On Wednesday, the PBS Newshour had a segment on the need to speed up the issuance of visas to Afghan refugees who had previously provided translation services to American troops. The segment begins at 25:00 on the video following:
Somehow the plea from the liberal media for speedier admittance of war refugees sounded strangely familiar. In fact, it was a lot like the heartfelt appeal of Sixty Minutes in 2008, which shrieked how Iraqis who worked for the US were “marked for death” so we Americans should quit being so mean and rescue 100,000 of them immediately.
If lives were in danger, then haste was important, and therefore 58,000 Iraqis got swift service for relocation to America as refugees. But in the rush, national security was sacrificed, and proper screening was not done. As a result, a couple of genuine enemies were admitted, one a former soldier from Saddam’s army.
Sardar Khan cradles his infant son in one arm as he considers a thick stack of his life’s most important documents on a glass table before him. The documents include medical records, letters of recommendation from U.S. military officers and five passports–one for Khan and each member of his family.
Khan is 26, an Afghan native, and has spent seven years working as a translator for the U.S. Army. He is proud of his work, but fears that it has put him and his children in danger. And the visa program designed to help Afghans like him escape such danger, he says, has done little to secure his safety.
“I am living in a village where everybody knows me … who I am, who I am working for, where my house is, these things,” Khan says. “They are just waiting for a small chance, like if the security gets a little bit worse. I am really concerned about my babies especially. I love them more than my life.”
Khan says he applied for a U.S. visa in 2012, under a program designed to help Afghans like him escape the country. He had an interview with the U.S. Embassy in early 2013 and has been waiting for an answer ever since. The process has left him emotionally and financially drained. Continue reading this article
Last Friday, two thousand residents of Plovdiv took to the streets to object to authorities returning a mosque to Muslim control in the person of the Grand Mufti. According to Reuters, “nationalists and soccer fans” attacked the building and 120 were arrested. News reports made the protesters sound like a bunch of hooligans (another word used by media).
Interestingly, a video of the event shows an orderly march of men and women of all ages, with flags, signs and patriotic symbols. After arrival at the mosque, behavior gets louder and more agitated.
Bulgaria may be poor and rough around the edges, but its people know for sure they don’t want a return of the Muslim jackboot. And wherever Muslims relocate, Islamic demands inevitably follow.
The current mosque business is seen as a stealth move by Islamists to mooch themselves back into Bulgaria. The transfer of the mosque to the Mufti follows his legal finagling, as explained in the Ottawa Citizen:
[. . .] But it’s not just the future of one mosque that’s at issue. The Grand Mufti has lodged more than two dozen claims to properties lost to the Muslim community a century ago following the expulsion of the last Ottoman Turk overlords from the country in the late 19th century.
According to the online outlet The Sofia Globe, the court applications follow amendments to the country’s Religious Denominations Act, which allow such applications by officially recognized religious groups. (According to a 2011 census, about eight per cent of Bulgaria’s 7.3 million people are Muslim.)
The Mufti’s claims have sparked a series of often violent demonstrations, of which the one late last week in Koslovo was only the latest. Opposition to the Grand Mufti’s claims is particularly strong in Karlova. The town is the birthplace of Vassil Levski, a Bulgarian national hero — he’s been dubbed the Apostle of Freedom — who in the late 1800s led a revolutionary movement to liberate Bulgaria from Ottoman tyranny. [. . .]
Following is a video of the rowdy bits of the Feb 14 protest, with translations of what the protesters are yelling, starting at around one minute in. Gates Of Vienna has a transcript of what was said, things like:
Crowd sings “Courage, fellows in battle, loyal, united, we are no longer obedient ‘raya’ (synonym for dhimmi)” (these are verses from a song from the anti-Turkish rebellions in the 19th century)
Lady on loudspeaker: “…Women of Bulgaria! We are here to say: in Bulgaria the howling of the “muezzin” will never drown out the toll of the (church) bells!”
Voices in the crowd: “Turkey out of Bulgaria! Down with Turkey, this is Bulgaria!”
It’s regrettable that property damage occurred in the Plovdiv activities, but authorities often don’t pay attention to reasoned debate from citizens. The Bulgarians are insisting they are unwilling to return to slavery under Islam.
As a careful writer, I normally spend a lot of time researching topics that are often controversial, like how illegal immigration is illegal and such. But I’ve never been so surprised as when investigating how far robotics have advanced in their capability to replace humans in complex tasks, from manufacturing to ordering in restaurants and automatic cappuccino stands.
In short, the robotic sci-fi future is here and now.
Below, inside Google’s self-driving car, now under development. In the future, human cabbies and truck drivers may be phased out of employment.
Given the increasing encroachment of smart machines into unprecedented areas of the economy, the predicted shortage of workers because of boomers’ retirement is not happening. We see it in the jobless recovery, where Wall Street is thriving, but Main Street is not. A 2013 report from Oxford University estimated that 45 percent of American jobs will be automated within the next 20 years.
Immigration, outsourcing, and smart machines crush citizen hopes
The American worker, from ditch-digger to rocket scientist, is under assault as never before. Government immigration policies, globalist eco- nomics, and the march of technology have combined to create a shrinking employment universe for ordinary Americans, the effects of which have been accumulating over decades. [. . .]
A large category of life and commerce being eyed for robotic improvements is driving. Google founder Sergey Brin is enamored of the idea of improving highway safety with “self-driving” cars and is investing his considerable wealth into developing the software and machinery. He predicted in 2012 that automated cars would be available in a few years. Google engineers were hard at work on the project, and a confident Brin remarked, “You can count on one hand the number of years until ordinary people can experience this.”
Presumably, it follows that robotic trucks and taxis would soon follow, with a job loss of potentially millions. In addition, Google has acquired several technology companies that are strong in robotics, indicating a serious move in that direction. The company has suggested it wants more automation in electronics assembly (now largely manual), and it plans expansion into retailing, such as automating the shipment process.
The New York Times published a chipper, tech-swoony article about the company’s smart automation, “Google Puts Money on Robots, Using the Man Behind Android” (12/4/13), in which executives called their vision a “moonshot” of advanced robotic innovation. However, quite a number of the online comments remarked about the job loss involved in the company’s plans for the future.
The advanced robotic warehouse is already here, created by the firm Kiva. Small wheeled robots scoot around the warehouse filling orders, guided by a main computer tracking the inventory. The robots are wheeled boxy objects about a foot high, and proceed automatically under movable shelving structures to transport the desired items to packing stations. The humans assist with basic manual labor; the machines and computers do the organizational work. Continue reading this article
On Saturday I made a rare trek to see a first-run movie, because of my curiosity about Hollywood’s treatment of an instance of defending western civilization. The new movie Monuments Men modifies the true story of the World War II officers who rescued works of art from Hitler’s theft. A project of George Clooney, the film is positive toward saving even religious statues and paintings, presumably because Nazis are a liberal-approved enemy, safe to denigrate.
In the trailer, actor-director-writer Clooney (as real-life Lieutenant Commander George L. Stout) says, “You can wipe out an entire generation, you can burn their homes to the ground, and somehow they’ll still find their way back. But if you destroy their history, destroy their achievements, then it’s as if they never existed. That’s what Hitler wants, that is exactly what we’re fighting for.”
The sentiment is a very worthwhile one and needs to be repeated often these days when the achievements of European civilization are belittled by the left.
The movie suffers from the Hollywood prime directive of entertainment. So the beginning seems a bit like The Dirty Dozen Art Historians, as the men are assembled for service (although the number is seven). The nod toward comedy is shown by the inclusion of John Goodman and Bill Murray appearing as art rescuers. There’s nothing wrong with humor-based soldier bonding; in fact, it’s a staple of war movies. But the comic asides add to a certain lack of focus, particularly when the group is separated to show the search for hidden stolen art around Europe. Still, there’s a lot to like — a first-rate cast, adventure mixed with a great purpose and the happy ending of cultural treasures being saved from oblivion. Thumbs up!
For another realistic presentation see the 2006 documentary The Rape of Europa, which can be found online. An earlier Hollywood effort is The Train, a 1964 film by John Frankenheimer starring Burt Lancaster as a French resistance engineer who appropriates a trainload of stolen art from the Nazis. You can watch a free version, albeit with Spanish subtitles here. In addition, Robert Edsel has a YouTube channel with some interesting videos.
But even with the recent film, Hollywood remains an undependable defender of foundational western values like free speech. The Investigative Project has a list of 10 mainstream films banned in the Middle East, including The Matrix Reloaded and The Wrestler. Hollywood’s response has been to practice self-censorship, particularly obvious in the disappearance of Muslim terrorists in film and TV, notably in the hit series 24 after Muslim complaints. Terrorist bombers are now Serbians, South Africans — anything but Muslims even though Allah’s servants kill daily in the name of Islam.
And what about the art that was rescued in WWII? Will Hollywood liberals defend it as enthusiastically from Muslims as from Hitler? Islam forbids the celebration of the human body, particularly when unclothed, which is a staple of European culture starting with the Greeks. Plus Muslims can hardly abide the existence of women, much less sympathetic portraits of them hanging in galleries.
In 2012, the Louvre opened a wing of Islamic art, but that gesture won’t save the Paris museum if even a tiny percent of France’s five million Muslims decide to tear it apart. The Muslims destroy their own heritage without a second thought, as when jihadists leveled historic Sufi sites in Timbuktu in 2012. Muslim immigrants have even less respect for the infidel culture they chose to inhabit far from dar al-Islam. The cultural conflict in Europe can only worsen over time given the demographic change caused by the disaster of Muslim immigration.
Today however, Hollywood has in its way stood on the side of freedom against tyranny. Let’s hope it doesn’t forget to defend western values in the future.
One measure would be the Karachi dentist who has 24/7 armed security, shown below (from the Saturday front page of the Washington Post).
Even though Obama declared al Qaeda to be “on the run” before his 2012 election, the various jihad franchises have going gangbusters of late, except for Egypt where the Muslim Brotherhood was rejected by the people. The Taliban in particular in on the march with its growing strength in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
The worsening violence in Karachi has prompted locals to purchase armored vehicles and weapons to protect families from kidnapping and robbery. It sounds like Mexico City, only with jihadists being the actors, plus nuclear weapons lurking in the background.
The upcoming pullout of American troops from Afghanistan is seen as a victory by the most extreme of Allah’s gangsters the Taliban. As tiresome to Americans as the seemingly endless Afghan war has been, the removal of US forces from that very dangerous neighborhood may have an explosive result.
Is there a foreign policy plan in Washington at all?
KARACHI, Pakistan — Armored car sales have soared, and some new luxury apartments feature bulletproof glass. Local police officers, slain this year at an average rate of one per day, are demoralized. And now even the journalists are trying to arm themselves.
Pakistan’s biggest city has been plagued by crime and political violence for decades, with Urdu- and Pashto-speaking groups battling for influence. But the bloodshed is worsening as the domestic Taliban insurgency expands.
The militant group was largely responsible for a 90 percent spike in terrorist attacks in Karachi last year, according to the Pak Institute for Peace Studies, which monitors violence. In the latest such attack, an explosion tore through a bus carrying police Thursday morning, killing a dozen officers. The Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility.
The bloodshed in this city reflects the Pakistani Taliban’s growing national offensive against the government and religious minorities. But the insurgents are also using violence to take control of some city neighborhoods, where ordinary residents are forced to contribute to their cause, analysts said.
The mayhem is raising concerns that one of the world’s most populous cities is teetering on the brink of lawlessness.
“Something must be done soon, if Pakistan is to be saved,” said Nasir Jamal, a deputy director of Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), a major political party.
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif insists that Karachi can be tamed through targeted security operations and peace talks launched last month with the Pakistani Taliban. But residents of the country’s economic and cultural hub are deeply worried.
“Everyone is just waiting their turn to be killed,” said Zamin Ali, son of a prominent Shiite attorney who was fatally shot outside a Karachi courthouse in July, part of a surge of sectarian killings being carried out by the Taliban and other Sunni-dominated militant groups. Continue reading this article
A bad refugee kid gone wrong has reappeared, after pleading guilty as a 17-year-old to the murder of Mary Bethell (pictured), 47, a substance-abuse counselor in Aurora, Illinois, three years earlier. Now Garang Deng, formerly of Sudan, regrets confessing to the murder and wants a new trial. It was a long strange trip getting to this point, and the story is again being thrust upon the public, unfortunately.
Do-gooders love to rescue diverse children from troubled areas of the world, even youngsters deeply damaged by exposure to terrible violence. By the time the little kiddies grow up imitating the sort of behavior they experienced, the noble rescuers have gone on to other projects, and local law enforcement has to pick up the pieces.
When three young African refugees were being sentenced in 2009 for the attempted kidnapping of a Virginia woman for ransom, a retired resettlement professional testified, “They went through terror themselves, so I couldn’t imagine them inflicting that on anyone else.”
That’s the naive attitude of elite do-gooders. They don’t understand how the imprinting of violence on young minds often overwhelms any revulsion to it, just as an abused child of an alcoholic hates the condition but may succumb to it.
However Deng’s legal situation plays out, he was a human time bomb of the sort unwise to import to this country as a refugee. As a boy in Sudan, he experienced terrible brutality and when he was relocated to America he began committing increasingly violent crimes as a young teenager, culminating in murder. It shouldn’t be a surprise.
New trial possible for man whose plea in Aurora woman’s shooting death was tossed out
When Garang Deng pleaded guilty to murder more than four years ago, it seemed like the final act of a tale that stretched from war-torn Sudan to a peaceful Kane County bike path.
After breaking into the home of Marilyn Bethell of Aurora in October 2005, Deng took her to the Illinois Prairie Path and shot her once in the head, Kane County prosecutors said.
Almost immediately after his guilty plea in 2009, Deng regretted it and began the legal process to withdraw the plea. An appeals court ruled in his favor in June.
Deng is scheduled to return to Kane County on Tuesday in his first court appearance in legal proceedings that eventually could lead to a new trial.
“We’re preparing as if we’re going to trial,” State’s Attorney Joe McMahon said.
Deng, who was 14 at the time of the slaying, was a Sudanese refugee whose family had left the African nation when he was a young boy to seek a more peaceful life. But Deng accumulated a history of juvenile offenses in DuPage County beginning at age 11, authorities said. Continue reading this article
There has been a debate going about whether an entitlement culture is being created by ObamaCare and other liberal programs of freebies. One such discussion occurred on Fox News, asking whether the healthcare law was a “disincentive to work.”
Certainly the current regime is engaged in behavioral training to encourage dependence on government, a liberal value. But the larger picture over decades is one of the economic system being less friendly to the needs of average folks. Perhaps they are hedging their bets by taking whatever is available.
The latest blow to American hopes for economic survival has been the rapid rise of smart machines, from office automation to actual robots, which now can perform complex tasks formerly done only by humans. Who needs a secretary to take dictation when software can turn speech into written words on a computer?
There has been some incidence of manufacturing returning to the US, but the small print reveals that the new plants will be increasingly automated, with far fewer humans being needed than in the previous era.
Foxconn’s plans to open a high-tech plant in the US may be part of the larger revival of US manufacturing. But don’t expect American jobs to come with the boom in business. [. . .]
What does that do for US jobs? Not much. A new study by McKinsey argues that manufacturers will increasingly turn to ”next-shoring,” or locating production closer to where their customers are located to satisfy local tastes and eliminate potentially damaging supply shortages. In theory, this should play well to the US economy, the mothership of global consumerism. But workers will still lose out to advanced robotics, which can perform increasingly sophisticated manufacturing operations, and 3D printers, which will be able to replace component suppliers. ”Cheaper, more proficient robots that can substitute for a wider variety of human tasks are another reason companies may locate more manufacturing closer to major demand markets, even where wage rates are higher,” the report says.
A more upbeat report came from CBS, touting a robot that is “helping” the human workers by doing repetitive boring tasks. But a machine that cost only $22,000 and can work 24/7 has got to be very appealing to CEOs, who would probably like lots more like that.
On Monday, a Guatemalan ex-soldier, Jorge Sosa (pictured), was sentenced to ten years in prison for lying about his past in order to enter this country and become an American citizen. The jail time sounds pretty slim for a man who took part in the massacre of at least 160 people in the village of Dos Erres in 1982, but the real accounting will hopefully occur when he is deported to Guatemala where wartime atrocities are still remembered.
Sosa is a perfect example of how the worst war criminals on earth can waltz in to stupid-generous America and make themselves at home. The details about the massacre makes for gruesome testimony, such as how villagers thrown into a well, followed by a grenade. But Sosa lied on his asylum application that he was a morally upstanding fellow, suitable for American admittance, and he got it.
Some of the diverse war criminals admitted to America include:
● Bosnian Sulejman Mujagic, was accused of murder and torture while an Army commander during the ethnic war in the former Yugoslavia. He was arrested in Utica in 2012, where 6500 Bosnians reside in one of the largest settlements of that tribe in the country.
● Gonzalo Guevara Cerritos was arrested in 2006 for being an illegal alien and also a member of the Salvadoran military death squad that brutally murdered six priests in 1989.
● Kelbessa Negewo was an Ethiopian government official who participated in torture of political enemies who objected to the marxist regime. After immigrating to the US, he was later recognized in a New York City elevator by one of his torture victims.
● Marko Boskic was a Serb militia triggerman who helped execute thousands of residents of Srebrenica in the 1995 massacre. Even so, he entered the US in 2000 using his real name and settled in Peabody Massachusetts where he had numerous arrests for drunk driving and such, but was only tracked down when Boston Globe reporter Elizabeth Neuffer investigated him. In 2010, the US extradited Boskic to Bosnia where he was tried and imprisoned.
In fact, this nation has a terrible history of letting bad guys in, whether they are categorized as terrorists or mass-murdering war criminals. The idea that US screening is too tough is ludicrous, given the record.
As despicable as ordinary war criminals are, most lead quiet lives in the United States where they seek to hide from their shameful pasts. But the jihadists that the administration will most certainly admit with its new permissive policy are active, willful enemies who want to kill infidel Americans.
RIVERSIDE, Calif. (AP) — A former Guatemalan special forces soldier was sentenced Monday to a decade in an American prison for lying on a U.S. citizenship application about his role in a civil war massacre that decimated a village more than three decades ago.
Jorge Sosa, 55, who taught martial arts in Riverside County, was also stripped of his American citizenship after being convicted of failing to disclose his alleged participation in the killing of at least 160 people in the village of Dos Erres.
The former second lieutenant was not formally tried in California for war crimes, but U.S. District Court Judge Virginia A. Phillips noted that a jury found Sosa committed crimes in Dos Erres after comrades testified that he fired a weapon into a well filled with screaming villagers and stood by as soldiers under his command raped and killed women.
“These are the crimes the defendant lied about and didn’t disclose,” Phillips told the court before handing down the maximum 10-year sentence. “The particular facts of what occurred on Dec. 7, 1982, at Dos Erres cannot be characterized in any other way than as crimes.”
The case is one of several aimed at perpetrators of the massacre that took place at the height of Guatemala’s 36-year civil war. In that nation, five former soldiers have each been sentenced to more than 6,000 years in prison for the killings, while one of Sosa’s former comrades is also serving a decade-long sentence in a U.S. prison for lying on his immigration forms. Continue reading this article
Swiss elites were disappointed in the voters’ rejection of the EU vision of open borders that has been such a failure in Europe, at least in the minds of many citizens. The vote was hailed by eurosceptics, like UKIP’s Nigel Farage who described the outcome as “wonderful news for national sovereignty and freedom lovers throughout Europe.”
However, the Swiss government was not happy with the results:
Euro-sceptic parties hail a blow for ‘people power’ as Swiss vote to scrap deal allowing EU workers in
Switzerland voted yesterday to reimpose curbs on immigration from the European Union, in a referendum that is likely to cause anger in Brussels.
The nation of eight million voted by a 50.3 majority in favour of a “Stop Mass Immigration” proposal pushed by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party (SVP). The decision means the government will have to renegotiate a deal struck with Brussels seven years ago that gave most EU citizens free access to the Swiss labour market.
The SVP had said that the 80,000 EU citizens who were now coming in every year was roughly ten times the initial predictions back in 2007, and that it had overburned the education and health systems. Public transport was also struggling to cope, as was the housing market.
Switzerland’s seven-member multiparty government, the Federal Council, in which the SVP has one cabinet post, had opposed the reintroduction of curbs, saying it could hit the economy and undermine the country’s relationship with the EU.
But under Switzerland’s highly devolved system of rule, where most key decisions are taken by popular referendum, the government has no choice but to respect the result. Continue reading this article
Jeh Johnson, the new guy who replaced Janet Napolitano as head of the Department of Homeland Security, remarked recently about illegal aliens, “Everyone knows we have millions of undocumented immigrants in this country, and they’re not going away; they’re not going to self-deport.” His comments came during a February 7 speaking event at the Woodrow Wilson Center with former Congresswoman Jane Harman, now CEO of the place.
That observation is simply not true. When tough enforcement measures were applied following passage of Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law, illegals packed up and left en masse for more permissive locales. Despite their obnoxious lawbreaking, lawbreaking foreigners are rational creatures who come to make lots of American dollars and act according to that goal.
If the nation as a whole enforced borders and the workplace, most of the foreign job thieves would go back to where they came from. Self-deport, in other words.
That’s right. They go to other, less law-abiding states to steal American jobs. All states should emulate Arizona to limit jobs to citizens and legal immigrants, as well as keep their dollars in America and avoid billions being shipped offshore as remittances.
What’s the rush? Have citizens forgotten how loose standards of who gets into America was a major contributor to the 9/11 terror attacks? Why isn’t the protection of the American people the top priority of the government? Open borders for jihadists is a really bad idea these days.
On Fox News Sunday, House Homeland Security Committee Chair Mike McCaul said, “Syria is probably the largest and most significant threat to the homeland security of the United States today.” [Watch.] He was responding to a question about US residents participating in jihad in Syria, but the effect of admitting thousands of permissively screened refugees could be similarly dangerous.
Tucker Carlson broached the policy change on a Fox show, and his mind was obviously spinning with the concept of “limited terror ties” being acceptable to Washington. His guest was retired INS Senior Special Agent Mike Cutler, who analyzed the difficulties, noting, “When someone comes from a country involved with terrorism, it’s almost impossible to adequately vet them quickly.”
The New York Times covered the important national security issue — on page A10:
Republican lawmakers are assailing new exemptions from antiterrorism laws the Obama administration issued this week for war zone refugees seeking to come to the United States, saying the rules are examples of unilateral action by President Obama that weaken immigration security.
The administration, under pressure to respond to the crisis of more than 2.3 million Syrians who have fled the civil war in their country, published two rules on Wednesday that will exempt refugees from provisions banning terrorists. The exemptions apply if the refugees provided only minor material support, such as meals or medical aid, to armed groups that have not been officially designated as terrorist organizations, or if they gave such support under pressure.
The Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Robert W. Goodlatte of Virginia, said the administration was “yet again abusing the powers granted to it” by Congress.
“With today’s national security threats,” Mr. Goodlatte asked, “why would we ever willingly loosen our immigration laws to allow those who have helped terrorists game the system?” [ . . . ]
Officials said the exemptions, which would immediately affect some 3,000 asylum applicants, had been in the works for years. They said the administration was acting under authority it was granted in a bipartisan compromise adopted in 2007 under President George W. Bush. That deal was struck by Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee who has a keen interest in refugee issues, and John Kyl of Arizona, a Republican senator at the time.
The unilateral action by the administration to make jihadist admittance easier is a dangerous piece of work, even for the current bunch. See White House Orders Relaxed Standards for Refugees for background, including cases of serious bad guys being welcomed.
WASHINGTON—U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, commented on the Administration’s latest executive immigration decree which loosens immigration screening standards for those who may pose a threat to national security:
“Kenneth Palinkas, who represents our nation’s immigration officers at USCIS, recently charged that our immigration processing system has become a ‘visa clearinghouse for the world.’ Now, a newly disclosed internal audit of immigration procedures reveals that at least 70% of asylum applications contained warning signs of fraud. We also know that asylum-seekers at the southwest border have exploited a glaring enforcement loophole by simply asserting they face a ‘credible fear’ in their home countries. The frequent result is that those making the assertion, instead of being promptly removed or detained, are instead released into the U.S. pending a determination on their claims that may occur years into the future, and do not show up for the hearings.
In light of these and other facts, it is thus deeply alarming that the Obama Administration would move unilaterally to relax admissions standards for asylum-seekers and potentially numerous other applicants for admission who have possible connections to insurgent or terrorist groups. This includes terror groups not yet designated: Al Qaeda was not designated by the Department of State as a foreign terrorist organization until 1999—long after the first attack on the World Trade Center. The 2011 case of suspected terror operatives from Iraq being admitted to the U.S. only further underscores that our immigration system lacks the safeguards necessary to protect our country. We need to tighten security standards for asylum, not relax them even further. 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.