America: A Nation of Exiles, Misfits, and Second Chances. But has it gone too far?

America. There has always been something truly unique about this country. People of all sorts have been coming here almost ever since its discovery, and they keep coming despite all our faults and failures (and there are many).  Nations, far older than us, are constantly comparing themselves to us. We’ve become the world’s yardstick for practically everything, but who are we really?

We don’t tend to think about it much, but most of those who came here to settle were misfits and exiles. They were people who didn’t fit into society any longer. They came to escape the restrictions their native country had placed on them. For many, they were locked into an economic and social caste system irrespective of their intelligence, ability, or motivation.  

Many were just one slippery step from debtor’s prison. Others had already fell victim to the harsh judicial system, often for petty crimes committed in the name of survival. The lucky one’s found themselves “transported”. This was a way to be rid of petty criminals, social deviants, and malcontents while emptying out their overcrowded prisons and relieving a marginal social safety net based largely on charity.  They were typically sent abroad as “indentured servants” to work off their sentences in places which were often difficult and dangerous (Georgia and the swamplands of South Carolina were often a key destinations).

Meanwhile, others simply wanted to chance to start life over again and a chance to show the world (and themselves) what they could do if given the opportunity, and so they came by the tens of thousands.  Many bore  the same title of “indentured servant” as the felons, though under slightly better circumstances in most cases.

These individuals were mostly young, poor, marginally educated, with very limited opportunities. Many were orphaned. They voluntarily leased themselves out for a set period of time. This usually covered their passage (typically in steerage) as well as their labor with the hopes that, in the end, they would get their chance at a new life. It was a difficult and often risky choice, with many never seeing the end of their bondage, but it was better than what awaited them if they had remained.

A surprisingly large segment of immigrants also came to avoid religious persecution. It was commonplace for each country to have an official religion, often headed by a monarch,  to which everyone was expected to participate, if not in person, then financially. It wasn’t uncommon for so-called “dissenters” to find themselves harassed by authorities, fined, imprisoned, or stripped of everything they owned in order to pay the mandatory tithes. This new country demanded none of that. There would be no state mandated religion.  It’s easy to understand why, to believers, this was seen as the “promised land”.

Not much has really changed in all those centuries since the first Europeans set foot on this continent. We still attract the world’s misfits, exiles, and those looking to start over. America is a different sort of country. It is not a nation which evolved organically over time like Europe or Asia. We came about in less than a blink of an eye in terms of history. We were created as an experiment, born out of a sense of justice, fair play, and individual sovereignty.

 In lieu of having a long history to shape our nation, ours was based a heritage of ideas stemming from the Enlightenment, Judeo-Christian morals, and the philosophies of the Near East, Ancient Greece and Rome.  Even our government was modelled on the Roman Republic. All of which is nicely summed up in our traditional national motto---"E pluribus Unum” (“Out of Many, One”) along with our official national motto, “In God We Trust”, which reflects the desire of many to come here to seeking their religious freedom.   

The Statue of Liberty, which graces the entry into New York, reminds us that we are still a nation of second chances. It’s often the first thing arriving immigrants see. The plaque at its base bears the  famous poem by Emma Lazarus entitled “The New Colossus” which speaks of America as the “Mother of Exiles”. It urges the world to “…Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breath free. The wretched refuse of teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift up my lamp beside the golden door!”

Marvelous words expressing the aim of America to welcome all those seeking to be free, but something has changed since those words were pinned in 1883. America was conceived of as a welcoming melting pot, where all would leave behind the worthless hatreds and prejudices from wherever they came. Here they would become a new people---“Americans”--- sharing a common language with a shared set of values, laws, and uniquely American traditions.

Somewhere along the way something changed. We no longer concerned ourselves with those who come here in defiance of our laws. We stopped being proud to be Americans. Today, we have some 13+ million illegals living here with millions using taxpayer based social services they never paid for. They have no interest in adopting our language, laws, traditions or values. Worse, we have politicians, cities and groups which are fine with that. What happened?

According to a U.S. government budget committee report on the costs of illegal immigrants to taxpayers dated January 11, 2024, 69% of illegal immigrants don’t have an education beyond high school (compared to 35% of Americans) which impacts their work skills and employability. Each individual cost taxpayers approximately $68,000 each over their lifetime or about $42 billion.  In addition, the children of illegal immigrates (including children born in the U.S. of parents here illegally) received roughly $68.1 billion dollars (as of 2019) in taxpayers funded services. Taxpayers also picked emergency care and other medical costs to the tune of $7 billion dollars annually.

Some hid behind the 14^th Amendment, which was intended to provide citizenship for recently freed slaves following the Civil War, in order to claim legal status, thanks “anchor babies” as noted above. More recently, others have claimed asylum status when they’re only seeking employment without applying for a work permit (employment isn’t recognized as a legitimate reason for asylum status under international law).  Still others send their children with strangers and then come seeking to be reunited with them.

Even certain religious institutions blatantly choose to ignore immigrations laws, believing that somehow they are exempt from following the law, and going as far as not just encouraging them to migrate, but providing them with shelter, housing, job contacts, and even how to manipulate the system to access taxpayer based services. Of course, these immigrants fill pews and church coffers, as well as improve their political clout.

We became fixated on the “right” of these individuals to enter our country undeterred while other nations, ever anxious to rid themselves of hungry mouths they can’t afford thanks to antiquated societal norms, openly proclaim that we had no legal right to protect and secure our border.

Somehow, our right of national sovereignty had come under attack while their sovereignty remained securely intact. Immigrants now come, not to be Americans, but to transplant their country, language, values, traditions, and all! Some intend to even transplant their religious values despite not being compatible with ours. We’re the ones expected to conform and adopt, not the immigrant. What went wrong?

Our  English language is treated as unimportant. The government now caters to “diversity” instead of promoting emersion. Immigrants view the taxpayer funded social security net as an entitlement just for being here. They regularly send money home to support their families and community, which is perfectly fine. But why do they refuse to apply for work permits and pay their fair share of taxes to the country which makes it all possible?

At about the same time, we started to see more and more people no longer identifying as Americans. They had become hyphenated Americans, be it cultural, racial, ethnic, or whatever. In addition, the very notion of “American” increasingly became as a form of slander. The “ugly American” of the 1960’s had suddenly returned home.

We were increasingly taught to be ashamed of our collective history. Entire chapters of our history have become distorted and rewritten. Critical thinking skills have been replaced, and with it, the quality of education. Discipline is now seen as a form of suppression. In colleges and universities, students aren’t expected to take responsibility for the debts they willingly incurred despite many earning majors where there is no demand in the job market.

Even the Pledge of Allegiance is no longer publicly acceptable. Neither are displays of the American flag (which is now considered a “trigger object”).  Statues and monuments deemed “offensive” by a select few are defaced, vandalized, and removed.  Individuals with criminal histories are portrayed as heroes while law enforcement is viewed with contempt.

While America has always welcomed various religions, how do we deal with a religion which wants to impose its own religious laws on society, going so far as verbal and physically attacking people, blocking sidewalks and traffic while they “pray”? They become incensed at criticism of their faith but encourage attacks on other religions. In Europe, this has proven to be a disaster as the governments continually cave to their demands while punishing the victims.  

This is all part of a new narrative being preached throughout America---the “Gospel of Political Correctness” as proclaimed by so-called “woke” Millennials and Gen Z. To contradict the gospel in any way is regarded as blasphemy or heresy, often resulting in being  “canceled” (sounds like a euphemism used by the Gestapo or KGB). The good news, however, is that you’re freely entitled to their opinion at any time, whether you want it or not.

How does a nation founded on freedom of speech, religion, and association cope with this? How does a nation protect its national security when our borders are ignored?  How do we address the issue of hyphenated loyalties, a declining education system, no common language, or an agreed upon history survive? Historically, nations similar to this  have become ungovernable and ultimately imploded. No nation can be pulled in multiple directions and hold in the long run  (I’m reminded of Yugoslavia, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, as well as the Ancient Roman Republic).

I’m reminded of a quote by Theodore Roosevelt (perhaps our greatest president and certainly my favorite). In speaking before the Knights of Columbus at Carnegie Hall in 1915, the former president addressed many of these same issues when he said, “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he’s an American , but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room but for one flag…We have room for one language here, and that is the English language…and we have room for but one sole loyalty, and that loyalty is to the American people”.

I couldn’t have said it better Teddy. Well done. The question  which needs to be addressed is whether we are going to heed Roosevelt’s word, spoken some 110 years ago or are we going to go the way of the Yugoslavia past or current Europe? America has always been a country of second chances for those with nowhere else to go. But for us, here and now, there’s no place for us to go. There’s no one coming to our rescue. Republics rarely, if ever, get second chances.

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 

Poems: The New Colossus

“Americanism”  by Theodore Roosevelt (1915)

Theodore Roosevelt: No Room in This Country for Hyphenated Americans

Hyphenate American

House Judicial Subcommittee Report: The Costs of IllegalImmigration to Taxpayers

Indentured Servants  

The Babyboomers and Millennials: The Generational and Religious Divide

Last week, I wrote about the decline of organized religion in the U.S.. In addition last week's article looked at how Babyboomers, Millennials, and Gen Z, have influenced this decline which began in the 1960's. This week, we'll get a more specific, starting with the Babyboomers and continuing with the Millennials.

Babyboomers (1946 - 1964) were the product of a society which experienced, on the one hand, one of the most prosperous economies in the country's history, and on the other hand, perhaps America's most violable period.  It was a traditional childhood and youth in one sense but would ultimately led to violent rejection of traditional values, anti-war protests, clashes over race relations and civil rights, which, between 1955 and 1975 took the nation from one which trusted the government to one which had utter contempt for the government.

It was during the 1960's and early 1970's that many Boomers turned their back on organized religion, although there was a brief and intense resurgence as noted by the popularity of musicals like "Godspell" and "Jesus Christ Superstar" which attempted to find a new relevance and interpretation in religion. At the same time, "Fiddler on the Roof" attempted to revive Judaism's historic belief in its traditions and values while plays, like "Hair" and  "Oh! Calcutta!" explored society's changing morality, especially its sexual morals.

The same, or similar expression of disconnect found expression in music, art, and even TV shows like "All in the Family", "The Smother Brothers Comedy Hour", and Rowan and Martin's "Laugh In".  Even network comedies like "Get Smart", "Love American Style", and others carried a anti-establishment undertone. It's not surprising then to expect that religion too would be affected.

Rock groups like The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, among others  had a profound effect on that generation's view of organized religion (in a sense, their "message" came to replace that of the pulpit's).  Groups like these introduced society to the Eastern philosophies, mysticism, yoga, acupuncture, mantras, meditation, holistic and herbal medicine, and Swami whose names we couldn't pronounce.

In addition, first cohort Boomers (1946 - 1954), were largely Left leaning politically. They promoted an idealistic vision of socialism, and began viewing the Cold War as nothing more than propaganda war by Wall Street over who controlled what natural resources and allowed military bases. 

By the late 60's, Boomers started moving to communes as a socialistic experiment and to "get back to nature". They joined small collectives, growing their own food, sharing chores, making their own clothes. Those who, for whatever reason, weren't able to join in, however, started forming neighborhood associations and block watches to take care of their piece of the New American Dream

They also started petition drives and formed boycotts against "unfriendly" or "anti-nature" corporations which wanted to pave over the "bunny fields". From thus the concept of the "NIMBY"---Not In My Backyard was born and remains very much alive today. It was also the birth of consumer advocacy,citizen lobbyists, grassroots environmentalism, and community activism.

The Boomers involvement with protecting the environment, especially air and water, ultimately resulted in the passage of the Clean Air and Water Act and creation of the EPA (1970) just as they had done earlier with the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964, which was later expanded in Title VII to include other categories such as gender and age discrimination.

Meanwhile, the second cohort of Babyboomers (1955 - 1964), which embraced many of the same ideals as their older siblings, tended to be less optimistic. They had been more deeply affected by the outcome of the Vietnam War (in part, due to the nightly "body count" on the evening news) and America's failure to secure victory after a nearly 20 year war and the loss of almost 60,000  (mostly young) men and women amid a mountain of lies by the military, Congress, and the Presidency which just seem to grow.

Lies, such as Watergate, caused  Boomers, along with much of America, not just lost its faith in the government and it's institutions, but even its religion was affected as we headed into the 1980's thanks to the rise of the "Televangelist" and the political activism of the "Moral Majority". Sadly, we've never recovered and as I wrote last week, the trend has turned into a death spiral. 

Babyboomers, who rejected materialism in the 1960's went on to be the wealthiest generation up to date, giving us the "Go Go 80's", shopping malls, timeshares, and modern day "greed is good" robber barons like Carl Icahn, T. Boone Pickens, and Ivan Boesky.  Boomers have been behind trends such as healthy eating and fitness craze, disco and mullets (my apologies), McMansions, wine clubs, along with countless others. 

As they age, many of the things Boomers have clung on to will begin to fade (and not just vinyl records or eight tracks). We're talking about traditional brick and mortar businesses (even banks, schools, especially universities are at risk), cable only TV, home ownership, big cars, professional football and, perhaps, boxing (due to head injuries) along with baseball (which is cited by Millennials as "too slow"), and  organized religion just to name a few.

A study by the University of California at Santa Barbara's sociology department indicated that around 42% of Boomers dropped out of organized religion all together, yet 33% never dropped out. Those individuals tended to be conservative, fundamentalist, and were Reagan supporters. However, 25% are slowly returning. Of those, the majority are leaning to liberal and less traditional churches or religious institutions. Their biggest hang-ups? The need for less formality, pro-choice, and LGBT acceptance.

Today, about 88% of Babyboomers describe themselves as "believing in God" or being "pretty sure" God exists (God or some sort of "higher power"). 83% said that religion still had a positive impact on their life. The survey didn't define "religion" as being formal or the same as a less structured "faith system".

When it came to attending some sort of religious service during the year, 71% said they did (but only 38% was weekly). However, when asked if they attended some other religious program (such as bible study or prayer group), 57% said no. When asked if they prayed, 77% said they did; 61% daily and 16% weekly. When asked if they meditated, 56% said they did. Of that, 45% was weekly, while 42% didn't ("prayer" and "meditation" were viewed as being separate from each other)

The same poll asked Babyboomers if they felt a sense of inner peace or spiritual well being. Only 14% said no. 84% did, at least some of the time.  44% also said they didn't read religious scripture of any sort. Just 38% did so weekly while 17% did so occasionally. Of those who did, 35% thought it was literal word of God. 29% said it could be...maybe...or shouldn't take literally. 29% said it wasn't the literal word.

When asked about Heaven and Hell,  74% thought that Heaven existed in some form. 26% didn't think it existed or weren't convinced. As for Hell, 59% believed it existed. 41% didn't think there was a Hell or wasn't sure.  So, how does this compare to the Millennials?

Millennials (1980 - 1996) are, for the most part, the grandchildren of the Babyboomers. They seem to have inherited much of their grandparent's distrust of the government, institutions, and organized religion. However, Millennials are also more dismissive of Boomers (the common Millennial phrase "Ok Boomer" is usually intended to be a polite dismissal of something a Boomer has said or done). 

Many believe that the current social and financial hardships they face as a generation are the direct result of Babyboomers, which they view as greedy and inconsiderate (typical of the "Me Generation). Millennials are the first generation whose quality of life didn't meet or exceed their parents.

Boomers  benefited from their parent's level "living wage" jobs, lifelong employment, employer provided healthcare and retirement (which was often the result of unionization). While Boomers attended college at higher numbers than any previous generation, their debt level was relatively low, especially compared to Millennials, due to many programs which have since been discontinued, including the original GI Bill.

 Millennials are, as we all know, more diverse than Boomers, especially along race, sexual orientation, and ethnic lines, not just as a group, but among their personal relationships. As a group, they tend to have far fewer friends than their grandparents at the same age. They're also more likely to have more health issues like high blood pressure, diabetes, Crohn's, and depression. They are also more likely to have an addiction problems. Millennials are more likely to marry later in life and have fewer children whereas Boomers had more children. Boomers also tend to divorce more often, even as they age.

When it comes to the importance of religion, just 38% of Millennials said it's very important. 29% said it was only "somewhat" important while 33% wasn't impressed with it. 28% attend religious services regularly. 38% did so just a few times a year and 34% said they never do.

Asked about prayer, 36% said no thank you. 39% said they prayed daily while 35% did so occasionally. By contrast, 42% meditated (though only 27% did regularly) while 58% didn't.  When asked if they participated in some sort of religious activity, a whopping 62% said no. Only 18% did on a weekly basis. The remaining 20% was a "hit or miss". 

When asked if they read religious scripture, 53% said no. Only 25% did so weekly. When it came to believing what they read, it didn't fare much better. 20% thought it was the literal word of God while the remaining 80% weren't so sure, which included 44% who said it wasn't. Heaven and Hell? 68% believe in a Heaven; 32% not so much. As for Hell, 56% said yes but the rest didn't think so.

The downward trend of religion seems to have begun in the 1960's, although the seeds were certainly planted much earlier; likely the outgrowth of the private hell brought home by the veterans of WWII and Korea. Babyboomers were said to have been the most spoiled group in recent history; totally devoted to materialism in their childhood yet by their 20's embracing a idealistic form of socialism, and again returning to "conspicuous consumption" and corporate greed by their 30's. Now, once more, returning to the nomadic spiritualism of their youth as they enter their senior years.  

Perhaps it was an attempt by their elders to buy them things they themselves couldn't afford during the Great Depression or during the war years. A vain attempt to buy happiness which left a spiritual void in their children. Maybe the same could be said of the Millennials. They too were spoilt by their parents and grandparents, only to be left feeling hollow inside.  

Millennials have a sense of anger at what they see as misused consumption by their elders, leaving them in no mood to be lectured by a generation which seemed to have had it all and blew it. Now they find themselves adrift financially, politically, and spiritually.  However, with no societal anchor to be found with their parents, grandparents, or great grandparents, the deciding fate of organized religion and perhaps society itself lays with the Gen Z, the new kids on the generational block.

 

Religious composition of Baby Boomers

Generational cohort by religious group

Why Millennials distaste for Babyboomers is justified

Religious composition of younger Millennials

 

 

Sanctuary Cities

Sanctuary cities. They've been with us since the being of civilization. In the bible, there are six such cities, all under the control of the priestly Levites. These six cities, Bosor, Ramoth and Golan west of the Jordan River and Kedesh, Hebron, and Sheham to its east, were places where individuals accused of crime could escape to in order find sanctuary until the crimes they were accused of could be adjudicated by the either the priestly court or local ruler.

 Even the main temple in Jerusalem could be used as a temporary shelter. The ancient Sumerians, Babylonians, and Assyrians also provided cities or temples where the accused could find a brief respite. The ancient Greeks too had cities of refuge, including various temples until such time as the accused could prove their innocence.

Fast forward to the modern era and we find the concept of the cities of refuge being played out in the form of sanctuary cities. In most cases this applies to immigrants trying to get away from war, famine, or disease, however, it's also come to include economic migrants which are individuals seeking better economic opportunities. This is especially the case in Europe which has adopted basically an open door policy toward these individuals. However, that has proven to be disastrous.

In numerous cases, cities and towns have been overrun. Crime has become rampant, partly as a result of a clash of cultures and refusal of the immigrants to adapt to their host country's laws, customs, language, or values. As a result, the immigrants have attempted to transplant their laws, customs, and values onto their new homeland and completely rejected the very notion of assimilation.

The governments throughout Western Europe and the UK have proven to be woefully unprepared for what they willingly invited into their country. As a result, these governments have unleashed nothing less than an invasion which will ultimately result in a complete or nearly complete replacement of the native population, along with their traditions, religions, customs, and culture.

To make matters worse, the governments have largely responded by cracking down on its own citizens, including the victims of the crime caused by these migrants (especially the victims of gang rapes which are often blamed on the victims!). These governments have gone as far as dictating to its native populations what to wear, when to go out and under what circumstances, removing traditional items (such as pork or liquor) from menus for instance; all in the name of "tolerance". 

They've even allow foreign laws to be applied on their own soil (laws which are, by their very nature, in direct conflict of existing laws and customs), and the enforcement of "no go" zones, thus sanctioning de facto occupation zones within their own country.

Finally, while officially there as "economic migrants", the majority of these immigrants have opted not to work. Instead, they've managed to imbed themselves into the very generous economic and social safety nets provided by these countries, and thus, the native population ends up supporting these "invaders" with their tax dollars while being forced into a form of submission to foreign laws and culture. The result has been bringing the once highly successful countries to their knees. As an aside, neither the United Nations or Amnesty International regard economic migrants as justification for any sort of amnesty.

Once, these countries were quite successful and prosperous; where individuals shared a similar work ethic and believed in similar values. Crime was hardly more than a blimp on the radar. Both the quality of life and life expediency were ranked in the top ten in the world for decades. Europe's cities and towns were known for not just being generally safe, but also for being pristine. There was a sense of pride in keeping these communities clean, especially in Germany, the Lowlands, and Scandinavia. However, the migrant crisis, triggered by criminally naive politicians and poorly prepared government infrastructures has all but destroyed what wars and earlier invaders could not.

America has fared better, but not by much. America has always been a nation which has welcomed immigrants. We are, in fact, a nation created by immigrants. Practically every nation, ethnic group, and religion can be found in the America. However, things have greatly changed. Once upon a time, America was viewed as a "melting pot", where individuals came and added their cultures and experiences to the rest. They quickly assimilated into society; adopting its language, customs, and values to create a unique culture all our own. An American Culture.

Naturally, immigrants tended to seek out others who were from the same country, similar religions or cultures. This resulted in the creation of small enclaves, mostly in cities and large towns. However, it didn't change the hope of those individuals of becoming totally immersed in the American experience. Many of these immigrants changed their names, religions and any other links to their past.

They tried to learn what they could about their new homeland long before immigrating. They did their best to learn English, which was a source of deep personal pride (in some cases, English language classes were held onboard the passenger ships). America was seen as a place to start over. Nothing mattered more than to become "Americans".

Most of these immigrants were individuals coming to seek a new life; a chance to start over. Later, immigrants were actively brought to this country by the federal government for humanitarian reasons. Typically this included individuals being persecuted for political, ethnic, or religious reasons. It also included individuals affected by natural and manmade disasters, particularly wars. However, all who sought to come here were expected to do so in accordance to our immigration laws, which, while strict, were viewed the world over as being more liberal and open than most.

However, that started to change in the late 1960's. Individuals who came to this country were encouraged not to assimilate. They were told they didn't need to learn English; we would "ease" their transition into this new society so they could take as long as they needed, if indeed, they even desired to integrate at all. Some never bothered to learn the language or understand the laws and culture of their adopted homeland; many saw America simply as a place to work and send money back home. The result was the creation of a subclass of immigrants which never became a part of the American mosaic; creating pockets of their native countries, transplanted on a new soil. This was "multiculturalism".

The result was a slow but steady increase in individuals who came here illegally with no intent in either assimilating or becoming citizens. In the beginning, most did so to join family and friends who had come to this country legally, however, for whatever reason, they decided to do so illegally. Generally these individuals had a criminal record, lacked adequate skills to find employment or had health issues (which included "anchor babies"). 

What had originally been a trickle had become a flood by the middle 1980's. The situation became so bad that in 1986, President Ronald Reagan signed into law a bill granting the estimated six million illegal immigrants amnesty (excluding those with criminal records). The idea was that the costs of rounding up and deporting these individuals was simply too time consuming and expensive.

Today, various towns, cities, and even states have gone a step further and declared themselves "sanctuaries". By that they mean that those in this country illegally are welcome. The local police departments and other taxpayer funded government entities are instructed not to cooperate in any way with federal authorities in the capture and deportation of these individuals. 

At present there are nine states and well over 100 counties, cities, and towns are have proclaimed themselves "open" to illegal immigrants in defiance to federal laws. Yet, at the same time, these same locales continue to receive federal money. Some have actually had the audacity to ask Washington for more federal dollars to cope with the increased costs of supporting these individuals!

Illegal immigration is ultimately the result of a demand for cheap labor. Employers want to avoid certain OSHA requirements such as safe and healthy work environments, wage laws, and taxes. Unions favor it because it increases their membership and puts dues in the bank. Religious institutions and churches, looking to increase their membership and influence, provide aid by encouraging illegals to enter the country through a system of safe houses, providing temporary shelter (often on church property), jobs, permanent housing, and instruct them on ways to circumvent various laws in order to gain access to taxpayer based services as well as medical care (the cost of which are passed on to consumers and taxpayers).

Unfortunately, it appears this situation will not be resolved until the President and Congress muster the backbone to enforce current laws regarding aiding and abetting criminals. The federal government must first cut off all federal money to states, cities, towns, and communities who provide "sanctuary" to illegal immigrants. Secondly, the Department of Justice needs to bring charges against all those who refuse compliance with federal immigration laws, be they governors, mayors, city councils, or whomever.

States which issue driver's licenses or permit voter registration of illegal immigrants should be voided. That is, a driver's license issued by the State of California or Colorado should not been held as valid outside that state without proper legal identification such as a birth certificate and/or cross checked with a expanded E-Verify. Voter registration should be accompanied by a photo ID and also cross checked with E-Verify. Meanwhile, state legislatures must take whatever steps necessary to make illegal any sanctuary status by the state, as well as counties, cities, and other communities along with a zero tolerance for anyone aiding or employing illegal immigrants.

That being said, the federal government needs to take more aggressive steps to stop the demand. Any employer found employing an illegal worker should have their business license suspended for 90 days for the first offense and face a minimum fine of $10,000 per illegal employee. In addition, corporate officers must be held responsible and should face 90 days jail time. Finally, they must be placed on a permanent watch list. This includes not just the business, but the officers as well.

A second offense should result in a six month suspension of their business license, 180 days in jail, and $25,000 fine per individual. A third offense should result in a permanent suspension of their business license, one year jail time, and $50,000 per individual. Needless to say, any federal contracts should be suspended with the first conviction and permanently after that. Any company with federal contracts who employs an officer guilty of the third offense in a managerial, supervisory, or consultant role must forfeit those federal contracts.

As for non-profits, particularly churches and religious organizations, should face equal consequences for aiding and abetting illegal immigrants. This includes loss of their tax exempt status for the same period as their business license. As the 70's TV detective "Beretta" used to say, "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time". In addition, no one should have access to taxpayer funded services unless they are able to verify they are in this country legally.

Illegal immigration currently cost taxpayers in the multi-billions of dollars on an annual basis. Given the ever widening income gap, increasing food and healthcare costs, not to mention the ever rising tax and utility rates plus the deepening debt many local and states governments are finding themselves, taxpayers can't afford to support those who intentionally defy our laws and then expect us to support them. The majority of us are having trouble just supporting ourselves.

On a related issue, America has a long and well established tradition of religious tolerance, as well as keeping religion out of politics. I doubt many in this country has a problem with Islam or any other religion. However, we will not tolerate attempts to replace or substitute our laws with their religious oriented laws for any reason. We will not allow what has happened to Europe and the UK to happen to this country, and we have no problem with defying politicians unlike our cousins across the pond.

Sanctuary cities of the past were created to provide a place where the accused could go and gain time to prepare a defense against their alleged crime. Today they've become a place where individuals are not accused criminals, but acknowledged criminals can go to avoid punishment. We cannot allow either states or elected individuals to pick and choose what laws they will enforce any more than we can allow churches or employers to ignore existing laws. Until those laws are changed legally, they remain laws and must be enforced.


Center for Immigration Studies-Map: Sanctuary Cities, Counties and States

Sanctuary Cities: What are they?

Sanctuary Cities: Top 3 Pros and Cons

Understanding Terrorism For What It Is

When the Notre Dame Cathedral recently burned and was nearly destroyed, almost everyone was quick to blame local Muslims. Perhaps, given the growing militancy of the local Muslim population throughout France, and in particular, in Paris was why. However, officials have stated that the fire was result of faulty wiring, which triggered the blaze, during renovation. Nevertheless, the crown jewel of Paris, which dates back to the early 13th Century, was nearly gutted; it's famous spiral collapsing to the horror of onlookers as a result of the intense heat.

Current estimates for rebuilding the structure put the figure at around $1 billion and $2 billion dollars, with a time frame of approximately ten years. In 1992, when a smaller fire broke out in Windsor Castle, the cost of renovation was around $32 million dollars. While millions have already be promised, there's no way to put a price on the historical artifacts which went up in smoke. However, this isn't about the tragic loss of this magnificent medieval structure or its irreplaceable furnishings. This is about the fact that almost everyone immediately assumed the fire was the result of Muslim terrorists. Is there any reason we should fear such an attack? Based on recent events, it would appear the answer is yes.

In Sri Lanka, which is a small island nation located off the coast of India, eight churches were systemically blown up, killing 320 people and injuring over 500. The culprits were members of the terrorist group, ISIS, whom President Trump recently claimed had been defeated in Syria. Obviously they are still very much active, at least when it comes mass homicide bombings. A few days before, these murderers were videotaped proclaiming their devotion to Allah and to ISIS, leaving no doubt who they were and what they were all about.

Following the attack, a statement was released by ISIS claiming that their attacks was the result of the attack on a mosque and Islamic Center in Christchurch New Zealand, which killed 50 individuals and injured 50 others. Ironically, the perpetrator, an Australian, stated that the reason for the assault was because of all the attacks on non-Muslims in Europe and elsewhere, along with what he called "The Great Replacement" of Europeans in Europe with African and Middle Eastern "migrants", though the media painted it as "white supremacy ". As an aside, authorities in Sri Lanka have stated that the attacks appear to have been planned before the two attacks in Christchurch.

In continental Europe (most notably Germany, Belgium, Holland, and Sweden, but especially in the UK, there has been numerous reports of knife attacks (these attackers usually stab as many people as possible and run away) and organized rape gangs, who typically do far more than just brutally assault and gang rape European women. In addition, the hijacking of cars, vans, and buses have been used in these attacks; all in the name of radicalized Islam and demands for Sharia law. How many knife attacks are we talking about?

In the UK, the incidence of unprovoked knife attacks is up 54% of the last five years. In 2018, 4,986 people were admitted to hospitals as a result of knife or sharp object attacks, up from 3,849 in 2017. The majority of these stabbings, 1,012, were on individuals between the ages of 10 and 19. If we go back to 2012, there has been a total of 71 reported terrorist attacks through 2017, of which 360 people have died. Note these statistics don't include assaults, rapes, or vandalism. It also doesn't include simple acts of harassment which are generally not considered crimes.

Additionally, these numbers don't include attempts by victims attempting to report such crimes since the local police force are often instructed to either discourage victims from filing such reports or the reports are written in such as generic way as to downplay who the attackers were (as in the attacks which took place throughout Germany on New Year's Eve in 2015/16). The reason most often given for downplaying these incidents is to avoid the appearance of escalating crime by the migrants and provoking fear among the residents. Of course, many of the victims have stated that they were "encouraged" by law enforcement to either not report these crimes or not include the "ethnicity" of their assailants out of threats of being accused of Islamophobia.

There is no doubt that militant Islam, which is an extreme ultra conservative form of Sunni Islam called Wahhabism, is currently waging a war with the West, whether the West wants to acknowledge as such or not. However, militant Islam is also waging a war against Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Christianity, Judaism, polytheism, and even against fellow Muslims; in particular Shiites, who make up approximately 15% of all Muslims.

For close to four decades, extremist have waged war. They have murdered tens of thousands of individuals---men, women, and children. Often beheading some while crucifying others (mostly Christians). Some have been burned alive, while numerous others have been shot or hanged. It's not uncommon for women to be gang raped; often selling young girls as sex slaves. They have destroyed hundreds of Christian churches, Buddhist and Hindu temples, Jewish centers of worship, not to mention destroy priceless artifacts in museums and historic sites; sites, I should add, which represent the very foundations of civilization itself. They engage in drug cultivation and sell to help finance their operations along with kidnapping, robbery, extortion, plus money filtered to them from wealthy supporters.

Is it any wonder then that the fire which nearly destroyed Notre Dame was originally thought to have been the work of Islamic extremist? Many Europeans believe that Europe is under siege; that its laws, culture, values, government and social systems, traditional religion, and most of all, its future are under attack. Locals have experienced protests and demands (threats in some cases) to stop advertising or selling traditional items like liquor (including beer and wine), pork, or tobacco. They have even been told that they can't have pets, which are view as "unclean", and has resulted in hundreds of dogs and cats being killed.

Local Muslim leaders have warned non-Muslim women to be covered and not to be alone (preferably escorted by a male relative) or face attack (including acid attacks) or rape. They've even demanded that girls be pulled from schools and working women exit the workplace. Some areas of Europe have even seen de facto "no go" zones for non-Muslims and the imposition of Sharia law. Along with this, they brought their traditional customs (some of which are regarded as unsanitary or unhealthy to say the least).

In response, local and national governments have looked the other way whenever possible; often going as far as to blame the victims or telling their citizens to "quietly comply" in order to "avoid trouble". Of course, this begs the question, "trouble" for who? It seems more a matter of cowardice and fear rather than taking responsibility and leadership. Europe, of all places, should know that appeasement never works. Sooner or later, the lion will eat you too unless you eat the lion first.

This mass migration has been said to be part of a secret UN plan--"Plan 2030"---to significantly replace the population of Europe with less educated individuals who are conditioned to do as they are told (as an aside, the name "Islam" translates to the word "submission", so perhaps that's where the idea comes from). Regardless, there is a massive influx of individuals into Europe; the majority of whom are males of military age who appear to be pretty healthy. Meanwhile, the United States is also facing its own migration crisis with hundreds if not thousands of individuals coming from Central and South America.

However, these individuals are primarily economic migrants, not individuals seeking political or religious asylum as they claim. They are looking for a job, not to immigrate and certainly not to assimilate. These individuals come "demanding" entry into the US as if it is somehow their right, which it isn't. The US, like every other country, has a sovereign right to secure it borders and protect its residents. Those who are seriously interested in asylum, can easily apply at any US consulate or embassy, which are located in practically every country in the world, so there's no need to storm our borders.

Interestingly, law enforcement authorities from Mexico, Honduras, and elsewhere have detained individuals identified as members of drug gangs or members of drug cartels, as well as those of Middle Eastern origin embedded in these so-called "migrant caravans". ISIS has already boasted that they've successfully smuggled potential terrorists into the US through these caravans as well as with the help of "coyotes"; smugglers who often work with or on behalf of drug cartels. With approximately 8 to 11 million illegal immigrants now living in the US, it wouldn't be surprising that there would be dozens of potential terrorists already in the US.

So, what do we do? First and foremost, we must except that we are engaged in a religious and cultural war; one whose sole aim is the change the face of not just the West, but of the world itself. This war is being waged by an extreme form of Islam against everyone who is not an active member of their sect. This war is both militant in that it involves violence and non-militant in that it invades and conquers by using existing laws, such as open immigration, social networks which encourage having children, and the tolerance of others while showing others no tolerance.

Immigration policies must change. Europe, if it is to act together, must seal their borders and aggressively prohibit migrants from entering. This also includes establishing and enforcing quotas on immigration They must be willing to return these individuals to their home countries immediately and to deduct the cost of doing so from the aid packages they provide to these countries. Those who are allowed in must show proof of either employment or sponsorship so that they will not be a economic burden on taxpayers.

They must accept and agree to follow existing national laws, and not attempting to force their religious customs or beliefs on others. They must learn the language of their host country. In addition, they should be required to have a minimum level of education, either upon entering the country (with proof) or meet that goal within a set period of time---no exceptions or extensions---otherwise, face deportation. They must agree not to engage in any criminal activity, lest they be immediately returned to their home country. They must agree to provide a current address and report any changes in their status immediately to law enforcement. Failure to do so should result in immediate deportation---no exceptions. Marriage to a natural citizen will also not serve as an excuse.

In the US, anyone guilty of aiding or assisting an illegal immigrant will be charged with aiding and abetting. This includes businesses, churches, mosques, or other religious institutions. They should also face suspension of their business licenses or tax exempt status as well as face a substantial fine per individual on a increasing sliding scale which should include jail time for repeat offenders and loss of any government contracts. Any town, city, or state which provides "sanctuary" status automatically forfeits federal tax dollars. This could also apply to Europe as well.

We must accept the fact that a terrorist attack is always possible. No country and no one is exempt. Therefore, we must learn to respond to terrorism or the threat of terrorism like the Israelis. Israel, which is surrounded by potentially hostile neighbors bent on their complete and total annihilation, has very few actual terroristic incidences. This is due to a number of steps which Israel has undertaken to detect and remove any potential threats before they happen, and they've done so at a fraction of the cost that most nations spend on anti-terrorist measures.

Israel uses a special police unit---YAMAM---which is specially trained to seek out, identify, and remove any threat before it happens. YAMAM is part of Israel's national police force, which many countries don't have, including the US. YAMAM is said to have the "powers of the police, the capabilities of the Mossad, and the brains of Shin-Beth, Israel's version of the CIA. Many of the police forces around the world have called on YAMAM to assist them with training, tactics and techniques needed to prevent terrorist attacks, including the New York City Police. Every major police force in the world should at least explore what YAMAM does better than anyone---stopping an attack before it happens.

People also need to be more aware of their surroundings. In countries without draconian gun laws, the people at least have a measure of protection. In countries who do, people must become better at learning how to defend themselves. There are hundreds of classes and courses out there. A simple basic self-defense class could make you a survivor rather than a victim, especially when it comes to a knife attack. For those willing to take the risk of becoming a victim, they should at the very least take a first aid course so they can help save lives. Lastly, it's the old maxim---"see something say something". If something or someone looks out of the ordinary, it's better to report it and be wrong than to be right and see people die.

The world is facing a serious evil right now. This evil knows no borders, no morals, and obeys no international laws. Their only ideology is their misinterpretation of a sacred book guided by a religious fanaticism which can't be reasoned or bargained with. It sees as its enemy everyone, regardless of who they are, where they live, or what they believe so long as it differs from them, and even then it doesn't necessarily matter. It attracts those who feel lost, alone, or powerless and promises them everything, if not in this world, then in the next. It doesn't believe in tolerance, which it sees as a weakness to be exploited. Appeasement has not and will never work. It glorifies death and violence in the name of peace. Terrorism is the last resort of those who believe they have nothing left to lose.

In order to fight this evil and prevail, we must be prepared physically, mentally, and spiritually. We must put aside our differences, whatever they may be--real, imagined, or manufactured by the media and government. We must educate everyone, regardless of race, gender, age, ethnic origin, or religion. Knowledge is power, and it's the kind of power which not only makes governments tremble, but those who strive to keep us in the darkness of ignorance as well, which can include any religion or ideology. We must acknowledge our common Humanity. Our differences are a trifle compared to what we have in common. That doesn't mean losing our national, ethnic or other identity. It simply means having a mutual acceptance and respect for each other. Finally, it means coming together and exposing this evil for what it is. Darkness has no power in the light; even the shadows run from it. We must be that light.


England's knife crime epidemic sees 54% rise in young stabbing injuries in 5 years

Islamic Terrorism in Europe

ISIS's Persecution of Other Religions
What Is ISIS? What you need to know about Islamic State in Syria and Iraq

Understanding No-Go Zones: What Are The Outcomes?

We've all heard or seen the term. It often shows up on the news and "talking head" political shows, and even on our social media sites from time to time. It's often used in conjunction with stories about war zones, and more recently, in places where it's simply to dangerous for ordinary people to venture (and just as often, too dangerous for even the police to patrol). But what is it really? What does it mean to have a "no-go zone" in your community, and where are these forbidden zones starting to become more prevalent?
As I said, "no-go zones" are typically found in war zones. They are often referred to as "exclusion zones", meaning that there could be unexploded ordinance hiding in the rubble, as well as landmines (which are the single deadliest weapon when it comes to civilian deaths).

It also means that the area is likely unsecure, with a high probability of roving enemy combatants lurking about (especially snipers).
As in years past, these area were often marked with warning signs (like with a large "Warning" in various in various languages, accompanied by a skull and crossbones---never a good sign). Entry into these zone are done so at one's own risk. There is no guarantee that anyone entering these zones will be provided with any type of assistance, be it due to getting lost, captured, injured, or wounded (and if killed, it's very unlikely anyone is coming for your body).

Of course, not all no-go zones are in places of conflict. In fact, most aren't located in or near a active war zone. The majority of no-go zones are actually found in various cities and towns where divergent (and unassimilated) populations attempt to enforce their own laws; independent of existing local laws. This includes roving patrols who harass, detain, and fine anyone who fails to comply. They are attempts to apply their own traditions, culture, and religious restrictions. In some cases, they may even attempt to "arrest" an individual and bring them before a religious tribunal where some type penalty of is applied. It's also common that these communities expand the tribunals into a de facto government.

In addition, this application as described above, usually have the support of the local population. These zones come about when individuals from either the same country or with a similar culture, religion, etc. settled in a certain area and begin to tacitly apply their cultural and/or religious values on their own street, or block, and then join with others to expand it to cover blocks, and eventually entire sections of a community. Typically, this begins subtly; with polite requests and calls for inclusion, tolerance, and openness.

As their numbers increase, these "request" begin to take a change in tone. They start to become more assertive. As the numbers continue to grow, so the growth of likeminded individuals, who bring with them their extended families, their businesses, and (naturally) their biases, traditions, and values. Often, at the same time, as these numbers grow, native populations begin to leave; not feeling safe or disliking the changes they are seeing. At some eventual tipping point, terms such as "tolerance" and "inclusion" start losing their original meaning, and are replaced with words like "compliance" and "dictate".

Somewhere during this transformation, the emerging population becomes unsatisfied with just those within their own community abiding by their value systems, and begin to apply it to others. Again, this usually starts as a "suggestion" or "request" in the name of "tolerance", but after a while, escalates to becoming compulsory, to the point where it supplants local law. Attempts by law enforcement to apply local law, or even conduct routine patrols in these communities, is view as an intrusion; an attempt to impose "foreign" laws on them!

As a result, the migrant population often responds violently by harassing the legal authorities, from verbal or physical threats (and, perhaps some general pushing and shoving) to becoming increasingly belligerent, up to and including open attacks, riots, destroying property, throwing rocks, "Molotov cocktails" or other homemade bombs, and so forth (it's not uncommon that afterwards, these same groups will demand the government clean up the mess caused by the rioters and restore their damaged property).

At this point the area is generally declared a "no-go zone", although governments often attempt to soften the obvious negative connotation of an area uncontrollable by the local authorities and use terms like "sensitive urban area", "vulnerable area", "exposed" or extreme exposed" zones, a "sundown area", as well as "closed zones" (which, by the way, all these apply to the native population, not to the migrants inside the area So when they say "stay out", they mean you). As an aside, there have been several attempts by journalists to cover these areas from the inside. Many who do are often meet with the same hostility unless they first obtain permission from the tribunal, and then only with an assigned escort, who also censor what is and what isn't covered.

So where are these so-called "sensitive" areas to be found? While they're are pretty much located just about everywhere, they are quickly popping up throughout Europe, especially in Western Europe. The idyllic country of Sweden has some 53 of these areas (with 15 of them classified as "particularly exposed" by the Swedish police). Germany has at least 40 such areas according to some police reports; perhaps more. Paris has approximately 25 such no-go zones, with dozens of others scattered about in France's major cities and towns such as Toulouse, Marseille, Bordeaux, and Avignon (one French police officer described crime as a "leisure activity" in these zones).

In the Lowland countries of Holland and Belgium, they too have their "no-go zones", although the Dutch are a bit more sensitive about it and often vigorously deny any such zones exist, though locals will likely beg to differ. The same for Belgium, though locals will nonchalantly suggest outsiders might want to skip the tour through Molenbeek (one local taxi cab driver said felt like a "seething North Africa ghetto" as author Robert Chamlers wrote in a article for the British edition of "GQ Magazine" on June 21, 2017 ).

Norwegian officials also deny they have any "no-go zones", though they might want to check with the local police and citizenry. Police officers have reported several cases of being attacked and "aggressive" responses to their presence (one police officer reported that Gonland, a district of Oslo, was "more Muslim than Morocco". Locals report of roving gangs, often targeting unaccompanied females and gays, amid rising violent crime (sexual crimes are perhaps the most serious issue, and are not just here, but reported throughout European countries with high migrant populations).

Denmark too has its share of growing "exposed" areas as well as what the Danish Prime Minister, Lars Lokke Rassmussen, calls "parallel societies"; unintegrated communities with their own laws and language. However, the Danish PM insists that he will not allow Denmark to suffer the same fate as Sweden and other European countries, and has refused to permit any majority migrant neighborhoods, and if necessary, will forced integration into Danish society (which I'm sure it will be...kicking and screaming all the way).

Of course, of the countries with the largest number of "exposed zones" is the UK (in terms of dozens through the country). England has perhaps the largest growing non-native populations of any country in Europe, outside of perhaps Germany. In the industrial city of Birmingham, the native population will make up just 48% of the population by 2019 (an entire decade than originally predicted). The same trend includes cities like Leeds, Manchester, York, London, Luton, and others. In fact, at the current rate, somewhere around the year 2040 or 2050, native Britons will be a minority throughout England due to low native birth rates, an increasing external immigration with matching high birth rates (this is known as "population replacement"). As an aside, unlike its fellow European neighbors, at least 2/3 (68%) of the migrants entering the country are Asian, principally from Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh, and not the Middle East.

While this issue of "no-go zones" seems to be primarily a "European problem" at this time, there is no reason to assume it will remain one. Both Canada and the United States has had issues of immigrant populations refusing to integrate. This ranges from the influx of illegal immigrants, to refusal to learn the native language and adapt to local laws. It also includes criminal complicity of individuals, businesses, and organizations (mostly religious) who are intent, for their own gain, to aid and abed these individuals (as an aside, other countries such as Australia, are experiencing a similar problem too. Mexico and South America have had less problems with illegal or unintegrated populations due to strict immigration laws and enforcement).

Although there are existing punitive laws for this, they have rarely been enforced, especially during the eight years of the Obama Regime. As a result, taxpayers have been stuck with the bill, which amounts to some $113 billion dollars annually (some figures are slightly higher and some lower, depending on how its calculated. But regardless, it's still a substantial figure which could be avoided). Europe's "open door" policy has proven to be more than a mere mistake or miscalculation. It has proven to be national suicide. The great Teddy Roosevelt (my personal favorite president) once said that while immigrants, with all their energy and innovation were welcome, this country has no room for divided loyalties. If you came to this country, you did so a future American; hyphenated Americans need not apply.

I agree with ole "Rough and Ready Teddy". If you come here with the intent to learn our laws; adapt to our collective traditions, values, and learn the language, then great. Come on in! If, on the other hand, you intend to recreate your country with perhaps a different climate (and especially at taxpayer expense), then I suggest you keep on going. If you're here just to make a buck or two, that's fine too. Just do it legally and get a "green card". We must not become a "Balkanized" America, complete with border checks and "sensitive zones" within our own country. This is the same mistake which has befallen other nations down through history (usually in the name of altruism and tolerance). Let's hope it division is never allowed to take root here.


Germany No-Go Zones: Police Afraid to go into lawless areas after open-door


Inside Germany's No-Go zones: Part One-North Rhineland-Westphalia

Are there police no-go zones in France? The police say yes


Europe's no-go zones: Inside the lawless ghettos that breed and harbor terrorists

Stealth Jihad is alive and well in Canada

Danish PM Warns of No-Go Zones