Category: Obama

Somalis using Obama photo for target practice

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Here is an AP story that appeared in the Boston Globe BEFORE OBAMA’S ANNOUNCEMENT LAST NIGHT that is really a re-hash of the missing Somali (former refugees) youth story from Minnesota.  You can just imagine what the Jihadists are doing to Obama’s photo this a.m.*   Entitled “Somali camps may pose threat to US,” it begins:

MOGADISHU, Somalia – The recruits gather in scorching desert hideouts in Somalia, use portraits of President Obama for target practice, learn how to make and detonate bombs, and vow allegiance to Osama bin Laden.

Training camps in the lawless nation of Somalia are attracting hundreds of foreigners, including Americans, and Somalis recruited by a local insurgent group linked to Al Qaeda, according to local and US officials. American officials and private analysts say the camps pose a security threat far beyond the borders of Somalia, including to the US homeland.

In interviews, former trainees gave rare details on the camps, which are scattered along desert footpaths, rutted roads, and steamy coastal dens. They say the recruits are told the United States is the enemy of Islam.

US and Somali officials say Somalia’s Al Shabab jihadist, or holy war, movement is growing, and uses foreign trainers with battlefield experience from other conflicts.

The threat posed by the training camps was underscored in federal court documents unsealed Nov. 23 in Minneapolis, home to a large ethnic Somali community. An indictment against several Somali-Americans who allegedly fought in Somalia said trainees at one camp included dozens of ethnic Somalis from Somalia, other African countries, Europe, and the United States.

[….]

“The message is simple,’’ Dahir Muhiyadiin, 18, said three months after finishing his training at a camp run by Somalia’s main insurgent group. “We are taught how the Western infidels want to eradicate pure Muslims, about how the US government does nothing as Israel harasses our Muslim Palestinians.’’

*Remember too how the American Al-Shabaab laughed at Obama here.

Cloward-Piven Strategy: bring down Capitalism by flooding the welfare system

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

More on November 23rd:   Jim Simpson, an expert on the Cloward-Piven strategy has more today at the American Thinker, here.

That is the basic goal involved in the Cloward-Piven strategy that most of us never heard of until Obama and the community organizers got to the White House.  I’ve been reading about it lately, thanks to RRW reader Paul, and it came to mind last night as I considered the fact that Somali refugees had flooded Maine primarily for the generous welfare system (more shortly).

This is just some background from David Horowitz’s Discover the Networks that I want to post so we can continue to build our ‘community destabilization’ category, and not lose the links.

Inspired by the August 1965 riots in the black district of Watts in Los Angeles (which erupted after police had used batons to subdue a black man suspected of drunk driving), Cloward and Piven published an article titled “The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty” in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation. Following its publication, The Nation sold an unprecedented 30,000 reprints. Activists were abuzz over the so-called “crisis strategy” or “Cloward-Piven Strategy,” as it came to be called. Many were eager to put it into effect.

In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor; that by providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Poor people can advance only when “the rest of society is afraid of them,” Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would “the rest of society” accept their demands.

The key to sparking this rebellion would be to expose the inadequacy of the welfare state. Cloward-Piven’s early promoters cited radical organizer Saul Alinsky as their inspiration. “Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1972 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judaeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one.

You should take some time and read Cloward and Piven’s 1966 seminal work in the Nation magazine to fully understand the concept.  They (and their comrades today) want to enroll as many people as they can on public assistance, cause a crisis by overloading local governments, bring greater federal control and ultimately collapse Capitalism as the federal government takes greater control and brings about ultimately a guaranteed wage for all— a redistribution of wealth.

This is the opening paragraph of the Nation article:

How can the poor be organized to press for relief from poverty? How can a broad-based movement be developed and the current disarray of activist forces be halted? These questions confront, and confound, activists today. It is our purpose to advance a strategy which affords the basis for a convergence of civil rights organizations, militant anti-poverty groups and the poor. If this strategy were implemented, a political crisis would result that could lead to legislation for a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty.

My theory is that the “poor” of the 1960’s were, in subsequent decades, entering the middle class.  Thanks to Capitalism there weren’t enough of them to collapse the system and many other Americans have an  antipathy to living off the government and accepting welfare!   So community organizers need the immigrants and refugees who have become accustomed, in the case of refugees, to living off of the United Nations, to help swell the welfare rolls.  That is the only logical explanation for the Obama Administration continuing to resettle very high numbers of refugees right now (in a recession!) when there is little work for them—well that, and the desire on their part to create a magical borderless utopian world.

The Somalis who migrated to Maine are only too happy to comply, next!  Here it is.

Horowitz publishes pamphlet on rules for revolution

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

David Horowitz has published a pamphlet that helps to educate us about Saul Alinsky and his influence on Obama and his Administration, something we have addressed  in our “community destabilization” category which we began at this time last year.   Here is what Frontpage magazine says about Horowitz and the pamphlet:

David Horowitz was one of the founders of the New Left in the 1960s and an editor of its largest magazine,Ramparts. He is the author, with Peter Collier, of three best selling dynastic biographies: The Rockefellers: An American Dynasty (1976); The Kennedys: An American Dream (1984); and The Fords: An American Epic (1987). Looking back in anger at their days in the New Left, he and Collier wrote Destructive Generation (1989), a chronicle of their second thoughts about the 60s that has been compared to Whittaker Chambers’ Witness and other classic works documenting a break from totalitarianism. Horowitz examined this subject more closely in Radical Son (1996), a memoir tracing his odyssey from “red-diaper baby” to conservative activist that George Gilder described as “the first great autobiography of his generation.”

Since taking office Barack Obama, who promised during his campaign to create a moderate, inclusive administration, has engaged in actions that have created division and fear because they are meant to radically change America, not improve on what has always worked. As a result, David Horowitz writes in Barack Obama’s Rules for Revolution: The Alinsky Model, “Many Americans have gone from hopefulness, through unease, to a state of alarm as the President shows a radical side only party visible during his campaign.”

Barack Obama’s Rules for Revolution: The Alinsky Model provides an understanding of the roots of the current administration’s effort to subject America to a wholesale transformation by looking at the work of one of the President’s heroes—radical Chicago “community organizer” Saul Alinsky.  

Read on and learn how you can get a copy.

How does this involve refugees and immigrants?  My theory is that since Alinsky said in order to “change” America one needed to continually pit the “have-nots” against the “haves,”  as Americans generally rose out of poverty, the immigrants were needed to continually build the “have-not” armies.  Now with Obama’s policies and the far left activists he has spread throughout government we will see an acceleration of immigrants, refugees and Americans arriving at the poverty level.  That is the goal!  That is why it is so baffling to logical people who wonder how we can continue to bring in tens of thousands of refugees and other immigrants when there is no work for them.  Their strategy is to build the “have-not” armies.

By the way, as I write this Judy is at David Horowitz’s Restoration Weekend, so maybe we will get a report about this auspicious gathering of conservatives when she returns.

Endnote:  I was looking for something else and came upon this post from earlier this month to help illustrate what I’m saying about a strategy and a goal, here.

Won’t amnesty for illegal aliens hurt legal refugees?

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

That is a question that has been bothering me for some time.  We know for a fact (the IRC told us in ‘Refugee Horrors in Houston’) as few as 20% of the legal refugees entering the US are finding work in some areas of the country.  So, if 12 million, or whatever the number is these days, workers are legalized overnight won’t that just add to an already huge pressure on legal immigrants (and Americans!) finding work?   So why do the NON-PROFIT refugee resettlement agencies continue to lobby for amnesty?

An article about Homeland Security head honcho Janet Napolitano saying the Administration was ready to push Comprehensive Immigration Reform (Amnesty) on Friday got me thinking about this again.

The Obama administration expects Congress to begin moving to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws early next year, while improved border security and a drop in migration caused by the economic downturn make passage “far more attainable” than in 2007, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Friday.

“When Congress is ready to act, we will be ready to support them,” said Napolitano, President Obama’s “point-person” on immigration policy issues. “The first part of 2010, we will see legislation beginning to move,” she said.

Napolitano’s speech, delivered Friday morning at the liberal-leaning Center for American Progress, was aimed at Latino advocates who have bridled at her rhetorical emphasis on enforcement in her first 10 months in office, and expressed skepticism that Obama would fulfill a campaign pledge to push for a “comprehensive” package.

LOL!  To learn more about he “liberal-leaning Center for American Progress” go here.

Huh?  She says this is the time to work on this legislation because the job market is tight!  So, we legalize overnight 12 million people and add more to the unemployment numbers?  That’s a good plan?  Makes me think that she too is an admirer of the Cloward-Piven strategy.

“We will never have fully effective law enforcement or national security as long as so many millions remain in the shadows,” Napolitano said.

At the same time, Napolitano sought to reframe the debate from past years, saying lawmakers’ earlier demands that the government improve “enforcement first” have been met, and arguing that the time to work on immigration issues is when a sluggish economy is dampening illegal migration, not when rapid job growth is fueling it.

Refugee resettlement contractors lobbying for Amnesty, why?

Now how can the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, perhaps the largest refugee resettlement contractor in the United States, be lobbying for more employment competition for the thousands of refugees they are contracted to care for who are living unemployed and in squalor in some cases.  It makes no sense!

“The president and his administration need to make it clear that immigration reform is a priority and must be acted upon during this Congress,” said John Wester, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and bishop of the diocese of Salt Lake City. “Hopefully this is the beginning of a campaign by the administration to get legislation moving.”

I want to remind readers that the Obama Administration has taken the lead in pushing Amnesty, they are just making it look like they are leaving it to Congress (just as they did with health reform).  Please note that in August Ms. Napolitano called all of the open borders groups and big businesses together at the White House to give them marching orders.  Why are the USCCB, World Relief, and Church World Service to name a few, lobbying with big businesses that surely want to keep labor costs low by having a huge pool of workers available?  Are they helping immigrants, especially refugees, or helping big business and big labor?

So what about groups like the Bowling Green International Center?  In, without a doubt, the most read and inflamed debate we have had for awhile, here, I wonder how it is that this obviously ‘over-its-head’ refugee contractor could have justified organizing a demonstration and lobbying campaign in Bowling Green in 2006 to push for Amnesty.

… have a look at this Form 990 for 2006 where 87% of this group (whatever its name is) was funded by taxpayers.   Yet, here they are involved in lobbying for an Amnesty for illegal aliens bill before Congress that year!

I honestly do not get the logic in this.  The only thing that makes sense is that these supposedly non-profit, but largely funded by taxpayers (that includes the USCCB) groups, see this as a way of expanding their “businesses” supplying labor to big businesses (like the meatpackers!) and supposedly services to immigrants hidden from public scrutiny by a presumption of good intentions.

Center for Immigration Studies report explains how the Sierra Club justifies more immigration

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

If you follow immigration issues generally, one of the most perplexing questions is how did it come about that the major environmental organizations (especially the Sierra Club) in the US don’t want to work to slow immigration when it is clear that more people means more environmental degradation.  Jerry Kammer has written a very detailed piece for the Center for Immigration Studies entitled, “Strategic Negligence: How the Sierra Club’s Distortions on Border and Immigration Policy Are Undermining its Environmental Legacy” that seeks to explain how this happened and tells us that some true conservationists are trying to turn that around.   Please read the report.

Mr. Kammer is just missing one key element in my opinion.

That key element is that Carl Pope, the Sierra Club’s long-time Executive Director, is more a Marxist than an environmentalist.   The new communist movement in this country has coalesced around the Apollo Alliance (Pope sits on its board of directors).   Pope is more comfortable with the far left labor unions, leftwing foundations, the big corporations and the likes of revolutionary Van Jones (be sure to watch the Pope/Jones interview linked in here) then he would be with David Brower.    The powerful alliance that helped elect Obama must have poor demanding immigrants to “change” our government—the goals of the “social justice movement” are more important to Pope and Jones than saving a little biodiversity.   

I only wonder that it took so long for people truly concerned about the environment to organize against open borders communists.  No, I don’t really, because they are mostly on the political left too and couldn’t begin to grasp that Far Left (communists!) had taken over the environmental movement that they began.

P.S. to all the environmentalists concerned with population growth generally, well-educated Americans have been having fewer children while the Somalis, Bosnians and other Muslims pouring into the US have no such concern—six kids and up is what they are aiming for—because they don’t give a damn about the environment!