t worry Dad – it’ll be quick.’ I heard ‘Oh my God, oh my God, oh my God’ – then I looked at the TV screen and saw the plane hit the tower.”
Of related interest is the fascinating photo essay by El Marco, Prayer Time at the Ground Zero Mosque, showing the building which is now a scruffy-looking mosque (where diverse worshippers wash their feet in the street), located next to a saloon, to be remodeled into something far more grand by wealthy jihadists.
Andrew McCarthy talked about his book, The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America, and he responded to telephone calls and electronic communications. Mr. McCarthy believes the real threat to the U.S. is the forces of Islam. He says the forces have collaborated with the American left to undermine U.S. national security and constitutional democracy.
McCarthy is a former New York prosecutor who handled the terrorism case of the blind sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, an experience which awakened him to the danger of hostile Islam, documented in his previous book, Willful Blindness.
On June 6, 1944, Supreme Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower sent a message to the Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen of the Allied Expeditionary Force about what they faced in the invasion of Normandy and their prospects for victory.
Back then, American military leaders didn’t have to mince words or worry about offending Muslims. (Unlike these twisted times, when General George Casey said regarding the Fort Hood massacre of 13 soldiers that “if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.” And he kept his job.)
I still hope that we can fight our way back to sanity from the upside-down world of appeasement toward our enemies, which is why I listen to General Eisenhower’s D-Day remarks every year.
Refugees: they bring culture as well as diversity, so let’s celebrate! That seems to be the loony script for a local Minneapolis puff piece on what must be a slow news day.
The weather didn’t dampen a big gathering of international refugees in Minneapolis on Saturday. Minnesota is home to about 100,000 refugees.
They bring as much diversity as they do culture to this state.
Dozens of refugees gathered near 7th and Hennepin in downtown Minneapolis to share their culture through song, dance, and storytelling. The Twin Cities refugee community is resilient, and it’s why many people say the events went on as planned despite the rain Saturday afternoon.
It was an extremely personal celebration for the refugees who gathered.
Twin Cities World Refugee Day celebrates the thousands of refugees living in Minnesota. The state is home to the largest Somali community in North America, and one of the largest Hmong populations in the U.S.
What a curious idea that Minnesotans and Americans don’t have a culture, or enough of one, and must import it from other societies. The traditional American character remains quite robust and unique, despite decades of effort on the part of the left to denigrate the hallmark individualism, fairness and patriotism, qualities which are resurgent in the Tea Party movement.
For the first time ever, the continent is the source of a majority of Minnesota’s legal immigrants, with Somalis topping the list.
The flow of immigrants to Minnesota is quietly reaching record highs amid signs of what could prove to be a profound and lasting shift in their continents of origin.
For the first time ever, African nations are supplying more than half the state’s legal immigrants. Four countries from that continent now stand atop the list.
Arrivals are doubling and quadrupling from countries such as Kenya and Liberia even as numbers are tapering off, for a variety of reasons, from past immigrant taproots such as India, Thailand and Russia, federal data show.
Africans say they are attracted here for the same reasons as others — quality of life, good schools for their kids — with the additional twist of Minnesota’s reputation in parts of that continent as being receptive to immigrants with funny accents.
“Minnesota holds a very prominent place in the minds of Liberians,” said Ahmed Sirleaf, of Advocates for Human Rights, a worldwide nonprofit based in Minneapolis. “I’ve heard people there say that Minnesota is one of the very few states where an immigrant with an accent can be hired to work in his chosen profession. In other places, most people have to stay in odd jobs.
The famous “Minnesota nice” reputation is not helpful. Better to be a grouch in some situations, particularly when the Refugee Industrial Complex sees your state as a soft touch for the uber-diverse nobody sane wants.
I was very sad to learn today that Father Pat Bascio died recently. He was the author of “On the Immorality of Illegal Immigration” a book which clearly explained the moral argument against border anarchy (see my review: Father Pat Bascio: A Rare Immigration Enforcement Voice in the Catholic Church). The upshot was that harming one group of people (poor American citizens) to improve the lives of a different group (illegal aliens from Mexico and beyond) could not be considered a virtuous social policy.
An obituary in the Dearborn County Register described a long and productive life, dedicated to following scripture and making the world a better place.
Patrick Bascio
Father Patrick Anthony Bascio, 83, of Aurora, Ind., died Sunday, May 30, 2010, in Covington, Ky.
He was born Sunday, Jan. 2, 1927, in Boston, Mass., Son of the late Pasquale Bascio and the late Antoinette Quagliata Bascio.
According to stories published by Regiser Publications, Bascio was a pilot in the United States Air Force toward the end of World War II when he was drawn to the priesthood. Ordained in 1955 by the Holy Ghosts Fathers, Bascio served as a missionary in various countries: Tanzania, Trinidad, and Grenada. In the 1970s, he got involved in the Grenada revolution. He was appointed as Ambassador of Grenada to the United Nations. He is the only Priest to ever be an Ambassador to the United Nations.
Bascio, who originally wanted to work with blacks, also served as pastor for a church in Harlem before being asked to develop a Ph.D. program in humanities for the United States Naval War College at Newport, R.I., in the 1980s. Later, the priest filled in at a Cincinnati parish for a year, and spent several years in Trinidad and the Bahamas before retiring in February 2006. […]
I’m including the lecture he gave last October, where I met Father Pat, and was so impressed with his honesty, humor and warmth.
In Part 2, Father Pat described how in Harlem the jobs that a few years earlier were held by local black people were being done by foreign workers. He declared, “Illegal immigration has devastated the black community in the United States.” He said that other priests agreed that open borders are bad in many ways, but Father Pat was the guy who stood up and wrote a stirring book that said “the Christian leadership in America is leading us down the wrong path.” Big loss.
Frank and Dawn Glogovsky (pictured), along with their 13-year-old son, were driving home from a family gathering when their car was struck by Jorge Dominguez after he ran a stop sign. (The obituary noted that Frank and Dawn were childhood sweethearts and married in 1988.)
All three members of the family were taken by emergency medical personnel to a hospital, but Dawn died there.
A Burlington man who allegedly caused a fatal car crash Monday while intoxicated is an illegal immigrant who was driving with a suspended license and has served jail time in Racine County for several prior offenses, officials said Thursday.
Because the man is an illegal immigrant, he likely should not have had a drivers license at all and should have previously been turned over to U.S. Immigration Customs Enforcement officials for possible deportation after completing his sentences in Racine County, officials said.
ICE officials Thursday confirmed that the man, Jorge Dominguez, 38, is an illegal immigrant. Dominguez, of 544 Chestnut Drive in Burlington, was charged Wednesday with seven criminal offenses including homicide by intoxicated use of a vehicle for a crash Monday around 11 p.m. when he allegedly ran a stop sign at the intersection of highways 45 and N in the Town of Paris, killing 45-year-old Dawn Glogovsky and injuring her husband and son, all of the Paris area. […]
Dominguez has been in and out of the Racine County Jail since 2008, serving sentences for past criminal offenses including battery, cocaine possession and obstructing an officer. When local police or sheriffs’ departments arrest an illegal immigrant like Dominguez for such criminal charges, they are supposed to inform ICE, which will place a detainer hold on that individual so that when they are released they go to ICE for possible deportation, said Carl Rusnok, ICE spokesman.
So Dominguez was clearly a dangerous criminal illegal alien, and was jailed in Racine County with an immigration hold put on him, yet he was released into America rather than deported after time served.
On Thursday, Rick Oltman and I drove out to the Golden Gate Bridge for a friendly bon voyage to Frosty Wooldridge and three biker companions.
It was far too early in the morning for a proper champagne send-off, but Rick (as Media Director for the Californians for Population Stabilization) brought his video cam to record the serious reason for the event: to spread the word that continuing Washington’s immigration/overpopulation policy is bad news for America’s future.
Below, three out of four bike riders: left to right, Denis Lemay, Scott Poindexter and Frosty Wooldridge, with the Golden Gate Bridge in the background.
Frosty Wooldridge, Colorado teacher and world bicycle traveler, will depart on an epic coast to coast bicycle ride from the Golden Gate Bridge, San Francisco, 3,500 miles to Washington, D.C. in the Summer of 2010.[…]
Riders: Denis Lemay of Canada, Scott Poindexter of Colorado, Bob Johannes of Colorado, Frosty Wooldridge of Colorado
He rides with the purpose of alerting the public that America faces adding 100 million people within 25 years if it fails to change its current demographic course. No amount of environmental conservation will afford a viable and sustainable civilization with the current high rate of growth.
Overpopulation issues that will be addressed include:
1. Growing water shortages
2. Accelerating carbon-based energy crisis
3. Accelerating air pollution and acidified oceans
4. Species extinction, and quality of life for Americans
5. Failed stewardship of a nation that will be handed to future generations
6. Solutions to overpopulation and continued population growth
The issue of overpopulation caused by out of control legal and illegal immigration continues to be one of the main issues shaping the future of our country. Please support Frosty and his team. For more information, go to www.frostywooldridge.com.
In the video, Frosty further explains what he has in mind.
With that background in mind, consider the crime committed by Ali Abdi (pictured), that of raping a nine-year-old girl, for which he was recently sentenced to 20 years in prison.
A Burlington man who jumped bail and fled Vermont the night before a jury found him guilty of aggravated sexual assault on a 9-year-old girl was sentenced Wednesday to 20 years to life in prison for the assault.
Ali Abdi, a Somali Bantu refugee, was sentenced by Vermont District Judge Patricia Zimmerman.
Chittenden County State’s Attorney T.J. Donovan said the sentence responded to a “horrific crime” against a girl who has “really been ostracized from her community.” The conviction is a deportable offense, Donovan said, but his understanding is that Abdi will likely serve his sentence in a U.S. prison before the federal government brings any deportation action.
The comment that the girl has “been been ostracized from her community” indicates the victim was Somali also.
Another report noted how crimes against girls are accorded little importance in Somali society.
Ali Abdi, a leader in the Somal Bantu community in Burlington, was sentenced Wednesday to 20 years to life in prison for sexual assault on a nine year old girl, despite pleas to the judge from two of his children.
Abdi had taken off during his trial, and was captured out of state. The jury was not told he ran away. He was convicted.
Abdi’s lawyer argued that the case has to be viewed as different from others, because Abdi comes from a different cultural background. Erik Smart told the judge that Abdi fled Somalia and spent thirteen years in a refugee camp before arriving in Burlington. Smart says the Somali Bantu community has forgiven Abdi.
“I would venture to say this community views this crime differently than our own community would,” Smart told the court.
Prosecutor Susan Hardin argued that cultural differences do not excuse a crime.
“It is critical that the Somali Bantu community and all the others in Chittenden County be sent a very clear message: if you sexually assault our children, there will be severe consequences,” Hardin said.
One example of the disrespect women and girls face in Somali culture is how rape victims may be executed under sharia law…
It doesn’t get worse than this. Last week, 13-year old Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was stoned to death in Somalia by insurgents because she was raped.
Reports indicate that was raped by three men while traveling by foot to visit her grandmother in conflict capital, Mogadishu. When she went to the authorities to report the crime, they accused her of adultery and sentenced her to death. Aisha was forced into a hole in a stadium of 1,000 onlookers as 50 men buried her up to the neck and cast stones at her until she died.
When some of the people at the stadium tried to save her, militia opened fire on the crowd, killing a boy who was a bystander.
So how exactly is Somali diversity supposed to benefit American society? I must be missing something.
Do you get the feeling that Americans are sick and tired of being gamed by parasitic illegal aliens? The jackpot baby scam, where a pregnant illegal alien crosses the border to pop out a citizen meal ticket, is rejected by a substantial majority of voters.
A recent poll shows that aliens using even cutesy babies as a prop is falling on deaf ears:
Fifty-eight percent (58%) of U.S. voters say a child born to an illegal immigrant in this country should not automatically become a citizen of the United States, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
Thirty-three percent (33%) disagree and say if a women enters the United States as an illegal alien and gives birth to a child here, that child should automatically be a U.S. citizen. That’s what the current law allows and many believe it would require a Constitutional Amendment to change the law.
On another aspect of the debate, voters overwhelmingly oppose allowing illegal immigrants to be eligible for state and federal government benefits. Just nine percent (9%) say illegals should receive such benefits, but 85% say they should not.
Still, there is a huge distinction in the minds of voters between dealing with illegal immigrants and overall immigration policy. Sixty percent (60%) of voters favor a welcoming immigrant policy that excludes only national security threats, criminals and those who would come here to live off our welfare system. Twenty-six percent (26%) disagree with such a policy, and 14% more are not sure.
Fifty-two percent (52%) of Democrats think children born to illegal immigrants in this country should automatically become U.S. citizens. Seventy-six percent (76%) of Republicans and 60% of voters not affiliated with either major party disagree.
Arizona officials say their recent adoption of a tough immigration enforcement law is due to the federal government’s failure to enforce federal immigration policy. While President Obama, Mexican President Felipe Calderon and others have complained that the state’s law could lead to racial profiling, 58% of voters nationwide favor passage of a law like Arizona’s in their own state.
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.
The polls keep rolling in and mounting up with the same message: Americans want an enforcement approach to solve border anarchy, and reject the craven surrender to Mexico that Obama prefers.
I was very sad to learn today that Father Pat Bascio died recently. He was the author of 
It’s an all-too-familiar story: a 
With that background in mind, consider the crime committed by Ali Abdi (pictured), that of raping a nine-year-old girl, for which he was recently sentenced to 20 years in prison.
