Hundreds of MS-13 Gangsters Are Arrested in Crackdown

On Thursday it was announced that more than 200 MS-13 gangsters have been arrested by authorities during a six-week operation to round them up after Attorney General Jeff Sessions had promised to prioritize the Salvadoran gang several months ago.

In April, he traveled to Long Island which has suffered from worsened gang crime, exacerbated by Obama’s active encouragement of Central Americans to enter the US illegally.

Long Island had recently seen an uptick in an ongoing street war with MS-13 gangsters playing a major role, capped on April 12 by the discovery of four butchered bodies in a Central Islip park. So the AG came to the community and pledged to bring the power of the federal government to bear on the brutal Salvadoran gang.

Below, illegal alien MS-13 members were arrested for the murder of high school girls Nisa Mickens and Kayla Cuevas in September 2016.

How violent is MS-13? At the end of the CBS report below, the reporter said her cameraman wore a vest and she stayed “in safer territory” during the arrests.

Given that violent history, it’s odd that CBS regards law enforcement applied to MS-13 foreign gangsters as “controversial.”

Inside ICE’s controversial crackdown on MS-13, CBS News, November 16, 2017

First on “CBS This Morning,” we’re getting rare access to Operation Matador, a joint law enforcement effort led by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations team, to crackdown on MS-13, or Mara Salvatrucha, and other trans-national gangs.

Federal officials will announce Thursday a breakthrough in the fight against MS-13, a gang from El Salvador. Hundreds of accused gang members and associates are under arrest, but its violence is spreading in American neighborhoods.

CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan went to one of the deadliest battlegrounds, Long Island, New York. They’ve made 345 arrests on Long Island and in the surrounding New York City area since May.

The target of the pre-dawn raid was a suspected member of MS-13 who had illegally entered the U.S. The team of 12 immigration agents and local police expected the 20-year-old suspect to be armed.

“He entered the country illegally so – and then he went through the immigration process and a judge ordered him removed,” said Jason Molina, assistant special agent in charge.

“We know he’s an MS-13 member?” Brennan said.

“Yes. We have information, we have pictures of him actually flashing gang signs,” Molina said.
 
But gang membership is not a crime, and the agents did not have a criminal warrant. They only weapons they found were “either pellet guns or BB guns,” Molina said.

But Molina’s team was still able to make the arrest based on the suspect’s immigration status – part of the unique mandate of the Homeland Security investigations unit of ICE. An hour later, they nabbed a second suspect. Molina said he is an MS-13 associate.

“So his known crime is entering the country illegally?” Brennan asked.

“Correct,” Molina said.

“But that’s it at this point, that’s all you definitely know?” Brennan asked.

“That’s correct. The purpose of classifying him as a gang member or a gang associate is because once he goes in front of an immigration judge, we don’t want him to get bail, because the whole point of this operation is to get these known gang members off the street,” Molina said.

(Continues)

Fewer Foreign Students Attend US Colleges

The Associated Press reports that fewer foreigners are coming to the US to attend college, and the news organization apparently regards the decrease as a negative thing. Certainly many Californians would see having fewer foreign students on campus as a big plus, especially if there were also fewer out-of-staters — both groups that must pay higher tuition. Every college slot taken by a non-Californian means a state resident does not get one.

In fact, the California system of higher education is so poorly run that it has stooped to deliberate unfairness to admit more non-residents with their fat tuition checks and register fewer state residents — just the population it is supposed to serve. In 2016, the state auditor slammed the University of California for lowering standards to admit more non-residents. Young Californians must wonder why they should study hard to make good grades and high test scores when the system actively works against them. Diversity is valued, but excellence isn’t.

Years of complaints from California parents and students finally convinced the all-powerful regents to respond a tiny bit, according to a May 18, 2017 article in the Los Angeles Times: UC regents approve first limit on out-of-state and international student enrollment which specified:

Regents voted to cap nonresident undergraduate enrollment to 18% at UC Davis, UC Santa Barbara, UC Santa Cruz, UC Riverside and UC Merced. Four campuses that already exceed that level — UCLA, UC Berkeley, UC San Diego and UC Irvine — will be allowed to keep but not increase the higher percentage they enroll in 2017-18.

Nonresidents currently make up 16.5% of the system’s 210,170 undergraduates.

So the “reform” from the regents let the most popular schools — UCLA and UC Berkeley — off the hook.

Below, UC Berkeley is one of the most desirable schools. In 2016 state residents made up only 67.6 percent of the admitted class — meaning a whopping 32.4 percent of the admitted freshmen a year ago were not Californians.

Interestingly, Inside Higher Ed puts the out-of-state percentage for UC Berkeley at “more than 24 percent” — so are foreign students not counted as out of state? The numbers have gotten sketchy now that there is supposed to be a limit on non-Californians. Berkeley’s Fall Enrollment Data page has a plethora of race and other information mixed up together, probably to confuse  — e.g. 24.5% white, 18.6% Chinese in 2017 plus 11.6 percent “international.”

However the bean counters slice it, Californians are getting the short end of the stick.

Plus some number of the foreigners use their presence in the country to wangle a job leading to immigration.

Anyway, here is the Los Angeles Times’ curiously upbeat position that despite the decrease of foreign students, California is still their top choice!

Enrollment of first-time foreign students dips in the U.S., but California is still No. 1, Los Angeles Times, November 13, 2017

After years of rapid growth, enrollment of first-time international students in U.S. colleges and universities dipped last year amid concerns about political uncertainty, tuition increases, visa delays and reductions in scholarship money, an annual survey found.

California remained the nation’s most popular destination for foreign students, with 157,000 coming to the state in 2016-17. They made up nearly 16% of more than 1 million international students in the United States that year, according to the survey of more than 2,000 institutions released Monday by the Institute of International Education.

Alyson L. Grunder, a deputy assistant secretary of State, said the U.S. ability to attract the world’s largest number of international students was “testament to the unmatched quality of American higher education.”

But the roughly 3% decline in new foreign students in California and nationally was the first drop the institute has recorded in the 12 years it has collected such data, and the decline appears to be deepening. The institute’s separate tally of data from about 500 colleges and universities found a 7% drop in enrollment of first-time students this fall — mostly at less-selective campuses.

Institute officials were diplomatic, and repeatedly declined to pinpoint President Trump’s hard-edged attitudes toward immigration and foreign visitors from countries he considers sponsors of terrorism.

“It really is much too soon for us yet to tell what is the definitive factor,” said Allan E. Goodman, the institute’s president. He said U.S. institutions need to redouble efforts to recruit more foreign students because they enrich campuses and collectively contributed $39 billion to the U.S. economy this past year.

“It’s a very healthy … wake-up call,” Goodman said.

Growth in foreign students is slowing

Overall, the number of international students in the United States went up by 3%, signaling a slowdown in what used to be double-digit growth. Institute officials said other countries, notably Canada, Germany and the United Kingdom, are recruiting foreign students more aggressively. Trump’s travel ban and fears of crime also appeared to be factors, they said. But only 20% of institutions surveyed in the smaller sample said international students had expressed a desire to leave the country because of the social and political climate.

(Continues)

Illegal Aliens Continue to Escape Deportation by Hiding in Churches

One of the immigration enforcement problems that’s still around is the situation of illegal aliens taking up residence in churches for the “sanctuary” they offer.

As it happens, the concept is fake —churches cannot set themselves up as mini Mexicos inside the United States, separate from American law. ICE officers could walk in any time and arrest the foreigners, but they don’t do so because they think it would look bad to have a Mexican moocher being dragged out with a priest squawking about the cruelty of la migra.

Many US citizens would cheer to see ICE arrests in the hypocritical churches, which are America-hating pro-Mexican institutions, but we probably won’t ever get to see that welcome sight.

Remember Elvira Arellano? She was the poster Mexican church lurker a decade ago, often holding her anchor-baby kid as a prop, as I imagined at the time to look like a ventriloquist set-up:

Fox News had a chat on the subject on Monday with Pastor Robert Jeffress who assured viewers that ICE could arrest the lawless foreigners at any time:

PASTOR JEFFRESS: I think our viewers are going to be surprised to learn that churches actually have no ability to harbor or offer sanctuary to people breaking the law. Right now, law enforcement officials can go into any church, any mosque, any synagogue and arrest those who are breaking the law, whether it be illegal immigrants, domestic terrorists or tax evaders; the only reason immigration officials aren’t doing that right now is they don’t think the optics wouldn’t look good of doing that, but right now they have the freedom to do that if they want to.

The Washington Times printed an article on Friday that precipitated the discussion:

Illegals finding unlawful sanctuary in America’s churches, Washington Times, November 10, 2017

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Church World Services, a nonprofit based in New York that presses for amnesty and opposes much of President Donald Trump’s border crackdowns, knows of dozens of illegals who’ve sought sanctuary within America’s places of worship over the last few years.

Churches, in other words — at least some of them — have become an illegal’s best friend. And it’s hardly biblical; it’s hardly heavenly or humanly lawful.

From The Associated Press: “Amanda Morales sees her children off to school each day from the entrance of a gothic church, but she won’t even venture onto the sidewalk for fear of what may happen if she leaves the building where she has been a virtual prisoner for more than two months. Morales has been living in two small rooms of the Holyrood Episcopal Church at the northern edge of Manhattan since August, shortly after immigration authorities ordered her deported to her homeland of Guatemala.”

She ran to the church for safety; she’s since stayed in the church for protection from deportation. This is not a boo-hoo for Morales moment. This is a sad and outrageous reflection on how politically correct our churches have become.

And churches offering such protections are becoming more and more common in America, particularly as Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency increases its enforcement.

Morales is just one example; her kids are legal, but she’s a fugitive and could be arrested at the drop of a hat. ICE, however, views churches as safe zones — “sensitive locations,” in fact — and won’t enter to arrest and deport.

Should this change?

(Continues)

Trump Effect: Farmers Turn from Foreign Pickers to Automation

Farm automation has been progressing along, just like uses of smart machines in other industries, but agbots may now be getting an extra boost. Apparently President Trump’s crackdown on illegal border crossings has decreased the supply of foreign pickers, so farmers are looking more favorably at tech solutions. The transition would have happened anyway, but immigration enforcement is speeding it up a bit.

Not only are there are robot weeders, pickers and cultivators, but cows can now walk into an automated milker when they feel the need.

Agricultural automation makes immigrant farm workers obsolete.

Who will pick the strawberries without illegal immigrants? ROBOTS!

For an extra automation touch, you can listen to the Reuters article posted below being read by a robot:

As Trump targets immigrants, U.S. farm sector looks to automate, Reuters, November 9, 2017

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Convincing big U.S. dairy owners to buy robots to milk their cows – and reduce the farmhands they employ – used to be a tough sell for Steve Fried. Recently, his job has gotten easier, he says, in part because of President Donald Trump.

“I get calls on a daily basis and it typically starts with, ‘I don’t want to deal with this labor headache any more’,” said Fried, sales manager for Lely North America, which makes robotic dairy milking and feeding systems.

Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration through stepped-up arrests and border enforcement has shaken the U.S. agricultural sector, where as many as 7 in 10 farm workers are undocumented, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation.

In addition, Republican lawmakers in Congress have introduced legislation that would require all employers to check social security numbers against federal databases to ensure their workers are in the country legally, something that is now voluntary in all but a handful of states.

The get-tough approach “has created a great deal of anxiety,” said Tom Vilsack, chief executive of the U.S. Dairy Export Council, who was U.S. Agriculture Secretary for eight years under President Barack Obama.

The shift comes as the industry was already struggling to cope with a shrinking, aging workforce. That is ratcheting up pressure on the sector to embrace new technology.

Farmers and food companies increasingly are moving to automate dairy operations, chicken processing, crop production and harvesting. Even delicate crops such as strawberries and peaches are being considered for mechanization.

“You’d be a fool to not have a plan that moves you that way,” said Duff Bevill, who owns a vineyard management company in Sonoma County, California.

(Continues)

Tucker Carlson Notes the Demanding Mob of Illegal Aliens in Senate Office Building

A gaggle of illegals and their pals swarmed Capitol Hill on Thursday where they insisted on a big amnesty for DACAs and Dreamers and all their cousins ad infinitum.

The scene looked pretty rowdy, verging on unsafe, as a large crowd of angry illegal aliens loudly demanded citizenship privileges to which they have no right.

Who’s in charge of public safety in the Senate office building? After the attempted mass murder where Rep. Steve Scalise was nearly killed last summer after being shot during a baseball practice with several other Republicans and Senator Rand Paul had six ribs cracked by a neighbor a few days back, it seems like the safety of elected officials should get more consideration.

Tucker Carlson found the lack of law enforcement to be disappointing:

“A literal horde of illegal immigrants stormed Capitol Hill today — hundreds of illegal immigrants and their supporters assembled in the Hart Senate Office Building very close to right here, chanting slogans in an effort to pressure Congress to disallow the deportation of people here illegally.

Now protesting inside the Hart Building is against the law; many protestors were students cutting school, and of course an illegal immigrant participating in an illegal protest inside the US is illegal on about eight different levels. Nevertheless only 15 arrests were made, and seems unlikely anybody will be deported over this or ever for any reason because we don’t deport people in America.

Howie Carr is a Boston area radio show host, and he joins us tonight. Howie, I mean not to put too fine a point on it, but for people here illegally to show up and scream at elected American representatives about how they demand this, that or the other thing, and then no one does anything about it kind of tells you that the law is toothless now.”

Howie Carr said he didn’t get it either, and went on to cite cases of violent crime in the Boston area committed by illegal aliens, like the Cambodian who beat and robbed an elderly woman in a wheelchair.

Here’s a spare video in case of disappearance and an audio version:

Interestingly, a recent poll found support for DACA forgiveness to be dropping: less than 30 percent of Americans want to see those illegals get an amnesty.

Sharyl Attkisson Explains How the Mainstream Media Created Massive Mistrust in Itself among the Public

Sharyl Attkisson was an award-winning reporter during her career in the mainstream media, including 21 years at CBS. At some point in her time with the MSM, she found her freedom as a journalist was being compromised and she resigned to pursue an independent career.

She has written two books critical of the media: Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s Washington (2014) and more recently The Smear: How Shady Political Operatives and Fake News Control What You See, What You Think, and How You Vote (2017).

Attkisson also hosts a weekly public affairs program Full Measure which is shown on Sinclair stations and can also be seen on its Youtube channel.

Illegal alien crime is a topic that has been investigated on Full Measure.

So she is a good person to do a 5-minute Prager University explanation of why we hate the media (it’s rotten) and how it got to be so mistrusted — nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the press is full of fake news according to a Harvard-Harris poll published last spring.

WHY NO ONE TRUSTS THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA

by SHARYL ATTKISSON

TRANSCRIPT (November 6, 2017):

Trust in the media is at an all-time low—and for good reason.

We in the business of journalism have exempted ourselves from the normal rules that used to govern us, and so the most egregious kinds of reporting errors are becoming more common. Formerly well-respected news organizations and experienced national reporters are making the sorts of mistakes that wouldn’t be tolerated in journalism school.

When these mistakes are corrected at all, it’s with seemingly little regret. And the corrections never get anywhere near as much attention as the original salacious—but incorrect—narrative.

How did we get here?

I discuss that in detail in my book, The Smear.

Here are three factors:

First, firewalls that once strictly separated news from opinion have been replaced by hopelessly blurred lines. Once-forbidden practices, such as editorializing within straight news reports and the inclusion of opinions as if fact, are not only tolerated—they’re encouraged. The result: It’s never been harder for Americans to separate news that’s real from news that’s not.

Example: May 14, 2016, ten days after Donald Trump became the Republican presidential nominee, the New York Times published a blockbuster article titled, “Crossing the Line: How Donald Trump Behaved with Women in Private.” The story’s authors, Michael Barbaro and Megan Twohey, interviewed Rowanne Lane, an ex-girlfriend of Trump’s. Her quotes made Trump sound, at best, like a jerk, and at worst, like a predator.

The reporters went so far as to provide their own quotes for the story, presenting their personal commentary as if it were established fact, writing, “This is the public treatment of some women by Mr. Trump. . . degrading, impersonal, performed.”

The problem is, the reporting wasn’t true—according to Trump’s supposed victim. Once the story was published, she publicly accused the Times of misleading her, writing a “hit piece” against Trump and putting a “negative connotation” on what—she said—was “not…a negative experience.”

No matter where you stand, this was a huge development in terms of journalism: the main source behind front-page national news discredited the entire premise of the story. Free Courses for Free Minds .com You’d expect something like that to rock the whole news organization and prompt investigations, a retraction, and re-examination of policies. Yet, I can find no record of any of that. The Times and their reporters never even apologized or printed a correction. Continue reading this article

The Self-Driving Car Edges Closer to True Autonomy

We’ve been hearing about self-driving cars for several years, but until now, there has always been a human in the driver’s seat in case anything went wrong. The latest news from Google reveals that its autonomous car, called the Waymo, is ramping up to the next level where no driver will be present at the wheel, although an employee will be present just in case for the time being.

The current Waymo car is a Chrysler Pacifica teched out with self-driving sensors and computers.

Industry flacks promoting the technology like to tout the increased safety of self-driving cars — 37,461 people were killed on US roads in 2016, an increase of 5.6 percent over the 2015 total.

So if autonomous vehicles can make the highways less deadly, that would be a genuine improvement with all those lives being saved.

But the price is high. Driving is a major occupation in the United States with an estimated 3.5 million Americans employed as commercial drivers.

The map below shows the most common job per state in 2014, and truck driver is remarkable for its frequency.

So the approach of true self-driving vehicles is moving ever closer, which promises increased highway safety, but with substantial job loss.

And in the more automated future, it makes no sense for the government to continue to import immigrant workers from abroad.

Waymo to take on Uber and Lyft with its fleet of self-driving minivans, CNBC, November 7, 2017

● Waymo said it plans to start a ride-hailing service with its fleet of driverless Chrysler Pacifica minivans.

● Although Waymo didn’t disclose when the service would launch, the first location will be Phoenix.

Waymo goes for driverless ride-sharing from CNBC.

Waymo, formerly known as the Google Self-Driving Car Project, is getting into the ride-hailing business, but with a twist. Sometime within the next few months Waymo will start offering the public rides in driverless Chrysler Pacifica minivans.

“The vehicles will be fully self-driving,” said Waymo CEO John Krafcik. “So you have your own personal space where you can sit back and relax.”

While Krafcik has yet to say exactly when Waymo’s ride-hailing service will launch, the first metropolitan area where people will be able to order a Waymo is Phoenix, he said. The public will use an app to catch a ride just as they do for Uber and Lyft.

Initially, those ride-hailing companies may hardly notice Waymo. After all, Waymo has a small fleet of minivans and is just starting up in one city at first. By comparison, Uber dominates the ride-hailing industry, while Lyft is a distant second, though quickly adding customers around the country.

Second Measure, which tracks the ride-hailing industry by analyzing credit card data, estimates Uber has a 70 percent share of the U.S. market, while Lyft has 25 percent and other smaller services make up the remaining 5 percent.

Still, Waymo’s corporate parent, Alphabet, has deep pockets and a strategy designed to leverage eight years of developing self-driving cars. While other tech firms, many automakers, some auto suppliers, as well as Uber and Lyft are also developing self-driving vehicles, Waymo is considered to be ahead of others when it comes to taking the driver out of car and having it operate safely on public roads. . .

 

Watch: Behind the scenes at Waymo

Behind the scenes at Waymo’s top-secret testing site from CNBC.

Senator Tom Cotton Defines Immigration in the National Interest

My copy of Imprimis, the Hillsdale College publication, arrived in the mail a few days ago, headlined with an article by Senator Tom Cotton titled “Immigration in the National Interest.”

Senator Cotton has recently been positioning himself as a major leader in the Senate for sensible policies of immigration control and reduction, particularly with his submission of legislation with Senator Perdue of the RAISE Act — Reforming American Immigration for Strong Employment. The top points include cutting legal immigration by about half, eliminating the insane Diversity Visa and reducing refugees to 50,000 annually. All of the measures would benefit American workers and improve public safety.

The proportion of foreign-born workers in the American labor force was 16.9 percent in 2016, or nearly 27 million in numerical terms according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

(Note: Imprimis is a small monthly, usually with one medium-length article of a conservative nature. The content is drawn from speeches delivered to Hillsdale College hosted events — see its YouTube channel for a sampling. You can subscribe online for the free paper edition by sending your address via this link.)

In the video below, Senator Cotton’s speech starts at around 18 minutes in, following introductory comments by Hillsdale College President Larry Arnn.

Immigration in the National Interest, by Senator Tom Cotton, Imprimis, October 2017

Last year, for the first time in our nation’s history, the American people elected as president someone with no high government experience—not a senator, not a congressman, not a governor, not a cabinet secretary, not a general. They did this, I believe, because they’ve lost faith in both the competence and the intentions of our governing class—of both parties! Government now takes nearly half of every dollar we earn and bosses us around in every aspect of life, yet can’t deliver basic services well. Our working class—the “forgotten man,” to use the phrase favored by Ronald Reagan and FDR—has seen its wages stagnate, while the four richest counties in America are inside the Washington Beltway. The kids of the working class are those who chiefly fight our seemingly endless wars and police our streets, only to come in for criticism too often from the very elite who sleep under the blanket of security they provide.

Donald Trump understood these things, though I should add he didn’t cause them. His victory was more effect than cause of our present discontents. The multiplying failures and arrogance of our governing class are what created the conditions for his victory.

Immigration is probably the best example of this. President Trump deviated from Republican orthodoxy on several issues, but immigration was the defining issue in which he broke from the bipartisan conventional wisdom. For years, all Democrats and many Republicans have agreed on the outline of what’s commonly called “comprehensive immigration reform,” which is Washington code for amnesty, mass immigration, and open borders in perpetuity.

This approach was embodied most recently in the so-called Gang of Eight bill in 2013. It passed the Senate, but thankfully we killed it in the House, which I consider among my chief accomplishments in Congress so far. Two members of the Gang of Eight ran for my party’s nomination for president last year. Neither won a single statewide primary. Donald Trump denounced the bill, and he won the nomination.

Likewise, Hillary Clinton campaigned not just for mass immigration, but also on a policy of no deportations of anyone, ever, who is illegally present in our country. She also accused her opponent of racism and xenophobia. Yet Donald Trump beat her by winning states that no Republican had won since the 1980s.

Clearly, immigration was an issue of signal importance in the election. That’s because immigration is more than just another issue. It touches upon fundamental questions of citizenship, community, and identity. For too long, a bipartisan, cosmopolitan elite has dismissed the people’s legitimate concerns about these things and put its own interests above the national interest.

No one captured this sensibility better than President Obama, when he famously called himself “a citizen of the world.”  With that phrase, he revealed a deep misunderstanding of citizenship. After all, “citizen” and “city” share the same Greek root word: citizenship by definition means that you belong to a particular political community. Yet many of our elites share Mr. Obama’s sensibility. They believe that American citizenship—real, actual citizenship—is meaningless, ought not be foreclosed to anyone, and ought not be the basis for distinctions between citizens and foreigners. You might say they think American exceptionalism lies in not making exceptions when it comes to citizenship.

(Continues)

Mexican Toxic Sludge Contaminates San Diego Beaches and Sickens Swimmers

A massive swarm of illegal aliens has not been the only poison flowing into the US from Mexico: our unfriendly neighbor has allowed huge amounts of untreated sewage and toxic chemicals to surge north, closing beaches and causing illness in many who come in contact with the vile sludge.

Americans have spent billions of dollars to have clean water and healthy land and beaches, yet wealthy Mexico (#15 in world GDP) refuses to treat its waste adequately.

The San Diego Union-Tribune reported last April that the “Imperial Beach, which stretches past the Tijuana Slough National Wildlife Refuge to the Mexican border, had portions of its shoreline off-limits to swimmers for more than a third of each year on average” (Focus: Tijuana pollution contaminates South Bay beaches at astounding rate).

Our government needs to smack the Mexicans into responsible treatment of their crud — they certainly can afford it, but would rather Uncle Sucker pick up the tab. Not with Donald Trump in charge.

WILLIAM LA JEUNESSE: There are two problems: the polluted Tijuana River flows north into the US; secondly Mexican waste that’s pumped into the ocean carries naturally into California. By law, Mexico is supposed to treat both and tell us when they don’t; officials say they’re not.

SERGE DEDINA, MAYOR OF IMPERIAL BEACH: You’ve got this plume of brown stenchy sewage. It was like a giant blob, like the blob moving forward up your beach and just filling your nostrils and everything, all your senses with the stench of raw sewage.

CHRIS HARRIS, NATIONAL BORDER CONTROL COUNCIL: Our guys understand the risks of law enforcement being shot at, being rocked, but what we won’t accept any more is working in basically a sewage or chemical waste dump.

LA JEUNESSE: The Border Patrol, surfers, anyone using this beach is exposed to Mexican waste.

HARRIS: I’ve personally got it on my arms and literally within a minute I’ve had a huge rash to the point my supervisor said go to the hospital.

LA JEUNESSE: This year 83 of 300 agents filed reports of being affected — chromium, cadmium, lead burns their boots. Swimmers immersed in e.coli get physically sick.

SWIMMER: It’s usually frothy, it stinks.

LA JEUNESSE: In February a spill in Mexico sent 250 million gallons of raw sewage and industrial waste into the US where the Tijuana River flows north over the border; 200 days a year officials closed Imperial Beach.

DEDINA: Unfortunately the United States government seems to be in the mode where everything’s fine, don’t worry about it.

LA JEUNESSE: Local cities are suing the US and Mexico.

HARRIS: Literally and pun intended, they don’t give a crap. Where’s the governor of California? Governor Brown is going around the world saving the world for the environment — God bless, but what about this environmental disaster down here?

LA JEUNESSE: So the bottom line is people are getting sick, Mexico is not poor — they have oil, have tourism, trade. It has money: officials just argue they’re choosing not to spend it on cleaning the water.

Look for Smart Machines to Change Work Substantially within Five Years

Recent reports give a near-term picture of how experts believe the automation revolution will roll out. Continuing education to adapt to technology will become more necessary as some careers will “cease to exist.”

There is a minor industry of reassurance — writers who spread the message that the automation revolution is over-hyped and will not create widespread unemployment. A news search for automation + jobs will routinely bring up 20 percent or more of don’t-worry items. One example is a New York Times October 7 opinion piece No, That Robot Will Not Steal Your Job that chirps, “There are jobs, jobs everywhere.”

Yes, the economy is booming now, which has been aided enormously by having a business-friendly president in the White House. The problem lies a few years down the road where the machines and software have become cheaper, and it makes sense for owners to replace workers.

“The displacement is already beginning to happen,” according to Jeff Hesse, principal of PwC, which published “Workforce of the Future” in September. He continued, ”It varies a bit by industry, but over the next five years we’re going to see the need for workers to change their skills at an accelerating pace.”

Okay, it’s a prediction, and not all predictions play out as written. But you would think that the potential of significant job loss from automation in the semi-near future would get a little attention in Washington, and it hasn’t.

There are strategies to cope with the revolutionary changes coming to the workplace, such as an increased emphasis on technical training to prepare workers for future jobs.

Certainly it makes sense for America to chill seriously on immigration if a PwC projection noted below is correct that “38 percent of U.S. jobs are at risk of being affected by automation by the early 2030s.” It is crazy to continue importing foreign workers when the need for them is Zero in the near future.

The Reports Are In: AI and Robots Will Significantly Threaten Jobs in 5 Years, Futurism.com, October 8, 2017

IN BRIEF
A report suggests people only have five years before automation and AI threaten jobs and force them to learn new skills for the workforce. The firm PwC surveyed 10,000 people from around the world, revealing people are concerned about automation, but they’re also willing to learn.

THE ROBOTS ARE COMING TO THREATEN JOBS

A study from Redwood Software and Sapio Research released October 4th revealed that IT leaders believe automation could impact 60% of businesses by 2022 and threaten jobs in the process. Now, a new, separate report from PwC, the second biggest professional services firm worldwide, suggests a similar timeline; one in which people may need to practice and learn new skills — or be left behind as automation takes over.

The report, titled Workforce of the Future, surveyed 10,000 people across China, India, Germany, the UK, and the U.S. to “better understand the future of work.” Of those, nearly 37% think artificial intelligence and robotics will put their jobs at risk; in 2014, 33% had a similar concern. . .

As of March 2017, PwC reports about 38% of U.S. jobs are at risk of being affected by automation by the early 2030s, with Germany closely behind at 35%; the UK at 30%; and Japan at 21%.

REQUIRED SKILLS AND ALTERNATIVE INCOMES

Last year, Microsoft co-founder and philanthropist Bill Gates said there were three skills people would need to survive in a job market that continues to embrace technology: science, engineering and economics. They don’t need to be experts, but they need to understand what people in each field are capable of. In the case of robotics, those with knowledge about managing automatic software programs will be highly sought after. Hesse also suggests people research which skills their fields will be in need of.

You can’t talk about the rise of robotics and automation without asking about those unable to adjust or unwilling to learn a new skill. 56% of the people PwC surveyed think governments should take any steps necessary to protect jobs, presumably so people without technical prowess can continue to work and earn an income.

(Continues)

New York City Increases Security for Marathon Following Truck Jihad

Big sporting events like marathons are catnip to Islamo murderers, and the deaths on Halloween from the Uzbek truck jihadist has reminded the city that it remains a top target for allah’s killers.

CBS reported on the increased security measures for Sunday’s New York City Marathon, a top running event for elite athletes that features a memorable route through all five boroughs. The city will add more blocking vehicles, more snipers and additional police officers to guard the runners from New York’s famous diversity — although it must be noted that the Uzbek killer lived across the river in New Jersey.

Still, the city’s muslim population counts over a million persons, so many that schools close for Islam holidays. Perhaps they can add Jihad-o-ween for October 31.

All this security from diversity doesn’t come cheap, although dollar figures are not available to the public. Apparently ruling elites don’t want little citizens to learn the cost of admitting huge numbers of potential enemies: in fact, the US has admitted more than two million immigrants from majority Islamic nations since 9/11. The number of Middle Easterners in 1970 was a manageable 200,000, but muslim immigration was later loosed upon the country. Not every allah-follower is a stone-cold murderer, but some are, due to the Koranic instructions to “kill them wherever you find them”

But back to the cost of protecting citizens from diversity, remember that the more muslims, the more expensive public safety becomes. The 2012 London Olympics cost $2 billion for security, a stunning amount even though the events lasted two weeks and were spread around various venues. In 2016, former Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis remarked that security costs for his city’s famous marathon quadrupled since the murderous jihad attack in 2013, but he didn’t give a dollar amount.

Below, Muslim immigrants Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev exploded bombs in the 2013 Boston Marathon that killed three and injured dozens.

Before muslim immigration, Americans didn’t face time-consuming screening for airline flights and didn’t have to pay the bill for anti-terrorist security for a footrace. It’s not like the United States needs any immigrants given the automated future; we certainly should stop admitting an enemy tribe that is murdering our fellow citizens.

America’s Excessive Child Poverty Rate Is Fueled by Mass Immigration

The fact that the United States has been admitting millions of poor unskilled foreigners as immigrants for decades makes it no surprise that the amount of child poverty is highly elevated. There’s a lot of adult poverty too, but the fact of kids growing up with insufficient resources is supposedly more shameful in our wealthy country.

As it happens, Washington’s obstinate auto-pilot immigration has imported millions of poor people who will never live without taxpayer-funded assistance for food, housing and education. The policy leaves our own poor people with the short end of the stick as schools in low-income areas are ever more crowded and dysfunctional, and American workers must compete with foreigners for jobs.

Below, a group of Obama’s border surge kids line up to get some free-to-them stuff supported by American taxes.

As economist George Borjas remarked the other day, mass immigration is the world’s “largest anti-poverty program” — although the influx is not kind to America’s poor and working class. “The largest loss is probably the wage drop suffered by the workers who now face more competition in the labor market,” Borjas said.

Op-Ed: Why does the U.S. have such an outlier child poverty rate? Our immigration system has a lot to do with it, By Kay S. Hymowitz, Los Angeles Times, October 29, 2017

Articles about America’s high levels of child poverty are a media evergreen. Here’s a typical entry, courtesy of the New York Times’s Eduardo Porter: “The percentage of children who are poor is more than three times as high in the United States as it is in Norway or the Netherlands. America has a larger proportion of poor children than Russia.” That’s right: Russia.

Outrageous as they seem, the assertions are true — at least in the sense that they line up with official statistics. Comparisons of the sort that Porter makes, though, should be accompanied by an asterisk pointing to a very American reality. Before Europe’s recent migration crisis, the United States was the only developed country to routinely import millions of very poor, low-skilled families, from some of the most destitute places on Earth — especially from undeveloped areas of Latin America — into its communities, schools and hospitals. Let’s just say that Russia doesn’t care to do this — and, until recently, Norway and the Netherlands didn’t, either.

Pundits prefer silence on the relationship between America’s immigration system and poverty, and it’s easy to see why. The subject pushes us into the sort of wrenching trade-offs that politicians and advocates prefer to avoid. Here’s the problem in a nutshell: You can allow mass low-skilled immigration, which many consider humane. But if you do, it becomes a lot harder to pursue the equally humane goal of reducing child poverty in this country.

::

In 1964, the federal government settled on a standard definition of poverty: an annual income less than three times the amount required to feed a family (size dependent) over that period of time. Back then, close to 23% of American kids were poor. Today, about 18% of kids are below the poverty line, amounting to 13,250,000 children.

At first, immigration did not affect child-poverty figures. The 1924 Immigration Act sharply reduced the number of immigrants from poorer Eastern European and southern countries, and it altogether banned Asians. The relatively small number of immigrants settling in the United States tended to be from affluent nations. According to the Migration Policy Institute, in 1970, immigrant children were less likely to be poor than were the children of native-born Americans.

By 1980, the situation had reversed: immigrant kids were now poorer than native-born ones. Why? The 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act overturned the 1924 restrictions and made “family preference” a cornerstone of immigration policy. In consequence of that move, as well as large-scale illegal immigration, a growing number of new Americans hailed from less-developed countries. As of 1990, immigrant kids had poverty rates 50% higher than their native counterparts. At the turn of the millennium, more than one-fifth of immigrant children were classified as poor.

Perhaps the most uncomfortable truth about these statistics is that a large majority of America’s poor immigrant children — and, at this point, a large fraction of all its poor children — are Latino.

(Continues)

Page 3 of 27012345...102030...Last »