Who really is the Amnesty Party? The answer will shock you!

In 1986 the first, and what was to be the only, amnesty since our nation was founded in 1778 was passed. Between 1986 and 2000 there were six more amnesties passed by the U.S. Congress.

So which party pushed amnesty?

Here is a list of all amnesties passed and who controlled the U.S. Congress:

  1. In 1986 the amnesty was called Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA. A blanket amnesty for some 2.7 million illegal aliens and only 40% ever became Naturalized. Republican Senate and Democrat controlled House. (R/D)
  2. Section 245(i ) Amnesty 1994: A temporary rolling amnesty for 578,000 illegal aliens. Democrat Senate and House. (D/D)
  3. Section 245(1) Extension Amnesty: 1997 An extension of the rolling amnesty created in 1994. Republican Senate and Republican House. (R/R)
  4. Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) Amnesty 1997 An amnesty for close to one million Central Americans. Republican Senate and Republican House. (R/R)
  5. Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act Amnesty (HRIFA) 1998 An amnesty for for 125,000 illegal aliens from Haiti. Republican Senate and Republican House. (R/R)
  6. Late Amnesty 2000: An amnesty for some 400,000 illegal aliens who claimed they should have been under the 1986 amnesty. Republican Senate and Republican House. (R/R)
  7. LIFE Act Amnesty 2000: A reinstatement of the rolling section 245(i) amnesty for an estimated 900,000 illegal aliens. Republican Senate and Republican House. (R/R)

When you add up who was in charge for the seven amnesties it becomes clear: THE AMNESTY PARTY IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

The Republicans completely controlled both houses for 5 of the 7 amnesties, split one and the Democrats controlled both houses only in 1994.

If you have been wondering why the Republicans, the so called Rule-of-Law Party, has not been taking action against Obama’s unconstitutional acts with immigration perhaps these facts will enlighten you.

Is Obama doing their work for them?

WHAT WORKS AND WHAT DOESN’T

You would think with seven amnesties granted from 1986-2000 sponsored overwhelmingly by Republicans granting 5,700,000 amnesties and with 11,000,000 (govt. numbers) illegal aliens currently demanding amnesty a smart bunch would have figured out it doesn’t solve any problems; it just creates bigger ones like the orchestrated kid’s invasion we couldn’t or wouldn’t repel. The amnesty approach satisfies special interest groups and dumps on citizens.

E-VERIFY DOES WORK

The same bunch that rewards illegal actions with legal residency have avoided legislating enforced mandatory E-Verify. Why? Because it works and they aren’t interested in fixing the illegal invasion what with the need for cheap labor and new democrats. They also don’t like to be reminded they promised E-Verify in 1986 along with a border as secure as the Korean border. The E-Verify approach satisfies citizens, especially workers, and requires special interest groups to obey employment laws.

The Oprah-ization of America

“Feelings, nothing more than feelings. Trying to forget my feelings of love…” Okay folks, I’ll stop singing.

Is it just me or have you noticed that feelings now trump common sense and rational reasoned thinking in America today? Feelings have become more important than national security, our economy, the lives of our troops and even public health when you observe the politically correct way our government is dealing with this Ebola thing. It is insane.

I am not blaming Oprah, but I saw this trend towards everything-being-about-feelings beginning decades ago when the Oprah Winfrey show became the hottest thing on national daytime TV. Has our culture become too feminized?

Before I continue, allow me to admit an embarrassing personal quirk. When I am passionately talking about an issue, I sometimes struggle to hold back tears. Encountering honorable things such as love, courage and goodness also tend to cause me to well up. Every time this happens during a radio or TV interview, I feel humiliated. I ask myself, “Lloyd Marcus what in the world is wrong with you?”

My mom was a very compassionate and emotional person. As her first born, I wonder if I inherited something from her. I rationalize my quirk with the knowledge that Jesus wept for his people. So, I am in good company.

Having said that, I am appalled by the emotion-driven touchy-feely brain-dead metro-sexual idiocy that is running the show in America today. Apparently, somehow I missed the national memo banning testosterone and common sense.

Dad taught my three younger brothers and me to take pride in being men; always try to do the right thing, stand up for what you believe, nobody owes you anything, protect and respect women. Dad instructed, “When you take a girl out on a date it is your responsibility to return her home safely.” That is being a real man.

In our new wimpy America, manhood is no loner celebrated. Respecting women now includes asking a girl’s permission before kissing her. Folks, biology dictates that most women like confidence in their men. Wimpy liberal dudes and hardcore radical feminists do not go nuts and misinterpret my point. I am NOT saying that women like overly aggressive jerks.

All I am saying is that I would not have witnessed the same swooning reaction from my mom to the movie scene in which Burt Lancaster kissed Deborah Kerr on the beach had Lancaster asked permission before kissing her.

America’s obsession with taking a kinder, gentler, careful not to offend or hurt anyone’s feelings approach to everything is out of control.

A few examples…

Guilt feelings over America’s sin of slavery have lead author and Ebola expert David Quammen to suggest that we risk Ebola getting into our country rather than blocking flights from Liberia. So this fool cavalierly advocates putting millions of Americans at risk of contracting Ebola as payback for slavery. This is insanity, folks.

As a child, I remember my grandmother was sent away (quarantined) for over a year because she had tuberculosis. Should my family have raised a stupid emotion driven stink saying there they go again, locking way (enslaving) a black woman? Quarantining my grandmother was the right thing to do; common sense.

Then, there is the disturbing way feelings has been allowed to reign supreme in Ferguson. Cops were instructed, do not come across too aggressive and let the angry looters wreak havoc freely for a night or two. Despite the police super sensitive nuanced response, Ferguson is still a war zone.

Allow me to propose a radical and controversial concept. How about the Ferguson police locking up everyone who breaks the law? I am concerned that feelings, rather than the facts, may factor in the fate of officer Wilson who shot Michael Brown.

A Democrat Missouri state senator said if officer Wilson is not indicted, then the current rioting “will seem like a picnic”. Isn’t such a threat outrageously irresponsible and inflammatory coming from a public official? Oh I forgot, the senator is black and Democrat, so he gets a pass. Never-mind.

Generals are frustrated that we are fighting ISIS with one arm tied behind our back because our Commander-in-Chief feels it would be unfair and mean to unleash the full power of the U.S. Military in defeating our enemies. Such half measures ultimately lead to higher numbers of U.S. troops dying. Its all about feelings folks.

In keeping with the Obama administration’s pattern of using every governmental agency at its disposal to overrule the Constitution, punish its enemies and bully Americans, the FCC is considering a petition to ban the name “Redskins” from being used over the airwaves. Can you believe that folks? Remarkably, Democrats believe being sensitive to the feelings of those who are obsessed with political correctness is worthy of killing the First Amendment.

Everywhere you turn, Constitutional rights, the law and freedom of speech are being overruled by a hypersensitivity to hurting someone’s feelings. Liberals tell us that public expressions of patriotism and wearing a t-shirt displaying an American flag to a California school on Cinco de Mayo is mean because it hurts the feelings of illegals. Don’t you just want to yell, “This is my country! Get over it!”

I know what you are thinking. What about your feelings as a hardworking, law abiding, flag waving, tax paying, play by the rules U.S. citizen? As far as Obama, Hollywood, the MSM and assorted other liberals are concerned, your feelings do not count. Period.

“Feelings, woo-o-o feelings…woo-o-o feelings, again in my arms.”

Americans Have the Solution to the Ebola Threat – Democrats and White House ignore it

I spoke with a neighbor who recently returned from a vacation in Sicily. The topic of Ebola came up and she asked, “Why aren’t we keeping people in countries with Ebola from coming to America?” That is the question more and more Americans are asking. President Obama and Democrats are avoiding the answer and ignoring the concern.

Shawn Bevans from IJ Review in a column titled “Americans Believe They Have the Solution to U.S. Ebola Threat – But the White House Isn’t Doing It” reports, “In light of the death of Thomas Eric Duncan, the first person diagnosed with Ebola in the U.S., officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have announced airport screening changes. Airline passengers arriving at 5 U.S. airports from Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone would be subject to enhanced health screenings as part of an ongoing effort to help combat the prolific spread of the deadly virus.”

The five 5 airports are JFK, Dulles, O’Hare, Newark Liberty and Hartsfield-Jackson in Atlanta. These airports account for 94% of the individuals who travel into the U.S. from the three West African countries.

In 2010 President Obama stopped more intense airport screening procedures, recommended by the CDC, for infectious diseases like Ebola. USA Today’s Alison Young in 2010 reported:

The Obama administration has quietly scrapped plans to enact sweeping new federal quarantine regulations that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention touted four years ago as critical to protecting Americans from dangerous diseases spread by travelers.

The regulations, proposed in 2005 during the Bush administration amid fears of avian flu, would have given the federal government additional powers to detain sick airline passengers and those exposed to certain diseases. They also would have expanded requirements for airlines to report ill passengers to the CDC and mandated that airlines collect and maintain contact information for fliers in case they later needed to be traced as part of an investigation into an outbreak.

Airline and civil liberties groups, which had opposed the rules, praised their withdrawal.

Bevans writes, “Not all Americans are convinced, however, that a screening procedure is enough to prevent those infected with Ebola from entering our country. According to an NBC News survey, 58% of Americans are in favor of an all-out travel ban on flights originating from Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone. Only 20% opposed the idea.”

In an Orwellian response to the growing concern of Ebola coming to America and support for a travel ban, President Obama’s CDC Director, Dr. Tom Frieden stated:

“The problem with [travel bans] is that it makes it extremely difficult to respond to the outbreak. . . . If we make it harder to respond to the outbreak in West Africa, it will spread not only in those three countries but to other parts of Africa and will ultimately increase the risk here.”

Dr. Frieden, along with President Obama and Democrats, does not seem to understand that Americans do not care about Ebola spreading to other parts of Africa, they only care about preventing it from coming to the U.S. Americans believe what happens is Africa needs to stay in Africa.

Americans look in dismay, and growing anger, at the President’s reluctance to protect the lives of Americans from Ebola and other diseases coming across our Southern borders. Democrats are siding with their leader – much to the chagrin of Main Street America.

Four Islamic State fighters arrested in Texas in the last 36 hours

“If you really want to protect Americans from ISIS, you secure the southern border.” Oh come now. That would be racist. Better to get beheaded or blown up in a jihad attack than that, right?

“JW Confirms: 4 ISIS Terrorists Arrested in Texas in Last 36 Hours,” Judicial Watch, October 8, 2014:

Islamic terrorists have entered the United States through the Mexican border and Homeland Security sources tell Judicial Watch that four have been apprehended in the last 36 hours by federal authorities and the Texas Department of Public Safety in McAllen and Pharr.

JW confirmed this after California Congressman Duncan Hunter, a former Marine Corp Major and member of the House Armed Services Committee, disclosed on national television that at least ten Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) fighters have been caught crossing the Mexican border in Texas. The veteran lawmaker got the astounding intel straight from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Homeland Security agency responsible for guarding the 1,933-mile southern border.

“If you really want to protect Americans from ISIS, you secure the southern border,” Hunter proclaimed on a national cable news show this week. “It’s that simple. ISIS doesn’t have a navy, they don’t have an air force, they don’t have nuclear weapons. The only way that ISIS is going to harm Americans is by coming in through the southern border – which they already have.” The three-term congressmen went on: “They aren’t flying B-1 bombers, bombing American cities, but they are going to be bombing American cities coming across from Mexico.”…

However, military experts told JW that the increase in security indicates that Ft. Bliss is a target. Military installations in the U.S. only make changes to security measures when there are clear and present threats, according to retired Army Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, former commander of the Army’s elite Delta Force who also served four years as Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence. “That means they’re getting a threat stream. Ft. Bliss had to have a clear and present threat,” Boykin said. Following that news, federal law enforcement sources in El Paso revealed that U.S. Congressman Beto O’Rourke telephoned the area offices of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) in an effort to identify—and evidently intimidate—sources that may have been used by JW to break the ISIS in Juarez story.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Whippings, Forced Marriages, and Beheadings: Inside ISIS’s ‘Morality Police’

Sam Harris: “My criticism of Islam is a criticism of beliefs…but my fellow liberals reflexively view it as an expression of intolerance”

State Department endorses handbook calling jihad “noble”

Germany: Muslims supporting the Islamic State attack Kurds with machetes and knives

UK: Muslim medical student arrested for Islamic State plot to commit jihad mass murder in Britain

Time for a New Ellis Island?

The open borders/amnesty advocates whom I have come to refer to as the “immigration anarchists,” regularly complain bitterly that Ellis Island was closed. Indeed, Ellis Island was closed on November 12, 1954. However, this hardly meant that the United States was no longer permitting aliens to be legally admitted into the United States which was the message that I suspect those bemoaning the closing of that government facility wanted people to infer.

The reality is that while Ellis Island had nearly 70 years ago, other ports of entry scattered across the United States were open and facilitating the entry of aliens into the United States. These ports of entry are to be found along both the northern and southern borders of the United States, at seaports along the coastlines of the United States and at international airports. This coincides with a point I have often made about the United States having 50 “border states.”

Last year approximately one million aliens were lawfully admitted into the United States by presenting themselves for inspection at those numerous ports of entry and provided with Alien Registration Receipt Cards (also known as “Green Cards”) to signify their lawful immigrant status in accordance with the alien registration requirement of the Immigration and Nationality Act. These aliens, from virtually every country on this planet, were, upon their day of being granted lawful immigrant status, immediately placed on the pathway to United States citizenship. The number of aliens who were lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States was greater than the number of all immigrants legally admitted by all other countries around the world.

So much for the wailing about the shuttering of Ellis Island!

However, what is almost never discussed by anyone — especially the immigration anarchists, is that Ellis Island was a quarantine station that was operated by the United States Public Health Service in conjunction with immigration authorities. The fact is that the inspection facility was intentionally located on an island of the shore of New York City to make certain that aliens could not set foot on the U.S. mainland unless they were admitted into the United States and transported to the mainland. This was done to make certain that aliens who suffered dangerous communicable diseases could not sneak into the United States and create an epidemic.

Recently the hospital located at the Ellis Island complex of buildings has opened as a new exhibit at the Ellis Island Museum. CNN published a report about the hospital on October 1, 2014 with the appropriate title, “New York’s hospital of immigrants: Where hope and pain collide.” The timing of the opening of that component of the museum at Ellis Island could not have come at a more appropriate time.

Concerns about the potential for dangerous diseases crossing our borders have been tremendously elevated in the wake of the recent Ebola outbreak in Africa that has reach historic proportions and with the discovery that a Liberian citizen, Thomas Eric Duncan, had traveled to the United States by commercial airline flight and lied about his exposure to patients who were suffering from the Ebola virus.

The October 3, 2014 report, “Ebola patient’s leaving Liberia was ‘unpardonable,’ its President says,” provided some important details.

Here is how the report begins:

(CNN) — Days before he became the first person diagnosed with Ebola on American soil, Thomas Eric Duncan answered “no” to questions about whether he had cared for a patient with the deadly virus.

Before leaving Liberia, Duncan also answered no to a question about whether he had touched the body of someone who died in an area affected by the disease, said Binyah Kesselly, board chairman of the Liberia Airport Authority.

Witnesses say Duncan had been helping Ebola patients in Liberia. Liberian community leader Tugbeh Chieh Tugbeh said Duncan was caring for an Ebola-infected patient at a residence in Paynesville City, just outside Monrovia.

That single lie on that piece of paper was all that was needed for Duncan to board that airliner and enter the United States through a port of entry, potentially putting countless lives in the United States at risk.

The immigration inspections process conducted by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors is supposed to prevent entry of aliens who pose a threat to national security and the safety and well-being of Americans. For this vital mission to succeed, our borders must be made truly secure to make certain that aliens cannot evade that inspections process.

The list of such aliens is contained in the following section of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA): Title 8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens. It includes various grounds of excludability including criminals, spies, terrorists, human rights violators and others. None of the grounds of excludability make any reference to race, religion or ethnicity. What is not generally known however, is that the list of these grounds for exclusion begin with public health concerns.

Here is how this section of law begins:

(a) Classes of aliens ineligible for visas or admission

Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, aliens who are inadmissible under the following paragraphs are ineligible to receive visas and ineligible to be admitted to the United States:

(1) Health-related grounds

(A) In general

Any alien—

(i) who is determined (in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services) to have a communicable disease of public health significance; [1]

(ii) except as provided in subparagraph (C), who seeks admission as an immigrant, or who seeks adjustment of status to the status of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, and who has failed to present documentation of having received vaccination against vaccine-preventable diseases, which shall include at least the following diseases: mumps, measles, rubella, polio, tetanus and diphtheria toxoids, pertussis, influenza type B and hepatitis B, and any other vaccinations against vaccine-preventable diseases recommended by the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices,

(iii) who is determined (in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services in consultation with the Attorney General)—

(I) to have a physical or mental disorder and behavior associated with the disorder that may pose, or has posed, a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the alien or others, or

(II) to have had a physical or mental disorder and a history of behavior associated with the disorder, which behavior has posed a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the alien or others and which behavior is likely to recur or to lead to other harmful behavior, or

(iv) who is determined (in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services) to be a drug abuser or addict, is inadmissible.

(B) Waiver authorized

For provision authorizing waiver of certain clauses of subparagraph (A), see subsection (g) of this section.

(C) Exception from immunization requirement for adopted children 10 years of age or younger

Clause (ii) of subparagraph (A) shall not apply to a child who—

(i) is 10 years of age or younger,

(ii) is described in subparagraph (F) or (G) of section 1101 (b)(1) of this title; [1]and

(iii) is seeking an immigrant visa as an immediate relative under section 1151 (b) of this title,

if, prior to the admission of the child, an adoptive parent or prospective adoptive parent of the child, who has sponsored the child for admission as an immediate relative, has executed an affidavit stating that the parent is aware of the provisions of subparagraph (A)(ii) and will ensure that, within 30 days of the child’s admission, or at the earliest time that is medically appropriate, the child will receive the vaccinations identified in such subparagraph.

All sorts of proposals to prevent the spread of the Ebola virus to the United States have been made by our political leaders including ending flights from countries in which patients suffering from Ebola have been found, including Liberia and Sierra Leone, where according to some reports, the Ebola virus is spreading like “wild fire.”

Of course people who are determined to leave those countries will likely manage to cross the borders of neighboring countries, potentially further spreading this deadly disease, and then seeking to board airliners for flights to the United States and other countries.

Recommendations are being made about how CBP inspectors and other government officials should modify the inspections process at ports of entry. Certainly this makes sense. However, no matter how effective the screening process may be at America’s ports of entry, we need to remember that our nation’s borders exist on maps but not in the “real world.”

Our nation has, as I have noted on ever so many occasions, 50 “border states.”

Our borders must be made secure against those who would smuggle aliens and contraband into the United States. In addition to concern about narcotics and weapons into the United States, even seemingly prosaic substances as meat may provide a deadly threat.

On August 21, 2014 Newsweek Magazine published a worrying report, “Smuggled Bushmeat Is Ebola’s Back Door to America.” Talk about the expression that “One man’t meat is another’s poison.”

High-ranking officials of the DHS of both the Bush and Obama administrations repeatedly claimed our “borders are secure” while blithely ignoring the massive tsunami of illegal aliens entering the United States each day along with record quantities of narcotics which provide an irrefutable metric that makes the failures of border security crystal clear. The United States is in the midst of the worst heroin epidemic in decades — perhaps ever. Police departments across the United States have taken to the unprecedented measure of providing their officers with the antidote to heroin overdoses.

Heroin and cocaine are not produced in the United States. If our borders were truly secure those substances could not get into the United States.

For years our politicians and even high-ranking officials of the DHS have claimed that running our borders is not a crime. The reality is, of course, far different.

While it is true that the first time an alien evades the inspections process and, in the jargon of immigration enforcement personnel is an EWI (Entrant WithoutInspection), an alien who has been previously deported and then unlawfully re-enters the United States is most definitely committing a felony. The provisions of this section of the Immigration and Nationality Act are contained in Title 8 U.S. Code § 1326 – Reentry of removed aliens.

Under this statute, the maximum penalty a previously deported aliens faces if he (she) has no criminal history and illegally re-enters the United States is 2 years in federal custody. However, an alien who was deported subsequent to being convicted of committing “aggravated felonies” faces a maximum of 20 years in a federal prison. Certainly any crime that carries a 20-year maximum penalty is a very serious crime, indeed.

I am particularly proud of that last violation of law; in the early 1980s I worked with then-U.S. Senator Al D’Amato to create that particular law and took special delight in making the first arrest of an alien (a convicted narcotics dealer) for violating that statute.

Today’s concerns about our borders being breached by transnational criminals and international terrorists from al-Qaeda, ISIS or Khorasan have been expanded to people entering the United States who are infected with the Ebola virus and other such contagious diseases that are truly the stuff of nightmares. These concerns may even transcend the issue of whether or not an alien evading the inspections process is committing a crime. Given the current circumstances, the bigger issue may turn out to be whether or not by malevolent intent in the case of criminals or terrorists or by being infected with a deadly communicable disease, an alien’s ability to evade the inspections process may result in massive numbers of casualties in the United States.

Our leaders, including event the most ardent open borders advocates, must finally accept the reality that our borders, no matter where they are to be found, are our first and last line of defense against criminals, terrorists and deadly epidemics.

Given the magnitude of the dangers, where our borders are concerned, “secure enough” is not secure enough.

The Liberal Case for Effective Immigration Law Enforcement

My purpose in tackling the issue of immigration is to provide you with perspectives you will not find reported in the mainstream media and will not hear from the great majority of politicians. My goal is to be thought-provoking and to help you to think independently about immigration. I ask that you put your preconceived notions aside. Most of those notions are probably the result of being hammered by a veritable barrage of myths and falsehoods about the most serious challenges and threats facing America today. It is vital to understand that the lack of integrity to the process by which aliens are granted lawful status in the United States — including resident alien status, and United States citizenship, pose an immediate and direct threat to national security.

Immigration is often portrayed by supposed journalists and many so-called political leaders as being a single issue of relatively small consequence to the nation. However, nothing could be further from the truth. Immigration is in fact a singular issue that profoundly impacts nearly every challenge and threat facing America today. Our immigration laws were enacted to achieve the primary and vital goals of protecting the lives and jobs of Americans. It is hard to imagine an American of any political stripe who would not want those two vital goals to be met. When politicians talk about the work “Americans won’t do,” they are insulting hard-working Americans.

Today I will play “Myth-Buster” and take on these myths, lies, and propaganda that are nothing short of Orwellian. Having raised the name of George Orwell let me provide a pair of insightful quotes of the author from the book, 1984:

In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

Political language — and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists — is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.

The ongoing crisis on the border which is meant to separate the United States from Mexico has moved the immigration issue to the lead story on news programs and newspapers all across the country. The reality is that immigration should have always been a major news story all along. It is so important an issue that while the media almost always labels Americans concerned about border security and the enforcement of immigration laws as “right wing” and may accuse them of bigotry, immigration should actually serve as one issue upon which all Americans can and should agree, irrespective of political orientation. That issue is national security. Immigration is a classic example of an issue that is not about “left or right,” but “right or wrong.”

The United States’ borders and immigration laws are the nation’s first and last line of defense against international terrorists, transnational criminals, aliens with dangerous communicable diseases, and those foreign nationals whose presence in the United States would undermine national security, public safety, and the well-being of American citizens. In fact, a country that is unable or unwilling to take defensive measures to prevent the entry of aliens posing a threat to national security has no justification for a military. The purpose of our armed forces is to keep America’s enemies as far from U.S. shores as possible. Today, there are unknown millions of foreign nationals from virtually every country on the planet, living in towns and cities from coast to coast and border to border. If only a small percentage of these individuals have come to the U.S. as terrorists, enemy combatants, or saboteurs we face a grave risk, indeed.

The mission of CBP (Customs and Border Protection) is to prevent the entry of aliens whose presence poses a threat to the safety of America and Americans. CBP inspectors at ports of entry are supposed to apply the appropriate provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to prevent the entry of such excludible aliens. Border Patrol agents are charged with making certain that aliens do not evade that vital inspections process. When aliens are admitted to the United States and then violate the terms of their admission, and when aliens evade the inspections process and enter the United States by running the borders of the United States, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is supposed to locate and arrest such aliens and seek to have them removed (or deported) from the United States.

Weeks after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, I testified before the House Immigration Reform Caucus and in describing the roles played by the various components of the immigration system, I referred to it as the “Immigration Enforcement Tripod” in which the inspectors enforce the immigration laws at ports of entry, the Border Patrol enforces the immigration laws between ports of entry, and the special agents enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States and provide back up to the other two elements. The third leg of the tripod has never been given meaningful resources. Today, there are nearly 7,000 ICE special agents. More than half of these agents are engaged in enforcing customs laws which have nothing to do with immigration. There are likely fewer than 3,000 agents assigned to enforcing immigration laws from within the interior of the United States. To put that number into proper perspective, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) has more than 35,000 police officers to protect New York City. The entire United States of America has less than one tenth as many ICE agents to protect the entire country.

The population of the City of New York is far smaller than the number of illegal aliens present in the United States today. Furthermore, although it is an important component of the interior enforcement mission, ICE is responsible for far more than simply locating and arresting illegal aliens. In addition to these critical duties, ICE agents are supposed to work to: identify and apprehend aliens who violate the terms of their lawful admission, uncover immigration fraud, conduct investigations into employers who intentionally hire illegal aliens, conduct good moral character investigations into the good moral conduct of applicants for United States citizenship, combat alien smuggling, (including working with the Coastguard to safeguard harbors and coastline against vessels entering surreptitiously), and find and arrest stowaways or crew members of oceangoing vessels that jump ship.

ICE agents are also supposed to assign personnel to work cooperatively with multinational task forces such as the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF), the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) and the Violent Gang Task Force (VGTF). There is certainly no shortage of work to be done — just an absolute shortage of personnel, resources and political will to accomplish these vital missions, even though the failure to carry out these vital tasks has serious national security and public safety implications.

Although it is rare for these issues to be raised in news reports about immigration, there have been some reports that address the link between immigration and national security. The 9/11 Commission Report and The 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel both made ample references to the importance of border security, the visa process, and the need for integrity to the process by which applications for immigration benefits are adjudicated. We will explore some of the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and its staff shortly.

We will begin by examining the lies, myths, and accusations often propagated by many openborders advocates whom I have come to refer to as the “Immigration Anarchists.” The terminology of the debate is critical. For military strategists, the goal is to seek the high ground to gain what is often an insurmountable superiority over the enemy. In a debate, control of language is the equivalent of the high ground. The term “alien” has been all but expunged from the American vernacular where immigration is concerned. This bit of Orwellian newspeak began with President Jimmy Carter who ordered that employees of the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) discontinue use of the term “illegal alien” to describe aliens illegally present in the United States. It was strongly recommended that INS employees use the term “undocumented worker” to describe such illegal aliens. Reporters working for newspapers, radio, and television stations also eschew use of the word “alien.”

The actual definition of the term “alien” as defined by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) is simply, “Any person not a citizen or national of the United States.” You can find this definition in Title 8 U.S. Code § 1101 – Definitions. Obviously there is no insult in the term alien. There is, however, clarity in that term, and as is the case with con artists and magicians who rely on obfuscating what the audience sees or hears, in discussions of immigration, clarity is often avoided at all costs. Magicians use blue smoke, mirrors, dramatic lighting, and often an extremely attractive scantily clad assistant to distract the audience. Con artists and deceptive businessmen use the small print in a contract or other such tactics to confuse and confound their intended victims. What is truly telling, however, is the fact that there is one instance where the immigration anarchists welcome use of the term “alien.”

The DREAM Act is an acronym for the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors. Proponents in favor of increasing immigration levels to the U.S. apparently made the decision that it was so important to link the concept of the “American Dream” for illegal aliens, that the term “alien” was remarkably acceptable. Of course, these immigration anarchists know full well that for increasing numbers of Americans, that American dream will become ever more elusive and eventually fail to be realized at all. Another startling and blatant example of hypocrisy that few have taken notice of.

It is incomprehensible that a reasonable American of any political orientation would disagree that our government must protect Americans from the specter of terrorism and threats posed by transnational criminals. Securing the borders of the United States and restoring integrity to the processes by which applications for visas and immigration benefits such as: political asylum, receipt of lawful immigrant status, and United States citizenship should be a first priority. Day after day, journalists on various television programs claim that it is reasonable to provide millions of “undocumented immigrants” with an opportunity to “come out of the shadows,” pay back taxes, and contribute to America. Another widely accepted myth is that we are a nation of “Four Border States.” This is utter folly. Any state that has an international airport, has access to the tens of thousands of miles of meandering coastline, or lies along our northern or southern borders are all “border states.”

On July 7, 2014 FrontPage Magazine published my article: Border Security and the Immigration Colander. In that piece I compared all of the ways in which aliens can enter the United States and game the process whereby applications for immigration benefits are adjudicated, to the many holes in the bottom of a colander used for draining pasta. I used this analogy to drive home the frequent assertions made by many politicians from both political parties that we cannot address the issue of illegal aliens residing in the United States until we first secure the U.S./Mexico border. Of course this leads us to the next absurd argument that the U.S. is incapable of deporting millions of illegal aliens and consequently must resort to dealing with them in a “reasonable” way.

To the average American these sentiments sound reasonable, especially given how often the public is told that to do nothing is unacceptable. The idea, however, that the country is unable to address illegal immigration without providing amnesty is terribly flawed. Given its importance, taking the right step to address immigration is key. Think for a moment of the doctor who takes the wrong action in treating a patient, loses his or her license, and is successfully sued for malpractice. Sometimes doing nothing at all is better than taking a wrong action. Statements to the contrary are often slogans and sound-bites that over time take on the aura of credibility, simply because they are repeated again and again.

Consider the notion of the mythical “Latino Vote.” Is it not an outrageous form of profiling to conclude that all Americans of Latino ethnicity will think and vote the same way? The same lunacy applies when we hear about the “Black Vote,” the “Jewish Vote,” or any other ethnic voting bloc. Such discussions lump all people of similar ethnicity, race, or religion into a common pool and promotes stereotyping which is at the heart of most bigotry and racism. Yet the very journalists who are quick to report that politicians must embrace comprehensive immigration reform to capture the “Latino Vote” are often the same individuals who decry police profiling of suspects.

Consider the term “undocumented” when used to refer to illegal aliens. Although it may sound innocuous, what that term really implies is that aliens who evaded the inspections process either do not have official identity documents, or do not want to provide them because they know that their true names may be listed on fugitive or terrorist watch lists. Use of the word “undocumented” was adopted by the Carter administration which first came to require that INS personnel discontinue use of the term “illegal alien” when referring to individuals illegally present in the United States. This use of language was designed to conceal the truth that should be obvious to all, but then again, in this instance, the following quote by George Orwell is extremely relevant, “To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.

It should be obvious to everyone that aliens who evade immigration inspections at ports of entry are evading a process that is supposed to prevent the entry of people whose mere presence can pose a threat to the safety and well-being of American citizens. The takeaway point is that people who evaded this process and enter the country illegally are uninspected. No rational person would willingly board an airliner if a number of fellow passengers were observed evading the inspections process conducted by TSA officials. No one wants a seat on a cruise missile! Yet today, we live among millions of unknown aliens who evaded a very similar inspections process conducted by inspectors of the Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

Now let’s consider the 9/11 Commission that was convened in the wake of the worst terror attacks ever perpetrated on U.S. soil to determine how these attacks were carried out. The goal of the 9/11 Commission was not unlike the commissions convened following the loss to two space shuttles, undertaken in an effort to make space flight safer. The National Transportation Safety Board sends investigators to the scene of airplane crashes for similar reasons.

The first paragraph of the preface of the 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel begins with the following statement:

It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.

The 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist travel went on to detail numerous examples of instances where terrorists not only made use of visa and immigration benefits fraud to enter the United States, but to also embed themselves in the United States. Page 47 of this report provides:

Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud. For example, Yousef and Ajaj concocted bogus political asylum stories when they arrived in the United States. Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.

The following paragraph is found on page 98 under the title Immigration Benefits:

“Terrorists in the 1990s, as well as the September 11 hijackers, needed to find a way to stay in or embed themselves in the United States if their operational plans were to come to fruition. As already discussed, this could be accomplished legally by marrying an American citizen, achieving temporary worker status, or applying for asylum after entering. In many cases, the act of filing for an immigration benefit sufficed to permit the alien to remain in the country until the petition was adjudicated. Terrorists were free to conduct surveillance, coordinate operations, obtain and receive funding, go to school and learn English, make contacts in the United States, acquire necessary materials, and execute an attack.”

Clearly the 9/11 Commission staff came to the conclusion that border security is synonymous with national security. Suddenly the term “undocumented” lacks credibility and should call into question why any leader would seek to minimize the true threat posed by aliens evading the inspections process.

Debunking the Myths

Let’s also consider the notion of providing immigration benefits to illegal aliens. Besides the issue of sending the wrong message, there is a far more serious issue with this proposal – the fact that there are no resources to interview the millions of illegal aliens, and no resources to conduct meaningful field investigations in conjunction with suspected fraud found in these applications. Immigration fraud was identified as a tool used with great success by terrorists – and not only the terrorists who so savagely attacked our nation on September 11, 2001.

When politicians push mandatory E-Verify, a program I agree with whole-heartedly, no one ever talks about how immigration fraud would enable aliens to game the immigration benefits program to be issued documentation to easily pass the E-Verify program. It is beyond belief that our leaders can continue repeating the mantra that we cannot deport millions of illegal aliens. Only the laws of nature are immutable. The speed of light is not established by someone with a badge, a radar detector or a summons book. The speed of light is established by the laws of nature. Man’s laws, however, are entirely different. Without enforcement, legislated laws are worthless and meaningless. The strategy of law enforcement agencies and government officials is to warn those who might contemplate breaking our laws that they will be discovered and punished.

Have you ever heard a mayor, governor, or police chief of a town declare that there are too many motorists to find those who speed or drive drunk, or heard management at the IRS say that because there are so many tax returns filed, the IRS would not be able to find tax cheats? Of course not! Why then do we accept these admissions of defeat where immigration is concerned? Clearly the threat of terrorism provides an area of agreement for all reasonable Americans.

Immigration, legal and illegal, not only impacts nearly every issue facing America, but provides enormous profits to a wide variety of individuals, organizations, industries, and special interest groups that make out like bandits by exploiting foreign workers, providing universities with students, and businesses with customers, all while creating unfair competition for everyday Americans. The news reports about immigration generally ignore many of these consequences and all too often provide misinformation, tricking many Americans into believing falsehoods about immigration, and about those who call for the effective enforcement of immigration laws and the securing of America’s borders.

There are similarly other aspects of the lack of border security and movement of people, money, and commerce across our borders that motivates those who profit from this to mislead citizens about the true nature of immigration and border security. For them, borders are impediments to profits.

Of course, as borders are made more porous, criminals, terrorists, contraband and foreign competitors are able to more easily transit our borders and enter the United States. This undermines national security, public safety, public health, and the well-being of America and Americans. In fact, U.S. borders are our first and last line of defense against international terrorists, transnational criminals, and aliens with dangerous communicable diseases who would otherwise undermine national security, public safety, and the well-being of the nation. Borders are also our first and last line of defense against contraband such as narcotics and weapons – including weapons of mass destruction.

We will explore the myths surrounding immigration that have come to be readily accepted. The purpose of this policy brief is to uncover information not readily provided by the mainstream media, so that American citizens can better understand the important challenges that confront the nation today. Knowledge is indeed power. My goal is to empower you to make better decisions in the voting booth and hopefully, to motivate you to contact your elected representatives to have your concerns and demands made known. When we patronize a restaurant we are very specific about the food we want and the way we want it prepared. No one would sit down in a restaurant and tell the waiter or waitress to serve up whatever the waiter wants us to eat. When the food is not prepared properly we either send it back or leave the restaurant. We must certainly be as demanding of our elected officials.

My 30 year career with the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) has provided me with unique experiences and observations. Having provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission, and more than a dozen Congressional hearings in both the United States Senate and House of Representatives, and numerous state and local legislative bodies, my involvement with the political side of the issue has afforded me with experiences and perspectives uncommon to most Americans.

Finally, I have traveled to towns and cities all over the United States to participate in town hall meetings and debates. I have appeared on college campuses and radio and television programs. What I have found is that most Americans, irrespective of their political orientation, share many of the same concerns with respect to the enforcement of immigration laws in the United States.

When public opinion polls are conducted, participants who define themselves as “politically liberal” or “politically moderate” may claim not to be as concerned about immigration and border security as their more conservative neighbors. When asked, however, about the issues that are of importance to them, political liberals, not unlike the broad spectrum of others who participate in such surveys, will often list the threat of terrorism and crime. The individuals polled frequently cite concerns about poverty and homelessness, failures of the education system, and lack of citizen access to quality healthcare. They often relay concerns about high unemployment and the inability of college graduates to find jobs commensurate with their expensive educations. Finally, issues related to environmental sustainability often make it onto their list of concerns. What they do not realize is that every one of these issues is impacted by the United States’ failure to effectively enforce immigration laws. The lack of integrity in the visa issuance process and immigration benefits program also contributes to all of these concerns.

When the results of these opinion polls are made public, the claim most frequently made is that only political conservatives and those who are “intolerant” are concerned about immigration, causing one to wonder which came first, the chicken or the egg. Often people allow themselves to buy into adopting a particular viewpoint based on what they believe is expected of them. The obvious question then, is whether Americans have been convinced by the reporting of journalists to take a position, or whether the journalists are accurately reporting on how Americans feel about the issues. Before delving into the specifics of immigration, I would like to provide you with a bit of food for thought as well as some tools to analyze how the public is being deceived. My goal is to enable you to recognize the tactics of deception and intimidation being employed by those who have much to gain by swaying public opinion.

In our polarized society, Americans have lost considerable cohesiveness that has enabled us in years past to overcome obstacles and challenges confronting the nation. Today, when we do communicate, instead of speaking with each other all too often we talk at each other. The fact that not all residents of the United States are capable of speaking a common language further Balkanizes our country. We certainly do not need a common religion or a common ethnicity in order to live in a cohesive country. In fact, ethnic diversity enriches all of our lives and expose us to food, music, and art we would otherwise not have experienced. I am a New Yorker and part of what makes New York such an exciting town is its great ethnic diversity. However, when we do not speak a common language we are unable to communicate and share ideas. People tend to mistrust individuals they are unable to communicate with, especially when they do not share a common language. This further exacerbates our problems. While multilingualism is important for people and should be encouraged, a common language is the cement that holds a society and a nation together. This is not about xenophobia but commonsense.

A Nation of Immigrants

We are often reminded that America is a “nation of immigrants.” My own family traces its roots back to Eastern Europe. My mom was born in Poland and my dad’s parents and siblings came to the United States from Russia at the turn of the last century. They did not speak a word of English when they stepped off the ocean liners that brought them to Ellis Island. Their number one priority was learning to read, write, and speak English as soon as possible. As much as America is arguably the most welcoming nation on earth, it is important that those who voluntarily come to live in the country welcome America as much as they want America to welcome them. As my mom used to tell me when I was a young man, “one-sided relationships are not true relationships!”

Along those lines, consider fans filling the stands of a baseball, football, or soccer stadium. The fans in the stands are extremely emotional. Often they consider the opposing team and individuals who support that team as foes. Think of how often riots break out during a hotly contested game, leaving people injured. When the fans leave the stadium after the game they may take out their frustrations on those celebrating the opposing team. In some extreme cases, cars get overturned and blood is spilled. All over a game! Humans are not unlike other creatures on this planet. We often exhibit “pack” or “herd” behavior and may be incited to riot or stampede. Often it does not take much to push a person over the edge.

Public opinion is not only reported on by the media, but is often influenced and even created by the media with all too many people not even realizing what motivates them to take a position on all sorts of issues. How many times you have heard someone take a position on a controversial issue and justify their point of view with statements like, “they say?” Another similar phrase is, “I have heard.” Sometimes these individuals don’t have a clue as to whom they are referring to, or if the information they have come to take as fact is actually true.

Information Is Power

When a government is overthrown, the rebels often focus their efforts on seizing control of airports, train stations, and radio and television stations. Information is power, and when information can be controlled, so can the general public. This is why propaganda and indoctrination are such important tools for totalitarian governments.

A wide variety of corporations understand just how important propaganda is. They spend incredible sums of money on commercials and advertisements to influence how consumers make decisions. They have even discovered a new tool in their efforts to convince consumers to buy their products. They pay film studios large amounts of money for “product placement.” Think of how people associate particular cars with certain movie heroes. How often is the label on a soda can or other such product clearly visible in a scene in a movie? Think of the hero in a film checking his wristwatch to view the time and for several seconds the watch, usually an expensive one, fills the entire screen so that the audience can clearly see the manufacturer’s brand name. Most likely this is not a coincidence, but the result of a carefully planned strategy where the manufacturer of that wristwatch paid top dollar for visibility in the film.

While on the topic of propaganda and ad campaigns, some thought should be given to political campaigns where candidates spend huge sums of money on radio and television advertisements. In order to pay for this air time, candidates often engage in a series of fund raisers where they attempt to convince people, companies, and various groups to make financial contributions to their campaigns. Think of how many IOU’s these politicians must shell out in their quest for campaign donations. All too often this process has come to be nothing short of legalized bribery. As a result, the wealthy are all too often getting the “best government money can buy!”

Now for another important issue, back when we were children attending school, think of how many kids did really dumb and dangerous things to avoid being called “cowards” or “chickens.” Use of these words have caused large numbers of children to suffer serious injuries. The reality is that anyone who would do such stupid things that they wind up in a hospital emergency room to avoid being labeled a coward, is in fact demonstrating the worst sort of cowardice imaginable. As children we frequently played games like “follow the leader” and “Simon says.” Not much has changed for many adults in our country. They still play games like “follow the leader.” Unfortunately, on important matters like immigration, they often pick some truly bad “leaders” to follow.

Consider how many movie stars, sports figures, or others in the public eye do commercials for products known as celebrity endorsements. The practice of endorsing is about getting consumers to play a game of “follow the leader,” right into the stores to buy that product. Half of the time these endorsements make no sense at all. If Mario Andretti, or some other famous racecar driver would endorse tires, motor oil, or other related product, consumers might understandably accept that celebrity’s advice. However, consider the celebrity who becomes a spokesperson for aftershave lotion, underwear, or some other such product. That actor or athlete obviously has no expertise about the product he or she is hawking, yet many people will still buy it, simply because they want to imagine themselves being just like that celebrity. There is a huge emotional component to this process of swaying public opinion.

The point is that when it comes to immigration, the public is constantly bombarded with the notion that immigration enforcement is only a concern for extreme political conservatives, racists, nativists, or the intolerant. As I noted previously in this brief, however, immigration is not at all about “left” or “right,” but about right or wrong. The manipulation of facts and the accusations and assertions about immigration have caused many otherwise intelligent people to come to some very wrong-headed conclusions. This is not unlike the many people who as teenagers decided to smoke cigarettes because as the old commercials for cigarettes used to remind everyone, “Winston tastes good like a cigarette should!” Many of them are no longer alive, having succumbed to lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease, and other devastating illnesses. But at least for a few years, they felt good that they looked “cool!” The Founding Fathers understood the true importance of conversation, discussion, debate, and even argument. This is why the First Amendment includes the concept of the right for peaceable assemblage, so that the citizens of our nation could meet with other citizens, especially those with whom they disagreed. This is an essential step for achieving a true consensus where controversial issues are concerned. The famed trial attorney, Johnnie Cochran, a member of the “Dream Team” who defended O.J. Simpson at his murder trial is remembered for a number of insightful and clever statements he made during that trial. In hammering the issue of the trustworthiness of one of the police witnesses at the trial, Cochran turned to the jury and said, “If you cannot trust the messenger, you cannot trust the message.”

The polarization of our nation today has caused many Americans to distrust their neighbors. Unfortunately, it is often human nature not to speak with people we have come to distrust and to ignore what they have to say altogether. Because we live in difficult and dangerous times, people need to feel as if they can easily identify individuals who can be blamed for their problems. Politicians and many journalists have, whether by intent or not, engaged in the “divide and concur” strategy that pits Americans against Americans. This strategy keeps us from listening to one another and in fact, makes it more likely that we will accuse each other of being responsible for the country’s problems and focus on each other, rather than the common enemy, which is often both major political parties.

Sharing Common Concerns

Because information is power, when immigration is the subject matter, honest and factual reporting is increasingly difficult to come by. Furthermore, because of misinformation provided by the mainstream media, perceptions about immigration have been created that are often misleading and dangerous. Rather than simply being an issue that concerns political conservatives, immigration is an issue that should be a primary concern for all Americans – particularly those on the political left.

The truth is that irrespective of political orientation, all Americans share common concerns when it comes to this important issue. It is nonsense to believe that apprehensions about unfettered immigration are held only by political conservatives. This sort of disinformation is calculated to divide our nation and our citizens. This is a blatant example of a divide and conquer strategy.

Irrespective of political affiliation, most Americans are concerned about the threat of terrorism. Public safety and public health should be major areas of concern for all citizens. What may surprise most Americans is that about 20 years ago, the late Barbara Jordan, a Democrat who had been a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, headed up a commission that was given her name to examine the issue of immigration. The report she issued made it abundantly clear that failures to secure the borders and enforce the immigration laws did more harm to American workers and their families, with the greatest harm being done to American minorities.

With regard to immigration, realities on the ground are often far different from what is reported in the media. Indeed, the notion that Democrats care little for enforcing immigration laws is only one of the many lies propagated to alter public opinion about the true importance of immigration laws and border security. Given their impact on the nation, it is vital that all Americans understand the true importance of these issues.

It is often stated that Republicans view large numbers of foreign workers (both legal and illegal), as a source of cheap labor for their wealthy contributors, while Democrats view illegal entrants as potential voters. This is an extremely simplistic view, but does have some merit. The point is that the leadership of both political parties see huge gains to be had when large numbers of aliens are allowed to enter the United States. This is why when the leadership of the Democrat and Republican parties fight over immigration and border security, their “battles” are as staged as were the battles waged by the wrestling teams we watched as youngsters. For the most part, the outcomes of the fights were predetermined and the actual battle was as scripted as a carefully choreographed ballet.

Just as leaders from both political parties ponder the potential gains when dismantling our borders and undermining the integrity of the immigration system, Americans from all political perspectives are suffering the negative consequences of these willful actions. If there is one issue where all Americans can and should agree, it is the absolute necessity of securing our borders against the illegal entry of people and contraband.

Political Collusion to Undermine Enforcement

The financial profits being amassed by a wide array of individuals, industries, and special interest groups, because of the human flood entering our country each day is astounding, and provides these profiteers with the motivation to do whatever they can to persuade politicians to give them what they demand: an inexhaustible supply of cheap, compliant, and exploitable labor. They are not unlike the slave-masters of that dark and immoral era of American history when slavery passed as business as usual.

In addition to the importation of cheap labor, many corporations, special interest groups, unions, religious organizations, universities and others, seek to increase their customers and clients from other countries. The United States Chamber of Commerce has long led the charge to increase the dangerous and ill-conceived Visa Waiver Program. Although we will examine their efforts and the dangers that this creates for America a bit later, suffice it to say that this program flies in the face of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and its staff.

Apparently in an effort to bow to political pressure to increase the number of legal immigrants allowed to enter the country, leaders from both the Democrat and Republican parties are in tacit agreement about the need to enable foreign nationals to enter the United States, so that no matter what is said, nothing will be done to solve the problems that this creates for America. Their apparent greed has motivated them to ignore commonsense, the safety and well-being of America and unbelievably, the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Staff.

Across the United States, some mayors and governors have taken to the outrageous strategy of creating “sanctuaries” for illegal aliens in an obvious effort to entice large numbers of illegal aliens to move into their states, cities, and towns. Of course, such efforts also wind up enticing illegal aliens to enter the United States with the hope that they can make their way to one of those havens. Clearly these mayors and governors are committing felonies under federal immigration statutes.

While the mayors and governors create sanctuaries for illegal aliens, the administration has created a “legal sanctuary” for these duplicitous politicians by not punishing them or their respective jurisdictions for these serious legal transgressions that not only undermine the safety and well-being of the residents of their localities, but creates powerful incentives for aliens to run our borders or otherwise enter the United States to make their way to one of these sanctuaries. When aliens evade the inspections process no record of their entry is created. There is no way of knowing who they are, or why they are here. There is no way to know why they are likely excludible, only that they are excludible. In all likelihood, such are the very reasons these aliens have entered the country illegally to begin with. This is the only reasonable conclusion that can be reached when aliens sneak into the United States, rather than presenting themselves for scrutiny during the inspections process as required by law. [1]

A Nation Defined By Borders

Countries are in large measure defined by their borders. Consider how Geography is taught to students: it is all about the borders and the land and resources contained within those borders. In fact, many of the borders that define countries were drawn in blood, having been established as a consequence of wars. Indeed, a nation’s first and last line of defense is its borders. A nation that is unable or unwilling to secure its borders against the entry of foreign nationals who pose a threat to national security, has no need for a military, inasmuch as failures to secure those borders undermines the achievements, gallantry, and sacrifices made by the military of that country.

Consider that the primary mission of the armed forces of the United States is to keep America’s enemies as far from its shores as possible. How can the armed forces of the United States protect America and Americans if the enemies of the United States are capable of entering the country by evading the inspections process, running the borders, stowing away on vessels or gaming the visa process? Terrorists who seek to attack the U.S. see the borders of the United States as the enemy lines they need to cross. They know that they cannot launch a frontal assault on the most effective military force on the planet, so instead they seek to engage in asymmetrical warfare which is not unlike guerrilla warfare tactics.

National borders are certainly no less significant than are the property lines of real estate property. Consider the definition of the term “trespass” as noted in the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:

tres•pass noun \ˈtres-pəs, -ˌpas\

1) Law: the crime of going on someone’s land without permission
2) A sin or other wrong or improper act

That definition hardly squares with the assertion, going back to the Carter administration, that aliens who evade the vital inspections process that our Customs and Border Protection Inspectors conduct at ports of entry are simply “undocumented.” The reality is that they are uninspected. In fact the official jargon of the Immigration and Naturalization Service uses to describe aliens who evaded the inspections process is EWI (Entry Without Inspection).

Let’s recall how many times Janet Napolitano, while serving as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, made the outrageous assertion that it is “not a crime to run the border of the United States.” In fact, while an alien who enters the United States without inspection for the first time is not generally committing a felony, aliens who have been previously ordered deported from the United States and then evade the inspections process to re-enter the United States illegally are committing a felony – one that may carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in a federal prison. There are relatively few federal crimes that carry such an onerous penalty. Clearly re-entry after deportation is a serious crime, yet you never hear politicians mention this fundamental fact. [2] Considering all of the foregoing, it is impossible to imagine that these systemic failures would not be of serious concern to all Americans ranging from political conservatives to the most liberal of our fellow citizens.

Finding Common Ground to End to the Illegality

Whenever government officials attempt to bring an end to criminal activity they seek to ramp up enforcement and impose greater sanctions against those who would violate the laws. Because of the dangers posed by drunk or otherwise impaired drivers, not long ago municipalities across the United States began enacting strong measures to deal with these issues. In many jurisdictions throughout the country, permissible blood/alcohol levels were lowered to .08 from what had been the previous standard of 1.0. Laws and ordinances were promulgated that greatly increased the penalties for motorists found driving under the influence, and included suspension and/or cancellation of drivers licenses, forfeiture of vehicles, greatly elevated fines, and even incarceration. Sobriety checkpoints were set up across the United States and commercials were run on radio and television programs warning of the seriousness of drunk driving, and informing drivers of impending police crackdowns on those foolish enough to violate the law. Billboards were used to further spread the message which even noted that “buzzed” driving (or driving while under the legal limit) was discouraged.

If the tactics employed by the administration on immigration were applied to drunk driving, the acceptable blood alcohol levels would have been made much higher. The politicians could have then claimed that when accidents did occur, and people were injured or killed, that the motorists were not actually drunk, so drunk driving was no longer an issue. Fortunately, sanity and commonsense prevailed and drunk driving accidents really did decline and lives were saved.

Isn’t it remarkable that there are far more motorists in the United States than illegal aliens, yet not a single politician has ever concluded there are too many drivers to effectively enforce the laws related to drunk driving? There are many more motorists in the United States who have cell phones than the number of illegal aliens present in the United States. Yet not one politician has ever said that there are too many motorists for law enforcement to adequately enforce the laws related to distracted drivers using cell phones to talk or text while driving.

Most of what we have focused on thus far has been the issue of public safety and national security. We have additionally noted that there have been huge economic incentives for duplicitous politicians and the various constituencies they represent to profit through the exploitation of cheap labor. Notwithstanding the impact of illegal immigration on the U.S. economy, the supposed “legal” immigration system is also being gamed to provide corporations with high tech workers who work for far lower wages than their American counterparts. Advocates for Comprehensive Immigration Reform are quick to ignore the fundamental fact that adding millions of authorized foreign workers to an already over-crowded and underemployed labor pool will not create more jobs for desperate American workers but will do precisely the opposite. [3] These massive additions to the American labor pool each month through the admission of lawful immigrants and non-immigrant foreign workers, all too frequently results in unfair competition for desperate American workers who are forced to compete with a growing population of authorized foreigners willing to work for lower wages. This forces all too many American workers to have to run up a “down escalator” that is picking up speed!

Flooding the labor market with foreign workers has lowered the wages of American workers, driving many families below the poverty line. In addition to the detrimental effect this has on quality of life, artificially flooding the labor market creates a vicious cycle which prevents the U.S. economy from crawling out of its deep hole. Notwithstanding the importance of this point, there are other important, indeed devastating consequences.

There is no doubt that America is enriched by immigration. Many Americans are the children of immigrants or may be immigrants themselves. The immigration system, however, must have real integrity and must live up to the purpose of the immigration laws, to protect the security of the United States and the well-being of the citizens of the United States. This is common ground upon which all Americans can and should stand.

During the Second World War the United States partnered with a communist nation, the USSR. We also worked with France – in spite of their adherence to the Napoleonic Code which declares that defendants in criminal cases are presumed guilty and must prove their innocence. We even partnered with Great Britain and they drive on the “wrong” side of the road! Because of this combined and coordinated efforts by the allies we prevailed in that war.

Today both political parties have become the adversaries of American citizens attempting to do the bidding of the mega wealthy. Even the specter of extremely violent terrorists openly boasting that they plan to attack the United States directly cannot motivate the majority of our elected “representatives” to seek to address the vulnerabilities in our immigration system including border security and the lack of integrity to the adjudications process.

I am often asked a question by people I meet in my travels around the United States and in fact, it is a question I often ask myself, “What will it take to wake up our political leaders?” Apparently not even the credible threat of a massive terror attack committed on American soil will spur these politicians to take the necessary actions to protect national security and public safety if it involves enforcing our immigration laws. Americans, irrespective of political ideology, should and must band together against both political parties and the politicians who fail to act on behalf of the citizens of the United States. We may not all agree on some issues, but where border security and effective immigration law enforcement is concerned, it is easy to find common ground. Membership in any American political party does not include a suicide pact!

America is currently in a war for survival against terrorist organizations including ISIS and others that include some of the most violent and pernicious sociopaths to be found in the history of the human species. In a war, second place is occupied by losers. This is a war we clearly cannot afford to lose. Americans must support and vote for those courageous political leaders, irrespective of party affiliations, who understand the true nature and significance of the immigration crisis and are committed to acting decisively, making the best interests of America and Americans their fundamental priority.

Immigration is not about “Left” or “Right” but about right or wrong!

Endnotes

  1. Under Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324, it is a felony to aid, abet, encourage or induce aliens to enter our country illegally or to conceal, harbor, shield or transport aliens who are illegally present in the United States. That same section of law deems any concerted effort to commit those crimes by working in concert with others to be guilty of conspiracy to violate the immigration laws.
  2. The relevant section of law is Title 8 U.S.C. § 1326 – Reentry of removed aliens. Section (b) of that statute addresses “Criminal penalties for reentry of certain removed aliens.” John Adams, one of the Founding Fathers, famously remarked, “Facts are stubborn things.” He was certainly correct.
  3. What is also not generally acknowledged or reported, is that already, each month, many tens of thousands of authorized foreign workers are admitted into the United States so that they can work. This includes the nearly 100,000 lawful immigrants who enter the United States each month, who are given “Green Cards” and are immediately placed on the pathway to United States citizenship, along with nonimmigrant workers including workers with H-1B visas and other such nonimmigrant work visas. Additionally, there are exchange visitor programs which also provide foreign workers with opportunities to work in the United States. Foreign students are almost always provided with practical training, which means they are authorized to be gainfully employed in the United States as well.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Progressives for Immigration ReformDownload a PDF of this Policy Brief.

VIDEO: On Borders, Ebola and Illegal Immigration

PASCO, Wash.,/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Clint Didier, former NFL football player, businessman and candidate for Congress in Washington’s 4th District, released a video regarding the borders, Ebola and illegal immigration:

FULL TEXT OF THE VIDEO

“Swine Flu, Dengue Fever, Ebola, Tuberculosis, Enterovirus D68. None of these horrible diseases and maladies belong in America. They are here, in large part, because our federal government has refused to put the safety of the American people first and secure our borders.

“National Security is supposed to be the #1 job of our federal government, but the bureaucrats inWashington, D.C. are failing us miserably. Millions of dollars have been spent to create an illusion that our borders are secure. Yet in reality, hundreds of illegals have already crossed our porous borders from a multitude of countries including many associated with Jihad and terrorism; and South American drug cartels operate along our southern border with seeming impunity, recruiting young illegals to join and carry out the unspeakably violent activities of the transnational gangs (such as the notorious Mara Salvatrucha – MS-13) on American soil.

“This must end now!

“When Phoenix is the number two city in the world for kidnapping and drug cartels intimidate and violate every law of civility with little or no response from our federal government, you know something is terribly wrong.

“We are a nation of immigrants. The debate and problems we have today are not about legal immigration, but illegal immigration! This debate is also a matter of national security.

“We must secure our borders first and foremost – before any other discussions!

Ronald Reagan said that a nation which cannot control its borders is not a nation. I want to protect the American people from disease, illegal drugs and terrorism.

“I’m Clint Didier, I’m running for Congress, and it is my solemn vow to put the interests and SAFETY of the American people before ANY political interest.”

Oklahoma Beheading Raises Questions About Prison Conversions and American Muslim Leadership

On Tuesday, September 30, 2014, Alton Alexander Nolen, a paroled former felon and Muslim convert aka Jah’Keem Yisrael was charged in Cleveland County, Oklahoma, Court with a first degree murder in the alleged beheading of 54 year old Colleen Hufford. He was also charged with the attempted murder of Traci Johnson, both on Thursday, September 25th on the premises of Vaughan Foods in Moore, Oklahoma. Earlier on Thursday Nolen had been suspended by the Vaughan Foods Human Resources Department because of arguments with Johnson and others, allegedly involving, possible racial and religious matters. Nolen, according to a report from his home town newspaper in Oklahoma, may have been fired for misogynist arguments with female workers about stoning women under Islamic Sharia law. Nolen was overheard invoking alleged “Arabic expressions” in his barbaric attacks that took the life of Hufford and stabbing of Johnson. If not for the shooting of Nolen by Vaughan Foods’ Chief Operating Officer, Mark Vaughan, a county reserve police officer, Nolen’s attack could have resulted in a possible mass killing episode. Police and FBI Investigation of Nolen’s social media revealed grisly beheading videos of American and British captives by the Islamic State, formerly ISIS. There were expressions of hatred towards unbelievers invoked by Qur’anic verses cited by Nolen.

Jacob Mugami Muriithi, Oklahoma City Nursing home worker. Source: The Oklahoman

Nolen’s act was not an isolated event in Oklahoma. On Friday, September 26th, Jacob Mugami Muriithi, a Kenyan Muslim immigrant, was arrested for threatening with beheading a fellow Oklahoma City nursing home worker on September 19th. Muriithi was arrested with bail set at $1 million on a terrorism compliant and currently is being investigated. According to an Oklahoman news report the unidentified woman:

said Muriithi identified himself as a Muslim and …he “represented ISIS and that ISIS kills Christians,” the detective told a judge in the affidavit. The two had not worked together before. The woman said she asked him why they kill Christians and he replied, “This is just what we do.”

Nolen attended Friday services at the same mosque as convicted 9/11 perpetrator, Zacarias Moussaouithe Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City (ISGOC). Saad Mohammed, Oklahoma CAIR chapter Board Chairman indicated that Nolen began regular attendance in May 2014. While Mohammed found Nolen fairly quiet, he said, “He was a little odd, a little strange in the way he carried himself. But we [at the mosque] never made anything of it.” The current Imam at the ISGOC Imad Enchassi, is a Palestinian immigrant who lived through the Sabra and Shatila Refugee Camp massacre in Lebanon. Breitbart reported: “both [Oklahoma]  CAIR Director Adam Soltani and ISGOC Imam Enchassi claimed just days prior to the beheading that Muslims and their children had been receiving death threats from Oklahoma residents; going as far as to say that Muslims and their children were under threat of being beheaded and were no longer safe in Oklahoma.”

The former Imam at the ISGOC who encountered Moussaoui in 2001 was Suhaib Webb, a Caucasian Oklahoma prison convert to Islam. Two days prior to 9/11, Webb participated in a fundraiser for Atlanta radical H. Rap Brown with late Al Qaeda operative, Anwar Al- Awlaki two days before 9/11, September 9, 2001. Webb ultimately moved to Boston to become Imam at the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center (ISBCC) controlled by Muslim Brotherhood affiliate, Muslim American Society. The ISBCC had as trustees,Yusuf al Qaradawi, notorious Anti-American and Anti-Israel Muslim Brotherhood preacher living in exile in Qatar and convicted terror financier Abdulrahman Alamoudi serving a 23 year term in a federal prison for funneling money for the assassination of a Saudi prince. Boston Marathon bombers, the late Tamerlan and surviving brother Dzhokhar Tsarneav, the latter awaiting trial in Boston, attended the Cambridge mosque of the ISBCC. Webb has returned frequently to the ISGOC to give sermons. According to a Daily Caller report, Webb published an apology for demonizing ISIS following the beheading by Nolen. Dr. Charles Jacobs of Americans for Peace and Tolerance characterized Webb in a Boston Jewish Advocate article in 2013 as someone who, “teaches vicious hatred and calls for young Muslims to engage in Jihad against non-Muslims in order to establish a global Islamic state.”

Given this background we interviewed noted forensic psychiatrist Dr. Michael Welner, a forensic psychiatrist, who is renowned within legal circles for his work on many of the most sensitive and complex cases in America and beyond. Because his ouvre includes eight mass killing or attempted mass killing cases, defendants implicated in terrorism, risk assessment, and engagement of cross cultural issues, we decided to reach out to him on the Oklahoma beheadings of this week. He is known to readers of the New English Review for the Omar Khadr military tribunal in Guantanamo, in which his work, including a videotaped interview, obliterated fraudulent claims of US torture of a teenage detainee and coercion of his confession; his testimony on risk assessment of future Jihadism had meaningful impact on both a jury picked by Khadr’s own attorneys, as well as the Canadian government. In addition to other terrorism-related cases and casework involving al-Qaeda, he has written on terrorism and its integral dependence on mass media.

Dr. Welner, who pioneered peer review to enhance the integrity of forensic consultation, is architect of the Depravity Standard, an evidence-driven inventory of a crime’s intent, actions, attitude, and victimology for application to criminal sentencing, release decisions, and war crimes tribunals. This fascinating research to essentially standardize how evil is distinguished in crime also includes protocols in which the general public, including all who read this, can directly participate in shaping future criminal sentencing, at www.depravitystandard.org. He is a key contributor to crisis mental health reform legislation before Congress, HR 3717 sponsored by Rep. Tim Murphy, and inspired a recently passed landmark law in Illinois requiring transparency and videotaping of competency examinations.

Jerry Gordon

Jerry Gordon:  Dr. Welner, thank you for consenting to this timely interview.

Dr. Michael Welner

Dr. Michael Welner:  Thank you for inviting me.

Gordon:  Alton Alexander Nolen is a former convicted felon and Muslim convert aka Jah’Keem Yisrael. He is suspect in perpetrating an alleged beheading and attempted murder of co-workers at Vaughan Foods in Moore, Oklahoma. The Imam of the Oklahoma City Islamic Center who encountered him during his parole suggested that he was a “little weird.” How might Nolen’s criminal past and alleged instability coupled with his Muslim conversion make him a recruit to commit such barbarity in sympathy with ISIS?

Welner:  In my professional experience, murder that reflects an ideological influence, which is what I would call this, is committed far more frequently by recent converts or recruits. It is an expression of bonafides by someone seeking greater prestige among the admired group. And it may be someone who is nominally affiliated or unaffiliated altogether. Leaders and more hard core adherents are content to rely upon such individuals as cannon fodder to set an example for others.

As for the depiction of him as “a little weird,” that is a non-specific finding. Were he not to have been “a little weird,” he would not have gotten himself fired from Vaughan Foods. It’s not investment banking.

I am reluctant to yet call him a recruit to ISIS. I think it is more accurate to say that at this point, there is clearly an unspecified segment of the American Muslim population that deeply identifies with ISIS. Some identify enough to travel overseas and to fight for ISIS when they would not do so for the United States military. Others would send their children to do the same. Still others admire them and support their missions and actions. To the end that ISIS has encouraged export of sectarian attacks on non-believers here, there are and will continue to be those who answer that call as a spiritual imperative.

This was an attempted mass killing. Mass killers are premeditated killers. Mass killers identify with being violent and destructive. That typically precedes their adopting any number of self-righteous causes.

The variant for each mass killer is the point at which they decide that the day has come for them to undertake a fantasized mass killing. In this case, Jah’Keem Israel was fired. That is a commonly identified trigger to mass killing in a person harboring deep identification with destructiveness as an expression of manhood.

In cases such as this, his spiritual journey is an ingredient in his justification of killing a complete stranger who had nothing to do with his firing. He beheaded the poor victim – we call that a “signature.” Amping one’s self up on righteous justification with one ideology or another is no different from the self-serving contempt of Elliot Rodger with which he intoxicated himself before decimating Isla Vista, California in May 2014.

Gordon:  Jacob Mugami Muriithi, a Kenyan immigrant and self-identified Muslim had independently and prior to Nolen’s action at Vaughan Foods, threatened a fellow nursing home worker in Oklahoma City with beheading allegedly saying that ”ISIS  kills Christians.” Why in your view should both of these events concern Americans?

Welner:  I am not yet concerned about this particular story as an American problem, so much as it is now an American Muslim problem. Belligerents and co-workers who feel an entitlement to being homicidal have been a problem in workplaces for decades. Non-violence policies in workplaces correctly involve police when such incidents happen, and those who make serious threats are appropriately held accountable.

What ISIS has demonstrated is that it has tapped into a tremendous reservoir of spiritual bloodlust among Muslims worldwide. Death by beheading is no more death than by an automatic weapon. However, beheading as trophy collection is a relish for dehumanizing others that the Depravity Standard research (www.depravitystandard.org) has demonstrated to be reflective of depravity in crime. Beheading is disseminated and celebrated among populations that now dominate the landscape of many Muslim countries illustrates in these populations, how Islam defines its ideals. If that is not the case, then it is up to the Islamic leaders of those countries to fight ISIS and to disown it for religious sacrilege – rather than merely to oppose it for political threat. That is not an American problem; that is a choice of the Muslim world to either choose the 7th century or choose another era which can accommodate their Muslim beliefs and statecraft.

Since pockets of the American Muslim community – the numbers of which are not identified for public awareness – do identify with this barbarity, the challenge will be to American Muslims: How do you define yourselves? Are you here for pluralistic coexistence or to foment Sharia and a Sharia society as you have in an inexorably decaying France, for example? Vehement opposition to the subversives must come from the American Muslim community first and foremost.

The dominance of the influence of American Muslims seeking pluralistic coexistence over the voice of rejectionist Muslims must be supported as a matter of Department of Homeland Security policy. If that does not happen, the belligerence and intensity of American Muslims who are rejectionist of separation of church and state will come define the identity of American Islam as it has elsewhere.

I am not as impressed with the ISIS threat to America as a practical matter. The Islamist students at American universities, as was suspect Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, are far more capable threats right now. The infrastructure exists within the United States to prevent malevolents from carrying out large scale terrorist attacks. The bigger threat to America is not from these combatants, but from America’s unwillingness to deploy simple public safety maneuvers.

It is difficult, for example, to defend a policy of allowing ISIS combatants to return to the United States when the very nature of their militancy is to destroy others around them who do not believe. The policy that shut down the infrastructure for detecting and intervening in violent planned activity in those specifically poisonous mosques that exploit freedoms is a greater threat than those who identify with sectarian murder. Dismantling fundamental public safety measures in order to pander to those who provide cover for subversive Islam is a problem that is far greater than ISIS is or will be.

Prisons are a useful bell weather of ISIS influence. Nidal Hassan, of course, recently pledged to ISIS from prison. I believe Muslim violence against non-Muslims will increase in American prisons if ISIS is influencing relations between the religions in a meaningful way.

Gordon:  Nolen had allegedly become a Muslim convert while incarcerated in a State of Oklahoma Department of Corrections facility. How might Nolen’s exposure to theocratic radicalization materials during conversion contribute to his criminal acts?

Welner:  If Nolen acted in the name of Islam, his evolution in prison is only part of the story. Malevolent and dominant alpha-inmates with their own Jihadist dreams can be all the more poisonous than even radical clerics and their materials, especially if they have access to the inmate or set an example that others admire. Any assessment of Nolen should probe the origins of his influence to Islam beyond mere investigation of a cleric.

Similarly, even if he did not access reading materials, this does not mean there was no external influence. It only signifies that he preferred being preached to rather than to read.

Gordon:  As witnessed by the Oklahoma case of suspect Nolen, Islam is the fastest growing faith in US prison populations. The 2010 Census found upwards 15% of US prison populations (approximately 350,000) were Muslims. That is in contrast to 2.6 million Muslims nationally, according to the 2010 US Census. What in your view contributes to the high rate of Muslim prison conversions?

Welner:  Religion is an altogether therapeutic contributor in prison. For people whose rejection of rules and order, or whose alienation, is tied to their arrests and antisocial history, attachment to a higher power is constructive. If prisons were to be the most religion-dominated communities in America, there would be a decline of prison violence and of criminal recidivism.

Islam has been very aggressive about spreading itself in prisons in America and really, all over the world. There are many reasons promoting its spread in American facilities. For many with substance abuse histories, the rigorous abstinence disciplines one from habits that otherwise handicap. For others with no paternal role models and fragmented social supports, the submission and order organizes and grounds one as a first step to functioning in a manner transferrable from confinement to the community. These are good things to even support and reinforce, in my opinion. If someone chooses prayer, it is a safer world.

Prison also distinguishes itself with a disproportionate population of black Americans. The disenfranchisement of many black Americans from Americana is cemented by incarceration and its lifelong consequences. The Nation of Islam fed off that alienation and provided black liberation/black nationalism as the antidote to many prisoners. Islam appeals to the same black alienation from Americana today, which is weaker in some segments and even stronger in others.

Because many clerics ministering in prison are not merely alienated from America themselves, but militantly so, those on a path of religious discovery are as vulnerable to being misguided as teenagers in a madrassa.

It is no secret that radicalization after conversion to Islam is a huge problem in prisons in the West, including the United States. Part of the problem is the willingness of jails and prisons to employ and to provide access to clerics who are radicalized. Allowing access of radicalized rejectionists to people who are disaffected, vulnerable, and under control of the state is a dereliction of the “corrections” and “rehabilitation” role of incarceration. See also: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/02/19/michael-welner-omar-khadr-and-the-jihadism-that-lurks-in-our-prisons/

This is only part of the problem, however. In some facilities, the reverse occurs –  imams who are invested in America are forced out by senior and dominant prisoners who prefer their Islam with a heavy dose of rage.

But Islam is also a sanctuary against native pressures of prison to enlist in gangs. The gangs are organized around predatory and criminal goals, and pressure others to choose allegiances. Muslims in prison, however, have achieved enough of a critical mass, and a willingness to be violent if bothered, that even the worst of gangs do not mess with them. A person might be advantaged with this protection as a lesser sacrifice than to opt for gang membership.

Still others may identify themselves as Muslim to avoid certain responsibilities, target their housing, to secure certain schedules, or even to get access to a preferred diet. Folks inside are just trying to work the angles, and if that meant identifying themselves as Baha’i, they understandably would.

Christianity is still the dominant religion in prison custody. It does not forcefully engage the criminal mindset in a way that organizes behavior in a pro-social way. Nor does it have the intimidating bearing that Islam can muster in prisons. So it loses ground. For some people, Jesus loves you and Jesus forgives is not enough, especially to those who have no conscience to care to be forgiven.

There is tremendous potential for prison ministries of all faith in prison. But charismatic influence is particularly vital to penetrate the mindset of criminal deviance. Why? Because a person who answers to no one and knows no greater power than himself and no greater need than his own will only grow from respect for a higher power. Charismatic ministry, whatever the faith, can penetrate that self-absorption.

In that regard, religion can be the opiate of the prison masses. Like any drug, however, it can be misused by the dealer and by the user. That is the nexus of the Islam-prison dilemma in America and indeed prisons around the world today.

Gordon:  There have been several cases by Oklahoma Correctional system Muslim plaintiffs requesting access to halal foods brought under the Federal Religious Land Use and Incarcerated Persons Act of 2000 that were generally found in favor of prisoners. Do you consider those legal victories at both lower and appellate court levels empowering radical Muslim prison conversions in Oklahoma and elsewhere?

Welner:  I don’t consider these lawsuits relevant to conversions at all. Prisoners brings suits for all kinds of reasons and other prisoners know this. Some prisoners bring lawsuits to keep themselves mentally occupied, others to be as much of an annoyance to the state as can be. Anyone incarcerated would understandably bring a lawsuit to secure halal foods in prison, simply to curry favor with other Muslim prisoners.

It is true that being devout has been demonstrated in Danish psychologist Nicolai Sennels’ research to be associated with rejectionist alienation and criminal recidivism among young Danish Muslim prisoners. However, there is no evidence that availability of halal food engenders radicalism, any more than lack of availability.

Gordon:  You have provided prosecution testimony in a GITMO military tribunal regarding Canadian Afghan, former al Qaeda teen age fighter, Omar Khadr. What were your evaluation of terrorists like Khadr and the likelihood of their recidivism following so-called re-education programs and release from incarceration?

Welner:  Success is dependent upon the quality of the re-educating imam. He has to be forceful enough and has to have street credibility. In this regard, former radicals hold potential, so long as they are not essentially double agents.

Aside from that, a personal support system that rejects radicalism is helpful. So do probation conditions that allow for re-incarceration in order to disincentivize radical activity. Becoming materially invested in integration into general and secular society, such as vocationally, is helpful. So is developing one’s own family with all the responsibilities of a parent, among other things.

Not surprisingly, these elements often contribute to decline in criminal recidivism in general.

Gordon:  What were the attitudes towards Western host countries that you found based on third party research of incarcerated Muslim criminals?

Welner:  Research of the Guantanamo detainees demonstrated that those with greater exposure to the West, including those educated at Western universities, are more hostile to the West.

This speaks to how American universities fail to take responsibility to an active allegiance to the American brand that subsidizes public and private institutions. Freedom is not free, and freedom that is not defended by more than just the United States military is destined to be eroded.

Gordon:  Why have the social media messages of ISIS resonated with foreign Muslim recruits to its cause both here and elsewhere in the West?

Welner:  Because they are designed to. Social media has no purpose for any organization other than promotional. Social media is the vector to the young, by the young, and that is exactly the space that ISIS is occupying right now.

ISIS knows its audience, knows its constituency, knows what they want to see and knows what they will be responsive to. Most importantly, what ISIS wants (crash-test dummies, support staff, stage props, and those to defend the cause until the United Nations defends them more formally) is responsive to agitprop, which resonates with the young and the restless. Whereas professors on American campuses can fill idealistic minds with propagandist drivel, social media likewise captures the same vulnerable demographic on their down time.

When young Muslims from the United States join ISIS, it represents a failure on the part of our government to convey the extent, breadth, and depth of America’s contributions to the Muslim world. That message was marginalized by the short-sighted and self-interested political class because it means more to them to demonize George Bush than it does to aid the United States to defeat Islamism and tyranny of Arab leaders toward their own people. This is an utter failure of the State Department and Department of Education to represent our overseas interests domestically. It is also a tragic failure of the Obama Administration to use the public relations monolith they created, with far more effective social media tentacles than ISIS could ever have, to advance the global appreciation of America’s goodness.

What would be credible and appropriate would be to underscore how many American lives under both Bush and Obama, be they soldiers or contractors, have sacrificed to free the Arab world and create opportunity and institutions. Then, the young and restless Arabs and Muslims would be enlisting in the U.S. Military to defend those advances from being rolled back by ISIS attack. Consider the attitude of Europeans who fondly recall America for the war we fought on their soil, in thousands of graves in cemeteries across the pond marking those sacrificed to rid them of tyranny that crushed their freedoms as well.

Our nation did an exceptional job of making this message clear with Gulf War I and the war in Kuwait. No Kuwaiti-American, for example, would ever think to fight for Saddam Hussein in Gulf War II, given that legacy. Why, then, when the United States has rebuilt Iraq and stabilized it for a long period, lavished resources on Jordan, politically opposed the regime of Bashar Assad, lavished foreign aid on Lebanon, the Muslim Brotherhood rule in Egypt and Gaza, and propped up the Palestinian Authority, is the legacy of the United States reduced to our apology after apology? Until this changes, seditious anti-American elements here will only gain motivation and momentum.

Defeating ISIS’ influence on American minds comes from making it clear how much the United States has done for the Muslim world. Conveying the message the other way around only reinforces the sense of entitlement nurtured by ISIS to destroy America and the West.

If the Obama media-promotional complex could deploy every single American superstar of film and sport to sell Obamacare, they could figure out a way to bring rightful national loyalty among Somalis and Syrians alike to the American brand that elected Obama in the first place.

Gordon:  What can correctional systems do to screen materials to prevent radicalization of federal and state inmates?

Welner:  Correctional institutions have the necessary apparatus to screen communications and contraband. The risk, however, does not derive from materials. It derives from inmates who identify with violence and who are deeply alienated, who are then further alienated by the influences they encounter in prison, including religious figures they look up to. Imams do not have to direct them to go out and kill. Those who are implicated in violence against innocent people who gave them no provocation are inspired to destructiveness and adopt Muslim grievances as a pretext to ghoulish murder and enslavement.

If correctional officials work collaboratively with a clear-eyed Department of Homeland Security, they can collaboratively stifle the seeding of radicalism in the same way that gangs are regulated behind bars. Obviously, there has to be a zero tolerance policy for imams who reinforce alienation from America and our pluralistic way of life. They can and should be fired in the same way that drug toting corrections officers are kept out of prison. Surely there are enough moderate elements to staff our prison with imams who provide pacifist and pluralistic guidance. And if American Islam does not have such talent, cultivating institutions that produce such talent should be where federal grants and Qatari money are going, rather than to meaningless conferences in which sycophants congratulate each other for sitting down for dinner together. The problem is not with America – it is already a nation of exemplary tolerance and as it relates to Islamists in America, forbearance.

It is easy enough to identify the most pernicious influences behind bars. They can be isolated from influence in the same way that gang leaders are. Correctional policy in America has to engage Islamist radicalization in the same way it successfully deals with gang infrastructure, especially that which has one foot behind bars and a support system outside.

Feckless leadership in European prisons has demonstrated what happens when these challenges are not handled proactively. In numerous Western countries, Great Britain being an example, radical Muslim inmates run the prisons. There is no will to influence the creeping sepsis into the submissive England, which is reduced to becoming a police state with cameras on every corner, haplessly watching its slow but defiant transformation in plain sight. Europe teaches us how life in our prisons, and how we handle homeland security inside prisons, are a window to the direction in which public safety is headed.

Gordon:  Thank you Dr. Welner for highly informative interview.

Welner:  My pleasure.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the New English Review. Also see Jerry Gordon’s collection of interviews, The West Speaks.

Election 2014: How to Stop a Socialist State

As election day Tuesday, November 4th, 2014 approaches it is important for voters to understand how politicians create a socialist state. According to Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals” there are eight levels of control that must be achieved before a socialist state is created. According to Alinsky, the first is the most important.

  1. Healthcare – Control healthcare and you control the people (Obamacare). This legislation violates every American’s 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendment Rights. Be not afraid. Obamacare started as Romney-Care in Massachusetts. If Romney runs for President in 2016 vote for the Conservative candidate. Romney is no different than Hillary Clinton.
  2. Poverty – Increase the Poverty level as high as possible. Poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if government is providing everything for them to live and survive. This is done by higher and higher taxes on the middle class. This is under way and accelerating.
  3. Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. Politicians use this as an excuse to increase taxes, rather than reduce spending. Debt will produce more poverty. Seventeen Trillion dollars and growing. Approved by Obama, allowed to continue by the U.S. Congress under the weak Republican House Speaker John Boehner’s leadership.
  4. Gun Control– Remove the ability of the people to defend themselves from the Government. Anti-Second Amendment politicians are able to create a police state by disarming law abiding citizens. Solution. Buy more guns and ammunition! Be ready to defend yourself. Get proper safety training on your newly acquired weapons. Vote out any anti-Second Amendment politician or any politician supported by Michael Bloomberg.
  5. Welfare – Take control of every aspect of a citizens life (food, housing, and income). Obama is on it. President Obama’s objectives: destroy jobs (Obamacare mandates) while expanding dependence (Medicaid, EBT cards, welfare, etc.). The GOP Controlled Congress keeps writing the checks for EBT cards, welfare, Obamacare and on and on.
  6. Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school. Common Core State Standards is the one size fits all central control system devised to indoctrinate America’s children. Common originated in the United Nations, the National Governors Association with funding from Bill Gates. State run media like ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN support it. By the way, Common Core is endorsed by former Florida Republican Governor Jeb Bush. If he runs for President in 2016 vote for a Conservative Republican boys and girls.
  7. Religion – Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools. This violates the 1st Amendment  right to free exercise of one’s religion. A Progressive/Socialist/Communist cannot control you if you follow a greater power than man and him a.k.a. Obama.
  8. Class Warfare – Divide the people into categories, wealthy/poor, white/black, legal/illegal/, etc.. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor, who are created by increasing poverty (see #2 above).

To the voters who read this column, this is a litmus test for anyone on your 2014 ballot.

If you allow any of the above to continue, as written by Saul Alinksy, endorsed by Hillary Clinton, led by President Obama, embraced by Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner, you will be responsible for the revolution that will be coming your way.

Free Americans will not allow this Progressive/Socialist/Communist take over of the American Constitutional Republic to continue. It would be advisable that you the voter put on notice your city, county, school board, state and Congressional politicians and candidates from all parties. Tell them to start following the U.S. Constitution or they will lose their jobs and/or be defeated on November 4th, 2014.

True Americans are working on taking this country back via the ballot box in 37 or so days.

Obama: Amnesty ‘the right thing for the country’?

I thought they were hiding in the shadows.

In an interview with NBC reporter Chuck Todd, President Obama stated his immigration decision (Amnesty) will be made affecting millions of illegal aliens following the 2014 elections is THE RIGHT THING FOR THE COUNTRY! 

Which country is he talking about; one where the poverty level illegal aliens are encouraged by their government to leave to alleviate their problems in a banana republic because he certainly cannot mean the United States and its citizens.

If he does mean the United States then he has not a clue as to the damage illegal aliens and amnesties have caused here with them occupying nearly one third of all prison cells, driving down American worker wages, overcrowding our schools and sucking on the government welfare teat.

How about a little history lesson.

The first amnesty ever was promised to be the only amnesty and grant green cards to less than one million seasonal farm workers that morphed into a total of approximately 5 million granted legal status between 1986 and 2000 through a total of 7 amnesties or amnesty adjustments. So less than one million turned into five million while a one time ever amnesty deal grew to a total of seven.Of the five million granted green cards only two million ever became naturalized citizens! Two other promises made in 1986 and never kept was to mandate all workers be legal workers and to secure the border.

The result today is chaos and anarchy with untold millions of illegal aliens fueled by republicans working to fulfill employers wants for cheap labor, American workers and American society be damned, while the Democrats push for ever more illegal aliens to fulfill their dreams of a European style welfare socialist state.

If one of you in Washington including Obama can explain how another unconstitutional Executive Amnesty Order encouraged on by anti American open borders groups and some in Congress can be construed in any to be the right thing for the country let’s hear it.

When I speak of the right thing for the country I am referring to the citizens of the United States of America.

Drought Conditions in the U.S. and Immigration

As water resources necessary for survival dwindle the U.S. Senate, in all its’ wisdom, passed legislation last year that would have doubled mass immigration levels to 2 million a year, dramatically increase worker visas and grant amnesty. Democrats are interested in poverty level voters and Republicans cheap labor. Fortunately the House refused to take up a bill which had no benefits but many negatives for the citizens that voted them into office.

In addition, contemplate what could happen if the population continues to soar.

Here is a link to an article about India, second most populated country in the world, and water their shortages. Don’t forget we are the third most populated country in the world and have 20% of all the world’s immigrants already living here.

When is enough enough?

Obama’s Trojan Horses, Glenn Beck and Christian Love

Insidiously, Obama is using beautiful needy illegal alien kids as perfect Trojan Horses to continue his fundamental transformation of America for decades. A Hudson Institute study shows that illegals granted amnesty by Obama are far less inclined to assimilate; embrace English, the concept of American Exceptionalism and respect our Constitution.

The study also shows that illegals granted a “get in America free” pass from Obama do not view America as being better than other countries. Thus, putting these future Democrat voters on the same page as Obama and the MSM.

Obama using kids as time-released sleeper cell Trojan Horses for his transformation of our country is brilliantly evil. His exploitation of these kids includes using them as human shields, providing cover for his hidden-in-plain-sight criminal illegal alien invasion of America. This arrogant evil man is skillfully exploiting the compassion, generosity and goodness of the American people.

Even the hearts of Glenn Beck and George Will have been touched and deceived by the faces and plight of the children invading our country daily.

Both Beck and Will have joined the chorus of those calling conservatives mean for not rolling out the red carpet to those invading our homeland. Illegals disrespect our laws, contribute to the dismal state of our economy, exhaust our resources and wave their country’s flag while calling us insensitive when we celebrate or wear the stars and stripes – in our own country. Frankly, it is breathtakingly rude to come into our home and make demands.

Rewarding those invading our southern border is misguided compassion. It sends the world a message to come break our immigration laws and risk the extremely dangerous trek in which children are routinely abused, raped and murdered. The odds of rape are so high during the journey to America, Coyotes load up illegal alien girls with birth control. Is it truly compassionate to encourage foreign parents to risk the lives of their children by illegally sending them to America?

I wish to address the manipulative flawed narrative that says true Christian love means never calling out evil doers or pushing back against those who aggressively impose their will on us. Does true Christianity require us to sheepishly allow the Left’s “anything goes” philosophy to overtake our land?

I asked the wisest man I know, my 86 year old dad who is still the pastor of four churches after 50 years in ministry. Dad chucked and said, “I let the Word of God do the work. When I say something is an abomination to God, it is not me offering my opinion. I am simply quoting the Word of God.”

While the Left is typically repulsed by Christianity and the Holy Bible, they love to throw scripture in our face when they think it serves their purpose.

or example: When arguing against the death penalty for murders, the Left is quick to talk about the biblical mandate to forgive. And yet, these same people are outraged when anyone attempts to talk a woman out of aborting her innocent unborn child.

Psalm 127:3 says: “Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward.”

I have about had it with Christians scolding our side for being angry and aggressively pushing back against Obama’s unprecedented lawlessness, tyranny, and iron fist assaults on our freedom and liberty. Handled responsibly, some anger is justified and even righteous. God does want us to fight back!

Paraphrasing a Bible story, King David and his army returned home after a battle greeted by the smell of smoke. The camp had been invaded and burned, their women and children were kidnapped, their possessions were taken. David’s men were so heartbroken and angry that they threatened to kill him. David prayed to God for guidance. God instructed David and his men to go get their stuff. They attacked their enemy and recovered their families and possessions.

1 Samuel 30: 8 — “And David inquired at the Lord, saying, Shall I pursue after this troop? Shall I overtake them? And He answered him, Pursue: for thou shalt surely overtake them, and without fail recover all.”

It is not God’s Will for Christians to allow evil to go unchallenged.

The metro-sexual weak-kneed spineless passive Christianity encouraged by the Left is simply a tactic to nullify opposition to their super aggressive repeals of our freedoms as they implement their socialist/progressive agenda; Obama’s fundamental transformation of America.

Upon his arrival on the national scene, Obama was seen as a messiah in the eyes of many; an articulate orator able to control the sea levels and create world peace. The Bible speaks of such false prophets.

Romans 16:18 — “For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naïve people.”

2 Timothy 3:6-9 — “These are the kind of people who smooth-talk themselves into the home of unstable and needy women and take advantage of them; women who, depressed by their sinfulness, take up with every new religious fad that calls itself “truth”. They get exploited every time and never really learn. These men are like those old Egyptian frauds Jannes and Jambres, who challenged Moses. They were rejected from the faith, twisted in their thinking, defying truth itself. But nothing will come of these latest impostors. Everyone will see through them, just as people saw through that Egyptian hoax.”

Real Christian love is making responsible, wise and character-driven decisions with the best interest of others at heart; not embracing lawlessness or surrendering to evil.

It is God’s Will that we take back America. Like King David and his men, lets go get our stuff!

What is the Difference Between the Democrat Party and the Communist Party USA?

On the home page of the Communist Party USA it says “A better and peaceful world is possible—a world where people and nature come before profits. That’s socialism. That’s our vision. We are the Communist Party USA.”

No, it’s not Socialism which is a watered down version of Communism. Real Communism is the kind that was practiced in the former Soviet Union. It can be found in Cuba and North Korea where the state controls all power and property,and the people have none.

Modified versions exist in China, Russia, Venezuela, and other nations where some aspects of Capitalism are maintained for the sake of their economies. In the West Socialism was incorporated by both the U.S. and Great Britain, and other nations via various social welfare programs.

Capitalism is about profits, innovation, entrepreneurship, and investment. It is about the freedom to acquire wealth. It emphasizes work, not welfare. It is the reason America has a dynamic economic system—when it is permitted to prosper, free from federal interference.

AA - Dem Party is CommunistIn America, conservatives have always been acutely aware of Communism, but the 47% who still approve of Barack Obama and those who are members of the Democratic Party are the dupes of those whose quest for tyrannical power permits them to tell the most appalling lies, particularly about Republicans.

The Democratic Party is so politically corrupt and devoid of moral standards that it is currently engaged in seeking to harm potential Republican presidential candidates with an utterly bogus indictment of Texas Governor Perry and the slanders leveled against New Jersey Governor Christie. It is a tactic of those who fear a loss at the ballot box.

It is the Democratic Party and its elected officials that have advanced the global warming hoax, now called climate change and the CPUSA website refers to the “Accumulation of greenhouse gases (as) a ‘planetary emergency’” This is what both the President and the Secretary of State are saying, but there has been no warming on a planet that is now 17 years into a cooling cycle.

As for those “greenhouse” gases, nitrogen and oxygen are the most abundant in the atmosphere, followed by nothing more dangerous than water vapor! Carbon dioxide is a very minor gas at 0.04%. And most importantly, the Earth is not a greenhouse. When the Sun’s radiation is reduced due to its own natural cycles, it gets colder.

Tied to the climate change message is an agenda that includes Obama’s “war on coal” and his refusal to permit the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from our neighbor Canada, among other measures to restrict access and use of America’s vast energy reserves. This is an attack on the nation’s economy in the name of “nature” or the “environment.”

The CPUSA wants “No new sanctions on Iran” and the administration’s negotiations with Iran to slow or end its nuclear weapons program have dropped some sanctions to get them to the table, but no one believes that Iran will stop because they are openly avowed enemies of America and Israel.

If you wanted to harm America, you would undermine its southern border so that thousands of illegal aliens could join the estimated eleven million already here. That is what President Obama has done and he is joined by former Democratic Majority Speaker Nancy Pelosi who said of the illegals, “We are all Americans.” No, they are not.

The chair of the Democratic National Committee, Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, continues to push for amnesty for illegal aliens saying “It isn’t about politics at all. They (illegal aliens) essentially have become the backbone of the economy.” The Center for Immigration Studies has documented the many jobs that have gone to illegal aliens, leaving native-born and naturalized U.S. citizens with fewer employment opportunities.

In July Gallup reported that “With thousands of undocumented immigrant minors crossing the nation’s southern border in recent months, the percentage of Americans citing immigration as the top problem has surged to 17% this month, up from 5% in June, and the highest seen since 2006. As a result, immigration now virtually ties ‘dissatisfaction with government’ at 16%, as the primary issue Americans think of when asked to name the country’s top problems.”

ObamaCare - Needle_PosterThe Affordable Patient Care Act—Obamacare—is the perfect example of Socialism in its government control of what once was the world’s finest healthcare system and is being destroyed by a law for which only Democrats in Congress voted.

President Obama has illegally asserted more power than the Constitution grants the executive branch, unilaterally altering Obamacare. It is the reason the House of Representatives is suing him.

For several generations since the last century, Americans have been indoctrinated to accept an ever-growing central government, but even so an August Reason-Rupe survey poll found that fully 54% favored a smaller government providing fewer services. Just 18% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, while 75% disapprove.

Though education is never mentioned in the Constitution, we have a Department of Education and the same applies to the Department of Energy, both created by Jimmy Carter. A Nixon executive order brought about the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency that is masterminding an attack on private property along with the manufacturing, agricultural and energy sectors of the economy.

If one looks at the Democratic Party today, there is often scant difference between it and the self-professed Communist Party USA which twice endorsed the election of Barack Obama, a man whose father was a Communist, whose grandparents who helped raise him were Socialists, and who was mentored in his youth by a card-carrying member of the CPUSA.

We have a President who believes that the problems throughout the world have been caused by America. His disdain for the nation and the military that serves to protect it is on full display. And the Democratic Party twice chose him as its candidate.

If you want to see what Communism looks like, acts and says, watch and listen to the Democratic Party.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Connecting the Red Dots: Where convicted illegal alien murderers were released

I grew up believing you people in Washington took your oaths seriously to protect the citizens yet ICE released 169 convicted killers and a total of 35,000 other criminals back into our society because their home countries won’t take them back. Together, they committed nearly 88,000 crimes, according to recently released report.

Question: A total of 36,000 illegal aliens involved whose countries won’t take them back must be a large number of countries. So how many are there?

Do you in Congress have the names of the countries refusing to back their citizens? Do you know which of those countries we currently give financial aid? Do you plan on stopping all aid immediately to any country that won’t take back their citizens? If not, why not?

What about transferring them all to Guantanamo Bay so they won’t be a threat to U.S. citizens?

unnamed (12)

Click on the map for a larger view.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Feds Let Go of Dozens of Convicted Murder Illegal Immigrants, See Where They Are on This Map | National Review Online

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of 100PercentFedUp.com.

Dennis Michael Lynch fears Americans are giving up and giving in on immigration

Dennis Michael Lynch appeared at an event sponsored by the Sarasota Patriots in Sarasota, Florida on August 22nd as part of his Fighting for America Tour 2014.

Lynch began his presentation by lamenting the fact that two of his appearances in Texas were cancelled. Lynch attributed it to “infighting” between TEA Party Conservatives and establishment Republicans. Lynch also notes that he is seeing a 25% drop in attendance at his 2014 tour events compared to his 2013 tour. Lynch fears that Americans are giving up the fight against illegal immigration.

Highlights of his remarks included:

  • The surge (migration) of illegals will continue and grow in the coming months. Camps in Mexico that can accommodate an estimated 100,000 illegals are being set up.
  • President Obama will soon sign an Executive Order granting de facto amnesty to the 44 million illegals currently in the U.S.
  • The media is focused on the children coming across the border when they make up only 15% of the illegal migration.
  • Putting the national guard or militias on the border will not stem the flow of illegals.
  • The number one issue in America today is the illegal migration according to recent polls, a sea change since he began speaking about it.
  • For every illegal one American loses his or her job, at every level of employment ( the landscaper becomes the carpenter, who become the plumber, etc.)
  • President Obama will exempt illegals from the Obamacare mandated insurance provision, which will take even more jobs away from legal American citizens. When President Obama exempts illegals from the Obamacare insurance mandate, businesses will hire them to avoid both the costs of insurance and paying any IRS penalty for failing to provide insurance.
  • President Obama is inflating the deportation numbers by counting “turn backs” as a deportation. A turn back is when the border patrol catches an illegal along the border and turns them around (escorts them) across the border back into Mexico. If that illegal turns around and returns and is turned back again and again and again, that is being counted as a deportation.
  • The Obama administration is legalizing the movement of illegals across the Southern border by coyotes (those paid by illegals to smuggle them into the U.S.). Human trafficking is if a person is kidnapped and moved across the border for the purpose of selling that person to another (e.g. for prostitution). Coyotes transporting illegals are being paid upward of $10,000 to $50,000 per illegal. According to Lynch this is nothing more than the profitable business of human smuggling not human trafficking.
  • Multiple diseases are coming across the border, with little or no screening. These diseased illegals will end up working in our restaurants, using our hospitals and attending public schools.
  • The Department of Justice has declared that public schools cannot ask students for papers showing they are in the U.S. legally. Schools cannot turn away an illegal, no matter how much it harms the district or the community (e.g. , takes resources away from current legal students).
  • Terrorists, including members of the Islamic State (IS), are coming across the border unchecked, which is a major threat to the national security of the U.S.
  • People like Senator Ted Cruz and Glenn Beck going to the border and handing out $2 million in free food, teddy bears and soccer balls is making the problem worse. Better to take the free food and toys to Houston, Texas and give it to needy legal children.

Lynch looked at the current field of potential Republican presidential candidates (Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Jeb Bush, Dr. Ben Carson, Mitt Romney) and dismissed them all as too weak on immigration and not having the gravitas to beat Hillary Clinton in 2016. Lynch believes that a candidate will emerge who will have what it takes to become the next President, but not from the usual pathway. Lynch prefers a strong leader from the business community. He mentioned Donald Trump as an example, not as a potential candidate.

Lynch is concerned about the internal struggle going on in the Republican party between conservatives and moderates (liberals). A uniting force is needed to bring these and others on board or America is lost.

Lynch presented clear solutions to solving the illegal migration problem:

  1. Enforce the laws. President Obama and his administration are completely ignoring the immigration laws.
  2. Punish businesses who hire illegals, if they continue prosecute them.
  3. Cut off all monetary support for illegals and they will self-deport.
  4. Deport first those recently here illegally before they become “embedded” in our communities.
  5. Deport the remaining 30-40 million illegals in the U.S. over time. It is cheaper to give them a check, let them keep their earnings/possessions and send them home on a plane than to support them in the long term.

Lynch concluded with a Q&A. He was asked if he would consider running for President. He said that if he had support like that of a Dr. Ben Carson, he would. Without that he will continue on his mission to tell the truth about what is really going on along the Southern boarder with Mexico. Lynch said he is coming out with a feature film next year. If it takes off, like the films of Michael Moore and  Dinesh D’Souza then he will consider his options.

Lynch looked tired and worn out. He was not the same man that I saw a year ago. We are all worn out, being ground down by the barrage of attacks from all fronts. But that does not mean Lynch is not in the fight.