Worse, our government has reduced its refugee screening program from two years to three months. However the latest iteration of “good enough for government work” probably doesn’t matter anyway: FBI Director Comey admitted last October in a House hearing that the US cannot adequately check Syrians for jihad affiliation because Washington cannot access Syrian databases. There is no way to do background checks without records, so even the three-month screening is a farce.
Nevertheless, refugees are being dumped in American communities, many of which do not understand the extent to which they are being endangered. President Obama is determined to unload 10,000 Syrians into the country within this fiscal year no matter what the threat. Last September, Secretary of State Kerry announced the US would “significantly increase our numbers for refugee resettlement” despite the danger to Americans, and he noted, “And in the next fiscal year, we’ll target 100,000, and if it’s possible to do more, we’ll do.”
Mike McCaul, Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, observed last year, “Many Americans are understandably concerned about the threat posed by inadequate security screening procedures for refugee seeking entry into the United States. ISIS themselves have stated their intention to take advantage of the crisis to infiltrate the west. We have to take this threat seriously.”
Senator Jeff Sessions, Chair of the Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, has expressed his concern about increased numbers of refugees. Within the context of how immigration of various categories is running at record highs, he noted the diminished ability of the nation to cope with the influx, which is worsened by overcrowded schools, the weak jobs economy and other factors. In September, the senator called for a long-term strategy to deal with Islamist ideology, and that did not include inviting thousands more of them to live among us. Instead, he emphasized the strategy of containment, which America used successfully in the Cold War.
Europe shows the horror Washington is rushing willy-nilly to imitate. For those of us who value women’s rights and safety, the mass sexual attacks that occurred on New Years in Cologne and other cities were a reminder of how bad Muslim diversity can be. On February 15, the AP reported that of the 73 suspects arrested thus far out of more than a thousand criminal complaints, the “overwhelming majority” were refugees, according to Cologne prosecutor Ulrich Bremer.
It’s no surprise then that a word has sprung up to describe the new social reality brought by unrestricted Muslim immigration: Rapefugee. A Google search of that descriptive term can be quite illuminating.
Say good-bye to the open visas of yesteryear; say hello to tracks of suburban housing from sea to polluted sea. There’s no surprise: as Washington has admitted millions of immigrants decade after decade, all the newbies need a place to live — or the Americans hope to flee to some undiverse community where English is still spoken.
Perpetual immigration comes with a big cost to American open spaces which cannot be unpaved or restored to a pristine state. According to a report released this week concerning 11 western states, an area totaling 4,321 square miles was developed from 2001 to 2011.
Natural beauty is part of our national heritage, but it is being destroyed by extreme immigration. Plus California in particular has suffered from a terrible drought over the past few years, but nobody in government ever says population growth may well overwhelm the water supply.
In frontier America, the open spaces of the West represented potential and hope for the future, as expressed in the 1867 Albert Bierstadt painting below, Emigrants Crossing the Plains.
The Oakhurst subdivision abuts open space in Clayton, Calif. (Contra Costa Times)
The natural landscape of the American West is gradually disappearing under a relentless march of new subdivisions, roads, oil and gas production, agricultural operations and other human development, according to a detailed mapping study released Tuesday.
From 2001 to 2011, an area totaling 4,321 square miles — or 15 times the size of San Jose, Oakland and San Francisco combined — was modified by development in the 11 Western states, the report found, with California losing the most natural land, and Wyoming and Utah changing at the fastest rate.
“We are nibbling away at our wild places at a fairly rapid clip,” said Mike Dombeck, former chief of the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management in the 1990s.
The report — at www.disappearingwest.org — was produced by scientists at Conservation Science Partners, a non-profit research organization based in Truckee, , who spent a year analyzing more than 30 large databases and a decade of satellite images over Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. Continue reading this article
Robots were on parade recently in Zurich to demonstrate in favor of a basic income for all citizens, a referendum item which is slated for the June 5 Swiss election.
Whether you agree with the solution, it’s refreshing to see people debating the socially transformative problem — what are humans supposed to do for income when half or more jobs are done by smart machines over the long term? As NYU Professor Gary Marcus remarked last Labor Day, “Eventually I think most jobs will be replaced, like 75 or 80 percent of the people are not going to work for a living.”
That’s a social apocalypse headed this way, and most political leaders are on snooze-mode.
As I have described, only two governments have grappled with the approaching automation behemoth: Tennessee and Israel. More attention in the states would be welcome, as well as in Washington, if the people in the Congress aren’t too busy with fundraising for re-election.
The idea of a guaranteed basic income as a remedy to technological unemployment has been floating around on the internets where the automation future is being discussed, both pro and con. The strategy was included in Martin Ford’s important book, Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future. He cites Hayek as a conservative proponent of the proposal.
Of course, a government that controls and dispenses incomes sounds a whole lot like socialism, and we know how well that hasn’t worked. If anyone can come up with a capitalism-based response to the robot catastrophe, inquiring minds would love to hear it.
It looked like the Zurich robots had a good time, at least.
Naturlich, the robots should also advocate for an end to immigration in Switzerland, because foreign workers will not be needed in the near future, if they ever were. In fact,
A “robot rally” has taken place in Zurich, with more than 100 activists wearing cardboard costumes in the streets as part of a major call for the introduction of Unconditional Basic Income (UBI) in Switzerland.
The Swiss are set to go to the polls on June 5 in a referendum on a guaranteed income for everyone. The sum proposed stands at 2,500 Swiss Francs ($2,500). The Swiss people will be voting on a new article in the country’s constitution which stipulates that the federal government would have to implement the UBI with an “amount high enough for people to live off in dignity.”
According to the organizers of the first rally of its kind in the world, activists from the Unconditioned Basic Income (BGE) movement, claim that the main idea of an UBI is to secure the basic needs of human life unconditionally. Calling themselves “the robots”, they argue that humans should be free and not struggle for basic income.
“We want to work for the humans to relieve them from the struggle for income. We are really good in working. But we do not want to take away people’s jobs and thereby bring them into existential difficulties,” a BGE declaration adopted earlier this year reads.
Fearing that soon the dangers of robotization in the workforce will cost humans their jobs, the “robots” decided to play an active role in defending the idea to introduce “an Unconditional Basic Income for all humans.” Continue reading this article
Sunday’s front page of the San Jose Mercury News headlined with an investigative piece about how businesses obtain cheap foreign labor. The piece details how companies use the various visa-laundering companies that admit sketchy workers and allow business to evade US laws regarding immigration, wages and work conditions. The local company Tesla was the case under scrutiny.
The face of the story is Gregor Lesnik, a Slovenian electrician hired to work at Tesla’s Fremont plant. He worked 10-hour days, six days a week installing pipes in a Tesla paint shop until he fell through the roof. He sustained serious injuries, for which none of the companies which aided his hiring wanted to be financially responsible: being a subcontractor is a common and convenient excuse. Lesnik is currently engaged in a lawsuit that has shined a light on the corrupt cheap labor system.
The automaker’s urgent upgrade of its Fremont facility benefited from cheap, imported workers, but did the companies involved flout visa and labor laws?
When Gregor Lesnik left his pregnant girlfriend in Slovenia for a job in America, his visa application described specialized skills and said he was a supervisor headed to a South Carolina auto plant.
Turns out, that wasn’t true.
The unemployed electrician had no qualifications to oversee American workers and spoke only a sentence or two of English. He never set foot in South Carolina. The companies that arranged his questionable visa instead sent Lesnik to a menial job in Silicon Valley. He earned the equivalent of $5 an hour to expand the plant for one of the world’s most sophisticated companies, Tesla Motors.
Lesnik’s three-month tenure ended a year ago in a serious injury and a lawsuit that has exposed a troubling practice in the auto industry. Overseas contractors are shipping workers from impoverished countries to American factories, where they work long hours for low wages, in apparent violation of visa and labor laws.
About 140 workers from Eastern Europe, mostly from Croatia and Slovenia, built a new paint shop at Tesla’s Fremont plant, a project vital to the flagship Silicon Valley automaker’s plans to ramp up production of its highly anticipated Model 3 sedan. Their story emerged from dozens of interviews conducted by the Bay Area News Group, and an extensive review of payroll, visa and court documents.
Yet neither the contractors involved nor Tesla itself have accepted legal responsibility for the hiring practices, long hours and low pay. While most of the imported workers interviewed for this story said they are happy with their paychecks, their American counterparts earn as much as $52 an hour for similar work.
“There’s definitely something wrong with this picture,” said Rob Stoker, president of the Building and Construction Trades Council of Alameda County, who believes local sheet metal workers lost tens of thousands of work hours and millions of dollars in wages.
Critics say the U.S. government hasn’t done enough to halt such arrangements, and has become an unwitting partner by allowing the workers to enter the country on a nonimmigrant visa for tourism and business, known as a B1/B2. Replacing U.S. workers with foreign visa holders for construction work is an improper use of the business visa, they say.
Recruited by a small Slovenian company called ISM Vuzem, Lesnik, 42, and his co-workers were flown into the U.S. for months at a time, housed in nondescript apartments, and shuttled to the Tesla plant six and sometimes seven days a week, according to workers and the suit. Continue reading this article
German citizens were assured by Chancellor Merkel that by opening their borders to Muslim “refugees,” it would be a rewarding act of humanitarian generosity. But there were far more foreigners than had been forecast by the government, and instead of good vibes, Germans got rapefugees, crime and chaos. So there have been various responses showing the citizens’ rejection of immigration anarchy, from the electoral success of the pro-sovereignty party to the burning of refugee housing.
Still, Merkel’s government has been largely deaf to citizen complaints because the suits think they know best about how the little people should behave.
History shows that when government fails to perform its prime directive of protecting public safety, the people will step up and do it themselves. One example is the San Francisco Committee of Vigilance, a group of concerned citizens who organized to combat the corruption and crime during the Gold Rush.
German authorities on Saturday reported an increase in the number of arson fires at shelters for refugees who flooded Germany last year, raising concerns about anti-migrant violence.
“This year, there have already been 45 arson fires,” said Holger Muench, head of the federal criminal police (BKA).
“What is particularly worrisome is the increasing scale of the violence,” he said in an interview with the Funke newspaper group.
In 2015, when Germany opened its doors to 1.1 million migrants mostly from war-torn Syria, 92 arson fires at centres for asylum seekers were reported, compared with only six in 2014, according to BKA statistics published in late January. Continue reading this article
But is it true that the border is under control? What do front-line law enforcement officers see in the real world?
Sheriff Paul Babeu appeared on Fox with Neil Cavuto the other day for an update on the state of the border. Cavuto noted the noisy illegal alien squawkers at a Trump rally and asked a question that I’ve often had — Why don’t the police bring a fleet of paddy wagons and mass arrest those foreign lawbreakers?
CAVUTO: A good many of these [protesters] by the way are illegals themselves which brings me to Paul Babeu, the Pinal County Arizona sheriff. Sheriff, what always interests me when I see illegals protesting is why ICE or other officials can’t or don’t arrest them on the spot.
PAUL BABEU: Great question. Maybe because they take the approach that it would be an infringing on their freedom of speech. But what about the other laws that they’re breaking?. . . When it comes to immigration laws, there is no debate here, it’s complete lawlessness. There are no consequences for breaking immigration law, and that’s what we have here. That’s why we see a 131 percent increase in families coming across, over the past six months alone, the Mexican border into the United States, is because the message has gone out — make it to the border and you’re home free. There’s deferred action for twelve to 20 plus million illegals right now under Obama. And sadly, Hillary Clinton has already announced — gone a step further than Obama, and says that she’s going to actually put them on a path to citizenship. So, this is outrageous, it’s unacceptable, anybody who questions whether they can support Donald Trump or not — there’s such a stark contrast, our safety, not only in our communities, but our entire country, our national security is on the line here, and there is no real choice when it comes to, do we support Donald Trump? It’s a resounding yes.
CAVUTO: All right, that’s where you’re coming from; I can appreciate that, but one of the things interesting me, and ICE is refuting these statistics, Sheriff, that nearly 20,000 criminal illegal immigrants were let go even though they knew of their criminal background. ICE says that was not the case, but you’ve seen evidence of those that you turned over to officials are let loose again. Sheriff Joe Arpaio has so much to say over these many years. Why does that happen? Because net net the return rate of illegals of any sort, criminal or otherwise, has slowed to a trickle. Why is that?
BABEU: Well this whole idea of there’s no consequences, the fact that they’re releasing 208 actual convicted murderers last year who are illegals who have no business in this country, 900 plus that were convicted of rape, sexual assault and child molestation, and the answer we get back from ICE is, well we don’t have proper travel documents or other countries won’t accept them back, and that’s not a legitimate excuse, They’ve released 500 plus of these criminals in Pinal County Arizona alone. They released a murderer in in Florence in my county seat, and they tell me the sheriff two weeks after the fact. And this guy’s from Russia. So it’s not a question of they’re all from Mexico. We had two murderers, and one was from Sudan and one was from Russia and other from Iraq. So the system is broken and that’s what we need to correct. Enforce the laws that are on the books.
CAVUTO: Thank you very much.
Below, here are the illegal alien criminals released by the feds that Sheriff Babeu mentioned — (left to right) Musa Salah Abdelaziz Abdalla, Dennis Valerievitch Tsoukanov and Nasser Hanna Hermez. All have lengthy criminal histories but were let go into American communities by ICE anyway.
Friend of immigration enforcement Tucker Carlson usually appears on a Fox News morning show where his sensible views about the immigration threat to national security get fewer eyeballs. But on Tuesday he was part of the panel on the network’s major news show, and he couldn’t resist bringing up the lessons of Trump that the Republican Party refuses to hear, that heartland Americans want immigration to be controlled and reduced.
Will speaking a tiny morsel of truth about the national question cause Carlson to disappear from Fox’s prime time? We’ll see.
TUCKER CARLSON: I would say the Republican Party in Washington should also not ignore Trump’s voters, and the one issue that they can win a lot of these voters back — and they should, he just won the Republican nomination beating 16 people, all of whom were backed in a sense by Washington Republicans. There’s a statement being made by voters to DC: I think they just need to move on immigration. I actually think a lot of the details of economic policy, the subjects Ryan is most interested in, Trump would probably move on those, but they’ve got to demonstrate a good faith effort to secure the borders and at least to rethink our current immigration scheme which has been in place for 51 years. Nobody is even willing to talk about it. Trump’s voters clearly want a public conversation on that. Why can’t they move on that?
HOST BRET BAIER: These Republicans are nowhere near deporting illegal immigrants.
CARLSON: But the population is. There was a series of polls in swing states done last week on how do you feel about a temporary ban on Muslim immigration. Everyone in DC’s horrified by the idea. It’s like evidence of membership the Nazi Party, and yet across the country, huge numbers of people — 65 percent of Wisconsin voters favor that, not all Republicans, a lot of Democrats. It doesn’t mean you should back it; it does mean you need to rethink your comfortable assumptions about immigration if you’re the Republican Party.
STEVE HAYES: In a country founded on freedom of religion, it’s not a good idea to ban religion.
CARLSON: It’s a little more complicated than that.
HAYES: Republicans can’t just cast aside their principles because Donald Trump comes around and you know this orange guy suggests free trade is bad, we’re gonna throw away two hundred years of Adam Smith.
CARLSON: I’ve never noticed a lot of principles among Republicans in Washington; perhaps they’re there, they’re hiding them well. I would just say, look at the destruction of Europe underway now — one of the lessons from Trump. It doesn’t mean we need to ban people who are Muslims, I agree that’s an overstatement, kinda crazy, but it does mean keeping your immigration regime the same in the face of what’s happening in Europe is equally crazy.
HAYES: I agree with you entirely. They need to respond to this clearly, but if you make the argument — you’re not making it, others have made it — that they just cast aside these pillars of conservatism because Donald Trump is making certain arguments about trade and other things, I think that’s unwise, and I think that’s one of the reasons that you’re seeing this resistance from some people. They don’t want to support somebody who opposes the things that they fought for and held most dear for years.
CARLSON: Open borders is one of the things they held most dear for years. They’re going to have to give up on it because the country just doesn’t support it. They’ve defended it and they need to change.
A Rasmussen survey published on Tuesday illustrated how the citizens remain concerned about national security: despite the squawks from the liberal media about Donald Trump’s call to pause Muslim immigration temporarily, 59 percent of likely voters think that Obama’s plan to speed the import of sketchy Syrians is unwise.
One of the poll’s questions focused on that issue, asking “The Obama administration reportedly wants to speed the screening process for Syrian refugees to come to the United States. The goal is to bring 10,000 of those refugees here by the end of the year. Do you favor or oppose allowing 10,000 Syrians to come to America?”
Unsurprisingly, less examination of Middle Eastern Muslims did not make them more appealing to American citizens.
The Obama administration reportedly is speeding the vetting process for Syrian refugees so 10,000 can come to the United States this year, but most voters still don’t welcome those newcomers and fear they are a threat to the country.
Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Likely U.S. Voters oppose allowing 10,000 Syrians to come to America by the end of the year. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 31% favor letting those refugees come here. Eleven percent (11%) are undecided.
I love Sarah Palin’s word coinage of “Cantor” as a verb meaning to primary a Republican who has become an anti-American establishment hack. On CNN Sunday morning, she pledged to support Paul Nehlen, an independent businessman who is running against Speaker Paul Ryan.
JAKE TAPPER: So, Governor, as you know, Speaker Ryan told me on Thursday that he is not ready to support Donald Trump. Now, one of Trump’s spokespeople told CNN that if Ryan does not back Trump, he should not be speaker of the House. What do you think?
SARAH PALIN: I think Paul Ryan is soon to be Cantored, as in Eric Cantor. His political career is over, but for a miracle, because he has so disrespected the will of the people. And, yes, as the leader of the GOP, the convention certainly, he is to remain neutral. And for him to already come out and say who he will not support was not a wise decision of his.
You know, I think why Paul Ryan is doing this, Jake, is, it kind of screws his chances for the 2020 presidential bid that he’s gunning for. If the GOP were to win now, that wouldn’t bode well for his chances in 2020, and that’s what he’s shooting for.
So, lot of people, with their never Trump or not right now Trump mantra going on, they have their different reasons. I think that one is Paul Ryan’s reason.
TAPPER: Well, specifically, when you talk about him being Eric Cantored, Eric Cantor was the House majority leader who was challenged in the primary by a conservative candidate who got a lot of grassroots support, and that was a big surprise.
Paul Ryan is facing a challenge in the Republican primary in Wisconsin. The primary is coming up. It’s August 9. The candidate is — I believe his name is Paul Nehlen. Are you planning to support his challenger?
PALIN: Well, that’s a good question, seeing as I haven’t even got to call him and tell him that I’m supporting him.
But, yes, I will do whatever I can for Paul Nehlen. This man is a hardworking guy, so in touch with the people. Paul Ryan and his ilk, their problem is they have become so disconnected from the people whom they are elected to represent, as evidenced by Paul Ryan’s refusal to support the GOP front-runner that we just said he’s our man.
And what Paul Ryan and his ilk, again, their problem is, they’re — they feel so threatened at this point that their power, their prestige, their purse will be adversely affected by the change that is coming with Trump, and with someone like Paul Nehlen that they’re not thinking straight right now.
So far, these leading Republicans have not gotten the message that the citizens are sick and tired of elites running America into the ground. Since the top GOPers are untrainable, they must be voted out.
On Friday, Ann Coulter remarked that Paul Ryan is “the next Eric Cantor” on Bill Maher’s Real Time show. When Maher claimed that Ryan is the head of the Republican Party, Coulter responded, “No he isn’t, he is so hated by the base. . . He is absolutely hated, he’s the next Eric Cantor, who was the highest member of leadership ever to lose in a primary.”
Mary Ann Mendoza has been a real trooper to keep her son’s memory alive, along with reminding the public of the preventable nature of the crime that killed him. Sergeant Brandon Mendoza of the Mesa AZ Police was on his way home from work when his car was hit head-on by a drunk illegal Mexican who had driven 35 miles the wrong way on the highway. The alien had been previously arrested for burglary and assaulting a policeman in Colorado, but was not deported. Mary Ann Mendoza was so angered at having her son’s life stolen that she wrote a letter to President Obama.
Mary Ann Mendoza appeared on Fox News on Saturday morning to discus Trump’s approach to the issue. She supports his strategy of taxing remittances — something I suggested in a 2002 op-ed (Relieve crisis on border with tax on remittances, Houston Chronicle, 12/3/02). Another program she backs is a fund to assist families who have lost a loved one to illegal alien crime, because now they get nothing and the lawbreakers get all sorts of help.
Of course, the best policy for illegal aliens is to keep them out in the first place.
TUCKER CARLSON: Mary Ann Mendoza’s son, police sergeant Brendan Mendoza was killed by an illegal immigrant in 2014, and she supports Donald Trump’s stance on immigration, but will the presumptive nominee change his position once he heads into the general election? Mary Ann Mendoza joins us now to discuss. Mary Ann, it’s nice to see you this morning. So Donald Trump is under pressure from the left of course, but also from the establishment of his own party to stop talking about the border issue. They think it’s divisive; he’s been attacked as a nativist for even bringing this up. What’s your view?
MARY ANN MENDOZA: My view is that I believe that illegal immigration is at the core of a lot of the problems that the United States is facing today — overload on our health system, overload on our welfare system, the schools, and not to mention the illegal crime that happens on a daily basis. Continue reading this article
Why should anyone be surprised? Automation started taking jobs with the invention of the ATM (Automated Teller Machine) in 1969 which has put many human banking clerks out of work. Customers can now use self-service machines to gas up the car, purchase groceries and check in at the airport — automation which saves money for the companies utilizing it.
Few humans are needed to produce cars and trucks in today’s factories.
If the important people are aware of the automation threat to the economy, does that mean our elected representatives might wake up soon? Perhaps presidential candidates or other politicians might even make the mental leap to the idea that importing immigrant workers is not appropriate to our modern times.
Some of the richest, smartest and most powerful humans have an important message for the rest of us as they convened this week to discuss pressing global issues: the robots are coming.
At the Milken Institute’s Global Conference in Beverly Hills, California, at least four panels so far have focused on technology taking over markets to mining – and most importantly, jobs.
“Most of the benefits we see from automation is about higher quality and fewer errors, but in many cases it does reduce labor,” Michael Chui, a partner at the McKinsey Global Institute, said on Tuesday during a panel on “Is Any Job Truly Safe?”
The four-day annual conference, which began on Sunday, has 3,500 invite-only participants exploring “The Future of Human Kind.” Continue reading this article
It’s too bad the media is mostly incapable of multi-tasking when it comes to reporting the news; otherwise the talking heads might mention the worsening border anarchy. The presidential campaign is just too easy to report, so full of personal conflict and colorful quotes — they can fill hours and hours 24/7 of cookie-cutter programming with the political struggles.
Meanwhile the surge of illegal aliens that was called a “ humanitarian crisis” in 2014 is as bad as it ever was, except now the media largely accepts the lawlessness as normal.
“Unaccompanied” children often bring their parents.
Greta Van Susteren did report Thursday on the border chaos with an effort to sort out the cause of such ineffectual immigration enforcement in an interview with former Border Patrol official David Aguilar. Her conclusion: “The president and the congress won’t do their jobs.”
The report from The Hill pointed out that the lawlessness remains in place.
The number of families and unaccompanied children apprehended on the southern border has skyrocketed this year, according to new figures from the Obama administration.
The numbers, compiled by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), reveal that child migration is on par with 2014 levels, when a wave of kids — thousands of them unaccompanied — arrived at the southern border.
The surge of illegal immigration quickly swamped border authorities, immigration courts and health and humanitarian workers, while sparking a political battle on Capitol Hill over the cause and proper response to the crisis.
The new figures raise the specter of another increase this summer. That would almost certainly inflame another political showdown in a volatile presidential year in which the issues of race, immigration and border security have been pronounced — particularly due to the hard-line enforcement approach adopted by the presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump.
Through the first six months of fiscal 2016, which ended on March 31, border officials apprehended 27,754 unaccompanied children, the CBP reported — a 78 percent jump from the 15,616 apprehended in 2015, and just shy of the 28,579 apprehended in 2014.
For family units, which consist of at least one child traveling with at least one adult, the increase was even more dramatic. In the first six months of 2016, 32,117 families were apprehended, the CBP reported — an increase of 131 percent from the 2015 figure (13,913) and 62 percent from the 2014 figure (19,830). 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.