Amazon’s automated warehouses continue to show how rapidly smart machines are taking over tasks that were performed by humans. A few years ago, workers pushed carts for miles around the warehouse picking out items for customer orders. Huffpo reported in 2011, “Some workers at Amazon.com’s Allentown, Pennsylvania warehouse are reportedly willing to contend with working at a brutal pace in dizzying heat so long as it means having a job.”
Was that only five years ago? It shows how quickly an industry can change when modern automation is applied.
San Jose California is a part of Silicon Valley, and naturally awareness of tech issues is high there. The home town Mercury News had a front-page spread on Sunday that focused on the employment threat presented by robots, as represented by the automation powerhouse that Amazon has become. The paper tried to draw a fine line, cheering the advances of robots and the jobs added to the nearby Amazon warehouse in Tracy while also observing the long-term inevitable job loss.
Certainly within such a dire employment prospects, it makes no sense for Washington to continue importing millions of unnecessary immigrant workers. In fact…
Automation makes immigration obsolete.
Amazon’s success has led to employment growth for the time being, but improving technology means fewer jobs later on. How do these brilliant captains of industry like Jeff Bezos expect the economy to run when half or more of the jobs (and paychecks!) have disappeared?
TRACY — In Amazon’s million-square-foot order-filling warehouse, two low-slung orange robots carrying stacks of consumer products are zipping across the floor, headed right at each other. One stops — not on a dime, it turns out, but rather over a QR code stuck to the floor — and allows the other to proceed, carrying inventory to a human worker who will pluck out an item, scan it and send it off for packing and shipping.
In this building the size of 28 football fields, containing four miles of conveyor belts and 15 million items awaiting customer orders from Northern California and beyond, the two limbless goods-moving machines are part of Amazon’s 30,000-strong robot army. Gliding in straight lines on a grid, separated from workers by chain-link fencing with signs warning people to keep out, the machines can lift and carry up to 750 pounds of retail products.
Seattle-based Amazon has pushed itself to the forefront of the robotics revolution, deploying robots in 15 U.S. fulfillment centers over the past four years. It has leased a fleet of 20 jumbo jets to further speed deliveries as an estimated 54 million Americans have flocked to its two-day-delivery Prime service.
The company says its superhuman robots have created far more jobs than they’ve taken, but experts say that employment trend will reverse as machines grow increasingly sophisticated and climb ever higher on the job-skills ladder, bumping Homo sapiens to the side.
“There was very little appreciable progress (in robotics) for a long time. Now we’re in an era where that progress is occurring,” said MIT economist David Autor.
But Amazon says the advancement won’t come at its workers’ expense. Two years ago, the e-commerce titan opened the Tracy facility with 1,500 full-time, permanent employees. Now, there are more than 3,000, company spokeswoman Ashley Robinson said. The job gains here that result from automation of certain tasks are seen across Amazon’s robot-equipped warehouses, Robinson said.
“It’s all about efficiency. It’s all about getting the boxes out to customers as quickly as we can. In a building without robotics it can take hours to fulfill an order. In this building it can take minutes,” Robinson said. “We’ve been able to build our workforce in this building because the robots have allowed us to fulfill more customer demand. It allows us to keep growing and growing.” Continue reading this article
Tuesday’s Washington Times headlined, “Immigrants children lured to terror: Identity often difficult for 2nd generation.”
The topic of the troubled second generation, particularly in Islamic families, is one that I’ve examined over time, recently in Government Screening Won’t Stop Second Generation Jihad. In that case, a Silicon Valley executive Sal Shafi contacted authorities because he feared his son, Adam (pictured), had turned jihad and was about to leave to join ISIS. Legal difficulties ensued.
Immigrant teens experience extra stress in the construction of who they believe themselves to be. Immigrant kids are not completely American nor entirely their parents’ tribe. As a result, many associate with others of the same demographic and form gangs based on ethnicity.
Muslim youth face a more consequential choice. The ISIS beheading gang claims to offer “true” Islam, not the watered-down or assimilated version of the parents, which provides a welcoming identity clubhouse to searchy young people.
The Washington Times article names a couple recent examples of second generation assimilation failures; I have reported on others in addition to the Shafi family. One was the son of Albanian immigrants Betim Kaziu was sentenced in 2012 to 27 years in the slammer for plotting to murder US soldiers overseas. Another was Mohamed Mohamud, a young Somali who plotted to bomb a Portland Oregon Christmas celebration, whose father (an engineer at Intel) contacted authorities with worries that his son was becoming radicalized.
The problem of second generation radicalization shows that immigration screening of the first generation does not protect America from danger. Islam can act like a recessive gene, becoming active in later generations to kill. Understanding this point means the prudent policy for American national security should be Zero Muslim immigration, period.
The online version of the Washington Times story was headlined somewhat differently:
While immigrants draw much of the attention, it’s their children who are proving to be the most fruitful recruiting ground for radical jihad in the U.S., accounting for at least half of the deadly attacks over the past decade.
The latest instance of the second-generation terrorist syndrome played out in Orlando, Florida, over the weekend when Omar Mateen, son of immigrants from Afghanistan, went on a jihad-inspired rampage, killing 49 people and wounding 53 others in the worst mass shooting in U.S. history.
Authorities said Mateen had flirted with other terrorist groups but declared his allegiance to the Islamic State on Sunday morning as he began his horrific spree.
He follows in the footsteps of Syed Rizwan Farook, one of the San Bernardino, California, terrorists who was the son of Pakistanis; Nadir Soofi, one of two men who attacked a drawing competition in Garland, Texas, last year and whose father was from Pakistan; and then-Maj. Nidal Hassan, the child of Palestinian immigrants whose shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, in 2009 set off the modern round of deadly lone-wolf attacks.
In other cases, attackers were immigrants brought to the U.S. as young children. They grew up in the U.S. but were besieged by questions of identity.
“Historically, the ‘high stress’ generation for American immigrants has been second generation,” said former CIA Director Michael V. Hayden. “Mom and Pop can rely on the culture of where they came from. Their grandchildren will be (more or less) thoroughly American. The generation in between, though, is anchored neither in the old or in the new. They often are searching for self or identity beyond self.” Continue reading this article
My head explodes every time I hear a TV commenter call a savage Islamic murder a “tragedy” — no, Hurricane Katrina was a tragedy; the jihad mass shooting in Orlando that killed 50 was a massacre for allah. Big difference. But we are hearing the usual media softening of jihad attacks because Americans aren’t supposed to notice how dangerous Muslim immigration is. The Orlando mass murders were executed by a son of Afghan immigrants, so it’s the common second generation problem.
Sebastian Gorka, a fine explainer of jihad, swatted that media malfeasance following the attack, as well as how detrimental political correctness has been to carrying out a proper response to America’s Islamic enemies. He appeared on Fox News early Sunday when not a lot was known about the attack in Orlando.
MARIA BARTIROMO: How do you see it now after that briefing where we now know that 50 people are dead 53 others are in the hospital and this was an act of terrorism?
SEBASTIAN GORKA: Maria, we need to stop using words like “shocking.” Nobody should be shocked: this is what they have been planning to do after Paris, after Brussels. Nobody should be surprised. Likewise this isn’t to be called a “tragedy.” This isn’t an Amtrak train being derailed; this is part of the global jihadi strategy. It’s not an accident: it is war against America. and lastly please please, I beg my colleagues in the US government, we have to stop talking about this maybe being a hate crime. It’s not a hate crime; it is part of an ideological military assault on the United States of America.
We have arrested 101 people linked to ISIS on US soil since the Caliphate was declared. This attack in part was facilitated by the policies of this administration, President Obama and Secretary Clinton, that have allowed political correctness into the threat assessment. Today I beg the White House — stop with the political correctness. We need to destroy this enemy before more innocent people — gay, straight, black, white, brown, yellow — are murdered on US soil.
BARTIROMO: You make very compelling statements there, Dr. Gorka. Tell us where you see this going in terms of an investigation of who else is out there. Who, what other terrorists are in America right now?
GORKA: Right now we have, as you your previous guests noted, more than 900 leads being investigated by the FBI in every single state of the union. What we need to know right now is who this person was connected to, how were they accessing ideological material, who those ideologues were. This person killed 50 people — that is more than one magazine’s worth of rounds inside a rifle, inside an AR rifle. This means he probably had some kind of training — who gave him that training? We have to find out the broader network and most importantly, not just the connections to ISIS or jihadis, but who are the ideologues, the people he was in touch with that spun him up to do this attack now during the season of Ramadan. I know the FBI are doing this right now we have to give them as much leeway as possible and stop the political correctness.
How can you tell when America has too many Muslims? One measure is the decision of the Census Bureau to publish an Arabic translation of the questionnaire for the next count, even though the language presents unique difficulties for use in such a situation.
Plus, we learn it’s important not to upset the Religion of the Perpetually Offended with culturally inappropriate symbols, like specifying “x” to mark a box to show assent. Diversity can be so complex.
In 2020, census questionnaires may for the first time be offered in Arabic, now the fastest-growing language in the U.S. However, the Census Bureau faces a challenge not only in translating the language but also in adjusting the appearance of the questionnaire for those accustomed to reading and writing Arabic script.
The Census Bureau has already conducted some research on what it would take to implement the new questionnaire and has made some recommendations. A final decision on these changes – or even whether the questionnaire will definitely be translated into Arabic – hasn’t been made. A new study presented at the American Association for Public Opinion Research annual conference in May detailed the bureau’s cognitive testing and focus groups of Arabic speakers not proficient in English to identify the translation and visual display issues that are unique to Arabic and anticipate the measurement problems that might result. The bureau will use this research to help determine whether a translation of the census form can accurately “translate” symbolic and layout meanings from English to Arabic.
Arabic is the fastest growing language in the U.S. The number of people ages 5 and older who speak Arabic at home has grown by 29% between 2010 and 2014 to 1.1 million, making it the seventh most commonly spoken non-English language in the U.S. Meanwhile, the number who speak Spanish at home has grown only 6% over the same time period.
The growth in Arabic language use is tied to continued immigration from the Middle East and North Africa and the growing U.S. Muslim population. The increasing presence of this group is one reason the Census Bureau may add a Middle East/North Africa category to the 2020 census form as part of major changes being considered to questions about race and ethnicity. In 2010, the Census Bureau offered an Arabic language assistance guide to help Arabic speakers fill out an English-language questionnaire.
The bureau identified about 1.9 million people with Arab ancestry living in the United States in 2014, but advocacy groups have suggested that the number may be much higher. Among those who speak Arabic at home, 38% were not proficient in English – that is, they report speaking English less than “very well.” This is comparable to the rate of English proficiency among the 39.3 million U.S. residents who speak Spanish at home. Some 42% of this group does not speak English very well, according to census data.
The challenges of translating surveys across cultures
Translating survey questionnaires is a tricky endeavor because it can be difficult to express the same meaning across two languages and cultures. But Arabic presents unique challenges because it is read from right to left on the page (the opposite of English and many other languages), the letters are connected like cursive writing in English, and, because it uses a different alphabet, words such as names can’t always be directly transliterated into English. Even if the questions are translated accurately, the visual elements of the survey may not necessarily transmit the same meaning as in English. For example, symbols such as an “X” to mark a response carry different connotations in different cultures. The census is usually a self-administered survey (that is, respondents complete the questionnaire on their own, on paper or online) and research shows that visual display can have a large effect on survey responses. Continue reading this article
One Friday, Senator Sessions issued an unusually brief press release concerning the Democrats’ approach to security at its July national convention: the party is going for walls to shield itself from its own members, while it refuses to similarly protect this nation from ISIS and other enemies on the borders.
Below, a generic security fence with barb wire, of the sort which may suffice to keep Bernie supporters out and prevent them from tearing up the Democrat assembly.
WASHINGTON—U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) responded to the decision to build a wall around the Democratic National Convention:
“It’s interesting that the Democratic National Committee will have a wall around their convention to keep unapproved people out while at the same time, their presumptive nominee, Hillary Clinton, pushes for open borders policies that are even more radical than President Obama’s. She would refuse to deport dangerous criminal aliens until after they have been convicted of committing heinous crimes against Americans, close detention centers, issue even more extreme executive orders than Obama, and increase Syrian refugees five-fold. Her proposed policies make no sense, decimate the rule of law, further reduce wages for poor Americans, and increase the risk of terrorism and criminal behavior.
Security is a necessity in this increasingly dangerous world. Clinton and the DNC don’t hesitate to use walls and guns for protecting themselves and their elite friends. I say it’s time to provide such protection to the at-risk people like Kate Steinle, and Clinton not understanding this will lead to her defeat.”
HILLARY CLINTON, DEMOCRAT CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT: “I think the idea of building walls as an answer to issues that confront our country is just not the right approach. We should be building bridges, we should be building understanding.”
For reporting of how the convention preparations look close up, see the local NBC coverage — “no-scale fencing” must mean it’s hard to climb:
Security at the Sports Complex during the Democratic National Convention next month will include “no-scale fencing” to enclose the Wells Fargo Center and Xfinity Live!, the Secret Service special agent in charge said in an interview Thursday.
But exact boundaries of the security perimeter around the sports arena, where the convention will take place July 25-28, are not yet finalized, Special Agent James Henry told NBC10.com. Continue reading this article
Big changes are planned for the nation’s transportation, although the citizens have not been consulted about whether they want private ownership of cars to be pushed to the side as the government plans for a system of self-driving cars hooked up to enormous computer networks.
Not that long ago, self-driving cars were just a spark in Sergei Brin’s mind, and were thought by many automation experts as something to occur in the distant future, if at all.
Ford: All of this [technology] is subject to a continuing acceleration, and for that reason, it’s going to unfold at a rate that may surprise us. To take the example of driverless cars: It’s just a few years ago — really, back in 2009 — that I wrote my first book on this topic, and I never imagined at that time that driverless cars would be feasible any time soon. It seemed like an almost impossible task, even to me. Yet now, virtually every auto manufacturer, as well as a whole bunch of companies that haven’t traditionally been in the car industry, are working on this, and it’s looking like it’s going to be feasible within 10, 15 years, at least. So it’s pretty amazing how fast things are moving.
At some point, the major car manufacturers figured out that automation technology was going forward and they should get on board in order to shape events to their advantage. That viewpoint was made clear in a Senate hearing where one of the expert panelists was an executive from General Motors (Hands Off: The Future of Self-Driving Cars, March 15, 2016).
SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION ANTHONY FOXX: “We are on the cusp of a new era in automotive technology with enormous potential to save lives, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and transform mobility for the American people. Today’s actions and those we will pursue in the coming months will provide the foundation and the path forward for manufacturers, state officials, and consumers to use new technologies and achieve their full safety potential.” (Gizmodo).
The upshot of the big tech plan is that self-driving cars will be joined together in a government-run network which will make a vehicle appear on demand when an individual calls for one — which sounds like quite a tall order even if the technology can be made to work. Cars are a lot about freedom in American culture, but the government thinks private car ownership needs to be pruned back to reduce roadway crowding, and a networked robot car system is what the big brains cobbled together.
Most citizens have no idea that this monstrous experiment is about to be foisted upon them, yet it is in the pipeline, unless the system fails or the people just reject it. The first step is to try out the technology at the city level, and the Smart City Challenge sponsored by the Department of Transportation is a way to kickstart that process with a pile of money.
One good thing about self-driving cars would be that rude foreign cabbies become obsolete and no more of them would be imported. . . right?
In ten years, will American cities still be crippled by bumper to bumper traffic and inadequate public transportation? Or will our urban centers come up with some ingenious technological solutions — and the funding to make them happen?
The Department of Transportation and major U.S. cities are betting on technology to solve their transit woes. As part of its “Smart Cities Challenge,” the DOT will give a winning city up to $40 million to help it experiment with innovative transit options. It would also be eligible for an additional $10 million from Paul Allen’s Vulcan Inc.
San Francisco, a finalist, imagines a fanciful city with an elaborate network of city-run self-driving cars and shuttles, where the on-demand businesses it’s still struggling to regulate are a seamless part of life.
The most technologically ambitious part of San Francisco’s big vision, created by the city’s new Office of Innovation, is getting people out of the driver’s seat and into shared, autonomous cars. The idea is to reduce traffic and reclaim parking structures and some roadways for housing and parks.
Existing streets will be outfitted with sensors so they can communicate with cars. Cars will be able to talk to other vehicles, orchestrating a delicate synchronized dance to minimize traffic and injuries.
The catch? The idea hinges on people selling their cars and relying on a city-run transit service. It’s a grand vision, but to convince anyone to give up their cars, the new system would need to be much faster and better executed than San Francisco’s current public transit. Continue reading this article
This week marks the beginning of the long Islamic month of Ramadan where jihad murders apparently count for more in terms of delivering the enthusiast to allah’s heaven (advertised as including 72 virgins). As a result, the month tends to be even more violent than the regular ones.
It has become the custom of TheReligionOfPeace.com website to keep daily track of the body count, giving the following explanation:
Muslims often insist that other religions are just as violent as theirs and that the bigger problem is “Islamophobia.” We put that narrative to the test each Ramadan with a running count of ALL terror attacks, categorized by motive.
Simple execution does not satisfy the bloodlust of some jihadists. Their murders often express a genuine creativity in horrific violence, such as crucifixions, beheadings and burning people alive.
Islam scholar Robert Spencer of JihadWatch has been putting out a series of brief videos titled The Basics of Islam (viewable on his Youtube channel). A recent one, #8 — The Meaning of the Word “Jihad”, is timely.
ROBERT SPENCER: Jihad is the central duty of every Muslim — it’s Arabic for “struggle.” Muslim theologians have spoken of many things as jihad— the struggle within the soul, defending the faith from critics, supporting the growth of the faith and its defense financially and even migrating to non-muslim land for the purpose of propagating Islam, But violent jihad is a constant of Islamic history and a central element of Islamic theology. Many passages in the Qur’an and the sayings of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad are used by jihad warriors today to justify their actions and to gain new recruits. No major Muslim group has ever repudiated the doctrines of armed jihad. The theology of jihad which denies unbelievers equality of rights and dignity is available today for anyone with the will and the means to bring it to life. . .
In the article following, Spencer explains the month of mass murder:
As Muslims struggle to increase their devotion to Allah, expect more mass murder.
Another Ramadan is upon us, and no less an authority on Islam than Barack Hussein Obama has assured us that “for many, this month is an opportunity to focus on reflection and spiritual growth, forgiveness, patience and resilience, compassion for those less fortunate, and unity across communities.” Meanwhile, a Muslim whom Obama would disparage as a “violent extremist” who has hijacked the religion of peace, Islamic State spokesman Abu Mohammad al-Adnani, called on Muslims to use this Ramadan to “get prepared, be ready … to make it a month of calamity everywhere for nonbelievers…especially for the fighters and supporters of the caliphate in Europe and America.”
Ramadan 2016 began with the news that a group of Muslims in Jordan were so filled with pious fervor that they murdered five Jordanian intelligence officers in an attack on a security office. The perpetrators may have been acting upon the understanding of Ramadan that a jihad group enunciated back in 2012: “The month of Ramadan is a month of holy war and death for Allah. It is a month for fighting the enemies of Allah and God’s messenger, the Jews and their American facilitators. One of our groups aided by Allah managed to bomb a bus full of Jewish tourists, plunderers of holy lands, after careful tracking. The holy war is not confined to a particular arena and we shall fight the Jews and the Americans until they leave the land of Islam.” Continue reading this article
A few days ago I noted the unwelcome arrival of America’s first Zika Anchor Baby. As a birthright citizen, the deeply damaged Honduran-American will be a drain on US taxpayers for its entire life, and now we have a dollar amount of that cost.
Tom Frieden, M.D.: “Of note is that the Center for Birth Defects at CDC estimates that a child with birth defect can have a lifetime incremental cost of care of between 1 and 10 million dollars.”
The former New York Lt. Governor, Betsy McCaughey, is an expert on ObamaCare and was discussing the “loopholes” in the system that will allow illegal aliens to get taxpayer-subsidized care under the program in California when she brought up the Zika situation:
McCAUGHEY: [starting 1:00] “Let me be clear, despite what you’ve heard, there are many many programs in this health law, Obamacare, that are targeted directly to providing health care for illegal immigrants and the Obama administration already spent billions with a “B” — billions of dollars a year on health care for illegal immigrants: you’ve got the community help centers all across the country, federally funded, catering almost exclusively to illegal immigrants.
You’ve got emergency Medicaid, especially prenatal care, labor care, delivery care, almost exclusively for illegal immigrants. We’ve got prenatal care [crosstalk] and the cost is going to go way up, sadly, tragically, when who knows how many pregnant women from South America who are fearful of carrying the Zika virus arrive in the United States to give birth to a child. Their labor and delivery costs will be covered here, and the lifetime cost of caring for this tragically disabled care will be picked up by taxpayers because these children will be US residents.”
Zika mom’s story is changing: initially she said she was “visiting” her US-residing extended family — when she was eight months pregnant. Now it becomes clear that she came for the free stuff. Like all other illegal aliens, she is a liar and a thief.
The Honduran mother who delivered what is believed to be the first baby to be born with a Zika virus-related condition in the New York tri-state area flew to America to specifically seek treatment.
In an interview with Fox News Latino, the young mother whose name has not been released publicly, explained that her initial symptoms were ‘underestimated’ by medical doctors in her native land.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated in February that it will cost at least $1million to treat a baby with Zika throughout their lifetime.
Mail Online contacted the US Customs and Border Patrol Agency who declined to comment about the woman’s immigration status along with the baby in question due to Privacy Act restrictions.
The 31-year-old woman told Fox News Latino that a rash appeared on her in December and that she was also feverish around the same time – both of which are symptoms of Zika.
She decided to see another doctor in the Central American nation, but then decided to seek treatment in the US and possibly entered the country on a tourist visa 33 days ago. Continue reading this article
In the following video, JamIel Shaw is joined by two other parents whose children have been killed by illegal aliens, Mary Ann Mendoza and Sabine Durden:
Job #1 for government is supposed to be public safety. But Washington is willfully failing that task, and Trump’s attention to illegal alien crime reminds the public of how little Obama & co. care about keeping citizens safe from the world’s criminals.
GOP candidate’s effort parallels Hillary Clinton’s outreach to mothers of African-Americans killed in gun violence
Republican presumptive nominee Donald Trump is giving a national platform to parents of victims of crimes by illegal immigrants, inviting them to rallies and telling their tragic stories to boost support for hard-line immigration policies.
The families help put a sympathetic face on Mr. Trump’s rhetoric branding Mexican immigrants as criminals and his plans to build a wall along the southern border and to deport millions of people who are here illegally. Those parents who are black and Hispanic also offer Mr. Trump political cover from allegations of racial and ethnic prejudice, most recently for accusing a Mexican-American judge of being biased against him.
Mr. Trump also is drawing intense media attention to what they see as public-safety issues caused by illegal immigration.
Sabine Durden told thousands of people at a Trump rally in Anaheim, Calif., two weeks ago about her 30-year-old son, Dominic, a sheriff’s dispatcher who was killed in a 2012 motorcycle accident by an illegal immigrant truck driver convicted twice of driving under the influence.
Choking back tears, she recalled: “I heard Donald Trump on the television as I walked by talking about illegal immigration and about the cost of American lives and I screamed. Donald Trump became my life savior that day, my hero… Wanting to control the border has nothing to do with racism but all to do with law and order.”
Online video of Mr. Trump kissing and signing posters of her son and other crime victims after the rally has been viewed more than 230,000 times.
In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Trump said meeting the parents of children killed by illegal immigrants “reinforced even more” his support for stringent immigration laws.
“Even I didn’t realize how bad it was,” he said. “When you see these families that have been destroyed by people who aren’t supposed to be here, who are criminals…The only way people can understand how severe this crisis is to see the families, and then they see the horror of it.” Continue reading this article
A couple decades ago, “Manhattanization” was a dirty word in San Francisco because people didn’t want a forest of huge skyscrapers built downtown or tiny stacked apartments to be the standard housing. But these days it’s different because millennials apparently don’t mind being crammed together in accommodations people wouldn’t accept in earlier times. There is a movement for denser housing in the popular Bay Area so hip young millsters can live in the cool zone.
From a park facing some of San Francisco’s “Painted Ladies” it’s hard to miss the Manhattan-style growth downtown.
The PBS Newshour reported on the campaign for more housing to be built in San Francisco and beyond, including pleasant suburbs across the bay with still-existing open space. The maximum-housing millennials see beautiful unbuilt acreage with the same eye as developers do.
On a larger scale however, San Francisco is feeling the effects of Washington’s policy of rapid population growth stemming from high immigration of varying legalities. The Population Clock over at the Census Bureau shows well over 323.7 million US residents today, with one international migrant (net) every 28 seconds. Those numbers add to the Democrat party, because most immigrant cultures like big government handing out a lot of freebies, and they aren’t bright enough to understand the American opportunities they came for were created by a market economy, not a socialist one.
In addition, it’s just expensive to live in popular big cities all over. Dick Schneider, a Bay Area campaigner for preserving open space, remarked about this report: “You go to any major urban area of the world, and the housing is expensive, because there are so many people there. More population density causes costs to raise per square foot — that’s true in big cities around the planet.”
Job growth in the San Francisco Bay Area has exploded in recent years and many people are being priced out. Blame the NIMBYS, including progressives fighting to protect their quaint neighborhoods by blocking any new construction. Activists battling income equality are fighting to change this with the new Yes-In-My-Back-Yard movement. Special correspondent Duarte Geraldino reports.
HARI SREENIVASAN: The fight to build more housing in an area where prices are through the roof.
Special correspondent Duarte Geraldino reports from the San Francisco Bay Area.
It’s part of our weekly Making Sense series, which airs every Thursday on the “NewsHour.”
MAN: Whose house?
AUDIENCE: Our house!
DUARTE GERALDINO: In the San Francisco Bay Area, it seems any small group of voices can derail a proposed housing development.
PROTESTERS: Ed Lee, can’t you see we don’t need no luxury?
DUARTE GERALDINO: Some urban liberals wage war on so-called luxury housing. Around here, the going price for a two-bedroom is over four grand a month.
PROTESTERS: No one Bay Area.
DUARTE GERALDINO: Meanwhile, some suburban conservatives fight against subsidized housing.
WOMAN: Stand up for your property rights before they get taken away. They want to take away your decision of where you’re going to live and how you’re going to live.
DUARTE GERALDINO: But there is a new and growing group protesting what it sees as the not in my backyard, or NIMBY, attitudes of both the left and the right. This group calls itself YIMBY, Yes In My Backyard.
The unserious border fence near Fort Hancock Texas shows how little the government cares about securing the nation from jihadist mass murderers.
Congressman Duncan Hunter’s district is located near the border and he has worked for years for border security aided by robust fencing. He obtained Homeland Security documents detailing the capture of an Afghan national with jihadist connections on the Mexican border and appeared on Fox News to discuss facts about the case.
CONGRESSMAN DUNCAN HUNTER: I’m coming to you right now from San Diego. We have known this anecdotally for a long time. Anybody who lives in Arizona, Texas or San Diego California, we know that there’s folks coming over from the Middle East and and Southwest Asia and and they’re using Mexico to get north into the US. So here’s what we just found out: the five Pakistanis and one Afghan were apprehended 15 miles north into Arizona.
They were flown from the Middle East to do Brazil then they went through Peru and then they went all the way up through Panama and into Mexico and now they ended up in the US. The five Pakistanis as far as we know got away. They actually claimed that they were asylum seekers. Their names didn’t register on any on database but the Afghan did. The Afghan was involved with terror plots, planning terror plots within the US and Canada. We know that he’s a a not a good guy in Afghanistan, and here he was in Arizona. So that’s the first problem, that there’s not a secure border, no matter what the administration tries to say. It’s not just people coming over looking for work, it’s people coming over here to harm Americans.
HOST: This was Mexican drug lords that basically help them with this smuggling ring to get these Middle Easterners, including the Afghan that you mentioned who wanted to cause harm here in the United States and in Canada, who wanted to bring them into this country, and they’ll do that for a fee, correct? We need to protect against that. How can we?
HUNTER: You have to secure the border. Here in san diego we have a double border fence. You know, Donald Trump talks about the wall — we have a double border fence here in San Diego where hardly anybody crosses. Literally we have two giant fences with a high-speed road in between that the Border Patrol drives back and forth. That has to go from the the Pacific Ocean to Texas and you can stop people from coming in. Fences make good neighbors.
Here’s the Washington Times article that sparked recent attention to border security as a nation security issue:
A smuggling network has managed to sneak illegal immigrants from Middle Eastern terrorism hotbeds straight to the doorstep of the U.S., including helping one Afghan who authorities say was part of an attack plot in North America.
Immigration officials have identified at least a dozen Middle Eastern men smuggled into the Western Hemisphere by a Brazilian-based network that connected them with Mexicans who guided them to the U.S. border, according to internal government documents reviewed by The Washington Times.
Those smuggled included Palestinians, Pakistanis and the Afghan man who Homeland Security officials said had family ties to the Taliban and was “involved in a plot to conduct an attack in the U.S. and/or Canada.” He is in custody, but The Times is withholding his name at the request of law enforcement to protect investigations.
Some of the men handled by the smuggling network were nabbed before they reached the U.S., but others made it into the country. The Afghan man was part of a group of six from “special-interest countries.”
The group, guided by two Mexicans employed by the smuggling network, crawled under the border fence in Arizona late last year and made it about 15 miles north before being detected by border surveillance, according to the documents, which were obtained by Rep. Duncan Hunter, California Republican. Continue reading this article
An accused war criminal living in the United States is now working as a security guard at Dulles International Airport near Washington, DC.
A CNN investigation found that Yusuf Abdi Ali, who is accused of committing atrocities while he was a military commander during Somalia’s brutal civil war, has been living a quiet life near the nation’s capital for about 20 years.
He is just one of more than 1,000 accused war criminals living and working in the United States.
Mass graves and haunting stories
In a shallow pit in northern Somalia, forensic anthropologists have been delicately digging around battered bones that were recently found in numerous mass graves. They’re the remains of a clan slaughtered during the war in the 1980s, alleged evidence of the brutality carried out by the government regime in power at the time.
Led by Mohamed Siad Barre, the regime took over Somalia after a coup in 1969 and ruled with an iron fist. In the north, the dominant Isaaq clan was heavily repressed and brutalized by government forces, according to human rights experts.
Yusuf Abdi Ali served as a commander in the Barre regime and is accused of terrorizing the Isaaq people, torturing clan members, burning villages and conducting mass executions. 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.