Monday, April 29, 2013
THE PROBLEM ISN'T JUST ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, IT'S LEGAL IMMIGRATION, TOO
The people of Boston are no longer being terrorized by the Marathon bombers, but amnesty supporters sure are.
On CNN's "State of the Union" last weekend, Sen. Lindsey Graham's response to the Boston Marathon bombers being worthless immigrants who hate America -- one of whom the FBI cleared even after being tipped off by Russia -- was to announce: "The fact that we could not track him has to be fixed."
Track him? How about not admitting him as an immigrant?
As if it's a defense, we're told Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (of the Back Bay Tsarnaevs) were disaffected "losers" -- the word used by their own uncle -- who couldn't make it in America. Their father had already returned to Russia. Tamerlan had dropped out of college, been arrested for domestic violence and said he had no American friends. Dzhokhar was failing most of his college courses. All of them were on welfare.
(Dzhokhar was given everything America had to offer, and now he only has one thing in his future to look forward to ... a tenured professorship.)
My thought is, maybe we should consider admitting immigrants who can succeed in America, rather than deadbeats.
But we're not allowed to "discriminate" in favor of immigrants who would be good for America. Instead of helping America, our immigration policies are designed to help other countries solve their internal problems by shipping their losers to us.
The problem isn't just illegal immigration. I would rather have doctors and engineers sneaking into the country than legally arriving ditch-diggers.
Teddy Kennedy's 1965 immigration act so dramatically altered the kinds of immigrants America admits that, since 1969, about 85 percent of legal immigrants have come from the Third World. They bring Third World levels of poverty, fertility, illegitimacy and domestic violence with them. When they can't make it in America, they simply go on welfare and sometimes strike out at Americans.
In addition to the four dead and more than 100 badly wounded victims of the Boston Marathon bombing, let's consider a few of the many other people who would be alive, but for Kennedy's immigration law:
-- The six Long Island railroad passengers murdered in 1993 by Jamaican immigrant Colin Ferguson. Before the shooting, Ferguson was unemployed, harassing women on subways, repeatedly bringing lawsuits against police and former employers, applying for workman's compensation for fake injuries and blaming all his problems on white people. Whom he then decided to murder.
-- The two people killed outside CIA headquarters in 1993 by Pakistani illegal immigrant Mir Qazi. He had been working as a driver for a courier company. (It's nearly impossible to find an American who can drive.)
-- Christoffer Burmeister, a 27 year-old musician killed in a mass shooting by Palestinian immigrant Ali Hassan Abu Kamal in 1997 at the Empire State Building. Hassan had immigrated to America with his family two months earlier at age 68. (It's a smart move to bring in immigrants just in time to pay them Social Security benefits!)
-- Bill Cosby's son, Ennis, killed in 1997 by 18-year-old Ukrainian immigrant Mikhail Markhasev, who had come to this country with his single mother eight years earlier -- because we were running short on single mothers.
Markhasev, who had a juvenile record, shot Cosby point-blank for taking too long to produce his wallet. He later bragged about killing a "n*gger."
-- The three people murdered at the Appalachian School of Law in 2002 by Nigerian immigrant Peter Odighizuwa, angry at America because he had failed out of law school. At least it's understandable why our immigration policies would favor a 43-year-old law student. It's so hard to get Americans to go to law school these days!
-- The stewardess and passenger murdered by Egyptian immigrant Hesham Mohamed Hadayet when he shot up the El Al ticket counter at the Los Angeles airport in 2002. Hesham, a desperately needed limousine driver, received refugee status in the U.S. because he was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Apparently, that's a selling point if you want to immigrate to America.
-- The six men murdered by Mexican immigrant Salvador Tapia at the Windy City Core Supply warehouse in Chicago in 2003, from which he had been fired six months earlier. Tapia was still in this country despite having been arrested at least a dozen times on weapons and assault charges. Only foreign newspapers mentioned that Tapia was an immigrant. American newspapers blamed the gun.
-- The six people killed in northern Wisconsin in 2004 by Hmong immigrant Chai Soua Vang, who shot his victims in the back after being caught trespassing on their property. Minnesota Public Radio later explained that Hmong hunters don't understand American laws about private property, endangered species, or really any laws written in English. It was an unusual offense for a Hmong, whose preferred crime is raping 12- to 14-year-old girls -- as extensively covered in the Fresno Bee and Minneapolis Star Tribune.
-- The five people murdered at the Trolley Square Shopping Mall in Salt Lake City by Bosnian immigrant Sulejman Talovic in 2007. Talovic was a Muslim high school dropout with a juvenile record. No room for you, Swedish doctor. We need resentful Muslims!
-- The 32 people murdered at Virginia Tech in 2007 by Seung-Hui Cho, a South Korean immigrant.
-- The 13 soldiers murdered at Fort Hood in 2009 by "accused" shooter Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, son of Palestinian immigrants. Hasan's parents had operated a restaurant in Roanoke, Va., because where are we going to find Americans to do that?
-- The 13 people killed at the American Civic Association in Binghamton, N.Y., by Vietnamese immigrant Jiverly Wong, who became a naturalized citizen two years after being convicted of fraud and forgery in California. Wong was angry that people disrespected him for his poor English skills.
-- Florence Donovan-Gunderson, who was shot along with her husband, and three National Guardsmen in a Carson City IHOP gunned down by Mexican immigrant Eduardo Sencion in 2011.
-- The three people, including a 15-year-old girl, murdered in their home in North Miami by Kesler Dufrene, a Haitian immigrant and convicted felon who had been arrested nine times, but was released when Obama halted deportations to Haiti after the earthquake. Dufrene chose the house at random.
-- The many African-Americans murdered by Hispanic gangs in Los Angeles in the last few years, including Jamiel Shaw Jr., a star football player being recruited by Stanford; Cheryl Green, a 14-year-old eighth-grade student chosen for murder solely because she was black; and Christopher Ash, who witnessed Green's murder.
During the three years from 2010 through 2012, immigrants have committed about a dozen mass murders in this country, not including the 9/11 attack.
The mass murderers were from Afghanistan, South Korea, Vietnam, Haiti, South Africa, Ethiopia and Mexico. None were from Canada or Western Europe.
I don't want to hear about the black crime rate or the Columbine killers. We're talking about immigrants here! There should be ZERO immigrants committing crimes.There should be ZERO immigrants accepting government assistance. There should be ZERO immigrants demanding that we speak their language.
We have no choice about native-born losers. We ought to be able to do something about the people we chose to bring here.
Meanwhile, our government officials just keep singing the praises of "diversity," while expressly excluding skilled immigrants who might be less inclined to become "disaffected" and lash out by killing Americans.
In response to the shooting at Fort Hood, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George W. Casey Jr. said: "As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that's worse."
On "Fox News Sunday" this week, former CIA director Gen. Michael Hayden said of the Boston bombing suspects, "We welcome these kinds of folks coming to the United States who want to be contributing American citizens."
Unless, that is, they have a college degree and bright prospects. Those immigrants are prohibited
Home Office fury as drug dealer immigrant wins right to stay in UK
A judge's decision to allow a convicted drug dealer who abandoned his children the right to stay in Britain over his “human rights” is at the centre of mounting political protest.
Hesham Mohammed Ali won an appeal against moves by Theresa May, the Home Secretary, to deport him because of his crimes.
He convinced a judge he had a “family life” which had to be respected because he had a “genuine” relationship with a British woman – despite already having two children by different women with whom he now has no contact.
Ali also mounted an extraordinary claim that his life would be in danger in his native Iraq because he was covered in tattoos, including a half-naked Western woman – a claim which was only dismissed after exhaustive legal examination.
In his decision to let Ali stay, the immigration judge said he was not taking into account new guidelines introduced by the Home Secretary last week, in an attempt to stop spurious human rights cases being brought by criminals to prevent their deportation.
The Home Office has said it was “disappointed” by the ruling, while MPs said it showed there was an urgent need to stop abuse of human rights laws.
“Foreigners who commit serious crimes should be deported, regardless of whether they have family in the UK,” a spokesman said.
“We are disappointed with this judgment and that is why this Government will bring forward primary legislation to prevent foreign nationals remaining in the UK through abuse of the Human Rights Act.”
Dominic Raab, the Tory MP who is campaigning for human rights reform, said of the case: “It is bad enough a convicted drug dealer cheating deportation because he has a girlfriend.
“But it’s even worse that our elastic human rights laws consume government time and money fighting such ludicrous claims. The shifting human rights goalposts have encouraged a 'try it on’ culture at taxpayers’ expense.”
Priti Patel, the Tory MP, said: “The right to family life has been completely abused in this case. It’s clear this individual has no regard for proper family life and the upbringing of his children, as he has no relationship with either of the mothers let alone either of his children themselves.
“It is wrong for hard-working British taxpayers to be footing the bill for cases like this. It is further evidence that our human rights laws need to be reviewed immediately.”
The Home Office spent thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money trying to have Ali deported, fighting his initial appeal – which was eventually set aside – and a second hearing.
The two key elements of his claim were his “family life”, and the danger his tattoos would pose if he was deported to Iraq.
During that hearing the court went to great lengths to consider the issue of Ali’s tattoos, with Judge Jonathan Perkins describing the issue as “problematic”. He asked whether Ali, 36, had considered having the tattoos removed and heard evidence from an expert witness on whether Iraqi people were victimised for having body art.
Ali was brought to Britain “irregularly” by a people-smuggling gang in 2000, when he was 24, and has never been in this country legally. Two years after arriving he made an asylum claim which was refused, as was a subsequent appeal. However, for reasons which are unknown, he was not deported and continued to live in Britain.
He had a child with an Irish woman and then another son with a woman from Liverpool but has no contact with either child, the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber heard.
In November 2005 he was convicted of possessing Class A and Class C drugs, and fined.
Just over a year later he was convicted of another offence at Snaresbrook Crown Court in London but this time it was more serious – possessing Class A drugs with intent to supply – and he was jailed for four years. Under immigration laws any foreign national jailed for a year or more should be subject to automatic deportation.
Within months of his sentencing, the Home Office told Ali they would attempt to deport him but because there was confusion over his true nationality, the case was allowed to lapse.
The drug dealer was released on bail in January 2009. Deportation proceedings began again in 2010, and Ali again lodged an appeal. He told the court he would be in danger if he was returned to Iraq because he was so Westernised.
Allowing him to stay at the second hearing, Judge Perkins said he was impressed by evidence from Ali’s girlfriend, Cy Harwood, 31, a Londoner who has trained as a beautician. They met in 2005.
The judge ruled that Ali’s deportation would have a very damaging effect on her and would be a breach of the couple’s rights under Article 8.
“Destroying an important relationship in the light of a reformed criminal who was last in trouble over six years ago is, I find, just too much and I am satisfied that an exception is made out,” he said.
The judge also detailed the claim that tattoos, and Ali’s claim that he had become Westernised, would put him in danger in Iraq.
“He described himself as 'covered in tattoos’ including a half-naked Western woman on his chest, a sea horse and star on his arm and his fiancee’s name 'Cy’ surrounded by stars on his hand.
“He was asked if he could refer to any evidence to confirm his alleged fear that being tattooed would be a sign of the infidel in Iraq. His answer was vague. He referred to watching videos on YouTube. He said that people with tattoos get stoned or harmed.”
Alan George, a specialist on Iraq who appeared for Ali, told the court he was not aware of any examples of Muslims being persecuted because of their tattoos but he added that “tattoos would be considered un-Islamic and a tattoo of a semi-naked woman particularly objectionable”.
He suggested it would be difficult for Ali to pray because Muslim ritual requires him to bathe and expose his body.
Describing the issue as “problematic”, Judge Perkins said: “I have had to think carefully about this but the appellant had not given any indication that he had any objection to trying to conceal the tattoo or have it removed.
“[The tattoo on Ali’s hand] might prompt inquiry but as it is a central feature of the appellant’s case that he is now a devout Muslim I am not persuaded there is a real risk of a tattoo doing more than prompting curiosity which would be satisfied by his sincere explanation about the strength of his religious convictions.”
Ali said he worked as a wrestling promoter and had also been a professional dancer. At one stage he passed an audition to work for Simon Cowell, the music impresario, but “he was arrested before he was able to take advantage of that opportunity,” the court heard.
Judge Perkins added that he was deliberately not taking into account the Home Secretary’s changes to the immigration rules.
“I do not arrive at this conclusion by considering the rules in their amended form which purports to introduce aspects of Article 8 expressly into the rules,” he said.
“They do not assist me with the proper application of the appellant’s human rights. My decision is in accordance with binding jurisprudence.”
The case raises new concerns over the arguments sometimes put forward by foreigners who are seeking to stay in Britain, such as the Bolivian man whose case was first reported in The Sunday Telegraph in 2009.
Camilo Soria Avila argued that he should not be deported partly because he and his boyfriend had bought a pet cat, Maya, and joint ownership of the animal added weight to his case that he enjoyed the “right to family life” in Britain.
The immigration tribunal ruled that sending Mr Avila, 36, back to Bolivia would breach his human rights because he was entitled to a “private and family life”
with his British boyfriend Frank Trew, 49, and joint ownership of a pet was evidence that he was fully settled in this country.
Posted by jonjayray at 10:21 AM