Exclusive-Doing the Work Our Media Won't: Clues to the Immigrant Crime Wave

Breitbart

The following is an excerpt from ¡Adios, America! The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole (June 1, 2015) by Ann Coulter.

To paraphrase the line about families, you can’t choose your native-born Americans—but you can choose your immigrants. Our immigration system will be working when the number of immigrants who commit crimes is zero.

Why would any country import other countries’ criminals? What could possibly be on the plus side of the ledger, with “criminal” on the minus side? Since the United Nations isn’t yet demanding that America allow everyone in the world to immigrate here, couldn’t we at least discriminate on the basis of felon vs. non-felon? Maybe we could do a triage:

1.) Helpful to country;

2.) Not helpful to country, but not a felon;

3.) Felon.

Here’s another idea: Instead of the Census Bureau collecting detailed information about how many rental units have “broken or missing stair railings” (382,000 in 2010) or have had mold in their bathrooms in the last twelve months (1.1 million in 2010), how about the government tell us how many immigrants have committed crimes? Determining the number of foreign born in the criminal justice system doesn’t rely on taking surveys, trusting Americans to accurately report on their stair railings, and hiring teams of statisticians to spend years analyzing the data. We just need the government to count. Unlike mold in private homes, criminals have come into significant contact with the government—cops, prosecutors, judges, and prison guards. And we’re already paying those guys’ salaries. As important as the number of carports in America is, it’s also important to know how many immigrants are committing crimes.

With the government keeping that information locked in a steel casket at Fort Knox, one has to look at ancillary facts. The available data suggest that the crime rate among immigrants is astronomical. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), for example, inadvertently issued a report indicating that there are twice as many foreign-born criminals as the GAO’s estimate. In 2006, the DHS stated that 605,000 foreign-born criminals would be arrested by state and local law enforcement in 2007 alone. That’s double the number of illegal aliens for whom the states requested reimbursement in 2009. If the DHS’s estimate is correct, then nearly a third of the 2 million prisoners in state and local facilities that year¹⁴ were foreign born.

Piecing together state and federal reports, it appears that half the correctional population in California consists of illegal aliens. According to a state report, there were fewer than two hundred thousand inmates in the entire California prison population, including mental hospitals, in 2009. That year, 102,795 illegal aliens were incarcerated in California, costing the state more than $1 billion a year. Texas counts only illegal aliens who have already been fingerprinted by the Department of Homeland Security. Even with that limitation, Texas arrests more than thirty-two thousand criminal aliens a year.

Then there is the explosion of America’s prison population since we began admitting millions of Third World immigrants in the 1970s. From 1925 until 1970, a steady 0.1 percent of the population was in state or federal prison. Thus, in 1925, when the U.S. population was 100 million, there were about one hundred thousand people in prison; and in 1970, when there were 200 million Americans, there were two hundred thousand in prison. Then, suddenly, just as a very different sort of immigrant began to be admitted under Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 immigration act, the prison population skyrocketed. If the incarceration rate had remained the same, there would only be about 310,000 people in prison today. Instead, there are more than 2 million prisoners in America. Since 1970, the U.S. population has increased by one-third, but the prison population has nearly sextupled. A lot of factors affect incarceration rates—liberal judges, destructive social programs, illegitimacy, and social decay. But those come and go. Immigration is forever.

I bet she regrets asking her question

Ozzie Saffa

Why Petrostates Make Bad Allies

catoinstitutevideo

In what the Obama administration describes as a “years-long” coalition effort to “degrade and destroy” ISIS, the United States has reentered conflict in the Middle East. The White House heralds its close cooperation with Arab allies, including a number of petrostates such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, describing their cooperation as vital to the success of the campaign.

But petrostates are unlikely to be good allies for the U.S. campaign in Iraq and Syria. The reliance of those countries on oil and gas revenues distorts both foreign policy decisions and their implementation. First, petrostates have weak foreign policy institutions, producing policy that is of poor quality and strongly driven by personalities. Second, the vast flow of oil income enables the states to back nonstate actors in conflicts, but their weak civil service cannot control the flow of arms or funds. Third, oil income also enriches private citizens, some of whom directly fund terrorist organizations such as ISIS. Thus, largely through ineptitude, those states have helped to foster Syria’s civil war, indirectly facilitating the rise of ISIS.

The idiosyncrasies of oil-rich states make them poor partners for the United States in this instance and in future conflicts. As allies, petrostates are especially likely to draw America into unnecessary and intractable conflicts.

In particular, Washington should largely disentangle itself from the Saudi alliance and from reliance on Saudi intelligence and diplomatic services. Keeping Saudi Arabia at arm’s length will help to minimize involvement in Middle East conflicts that are not vital to U.S. interests.

Leaked Docs: USA Vulnerable to Criminals, Terrorists Entering Without Scrutiny After Obama Exec Amnesty

breitbart

By Matthew Boyle 

Under the executive amnesty immigration action from President Barack Obama, internal administration documents show the administration is considering allowing terrorists, transnational criminals, and anyone else who wants to enter or stay inside the United States to not even answer if they’ve ever been connected with a crime.

The internal Obama administration documents, obtained by Breitbart News through a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) source, include a draft application for illegal immigrants seeking to stay in the country and future prospective immigrants seeking to the enter the country.

On the draft application, applicants for “T nonimmigrant status” or for “U nonimmigrant status” are not required to answer a series of key questions about their background. T nonimmigrant visas are for people who are petitioning the U.S. government to be considered a “victim of a severe form of trafficking in person” and U nonimmigrant visas are for those seeking to be considered a “victim of criminal activity.”

Part of the president’s executive immigration action is to expand T and U visas. In order to engage in “[p]rotecting victims of crime and human trafficking as well as workers,” a White House fact sheet on the president’s executive action reads, “[t]he Department of Labor (DOL) is expanding and strengthening immigration options for victims of crimes (U visas) and trafficking (T visas) who cooperate in government investigations.”

This draft application form shows the administration is considering not requiring such applicants to answer whether they’ve ever been in the U.S. for a “period of 6 months or more,” whether they’ve ever “filed an application or petition for immigration benefits with the U.S. government” or one has been filed on their behalf, whether they have ever been “denied or referred an immigration benefit by the U.S. Government, or had a benefit revoked or terminated (including but not limited to visas) or if they’ve ever been connected legally with a crime—regardless of its seriousness—inside or outside the United States of America."

That last question is the operative one. Such applicants claiming they are victims of human trafficking or of any crime any where won’t, if this Obama administration proposal becomes final, have to answer: “Have you EVER, in or outside the United States, been arrested, cited, charged, indicted, fined, convicted, or imprisoned for breaking or violating any law or ordinance, excluding minor traffic violations? Describe in detail. Include all offenses where impaired driving may have been an issue. If you answered ‘Yes,’ describe the incident in detail and include all offenses where impaired driving was an issue in Part 6 Additional Information [which is later in the application].”

The document is technically a draft offered to change the current U.S. Immigration and Citizenship Services (USCIS) application form I-192 in connection with Obama’s executive amnesty action. USCIS form I-192 is the “application for advance permission to enter as nonimmigrant” for those seeking to enter the country. This draft USCIS document is dated Oct. 29, 2014, and specifically states on each page in background text that this document is “Not For Reproduction.”

Accompanying the document which contains the proposed changes to the I-192 form is an “ICE Regulations” internal email sent to several ICE officials and DHS staffers, asking them to comment on the proposed USCIS changes for Obama’s executive order. “Please find attached for your review a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (USCIS) advance copy of proposed changes to the USCIS Form I-192, Application for Advance Permission to Enter as a Nonimmigrant, which expires April 30, 2015,” the email address “ICE Regulations” sent to a list of top internal ICE staffers on Nov. 4, 2014—on election day, as the American people rejected the president’s executive amnesty—at 9:49 a.m. exactly with the “importance" label of “high."

“Summary: USCIS would like ICE and CBP to review and comment on the attached package for Form I-192, Application for Advance Permission to Enter as a Nonimmigrant, which expires 04/30/15,” the internal email reads:

Minor non-substantive corrections are made to the form as well as standard language and formatting updates. Changes from the existing form package are noted in red font and standard language used in all USCIS form packages (which should not require review) is noted in purple. To aid your review Word translations of the PDFs are included. Please use Track Changes, comment bubbles, and highlighting to indicate your requested edits. Word conversions are not 1-for-1 and some spelling and formatting errors may be present and do not need to be noted.

The email specifically notes that DHS employees who received this document are not allowed to publish it or share with it anyone without express prior approval. “Authorization for Sharing: Do not share this draft rule, in whole or in part, with anyone outside of DHS without first obtaining authorization for such disclosure from the DHS OGC Regulatory Affairs Law Division," it reads, before noting the deadline for comments internally on this matter were due by noon on Friday, Nov. 14—six days before Obama’s executive amnesty announcement. 

At this time it’s unclear if these provisions included in the draft USCIS changes regarding T and U visas—or any other of the changes—will make it into the final documents for the president’s executive amnesty order. Those new documents are not public yet, and it’s unclear when they will be.

Breitbart News has reached out to USCIS and ICE for comment, and both were unavailable to comment on the documents by press time, but have confirmed they’ve received press requests. We’ll update as we get more information on this front.

The revelation that the president’s executive amnesty is even considering allowing anyone associated with criminal activity in the U.S. or abroad, including terrorism, to get U or T visas without answering questions regarding their potential criminal history could blow up negations on Capitol Hill right now for a long-term omnibus spending deal. Sometime later on Monday, or early on Tuesday, House Appropriations Committee chairman Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY) is expected to—with Speaker John Boehner’s blessing—introduce a “CR-omnibus” spending package that will fund all of government except DHS through the end of the 2015 fiscal year in September and will fund DHS, including Obama’s amnesty—and these efforts by USCIS to process potential criminals under T and U visas—through at least March. Many rank-and-file Republicans in the House have been furious with GOP leaders on this matter.

immigrationdocuments.pdf

New York Times: The Big Money Behind the Left's Amnesty Push

breitbart

Julia Preston at the New York Times reveals the big-money organizers of progressives' campaign to pass immigration reform legislation which would legalize millions of illegal immigrants within the United States' borders.

The calls started shortly after President Obama’s news conference on the day after the midterm elections. He had said he would go ahead with action on immigration before year’s end, in spite of warnings from Republicans that he could wreck relations with the new Congress they will control. White House officials were calling immigrant advocates to talk strategy and shore up their support.

The officials wanted to reassure them, several activists said, that the president, after delaying twice this year, was ready to take the kind of broad measures they had demanded to shield immigrants here illegally from deportation.

The White House calls — and the president’s decision itself — reflected the clout the immigrant movement has built up in recent years, as it grew from a cluster of scattered Washington lobbying groups into a national force.

A vital part of that expansion has involved money: major donations from some of the nation’s wealthiest liberal foundations, including the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Open Society Foundations of the financier George Soros, and the Atlantic Philanthropies. Over the last decade those donors have invested more than $300 million in immigrant organizations, including many fighting for a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

Read the rest of the article here >>

50 Years Ago Today, Ronald Reagan Gave A Speech That 'Changed America Forever'

ReaganFoundation 

Read at nation.foxnews >>

Report: Nearly 2.5 Million Immigrants from 'Predominantly Muslim Countries' Reside Inside U.S.

breitbart

Approximately 2.5 million immigrants from “predominantly Muslim countries" reside inside the U.S. right now, a new report from the Center for Immigration Studies found.

The four-page report, which details which countries and world regions from which immigrants in the U.S.—both legal and illegal—came to this country, found that since 2000 nearly a million more immigrants from such Muslim countries came to the U.S.

In 2000, there were 1,518,755 immigrants from Muslim countries in the U.S. In 2010, That number stood at 2,184,664, and in 2013 it stands at 2,480,407.

Between 2010 and 2013, there was actually a greater increase in the number of immigrants from the Middle East than from Central America. During that timeframe, 207,758 more immigrants moved to the U.S. from the Middle East, whereas only 113,744 immigrants came from Central America.

The report found that despite the staggering growth of immigration from the Middle East, the regions that sent even more immigrants to the U.S. in the past few years are South Asia, East Asia, and the Caribbean. South Asia, which includes India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, sent 372,546 more immigrants to the U.S. between 2010 and 2013, whereas East Asia—which includes China, Korea and Vietnam—sent 364,909 more immigrants to the U.S. during that timeframe. From the Caribbean, 223,011 more immigrants entered the U.S. between 2010 and 2013.

During that same timeframe, immigration from Mexico dropped 126,126. In 2010, there were 11,711,103 immigrants both illegal and legal in the U.S. from Mexico, according to this data set, and in 2013 there were just 11,584,977 immigrants from Mexico in the U.S.

The report, authored by Steven Camarota and Karen Zeigler from CIS, relies on U.S. census data to make these observations.

"The data show that the nation’s immigrant population (legal and illegal) grew by 1.4 million from July 2010 to July 2013,” Camarota and Zeigler wrote. “The data also imply that 3.3 million new immigrants settled in the country in that same period. These new arrivals were offset by return migration and deaths among the existing population. The immigrant population, referred to as the foreign-born by the Census Bureau, includes all those who were not U.S. citizens at birth, including illegal immigrants.”

Between legal and illegal immigrants residing in the U.S., the authors found that America’s immigration population “hit a record 41.3 million in July 2013.”

“The sending regions with the largest increases from 2010 to 2013 were South Asia (up 373,000, 16 percent growth); East Asia (up 365,000, 5 percent growth); the Caribbean (up 223,000, 6 percent growth), the Middle East (up 208,000, 13 percent growth); and sub-Saharan Africa (up 177,000, 13 percent growth),” Camarota and Zeigler wrote.

Center For Immigration Studies Report

WELFARE NATION Census: One-third of Americans getting benefits

foxnews

By Mike Emanuel

Fifty years after the “war on poverty” was first waged, there are signs a new offensive is needed.
Newly released Census data reveals nearly 110 million Americans – more than one-third of the country – are receiving government assistance of some kind.
The number counts people receiving what are known as “means-tested” federal benefits, or subsidies based on income. This includes welfare programs ranging from food stamps to subsidized housing to the program most commonly referred to as “welfare,” Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
At the end of 2012, according to the stats, 51.5 million were on food stamps, while 83 million were collecting Medicaid – with some benefitting from multiple programs.
Though the programs were created to help those in need, some analysts worry that the way they’re designed is, increasingly, incentivizing people not to work. They note that when recipients combine several government assistance programs, in many cases they pay better than going to work.
The Cato Institute’s Michael Tanner said that in the eight most generous states, the benefits can be tantamount to a $20 minimum wage – which would exceed the $7.25 minimum wage in most states.
“So in many cases people could actually do better on welfare than they could in an entry level job," Tanner said.  
Supporters say the safety net is necessary to keep Americans from living in dire conditions. As for concerns that these benefits pay better than working, they argue the solution is to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour.
"I think a lot of people would do the jobs when they pay a living wage,” said Melissa Boteach, from the Center for American Progress. “In addition, there's growing jobs in health care and information technology and energy. There's a lot of places where, if able to make investments, we can really grow our economy in those sectors.”
As millions still rely on government assistance programs, technology and automation have eliminated jobs many Americans used to do with a high school diploma. The challenge for policymakers is helping the economy adjust.
"We have to figure out a way around this. Put innovation in play and really figure out how we're going to create a new economy where we can both raise wages and create more jobs for people," Boteach said.
Tanner said there must be a serious effort to put people back to work because the continued growth of these entitlement programs is unsustainable. The number of people on such benefits is up slightly from 2011.
The government still runs a half-trillion dollar deficit, according to the most recent estimates, and the national debt is nearing $18 trillion.
"You can't in the long run have a society in which you have to rely on a smaller and smaller group of wealth producers who have to support more and more people who are not contributing to that wealth," Tanner said.

Leaked CBP Report Shows Entire World Exploiting Open US Border

breitbart

By Brandon Darby 

www.washingtonpost.com

LUBBOCK, Texas — A leaked intelligence analysis from the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reveals the exact numbers of illegal immigrants entering and attempting to enter the U.S. from nearly every nation on Earth. The report was obtained by a trusted source within the CBP agency who leaked the document and spoke with Breitbart Texas on the condition of anonymity. The report is labeled as "Unclassified//For Official Use Only." The report indicates that the data should be handled as "Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU)."

The numbers provided are in graphics and are broken down into “OFO” and “OBP.” The Customs and Border Protection agency is divided into the Office of Field Operations (OFO) and the Office of Border Patrol (OBP). The OFO numbers reflect anyone either turning themselves in at official U.S. points of entry, or anyone caught while being smuggled at the points of entry. The OBP numbers reflect anyone being caught or turning themselves in to Border Patrol agents between the points of entry, or anyone caught at interior checkpoints by Border Patrol agents. The “OFO Inadmissible” designation to any individual from a nation other than Mexico or Canada means that U.S. authorities took the individuals into custody. Whether they were deported or given a Notice to Appear is unknown. It is important to note these numbers do not include data from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The unavailable ICE data are in addition to these numbers.

The report reveals the apprehension numbers ranging from 2010 through July 2014. It shows that most of the human smuggling from Syria and Albania into the U.S. comes through Central America. The report also indicates the routes individuals from North Africa and the Middle East take into the European Union, either to illegally migrate there or as a possible stop in their journey to the United States. The data are broken down further into the specific U.S. border sectors where the apprehensions and contact occurred.

Among the significant revelations are that as of July 20, 2014, 1,443 individuals from China were caught sneaking across the porous U.S. border this year alone, with another 1,803 individuals either turning themselves in to U.S. authorities at official ports of entry, or being caught attempting to illegally enter at the ports of entry. This comes amid a massive crackdown by Chinese authorities of Islamic terrorists in the Communist nation.

Twenty-eight individuals from Pakistan were caught attempting to sneak into the U.S. this year alone, with another 211 individuals either turning themselves in or being caught at official ports of entry.

Thirteen Egyptians were caught trying to sneak into the U.S. this year alone, with another 168 either turning themselves in or being caught at official ports of entry.

Four individuals from Yemen were caught attempting to sneak into the U.S. by Border Patrol agents in 2014 alone, with another 34 individuals either turning themselves in or being caught attempting to sneak through official ports of entry. Yemen is not the only nation with individuals who pose terror risks to the U.S. that the report indicates travel from. The failed nation of Somalia, known as a hotbed of Islamic terror activity, was also referenced in the report. Four individuals from Somalia were caught trying to sneak into the U.S. by Border Patrol agents in 2014. Another 290 either turned themselves in or were caught attempting to sneak in at official ports of entry. This reporter previously covered the issue of illegal immigration into the U.S. from Somalia and other nations in the Horn of Africa. 

In addition to the individuals from terror-prone nations who attempted to illegally enter the U.S., individuals from nations currently suffering from the world’s largest Ebola outbreak have been caught attempting to sneak across the porous U.S. border into the interior of the United States. At least 71 individuals from the three nations affected by the current Ebola outbreak have either turned themselves in or been caught attempting to illegally enter the U.S. by U.S. authorities between January 2014 and July 2014.

   Darby CBP Leak Numbers Globe

Supreme Court limits president's recess appointment power

foxnews

The Supreme Court delivered a blow Thursday to President Obama, ruling that he went too far in making recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board. 

In a unanimous decision, the high court sided with Senate Republicans and limited the president's power to fill high-level vacancies with temporary appointments. It was the first-ever Supreme Court test involving the long-standing practice of presidents naming appointees when the Senate is on break. 

In this case, Obama had argued that the Senate was on an extended holiday break when he filled slots at the NLRB in 2012. He argued the brief sessions it held every three days were a sham that was intended to prevent him from filling the seats. 

The justices rejected that argument, though, declaring the Senate was not actually in a formal recess when Obama acted during that three-day window. 

Justice Stephen Breyer said in his majority opinion that a congressional break has to last at least 10 days to be considered a recess under the Constitution. 

"Three days is too short a time to bring a recess within the scope of the Clause. Thus we conclude that the President lacked the power to make the recess appointments here at issue," Breyer wrote. 

At the same time, the court upheld the general authority of the president to make recess appointments. 

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, among those who criticized the president for unilaterally filling the NLRB slots, applauded the high court decision on Thursday. 

"The president made an unprecedented power grab by placing political allies at a powerful federal agency while the Senate was meeting regularly and without even bothering to wait for its advice and consent," he said in a statement. "A unanimous Supreme Court has rejected this brazen power-grab." 

On a separate track, House Speaker John Boehner said a day earlier he plans to proceed with a lawsuit against the president over his alleged abuse of executive power. 

Reacting to the Supreme Court decision on Thursday, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said the administration is "deeply disappointed" in the ruling. He said that while the administration disagrees with the decision, it will honor it. 

The issue of recess appointments receded in importance after the Senate's Democratic majority changed the rules to make it harder for Republicans to block confirmation of most Obama appointees. 

But the ruling's impact may be keenly felt by the White House next year if Republicans capture control of the Senate in the November election. The potential importance of the ruling lies in the Senate's ability to block the confirmation of judges and the leaders of independent agencies like the NLRB. A federal law gives the president the power to appoint acting heads of Cabinet-level departments to keep the government running. 

Still, the outcome could have been worse for the administration. The justices, by a 5-4 vote, rejected a sweeping lower court ruling against the administration that would have made it virtually impossible for any future president to make recess appointments. 

The lower court held that the only recess recognized by the Constitution is the once-a-year break between sessions of Congress. It also said that only vacancies that arise in that recess could be filled. So the high court has left open the possibility that a president, with a compliant Congress, could make recess appointments in the future.  

The case decided Thursday arose out of a dispute between the NLRB and a Pepsi-Cola distributor, Noel Canning. The NLRB had ruled against him in a labor dispute, but Canning argued that three of the five board members were improperly appointed. 

A recess appointment can last no more than two years. Recess appointees who subsequently won Senate confirmation include Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justice William Brennan, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, two current NLRB members and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau director Richard Cordray. Former UN Ambassador John Bolton is among recess appointees who left office because they could not win a Senate vote. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Is there a danger of Sharia law creeping into US?

Islamist Internet threat 'theatre,' expert says

Toronto Sun

OTTAWA -- Canada is the latest western country to receive an Internet threat from an Islamic militant group fighting in Syria's civil war.

"This is a message to Canada and all of America," says a young English-speaking man on a recently uploaded YouTube video. "We are coming and we will destroy you."

The man, who in the 75-second clip is surrounded by masked people holding rifles, claims to be a member of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, also known as ISIL.

"I (came) to this land for one reason alone," the man says before tearing and burning what looks like a passport, "I left comfort for one reason alone: For (God)."

ISIL, which is operating in Syria, has been publicly disavowed by al-Qaeda for being too unruly and unmanageable.

Mubin Shaikh, an expert on Islamic militant groups, says that ISIL is known to be so vicious it kills fellow Muslims whom the group claims don't subscribe to its brand of Islam.

The former CSIS and RCMP mole who infiltrated the Toronto 18 terror cell in 2006, says he is completing his PhD.

He says Canadians shouldn't be too concerned about the video since it is most likely staged and being used for marketing purposes.

"This video clip is theatre," he said. "It served a number of purposes; it appeals to (ISIL's) own groups and those they want to recruit."

Al-Qaeda Calls for Car Bomb Attacks on American Cities, Targets Abroad

breitbart

By Kerry Picket

The latest issue of Al-Qaeda's Inspire magazine contains an article about using car bombs in U.S. cities as well as abroad during election seasons, both presidential and congressional, as well as on Christmas and New Years Eve. 

The cities and areas listed in the piece include Washington, D.C., New York, Northern Virginia, Chicago, and Los Angeles.

America is our first target, followed by United Kingdom, France and other crusader countries.
As for the field target for the car-bomb, you have places flooded with individuals, e.g. sports events in which tens of thousands attend, election campaigns, festivals and other gathering. The important thing is that you target people and not buildings:
Washington DC and New York:
Washington is the capital, and New York is the former capital. Both have symbolic importance to the American people and government. Moreover, White House is in Washington, and DC has about 347,000 federal govern ment employees and many important figures in the government live there. As for New York, it is known for its status as a financial, cultural, transportation, and manufacturing center, it is the leading center of banking, finance and communication in the United States.
Northern Virginia:
It has a big military presence, almost all the military bases are based in this state, apart from the Air Force which is based in Chicago. There are federal agencies in Northern Virginia, including the headquarters of the Department of Defense and CIA; and military facilities in Hampton Roads, the site of the region's main seaport. Virginia in general attracts a load of tourists.
Chicago:
It is in the mid of the US, hence it is a major transportation hub. It is an important component in global distribution, as it is the third largest inter-modal port in the world. It is also an important worldwide center of commerce. The city has the second largest financial center in the United States. Among its most important financial structures:
1. Sears Tower, a 108-story skyscraper, it held the title tallest building in the world for about 25 years.
2. The Chicago Board of Trade Building.
Los Angeles:
The most populous city in the state of California, and the second most populous in the United States. It is also the largest manufacturing center in the western United States. It is also the home base of Hollywood. Areas and Restaurants with high profile personalities - Usually these people visit the restaurants during the weekend:
Arlington
Alexandria
Restaurants and Bars in the M street, Washington.
Tennis stadiums; they are visited by thousands of people, and high profile people, especially the US Open.

The piece includes interviews with islamist and Al-Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki, who was killed in a U.S. drone strike in 2011, and Samir Khan, who was killed in the same air strike. Khan served as editor and publisher of Inspire up to that point. A photo of New York City is shown at the end of the piece. 

The terrorist organization's magazine has a letter from the editor that states:

Whenever Al-Qaeda is mentioned, the American citizens' mind thinks of vest and car bombs.
Bearing in mind that none of these weapons has struck them post 9/11. So why would they relate Al-Qaeda to these bombs? Simply because they fear these weapons and have seen enough of their destructive power in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Many Feisal Shahzads are residing inside America, and all they need is the knowledge of how to make car bombs. They are all yearning to fulfill their duty of Jihad.
The American government was unable to protect its citizens from pressure cooker bombs in backpacks, I wonder if they are ready to stop car bombs!
Therefore, as our responsibility to the Muslim Ummah in general and Muslims living in America in particular, Inspire Magazine humbly presents to you a simple improvised home recipe of Shahzad's car bomb.
And the good news is … you can prepare it in the kitchen of your mom too.

The piece also lists specific locations and times to attack European sites in England and France. These include the Bastille Military Day Parade on July 14 in Paris and soccer (football) stadiums during Premier League FA Cup Matches in the UK "when huge crowds leave the stadium and celebrate around the entrances and FA Cup matches."

Hijab Day: Islam Imposed on Citizens in Minneapolis

breitbart

By Pamela Geller 

The counter-jihad website Creeping Sharia reported Monday that “according to a Facebook post, Somali staffers that work at Minneapolis City Hall declared February 28 ‘Hijab Day’ at City Hall and convinced the police chief and female city council reps to wear hijabs on the job.”

The idea originated with female Muslim City Hall employees, who then cajoled non-Muslim women into participating in Hijab Day as well. One enthusiastic participant was a Muslim woman named Ilhan Omar, who is on the staff of Minneapolis City Council Member Andrew Johnson. Omar recently instigated a brawl at a Democratic caucus meeting in Cedar-Riverside, leading to several injuries and the cancellation of the meeting.

Pictures depicted Minneapolis Police Chief Janeé Harteau and several female City Council members, all smiling and wearing hijabs. Why? Is there wear a kippah day? A Sikh turban day? A Christ on the cross day? A Wiccan witch day? What’s next? Slaughter a live animal and let it bleed out for lunch day? Inshallah!

This is imposing Islam in Minneapolis. This is dhimmitude on steroids. A municipality celebrating “Hijab Day” is a violation of the establishment clause. The dhimmi Chief Harteau ought to be fired.

The hijab is a political statement, not a religious mandate. Mark Steyn says in his book America Alone that “there is no evidence that any Muslim woman anywhere ever wore the jilbab before the disco era, when it was taken up by the Muslim Brotherhood and others in the Arab world. It is no more ancient and traditional than platform shoes, bell bottoms, and cheesecloth shirts.”

And “celebrating” Hijab Day is a political statement.

The Minneapolis officials could have more accurately called it Misogyny Day, as the hijab is a call to women and girls to cover up and hide their femininity. It is offensive, and it is misogynistic. The message to women: Hide who you are, because savages cannot control their carnal appetites! Do it and like it! Embrace the hate! Celebrate the most extreme, brutal and misogynistic ideology on the face of the earth!

More notably, Police Chief Janeé Harteau is a homosexual. “Celebrating” the symbol of a virulently anti-gay ideology is the height of cluelessness and/or self-loathing. Gays under the sharia are persecuted, oppressed and executed. Over at my newsite Atlas Shrugs, I run weekly, sometimes daily, news stories of gays getting beaten, whipped or killed under Islamic law. And Police Chief Janeé Harteau is celebrating this? Why hasn’t Harteau joined us in condemning the Muslim oppression of gays under the Sharia? No, instead she bullies her division into wearing this garment of oppression.

The fault, however, doesn’t lay solely with these Janeé Harteau and her friends. In his submission speech in Cairo in 2009, Barack Obama said: “Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state in our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That’s why the United States government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab and to punish those who would deny it.”

But the women who really need protection are not Muslimas who are wearing hijabs – who is bothering them? The real problem is the women around the world, including non-Muslims, who have been threatened and even killed for not covering their heads, including Aqsa Parvez who was murdered by her father and brother for not wearing her hijab; Amira Osman Hamid, the Sudanese woman who took off her hijab and was sentenced to be flogged for doing so; and Amira, the young girl in Egypt who killed herself after she refused to wear the hijab and her family beat her.

Arab American News reported that the last recorded dispute between Michigan honor-killing victim Jessica Mokdad and her stepfather Rahim Alfetlawi, who killed her, was over the wearing of the hijab, which he originally forced her to wear. Jessica didn’t want to wear it, thereby bringing shame on him and the family. Macomb County Assistant Prosecutor Bill Contaldo said: “He thought she was becoming too Westernized. I think this was a very nice young lady wanting to experiment with Western culture without control and without abuse.” The Detroit Free Press reported: “Mokdad’s mother told police that Alfetlawi felt so shamed by her daughter’s Western ways. He killed her in an honor killing, Warren Police Sgt. Stephen Mills said.”

The Mokdad honor killing was covered up, although I exposed the facts about it at my AFDI/SIOA Jessica Mokdad Human Rights Conference on honor killing and Islamic law on April 29, 2012 in Dearborn, Michigan. Probably Janeé Harteau never heard of Jessica Mokdad. But Hijab Day at the Minneapolis City Hall is monstrous in light of the fate of girls like Jessica and Aqsa Parvez.

And it’s not just a few fanatical fathers: last September, according to AFP, an Al-Qaeda group in Syria said that girls in areas it controlled would not be allowed to attend school unless they wore “Islamic clothing” – that is, the hijab (at least). These things aren’t happening only in Muslim countries: in February 2013, South Australia’s biggest Islamic school warned both Muslim and non-Muslim teachers that they would be fired if they didn’t wear hijab to school functions.

Creeping Sharia adds: “Meanwhile, the sons of hijabis in Minneapolis were busy striking terror at an LA Fitness where police responded to 147 incidents in 2013 and 24 incidents this year.”

When are they having Female Genital Mutilation Day at Minneapolis City Hall?

-----------------------------
Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of PamelaGeller.com and author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. Follow her on Twitter here.

Ukraine: Klitschko Was Focus of Leaked 'F--- the EU' Call

Waldemar Cimala

nbcnews

By Petra Cahill

When the now infamous “F--- the EU” conversation between American diplomats first surfaced this month, attention was focused on the presumed Russian leakers’ Cold War-era “tradecraft” and the impolitic use of the F-word.

But taking a closer look at the substance of the conversation between U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt now that the turmoil in Ukraine is center-stage reminds that the discussion focuses on the disparate opposition leaders and how the U.S. might play them to suit American interests.

Much of the leaked conversation centers around Vitali Klitschko, the former heavyweight boxing champ and a major leader of the opposition movement, who Nuland believes is essentially not ready for the big leagues.

The diplomats discuss "personality management" of Klitschko and other opposition leaders Arseniy Yatseniuk and Oleh Tiahnybok.

The leak clearly starts mid-conversation with Nuland asking, “Whaddya think?”

Pyatt replies, “I think we're in play. The Klitschko piece is obviously the complicated electron here...” He explains how he wants Nuland to have a have a phone call with the former heavyweight.

Nuland replies: “I don't think Klitsch [Klitschko] should go into the government. I don't think it's a good idea.”

Pyatt replies: “Yeah. I guess... in terms of him not going into the government - let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I’m just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead, we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tiahnybok [Oleh, leader of the far-right Svoboda Party] his guys and I'm sure that's part of what [President Viktor] Yanukovych is calculating on all of this."

Nuland breaks in: “I think Yats [Yatseniuk] is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the guy. You know, what he needs is Klitsch and Tiahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitch going in, he’s going to be at that level, working for Yats and Yuk, it's just not going to work.”

Pyatt replies: “Yeah, no. I think that's right…”

Later Pyatt adds: “I think just knowing the dynamic that's been with them where Klitschko has been the top dog, he's going to take a while to show up for whatever meetings they've got and he's probably talking to his guys at this point. So I think you reaching out directly to him helps with the personality management among the three…”

The conversation goes on to discuss a new U.N. envoy and the infamous “F--- the EU” comment, conveying frustration with the European Union's efforts to find a diplomatic solution to the burgeoning crisis.

Vintage America: Architectural and Cultural Holocaust

USAHavana

At the end of the 19th century America was set to become a grand nation, our cities would have rivaled Paris, London, Vienna and maybe even Rome. In the 1930's
cultural Marxists infiltrated our top universities in order to destroy traditional Western values through interventions into our culture. They have promoted vulgar design, and they have advocated brutalism in architecture. Through their positions in academia, corporations and municipalities, they have destroyed our national heritage from within. Here is a vision of what they stole from us, replacing beauty with square boxes of steel and glass. Perhaps with the advent of 3d concrete printing, we can reclaim our lost buildings.

Black conservative leaders discuss how the NRA was created to protect freed slaves

DAFRUSA

'F*** The EU' Leaked Phone Call Has Top U.S. Diplomats Apologizing

TIME

Homeland Security Chief: Illegals Have ‘Earned the Right to be Citizens’

LSUDVM

breitbart

From CNS News:

Speaking at the United States Conference of Mayors on Friday, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said the approximately 11 million people who are in the country illegally have “earned the right to be citizens.”

“An earned path to citizenship for those currently present in this country is a matter of, in my view, homeland security to encourage people to come out from the shadows,” said Johnson, in what he remarked was one of his first public speeches since being confirmed as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) chief in December.

“It is also, frankly, in my judgment, a matter of who we are as Americans,” he said, “to offer the opportunity to those who want to be citizens, who’ve earned the right to be citizens, who are present in this country – many of whom came here as children – to have the opportunity that we all have to try to become American citizens.”

Read the rest of the story at here >>

The Reign of Collective Stupidity

americanthinker

By David Solway

An acquaintance of mine tells the story of finding himself in the midst of a public demonstration against Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The chant being raised, so reminiscent of the 1960s, was: Hey, Hey, Ho Ho! Stephen Harper Has Got To Go. My acquaintance asked a placard-bearing young woman, obviously a student, what precisely she objected to in Harper's conduct and policies. She was unable to respond. He repeated his question and, after some hesitation on her part, received the answer: "I don't know, but he's got to go." Ipse dixit!  

Listening to CBC radio's weekly opinion sampler, Cross-Canada Checkup, on the Sunday before New Year, I was treated to a random specimen of public perspectives and sentiments on issues regarded as having been of major importance in the year coming to an end. I learned, inter alia, that global warming was a dire threat to the continuance of the species. I discovered that our conservative government has pursued an agenda injurious to the national interest. And so on. That global warming has been largely discredited and that temperatures have remained stable for the last 17 years was, apparently, news to the coast-to-coast participants in the program. They had never heard of premier Canadian climatologists Tom Harris, Lawrence Solomon, Tim Patterson and Ross McKitrick (oft maligned by the denizens of the global warming industry) or of the Oregon Petition with its 32,000 dissenting scientists. (As James Lewis comments, "Anybody who still falls for climate scare-lines after this freezing winter is either (a) terminally brainwashed or (b) stupid beyond repair. It's often hard to tell the difference.") That the Harper government had steered the country through the fiscal meltdown of the last tumultuous years, leaving it in one of the strongest economic positions in the developed world, was scarcely a blip on the radar of national consciousness. People with salaries and the leisure to opine at length on phone-in programs seem to think this privileged condition is somehow natural and unassailable.

Recent polls have indicated that Liberal leader Justin Trudeau, a youngish wavy-haired ignoramus whose only credentials are that he is a former prime minister's son, a part-time public school drama teacher and bungee-diving coach, and rather pretty in comparison to our elder statesmen and pudgy politicians, leads Stephen Harper by a 10 percent margin in electoral popularity. Harper, for all his faults, kept the country afloat. Trudeau would have sunk it in record time, with shenanigans like his vote-trawling outreach to a terror-linked Islamic organization, his refusal to call honor killings "barbaric," his objections to the immensely profitable Northern Gateway pipeline (while approving of the Keystone XL project. Go figure!), his favorable comments on Quebec sovereignty, and the inevitable tax hikes the Liberal party would impose on the middle class. Yet the Canadian public has to date smiled benignly on a man who performs a partial strip tease in front of smitten ladies during a charity event. The level of political imbecility we are witnessing is incommensurable.

Canada, however, is small beer in comparison to the political travesty that is the United States, where nearly half the population relies on food stamps, welfare payments, tax rebates and a blizzard of entitlements, whose foreign policy is a shambles of half-baked and destructive initiatives, which boasts a scandal-ridden and thoroughly inept administration and is mired in a swamp of economic insecurity, which has exponentially expanded a "coercive, intrusive regulatory regime" as well as devastating the healthcare system, and which twice elects a man who would make a Justin Trudeau prime ministry look like a feasible alternative to the electoral mayhem, fiduciary malfeasance and political stagnation that "The One" has inflicted upon his nation.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/01/the_reign_of_collective_stupidity.html#ixzz2qmxWYZ4l