The European Union superstate has illustrated the failure of government that is too big and too distant from the people it is supposed to represent. Problems began to be seen when referendums to approve the EU constitution went down to defeat in the Netherlands and France in 2005 — although the bureaucrats in Brussels have managed a work-around to rejection by the people.
The borderless world is a leftist fantasy, as shown by the Marxist maxim, “Workers of the world, unite!” In 2008, Britain’s Labour Party Prime Minister Gordon Brown declared in Boston, “We are all internationalists now.” He even coined the phrase, “a New Global Deal,” that expresses the plan of elites to redistribute wealth from the first world to the third.
However, transnational corporations see the advantages to them when the influence of national sovereignty is reduced with less rule of law. A future globalist world of rule by corporations unaffected by regulation of environmental quality and worker rights would be quite agreeable to many captains of industry. (The Obama administration has certainly gone crazy with business regulations, but nobody wants Red China-style air you can cut with a knife either.)
One of the most astute assessments of the size question of government was made by Czech President Vaclav Klaus in 2003 when he stated, “You cannot have democratic accountability in anything bigger than a nation state.”
Geert Wilders (pictured) gave a speech in Berlin recently which expounded on that general idea, that living in an accountable nation-state is vital to freedom.
Thank you for inviting me to Berlin. It is an honour to be here in this beautiful city of Berlin. When I was here last year I emphasized how important Germany is for all of us. We all benefit from a healthy, democratic, self-confident Germany.
Much has happened since my last visit. In the Netherlands we were able to achieve many amazing things. We have successfully started to roll back the process of Islamization in the Netherlands.
We have done so in a peaceful way and through the democratic process. Recently, a deranged narcissistic psychopath from Norway committed a horrible crime. In cold blood he murdered nearly eighty innocent fellow citizens. The assassin pretended to be a concerned European. He said that he had committed his atrocity because “It is meaningless to participate in the democratic process.”
But he is wrong! The mass murderer from Oslo murdered and maimed, and he justified his heinous crime by denying – I quote – “that it is remotely possible to change the system democratically.” – end of quote.
But he is wrong! The Oslo murderer falsely claims to be one of us. But he is not one of us. We abhor violence. We are democrats. We believe in peaceful solutions. The reason why we reject Islam is exactly Islam’s violent nature. We believe in democracy. We fight with the force of our conviction, but we never use violence. Our commitment to truth, human dignity and a just and honourable defence of the West does not allow us to use violence nor to give in to cynicism and despair. We cherish the tradition of Aleksander Solzhenitsyn, Jelena Bonner, Lech Walesa and Ronald Reagan. These heroes defeated a totalitarian ideology by the power of their conviction and without firing a single shot. As the ex-Muslim and Islam-critic Ali Sina said in a reaction to the Oslo atrocity: “We don’t raise a sword against darkness; we lit a light.”
So it is. We lit the light of the truth. And the truth will set us free.
The truth is that Islam can be successfully fought with democratic means. We do so in the Netherlands. You can do so, too, in Germany! Let me tell you what we have achieved in the Netherlands since my last visit to Berlin, less than one year ago. It will encourage you. What can be done in the Netherlands can also be done in Germany.
My party, the Party for Freedom, which has 24 seats of the 150 seats in parliament, supports a minority government of Liberals and Christian-Democrats. We do this in return for measures to restrict immigration, roll back crime, counter cultural relativism, and restore our traditional Western freedoms, such as freedom of speech. The Party for Freedom has been in this position for less than a year, but we are achieving great things.
We have achieved that the Netherlands will soon ban the face-covering Islamic burkas and the niqabs!
Note to self: move Rep. Duncan Hunter from good guy category (voting grade A-) to interior sh#t list, along with Sen John McCain and others who think border security is merely a precursor on the short road to inevitable Amnesty for millions of lawbreaking foreigners — based on Hunter’s recent Politico opinion piece extolling “comprehensive immigration reform” (below).
There should NEVER be another amnesty, mostly because when the government rewards a behavior, we all get lots more of it.
It’s basic psychology. Try rewarding your kid for screaming at the dinner table or Fido for relieving himself on the Oriental rug: the unwanted behavior will persist, if not worsen. If Washington announces another amnesty with lots of enforcement as part of the deal (heh), the message to Mexico and beyond will register as Amnesty, period.
Another psychological aspect is how demanding the illegals have become. They are not the grateful newcomers of your grandfather’s generation. La Raza and other hispanic supremacists have fostered the ideology of entitlement, that Mexicans in particular are victims and therefore due everything they can mooch from US taxpayers, like free college educations for the kiddies as is about to be implemented in California.
Anyway, wasn’t Obama’s strategy supposed to be heightened border enforcement to be followed by an amnesty for the future Democrats? The government can’t even manage genuine border control for a short period. So Obama gave up on the charade and implemented a pre-election administrative amnesty for his hispanic base.
The failed Reagan Amnesty of 1986 was supposed to include border and workplace enforcement, but oops, Washington forgot. Slave-cheap labor is just too attractive for business — which is why there are still 8 million illegals unlawfully occupying American jobs while 14 million citizens are unemployed in a wrenching jobs depression.
Bottom line: a nation of laws cannot forgive lawbreaking invaders every generation and then expect either citizens or foreigners to respect the legal system at all. No other area of public policy offers reward rather than punishment for crimes.
The message from Washington to the world about immigration should be “Enforcement ONLY.”
Our borders must be secured before any comprehensive immigration reform.Luckily, border security is the easy part.
The right combination of border infrastructure, personnel and technology – all working in unison – can effectively close smuggling corridors and make it excruciatingly difficult to enter the U.S. illegally.
That’s something we can do now. It will be harder, but not impossible, to find consensus on the broader immigration issue. Even current law would suffice, assuming it’s consistently and thoroughly enforced – which has not been the case.
What’s unfortunate is the Senate, under Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), has showed time and again – starting with its inability to pass a budget – it’s unwilling to work toward implementing responsible reforms. All Congress needs to do, short of making workplace enforcement mandatory for all employers, is attach real consequences to any state or locality that refuses to enforce existing immigration law.
One reliable option is to deny federal reimbursement for initiatives such as the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program. Another is to restrict federal funding altogether.
What’s the real upside to effective enforcement? It’s good for everyone – citizens, legal immigrants and, yes, even illegal immigrants. Continue reading this article
Is American sovereignty finally appearing as an important topic in the Presidential campaign?
Law and borders have been given short shrift in earlier Presidential elections because both parties have constituencies that favor permissive immigration enforcement: Republican elites like cheap labor and Democrat honchos believe that importing millions of big-government foreigners will bring a permanent liberal majority.
But the emergence of the Tea Party has changed the game. Grassroots conservatives across America are politically engaged to fix what’s wrong with the country — and that includes immigration anarchy. They demanded better governance in local townhall meetings last year and voted in a Republican House in 2010 with dozens of Tea Party-identified members, pledged to cut spending and rein in government.
According to the Washington Post, Republican candidates are hearing from many citizens voicing concerns about border security and immigration enforcement:
KEENE, N.H. — Mitt Romney opened his town hall meeting here talking about the economy — his thoughts on growing business, getting government out of the way — just as he does nearly every other campaign event. But when he opened last week’s forum for questions, the first voter he called on didn’t seem concerned about any of that. He wanted to know the Republican presidential candidate’s stance on border security.
A similar scene played out in South Carolina a few days later, when Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) attended a town hall meeting she assumed would center on the economy, jobs and the federal deficit — only to see the assembled voters react most passionately to her comments on illegal immigration.
Polls may not suggest it, and the candidates may not be catering to it, but immigration is an issue that voters won’t let the GOP White House hopefuls escape. [. . .]
TAMPA — With Rick Perry proving to be a serious threat to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign, the former Massachusetts governor swung through Tampa on Friday to exploit what some Republicans see as Perry’s Achilles’ heel: immigration.
“We must stop providing the incentives that promote illegal immigration,” Romney told more than 100 people attending a Republican Hispanic conference. “As governor, I vetoed legislation that would have provided in-state tuition rates to illegal immigrants and I strengthened the authority our state troopers had to enforce existing immigration laws.”
Romney, 64, never mentioned by name the Texas governor, who leads Romney in most national polls as well as in early primary and caucus states. But immigration is a new issue of focus for Romney this election cycle, and his campaign knows Perry, 61, is already facing criticism from conservatives for not taking a hard-enough line.
For instance, in 2001 Perry signed a version of the DREAM Act that made Texas the first state to allow in-state tuition to undocumented immigrants — much like the bill Romney boasted of killing in Massachusetts.
Last year, Perry said he had no interest in passing a tough Arizona-style immigration law for his border state. He also has questioned the effectiveness of building a massive border fence, something Romney said Friday should be a priority. Continue reading this article
To illustrate how deeply Democrats have decimated California, consider the worthwhile state institutions that are being destroyed while illegal alien students are being funded and citizen young people bypassed.
One of the best things about California is the wonderful system of beautiful state parks, but a substantial number are being sacrificed due to the ongoing budget crisis — 70 parks out of a total of 278.
We can be sure that Mexican organized crime will be eyeballing the newly available acreage to expand their toxic marijuana grow zones. Mexican cartels have already been violating Point Reyes for years.
Independent foreign moochers have ripped off national and state parks of anything valuable they can steal. One example is the Olympic National Park where illegals have been picking salal (valued for floral arrangements) for years, Poaching natural resources is a squatter favorite because law enforcement is more lax. California’s unprotected parks will be sitting ducks when an onslaught of ravening wolves come to steal and spoil.
Below, a quiet glade in Samuel Taylor Park, near Lagunitas in Marin County, which is being closed due to state budget cutbacks.
Here are the figures: the state is closing 70 parks to save $11 million annually, but is about to spend $40 million per year of taxpayer funds on college educations for illegal aliens who cannot work legally upon graduation.
Following is more about the terrible destruction of California parks:
Many Californians cannot believe it’s come to this: closing 70 state parks to save $22 million over the next couple of years.
That may not sound like a lot, but many of the Golden State’s parks are in varying states of disrepair and need $1.3 billion dollars of deferred maintenance.
Needing to cut costs wherever he can, Gov. Jerry Brown looked at the parks with the highest repair bills and the least significance — cultural, historic, economic or otherwise.
But some, like the old Governor’s Mansion in Sacramento, are very popular, while sites like writer Jack London’s ranch in Sonoma County are considered local treasures. The second-largest state park in California, Henry Coe in Santa Clara County, is also on the closure list.
“We’ve reached a point where we’ve had the last straw to break the camel’s back, but there’s no other choice but to close,” says Roy Stearns, deputy director of communications for the California State Parks Department. Continue reading this article
Over in Denmark, retired cartoonist Kurt Westergaard lives a safe life because he has 24/7 security to protect him from members of the Religion of Peace.
Mr. Westergaard doodled up the infamous Bomb-Turban Mohammed, which outraged hostile Muslims worldwide. It was the most iconic image of the several cartoons published by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten which grew into the global cartoon jihad.
As a result, Westergaard has become something of a free speech hero, which is a hazardous position, so he is not often interviewed.
The Internal Revenue Service allowed undocumented workers to collect $4.2 billion in refundable tax credits last year, a new audit says, almost quadruple the sum five years ago.
Although undocumented workers are not eligible for federal benefits, the report released Thursday by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration concludes that federal law is ambiguous on whether these workers qualify for a tax break based on earned income called the additional child tax credit.
Taxpayers can claim this credit to reduce what they owe in taxes, often getting refunds from the government. The vagueness of federal law may have contributed to the $4.2 billion in credits, the report said.
The IRS said it lacks the authority to disallow the claims.
Wage earners who do not have Social Security numbers and are not authorized to work in the United States can use what the IRS calls individual taxpayer identification numbers. Often these result in fraudulent claims on tax returns, auditors found.
In California, illegal alien college students already get in-state tuition, courtesy of the beleaguered taxpayer. But that was not enough. Now they must have even more of the public’s scarce funds, even though the state’s system of universities has been deeply damaged because of budget cuts.
Even so, California Democrats are determined to redistribute the citizens’ money, taking financial aid from worthy young Americans and giving it to illegal aliens from Mexico and beyond. New reports are full of stories about college students who cannot graduate because courses they need are not being given as a result of budget cutbacks. In such a climate, goodies for illegal alien students nevertheless remain a top priority for Democrats.
The state Senate on Wednesday approved the second half of contentious legislation that would allow students who are illegal immigrants to apply for state-funded scholarships and financial aid.
The Senate approved AB131, also known as the California Dream Act, with a 22-11 vote, leaving it just one step away from the governor’s desk.
The state Assembly must consider changes to the bill it previously passed before it can go to Gov. Jerry Brown.
“These students are valedictorians, they’re class presidents, and they’re all-star athletes. They are the future of California,” said Sen. Charles Calderon, D-Whittier, who carried the bill in the Senate.
The bill is part of a legislative package by Assemblyman Gil Cedillo, D-Los Angeles. Last month, Brown, a Democrat, signed a separate bill by Cedillo approving private scholarships and loans for illegal immigrant students. AB131 would make those students eligible for state-funded financial aid.
Critics say allowing access to those state resources encourages illegal immigration. Supporters counter that the students, many of whom were brought to the United States as young children, shouldn’t be punished for their parents’ actions.
Sen. Doug La Malfa, R-Willows, opposed the bill Wednesday. He read a letter from a constituent who said his daughter’s California education grant was recently cut. He said passing a law such as this would be like rubbing salt in his wound.
Cedillo’s legislative package differs from the federal Dream Act, a proposal that would create a path to citizenship for those who are brought to the country illegally as children.
Under the bill approved Wednesday, illegal immigrant students would have to meet the same requirements as others but only would qualify for financial aid that remains after legal residents apply.
“They basically receive the leftovers,” Calderon said.
On Monday, the Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis signed agreements with the governments of the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica and El Salvador to protect their workers in this country. At the same time, she emphasized her department’s concern with the well being of foreign job thieves.
Not that such a move should be a surprise. Solis has been going the extra mile for lawbreaking foreign workers for as long as she has been the Labor Secretary. (See Department of Labor against American Workers from 2010.)
Border: An administration that conducts raids looking for illegal wood rather than illegal aliens signs partnerships with foreign governments to advise these aliens of their rights. What part of “illegal” don’t they get?
Right on the heels of enacting the federal Dream Act through administrative fiat, the administration of President Obama, specifically Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, on Monday signed “partnership” agreements with ambassadors from a group of Latin American nations aiming to protect what she described as the labor rights of both legal and illegal migrants working in the U.S.
This ceremony marked the signing of partnership agreements with the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, and El Salvador, joining Mexico, Nicaragua and Guatemala, which had signed the agreement previously.
So while the administration works closely with foreign countries to promote illegal immigration, it takes border states like Arizona to court when they try to protect their borders and enforce our immigration laws.
Partners in crime would be more like it. According to the Immigration and Nationality Act, “employers may hire only persons who may legally work in the United States (i.e., citizens and nationals of the U.S.) and aliens authorized to work in the U.S.” Continue reading this article
Omar’s comfy lifestyle makes it hard not to notice how easy being an illegal alien in America is these days. It’s amazing anyone bothers with the troublesome legal immigration process, given the time and money involved.
Interestingly, Uncle Omar was ordered repatriated to Kenya in 1992 but somehow the feds never got around to enforcing the deportation order, even though he didn’t appear hard to find, since he had a home, a car and a job.
Inquiring minds want to know more about how Uncle Omar got a Social Security number, which helped him get a Massachusetts DL a couple decades back.
The CNN report below has some fascinating details, including a helpful diagram of the Obama polygamous family tree, which may require a second viewing. The reporter chose his words carefully and did not use the word polygamy however, which would have reminded viewers that the President is part of a curiously diverse African family. Additionally, legal talking head Toobin says that drunk driving is not serious enough to get Uncle Omar deported — that’s the elite view from the back of a limo where occupants are protected from drunk-driving illegal aliens.
President Barack Obama’s uncle, an illegal immigrant charged with drunken driving last week, was ordered by an immigration judge to leave the country almost two decades ago, a federal official said Wednesday.
The official said a deportation order was issued against Onyango Obama in 1992. The official spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to release details on the case.
Obama, who’s from Kenya, is the half-brother of the president’s late father. He has pleaded not guilty to operating under the influence of alcohol and is being held on an immigration detainer.
An immigration detainer, used by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to identify people in jail or prison who could be deported, is a request to another law enforcement agency to notify ICE before releasing the person from custody so ICE can arrange to take over custody.
Obama’s immigration attorney, Margaret Wong, of Cleveland, declined to comment on his case or on how long he has been living in the U.S. illegally.
The White House also has declined to comment.
Obama, 67, was arrested last week in Framingham, where he has lived for years, about 20 miles west of Boston. He had made a rolling stop at a stop sign and nearly caused a police cruiser to strike his sport utility vehicle, police said. After being booked at a police station, he was asked whether he wanted to make a telephone call to arrange for bail, they said.
Michael Coren is a new name to me, but what I’ve seen of him in the past week is quite agreeable. He has a new talk show on the Sun television network in Canada, which also presents Ezra Levant.
BlazingCarFur tubed up the whole debut episode, which is posted below. The guests included Ann Coulter, Mark Steyn, Tarek Fatah and Juan Williams discussing Islam, mob psychology, free speech and the future of America.
There was a mid-sized riot in a New York state amusement park Tuesday in which 15 Muslims were arrested. Rye Playland was closed for two hours as the fracas ensued. Two park rangers were injured in the county-run park.
The problem arose when Muslims were informed that “headgear” like hats and scarves was not permitted on some rides for safety reasons to prevent an Isadora Duncan-type event.
But being Muslims, they were unwilling to follow the rules required of everyone because they believe they are Special.
So was this event staged as lawsuit fodder like so many others (e.g. the recent Abercrombie case and the Flying Imams) or was it just another instance of Muslim intransigence?
The Muslim American Society was warned in advance that no head coverings were permitted because of safety reasons. That fact points to the lawsuit possibility, plus the upcoming 10-year anniversary of the 9/11 Islamic attacks which makes reasserting Muslim victimhood an important propaganda goal.
In addition, it’s an opportunity to show pictures of sad kiddies and run sound bites of shrieking women in veils complaining about police brutality — great stuff for the Islamic media machine. Call Al Jazeera! “Muslims are the victims of Islamophobia in America!”
Today, the spin is all about Muslim identity and victimhood: “This all happened because we’re Muslim.”
Fifteen people were arrested Tuesday at e Playland Amusement Park in Rye, N.Y, The Journal News of Westchester, N.Y. reports.
The brawl started when Muslim park-goers became upset that Playland was extending its ban on headgear to women who wished to wear their religious headgear while going on rides, the newspaper says. Many Muslims celebrating Eid-ul-Fitr, the end of the Ramadan fasting and reflection period and one of Islam’s major holidays, had come to the park.
A Westchester County park official told the newspaper a Muslim organizer of a large outing to Playland was informed of the headgear ban, which extends to caps and skullcaps and such.
The ban stem from accidents on Playland rides that did not involve headgear but resulted in tighter regulations meant to promote safety on rides, such as preventing hats from falling off and causing issues.
A scarf could potentially choke a person, a park spokesman told the newspaper.
Accounts vary, but the dispute began after park-goers were told the headgear ban applied to women wearing traditional Muslim head coverings, known as hijabs. The newspaper said a scuffle started within the group and then broadened after others intervened.
New York’s Daily News said one woman, Entisai Ali, began arguing with officers over the head scarf rule, quoting Dena Meawad, 18, of Bay Ridge, Brooklyn.
“The cops started getting loud with her and she started getting loud, too. They pushed her on the ground and arrested her,” Meawad said.
Her cousin, Kareem Meawad, 17, went to try to protect the woman and was beaten by police and also arrested, she told the Daily News. Her brother, Issam Meawad, 20, was pushed to the ground and arrested.
“She just wanted to get on a ride. That was it,” Dena Meawad was quoted as saying. “It’s clear, this all happened because we’re Muslim.”
Leave it to the Associated Press to readminister its scab-picking habit of portraying Muslims residing in America as poor little victims who suffer Islamophobia at the hands of cruel Americans. That’s the unsubtle message in the AP’s report on a new Pew poll that begins with the assertion that Muslims here endure harassment from the public and undue attention as potential terrorists from law enforcement.
If life in the United States is so terrible, then Muslim immigrants can always pack up and leave the same way they got here. Most can be defined as newbies: 63% of Muslim residers are first-generation immigrants to the U.S., with 45% having arrived in the U.S. since 1990.
Wouldn’t Muslims be happier in Dar al-Islam? For example, living in Riyadh would be ever so handy for the hajj, and Saudi Arabia does not permit any pork chops that annoy Muslims. It just seems a better fit.
Most come for the money alone (like most immigrants) and live in their tribal enclaves like Dearbornistan and Tehrangeles.
Ezra Levant and Kathy Shaidle have an intelligent discussion about the poll results in the following video:
However I don’t agree with them that it’s a good thing that Muslims with all their complaints still find America a friendly place to them — go figure. More Americans need to get unfriendly, and pipe up with the idea that Muslim immigration should end yesterday, because it is one of the worst public policies ever.
More than half of Muslim Americans in a new poll say government anti-terrorism policies single them out for increased surveillance and monitoring, and many report increased cases of name-calling, threats and harassment by airport security, law enforcement officers and others.
Still, most Muslim Americans say they are satisfied with the way things are going in the U.S. and rate their communities highly as places to live.
The survey by the Pew Research Center, one of the most exhaustive ever of the country’s Muslims, finds no signs of rising alienation or anger among Muslim-Americans despite recent U.S. government concerns about homegrown Islamic terrorism and controversy over the building of mosques.
“This confirms what we’ve said all along: American Muslims are well integrated and happy, but with a kind of lingering sense of being besieged by growing anti-Muslim sentiment in our society,” said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Washington, D.C.-based Muslim civil rights group.
“People contact us every day about concerns they’ve had, particularly with law enforcement authorities in this post-9/11 era,” he said.
Muslim extremists hijacked four passenger planes on Sept. 11, 2001, crashing them into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Shanksville, Pa.
In all, 52 percent of Muslim Americans surveyed said their group is singled out by government for terrorist surveillance. Almost as many — 43 percent — reported they had personally experienced harassment in the past year, according to the poll released Tuesday.
That 43 percent share of people reporting harassment is up from 40 percent in 2007, the first time Pew polled Muslim Americans. 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.