A timely post about from www.Vdare.com about the group “Tigres Del Norte” that was in the D.C. mall amnesty rally. This follows this post about Ernesto “Che” Guevara. In the meantime, you can get more involved if you like here and read an interesting book HERE.
"Somos Mas Americanos" - We are More AmericanScratch the surface, and The National Question pervades every facet of American society. The entertainment world is no exception. In July of 2002, country-western singer Chad Brock was lambasted for what he said at a concert in Greeley, Colorado: “Why should we adapt? You are coming over to our country. We don’t speak Russian. We don’t speak Spanish. We speak English here.” [“Singer’s Remark Riles Hispanics,” Denver Post, July 9, 2002]And two years ago, rock guitarist Ted Nugent provoked the wrath of LULAC by saying, also in a concert, that “If you can’t speak English, get the #%!# out of America.” [VDARE.COM warning: link contains original verb.]What Brock and Nugent were saying—each in his own way--was that immigrants should learn English—a quite reasonable opinion shared by most Americans. What would happen, though, if a successful recording artist or group released a song that relegated some Americans to second-class status?Answer: Apparently nothing - if the group is composed of Mexican immigrants, who relegate gringos to second-class status in their own country. The song in question is “Somos Mas Americanos” [We are more American], sung by a group called Los Tigres del Norte. One of the results of the creeping bilingualism in the U.S.A. is the growth of a parallel Spanish media—practically unknown to most clueless English-speakers. “Somos Mas Americanos ” has spent a whole year on the record racks without controversy. I purchased my copy of “Uniendo Fronteras” in a Wal-mart in the state of Texas. You might ask your local Wal-mart why they sell anti-American music. “Somos mas americano,” sing the Tigres, “than the son of the Anglo-Saxon.... than every last one of the gringos.” If you haven’t heard of Los Tigres del Norte, well, they aren’t singing songs for you anyway. But they are singing about you. Based in California, the Tigres del Norte are Grupo Numero Uno in Norteño, a polka-based form of music from northern Mexico, famous for its story-song “corridos” [To see a photo of the Tigres click here].The nucleus of the group is formed by front-man Jorge Hernandez and his brothers, who migrated from Mexico to California in 1968. They were adopted by British impresario (and non-Spanish speaker) Art Walker, who encouraged them to electrify, modernize and commercialize their music. Walker’s Fama Records was the first Spanish-language record company on the West Coast. “Contrabando y Traición” [Contraband and Treachery], 1972-73, was the Tigres’ first big hit, as well as the first of the “narcocorrido” genre. (For more details, check out this article from the Silicon Valley paper Metro, “Tiger Tales.”) Just how big are the Tigres? Well, they’ve won a Grammy. They have earned 7 gold albums (sales of 500,000 or more), no small feat when you consider that Latin music sales only make up 4.6% as of the year 2000, last year for which full-year statistics are available. Last May, they received the “Latino spirit award” from Gray Davis, one of those “sons of the Anglo-Saxon” who happens to be governor of California. For now.They’ve been honored by the Smithsonian Institution. They are slated to receive the “Estrellas de la Gente” [Stars of the People] award at a big award shindig, “De La Gente Ritmo Latino,” in LA’s Kodak Theater, on October 25th. And, for the past year, the Tigres have received a free ride from the media since releasing “Somos Mas Americanos.” Not only were the Tigres - not even U.S. citizens, although they’ve lived in California for 34 years - unafraid to release this bitter piece of irredentist anti-gringo propaganda, but it's been a raving success. The song was released in August of 2001 on the Tigres’ album “Uniendo Fronteras” (“Uniting Borders”, but what they really mean is “Erasing Borders”.) “Uniendo Fronteras” did quite well, spending 3 weeks at No. 1 on Billboard's Top Latin Albums chart. “Somos Mas Americanos” peaked last May at #12 on the Billboard’s Regional Mexican Airplay Chart, and at #39 on Billboard’s Hot Latin Tracks. (Both of these figures are based only on the album’s success in the U.S.) "Somos Mas Americanos" peaked at #7 on San Antonio’s KLEY. But it wasn’t only popular in the Southwest. It peaked at #3 on WARV (Richmond, Virginia) and WAGL (Lancaster, South Carolina). You might inquire how high it climbed on your local Spanish-language station. At a Tigres del Norte concert in the Houston Astrodome on February 24th, 2002, the song was apparently the audience favorite.For the benefit of VDARE.com readers, I present below my translation of “Somos Mas Americanos.” It doubtless fails to capture the literary quality of the original-language lyrics. But it does translate the content. That way, you can be aware of what your neighbors may be listening to on your local Spanish-language radio station:
“Somos Mas Americanos” (by Enrique Valencia)Windows Media Player sample at Yahoo.com
A thousand times they have shouted at me,
“Go home, you don’t belong here”
Let me remind the Gringo
That I didn’t cross the border, the border crossed me
America was born free—Man divided her
They drew the line so I would have to jump it
And they call me Invader
That’s a big error
They took eight states from us—who is the invader here?
I am a stranger in my own land
I don’t come to make war—I’m a working man
(Chorus)
If history does not lie, the Powerful Nation was seated here in glory
Composed of valiant warriors
Indians of two continents
Mingled with Spaniards
And if we go by the centuries
We are more American [“Somos Mas Americanos”]
We are more American
Than any son of the Anglo-Saxon
(Spoken)
They purchased from us, without money,
the waters of the Rio Bravo
They took from us Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado
California too, and Nevada
Even with Utah it was not enough—they also took Wyoming from us!
I am of Indian blood—I am Latino—I am Mestizo
We are of all colors and all occupations
And if we go by the centuries
Though it pains The Neighbor
We are more American
Than every last one of the Gringos
(Chorus)
[Original Spanish lyrics) ]
Ya me gritaron mil veces
que me regrese a mi tierra
Porque aqui no quepo yo
Quiero recordarle al gringo
Yo no cruce la frontera
La frontera me cruzo
America nacio libre
El hombre la dividio
Ellos pintaron la raya
Para que yo la brincara
Y me llaman invasor
Es un error bien marcado
Nos quitaron ocho estados
Quien es aqui el invasor
Soy extranjero en mi tierra
Y no vengo a darles guerra
Soy hombre trabajador
Y si no miente la historia
Aqui se sento en la gloria
La poderosa nacion
Entre guerreros valientes
Indios de dos continentes
Mezclados con español
Y si a los siglos nos vamos
Somos mas americanos
Somos mas americanos
Que el hijo de anglosajon
(hablado)
Nos compraron sin dinero
Las aguas del Rio Bravo
Y nos quitaron a Texas Nuevo Mexico, arizona yColarado, tambien volo
California y Nevada con Utah no se llenaron
El estado de Wyoming
Tambien nos lo arrebataron
Yo soy la sangre del indio
Soy latino soy mestizo
Somos de todos colores
Y de todos los oficios
Y si contamos los siglos
Aunque le duela al vecino
Somos mas americanos
Que todititos los gringos
To refute all the pseudo-historical nonsense in “Somos Mas Americanos” would require another article. Allow me however, to address one.The song’s assertion that “I didn’t cross the border, the border crossed me” is pure bunkum. The majority of Mexican-Americans in the U.S. today are NOT descended from the residents of the Southwest in the period from 1836—1853, when it passed (in phases) from Mexican to U.S. control. After all, the members of the Tigres themselves are immigrants from Mexico. And Mexicans have no more right to enter the U.S. than immigrants from Asia, Europe or anywhere else in the world. But just because this excuse for illegal immigration is bogus does not mean it is not influential. Far from it. False myths can function quite effectively as powerful motivations for mass movements. “Somos Mas Americanos” does not exist in a vacuum. The Tigres are not fringe, underground musicians. They are in the mainstream of contemporary Latino music. Immigration enthusiasts fixated on romantic images of the Ellis Island experience had better pay attention too . The difference between immigration a century ago and immigration now is so enormous as to amount to a difference in kind. Irving Berlin, an immigrant of that bygone era, wrote “God Bless America.”
Today, the immigrants in Los Tigres del Norte sing “Somos Mas Americanos.” And not only is the song uncontroversial - but they receive an award from the governor of California. How times have changed! American citizen Allan Wall has lived in Mexico since 1991,and is permitted to live and work there thanks to a legal work permit issued by the Mexican government.
VDARE.COM articles are archived here; his FRONTPAGEMAG.COM articles are archived here. Readers can contact Allan Wall at allan39@prodigy.net.mx
Showing posts with label #amnesty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #amnesty. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 9, 2013
Monday, June 3, 2013
Last polls on Ky very important
A very interesting post from lbp.action@yahoo.com about Kentucky's polling on immigration reform. Remember, the state's two Senators are Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Tea Party Favorite Rand Paul. This follows this post about the true demographics of the 2012 presidential election. This follows this post about the release of illegal immigrant felons from prison by ICE. This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! For more about what is happening in the nation now click here and you can read the two very interesting books that are 
shown HERE.
POLL: KENTUCKY VOTERS OVERWHELMINGLY REJECT
KEY PARTS OF SENATE IMMIGRATION BILL
The state's Republicans (about 40% of the voters) are so strongly opposed to so many parts of S. 744, that a Republican official who supports the bill would be inviting a Primary challenge. And Independents (about a fifth of the voters) are almost as strongly opposed as are Republicans.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. 1 Objection: Only 8% of likely voters agree with the bill's increase of total immigration.
In 1990, Congress increased immigration above the traditional average of around 3 million a decade to around 10 million. S. 744 would triple that in the first decade to 33 million. The poll shows virtually no support for any kind of increase, let alone one of that magnitude.
Only 10% of Democrats in the state believe immigration should be increased. Only 4% of Republicans.
During Judiciary Committee markup of the bill, Sen. Sessions argued that Congress ought to be reducing immigration, not increasing it at this time. He was ridiculed in the mainstream media for making an argument far out of the mainstream. But Sen. Sessions' conclusion that immigration is too high is state voters' most popular choice among options of too low, too high or about right.
64% of Republicans indicate that current immigration of 1 million a year is too high.
"Too high" is also the top choice of the state's men, women, whites, blacks, every educational level, Democrats, Independents, Evangelicals, Protestants, Catholics and people of no religion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. 2 Objection: Only 21% of likely voters agree that the nation is in danger of labor shortages and needs more immigrant workers.
The main point of most of S. 744 is to increase foreign workers for occupations up and down the skill ladder. Sen. Sessions argued in committee that it makes no sense to offer 33 million lifetime work permits in the first decade after the bill when 20 million Americans who want a full-time job still can't find one. Kansas voters strongly support Sen. Sessions on that point.
72% of the state's voters disagree with the need for more immigrant workers while21% agree.
There is virtually no passionate feeling for the bill's insistence on more foreign workers.
45% STRONGLY disagree while only 7% STRONGLY agree. The passion ratio is 6-1 against the bill on this point.
No demographic group -- education, religion, age, race, political, gender -- agrees with the Gang of Eight's assessment of a shortage of American workers.
80% of Republicans (and 77% of Independents) disagree with more immigrant workers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. 3 Objection: Only 18% of likely voters agree with the bill's offering work permits to illegal immigrants before implementing enforcement measures at the workplace and border.
The Judiciary Committee rejected several amnedments to require some or all of the enforcement promises in the bill to occur before the 11 million illegal aliens are given legalization and work permits. 25% of the state's voters on another question answered that they support giving work permits to illegal immigrant workers at some time, but a significant percentage of them are opposed to doing so until "enforcement at the borders and workplace must be implemented first."
80% of Republicans chose enforcement-first before even "considering" giving work permits, while 9% supported the bill's work permits first.
Independents favored enforcement-first by 67% to 20%.
Census Bureau Refutes “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” Mantra—Obama Won Because Of Old Black Ladies (And Turned-Off Whites)
A very interesting post from www.Vdare.com about the true demographics of the 2012 presidential election. This follows this post about rallying to oppose the "Gang of Eight" amnesty bill. This follows this post about the release of illegal immigrant felons from prison by ICE. This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! For more about what is happening in the nation now click here and you can read the two very interesting books that are
Peggy Lee - Mañana
 |
"Mañana" - Peggy Lee and the David Barbour Quartet, 1950. From "The Snader Telescriptions". Copyright 2011 Peggy Lee Associates, LLC, under exclusive license to South Bay Music, LLC.
00:03:04
Added on 5/18/11
10,051 views
|  |
Census Bureau Refutes “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” Mantra—Obama Won Because Of Old Black Ladies (And Turned-Off Whites)
National exit polls showed that 10 percent of the electorate was Hispanic, compared with 9 percent in 2008 and 8 percent in 2004. … A growing perception of hostility toward illegal immigrants by Republican candidates is driving many Latinos to the polls.But what if these nice, round turnout numbers provided by the Edison exit poll company weren’t true? What if the “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” clamor is based on exit poll error?
[Growing share of Hispanic voters helped push Obama to victory, By Donna St. George and Brady Dennis, Washington Post, November 7, 2012]
What if in 2012 the Sleeping Giant of the Latino Vote didn’t actually awake—but instead rolled over and started a new siesta?
In short, what if the Main Stream Media exaggerated the Hispanic share of the 2012 vote by a factor of almost 20 percent?
Well, we now have the numbers. We now know that the suppositions behind these awkward questions are true.
After every national election, the Census Bureau conducts a massive survey of voter turnout. Then it bureaucratically mulls over the results for months—while the conventional wisdom congeals around whatever slapdash numbers the exit poll firm emitted in the early going.
In contrast to the Census Bureau survey, though, exit polls aren’t designed to measure turnout. Heck, exit polls aren’t even very good at figuring out who won the election—just ask President John F. Kerry.
Exit polls can’t be based on the random samples that would be needed to measure turnout accurately, because the exit poll company has to bake a forecast of the electorate’s demographics into its plan of which precincts to send workers to cover. Not surprisingly, it tends to get back the results it anticipated.
Moreover, Hispanics are both of interest to sponsors and difficult to survey (they can need Spanish-speaking pollsters). So their needs are typically given more weight in planning the exit poll. The result: national exit polls have overstated the Hispanic share of the vote at least since 2000.
Now, finally, on May 9, the Current Population Survey division of the Census Bureau has issued its turnout report, scintillatingly titledThe Diversifying Electorate—Voting Rates by Race and Hispanic Origin in 2012 (and Other Recent Elections)[PDF]
Despite the title, it makes compelling reading.
It turns out that the official best estimate of the Latino share of 2012 voters isn’t 10 percent—but merely 8.4 percent:
So the standard story you’ve been hearing in the MSM for almost seven months is indeed inflated by 19 percent.
But what can you expect … because the conventional wisdom as embodied in that Washington Post story has been exaggerated for, roughly, ever.
Hispanics didn’t account for 9 percent of the 2008 electorate, but 7.4 percent. And in 2004, they weren’t 8 percent, but 6.0 percent. Way back in 2000, the exit poll claimed that Hispanics made up 7 percent, but the real number turned out to be 5.4 percent, as I reported for UPI on July 24, 2001. [Mexican-American Vote Smaller than Many Think]
But who did turn out in 2012 to drive Obama to victory? Who was the fresh new face of the American electorate in 2012?
Old black ladies.
According to the Census survey, fans of Tyler Perry movies voted in remarkable numbers in 2012—even more than in Obama’s first victory in 2008.
Unsurprisingly, given Obama’s candidacy, from 2004 to 2008 the number of black voters had grown 15 percent.
Unexpectedly, however, blacks added another 10 percent to their vote total from 2008 to 2012. Nationally, 66.2 percent of eligible blacks voted compared to 64.1 percent of whites, 48.0 percent of Hispanics, and 47.3 percent of Asians.
Thus in the crucial battleground state of Ohio, blacks achieved a voting rate of 71.7 percent compared to 61.9 percent for whites.
Overall, the raw black vote total grew more than even the Hispanic vote from 2008 to 2012: an incremental 1.68 million for blacks versus 1.44 million for Hispanics, and a decline of 2.00 million for whites.
Among blacks, older women were the most diligent at increasing their turnout in 2012.
The Census Bureau explains:
In 2012, overall turnout rates decreased in comparison with both 2004 and 2008, a drop in voting characterized by large decreases in youth voting rates for all race groups and Hispanics. The only subgroups showing voting rate increases in 2012 were blacks between the ages of 45 to 64 and 65 years of age and over.This growth in black turnout was particularly concentrated among those over age 65. Also, black women traditionally vote at significantly higher rates than black men, and the black gender gap in turnout hit a new record in 2012.[For First Time on Record, Black Voting Rate Outpaced Rate for Whites in 2012,By Sarah Wheaton, New York Times, May 8, 2013]
So why did so many old black ladies bother to vote in 2012?
To express racial solidarity. To win. To ensure the White House stays black.
Old black ladies are American citizens. They are more than entitled to show up at the polls and vote for a credit to their race like Barack Obama.
But they are not exactly The Wave of the Future. The vast enthusiasm that Obama excited among aged African-Americans is not a logical reason to put Hispanic illegal aliens on the voting rolls.
But that is in fact the standard logic.
It’s worth noting that the Democrats are perfecting racial dog whistling with their constant claims that Republicans are trying to strip the vote from minorities, assertions that seemingly resounded with elderly blacks.
Black news site The Root reported:
The NAACP also credited its leadership in the pitched battle against Republican-led state voting restrictions such as photo-identification laws. Numerous civil rights groups and the Obama team fomented a backlash among black voters with a "Don’t let them take away your vote!" message.This crowing by the NAACP, normally a dusty yesterday’s-news organization, is not unreasonable: The Census Bureau study suggests the NAACP really did help generate a backlash among elderly blacks.
[Black Voter Turnout Is Up. Will That Persist?, By Corey Dale, May 12, 2013]
From a game theory standpoint, the Democrats would want to cheat at least enough to cause Republicans to react to their cheating by proposing legislation to protect the validity of the vote. The Democrats can then rile up blacks with the message that Republicans are trying to take their votes away.
It seems to have worked.
In contrast to the fervent black effort to re-elect Obama, whites were strikingly unmotivated by Romney. The total white vote dropped from 100 million in 2008 to 98 million in 2012 (down two percent). Only 64.1 percent of eligible whites voted in 2012, down from 66.1 percent in 2008 and 67.2 percent in the recent high-water mark year of 2004. This was the first time in the history of the Census survey that whites were not the highest-ranking group in terms of their rate of voting.
Among Hispanics eligible to vote, gross numbers continued to rise—but the rate of those taking the trouble to vote dropped from 49.9 to 48.0 percent. The number of Hispanics who claimed to be eligible but didn’t bother to get to the polls soared from 9.8 million to12.1 million.
In a strikingly independent-minded column in the Washington Post, of all outlets, Esther J. Cepeda noted the slack Hispanic turnout in 2012:
After nearly a year of breathless reports about how Latinos were going to trip over themselves to get to the polls and vote against Mitt Romney’s hardline immigration stance — remember Time magazine’s Spanish-language cover “Yo Decido”? — the reality is less dramatic.Cepeda noted, for perhaps the first time in the history of the Washington Post, the self-interest behind the spin:
[The GOP’s Hispanic problem, May 15, 2013]
The reason you don’t hear much about these sobering numbers from the Hispanic advocacy organizations—as opposed to how they react with any statistic even remotely suggesting an impending Latino supremacy—is obvious. After all, immigration reform is only in play because Republicans are scared witless that unfavorable Latino voting power will sink their party in upcoming elections.Some other points from the Census survey: Naturalized immigrants made up only 7.0 percent of the 2012 electorate. Conversely, native sons and daughters comprised 93.0 percent of the vote.
But how true can this be when fewer Latino voters bothered to vote in a contest featuring an incumbent Democrat and a Hispanically tone-deaf Republican candidate who could never quite get past “self-deportation” than in 2008, when Barack Obama and John McCain—a longtime supporter of immigration reform—were running?
Even among Hispanics, immigrants accounted for only 27.3 percent of their voters (in other words, 72.7 percent of the Hispanics who voted in 2012 were born in this country).
Needless to say, this ought to raise the interesting question: just how much do actual Hispanic voters care about immigration?
After all, Hispanics who vote tend not to be terribly young, so they are generally removed from their ancestors’ immigration by quite a few decades.
The GOP has dug itself quite a hole by its complacency about immigration.
But the conventional wisdom that it must immediately consent to “a path to citizenship” for illegal aliens—let alone, for reasons that are never explained, simultaneously increasing legal immigration from its already record level—is a transparent Democratic Electing-A-New-People ploy that persuades only the innumerate (or corrupt) among the Republican Brain Trust.
Steve Sailer (email him) is movie critic for The American Conservative and writes regularly for Takimag. His website www.iSteve.blogspot.com features his daily blog. His book, AMERICA’S HALF-BLOOD PRINCE: BARACK OBAMA’S "STORY OF RACE AND INHERITANCE", is available here and here (Kindle)
Friday, May 31, 2013
Rally & Mtg Sen Boxer's Staff OPPOSE Senate Amnesty Bill
A very interesting post from http://californiascrusader.com/about rallying to oppose the "Gang of Eight" amnesty bill. This follows this post about Talk Radio suppressing the immigration amnesty response. This follows this post about the release of illegal immigrant felons from prison by ICE. This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! For more about what is happening in the nation now click here and you can read the two very interesting books that are
Rally & Mtg Sen Boxer's Staff OPPOSE Senate Amnesty Bill Riverside, CA 1pm Thu June 6
Ad: Immigration 'reform' adds 33 million competitors to jobless Americans
 |
The Senate Gang of Eight immigration bill would offer a minimum of 33 million lifetime work permits in the first decade alone (11 million to current illegal immigrants, 11 million to new legal…
00:00:31
Added on 5/26/13
| |
| ||||||||||||
Bring American Flags & Signs for the Rally before the meeting with staff members.WALL STREET JOURNAL Claims Americans Aren't On Fire Over Amnesty—Because Talk Radio Has Been Bought Off?.
A very interesting post from www.Vdare.com about Talk Radio suppressing the immigration amnesty response. This follows this post about lies in the "Gang of Eight" amnesty bill. This follows this post about the release of illegal immigrant felons from prison by ICE. This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! For more about what is happening in the nation now click here and you can read the two very interesting books that are
WALL STREET JOURNAL Claims Americans Aren't On Fire Over Amnesty—Because Talk Radio Has Been Bought Off?
Part of the problem is likely the buying off of talk radio “conservatives” with big-money ad purchases (paid by Facebook billionaire Mark Zuckerberg), particularly of Senator Rubio lying up a storm about how conservative the bill is, how filled with enforcement it is, blah blah. Those ads have run heavily on Rush Limbaugh’s show, among others. Limbaugh has recently begun speaking of amnesty again, but such a death threat to traditional America needs constant reinforcement, does it not? Perhaps he heard from enough irate listeners that buying into the Rubio snake oil is not acceptable.
We Won’t Be Distracted from Amnesty, RushLimbaugh.com Transcript, May 28, 2013
RUSH: By the way, Chris Cillizza’s point, that piece that I was sharing with you about how all of these scandals are distracting everybody away from amnesty, not here. And I just want to reiterate with all of these things that are going on, amnesty is the biggie, folks, because if amnesty is achieved, then all the rest of this is academic, and we basically have a one-party government and country for at least a generation. By the way, Chris Cillizza, even in his story, Chris Cillizza’s point was that the IRS scandals were distracting talk radio from raising the alarm about amnesty. He admitted that it was talk radio that stopped amnesty in 2007.
Chris Cillizza, the Washington Post. And he said all these other scandals — Benghazi, IRS — are providing cover for amnesty, got talk radio distracted, so they know where their real problems lie. Cillizza admits it. But here’s the point. The amnesty bill, as it’s written, or the pathway to citizenship bill, delays citizenship for a number of years. That’s why you’re hearing pathway to citizenship. Well, what’ll happen, the theory is — and it’s a good one — what’ll happen is if the law is passed, then it’ll immediately be challenged, that this citizenship provision is unconstitutional. You can’t bring these people out of shadows. You can’t grant them this. You can’t do that. They’re citizens now, and all you need is one Obama judge, one liberal judge, and they’re not hard to find these days, and, bammo, you’ve got instant citizenship, instant voting.
FAIR recently posted a list of 40 things wrong with S. 744 which could be helpful talking points, but the important thing callers should be saying is that the bill hurts American workers and taxpayers, and they want it voted down. Legalizing lawbreaking is no way for a great nation to deal with a vexing problem.Here’s the text of the WSJ article:
Immigration Bill Slow to Stir Foes’ Passion, Wall Street Journal, May 28, 2013
Fierce Backlash That Derailed 2007 Overhaul Bid Has Yet to Materialize, Though Opponents Vow to Intensify Campaign
Grass-roots activists were instrumental in derailing the previous attempt by Congress to overhaul immigration laws, in 2007. This time, they have yet to ignite a similar fire.
Coordinated rallies last week to oppose the current bipartisan immigration legislation drew sparse crowds, with fewer than 10 people showing up for a protest in Dover, Del. The number of phone calls to lawmakers’ offices opposing the bill has been a fraction of what it was six years ago. As a discussion topic on conservative talk radio in recent weeks, immigration has ranked behind issues such as Syria-Israel tensions and President Barack Obama’s speech on counterterrorism.
“This time I am getting this sense of resignation,” said Rusty Childress, a veteran opponent of illegal immigration in Phoenix. “We have to awaken the sleeping giant.”
The current immigration bill, introduced by a group of senators known as the “Gang of Eight,” would provide a pathway to citizenship to about 11 million people illegally in the U.S. and create new work-visa programs. It also would require beefed-up border security and employment verification before steps to legalize undocumented immigrants could kick in.
Opponents of the bill say that, like the 2007 effort, it amounts to amnesty for law breakers and doesn’t stanch the flow of illegal immigration. Adding legalized immigrants to the workforce would disadvantage jobless Americans, they say.
But this year’s bill hasn’t stirred as much opposition. It has more support from mainstream Republicans eager to improve the party’s standing with the fast-growing Hispanic population, and from many evangelical Christian leaders. Also, a steep drop in illegal immigration in recent years has meant fewer television images of migrants sneaking into the country.
Even so, prospects for the bill’s passage appear mixed. The Senate legislation hasn’t yet been tested in that chamber, and efforts by a bipartisan House group to write a similarly broad bill haven’t succeeded. The path to citizenship provision of the Senate bill could prove particularly troubling in the House.
Meantime, opponents promise to intensify their campaign. Mr. Childress leads “Remember 1986,” a group named after the year of the last big immigration overhaul, signed by President Ronald Reagan. The group sponsored the coordinated rallies last week, many of which were dwarfed by larger protests the same day against the Internal Revenue Service over its scrutiny of conservative nonprofits. Mr. Childress said his group would start targeting a tea-party base that he said is “newly energized” since the IRS news broke.
A fierce backlash against the bill six years ago ultimately spelled its demise because it prompted lawmakers such as Georgia Republican Sens. Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss, who helped draft sections of the measure, to withdraw support. “The backlash began as soon as an outline for a bill was announced, and it was relentless,” said Joan Kirchner, a top aide to Mr. Isakson. Neither of the Georgia senators has taken a public position on this year’s bill.
In recent weeks, Mr. Isakson’s office has been receiving about 100 calls a day compared with as many as 2,000 a day in 2007. The volume is expected to rise if a bill reaches the floor, Ms. Kirchner said, “but signs are it won’t be as intense.” Activists said they are planning a protest outside Mr. Isakson’s Atlanta office in early June.
Michael Harrison, publisher of Talkers, a talk-radio trade magazine, said many influential hosts have “moved on” to discuss gun control, health care and other “hit topics” because “the public’s attitude is different on immigration.”
Alan Ogushoff, who made protest calls to Mr. Chambliss’s office in 2007, often several times a day, said he remains a foe of any legalization. But, the avid listener of conservative talk radio said, “I’m just going to let this happen and move on; I’m burned out fighting it.”
Roy Beck, president of NumbersUSA, a national group that channeled grass-roots opposition to the 2007 bill into a barrage of calls, faxes and emails to lawmakers, agreed “there may be some fatigue” now. Still, the group over the weekend said it unveiled TV and radio ads opposing the bill in 18 states. One radio script warning of the dangers of adding more potential workers says: “Jobs—20 million of our friends, family and neighbors still can’t find one.”
Groups pressing for an immigration overhaul, such as businesses and undocumented youngsters, also have been more vocal. The Evangelical Immigration Table, made up of leaders of Christian organizations, this week will launch another round of national radio ads to promote the overhaul.
“This time, there is not as much emotion on our side,” said Mr. Beck of NumbersUSA. But, “I don’t know if that means there is less resolve.”
Thursday, May 30, 2013
DIS Update: The Gang of Eight bill's big lie
A very interesting post from www.thedustininmansociety.org about lies in the "Gang of Eight" amnesty bill. This follows this post about China being able to spy due to visas and other means. This follows this post about the release of illegal immigrant felons from prison by ICE. This follows this post about how to 
! For more about what is happening in the nation now click here and you can read the two very interesting
books that are shown HERE.
| |
|
Red Chinese Spies Are Welcomed to America by Business and Universities
A very interesting post from www.Vdare.com about China being able to spy due to visas and other means. This follows this post about Harry Reid's confidence in "Gang of Eight" amnesty bill passing. This follows this post about the release of illegal immigrant felons from prison by ICE. This follows this post about how to
books that are shown HERE.
Red Chinese Spies Are Welcomed to America by Business and Universities
For once, I think The Five’s resident liberal Bob Beckel has it right about something: Red China is a big threat, and it’s wrong to envision its recent hacking activities as distance espionage only: Chinese are the largest cohort of international students and some stay around and work in defense industries, like naturalized PRC guy Chi Mak, who was convicted of spying in 2007.
<div>Watch the latest video at <a href=" http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></div> ;
It is crazy to educate our enemies, be they Red Chinese or Islamic. America has more enemies than anybody, but Washington pretends otherwise to please business and university interests. Our national security is severely endangered by short-term economic choices, like colleges welcoming full-tuition students from dangerous nations like Saudi Arabia and Red China.
Here’s the Washington Post article from Tuesday that stirred up the interest in China’s theft of America’s military secrets:
<div>Watch the latest video at <a href=" http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></div> ;
It is crazy to educate our enemies, be they Red Chinese or Islamic. America has more enemies than anybody, but Washington pretends otherwise to please business and university interests. Our national security is severely endangered by short-term economic choices, like colleges welcoming full-tuition students from dangerous nations like Saudi Arabia and Red China.Here’s the Washington Post article from Tuesday that stirred up the interest in China’s theft of America’s military secrets:
Confidential report lists U.S. weapons system designs compromised by Chinese cyberspies, Washington Post, May 27, 2013
Designs for many of the nation’s most sensitive advanced weapons systems have been compromised by Chinese hackers, according to a report prepared for the Pentagon and to officials from government and the defense industry.
Among more than two dozen major weapons systems whose designs were breached were programs critical to U.S. missile defenses and combat aircraft and ships, according to a previously undisclosed section of a confidential report prepared for Pentagon leaders by the Defense Science Board.
Experts warn that the electronic intrusions gave China access to advanced technology that could accelerate the development of its weapons systems and weaken the U.S. military advantage in a future conflict.
The Defense Science Board, a senior advisory group made up of government and civilian experts, did not accuse the Chinese of stealing the designs. But senior military and industry officials with knowledge of the breaches said the vast majority were part of a widening Chinese campaign of espionage against U.S. defense contractors and government agencies.
The significance and extent of the targets help explain why the Obama administration has escalated its warnings to the Chinese government to stop what Washington sees as rampant cybertheft.
In January, the advisory panel warned in the public version of its report that the Pentagon is unprepared to counter a full-scale cyber-conflict. The list of compromised weapons designs is contained in a confidential version, and it was provided to The Washington Post.
Some of the weapons form the backbone of the Pentagon’s regional missile defense for Asia, Europe and the Persian Gulf. The designs included those for the advanced Patriot missile system, known as PAC-3; an Army system for shooting down ballistic missiles, known as the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD; and the Navy’s Aegis ballistic-missile defense system.
Also identified in the report are vital combat aircraft and ships, including the F/A-18 fighter jet, the V-22 Osprey, the Black Hawk helicopter and the Navy’s new Littoral Combat Ship, which is designed to patrol waters close to shore.
Also on the list is the most expensive weapons system ever built — the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which is on track to cost about $1.4 trillion. The 2007 hack of that project was reported previously.
China, which is pursuing a comprehensive long-term strategy to modernize its military, is investing in ways to overcome the U.S. military advantage — and cyber-espionage is seen as a key tool in that effort, the Pentagon noted this month in a report to Congress on China. For the first time, the Pentagon specifically named the Chinese government and military as the culprit behind intrusions into government and other computer systems.
As the threat from Chinese cyber-espionage has grown, the administration has become more public with its concerns. In a speech in March, Thomas Donilon, the national security adviser to President Obama, urged China to control its cyber-activity. In its public criticism, the administration has avoided identifying the specific targets of hacking.
But U.S. officials said several examples were raised privately with senior Chinese government representatives in a four-hour meeting a year ago. The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a closed meeting, said senior U.S. defense and diplomatic officials presented the Chinese with case studies detailing the evidence of major intrusions into U.S. companies, including defense contractors.
In addition, a recent classified National Intelligence Estimate on economic cyber-espionage concluded that China was by far the most active country in stealing intellectual property from U.S. companies.
The Chinese government insists that it does not conduct cyber-espionage on U.S. agencies or companies, and government spokesmen often complain that Beijing is a victim of U.S. cyberattacks.
Obama is expected to raise the issue when he meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping next month in California.
A spokesman for the Pentagon declined to discuss the list from the science board’s report. But the spokesman, who was not authorized to speak on the record, said in an e-mail, “The Department of Defense has growing concerns about the global threat to economic and national security from persistent cyber-intrusions aimed at the theft of intellectual property, trade secrets and commercial data, which threatens the competitive edge of U.S. businesses like those in the Defense Industrial Base.”
The confidential list of compromised weapons system designs and technologies represents the clearest look at what the Chinese are suspected of targeting. When the list was read to independent defense experts, they said they were shocked by the extent of the cyber-espionage and the potential for compromising U.S. defenses.
“That’s staggering,” said Mark Stokes, executive director of the Project 2049 Institute, a think tank that focuses on Asia security issues. “These are all very critical weapons systems, critical to our national security. When I hear this in totality, it’s breathtaking.”
The experts said the cybertheft creates three major problems. First, access to advanced U.S. designs gives China an immediate operational edge that could be exploited in a conflict. Second, it accelerates China’s acquisition of advanced military technology and saves billions in development costs. And third, the U.S. designs can be used to benefit China’s own defense industry. There are long-standing suspicions that China’s theft of designs for the F-35 fighter allowed Beijing to develop its version much faster.
“You’ve seen significant improvements in Chinese military capabilities through their willingness to spend, their acquisitions of advanced Russian weapons, and from their cyber-espionage campaign,” said James A. Lewis, a cyber-policy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Ten years ago, I used to call the PLA [People’s Liberation Army] the world’s largest open-air military museum. I can’t say that now.”
The public version of the science board report noted that such cyber-espionage and cyber-sabotage could impose “severe consequences for U.S. forces engaged in combat.” Those consequences could include severed communication links critical to the operation of U.S. forces. Data corruption could misdirect U.S. operations. Weapons could fail to operate as intended. Planes, satellites or drones could crash, the report said.
In other words, Stokes said, “if they have a better sense of a THAAD design or PAC-3 design, then that increases the potential of their ballistic missiles being able to penetrate our or our allies’ missile defenses.”
Winslow T. Wheeler, director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Project on Government Oversight, made a similar point. “If they got into the combat systems, it enables them to understand it to be able to jam it or otherwise disable it,” he said. “If they’ve got into the basic algorithms for the missile and how they behave, somebody better get out a clean piece of paper and start to design all over again.”
The list did not describe the extent or timing of the penetrations. Nor did it say whether the theft occurred through the computer networks of the U.S. government, defense contractors or subcontractors.
Privately, U.S. officials say that senior Pentagon officials are frustrated by the scale of cybertheft from defense contractors, who routinely handle sensitive classified data. The officials said concerns have been expressed by Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Adm. James A. Winnefeld Jr., the vice chairman, as well as Gen. Keith Alexander, director of the National Security Agency.
“In many cases, they don’t know they’ve been hacked until the FBI comes knocking on their door,” said a senior military official who was not authorized to speak on the record. “This is billions of dollars of combat advantage for China. They’ve just saved themselves 25 years of research and development. It’s nuts.”
In an attempt to combat the problem, the Pentagon launched a pilot program two years ago to help the defense industry shore up its computer defenses, allowing the companies to use classified threat data from the National Security Agency to screen their networks for malware. The Chinese began to focus on subcontractors, and now the government is in the process of expanding the sharing of threat data to more defense contractors and other industries.
An effort to change defense contracting rules to require companies to secure their networks or risk losing Pentagon business stalled last year. But the 2013 Defense Authorization Act has a provision that requires defense contractors holding classified clearances to report intrusions into their networks and allow access to government investigators to analyze the breach.
The systems on the science board’s list are built by a variety of top defense contractors, including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. None of the companies would comment about whether their systems have been breached.
But Northrop Grumman spokesman Randy Belote acknowledged the company “is experiencing greater numbers of attempts to penetrate its computer networks” and said the firm is “vigilant” about protecting its networks.
A Lockheed Martin official said the firm is “spending more time helping deal with attacks on the supply chain” of partners, subcontractors and suppliers than dealing with attacks directly against the company. “For now, our defenses are strong enough to counter the threat, and many attackers know that, so they go after suppliers. But of course they are always trying to develop new ways to attack.”
The Defense Science Board report also listed broad technologies that have been compromised, such as drone video systems, nanotechnology, tactical data links and electronic warfare systems — all areas where the Pentagon and Chinese military are investing heavily.
“Put all that together — the design compromises and the technology theft — and it’s pretty significant,” Stokes said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)