Race Based Politics


Gang of 8 Press Conference 6-27-13

Justin Smith writes about illegal aliens flowing into the USA and the Obama Administration lack of enforcement to stop Mexican aliens from entering America. Also Justin writes of GOP betrayal in joining Dems in writing horrible legislation that is akin to blanket amnesty and still a relaxed enforcement of guarding our border from illegal aliens and Mexican drug cartels taking advantage of lax border enforcement.

 

JRH 7/3/13

Please Support NCCR

****************************************

Race Based Politics

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 6/30/2013 8:43 PM

 

In appalling, ignominious fashion, the U.S. Congress passed both the Corker-Hoeven Amendment (June 24, 2013) and the Border Security, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act [SlantRight EditorFull Text from Politico 6/21/13 3:36 PM EDT] (June 27, 2013), as they proved once again, with the help of fifteen Republican Senators, that they are more eager to be seen as “citizens of the world” than they are with actually fixing the illegal immigration problem. Much of what occurred during this past week was simply a ploy designed to make the American public think that a tough new immigration bill was passed, when in reality, amnesty was given to upwards of thirty million illegal aliens, rule of law and enforcement was circumvented and our Republic was degraded and endangered!

The U.S. currently deals with an inflow of one million legal immigrants per year; even if one accepts the questionable “11 million” figure for the number of illegal aliens in the U.S., these recent pieces of legislation are illogically conceived, too expansive and unsustainable, especially in light of the fact that between 1953 and 2000, the U.S. allowed only 26.3 million legal immigrants into the nation. It is quite like taking the federal responsibility for the addition of two new states, when one considers the numbers.

Border security weighs equally with the economic ramifications of these bills. Sixty-percent of all illegal immigrants are Hispanic, and they account for 30% of the U.S. prison population. But, the U.S. government really has not any idea how large a segment of the illegal alien population is comprised of criminals and terrorists. In 2010, Jamal Yousef, a Hezbollah agent, was arrested in New York City with a weapons cache of 100 M-16 assault rifles, 2500 grenades, 100 Ar-15s, C-4 explosives and anti-tank munitions; and, last February, three Mexican nationals were sentenced to ten years in prison for running a marijuana operation out of Wisconsin’s Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest.

On June 24th, (FoxNews Sunday) Senator Lindsey Graham stated, “We’ve practically militarized the border”, however, this is far from the reality under an Obama administration that will not even allow Border Agents to question criminal suspects about their immigration status and maintains a “catch and release” policy, which basically nullifies any attempts to enforce border controls…No one is “in the shadows”… illegal aliens are now proudly proclaiming their illegal status. And currently, a 70 mile deep swathe into the U.S. interior along hundreds of miles of the U.S.-Mexico border are posted as outside of effective U.S. government control; much of this corridor is now controlled to varying degrees by transnational criminals and the Mexican drug cartels, who are the only ones “militarizing the border.”

Corker-Hoeven, drafted behind closed doors and given no time for constituent review, will cost U.S. taxpayers significantly more than its initial $40 billion price-tag, for nothing in return. It adds 20,000 new border agents; it would not make any difference if it added two million new agents…30 million illegals will be “legalized” and the damage will be done. One should also recall the 1986 amnesty and the broken promise of immigration law enforcement and the Border Security Fence Act of 2006 that was never fully implemented; in 2011, Janet Napolitano cut border security spending from $1.3 billion to $573 million, and she ended the Security Border Initiative Network, because she did not view it as “cost effective” or “viable”: Page 35-line 24 of Corker-Hoeven places the completion of 700 miles of border fence at Napolitano’s discretion, and page 30-line 4 does the same regarding the use of technology.

Under Article 32 of the Mexican Constitution, a person cannot immigrate to Mexico without first demonstrating a particular skill or potential usefulness; Article 34 requires immigrants to have the means to support themselves; applicants for legal immigrant status are screened for mental illness and prior criminal acts as outlined by Article 37. And, entering Mexico illegally is a felony punishable by 5 years in prison and a 5,000 peso fine; more importantly, only citizens of their republic can take part in the politics of the country, according to Article 133.

After Monday’s vote on the Corker-Hoeven Amendment, Mexico’s Foreign Minister Jose Antonio Meade stated, “Fences do not unite us. They are not the solution to the migratory phenomenon and are not consistent with a secure and modern border.” What hypocrisy…what a double-standard!

With unbelievable hubris, the illegal aliens exacerbated the problem by demanding a path to citizenship immediately… no humble request here. Much of this emanates from LARAZA, Presente.org and the Dream Act Coalition. Reyna Mntoya of United We Dream in Arizona recently stated, “We’re not willing to compromise on citizenship.” Wait a minute…whose country is this any way!?

Claims of deficit reduction from the bills’ supporters are full of manipulations and accounting tricks using Social Security contributions by newly created “registered provisional immigrants” to fund associated increases in spending. But, all this and more will necessarily be paid out almost immediately (food stamps/unemployment) to native Americans removed from the workforce, because these newly legalized immigrants are suggested to be ineligible, by the Democrats, for subsidies on the Obamacare exchanges until after they become citizens, which is certain to be challenged under the 14th Amendment; this allows employers to escape the $3,000 fine attached to failure to insure American workers and makes the immigrants the more cost effective route for businesses. On top of this, add the billions of dollars paid out for the benefits of these RPIs during their retirement.

America witnessed Marco Rubio, Mitch McConnell, Bob Corker, Lamar Alexander and ten other Republican Senators (Wicker changed his vote) shamelessly align themselves against their constituency and join a coalition of business groups, unions, gay rights, Latino and immigration advocates, and poltroons, quislings and Democrats, such as Chuck Schumer and Robert Menendez. McConnell could have at least attempted to stop this bill through the Senate procedural process; and, while Rubio has stressed “border security” to Americans for months, he recently appeared on Univision’s Spanish speaking talk show, ‘Al Punto’, and said, that if the bill passed, “First comes legalization…”.

What “modernization” can be found in a bill stuck in circa 1986 with rewards for illegal aliens, a blanket amnesty and an immediate path to citizenship?… Where is there any real “border security” or “economic opportunity” in this bill for U.S. citizens… naturalized immigrants and native born alike… who pay their taxes, fight our wars and obey our laws?

Many of our Senators, such as Marco Rubio, Chuck Schumer and Bob Corker, are duplicitous masters of political theater, as they ignore the fact of high unemployment, a $5000 drop in median income for families since 2007 and a .1% economic growth, and they divide and conquer us by engaging in identity politics. They have pushed ahead with this big government piece of legislation that they call “comprehensive immigration” over the objections of the majority of Americans, in just the same manner they used with Obamacare; the nation will not get the quality high-skilled, high-tech workers Congress suggests it needs through this Reward/Amnesty bill for thirty million of the most poorly skilled imaginable. And, for those concerned about children who grew up here as illegal aliens, their cases can be adjudicated case by case through a special court. But our U.S. government should not assume a responsibility or a constitutional writ that does not exist and spend the treasure of Americans to satisfy foreigners: Doing the right thing and following the rule of law is not always easy, and sometimes it includes seemingly harsh action. We are either a nation of laws… a Republic… or we are not; identify the illegal aliens and deport them!

Now, unfortunately, too much going forward rests in the hands of a weak, timid and untrustworthy Speaker John Boehner. It will be the responsibility of House Republicans to force Boehner to reject the Senate bill and the race based politics of Senator McCain, Senator Menendez and many others…race pandering… the sort of thing that conservatives have always rejected historically; the House must reject those who have described opponents to this bill as “nativists, racists, misogynists and elitists”, as they illustrate their willingness to embrace the millions of young and old of all races and nationalities, who seek to enter the U.S. legally in their search for the right to Live Free! : America cannot build an integrated, cohesive nation of assimilated immigrants, maintain Her Heritage of Exceptionalism or guarantee everyone equal opportunity at success through race pandering in the U.S. Senate. Start the calls and letters to Congress now, if you hope to save America from this terrible monstrosity called “comprehensive immigration” legislation!

 

By Justin O. Smith
___________________________

© Justin O. Smith

Edited by John R. Houk

Coulter: Avoid the Need for Spying Using One Not-So-Weird Trick


Islamic Terrorist Networks USA map

 

You need to read this tongue-in-cheek article from Ann Coulter about the American government and Obama’s immigration policies. He spies on American citizens, has porous borders for illegal immigrants to flow in and brings in Radicalized Muslims while placing real political refugees or immigrants that offer value for the USA to be denied or quagmire in immigration paperwork and waiting lists.

 

JRH 6/20/13

Please Support NCCR

Sheriff Joe Supporters Beat Back Left Wingnuts


Arpaio Bill Board - Don't Recall Petition

John R. Houk

© June 1, 2013

 

I’m probably a bit behind the curve on this; nevertheless I am pleased to announce the Leftists annoyed with Sheriff Joe Arpaio were duly defeated in their moronic efforts to get a recall election on the books in Maricopa County Arizona. The Left Wingnuts failed to turn in the 355,000 needed signatures of registered voters to force a recall vote.

 

The Left Wingnuts were probably organized in Arizona but their financial backing came from out of State. And so it is fair to guess that much of Arpaio’s campaign support came from outside of Arizona as well. That works for me since the Obama Administration was paramount in punishing Arpaio politically through the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security.

 

Did I mention the Obama Administration is wracked with scandal for using government tools to persecute individual Conservatives and Conservative organizations? I would not be surprised to discover Arpaio was part of an IRS investigation or a Justice Department investigation because of the good Sheriff’s anti-Obama political stand.

 

Anyway here is the WND article I read that I discovered the mixed bag of good news about Sheriff Joe.

 

JRH 6/1/13

Please Support NCCR

The lesson from London


Lee Rigby - UK soldier decapitated London

An ACT for America email writes about the foolishness of President Barack Hussein Obama declaring the war on terror is now over.

 

Before I get to that email here is Liz Trotta of Fox News editorializing on BHO’s timing on declaring the war on terror over:

 

VIDEO: Obama Says The War On Terror is Over! – Is The War On Terror Really Over? – Liz Trotta Commentary

 

  

Now below is the ACT for America email which includes an editorial from the Wall Street Journal by Douglas Murray.

 

JRH 5/30/13

Please Support NCCR

******************************

The lesson from London

 

Sent by ACT for America

Sent: 5/28/2013 1:35 PM

 

“How many ignored warnings does it take?”

 

Douglas Murray of the London-based Henry Jackson society wrote an excellent column last week for The Wall Street Journal (see below).

The subtitle states, “Britain has been in denial about the Islamist threat.”

So true. It’s very disturbing that this same denial permeates the thinking of far too many of America’s political, academic, media, counterterrorism and law enforcement leadership.

An Associated Press story over the weekend, referring to President Obama’s national security speech late last week, began this way:

“Some call it wishful thinking, but President Barack Obama has all but declared an end to the global war on terror.”

The reason Obama has done so is because he sees only al Qaida and its affiliates as a threat. Doing so misses the point.

The point is the “war on terror” is not confined to one organization and is not limited by geography, but is defined by those who subscribe to jihadist ideology. Denial won’t change this fact.

Our federal government continues to lead us down the very same path that has failed so miserably in Great Britain and much of Europe.

________________

The London Terror Attack Was More Than ‘Unforgivable’

Britain has been in denial about the Islamist threat. Time to face it down.

 

DOUGLAS MURRAY

London

 

How many ignored warnings does it take? That is one question that should hang over Britain after the horror of the daytime murder of a British soldier on the streets of south London. On Wednesday afternoon, Drummer Lee Rigby was killed in Woolwich by two men wielding large knives and shouting “Allahu akbar”—God is great.

Islamists have been saying for years they would do this. They have planned to do it. And now they have done it.

Related Video

 

clip_image002

WSJ Europe editorial writer Ray Zhong on the alleged terror attack in London Wednesday, and what it says about the wider war on terrorism. Photo: Getty Images

 

The attack itself is not surprising. What is surprising is that British society remains so utterly unwilling not just to deal with this threat, but even to admit its existence. Politicians have called the Woolwich killing “unforgivable” and “barbarous.” But expressions of anger should not really be enough.

Attempts to attack military targets in Britain go back to before the millennium and even before, it is important to note, the war on terror. In 1998 Amer Mirza, a member of the now-banned extremist group al Muhajiroun, attempted to petrol-bomb British army barracks. In 2007, a cell of Muslim men was found guilty of plotting to kidnap and behead a British soldier in Birmingham. The plan had been to take the soldier to a lock-up garage and cut off his head “like a pig.” They wanted to film this act on camera and send it around the world to cause maximum terror.

In 2009, al Muhajiroun protested at a homecoming parade in Luton for British troops returning from Afghanistan. Carrying banners saying “go to hell,” “butchers” and “terrorists,” the group was protected by British police officers from an increasingly irate crowd of locals. The resulting outrage toward the police gave rise to the deeply troubling English Defence League, a street protest movement that often turns violent.

 

clip_image003
National News/Zuma Press

Police in Woolwich, south London, after Wednesday’s attack.

Now comes the attack in Woolwich, which the perpetrators—as with the earlier cell—wished to be observed and even filmed. Reports suggest that they invited people to capture their actions on video. The perpetrators gave interviews, machetes in hand, to bystanders with cameras. This horrific scene is something that will stick in the memory.

But it should also have been foreseen. Instead we entered the stage of denial. For there is already, in the reaction to events, more than a hint of what I have previously termed “Toulouse syndrome.” The term is named after the attacks last year carried out by a jihadist called Mohammed Merah, who killed three French soldiers in a rampage that concluded with the murders of four French Jews at a school in Toulouse.

In the early stages of the attacks, when little was known, there was significant speculation that the culprit was a far-right extremist. At that stage everybody knew what they were going to say. But once the culprit turned out to be an Islamist, the gaze nearly fell away completely. “Nothing to see here, please move on” was the order of the day.

“Toulouse syndrome” also touched Boston last month. After the bombing at the marathon, media and politicians waited, hoping—some even said as much—that the attackers would be tea-party types. Then everybody would know what to say. But when it turned out to be Islamists?

So it is with the Woolwich killing, which British officials have lined up to denounce. Yes it is sickening. Of course it is barbaric. But what of it? Even all these years after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2011, our societies remain unfit for purpose in facing up to—and facing down—Islamic extremism.

Too many still seek refuge in ignorance and denial that was so memorably displayed by U.S. officials after the Fort Hood shooting in 2009. A man who was a member of the American armed forces, Maj. Nidal Hasan, gunned down his colleagues while shouting “Allahu akbar.” On that occasion the American government, like the French government before it and the British government this week, decided to focus on everything about the attack other than what really mattered: the motive. Fort Hood was put down to a case of workplace violence.

There will be many angles to the events in London that must be addressed in the coming days, and we can hope many will receive the appropriate level of public attention. Among them will be one particularly unpleasant irony.

Most of the extremists who have repeatedly expressed their hatred of British soldiers are themselves supported by the British state. A prominent hate-preacher—Anjem Choudary, a leader of the disbanded al Muhajiroun—was even caught on video earlier this year extolling Britain’s “jihad-seekers’ allowance.” As he explained to his followers, “The normal situation, really, is to take money from the kafir”—a slur for non-Muslims. “Allahu akbar. We take the money.”

After the video showed up online, a BBC reporter asked Mr. Choudary to clarify how much he’s taking—the press has long reported a sum of £25,000 ($37,770) per year. “It’s irrelevant,” Mr. Choudary replied.

This would not be the first time a country has paid both sides in a conflict. But if the reported figure is anywhere near accurate, it would surely be the first time in human history that a society has paid its opponents better than it pays its own. A British soldier can expect to start in the army on a salary of around £16,000 ($24,172).

The events in south London must cause a re-evaluation by British society of the insanity we have been permitting. The question is not how sad we feel. The only question should be what we do about it.

Mr. Murray is associate director of the Henry Jackson Society, a London-based think tank.

________________________

The lesson from London

 

ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.

_______________________

The London Terror Attack Was More Than ‘Unforgivable’

 

A version of this article appeared May 24, 2013, on page A13 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The London Terror Attack Was More Than ‘Unforgivable’.

 

Copyright ©2013 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Intro – Top Norwegian Prof: Critics of Mass Immigration Mentally Ill


Per Fugelli 2

Per Fugelli

 

John R. Houk

© May 24, 2013

 

Fjordman writes an essay entitled “Top Norwegian Prof: Critics of Mass Immigration Mentally Ill”. If you are an American I urge you to read this essay! The essay is about Free Speech in Norway and how the Left utilizes Hate-Speech laws to shut up Conservatives and those against the mass immigration of culturally different people to Norway. The culturally different people are not non-Nordic people of Europe or of the Oriental Asian persuasion. The immigration of people with a totally divergent culture to Norway is Sharia-Minded Muslims that are literally taking over broad swaths of Norwegian communities. This is significant because of the rise of crime perpetrated by Muslims against the Norwegians. Blond Norwegian gals are so concerned of the rape epidemic perpetrated by Muslims against non-Muslims that they are dying their hair to a dark brunette.

 

Why should Americans be concerned of how Islam affects Norwegian culture or how Norway’s Left propagandizes multiculturalism so much that they try to throw anti-multiculturalists and Counterjihadists in jail to repress threats to reversing the acceptance of multiculturalism?

 

The reason is Norway’s limitation on Liberty and Free Speech is a snapshot of America’s potential future. With Obama now being exposed as running a politically corrupt Administration that actually uses government agencies (Like the IRS, Justice Dept.  or Agenda 21) to repress American Conservatives it is quite apparent the Norwegian snapshot looms near if we do not undo Obama’s “Change”.

 

JRH 5/24/13 (Hat Tip: Gates of Vienna)

Please Support NCCR