The Federal Government Steels Children After All?

#WhereAreTheChildren

‘Where are the Girls?’: Child Trafficking Feared as DHS Can’t Say Where Immigrant Girls are Being Held

Fears of child trafficking are rising as independent media and citizens realize that the only footage of children refugees is boys. DHS was asked where the girls are, and they could not answer.

As the debate swarms over illegal immigration, Americans on both the left and the right are at each other’s throats pointing fingers over who’s responsible. In the meantime, what was a “conspiracy theory” a month ago is now being confirmed by the very people accused of keeping people in cages. One question, however, has just been raised which gives one a dark and sickly feeling inside when thinking about the potential answers to it: “Where are the girls?”

There is something particularly disturbing about the minuscule amount of footage recently released by HHS last week—it only shows boys, and only boys age 10 and up. Where are the girls? Where are the toddlers? Where are the babies?

Could it be that HHS is only releasing footage of these older boys to portray an image of less suffering and compliant young men in order to keep the public happy? Are the places where girls are kept so disturbing that none of this footage can be released?

According to official policy, the government does not remove toddlers and babies from their mothers. However, as TFTP reported, a mother from Honduras who came to the U.S. seeking asylum with her family said she was breastfeeding her infant at a detention center when her baby was suddenly taken from her with no warning and no explanation.

Read More: https://thefreethoughtproject.com/where-are-the-girls-child-trafficking-feared-as-dhs-cant-say-where-immigrant-girls-are-being-held/

Real Talk: Legal Immigration and ILLEGAL Immigration are not the SAME Things

every 30 seconds another person becomes a victim of human trafficking

People like myself that believe (for reasons not racist) that one of the only good purposes of a federal government is to secure the border. 

“Our founders, asserted their concerns publicly and routinely about the effects of indiscriminate mass immigration. They made it clear that the purpose of allowing foreigners into our fledgling nation was not to recruit millions of new voters or to secure permanent ruling majorities for their political parties. It was to preserve, protect, and enhance the republic they put their lives on the line to establish.”
https://www.nationalreview.com/…/immigration-founding…/

Though, I don’t agree with separating families, the media coverage is almost entirely exaggerated and hyperbolic to create an emotional reaction against Trump, while excluding a bunch of important and rational details…

“…the reporting from the border has also been incomplete, misleading, and at times biased and emotionally overwrought. It’s no secret the mainstream media disagrees with Trump’s push to crack down on illegal immigration and tighten border security, but that shouldn’t excuse the lack of nuance and granularity in much of the reporting we’ve seen over the past week or so.”
http://thefederalist.com/…/4-things-media-wont-tell…/

I think his base is concerned about illegal immigration, the argument is hardly ever against LEGAL immigration but the media acts like they’re all purely racist against all immigrants.

“It’s not personal. Republicans aren’t anti-immigrant. They’re anti-illegal immigration. It’s the basis of any society to prioritize its resources for its own members rather than diverting them to people in other societies. Our society is our responsibility, their societies are their responsibility.”
http://thefederalist.com/…/no-americans-want-border…/

Not everyone’s racist, there are still a large number that voted for Obama, and also voted for Trump.

“ANES data suggest that about 8.4 million 2012 Obama voters backed Trump in 2016 ”
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/…/just-how-many-obama…/

I think most people and sources agree that legal immigration is a win win…

“Immigration’s Long-Term Impacts on Overall Wages and Employment of Native-Born U.S. Workers Very Small, Although Low-Skilled Workers May Be Affected, New Report Finds; Impacts on Economic Growth Positive, While Effects on Government Budgets Mixed”
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx… 

and the media for “some reason” doesn’t want to admit that ILLEGAL immigration is a negative on our society…

“Illegal immigration costs Americans billions of dollars each year. Illegal aliens are net consumers of taxpayer-funded services and the limited taxes paid by some segments of the illegal alien population are, in no way, significant enough to offset the growing financial burdens imposed on U.S. taxpayers by massive numbers of uninvited guests.”
https://www.fairus.org/…/fiscal-burden-illegal…

The Open Borders Argument: Life Isn’t Fair, Give Us Your Stuff

… and locking your home at night just shows your privilege. 

Borders aren't fair give us your stuff

Immigration Lies and Hypocrisy

Walter E. Williams

President Donald Trump reportedly asked why the U.S. is “having all these people from shithole countries come here.” I think he could have used better language, but it’s a question that should be asked and answered. I have a few questions for my fellow Americans to consider. How many Norwegians have illegally entered our nation, committed crimes and burdened our prison and welfare systems? I might ask the same question about Finnish, Swedish, Welsh, Icelanders, Greenlanders and New Zealanders. The bulk of our immigration problem is with people who enter our country criminally from Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, Africa and the Middle East. It’s illegal immigrants from those countries who have committed crimes and burdened our criminal justice and welfare systems. A large number of immigrants who are here illegally — perhaps the majority are law-abiding in other respects — have fled oppressive, brutal and corrupt regimes to seek a better life in America.

In the debate about illegal immigration, there are questions that are not explicitly asked but can be answered with a straight “yes” or “no”: Does everyone in the world have a right to live in the U.S.? Do Americans have a right to decide who and under what conditions a person may enter our country? Should we permit foreigners landing at our airports to ignore U.S. border control laws just as some ignore our laws at our southern border? The reason those questions are not asked is that one would be deemed an idiot for saying that everyone in the world has a right to live in our country, that Americans don’t have a right to decide who lives in our country and that foreigners landing at our airports have a right to just ignore U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents.

Immigration today, even when legal, is different from the immigration of yesteryear. People who came here in the 19th century and most of the 20th century came here to learn our language, learn our customs and become Americans. Years ago, there was a guarantee that immigrants came here to work, because there was no welfare system; they worked, begged or starved. Today, there is no such assurance. Because of our welfare state, immigrants can come here and live off taxpaying Americans.

There is another difference between today and yesteryear. Today, Americans are taught multiculturalism throughout their primary, secondary and college education. They are taught that one culture is no better or worse than another. To believe otherwise is criticized at best as Eurocentrism and at worst as racism. As a result, some immigrant groups seek to bring to our country the cultural values whose failures have led to the poverty, corruption and human rights violations in their home countries that caused them to flee. As the fallout from President Trump’s indelicate remarks demonstrates, too many Americans are afraid and unwilling to ask which immigrant groups have become a burden to our nation and which have made a contribution to the greatness of America.

Very unfortunate for our nation is that we have political groups that seek to use illegal immigration for their own benefit. They’ve created sanctuary cities and states that openly harbor criminals — people who have broken our laws. The whole concept of sanctuary cities is to give aid, comfort and sympathy to people who have broken our laws. Supporters want to prevent them from having to hide and live in fear of discovery. I’d ask whether, for the sake of equality before the law, we should apply the sanctuary concept to Americans who have broken other laws, such as robbers and tax evaders.

We should not fall prey to people who criticize our efforts to combat illegal immigration and who pompously say, “We’re a nation of immigrants!” The debate is not over immigration. The debate is over illegal immigration. My sentiments on immigrants who are here legally and who want to become Americans are expressed by the sentiments in Emma Lazarus’ poem “The New Colossus,” which is on a plaque inside the Statue of Liberty and in part says, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

Read More: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/02/01/immigration-lies-and-hypocrisy.html

The Cost of Illegal Immigration

migrants in Germany

  • “At the federal, state, and local levels, taxpayers shell out approximately $134.9 billion to cover the costs incurred by the presence of more than 12.5 million illegal aliens, and about 4.2 million citizen children of illegal aliens.” — Matt O’Brien and Spencer Raley.
  • It is also rather more than the single payment of $25 billion that it will cost to build a wall — five and a half times more, and every year.
  • “Undocumented immigrants are at least 142% more likely to be convicted of a crime than other Arizonans. They also tend to commit more serious crimes…” — John R. Lott.
  • In 2015, included in the DEA’s drug-threat assessment was the fact that drug overdoses killed more people in the United States than car accidents or guns. Many of these drugs [were] smuggled in large volumes by drug cartels.”

In his State of the Union address on January 30, US President Donald J. Trump referred to the brutal murder of two 16-year-old girls from Long Island in December 2016 by members of the “savage MS-13 gang,” responsible for a spate of other gruesome killings in the area, as well.

Many of these gang members, he explained, had entered the United States illegally. “For decades, open borders have allowed drugs and gangs to pour into our most vulnerable communities,” he said.

Calling on Congress “to finally close the deadly loopholes that have allowed… criminal gangs to break into our country,” he listed the four pillars of his immigration-reform proposal:

  • A path to citizenship for 1.8 million illegal immigrants who were brought to America by their parents.
  • The construction of a “great wall on the southern border” and enforcement by agents patrolling and securing the border.
  • Ending the visa lottery, “a program that randomly plans out green cards without regard for skill, merit, for the safety of American people.”
  • Ending the “current, broken system” of chain migration of distant relatives, and limiting sponsorships to spouses and minor children.

Although he did not specify this in his speech, Trump reportedly is seeking $25 billion from Congress to fund the wall. Opponents of the wall have been arguing that illegal immigrants do not commit crimes at a higher rate than legal immigrants or native-born Americans; that illegal immigration has been a boon to the economy, rather than a drain on it; and that the cost both of deportation and a wall far exceeds the benefits of both. These claims are repeatedly voiced by the Trump administration’s detractors, as part of their campaign to accuse the president of racism; but what are the facts?

To set the record straight, let us take a look at a number of those that have been obscured or ignored by the media.

As far as the cost of the wall is concerned, a study released in September 2017 by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) reveals that, “At the federal, state, and local levels, taxpayers shell out approximately $134.9 billion to cover the costs incurred by the presence of more than 12.5 million illegal aliens, and about 4.2 million citizen children of illegal aliens.” This, the report says, is a nearly $3 billion increase in the cost since 2013. It is also rather more than the single payment of $25 billion that it will cost to build a wall – five and a half times more, and every year.

The same goes for the cost of deporting illegal immigrants. According to Steven A. Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies,

“…The average cost of a deportation is much smaller than the net fiscal drain created by the average illegal immigrant,” in part due to the fact that “illegal immigrants overwhelmingly have modest levels of education — most have not completed high school or have only a high school education…creating more in costs for government than they pay in taxes.”

The question of the rates of criminality among illegal aliens vs. those of legal immigrants and American-born citizens has been examined by John R. Lott, Jr., president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, using Arizona’s prison population as a microcosm for study. According to Lott, the ability to measure the crime-rate among illegal immigrants in the U.S. has been difficult, due to many factors, including the lack of a national data base and “primitive” methodology – such as “simple, cross-sectional analysis to see whether areas with higher immigrant populations have higher crime rates,” and “a purely time series approach… look at the United States as a whole and note that crime has decreased since 1990 as immigration has increased.” The advantage of the Arizona Department of Corrections study, Lott says, is that

“over our 32.5-year period, we know each prisoner who entered the prison system, their criminal convictions history, and whether he is a documented or undocumented immigrant. The only mystery is why this type of data has not been utilized until now.”

Peter Kirsanow wryly solved the mystery in National Review, writing:

“Unfortunately, almost every public official not named Jeff Sessions guards against disclosure of illegal-immigrant crime data more tenaciously than disclosure of nuclear launch codes.”

According to Lott, whose research spans 1985-2017:

“Arizona’s prison population data allow us to compare undocumented immigrants’ share of the prison population with their estimated share of the state population…For the first time, we break down the data to examine differences between US citizens, undocumented immigrants, and legal permanent residents. One advantage of using convictions rather than just reported crimes is that convictions depend on a ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ standard of evidence and thus are much less likely to count innocent people.”

The findings are unequivocal, as the following summary illustrates:

“Undocumented immigrants are at least 142% more likely to be convicted of a crime than other Arizonans. They also tend to commit more serious crimes and serve 10.5% longer sentences, more likely to be classified as dangerous, and 45% more likely to be gang members than U.S. citizens…There are dramatic differences between in the criminal histories of convicts who are U.S. citizens and undocumented immigrants…

“[Y]oung undocumented immigrants commit crime at twice the rate of young U.S. citizens. These undocumented immigrants also tend to commit more serious crimes. If undocumented immigrants committed crime nationally as they do in Arizona, in 2016 they would have been responsible for over 1,000 more murders, 5,200 rapes, 8,900 robberies, 25,300 aggravated assaults, and 26,900 burglaries.”

These numbers do not even include the cost to American taxpayers of the toll taken on America’s children by illegally imported drugs. Although available information on this is at best spotty, the key finding from the DEA’s 2017 National Drug Threat Assessment is that the “most commonly reported greatest drug threat was heroin, at 44.1 percent of law enforcement responses… This was followed by 29.8 percent of respondents indicating methamphetamine was their greatest drug threat, 9.3 percent reporting controlled prescription drugs…”

This tells us something about the extent of the problem, but not enough. The 2010 drug-threat assessment, released a year after the previous administration took office, revealed that,

“From January through November 2009, U.S. seizures of illegal drugs in transit exceeded 1,626 metric tons, indicating that DTOs succeed in moving several thousand tons of cocaine, methamphetamine, marijuana, heroin, and MDMA into the United States annually. There are unique smuggling and transportation methods…”

In 2015, included in the DEA’s drug-threat assessment was the fact that drug overdoses killed more people in the United States than car accidents or guns. As was noted by the BBC at the time, “Many of these drugs are smuggled in large volumes by drug cartels…”

The late Democrat Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously said, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” His successors in Congress would do well to remember this while debating the issue of illegal immigration. They certainly need to keep it in mind when voting on the administration’s proposed plan.

Read More: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11829/illegal-immigration-cost

Soros-sponsored immigration network in Italy | GEFIRA

Why is it cool and “progressive” for billionaires to fund revolutions and destabilization around the world so they can profit from failed states?

If there was ever a purpose for government I would think it would be to protect the people from billionaires paying to destabilize their country.

Oh, too late, and it’s even here now. They have been doing this around the world since the 50’s. Did anyone think this manufactured regime change wouldn’t come back home…? P.D.

Soros-sponsored immigration network in Italy

Why is there a migrant crisis in the Mediterranean? Why are NGOs involved? Because there is an extensive network of open borders activists and organizations behind it; many of them are directly funded by or cooperated with George Soros’ Open Society. Is it illegal? Not really. Political activism is an essential part of democratic societies. However, sometimes it goes too far, or the promoted causes prove to be either unrealistic or unsustainable.
The network of the “immigration lobby’’ in Italy is made up of International NGOs financed by the Open Society Foundation (green), Italian NGOs financed by OSF (blue), and organizations with shared projects with OSF (purple).

 

Soros Italian NGO network
Soros Italian NGO network

The network, as exemplified by CILDI, is extensive and intricate. It ranges from former ministers, Kyenge (Immigration) and Bonino (foreign affairs), both directly responsible for the large influx of migrants being forcefully accepted into Italy, to support groups promoting press censorship, but also providing juridical support, advocacy and publications.
Only in few cases one can inspect their budgets, not exactly a trait suggesting transparency and openness.

The main theme of the Open Society network is to use anti-discrimination laws to promote unlimited migration via the abolition of borders. The idea is clearly stated in the manifesto of many organizations. Most organizations promote their extreme views as “fact based’’ or “common sense’’ to give themselves an aura of scientific approach, while providing subjective and ideological interpretation of data and omitting inconvenient information. That is also why they omit the nationality of the criminal. It’s equivalent to admitting there is a problem but it should not be talked about. This is typical of totalitarian regimes, not democratic and certainly not “open’’ societies. The stated goal of “correct information on the theme of immigration’’ is certainly not achieved this way.

Finally, the no-borders strategy is being implemented with the widespread action of the immigration lobby in favour of NGOs operating in the Mediterranean. Whether through its funding or publications covering the topic, conferences, research or information channels for migrants, the network effectively provides support for migrants, regardless of whether they are legal or illegal…

Read More: gefira.org/en/2017/07/13/soros-sponsored-immigration-network-in-italy/