Lefties get riled up when anyone suggests that all cultures are not equal, as if the self-esteem of backward aliens might get damaged by hearing such an idea. Note to leftists — the foreigners come for the money, not to feel better about themselves.
On Thursday, Ann Coulter discussed the verboten topic of peasant cultures with Fox Business’ Stuart Varney.
VARNEY: I think at the very basis of this argument about sanctuary cities as the whole basis of the immigration argument is the Hispanic vote, and that’s what everybody’s chewing on, and the Democrats think they’ve won it and they’re running with it.
COULTER: They probably have; that’s why they they like this mass immigration of peasant cultures to America but it shows they really don’t care that much about the war on women.
VARNEY: The first sentence out of your mouth you explode: these peasant cultures invading our country. . .
COULTER: Normal people, whether that’s PC or not, recognize that we have in amazingly successful culture, thus we have a successful country. That’s why so many people want to come here but if we dump millions upon millions of people from backward cultures, as different from ours as possible, incredibly poor. Not only are you getting just a shocking war on women but — why do the democrats want it? — because post-1970 immigrants are voting 8 to 2 for the democrats and nothing Republicans do is going to change that. In addition, specifically with the Hispanic vote, which you mentioned, only Democrats and the RNC seem to think all brown people are are alike.
VARNEY: How would you define British culture?
COULTER: British culture? Well coincidentally, the studies from Harvard at UCLA you can look them up. The two factors they found for the least corrupt cultures — two things — protestantism and years of British rule, which is why Hong Kong is pretty good. So it’s not an ethnic thing, it’s not on an individual person thing. It is a cultural issue and cultures are hard but really ingrained.
VARNEY: Fascinating, really it is — inflammatory but fascinating.
COULTER: I don’t think it’s inflammatory but thank you.
Coulter made similar remarks this week when she debated crime and backward diversity with liberal Alan Colmes. When she mentioned “peasant cultures where child rape is common” Colmes was incensed that she would speak so unkindly about the illegal alien hispanics who don’t child rape.
Out in the Mexican boondocks, the peasant culture can be quite vibrant, and remains so when imported to America. In 2009, a Mexican illegal alien residing in Greenfield California sold his 14-year-old daughter for cash and some cases of beer. When the money wasn’t forthcoming, he reported the non-payment for the enslavement of a minor to local police, hoping the cops would help him collect the debt. The father, Marcelino de Jesus Martinez (pictured), was a member of the Triqui tribe for whom a “bride price” is a cultural norm, as is polygamy. In America, the sale of humans became illegal in 1865 under the 13th Amendment.
Sadly, Martinez got a very permissive plea deal instead of a serious sentence for enslavement and sex trafficking of a minor. Still, the crime stands as an illustrative example of what peasant cultures do when they are admitted to America: child rape is only one barbaric behavior of diverse cultures from the third world.
If anything, Coulter understates the backwardness of peasant cultures. If we switch the diversity channel to Africa, Asia and the Middle East, ugly practices like animal sacrifice, honor killing, polygamy, marriage by capture and FGM turn up.
One inquiring mind at PBS is economics reporter Paul Solman, who gets out and talks to people about financial issues as they play out in the real world. I thought his 2013 report about teen unemployment was first rate, in particular because he actually met with inner city kids and asked them how their job search was going. He also reported on the growth of automation in 2012, asking whether we should fear the end of work for humans.
On Thursday’s PBS Newshour, Solman did another economics walkabout, visiting a Stanford golf course where he observed a robot caddy and then going to the campus proper, where a Stanford local delivery robot moved among students. Interestingly, an earlier booster, Vivek Wadhwa, no longer believes that tech is a panacea, but now he thinks, “Technology. . . is going to disrupt industries and create unemployment on a scale that we haven’t imagined before.”
PBS didn’t connect the dots with immigration, but massive future unemployment certainly means America doesn’t need to import workers from abroad to carry golf bags or pick crops or anything else. Citizens will need every one of the jobs that hasn’t disappeared. Because of the smart machine revolution, the correct number of immigrants is ZERO.
Solman also observed an OSH robot that guides customers to their desired products in an Orchard Supply Hardware store.
Below, the OSHbot helps a customer find a desired hardware item. The smart machine costs $50,000 and doesn’t require coffee breaks, healthcare or vacations. Or sleep: after business hours, it cruises around and updates its database of where products are located in the store.
Here is Paul Solman exploring robots around Stanford and Silicon Valley:
GWEN IFILL: We have shown you before the rising role that automation and robots play in some parts of the work force.
Tonight, we have a more sobering and perhaps somewhat eerier picture of how those trends are gathering force more quickly than anticipated.
Economics correspondent Paul Solman looks at the promise and perils of the rise of the robot, part of our weekly series Making Sense, which airs every Thursday on the NewsHour.
PAUL SOLMAN: The 11th hole at Stanford University. Chad Gray’s an OK golfer, but his caddy is really hard to beat.
CHAD GRAY, CaddyTrek: It’s going to go wherever you want it go. Follows you like a puppy dog.
PAUL SOLMAN: Meet the robot CaddyTrek.
CHAD GRAY: It has two ultrasound bars that send a signal back to the remote that’s on my back pocket here.
JERRY KAPLAN, Author, “Humans Need Not Apply”: It’s an incredibly simple piece of technology.
PAUL SOLMAN: But the implications for America’s caddies, and millions of other workers, are ominous, says computer scientist and serial entrepreneur Jerry Kaplan. Kaplan has his own labor-saving schlepper, an R2-D2 designed to make local deliveries. Continue reading this article
The channel tunnel that connects the British island to Europe has become a magnet for thousands of illegal aliens who believe Britain is the most generous distributor of free stuff to foreign moochers. As a result, thousands camp out in Calais, enabled by the free food they receive from French charities, as the foreigners try to hop trucks into the UK.
Over the last few days, huge numbers of Africans and Middle Easterners have made a run on the border and the scene has become dangerously chaotic.
Below, poorly equipped French police fought running battles to bring order to Calais.
In a July 29 BBC interview (below), UKIP politician Nigel Farage described the situation as worsening over the last six weeks, and that the French have not done enough to stop the violence. He noted the cause: “What Europe has done with the migrant tide that is now coming across the Mediterranean, basically, the European Commission have said that anyone that lands in Greece or Italy can stay. Because of that policy, we’ve seen the massively increased pressure at Calais.”
Migrants massed around the entrance to the Channel Tunnel said on Thursday they would keep trying to sneak across to Britain, undaunted by the arrival of 120 extra riot police on the French side.
A police officer said the number of migrants trying to enter Britain eased slightly overnight compared to earlier in the week, with about 800 migrants around the site and some 300 intercepted by police.
That compared to an estimated 1,500 attempts by migrants to enter the tunnel on Tuesday night and 2,000 on Monday. Some were probably repeat attempts by the same people.
Some 3,000 migrants live around the tunnel entrance in a makeshift camp known as “The Jungle”, making the northern French port one of the frontlines in Europe’s wider migrant crisis alongside Italian and Greek islands used an entry point for those crossing the Mediterranean from Africa or the Middle East.
Freight and passenger traffic through the rail tunnel have been severely disrupted in past weeks as migrants desperate to enter Britain have stepped up attempts to board trucks and trains travelling from France.
“All Europe, you know that the England is good. All, everybody knows that,” a 25-year-old Sudanese migrant who gave his name only as Mohammed told Reuters. Continue reading this article
The automation revolution keeps picking up speed as the machines get better. Today’s news included a report from Fox Business about McDonald’s introduction of kiosks to replace human order takers in its restaurants. The company saw the writing on the wall last year with the noisy campaign to demand big pay raises for fast food workers and expedited its plans for more machines and fewer humans.
Below, the new McDonald’s food-ordering kiosks are large stand-alone items rather than the small tablets on tables some companies have chosen.
If fast-food workers had half a brain, they would demand a policy change that might actually raise their wages: End Immigration. Surplus workers are the source of cheap labor for the business owners, and the increasing expansion of robots and automation means that America really doesn’t need to import immigrant workers anyway.
A lot of the reporting about the new McD kiosks featured the local angle and made the cost-saving change sound like a boon to the customer:
Jason Riley, a writer for the Wall Street Journal, is a big time amnesty enthusiast. But his recent piece pointed out a strong impetus for cities adopting sanctuary policies, namely the threat of an expensive lawsuit from leftist monsters like the ACLU. Some cities have been sued for cooperating with the feds to deport criminals because the ACLU says it is unlawful.
Riley appeared with Stuart Varney on Wednesday to explain.
Here is the part of Riley’s article that pertains to the ACLU lawsuits aimed at releasing dangerous alien criminals onto American streets:
If San Francisco had been more cooperative with federal authorities, Kate Steinle might still be alive.
[. . .]
This month the administration watered down Secure Communities, renamed it the Priority Enforcement Program, and promised local jurisdictions that the DHS would only issue detainers for felons or other perceived threats to public safety. This may help stem the growth of sanctuary cities and improve federal-local cooperation, but it’s no guarantee. Cities are also under pressure from groups like the American Civil Liberties Union which maintain that cooperating with the federal government on immigration enforcement is illegal.
Court rulings in Oregon and Pennsylvania last year went against local authorities who had detained arrestees for an additional period at the request of the DHS. In Oregon, a federal judge ruled that Clackamas County officials violated the rights of a woman arrested for ignoring a restraining order when they turned her over to DHS officials. The county settled the case by paying the woman $30,000 and picking up her court costs. In a Pennsylvania case involving a man arrested on drug charges, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that local authorities are not required to honor federal detainers. The man sued and was awarded $145,000 in damages and legal fees.
Other cities are taking note, said Mr. Rosenblum. “This local jurisdiction fear of lawsuits, there’s something to that. It’s a big issue, especially in the Ninth Circuit, where the Oregon case was. After that, you saw a big wave of California, Oregon and Washington state counties opting out.” [. . .]
The term “sanctuary city” has become a rallying cry for conservative Republicans seeking stiffer immigration laws. They characterize such places as havens where those in the country illegally are protected from immigration authorities.
The reality behind the phrase is that while some cities actively thumb their noses at federal immigration policies, many refuse to enforce them not because of any moral obligation to immigrants; they fear lawsuits.
Since the fatal shooting of Kathryn Steinle on a San Francisco pier allegedly by an immigrant who was released from jail even though U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement sought to deport him for a sixth time, the debate over how to handle cities and counties that refuse to cooperate with immigration authorities has reached a feverish pitch.
On Thursday, House Republicans passed a bill aimed at punishing cities that refuse to share information with federal immigration authorities, which the White House threatened to veto. While the bill doesn’t specifically address the release of immigrants sought by federal authorities for deportation, the Republicans are pitching other legislation to do so.
The vote came after presidential hopeful Donald Trump attacked illegal immigration on the campaign trail.
While notably liberal San Francisco has openly declared itself a haven for all immigrants regardless of their legal status, some of the cities and counties that have stopped detaining immigrants for ICE are politically conservative and are not trying to shield residents from deportation. Continue reading this article
On Monday I traveled to San Francisco to join with a couple dozen other friends of public safety to protest the preventable crimes of illegal aliens. Those crimes are assisted by the policy of Sanctuary Cities, which actively protects illegal alien criminals and allow them to harm and even kill Americans. That government program was responsible for the murder of Kate Steinle who was shot dead by a five-times-deported Mexican felon on July 1.
Kate Steinle has become the symbol of how little the government cares about protecting its law-abiding citizens. As Congressman Trey Gowdy recently remarked, “Those of us who have daughters, saw our daughters in Kate Steinle.” She was walking with her father on a San Francisco pier popular with both locals and tourists, a place known to many Americans. But she wasn’t safe there, because liberal San Francisco stubbornly clings to its extreme sanctuary policy.
SAN FRANCISCO (KRON) — The Pier 14 shooting death of Kate Steinle is a crime that touched a nerve and is sparking a debate in the Bay Area and across the nation about sanctuary cities–and shielding undocumented immigrants.
KRON 4’s Vicki Liviakis shows the protest. The flowers at this make shift memorial are dry, but emotions are still raw.
“She was on this pier with her dad, and the last thing she said to her dad as she died here was help dad,” one protester said. “Now, we look to government to help us but government isn’t helping us when it comes to sanctuary cities.”
A group called Citizens for Safe Cities wants to overturn san francisco’s sanctuary city policy – which they say shielded a known criminal.
It’s mid-summer and the weather is pleasant, a perfect time for third worlders to flood into Europe more easily. There has been a lot of reporting about the rickety boats headed north from Africa, but it’s also possible for the intruders, some number of whom are unfriendly Muslims, to walk to the first world, just like Mexicans do to get here.
On Sunday, the New York Times reported on the walkers, and interestingly didn’t call them “refugees” at every opportunity. Perhaps the brilliant reporters there figured out that when all of the relocators are young males (as in the photo below), then they are likely economic migrants looking for “a better life” i.e. more money, rather than families forced from their homes by war or natural disaster.
Below, Syrian men traverse Serbia on the way to Hungary and points beyond in Europe.
Unsurprisingly, pockets of resistance are forming up among Europeans. Hungary is building a fence to block the intruders, which supposedly will be finished by November. Naturally the invaders are miffed, with some declaring ”This wall, we will not accept it”, showing their aim to conquer rather than immigrate.
“For us, today Europe is at stake,” Orban said. “The survival, disappearance or, more precisely, the transformation beyond recognition of the European citizen’s lifestyle, European values and the European nations.”
“The question now is not only what kind of Europe we Hungarians would like to live in,” Orban said. “Rather, will all that we now call Europe exist at all?”
Below is a cheerful video item from Deutche Welle that follows the journey of one invader, a Syrian named Ahmad Shelabi, as he travels to Germany to start his “new life.” No mention that any job he finds will be one not available for a German citizen — unpleasant facts can ruin a diverse puff piece!
A lot more resistance from the people of Europe will be required for Brussels to come around to defending their culture from demographic defeat via illegal immigration, the 21st century’s more polite form of war.
SUBOTICA, Serbia. — They call it “the jungle,” but it’s really just a tangle of dirt paths through stunted trees near an abandoned brick factory.
Between 150 and 200 people — mostly men, with a smattering of young families — cluster in discrete groups in scattered campsites, most resting on dusty blankets, the earth blackened here and there by the remains of the previous night’s fires.
“We have people from Iraq, Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, Eritrea, Somalia, Morocco,” said Mohamd, 42, a former truck driver for a factory near Aleppo, Syria, who hopes to reach the Netherlands. “Am I forgetting anyone?”
His cousin, Walid, 45, scratched his well-worn sandal into the hard clay. “Algeria?”
Mohamd waved him off. “That group went into Hungary two nights ago,” he said. “We have not seen them back yet.”
With war continuing to plague the Middle East and Afghanistan, and thousands trying to flee Africa’s grinding poverty, the swell of refugees and migrants hoping to reach Western Europe shows no signs of abating this summer.
For the last few years, the most popular route has been across the Mediterranean on boats run by Libyan smugglers that aimed for the nearest islands off the Italian coast. But as that route has become increasingly dangerous — the range of threats include drowning, abandonment by unscrupulous smugglers and crackdowns by European border patrols — the human tide is shifting. Increasingly, migrants are following a land-based route into Europe by way of Greece and the West Balkans.
But with the alternative crossing come other perils: violence, exploitation, intolerance. Though most European countries are overwhelmed by the tide, fueling an anti-immigrant backlash in many places, Eastern European countries like Hungary, Serbia and Bulgaria are considered particularly hostile.
Donald Trump’s surprise emergence as the Republican frontrunner because of his tough talk about immigration has highlighted the issue and created interesting reactions among the other candidates. Rick Perry has taken to sniping at Trump, calling the billionaire businessman a hypocrite who employs illegals and a “cancer on conservatism.”
Perry says, that as a former Texas governor, he’s the guy who’s been there (the border) and done that (enforcement). His campaign page states, “No governor in the country has more first-hand experience with the federal government’s long-time failure to secure the border than Gov. Perry.”
Speaking of Mexico, Perry maintained a friendly relationship with the Presidente Vicente Fox (pictured below) based on Perry’s generosity with Texas resources toward Mexicans in terms of jobs and subsidized education.
Former Congressman Tom Tancredo ran for President in 2008 to spotlight immigration anarchy and he recently recollected how useless Perry was about the issue during in interview on Newsmax TV with Steve Malzberg.
MALZBERG: I had Jim Abbott, the current governor of Texas on the show couple weeks ago and I asked him if Trump’s earlier attacks on Perry about doing nothing for the border were warranted, and he kind of sidestepped that. He didn’t rush to the defense of Governor Perry. What kind of job do you think Perry did in Texas as governor when it came to the border?
TANCREDO: Let me tell you, he was absent without leave for a large part of his career there. We tried, again I must tell you, how many times even during the 2007 election, we would try to get that — you know the whole reason I was running for that primary, the presidential primary, had only one purpose, to get everybody to talk about issue. He was one that we were trying desperately to get to discuss it, yet at the time was also looking at that possibility of running for president but he wouldn’t do it, he wouldn’t touch it. In fact he attacked me during that period time, saying that you could be for border security, but you don’t have to be like Tancredo, whatever that means. And he stayed away from it completely.
It’s amazing that we go through the same stuff again and again, and these political hacks flip-flop this way and that, like nobody will remember their records. Perry acts indignant about what Donald Trump has said about immigration, but Perry’s history bears no scrutiny at all.
Did the GOP leadership of the House and Senate think that party voters wouldn’t detect their consistent failure to oppose Obama policies of crazed overspending, globalized trade and immigration amnesty, among others?
A recent Pew survey shows the support of Republicans for GOP behavior has dropped like a stone — down 18 percent (from 86% to 68%) since the Repubs took over the Senate. Last year the party promised opposition to Obama, and citizens have gotten nothing of the kind.
How Republicans View Their Party
Recent Pew Research Center surveys have found signs of dissatisfaction with the GOP among Republicans. In May, just 41% of Republicans said they approved of the job performance of the leaders of the GOP-led Congress. In 2011, after Republicans had won control of the House, 60% of Republicans approved of the job being done by their party’s leaders in Congress.
The current survey finds that positive views of the GOP among Republicans have declined 18 percentage points since January, from 86% to 68%.Independents also view the Republican Party less favorably; 29% today, compared with 37% six months ago.
Democrats, by contrast, continue to express highly positive opinions of their party: 86% view the party favorably, little changed from 84% in January. Independents’ views of the Democratic Party also are unchanged since January, at 38%.
And as a timely proof of the perfidy of Republican leadership, on Friday Senator Ted Cruz called out leader Mitch McConnell on the Senate floor for lying to the conference about the important-to-elites Export Import Bank bill. That’s not something that happens in the gentlemanly Senate, where politeness is sometimes used to cover up malfeasance and bald-faced lies. Americans care about jobs, the economy and safety, given the increasing success of our many enemies. But instead of taking on the issues citizens care about, the Senate is prioritizing a banking scam for wealthy corporations.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), a 2016 GOP presidential candidate, delivered a brutal speech bashing his own party’s leadership’s failures on the Senate floor on Friday morning after Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) moved forward with a plot to reauthorize the Export Import Bank.
In the speech, Cruz says—calling him out personally—McConnell lied to the entire Republican conference. Cruz’s speech stemmed from how McConnell—despite telling the entire GOP conference there was no such secret deal with the Democrats during the Obamatrade process to later bring up Ex-Im reauthorization—actually did cut a deal with Democrats, specifically Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA)
“Today is a sad day for this institution,” Cruz said on the floor.
The Senate operates based on trust. Whether we are Democrats or Republicans, these 100 Senators have to be able to trust that when a Senator sys something, he or she will do it. Even if we disagree on substance, that we don’t lie to each other. What we just witnessed this morning is profoundly disappointing.
Cruz then proceeded to expose comments McConnell made to Republican senators in a private lunch, showing that McConnell lied to his entire conference. The comments Cruz talks about were around the time of the first Obamatrade votes in the Senate, when McConnell told Republicans—something that has since been proven to be untrue—that there was no deal with Democrats to vote on Ex-Im later in exchange for the necessary votes to pass Obamatrade. [. . .]
Following are the remarks of Senator Cruz, which are devastating in their calm recitation of facts. At one point he noted why the voters have good reason to be disgusted with the Republicans they elected:
CRUZ: There is a profound disappointment among the American people because we keep winning elections and then we keep getting leaders who don’t do anything they promised. The American people were told if only we have a Republican majority in the House things will be different. Well in 2010 the american people showed up in enormous numbers and we got a Republican majority in the House and very little changed. Continue reading this article
The last 18 months of Obama’s term look to be filled with extreme actions of an unconstitutional nature like his unlawful amnesty, using his pen and his phone. The Republicans in Congress won’t stand up to him, and he knows it. So the period ahead is a dangerous time.
Washington, D.C.: The Center for Security Policy today released a new paperback version of the monograph by investigative journalist James Simpson: The Red-Green Axis: Refugees, Immigration and the Agenda to Erase America.
This report extensively details the networks of radical left non-profits, foundations, government agencies and the personalities behind them. Unbeknownst to most Americans they are using refugee resettlement as a pretext to import waves of immigrants from third-world nations as a key front in Obama’s strategy of “fundamentally transforming” America. These refugees have little interest in assimilating. Many are from Muslim countries, view immigration as “Hijra” i.e. a subversive means to invade a foreign nation, and have demonstrated a willingness to either support or engage in terrorism both in America and abroad.
These groups are coached by leftist non-profits to capitalize on our generous welfare programs and shown how to maneuver around legal impediments – all at our expense – but are not being taught how to assimilate. The report conservatively estimates welfare costs at $10 billion per year. Additionally, government resettlement contractors receive $1 billion annually in federal tax dollars and non-profits supporting the agenda are provided billions of dollars from non-profits like George Soros’ Open Society Institute. Continue reading this article
Breitbart (normally a fine news source) seemed surprised that a dim administration apparatchik, ICE Director Sarah Saldana, recently remarked during a hearing that an amnesty for millions of foreign lawbreakers was the price required for any kind of immigration enforcement.
Actually the devil’s bargain of no enforcement is the same old lawless crap and not new at all. In 2010 then-Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) noted at a local town hall that during a private meeting with the President, Obama had said that precise thing:
KYL: “The problem is, he (Obama) said, if we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.”
Fortunately, the video of that statement still resides on the internets:
Plus, the appearance of the video kicked up a minor kerfuffle at the time, complete with denials from the palace:
The White House on Monday denied Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl’s claim that President Barack Obama told him privately that he would not work to secure the border unless it was part of a comprehensive immigration reform package.
In a video that started circulating among conservative blogs over the weekend, the Arizona Republican is seen telling supporters in North Phoenix that in a private meeting in the Oval Office, Obama said “the problem” with border enforcement measures is that “if we secure the border then [Republicans] won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.” [. . .]
President Obama’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) director tells lawmakers that no consequences are planned for sanctuary cities until Congress first passes “comprehensive immigration reform.” Sarah Saldaña testified before a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on criminal alien violence.
After hearing emotional testimony from families torn apart by illegal immigrant murderers, Republican members of Congress grilled two administration witnesses: Leon Rodriquez, Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and Sarah Saldaña, Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Both Rodriquez and Saldaña have been tasked with carrying out President Obama’s executive amnesty for so-called DREAMers, which includes work permits and medical benefits for low-income illegal aliens funded by citizen taxpayers.
Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) repeatedly pressed Saldaña on why the Administration was taking no action against sanctuary jurisdictions that refuse to turn over dangerous criminal aliens from their prisons and jails to federal law officers. Saldaña replied that Congress would first have to pass “comprehensive immigration reform.”
Vitter: “This has been going on for years and you still are not prepared to say that there is ever going to be any negative consequence to those [sanctuary] jurisdictions. When is that going to change?”
Saldaña: “I presume when you all address comprehensive immigration reform; perhaps it can be addressed there.” [. . .]
More than a decade ago, when I began a website focused on illegal alien crime victims, ImmigrationsHumanCost.org, it didn’t take long to understand that the government was not interested in revealing the extent of lawbreaking foreigners’ offenses against Americans. The most basic statistics just weren’t available.
Ann Coulter has pointed out the same lack of information in recent columns and in her latest book Adios America. She observed (p. 99), “You will spend more time trying to obtain basic crime statistics about immigrants in American than trying to sign up for Obamacare. The facts aren’t there.”
The truth about illegal alien crime is not politically acceptable, so the government hides it.
Anyway, how hard can it be to obtain and collate information from incarcerated persons? They are a census-taker’s dream.
Mr. Speaker, America’s policymakers face an information gap that undermines our ability to make the immigration policy decisions needed to protect American lives from the threat posed by illegal aliens.
What information gap? Crime statistics that reflect criminal conduct by illegal aliens. The horrifying murder of 32-year-old Kate Steinle in San Francisco has once again put crime by illegal aliens in the national spotlight.
But this issue should always be in the spotlight, because it daily affects American citizens across the country, despite pro-amnesty forces’ best efforts to suppress politically inconvenient truth about illegal alien crime in America.
The fact is, America’s crime data for illegal aliens is inadequate. While we have access to federal sentencing data for illegal aliens, illegal alien crime data for cities, counties and states is just not there. For example, while illegal aliens are roughly 3.5% of America’s population, U.S. Sentencing Commission data reflects that, out of 74,911 federal sentencing cases, illegal aliens committed 17% of drug trafficking, 20% of kidnapping/hostage taking, 12% of money laundering, 12% of murders, and a whopping 74% of drug possession felonies! If this federal data is any indicator, illegal aliens are far more likely to commit violent and dangerous crimes than the average American or lawful immigrant! 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.