Americans feel more strongly than ever that the lack of immigration law enforcement directly effects poverty in the country.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 61% of Adults say if immigration laws were enforced, there would be less poverty in America. Only 19% disagree with that assessment, while 20% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
The number of adults who feel there would be less poverty is up 16 points from early July 2007 when only 45% of Americans felt that way. At that time, 32% disagreed.
Seventy-seven percent (77%) of Republicans and 58% of adults not affiliated with either political party feel there would be less poverty if immigration laws were enforced, a view shared by just 48% of Democrats. [. . .]
Men — by a 67% to 56% margin — are more likely than women to believe enforcing immigration laws would reduce poverty.
Adults under the age of 50 are more inclined to agree that there would be less poverty if immigration laws were enforced than their elders.
Despite the billions of dollars spent on government anti-poverty programs, a majority of Americans nationwide still believe there are more poor people in the country today than there were 10 years ago. In fact, a plurality (45%) of adults thinks the current government anti-poverty programs actually increase poverty in America.
A majority of Likely U.S. Voters feel that the policies and practices of the federal government encourage illegal immigration. Most voters continue to favor strong sanctions on employers who hire illegal immigrants and landlords who rent to them. Voters also feel strongly that police should check the immigration status of drivers during routine traffic stops.
President Nicolas Sarkozy’s controversial Interior Minister Claude Gueant wants to reduce the number of legal immigrants entering France, including those coming to work legally or join their families.
Asked by Le Figaro weekly magazine whether he was going to do something to reduce legal migration, Gueant, who has previously stoked controversy with statements on Islam and immigration, said “of course.”
“I’ve asked for the number of people admitted as labour immigrants (around 20,000 per year) to be reduced,” he said in the interview to be published on Friday.
“And we will continue to reduce the number of foreigners coming to France to join their families,” or around 15,000 people a year, he said, adding that he had requested a study of other European countries’ practices vis-a-vis international law.
The UMP party of Sarkozy and Gueant has veered increasingly to the political right ahead of next year’s presidential election.
Critics accuse it of trying to win over voters who would otherwise vote for the anti-immigration far-right National Front party.
“In terms of asylum (around 10,000 people a year), our country is more generous, despite restrictions, than Germany or the United Kingdom, even though we apply the same international conventions,” Gueant said.
“If it emerges that there are anomalies in our practices, changes will be made,” he said.
With regard to illegal immigration, Gueant said that “before 2001, France only sent between 8,000 and 9,000 people back to their countries (while) today it’s around 30,000.”
He said the aim was to expel 28,000 people in 2011 but “Quite frankly, I hope that we can expel more.”
“We are at home, France will soon belong to us. There are already 10 million of us, soon there will be 20 million, you’ll see. You will not be able to stop us from doing anything. This country is ours.”
Nevertheless, the French authorities arrested dozens of the Muslims who staged a protest against the new law.
Police on Saturday arrested 61 people — including 19 women — for attempting to hold an outlawed Paris protest against France’s pending ban on face-covering Islamic veils, a top police official said.
Fifty-nine people were detained while trying to demonstrate at Place de la Nation in eastern Paris, as were two others while traveling there from Britain and Belgium, said Nicolas Lerner, chief of staff for the Paris police chief.
The arrests come amid in a rising, if small, groundswell of controversy over Monday’s start of an official ban of garments that hide the face, which includes Muslim veils such as the slit-eyed niqab and the full face-covering burqa. Women who disobey the law risk a fine, special classes and a police record.
The demonstrators rallied in defiance of a ban of the protest ordered Friday by Paris police on the ground that a Muslim group’s call for the rally was “clearly an incitement to violence and racial hatred,” said Lerner.
“The demonstration was not banned because of the practice (among some Muslim women) of wearing veils, but because of the speech,” he said, adding that Jewish groups and others had planned counter-protests — raising the prospect of public disorder. Continue reading this article
In 2001, the torso of a young black boy was pulled out of the Thames in London near the Globe Theater. The body had no head or limbs, so the mystery of who he was and where he came from took a decade to solve. Police called him Adam so the public wouldn’t forget that he was a real boy. (See my 2008 article, Witchcraft Imported by Immigration)
Analysis of the stomach, lungs and bones indicated he had lived most of his life in Nigeria and had come to Britain only a few days before his death. Other tests showed that he had ingested a paralytic agent, when rendered him unable to move as he was cut into pieces during a ritual witchcraft murder.
The case shined a light on the growing problem of human sacrifice in Britain, committed largely by African immigrants who practice witchcraft. The Times of London reported in 2006 that there were 50 such cases in that city alone (‘Witch child’ abuse spreads in Britain).
Incidentally, witchcraft diversity is alive and well in the Middle East, India and Mexico, as well as Africa. Every case is a reminder that all cultures are NOT morally equal, and immigration from those places welcomes practices that we consider reprehensible crimes.
In the case at hand, we now know the name of the little boy who was so brutally murdered — Ikpomwosa — although he will likely be remembered as Adam. But the identity of the killers remains a mystery.
The horror of Adam’s last hours is almost beyond imagination. In his short life, he’d got used to being far away from his West African home and perhaps even accustomed to being passed — like a chattel — from one adult to another.
From the moment he was handed over to a man he didn’t know and brought to London, this poor little boy — five, maybe six years old — would have known only cruelty and terror. In those final hours, he must have been so frightened, so terribly alone.
What I want to believe is that he was so drugged he was unconscious and oblivious of the terrifying events that were about to unfold. But, deep down, I fear that wasn’t so.
Post mortem results, too grim to bear much repetition, reveal that he was still alive when his throat was cut; the West African poison that was found in his intestine is a paralysing agent, not an anaesthetic. There’s a very real chance that Adam would have seen what was coming.
Unable to move and unable to scream, Adam’s last sight on earth would have been of a man approaching him — and then the flash of a razor-sharp knife.
Britain’s first ritual killing had just claimed its victim, an innocent little boy.
Adam’s body was found in the River Thames in London, close to the reconstruction of Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre, on September 21, 2001. The case, however, soon became known as ‘the torso in the Thames’ because when it was found, the body was without its legs, arms and head and had been entirely drained of its blood.
All that was left was the small trunk of a little black boy, its lower half clad in a pair of bright orange shorts. When it was first spotted in the river by a member of the public, he initially assumed he was looking at a barrel.
I’m a correspondent on ITV’s London Tonight programme and within days of the body being discovered I was dispatched to the first police press conference about the case.
It was one of those occasions you never quite forget, with the normal bustle and noise of a busy press conference making way for a stunned silence, with even the most hardened reporters visibly shaken by the horror of what the police were describing.
Some, I know, simply didn’t believe them.
The boy’s head, arms and legs had been removed with skilful precision, we were told, while his lower intestine contained a highly unusual mix of plant extracts, traces of the toxic calabar bean and, perhaps most surprisingly of all, clay particles containing flecks of pure gold.
The police knew that sheer shock value would keep the story in the headlines for a few days but they also knew that a body without a face, without a name, meant there was a real danger of this being perceived as a murder without a victim. So they gave the boy a name.
‘His name is Adam,’ a visibly affected Commander Andy Baker told us, ‘and until we can identify him and his family, we will act as his family.’ Continue reading this article
It is always admirable when persons in the public eye have the grit to say when they have made a mistake. And when an apparent liberal admits that multiculturalism is a dumb idea, then it’s practically a flying pig moment.
Anyway, an Australian newspaper editor, Greg Sheridan, recently explained how he came to reject multiculturalism as a worthwhile political goal, a learning process that is interesting to observe. You can read his “before” viewpoint from 1996 at the end of the article.
The lengthy piece at times wanders off into the weeds of Australian public policy and the definition of multiculturalism, but the real story is how the author came to fear the crime and violence spawned by Islamic immigration. When Sheridan no longer felt safe walking home from the train and his son was challenged by a Muslim kid with a gun, he no longer felt enriched by Islamic diversity.
You can listen to a recent radio interview with Greg Sheridan here.
IN 1993, my family and I moved into Belmore in southwest Sydney. It is the next suburb to Lakemba. When I first moved there I loved it.
We bought a house just behind Belmore Sports Ground, in those days the home of my beloved Bulldogs rugby league team. Transport was great, 20 minutes to the city in the train, 20 minutes to the airport.
On the other side of Belmore, away from Lakemba, there were lots of Chinese, plenty of Koreans, growing numbers of Indians, and on the Lakemba side lots of Lebanese and other Arabs.
That was an attraction, too. I like Middle Eastern food. I like Middle Eastern people. The suburb still had the remnants of its once big Greek community and a commanding Greek Orthodox church.
But in the nearly 15 years we lived there the suburb changed, and much for the worse.
Three dynamics interacted in a noxious fashion: the growth of a macho, misogynist culture among young men that often found expression in extremely violent crime; a pervasive atmosphere of anti-social behaviour in the streets; and the simultaneous growth of Islamist extremism and jihadi culture.
In the ongoing budget-cutting debate in Washington, some congressional Democrats have accused their Republican opponents of being held captive by the Tea Party movement, but voters like the Tea Party more than Congress.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 48% of Likely U.S. Voters say when it comes to the major issues facing the country, their views are closer to the average Tea Party member as opposed to the average member of Congress. Just 22% say their views are closest to those of the average congressman. Even more (30%) aren’t sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Forty-nine percent (49%) of voters think the Tea Party movement is good for the country, consistent with findings since May 2010. Twenty-six percent (26%) disagree and say the grassroots, small government movement is bad for America. Sixteen percent (16%) say neither.
Forty-five percent (45%) say the average Tea Party member has a better understanding of the problems America faces today than the average member of Congress does. That figure is down seven points from a year ago. Still, today only 31% think the average member of Congress has a better understanding. Twenty-three percent (23%) are undecided.
One-third of voters continue to have ties to the Tea Party movement. That includes 22% who say they themselves are members and 12% more who say they have friends or family who belong. Those findings haven’t budged from the end of December. Fifty-two percent (52%) say they have no links to the Tea Party, but 14% are not sure. [. . .]
Forty-four percent (44%) of Republicans say they are members of the Tea Party, with another eight percent (8%) who have family members or friends who are in the group. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of Democrats have no ties to the group. Seventy-eight percent (78%) of Republicans – and 54% of voters not affiliated with either major political party – say the movement is good for the country. A plurality (48%) of Democrats sees it as bad for the country.
Sixty-nine percent (69%) of GOP voters and 62% of unaffiliateds say their views about the major issues facing the country are closest to those of the average Tea Party member. But among voters in President Obama’s party, only 37% say their views are closest to the average member of Congress, while 47% are undecided.
Most Democrats (54%) think the average member of Congress has a better understanding of the problems America faces today. Seventy-two percent (72%) of Republicans and 51% of unaffiliated voters have more confidence in the understanding of the average Tea Party member.
There’s a similarly sharp divide between Mainstream and Political Class voters. Fifty-nine percent (59%) of those in the Mainstream think the Tea Party is good for America, but 69% of the Political Class say it’s a bad thing. There are comparable differences of opinion when it comes to whose views are closest to their own and who has a better understanding of today’s problems.
But then 38% of Mainstream voters are either Tea Party members or have a family member or friend who belongs to the movement. Ninety-four percent (94%) of those in the Political Class have no ties to the Tea Party. Continue reading this article
Thousands of “refugees” from North Africa and beyond continue to pour into the tiny island of Lampedusa, overwhelming the population of 5,300. Or perhaps they shouldn’t be called refugees because nearly ALL of those fleeing are young men, instead of families as one would expect of true refugees. In fact, some media call them illegal immigrants straight out, as the Telegraph has done.
The islanders are not happy and indeed feel threatened by the mobs of Muslim men. Below is a video of local fishermen in which they said they didn’t want to leave their wives and children alone to go out and work because they were afraid of what might happen. The piece is dated is March 6, when there weren’t as many North Africans as now. The article posted further below also notes how the local girls are “being pestered by gangs of immigrants for sex.”
Below, the North Africans have built their own tent city on the island, with an abundance of trash.
According to the western press, the Libyan “rebels” are fighting a heroic battle against the dictator Moammar Gaddafi. And optimists have dubbed the regional unrest as the Arab Spring. But not everyone is feeling the hope. The men encamped in Lampedusa prefer to flee rather than fight, which doesn’t say much for the faith they have in their own societies. Many are obviously taking advantage of the upheaval to get into Europe instead of rebuilding their homelands. It must look too much like work.
Below is a video where the Tunisians protest that they haven’t been welcomed properly to Europe — they are outraged that the accommodations are no better than what they left.
The situation is terrible for the Lampedusa people, and it has been created by Europe’s willingness to take these thousands of faux refugees. They should be turned away by the military before they reach the island and eventually get to the West.
Swathed in Red Cross blankets, they were waiting for Silvio Berlusconi’s promises to come true as they huddled at midnight around a fire made from cardboard boxes.
Here in Lampedusa, a rocky island off the southern tip of Italy, the ten North Africans plan a new life in Europe — and believe the libidinous Italian Prime Minister will make it possible.
‘We pray for freedom,’ says Mohamed Fitouri, a 23-year-old builder from Benghazi, the rebel-held, second largest city in Libya, speaking in the firelight. ‘I cannot return to my country if it is ruled by Gaddafi. None of us can. Our future is in England or France. There is no turning back.’
Whoa! It’s pretty doubtful the British or French want any more Muslims residing in their nations. How is this situation not an invasion?
The guy quoted certainly is not much of a Libyan patriot. Mohamed has already given up on the home team’s chances. What European country would want a disloyal opportunist like him?
Last week Berlusconi made a whistlestop tour of Lampedusa, where 6,000 clandestini, or illegal immigrants, have arrived in rickety boats from North Africa — 70 miles away across the Mediterranean — in less than seven weeks. The island actually sits closer to the African coast than it does to Sicily, which makes it an obvious target.
Fleeing their turbulent homelands of Libya and Tunisia, they have doubled the population of this once picturesque holiday island. Today it has become a grotesque place, fouled by a toxic stench of human waste.
The narrow streets are thronged with men wearing a bizarre garb of tennis shoes and hoodies covered in blankets from the Red Cross which, fearing a health epidemic, set up a field hospital in a tent by the port two days ago. So many immigrants have been arriving that Italy has declared it a national emergency.
By night, the unwelcome arrivals sleep in wooden fishing boats pulled on to the quayside for the winter, down narrow alleyways, or top-to-tail like sardines on the floor of the port’s harbour office.
On the hillside above the port, there are hundreds more, in makeshift shelters of plastic sheeting and corroding oil drums that litter the hillside. Down below, the once-clear waters are awash with plastic bags, banana skins and soiled paper, the debris of suffering humanity.
Despite a massive police presence, and attempts to move thousands off the island to holding camps in Italy, the situation is potentially explosive. With teenage girls being pestered by gangs of immigrants for sex, the presence of so many young men has also led to sporadic outbreaks of violence on the few streets here.
Drug use is also widespread. Some of the immigrants — among them escapees from Tunisian jails — have smuggled in narcotics along with large sums of cash to fund their journey farther north into Europe.
But drugs or not, these men are hated by the 2,000 families who live here, and Berlusconi knows it. On Wednesday he promised to free Lampedusa of all the illegal visitors in less than 60 hours with an airlift and a fleet of ships to take them to the mainland, where their claims for asylum will be processed.
After that, a minority will be sent home, though many will be allowed to stay and eventually claim naturalisation. Others will head to France and try to board lorries bound for England. Continue reading this article
One of the ways that Islam imposes sharia around the world is by behavioral shaping through violence and intimidation. Today’s illustration is Sen Lindsey Graham’s suggestion on a Sunday talk show that Congress make it a crime to burn the Koran.
It is regrettable that Muslims are killing in large numbers, but that behavior is normal for them. We Americans should not destroy our tradition of free speech in response to their primitive 8th century culture of faith-based violence. The “Religion of Peace” indeed!
Attacking free speech is a major tactic of Allah’s gangsters, as one can observe in Europe, where violence is commonly used against freedom-loving people. For example, Dutch artist Theo van Gogh was assassinated in 2004 for making a film critical of Islam’s treatment of women. Rising political star Pim Fortuyn was similarly murdered for telling the inconvenient truth about the religion.
So when three suspicious foreign men acted like they might be doing reconnaissance on Camp Pendleton for a later attack, local attention was aroused. Before showing up at the front gate in two cars, the men made terrorist threats at a gas station and asked directions to the base. Their behavior seems dumb, but violent Muslims sometimes exhibit an odd combination of arrogance and stupidity.
SAN DIEGO — 10News learned Camp Pendleton base officials have essentially closed the case involving three Middle Eastern men who tried to drive onto the base without proper authorization last weekend.
Retired Colonel G.I. Wilson told 10News, “It does make you very, very suspicious, and the fact they came back a second time would really put my antenna up.”
The three men — 40-year-old Afghani Ahmad Rahmani Naeem, 41-year-old Iranian Vahik Petrossian and 27-year-old Iranian Sengekdi Norvik Avanosian — attempted to get into Camp Pendleton last weekend under what was considered suspicious circumstances.
According to a Be On the Lookout (BOLO) alert issued to high-ranking Camp Pendleton officials, someone reported hearing hateful comments and terrorist threats from three men at a gas station in Oceanside Saturday.
Investigators at Camp Pendleton said the men asked the attendant for directions on how to get to Camp Pendleton before they left the gas station.
According to the alert, shortly after midnight Sunday, a rented silver Toyota Corolla driven by Naeem attempted to enter Camp Pendleton through the main gate. As it was being searched, Petrossian and Avanosian drove up in a black Mercedes, but were told to wait. Instead, they continued past the gate and onto the base. Following a short pursuit, the Mercedes was stopped and searched.
No weapons or contraband were found in the Mercedes, but base security noticed the air bag in the steering wheel of the Mercedes had been pulled out and re-attached with duct tape and had wires hanging free, the alert said.
According to the alert, Naaem told base security he was lost and was trying to go to Glendale. When interviewed, Petrossian and Avanosian said they were lost and trying to go to Glendale. The three men claimed not to know each other, the alert said.
Naaem, Petrossian and Avanosian were photographed and released after questioning, and a warning about the trio was posted to law enforcement.
However, later that morning about 8:30 a.m., Naeem returned in the Toyota and tried to get on the base again, saying he made a mistake and was trying to enter Interstate 5, the alert said. After his vehicle was searched, Naeem was issued a letter of debarment from the base and escorted to the freeway. Continue reading this article
According to CNN, disaffection among Muslims residing in America is growing, and that’s a bad thing. But when you read the network’s own description of one instance, it’s clear that the local Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) representative was stirring the pot to foment that alienation. If the Muslim congregation didn’t know about the Peter King hearings investigating domestic radicalization, then CAIR guy Dawud Walid was there to provide the Muslims-as-victims spin.
As terror analyst Walid Phares noted last fall, “According to open-source reports, between 2001 and 2008, U.S. agencies stopped one or two terror attempts a year. However, from 2009 until today, the government has been uncovering one or two cases a month, a troubling growth in jihadi activities.”
So Islamic terror diversity is on a definite upswing in America, yet all we citizens hear from Muslims is complaining about bogus Islamophobia. It is not reassuring from a national security viewpoint that the public conversation is about citizens’ alleged cruelty toward Islam followers, even though the people believe otherwise: Rasmussen Poll: Just 17% Think Muslims Are Mistreated.
Not all cultures are compatible. Muslims would be low on the list of easily assimilable immigrants with their high-decibel rejection of western values like secular law, gender equality, free speech and reason over power. Washington would be wise to end Muslim immigration for national security reasons, if nothing else.
CNN is unfortunately carrying water for America’s enemies, as exemplified by its recent news special, “Unwelcome: The Muslims Next Door” [Watch], which the New English Review called “too sympathetic and biased.” But CNN does at least draw attention here to CAIR acting as a fifth-column enterprise, even if CNN did so inadvertently. That’s the best you can say.
Madison Heights, Michigan (CNN) – Dawud Walid asked the worshipers for a show of hands: How many had heard about the Muslim radicalization hearings in Washington earlier that day?
About half of the 50 or so Muslims in the banquet hall-turned-mosque indicated that they had.
So Walid, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ Michigan chapter, briefed the other half about the hearing, calling it an “unfortunate first in American history.”
Then he went further, warning about what he said were a handful of growing threats to American Muslims.
“As we approach the 10th anniversary of September 11, we are seeing unprecedented acts of Islamophobia,” Walid told the worshipers at the American Islamic Community Center, 10 miles north of Detroit.
“After 9/11, it was coming from a few right-wingers,” he said. “But now, in 2011, we’re seeing it from Congress.”
Walid went on to tell the congregation that a dozen states – from Georgia to Missouri to New Mexico – are considering bans on Sharia, or Islamic law, and warned that such bans could lead to prohibitions on women wearing the hijab, or headscarf, and even on Muslims worshiping Allah.
“Praying five times a day is Sharia,” he said. “Do you go to jail for that?”
As usual, Muslims think they are innocent little lambs who have done nothing to deserve the suspicion with which Americans regard them!
As one of the largest and oldest Muslim enclaves in the nation – and, with its century-old ties to Ford Motor Co., one that’s intimately bound up in the modern American story – the metro Detroit community is perhaps as close as one can get to the soul of American Islam.
At a time when the country is wrestling with its views on Islam, the faith causes relatively little friction in the largely Arab cocoon of southeast Michigan.
But narratives playing out in the national media, from the radicalization hearings spearheaded by New York Republican Rep. Peter King to the wave of proposed Sharia bans to anticipation of the September 11 anniversary, have left many Muslims here feeling ostracized in their own country.
If asked, many Americans might fear that jihadists would attempt an attack on the 10-year anniversary of 9/11. The authorities will be on high alert, that’s for sure. But Muslims are worried about their little feelings being hurt.
The community is growing more defensive in the face of what many here say is a national climate of suspicion reminiscent of the period immediately after the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Continue reading this article
It’s nice to see that Republican Darrell Issa, the Chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, is going after the administration on the corrupt and crazy Operation Gunrunner scheme of the ATF that delivered thousands of weapons to Mexican organized crime during a failed “sting.” We certainly wouldn’t have seen this kind of investigation in the previous all-Dem Congress.
Is it news that at least one of American agents killed was shot by a Project Gunrunner weapon, as Issa mentioned in the video above? Every report I’ve seen thus far said those weapons were found at the crime scene, but didn’t make a ballistic connection.
Issa said, “It’s more than a scandal, it’s a crime.” He also characterized the scheme as “like Iran-Contra, only worse.”
Top GOP oversight official Rep. Darrell Issa is subpoenaing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for documents on Project Gunrunner and Operation Fast and Furious after the agency missed a Wednesday deadline for producing the documents.
“The unwillingness of this administration – most specifically the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms – to answer questions about this deadly serious matter is deeply troubling,” Issa said in a statement. “Allegations surrounding this program are serious and the ability of the Justice Department to conduct an impartial investigation is in question. Congressional oversight is necessary to get the truth about what is really happening.”
In Project Gunrunner and Operation Fast and Furious, ATF allowed American guns to be smuggled into Mexico and sold to Mexican drug cartels. The goal of the program was to track the illegal weapons and drug markets after they were used in crimes and abandoned using ballistics information and serial numbers for the guns.
Issa had fired off his request to ATF, which falls under the Department of Justice, on March 16, giving the bureau two weeks to fulfill it – they missed their deadline.
Issa is demanding “documents and communications relating to the genesis,” of the ATF programs and documents and communications about the “individuals responsible for authorizing the decision to ‘walk’ guns to Mexico in order to follow them and capture a ‘bigger fish,’” he said.
The documents could show who in the Obama administration made final decisions about the program. Issa has suggested in interviews the documents could implicate Attorney General Eric Holder.
Issa has also requested documents from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Those documents are due April 12.
Another angle in the investigation is a possible connection between guns sold to Mexican drug cartels and the Dec. 14 shooting death of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.
Issa became involved in the investigations after the Obama administration stonewalled Sen. Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican, who does not have subpoena power.
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.