Rasmussen Poll: Voters See Illegal Immigration in Terms of More Crime and Taxpayer Ripoff

A recent survey highlighted the differing views of members of the two parties regarding unlawful immigration. Unsurprisingly, the Democrats are rather unconcerned, while Republicans believe the systemic invasion of foreign job thieves and criminals is causing serious harm to the nation.

Voters Measure Illegal Immigration in Major Crime, More Tax Dollars, Rasmussen Reports, March 29, 2017

Voters tend to view illegal immigrants as the source of more major crime and a big drain on taxpayers’ wallets.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 44% of Likely U.S. Voters think illegal immigration increases the level of serious crime in America. Nearly as many (41%) say it has no impact. Just seven percent (7%) feel illegal immigrants actually decrease the amount of serious crime. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Forty-nine percent (49%) still believe illegal immigrants are a significant strain on the U.S. budget, although that is down from 67% when Rasmussen Reports first asked this question in March 2010. Thirty-seven percent (37%) say illegals are not a big strain on the budget, up from 23% seven years ago, while 14% are undecided.

As on nearly all issues related to illegal immigration, there is a sizable difference of opinion between Republicans and Democrats. Seventy-four percent (74%) of GOP voters and a plurality (44%) of voters not affiliated with either major political party say illegal immigration increases the level of serious crime, but only 16% of Democrats agree. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of Democrats think it has no impact.

Similarly, while 78% of Republicans and 51% of unaffiliated voters believe illegal immigrants are a significant strain on the U.S. budget, just 21% of Democrats share that view. Most Democrats (62%) disagree. Interestingly, a plurality (48%) of Democrats considered illegal immigrants a major budget strain in 2010, along with 73% of unaffiliateds. Continue reading this article

Fox Chatterbox Eric Bolling Reveals His Amnesty Plan

Since Donald Trump was elected president, does immigration enforcement now seem too mean-spirited when cute anchor kids might be separated from deportable parents? (Funny how Mexican family values don’t include keeping parents and kids together when there is free stuff to be gleaned from generous-stupid America.)

A February Rasmussen poll headline read, Support for Deportations Plummets, although no further details were given in the brief report. Are some supposed conservatives getting cold feet about law and borders when the real thing actually happens occasionally?

During Thursday’s Outnumbered program on Fox News, Eric Bolling, who generally talks up the conservative position on issues, spouted off with his simple rubber-stamp amnesty solution for the illegal alien problem. In a segment where the group’s discussion was focused on sanctuary cities, Bolling just had to share:

ERIC BOLLING: I have honestly a common-sense solution to the immigration issue, and I’ve said this before. The DMVs — there’s probably 50 or 60 of them in each state, maybe 10 or 15 in each state. Create little harbors, make those embassies where, if you’re an illegal, you can walk into this area, the DMV or whatever you call it, and you’re not going to get arrested or deported, but you’re going to get documentation of who you are. It’s not a path to citizenship: it’s a path to legality. You’ll pay your taxes, you’ll be able to stay here, and eventually you can go back to the end of the line to become a citizen.

That program would be very attractive to Mexican axe murderers and cartel criminals: just get a little paper in the DMV and voila — you’re legalized and documented! Sketchy foreigners could essentially get a new identity under the Bolling Plan. Dangerous or useless aliens get to stay and earn American dollars, which is what they came for, not to participate in the political process. The ability to work legally is the real amnesty.

Gang background? No problema in Eric Bolling’s DMV Amnesty Plan.

New Evidence Shows that Automation Is a Threat to Jobs and Wages

A new automation report has been published and it tackles the measurement of a vital trend, namely the amount of robotization that has already occurred.

As has been noted here, in 2013 the Associated Press published a series documenting how the Great Recession had prompted many businesses to invest in technology, thereby killing middle-class jobs and slowing the recovery.

AP IMPACT: Recession, tech kill middle-class jobs, January 23, 2013

NEW YORK (AP) — Five years after the start of the Great Recession, the toll is terrifyingly clear: Millions of middle-class jobs have been lost in developed countries the world over.

And the situation is even worse than it appears.

Most of the jobs will never return, and millions more are likely to vanish as well, say experts who study the labor market. What’s more, these jobs aren’t just being lost to China and other developing countries, and they aren’t just factory work. Increasingly, jobs are disappearing in the service sector, home to two-thirds of all workers.

They’re being obliterated by technology. . .

Automotive manufacturing is now performed largely by robots.

The new report, titled Robots and Jobs: Evidence from US Labor Markets is a thorough and wonky 91 pages, aimed at a technology and university audience. Fortunately there are tech explainers around to translate the analysis-speak into regular English. Plus, the charts included in the Qz.com piece below are enlightening, particularly the first one which shows that robots have been increasingly used in American factories and elsewhere for decades.

Interestingly, the article begins with the automation warning from the outgoing President Obama, who nevertheless was the Immigrationist-in-Chief whose liberal policies admitted huge numbers of superfluous foreigners to compete with Americans, for example three million immigrant workers in 2015 alone. But in his final weeks he noticed the automation job threat. Oh.

With millions of humans being replaced by smart machines, importing immigrant workers is surely a foolish and obsolete policy that should be consigned to the ash heap of history.

Compelling new evidence that robots are taking jobs and cutting wages, Qz.com, March 28, 2017

In his final speech as US president, Barack Obama warned of the “relentless pace of automation that makes a lot of good, middle-class jobs obsolete.” Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft, has said that governments will need to tax robots to replace forgone revenue when human workers lose their jobs.

If the past is prologue, these concerns are warranted.

In a recent study (pdf), economists Daren Acemoglu of MIT and Pascual Restrepo of Boston University try to quantify how worried we should be about robots. They examine the impact of industrial automation on the US labor market from 1990 to 2007. They conclude that each additional robot reduced employment in a given commuting area by 3-6 workers, and lowered overall wages by 0.25-0.5%.

A central question about robots is whether they replace human workers or augment them by boosting productivity. Acemoglu and Restrepo’s research is a powerful piece of evidence on the side of replacement. So, brace yourself: According to the International Federation of Robotics, there are already between 1.5-1.75 million industrial robots in operation, and some observers expect that number to more than double by 2025.

But not all robots are created equal. For their study, the economists use the definition of the International Organization for Standardization, which defines industrial robots as machines that are automatically controlled, reprogrammable, and multipurpose. By this definition, an elevator is not a robot, because it cannot be made to do anything besides shuttle people from floor to fl

Industrial robots are most commonly used in the automotive industry, which accounts for 39% of robot usage in the US. It’s no surprise, then, that workers in America’s Midwestern carmaking capitals have been the most affected by automation.

Assessing the impact of robots on jobs is no simple task. Advances in other kinds of technology, the spread of the internet, and increased trade with China and Mexico also led to changes in the US labor market over the period studied by the economists.

In order to isolate the effect of robots, Acemoglu and Restrepo used a clever statistical trick. They collected data on adoption rates of industrial robots in Europe, and then analyzed what happened to American labor markets by comparing industry trends with their equivalents in Europe. This isolated the changes likely caused by the spread of robots, and not some other factor peculiar to the US.

However you measure it, the short-term impact of automation has been wrenching for many workers. Yet, history also suggests that fears of new technologies leading to persistently high unemployment are unfounded. Over the long term, markets always find a way to make use of humans’ skills. Assuming this time really isn’t different, they probably will again.

Self-Driving Cars Advance toward Automated Future -- with Bumps along the Road

The big auto companies — and a few techies like Google — are locked in competition to see who will dominate the coming self-driving market and the automated transportation future. The companies may imagine that cities will buy whole fleets of autonomous cars which will replace the privately owned vehicles that clutter up the streets and parking garages — and yes, the transportation landscape could work out that way to some degree. Or perhaps many people won’t want to give up private ownership of their vehicle because a car can also be a closet for necessary stuff, as I experienced as a commuting college student. Either way, utopian city planners fear (or hope) that overpopulation will lead to a parking armageddon in cities, and community cars owned by the government will save the day.

Below, a self-driving car navigates a Pittsburgh bridge as part of the years-long testing process.

At the other end, where the one percent live, some car designers visualize a deluxe living room on wheels for rich customers, like a Rolls Royce model, called an “amazingly ludicrous self-driving luxury vehicle.” A recent Bentley prototype has a holographic butler to serve as an interface with the machinery — user-friendly for the uber-wealthy.

Anyway, there’s big money being poured into the self-driving project, like the $1 billion pledged in February by Ford over five years to maintain its technical expertise at a high level. Therefore, any bumps along the way — namely accidents — that may slow progress to the industry-approved future are worrying to the people in charge.

A recent report from Fox News included some interesting facts, in particular that a human driver needs to take control of the car on average every eight-tenths of a mile. That frequency of human intervention doesn’t seem very self-drivey. Perhaps the technology still needs a lot of improvement before it’s ready for mass use.

WILLIAM LA JEUNESSE: Self-driving cars and trucks are still at least 3 years away, but the road getting there has had more than a few bumps. The latest — Friday in Arizona when a driver illegally made a left turn crashing into a self-driving Uber SUV. Two employees inside escaped injury.

UBER DRIVER: I hope this bring new jobs, I hope it brings convenience, safety.

LA JEUNESSE: Uber’s self-driving program arrived in Arizona in December after a dispute in California over mandatory accident reporting. Unlike California, Arizona doesn’t require a special permit for self-driving vehicles.

VOLVO SPOKESMAN: Once you are in self-driving mode, we want to make sure that you feel you still have control of the vehicle.

LA JEUNESSE: About six companies test autonomous cars in 13 states. And while there is no central repository of accident data, in December an Uber SUV did not see a stop light in San Francisco and sailed through a crosswalk. Last February a Google autonomous car sideswiped a bus while trying to pass. In May, a Tesla driver died in a self-driving crash, but investigators could not attribute it to the auto-pilot system.

THOMAS FREY, DA VINCI INSTITUTE: All the things that go wrong in the driverless car world are going to force us to create a much more safe and durable system.

LA JEUNESSE: According to the website Recode, Uber’s 43 self-driving cars travel up to 20,000 miles a week, but a human must still take control approximately every eight-tenths of a mile.

CHRISTOPHER HART, NTSB CHAIRMAN: The theory that if you remove the driver, you remove driver error — there are several defects to that theory. First of all, the automation has to work. If the automation doesn’t work, then what? If the automation fails, will it fail safe?

FREY: Airplanes are much safer than car transportation today. It’s going to take a while before we get driverless vehicles to the same level of safety as air transportation.

LA JEUNESSE: Now as for that accident Friday in Arizona, police did cite the human driver for failing to yield to the computer-sided car, and Uber is back in the test markets. . . Tempe, Pittsburgh and San Francisco.

America’s Attorney General Jeff Sessions Moves Against Deadly Sanctuary Cities

Attorney General Sessions appeared at the beginning of Sean Spicer’s daily press briefing on Monday to speak about the administration’s seriousness regarding the withdrawal of federal funds from communities that choose to protect illegal aliens rather than citizens.

Unsurprisingly, Sessions noted that these bad policies have deadly consequences, including the preventable death of Kate Steinle in San Francisco by a five-times-deported Mexican. Sessions’ Senate career included a recognition of the human cost of immigration anarchy, and crime victims of illegal aliens were a topic in his Attorney General hearing.

Kate Steinle was shot dead as she strolled with her father on a San Francisco pier by a habitual illegal alien criminal whom the city had protected from deportation.

In January, President Trump signed an executive order promising to withhold federal funds from sanctuary cities. General Sessions tightened the legal screws today.

Stiffer measures will likely be needed since outliers like San Francisco promise to defend foreign lawbreakers using taxpayer funds. Texas Governor Greg Abbott is seeking legislation to jail law enforcement officials for refusing to enforce the law against illegal aliens — which may be the level of punishment required to restore immigration enforcement throughout America.

Here’s the Sessions statement:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions Delivers Remarks Announcing Sanctuary Jurisdictions, Monday, March 27, 2017

Good afternoon.  The Department of Justice has a duty to enforce our nation’s laws, including our immigration laws.  Those laws require us to promptly remove aliens when they are convicted of certain crimes.

The vast majority of the American people support this common-sense requirement.  According to one recent poll, 80 percent of Americans believe that cities that arrest illegal immigrants for crimes should be required to turn them over to immigration authorities.

Unfortunately, some states and cities have adopted policies designed to frustrate the enforcement of our immigration laws.  This includes refusing to detain known felons under federal detainer requests, or otherwise failing to comply with these laws.  For example, the Department of Homeland Security recently issued a report showing that in a single week, there were more than 200 instances of jurisdictions refusing to honor Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer requests with respect to individuals charged or convicted of a serious crime.  The charges and convictions against these aliens include drug trafficking, hit and run, rape, sex offenses against a child and even murder.

Such policies cannot continue.  They make our nation less safe by putting dangerous criminals back on our streets.

We all remember the tragic case of Kate Steinle, the 32-year-old woman who was shot and killed two years ago in San Francisco as she walked along a pier with her father.  The shooter, Francisco Sanchez, was an illegal immigrant who had already been deported five times and had seven felony convictions.

Just eleven weeks before the shooting, San Francisco had released Sanchez from its custody, even though ICE had filed a detainer requesting that he be kept in custody until immigration authorities could pick him up for removal.  Even worse, Sanchez admitted that the only reason he came to San Francisco was because of its sanctuary policies. Continue reading this article

Rasmussen Poll: Only 35 Percent of Voters Want to Live in a Sanctuary City

Funny how the world looks different from the back of a limo, and powerful liberals have made it clear that they see the safety of illegal aliens as being more important than that of American citizens. For example, even following the recent high school rape committed by illegal aliens, Maryland’s Democrat-run House of Delegates nevertheless voted to become a sanctuary state.

Unsurprisingly, most citizens don’t like the idea of their town being made into an anything-goes freebie flophouse for illegal alien grifters. Obviously, the sanctuary designation is a dangerous welcome mat for criminals. Crime is a job some Americans will do, and we therefore don’t need to import lawbreaking foreigners to perform it for us.

The majority of Americans don’t want to live in a sanctuary city, according to Rasmussen’s detailed and informative poll.

35% Want to Live in a Sanctuary Community, Rasmussen Reports, March 24, 2017

The rape of a 14-year-old girl in a Maryland suburban high school by two older students who were in this country illegally has moved the sanctuary city debate back on the front burner. Most voters don’t want to live in a community that shields illegal immigrants from the government, and many question the safety of such communities.

Elected officials in many communities have declared themselves sanctuaries for illegal immigrants, refusing to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, and 35% of Likely U.S. Voters favor the community they live in declaring itself a sanctuary community. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 52% oppose their community declaring itself a sanctuary for illegal immigrants. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

A plurality (48%) of Democrats favors living in a sanctuary community, but only 27% of both Republicans and voters not affiliated with either major political party agree.

Forty percent (40%) of all voters believe sanctuary communities are less safe than communities that do not protect illegal immigrants from federal authorities. Seventeen percent (17%) say sanctuary communities are more safe, while 35% think the level of safety is about the same.

The survey of 1,000 Likely U.S. Voters was conducted on March 22-23, 2017 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

Fifty percent (50%) of voters said in November that the U.S. Justice Department should take legal action against cities that provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants. That was down from 62% in July 2015 just after the highly-publicized murder of a young woman in San Francisco by an illegal immigrant from Mexico. Fifty-two percent (52%) still want to cut off federal funding to sanctuary cities.

Most voters have favored punishing sanctuary cities in surveys since 2007. New York City, Philadelphia, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. are among the numerous cities that now refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. Continue reading this article

New Research: Automation Could Grab More Than a Third of US Jobs by Early 2030s

A new report came out last week forecasting the likelihood of automation taking human jobs. The study comes from PwC (Price Waterhouse Cooper) and can be seen online at UK Economic Outlook where the section about international automation begins on page 30.

The upshot is not quite as dreary as the 2013 Oxford study by Frey and Osborne which estimates nearly half of US jobs vulnerable within 20 years. Nor is the new investigation as hopeful as the 2016 paper from Arntz, Gregory and Zierahn titled The Risk of Automation for Jobs in OECD Countries which found a significantly lower number for Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development nations (listed in OECD.org).

Here’s a snip of the PwC text leading up to an explanatory chart:

This debate was given added urgency in 2013 when researchers at Oxford University (Frey and Osborne, 2013) estimated that around 47% of total US employment had a “high risk of computerisation” over the next couple of decades – i.e. by the early 2030s.

However, there are also dissenting voices. Notably, Arntz, Gregory and Zierahn (OECD, 2016) last year re-examined the research by Frey and Osborne and, using an extensive new OECD data set, came up with a much lower estimate that only around 10% of jobs were under a “high risk of computerisation”. This is based on the reasoning that any predictions of job automation should consider the specific tasks that are involved in each job rather than the occupation as a whole.

In this article we present the findings from our own analysis of this topic, which builds on the research of both Frey and Osborne (hereafter ‘FO’) and Arntz, Gregory and Zierahn (hereafter ‘AGZ’). We then go on to discuss caveats to these results in terms of non-technological constraints on automation and potential offsetting job creation elsewhere in the economy (though this is much harder to quantify).

The following chart compares the PwC findings with the earlier reports:

The chart illustrates the comparison of estimates well, but leaves out the all-important time projection, which is the first key point, found on page 30:

Our analysis suggests that up to 30% of UK jobs could potentially be at high risk of automation by the early 2030s, lower than the US (38%) or Germany (35%), but higher than Japan (21%).

The mid-range PwC estimate is still very tough at 38 percent job loss — during the worst point of the Great Depression in 1933, America’s unemployment rate was 25 percent.

In addition, the US government’s immigration machine remains stuck on auto-pilot, importing more than one million legal immigrants annually. Why continue this outdated policy when workplace opportunities are about to shrink dramatically? It’s not like America needs workers for the factories, when the US has lost more than seven million factory jobs since manufacturing employment peaked in 1979, yet production is barreling along at near-record levels. Advanced machines are propelling a manufacturing revolution.

So America doesn’t need to import foreign workers at all going forward. In fact,

Automation makes immigration obsolete.

This kind of immigration-fueled population growth needs to stop. Hordes of unemployed foreigners are unlikely to be peaceful when jobs disappear.

Plus, it’s disappointing that the Treasury Secretary is so clueless about technology, as reported in La Times:

Robots could take over 38% of U.S. jobs within about 15 years, report says, Los Angeles Times, March 24, 2017

The automation of factories is a big factor for job loss in the U.S.

More than a third of U.S. jobs could be at “high risk” of automation by the early 2030s, a percentage that’s greater than in Britain, Germany and Japan, according to a report released Friday.

The analysis by accounting and consulting firm PwC focused primarily on the economic outlook in Britain, but it included a section on automation in Britain and elsewhere.

In the U.S., 38% of jobs could be at risk of automation, compared with 30% in Britain, 35% in Germany and 21% in Japan.

The report emphasizes that these estimates are based on the anticipated capabilities of robotics and artificial intelligence by the early 2030s, and that the pace and direction of technological progress are “uncertain.”

The key issue is not that the U.S. has more jobs in sectors that are universally ripe for automation, the report says; rather, it’s that more U.S. jobs in certain sectors are potentially vulnerable than, say, British jobs in the same sectors.

For example, the report says the financial and insurance sector has much higher possibility of automation in the U.S. than in Britain. That’s because, it says, American finance workers are less educated than British ones. Continue reading this article

Sanctuary Policies Continue to Harm Americans, with Liberal Help

The wickedness of liberal politicians still amazes, as they continue their open-borders, no-enforcement policies that directly cause the deaths and injury of innocent Americans. Liberals’ morality is a strange concoction in how they believe that the protection of foreign criminals is more virtuous than public safety for the citizens whose taxes fund the system.

A symbol of justice in America is a blindfolded woman holding a scale to indicate that the application of law should not depend on the nationality of the accused person. But liberal ideology decrees that diverse persons are victims and therefore require extra influence to be added to their side.

Illegal alien crime has been in the news recently, particularly because of the shocking Rockville High School rape by a pair of illegal aliens a few days ago and the stubborn resistance of Maryland officials to dismantle their dangerous sanctuary policies.

Interestingly, Univision reported that America’s top liberal, Barack Obama, contributed the kid-alien policy that led to the Rockville rape, and the tougher border enforcement of President Trump would have kept the illegal alien perps out.

Don Rosenberg, the father of an illegal alien crime victim, appeared on Fox News Saturday to discuss the continuing plague of sanctuary policies.

Below, Don Rosenberg holds a photo of his son Drew, who was killed by an unlicensed illegal alien who had been previously arrested but released.

(Historical note regarding the following video: the man in horn-rimmed glasses standing to the left of Mayor Eric Garcetti is the long-time enemy of American law and sovereignty, Gil Cedillo. Despite being born in Barstow, the hispanic politician was known for years as “One Bill Gil” for his relentless pursuit of drivers’ licenses for illegal aliens because the document functions as a sort of amnesty-lite since it opens the door to benefits and jobs. He must be thrilled that California is moving to become a sanctuary state to spite President Trump, a policy that will of course be a giant criminal magnet.)

When asked about Mayor Garcetti’s sanctuary policy in Los Angeles — which remarkably extends to non-cooperation with the federal authorities at the city’s international airport — Rosenberg responded, “I guess insanity would be the easy answer. What’s amazing about what Garcetti is doing . . . is he’s jeopardizing the health, safety, welfare of everybody in Los Angeles and the surrounding area. If we learned one thing from the 9/11 Commission when it came to terrorism, is that law enforcement has to work together. And look what just happened in England this week — so you have a terrorist who wasn’t on the watch list, could have flown to Los Angeles and [Garcetti]’s telling the Los Angeles police, don’t work with the federal authorities even at the airport. I mean, it’s criminal behavior on his part.”

Hopefully, President Trump will punish these sanctuary areas more harshly than just cutting their federal aid in order to return immigration law enforcement and protection from foreign criminals to all of the United States.

Providence Police Show How Crowd Control Is Done

On Saturday morning, a group of pro-Trump patriots marched in the capital of Rhode Island to display their appreciation for the sovereignty-defending president. Naturally, a gaggle of anti-Trump marxists gathered to harass and jabber.

What I noticed was how effective the local police were at preventing antagonistic sides from getting out of control: they formed a line and kept the groups apart. Fundamental cop stuff, right?

That was exactly the element missing in the March 4 Berkeley event where gangs of masked anarchists were allowed to assault the pro-Trump crowd, many of whom were older, even elderly. The Berkeley Police stood around as violence intensified without utilizing the strategy of basic crowd control. The city leaders made it clear that pro-Trump citizens were not welcome in their precious People’s Republic. See my blog for details: Berkeley Police Watch as Masked Anarchists Pursue Violence, Finally Arrest 10.

In Providence, the police formed a line to keep the two sides apart.

Because the peace was maintained in Providence, some people managed to have respectful disagreements. This is how political discourse is supposed to work, and law enforcement is a part of the picture.

A line of police officers divide Trump backers and foes at State House, March 25, 2017

Supporters and opponents of President Donald Trump got into shouting matches in front of City Hall Saturday morning as a march to the State House in support of the president got underway.

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — Providence police and state troopers formed a line between Trump supporters and foes at the State House terrace to prevent violence.

There were about 1,000 demonstrators at the State House, according to estimates made by Providence Journal reporters and the Providence police.

The rally ended at about 12:45 p.m., when the Providence police and state troopers ordered demonstrators to leave the area of the State House. The pro-Trump forces mostly dissipated, while the anti-Trumpers marched back toward City Hall, intending to head to a “RISE UP! Rhode Island” rally at the Roger Williams Memorial National Park on North Main Street, where organizers said they will urge people to “raise their voices against the current administration’s policies of hate and bigotry and stand in solidarity for equal rights for everyone.”

The two sides marched up Francis Street from Providence City Hall together. Trump’s supporters led. The opponents followed.

They were noisy: the President’s supporters chanting “USA, USA;” the opponents shouting expletives associated with Trump’s name.

But there was no trouble until the two factions reached the State House when there was some pushing and shoving.

That ended when the police formed their standing barrier between the two sides.

“I think it was a good representation of the American system of government,” Providence police Commander Thomas A. Verdi told The Providence Journal. “Two groups equal in size … each voicing their opinions and positions, and both very passionate, but able to do so in a very peaceful way.”

Around the edges of the crowd, something like respectful conversations broke out between a few on either side. Continue reading this article

London Terror Attack Sends City Elites into Appeasement Swoon

It’s so tiresome to see the same old liberal response to a shocking terror attack in a major world city as happened in London on Wednesday, where a hit-and-run SUV and knife attack killed four and injured dozens.

Prime Minister Theresa May said Britons were “not afraid” — although maybe they should be, since after years of terrorist murders, British police still are mostly unarmed: the officer who was stabbed to death, 48-year-old Keith Palmer, was not carrying a weapon, even though he was posted near Westminster as part of the protective force.

Hello! London is no longer the same community that believed police without guns could be more reasonable and accepted by the citizenry. In fact, the city is no longer majority white, as of 2012, and it continues to become less British because of catastrophic immigration. In December, over a thousand muslims yelling Allah Ackbar marched in London, demanding a caliphate.

The muslim mayor of the city, Sadiq Khan, declared after the recent killings that such disturbances are part and parcel of living in a big city these days.

Prime Minister May also declared in response to the murders that it’s wrong to describe the attack as “Islamic terrorism” and further expounded that the killer’s suspected ideology was a “perversion of a great faith.”

Every liberal pol is an expert on the religion of Islam! (When it is actually a totalitarian political system.)

No expression of liberal grief can be complete without a vigil, and London held a tasteful British one in Trafalgar Square on Thursday that included some Islam-is-peace propaganda.

The response behavior is painfully predictable and exhibits so little understanding of what kind of relentless enemy the West faces in Islam. Being nice and accommodating won’t work, a point that was emphasized by Ayaan Hirsi Ali when she was interviewed by Tucker Carlson on Wednesday.

TUCKER CARLSON: Why is it that so many on the left — internationally, in this country, in Great Britain, all through Europe — have so much trouble coming to terms with the religious component of this violence?

AYAAN HIRSI ALI: I don’t know. I acknowledge as you do that it’s masochistic, it’s stupid, and I think if you look at the Islamists, they don’t go to the liberals and say, “Thank you so much for letting us take over; we’ll stop terrorizing.” They don’t do it.

CARLSON: So what you’re saying is the Islamists don’t want sensitivity above all, that’s not their goal.

HIRSI ALI: No, Islamists want one thing and that is a sharia-compliant society and eventually the world. That’s what their aim is; it sounds crazy to you and me and everyone else, but that’s the objective. And they want to get there through dawa — this is infrastructure of indoctrinating people into accepting it and other ways of intimidating, you know, forcing them to do it and jihad — violence. And whoever is in their way is their enemy, and it doesn’t matter how nice the liberals are, how accommodating and obliging they are — that’s the objective of the Islamists. And if you don’t understand that, then I don’t think you should be in the business of making legislation, in the business of informed leadership because you’re just incapable of understanding that problem.

Britain needs to snap out of its PC snooze and recognize that the enemy is inside the gates.

Microsoft Age Recognition Software Puts High School Rapist's Age at 27

For an illegal alien, being classified as a minor is very advantageous for getting benefits and free stuff, so unlawful foreigners lying about their age is common from San Francisco to Massachusetts and Europe.

Both of the accused rapists at Maryland’s Rockville High School were students there, with ages given at 18 and 17. A photo of the older one, Henry Sanchez, was published, and he looked rather mature, so I ran the picture through Microsoft’s facial recognition software located online at How-Old.net with the following result:

This software has been used by news websites particularly in the UK because of the extreme cases of fake youth among the illegal aliens flooding into Europe from the Middle East.

One news site, the online version of the Daily Express newspaper, gave examples of the kid imposters and noted that the software was not exact but did work pretty well among their staff:

Older than their years? Facial analysis gives Calais refugee children an average age of 25, Express.co.uk, October 21, 2016

To test out their claims Express.co.uk ran photographs of 11 of the child refugees who were snapped as they arrived in Britain yesterday through the How-Old.net calculator.

The facial recognition site, which judges people’s ages by analysing their facial features using complicated algorithms, was set up by computer boffins at Microsoft.

It was developed by experts at the computer giant to advance the use of facial recognition software in a variety of fields, including as a security feature to authorise bank transactions.

The site carries the disclaimer its findings are not always accurate, and that they are only designed to indicate how old somebody looks – not to give their actual age.

And a spokesman for Microsoft today insisted: “How-old.net was designed to be an example of how developers could build a fun app using modern development practices. It is not intended to be used as a definitive assessment of age.”

When express.co.uk ran photographs of five of our reporters through the system, who were all men aged between 28 and 34, its results were accurate to within two years in all but one instance. . .

To be clear, the software gives an age estimation based on appearance. There are other means to approximate the age of illegal aliens, who normally don’t present a birth certificate upon arrest, like dental examination and bone density testing.

No mention has been made of any physical examination of the foreigners placed in Rockville High School, so we must assume that officials just accepted the age given by the illegal aliens and enrolled them among American teenagers.

Plyler vs. Doe is the 1982 court decision that requires US schools to accept illegal alien children for education, but the decision speaks in terms of “school-age children” not adults:

JUSTICE BRENNAN delivered the opinion of the Court.

The question presented by these cases is whether, consistent with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Texas may deny to undocumented school-age children the free public education that it provides to children who are citizens of the United States or legally admitted aliens.

Therefore the age of the illegal alien matters, and a 27-year-old foreigner would not be covered by this ruling in my non-lawyer common-sense opinion.

Maryland: Illegal Aliens Placed in High School Rape 14-Year-Old American Girl

Stupidly permissive school officials placed two illegal aliens from Central America who claimed to be teenagers into freshman classes of Rockville High School because of their inability to speak English. As a result, a 14-year-old girl was raped and sodomized in the boys’ restroom. This horrific crime represents the diversity being foisted upon unwilling citizens by open-borders criminal-friendly sanctuary cities and states.

Below is a photo of the accused Guatemalan rapist, Henry Sanchez, supposedly 18 years old. Did authorities check his physical features to determine his real age as is done now in Europe? Computer analysis of faces is used, as well as bone density and dental maturity examination to make sure that the “boy” being resettled is really what he says he is.

In addition, don’t the facial scar and broken nose suggest that Sanchez is a rough character and inappropriate to be a high school freshmen?

Fox News reported the story on Monday:

BRET BAIER: Now to a disturbing story out of suburban Washington DC where two Rockville High School students have been arrested and charged with rape, but should the teenagers have been in the country at all? Correspondent Doug McKelway has a story that is still developing tonight.

DOUG McKELWAY: At Rockville High School in progressive Montgomery County, Maryland, police say a 14-year-old ninth-grade girl was pushed into a boys’ restroom last Thursday. Despite her efforts to resist by holding on to a sink, she was shoved into a stall where she was allegedly raped and sodomized. Police arrested two ninth graders: 18 year old Henry Sanchez, an illegal from Guatemala, and a minor 17-year-old, Jose Montano, also here illegally. Both are being held without bond.

CITIZEN (PARENT?): I just hope she’s okay you know now, in a week from now, and maybe the rest of her life.

CITIZEN IN CAR: You figure that they’re protected and they’re safe, but . . .

McKELWAY: It happened amidst a debate to formally declare Rockville a sanctuary city though both it and Montgomery County have long practiced informal sanctuary. In a joint statement after President Trump’s inauguration, county leaders reassured residents of long-standing policy quote “Police do not enforce federal immigration law.” Maryland state policy goes well beyond non-enforcement, granting in-state college tuition rates to illegals. It has helped lead to massive demographic shifts here.

DANIEL McHUGH, MONTGOMERY COUNTY YOUNG GOP: Who’s come with them? Their parents their aunts, their uncles, the cousins, their nieces, their nephews. MS-13 has come through that door with them too.

McKELWAY: Among school families in central Montgomery County, 51 percent are now immigrants. The poverty rate for immigrant homes at 14 percent is twice that for native homes at seven percent, meaning a lower tax base as some schools struggle to serve student bodies speaking as many as 19 different languages.

McHUGH: Higher taxes, lowered educational standards and higher crime is what we’ve faced in Montgomery County as a result of pro-illegal-immigration policies put forth by the county government and even by the state.

McKELWAY: After Thursday’s incident the superintendent of Montgomery County Schools wrote parents about the alleged crime, calling it quote, “Horrible and unacceptable. They do not represent the positive values of our students and school communities.”

Yet in the 22 month period from January 2014 through September 2015, Montgomery County ignored federal immigration orders to detain 63 illegals who had prior criminal records. Coincidentally today the Department of Homeland Security began publishing a weekly list of sanctuary cities and the numbers of illegals those cities are releasing after DHS ordered them detained. And lastly, tomorrow night Rockville High School will host its monthly parent teachers meeting. No doubt concerned parents will have lots of questions. Bret?

BAIER: And we’ll be there.

Sanctuary cities function as a crime magnet to foreign criminals. The Mexican multiple deportee who shot Kate Steinle dead said in a jailhouse interview that San Francisco’s sanctuary policy was the reason he chose to live there.

America’s current de facto immigration policy imports poor, unskilled and criminal foreigners. President Trump is trying to reverse the situation of immigration being totally negative, but Democrats see importing millions of big-government voters as their only hope to regain power.

A recent poll determined that 80 percent of voters disapproved of sanctuary cities, yet they remain: nearly 500 have been counted by CIS.org, including a recent surge that apparently shows Democrat governments would rather snub President Trump than protect their own citizens from preventable illegal alien crime. This is the depth of evil to which liberalism has plunged itself.

Page 18 of 268« First...10...1617181920...304050...Last »