For today’s cultural sensitivity parable, consider the Pakistani immigrant who murdered his wife for preparing lentils for dinner, rather than goat. The case may sound incredible, but the dollars required of New York taxpayers to prosecute and incarcerate the man are quite real.
Being a traditional Muslim male, Noor Hussein (pictured) felt it was his right to beat his wife as the Koran specifies: if a woman disobeys her husband, say by not cooking the dinner he said he wanted, then a thrashing is in order.
That’s Islam, the so-called “religion of peace.” Not for women, or anyone else not in the club.
As the defense attorney observed of Noor in her opening statement, “He comes from a culture where he thinks this is appropriate conduct, where he can hit his wife.”
It looks like a cultural defense is the plan.
Do we feel enriched by Muslim diversity yet? Wouldn’t America be better off without them?
An elderly Pakistani immigrant beat his wife to death with a stick after the doomed woman made the mistake of cooking him lentils for dinner instead of the hearty meal of goat meat that he craved, according to court papers.
Noor Hussein, 75, was so outraged over the prospect of eating the vegetarian fare that he pummeled his wife, Nazar Hussein, 66, inside their Brooklyn apartment until she was a “bloody mess,” prosecutors said in opening statements of his murder trial Wednesday.
“Defendant asked [his wife] to cook goat and [his wife] said she made something else,” court papers said.
“The conversation got louder and [his wife] disrespected defendant by cursing at defendant and saying motherf–ker and that the defendant took a wooden stick and hit her with it on her arm and mouth.”
Defense attorney Julie Clark admitted Hussein beat his wife — but argued that he is guilty of only manslaughter because he didn’t intend to kill her. She said that in his home country, beating your wife is customary.
“He comes from a culture where he thinks this is appropriate conduct, where he can hit his wife,” Clark said in her opening statements at the Brooklyn Supreme Court bench trial. “He culturally believed he had the right to hit his wife and discipline his wife.” Continue reading this article
In 2011, 23-year-old Matthew Denice was dragged to death by a drunk-driving illegal alien from Ecuador. Nicolas Guaman, with a blood alcohol level at 3x the legal limit, ran a stop sign, crashed into Denice’s motorcycle and dragged the young man for a quarter mile as bystanders banged on Guaman’s truck to make him stop.
Milford police arrested Guaman in 2008 on charges of assault and battery on a police officer and at least one public employee and of breaking and entering, according to the police and the Worcester district attorney’s office. The case was continued without a finding for one year. Police said he also faced a few minor traffic charges dating to 2007, but the district attorney’s office could not confirm that information.
Guaman had assaulted a police officer but was not deported. Massachusetts is crazy liberal and likes to pamper dangerous foreigners. The case is another reminder of what happens when the government forgets that its prime directive is to protect public safety — as exemplified by the recent report that the government released 36,000 foreign criminals including murderers, rapists and drunk drivers.
Another example of twisted values: a court-appointed psychologist told the previous judge on the case that Guaman couldn’t be tried because “nearly half of indigenous South Americans from Mongoloid descent are deficient in an enzyme required to break down and metabolize alcohol.”
According to proper liberal-think (plus some odd racial formulations), the killer was actually a victim.
The bench trial took four days, and while the prosecution pursued charges of second-degree murder, Judge David Ricciardone decided that a manslaughter verdict was more appropriate, with a sentence of 12-14 years in prison.
The verdict was a disappointment to many, who thought the killer should get the maximum punishment possible. Local WBZ-TV new analyst Jon Keller wrote in Keller @ Large: Nicolas Guaman Is A Murderer: “The justice system bent over backwards to give Guaman a fair trial, but it didn’t do much for Matthew Denice and his family. It looked the other way while Guaman lived here illegally for nine years.”
An Ecuadorean immigrant was sentenced Monday to 12 to 14 years in prison for dragging a Milford man to his death with his truck.
Nicolas Dutan Guaman was found guilty earlier Monday of motor vehicle homicide and manslaughter by motor vehicle by Judge David Ricciardone. Guaman was acquitted of the most serious charge he’d faced: second-degree murder.
Prosecutors said that on Aug. 20, 2011, Guaman struck Matthew Denice, 23, who was riding his motorcycle. Denice was caught under the truck and stuck in the wheel well, where he was dragged for about a quarter-mile as panicked onlookers tried frantically to get Guaman to stop.
Guaman was also convicted of reckless endangerment of a child, leaving the scene of an accident which caused personal injury or death, failing to stop for police and driving without a license.
Guaman’s six-year-old son was in the truck at the time of the crash.
Ricciardone also sentenced Guaman to serve 10 years of probation after his sentence is up, during which time he would be forbidden from driving. In all likelihood, Guaman, who came into the country illegally, will be deported before then. Continue reading this article
For years, Victor Davis Hanson has been reporting the demographic changes from Fresno County in central California. A favorite of mine is The Civic Education America Needs about the education experience he had in the early 1960s where his diverse school taught American values.
A recent spill from his bike put Hanson into the hospital, and his observations from the emergency room of third world immigrants getting first world healthcare are illuminating.
More disturbing is his report of a neighbor being killed a week ago for confronting “intruders” on his farm who were stripping a stolen car.
This weekend I missed my first posting at PJ Media since beginning in 2006.
Why? Let me briefly explain the lapse — if I can be forgiven for comparing a bike accident with what I have seen on the farm the last 50 years (sliced off fingers, crushed legs, herbicide poisonings, manifold burns, etc.).
I was going on a usual morning bike ride — safe stuff with like-minded older folks. I’m 60; so is my biking partner and fellow Hoover Institution associate Bruce Thornton. We are hardly reckless. (Not like sulfuring at midnight recklessly in one’s 20s in the old days without goggles or mask.)
We usually go deliberately during off-traffic hours when cars are rare, on little-traveled roads and bike paths. We always follow the same direction over the same 32-mile route. After nine years we have memorized every bump, cracked bit of pavement, bad stop light, etc. We bike slowly, about 14-15 mph, always in single file. We are, after all, 60 and hear daily horrific stories of injured and dead bikers.
In nearly ten years of rides, I have had some scrapes but only two bad spills (a homeless person once jumped out from the bushes on a Santa Rosa bike path; I swerved to miss him and ended up going over the handlebars: slight concussion; broken shoulder, three ribs, and collar bone. I was also attacked and knocked flat once by a pack of dogs with no licenses, shots, or English-speaking owners). So we must be doing something carefully, for our sixtyish group of three or four to usually avoid problems.
I lead a yearly tour on May 17th, so usually quit riding one week ahead, just in case. Friday morning was to be last ride until I came back on May 30.
About four-fifths of the way home, suddenly the front wheel locked and I woke up about 15 seconds later with my face on the pavement. Four hours later at the emergency room I discovered that I had four ruined teeth (three shaved off, one split down the middle into the root), a concussion, a broken nose, 65 stitches for facial and gum lacerations, and a sliced-apart lower lip (with broken teeth shards sticking into my upper lip).
What happened? Apparently a hairline fissure around the carbon bike fork failed, and the fork bent and locked up the front wheel without warning. (Yes, I know I should inspect the bike thoroughly each time I get on, but the crack was invisible.)
Seven days after falling, I am leaving for Europe and the tour this week, a bit dizzy, fearful that my ogre-like appearance will turn off audiences. I’ve been getting out of bed to rush off to various doctors to extract a split abscessing tooth, do a bone graft, grind off jagged teeth points that have lacerated my tongue, have stitches removed, etc. — and feel both foolish and very lucky. I had a jammed neck and was a bit disorientated, suggesting to the ER staff a fracture and perhaps serious neck problems. But the CT scan came back normal. After sitting under bags of ice and gobs of Neosporin ointment the last five days, I have reflected on the unforgiving moment that changes everything.
Again, I feel very fortunate. The ER personnel offered tales of lesser bike falls where the victims ended up paralyzed, or with cranial bleeding — or dead.
But when you are lying flat and cannot read or talk or eat, your mind wanders into retrospection and memoriae temporis acti — dreaming of the sort that one must be careful about, lest it devolves into the depression of should have, could have, would have done this or that.
I offer a general thought from the ER and subsequent last five days: we live in a weird postmodern/premodern world. Never have Americans been so blessed and never so ungracious.
The ER trauma center was postmodern: even a plastic surgeon was on duty, who did wonders with my hanging lip and crushed nose. The triage team was top-notch. The equipment, nursing staff, and regimen were stellar. Without them I would be infected, disfigured, and bedridden. (Though I may hold off entirely on that optimism until May 30th, when I am back and the gambit of not canceling has been proven wise. How do you tell your guests that you were stupid enough to endanger their entire trip?)
For five hours, I watched the worst imaginable cases wheeled in — the wages of burns, wrecks, shootings, stabbings, falls, drug overdoses, heart attacks, shock, etc. — all met with an upbeat, can-do staff professionalism.
The clientele, however — metal detector required for entrance — was premodern. Many were foreign nationals. Some appeared to be gang-bangers. Police were ubiquitous (not all the injured were virtuous or harmed by accident). English was rarely spoken by the patients. It was a world away from the ER crowd of rural California circa 1960. Continue reading this article
Loyalty is generally considered to be a fine attribute, but when it blinds people to being screwed over, maybe not so much. Political writer Deroy Murdock has crunched the economic numbers (see his chart) about how severely Obama’s economic policies have hammered black Americans, yet they remain enthusiastic supporters: the guy can do no wrong in their minds, but if a white President had done such a rotten job, they would be protesting loud and long.
My opinion is that the anger among blacks at their worsening circumstances has been displaced into issues like Trayvon, avoiding any emotional confrontation with the President.
Meanwhile, the President is unstinting in his helping hand for hispanics of varying legality.
Anyway, Murdock’s investigation shows how really bad the jobs situation is among blacks. (Spare video link.)
In addition, the best thing that could be done to alleviate black unemployment would be immigration enforcement, another failure of the administration.
On Monday, former US Civil Rights Commissioner Peter Kirsanow appeared on Laura Ingraham’s radio show and noted the negative effect of excessive immigration on blacks. He said the last five years have been the worst for black Americans in 50 years and immigration contributes enormously to falling wages, higher unemployment and fewer participating in the workforce. (Listen.)
According to a Fox News survey released on Wednesday, Obama’s approval rating stands at 45 percent among all registered voters. However, among black voters, Obama’s job approval soars to 86 percent.
Given Obama’s devastating impact on black Americans, this is even more confounding than the whereabouts of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370.
Obama’s election, no doubt, generated considerable ethnic pride. Seeing a black man (or, precisely, a half-black man) inaugurated was a truly exceptional milestone for all Americans — black and otherwise.
But Obama reached the Oval Office nearly five years and four months ago. Since then, his performance should have dimmed his halo among blacks, especially considering how much they have suffered on his watch.
• When Obama entered office on January 20, 2009, U.S. unemployment stood at 7.8 percent. By April 2014, that Bureau of Labor Statistics figure had fallen to 6.3 percent — a modest improvement. Among blacks overall, joblessness dropped, though less significantly — from 12.7 to 11.6 percent. But for blacks aged 16 to 19, unemployment grew from 35.3 to 36.8 percent.
• Obama’s somewhat more sanguine unemployment numbers, such as they are, seem less about job growth and more about people simply abandoning the workforce — whereupon they conveniently exit the unemployment rate. The more revealing labor-force-participation rate thus fell from 65.7 percent in January 2009 to 62.8 percent last month, a portrait of disengagement last witnessed in March 1978. For black adults, that number slipped from 63.2 to 60.9 percent. While 29.6 percent of blacks aged 16 to 19 were working when Obama took power, only 27.9 percent were employed last month.
• Poverty has increased under Obama. Overall, 14.3 percent of Americans were below the poverty line in January 2009, versus 15.0 percent in 2012, according to the latest available data from the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey. Similarly, the share of black Americans living in poverty expanded from 25.8 to 27.2 percent. Continue reading this article
On Wednesday morning, a very different train car was put into service on the N-Judah line. Its 14 double-wide seats were replaced with seven single seats. It’s certain the change did not go unnoticed.
“Normally on the aisle of the light-rail vehicle it allows for two rows of people, and no one can get in between them,” said Supervisor Scott Wiener, who that morning boarded the re-configured car at Ninth and Irving streets. “Now you have people holding on to the handrail and an entire row of people could file in between them. To me it seems positive.”
The idea, which Wiener first pushed for in 2011, is that two more people can fit aboard a train for every seat that’s removed. In this case, the change adds space for 10 more riders.
The single car with reconfigured seats is being deployed as part of a pilot program the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency is using to gather rider feedback.
Riders on the N-Judah can look for the train car through May 29. After that, it will be put on the L-Taraval line until June 13. It is primarily used during morning and evening commute hours.
One of the disturbing by-products of Obama’s widely advertised open-borders policy is the surge of unaccompanied children illegally entering the US. Even very young children are endangered by parents who urge them to travel hundreds of dangerous miles by themselves. A January report by the Wall Street Journal estimated that 60,000 kids will cross the border by themselves this year (Flow of Unaccompanied Minors Tests U.S. Immigration Agencies).
The media like to spin the issue as one of family reunification, where kiddies are supposed to be reunited with mom and dad in mooching a better life in America. But some of the cases look more like belated birth control, where youngsters are pushed out of the home at a very young age because they are somehow inconvenient.
How dangerous is the journey? Consider the clip from the documentary Which Way Home which chronicles the experiences of young boys riding the rails north. It’s all fun and games, with the kids hanging off the side of the train and flapping their arms, till the end of the clip where we learn two boys died when they didn’t duck for a tunnel.
The feds should instead hand the kids over to the embassies of their home nations for them to handle. The American taxpayer should not be made responsible for the squatters of the world, whatever their age.
But the decision has been made to transform part of an air force base into a flop house for kiddie illegal aliens, which can only incentivize more to come. When the government rewards a behavior, it can expect more of it.
Record-breaking numbers of children and teenagers caught in the U.S. illegally and alone have overwhelmed the federal government’s detention network, prompting officials to start housing up to 1,000 on a San Antonio Air Force base.
Kenneth Wolfe, an Office of Refugee Resettlement spokesman, said Friday that the Department of Defense has agreed to start temporarily housing children at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland starting on Sunday.
Resettlement agency officials used the base temporarily as an emergency shelter once before, in the spring of 2012, when the numbers of children caught crossing the border jumped sharply, leaving the federal government scrambling to find adequate bed space.
Since then, their numbers have continued to grow exponentially, driven by what advocates are calling a “humanitarian crisis” in Central and South America. Some 60,000 unaccompanied children and teens are expected this year – up from about 6,560 in 2011, according to the agency.
The exact cause of the influx has stumped academics, government officials and advocates. They describe a “perfect storm” of factors: lack of opportunity at home; family ties in the U.S. pulling them north; and the overriding factor – the rise of violent drug cartels and gangs in Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala and Mexico.
“It’s becoming more and more clear that they are fleeing for their own safety,” said Michelle Brane, the director of the Migrant Rights and Justice program with the Women’s Refugee Committee. “Violence in the region is driving people out.”
Once children from countries other than Mexico are caught in the U.S. illegally without a parent or close relative, they are transferred to the resettlement agency within 24 hours and housed in a sprawling network of more than 90 shelters, group and foster care programs, juvenile detention and behavioral treatment centers. Continue reading this article
This nation’s working people have no greater friend in Washington than Senator Jeff Sessions. On Wednesday, he spoke on the Senate floor, calling out the architects of the S.744 amnesty bill for claiming increasing labor via increased immigration would actually raise wages for US workers — a complete denial of the economic fact of supply and demand.
Senator Sessions also posted an accompanying press release, citing facts about the dangers of the Democrats’ plan to import cheap labor.
WASHINGTON—U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, delivered the following remarks today in response to Senate Democrat leaders’ desire to pass an immigration bill that would reduce Americans’ wages and employment by dramatically increasing the supply of new labor:
“Today Majority Leader Reid and Senator Chuck Schumer came down to the Senate floor to demand that the House of Representatives pass their immigration bill. They labeled Republicans as ‘extremists’ for not giving in to their demands.
Senator Schumer said that Republicans are ‘xenophobes’ because they don’t want to pass his plan.
Let’s talk about what is extreme.
A new report reveals that this Administration has released 36,000 criminal aliens from ICE detention—including this report found: 193 homicide convictions, 1,153 sexual offenders, 303 kidnapping convictions and 1,075 aggravated assault convictions.
These dangerous offenders should be placed back into custody.
You know what else is extreme? Extreme is trying to pass an immigration bill that would double the flow of new guest workers into our country—and triple the grants of permanent admissions—when 50 million working-age Americans are out of work.
It is not xenophobic but compassionate to say we should focus our attention on helping struggling American workers. It is not xenophobic but out patriotic duty to defend the integrity of our borders and the rule of law. It is the oath we all took as Senators to defend the constitution of the United States.
There was one group of people omitted from the remarks of Leader Reid and Senator Schumer: American workers.
According to CBO, Senate Democrats immigration bill would increase unemployment while reducing wages for the next 12 years and reducing Americans’ per-person wealth for the next 17 years. If you bring in 30 million people in the next ten years, as this bill would do, tripling the number that would normally be given legal status in America, it would bring down the per-person wealth and it would bring down wages. Surely the Chamber of Commerce understands the free market. Do they not? Surely Senator Reid understands that. Does he not? On a conference call yesterday worrying about the American steel industry, we talked about how a large amount of steel was being dumped into America. Why? What is the impact of that? What is the concern? More steel equals lower prices for steel. If you bring in more cotton, the lower the price is for cotton. If you bring in more labor, you’ll have lower wages for American workers. That’s what the CBO tells us. There is no disputing that, yet we have Senators who repeatedly speak on the floor and say this is going to increase wages. Give me a break. You can’t just say something and think that’s going to make it a reality. It’s the opposite of reality.
Under current law, we admit more than six hundred thousand guest workers each year and 1 million permanent immigrants.
Under the Senate bill, we would admit more than 1.2 million guest workers each year and give permanent residency to 30 million immigrants over the next ten years. A tripling of what the normal rate would be.
Research from Harvard professor Dr. George Borjas shows that American workers lose more than $400 billion in wages each year due to competition from lower-cost workers from abroad. Dr. George Borjas’ research also shows that from 1980-2000, he concluded wages declined 7.4% for lower-skilled American workers due to high immigration levels
So there is no doubt, colleagues, you have to understand this: A vote for the Reid-Schumer immigration bill is a vote to lower the wages of American workers. Not only that, it makes it harder for Americans to get a job, period.
The people hurt worst by the Democrats’ immigration policies are young Americans, low-income Americans, and minority workers.
Minority workers, according to Dr. George Borjas’ studies and others, are particularly damaged by the large flow. This includes Hispanics who come here lawfully or have been legalized in America and are trying to get started on the way up and would like to have a pay raise, but their wages are being pulled down by an extraordinary, unjustified flow of labor that we can’t absorb. We don’t have enough jobs. That’s the problem. We need to ask: Is this a good idea for America? Can we absorb this number of people and maintain decent wages or are we in a longer-term trend and we’re just going to allow middle and lower-income workers see their wages erode? It’s a big issue and we need to be honest about it.
Mr. Schumer says we should do the bidding of the Chamber of Commerce. Well, talking about hijacking, it seems Mr. Schumer’s party has been hijacked by special interests and they’ve lost sight of who they claim to represent—working Americans. That’s my charge. We have a generous immigration policy. We need to make sure it’s enforced correctly and carried out lawfully. That’s what the American people have asked of us. They’ve demanded for 40 years that we create a lawful system that we can be proud of, that treats people fairly. You make your application to come to America, you lay out your qualifications, and they’re evaluated and the best people, the most deserving on an objective basis are the ones that are admitted. What’s wrong with that? That’s what Canada does. That’s what the UK does. It’s what Australia does. There is nothing wrong with that. That’s what we should be doing. We should decide how many people the country can absorb and what wage categories before we admit huge numbers and certainly before we double the number we presently bring in. Continue reading this article
CIS’s handy list of the crimes committed by non-American bad guys tells the tale. The US has so many diverse opportunities for lawbreaking:
I wondered about how many miscreants in the list were lucky enough to come from nations that won’t receive their homegrown criminal, but the number was only 3,000. As reported here earlier, the Supreme Court’a 2001 ruling of Zadvydas v. Davis, 2001, required foreign criminals could not be jailed indefinitely if the dear homeland wouldn’t take them.
The response to the report was fairly intense — maybe because of midterm elections looming in a few months? Amnesty squish Congressman Goodlatte was quick out of the box to say he was shocked, shocked that bad guys were being loosed on American streets, even suggesting a hearing.
Does public safety oversight happen only when the members are seeing an election in the near future?
Fox News has had a couple segments. The following is decent.
This one also:
The Washington Times gave the story front-page attention.
Immigration officials knowingly released dozens of murderers and thousands of drunken drivers back into the U.S. in 2013, according to Obama administration statistics that could undercut the president’s argument that he is trying to focus on the most serious criminals in his immigration enforcement.
Among the 36,000 immigrants whom U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement released from custody last year there were 116 with convictions for homicide, 43 for negligent manslaughter, 14 for voluntary manslaughter and one with a conviction classified by ICE as “homicide-willful kill-public official-gun.”
The immigrants were in deportation proceedings, meaning ICE was trying to remove them from the country and could have held them in detention but released them anyway, according to the Center for Immigration Studies, which published the numbers Monday. The Washington Times also obtained the data.
“This would be considered the worst prison break in American history, except it was sanctioned by the president and perpetrated by our own immigration officials,” said Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican. “The administration’s actions are outrageous. They willfully and knowingly put the interests of criminal immigrants before the safety and security of the American people.”
The data raised thorny questions about how the government decides which immigrants to detain and which it will release as they await court hearings and final action on deportation.
Jessica Vaughan, policy studies director at the Center for Immigration Studies, said the numbers undercut the Obama administration’s argument that it is trying to keep its enforcement efforts targeted at dangerous criminals.
“We keep hearing from the administration that they are focused like a laser on enforcement against the worst of the worst, convicted criminals, as their top priority. On the other hand, they are releasing, at a rate of about 100 a day, aliens from their custody with criminal convictions, and many of them are serious criminal convictions,” she said. Continue reading this article
Tuesday’s LA Times front page featured an employment story with an upbeat headline: “U.S. jobs return as offshoring ebbs.”
But you don’t have to read far to see that the number of returning jobs is seriously reduced. A caption notes one power system company “can now make an alternator with one worker in the time it took four workers in China.” A major difference is increased automation.
Generac Power Systems, which shifted some of its work from abroad, can now make an alternator with one worker in the time it took four workers in China. Above, an employee at its Whitewater, Wis., plant.
The smart machine revolution of computers, robots and automation is well underway, reducing the need for human workers, yet the big brains in Washington think that doubling legal immigration is a swell idea.
No, increased immigration is a bad idea, particularly when the true future needs for workers are considered.
In 2001, Generac Power Systems joined the wave of American companies shifting production to China. The move wiped out 400 jobs in southeast Wisconsin, but few could argue with management’s logic: Chinese companies were offering to make a key component for $100 per unit less than the cost of producing it in the U.S.
Now, however, Generac has brought manufacturing of that component back to its Whitewater plant — creating about 80 jobs in this town of about 14,500 people.
The move is part of a sea change in American manufacturing: After three decades of an exodus of production to China and other low-wage countries, companies have sharply curtailed moves abroad. Some, like Generac, have begun to return manufacturing to U.S. shores.
Although no one keeps precise statistics, the retreat from offshoring is clear from various sources, including federal data on assistance to workers hurt by overseas moves.
U.S. factory payrolls have grown for four straight years, with gains totaling about 650,000 jobs. That’s a small fraction of the 6 million lost in the previous decade, but it still marks the biggest and longest stretch of manufacturing increases in a quarter century.
Harry Moser, an MIT-trained engineer who tracks the inflow of jobs, estimates that last year marked the first time since the offshoring trend began that factory jobs returning to the U.S. matched the number lost, at about 40,000 each.
“Offshoring and ‘re-shoring’ were roughly in balance — I call that victory,” said Moser, who traces his interest in manufacturing to his parents’ work at the long-closed Singer Sewing Machine plant in New Jersey. (He once worked there too.)
He now runs the Reshoring Initiative, a Chicago nonprofit that works with companies to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S.
Several factors lie behind the change.
Over the last decade, Chinese labor and transportation costs have jumped while U.S. wages have stagnated. The average hourly pay for non-supervisory manufacturing workers in the U.S. has barely kept up with inflation, rising on average just 2.3% over the last 10 years and by only half that since 2010, according to Labor Department figures.
Factoring in the rise in value of its currency, China’s base wage, measured in dollars, has risen 17% a year, according to an April report by Boston Consulting Group.
Funny how when the New York Times decides to report on the topic of immigrants plus crime, the victims are foreigners who don’t speak English.
You wouldn’t expect to see reportage of Americans murdered, raped or stolen from, with the perps being illegal aliens from the queen of liberal media. There’s plenty of crime committed by border-violating foreigners, with many American victims, but the Times has a different agenda.
Besides, who would relocate to a complex, first-world nation without speaking the language at least a little?
Illegal aliens do, because they figure they can mooch American jobs and benefits by residing in a language-balkanized community like LA or Miami, where English is not required in everyday use. Plus the foreigners have the media on their side, plus well-paid ethnic helpers in La Raza and such.
The basic narrative here is immigrant-victim sob stories of foreigners not immediately presented with a police officer speaking their language. But at least there are some interesting facts, e.g. nearly two million English avoiders, plus a fascinating map of language diversity in New York City.
One also notices how many of the language complainers are women who have been beaten up by their culturally misogynous husbands. And no dollar cost is given for all this attention to diversity.
New York City now has more non-English speakers than ever, according to the Census Bureau: nearly two million. In response to this growing population, the city has assembled a host of programs to help it serve not just those who speak Spanish, Chinese and Russian, but also languages like Pashto, Punjabi, Uzbek and Urdu.
The New York Police Department, the largest in the country with almost 35,000 officers, has tried to stay at the forefront of the effort, and has billed its foreign language program as the world’s standard.
But having services doesn’t ensure they will be used, and some New Yorkers say that in the frantic, often frightening minutes just after a crime has occurred, their pleas for assistance in their native language have been ignored by officers. While help arrived swiftly after a call to 911, they say, officers didn’t summon a bilingual colleague, find an impartial bilingual bystander, or call the interpretation service the city uses for such situations. Domestic violence calls, already fraught with confusion and tension, have been particularly prone to language lapses, according to victim advocates. In interviews, several women said that without an interpreter, their attempts to report crimes were stifled.
A Russian-speaking woman said that after her husband accosted her in a drunken rage at his Coney Island home, she called the police. Officers ignored her requests to tell her story in her native tongue, she said. Instead, an officer scribbled the word “refused” and told her to copy it onto a report meant to contain her testimony. She followed his instructions. Embarrassed by the abuse, she agreed to be interviewed on condition of anonymity.
A Bengali-speaking woman said that after strangers punched and sexually assaulted her after a break-in at her home in Queens, officers asked her 10-year-old child to interpret. Unwilling to traumatize the child, she did not divulge the sexual attack. And a Spanish-speaking woman, Josefina Ramirez, said that after an argument with her landlord, she called 911 for protection. A pair of officers ignored her request for interpretation, she said, and rifled through her pockets, taking her keys, and then ejected her from the building.
Ms. Ramirez, 57, said she spent the night wandering the streets of Bushwick, Brooklyn. “Instead of protecting me, they hurt me,” she said. “I understood nothing of what was going on.” Continue reading this article
Is the Washington Post developing a lib-crush on Jeb Bush? The paper featured a curious piece about Bush on Monday’s front page (“For Jeb Bush, a family decision”), celebrating his appeal to diversity via the Mexican wife, but the article brings up ancient history that may have been forgotten by the public. One item: daughter Noelle’s several run-ins with the law concerning drugs, including a famous 2002 mug shot (shown).
Incidentally, the mainstream press exhibited fondness for John McCain whom they characterized as a “maverick” but the affection for the Arizona Senator disappeared when he actually ran for President. The liberal media is not a reliable squeeze.
The media likes liberal Republicans, particularly the ones who support a firehose supply of cheap foreign workers. The scribbler class appreciates inexpensive household help.
Still, the article has too many negative details of the Jeb Bush narrative to be considered a full-on puff piece. We read that Jeb and Mexican wife Columba speak Spanish together; is English not comfortable for her? (At least candidate John Kerry’s immigrant wife, billionaire Teresa Heinz, was an adequate speaker of America’s language.) Plus, there’s the druggie daughter “hiding crack cocaine in her shoe.”
Perhaps if Jeb were to expand on his statement that illegal immigration is an “act of love” then that might get more positive press clips. Too bad for Jeb that the voters are sick of open borders fawning from elites.
Jeb Bush can trace some of his most appealing qualities as a potential presidential candidate for a diversifying electorate to his 40-year partnership with his Mexican-born wife, Columba.
The couple speak Spanish to one another, and their lives have been immersed in Hispanic culture and the immigrant experience.
But Columba’s intense distaste for the public arena is one of the issues weighing most heavily on the former Florida governor as he grapples with whether to run for the White House in 2016, according to interviews with friends, former staffers and GOP donors close to the family. These people said Columba may be willing to take on the burdens of a campaign, yet even then the couple would need to find a way to craft a comfortable role for her.
“Columba is not in any way power-ambitious,” said Rafael A. Peñalver Jr., a Miami lawyer who has been friends with the Bush family since the early 1980s. “She is a very private person.” He added: “She’s supportive and will stand by him, even taking roles that are not in her nature.”
Still, another Bush confidante said, “the family issues are Columba, 1, 2 and 3. It’s whether she’s up for it.”
“She’s cognizant of what a campaign would be like, and she would have to come to terms with that. He’s not going to do it over her objections,” said the confidante, who like a number of loyalists, spoke only on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal deliberations of the family.
Both Bushes declined to be interviewed, and spokeswoman Kristy Campbell declined to comment on his behalf.
Jeb Bush, 61, has acknowledged that he is thinking about running, indicating he will make a decision later this year. He has repeatedly said he will decide based on whether he believes he can run an optimistic, hopeful campaign — run “joyfully,” as he has put it — as well as whether a campaign would be the right thing for his family.
Presidential campaigns have come to rely heavily on candidates’ family members playing visible roles such as fundraising, speaking and submitting to media interviews. Spouses have increasingly become full-fledged fill-ins for the candidates. Sons and daughters help the candidate forge ties with younger voters and can soften and humanize a candidate’s image.
The pressure for family participation could be more intense on Bush, who is so widely identified as the scion of a political dynasty and who could find himself facing a campaign by Hillary Rodham Clinton that fully incorporates her husband and daughter Chelsea as political allies.
People close to Bush say the impact a modern presidential campaign would have on his wife and children remains the most important piece of a difficult family decision that goes far beyond a simple political analysis of whether voters want another Bush in the White House. In addition to Columba’s reluctance, he must consider their 36-year-old daughter, Noelle. Her struggles with drug addiction burst into the headlines 12 years ago when she was arrested, but she has since dropped almost entirely from public view. 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.