Category: Other Immigration

National Association of Evangelicals: less than truthful!

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Update October 24th:  Here is Roy Beck on the revelation that only 25% of the NAEs members signed on to their Senate testimony.

Don’t you just love it when a bunch of ‘holier-then-thous’ pontificate about moral issues and then turn out to be a sack of liars. (Whatever happened to not bearing false witness?)  It sure looks like that is what is going on with the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE).  I told you about them  about 10 days ago when they testified in favor of amnesty for illegal aliens and led Congress and the sycophant media to believe they represented over 30 million people.

According to Mark Tooley writing at American Spectator, they don’t.  What they didn’t say at the time of their testimony is that only 11 of the 40 member groups of the NAE endorsed the policy:

The NAE website shows only 11 of NAE’s over 40 member denominations endorsing the immigration stance. And only 11 individuals are signers, though reportedly 75 NAE board members voted for it.

This honest (not!) Christian pastor testifed to Congress that there was no dissent in coming up with the policy position:

NAE’s president, Minnesota megachurch pastor Leith Anderson, unveiled NAE’s new advocacy earlier this month to the U.S. Senate Judiciary subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship.

This next paragraph gave me great relief because the Salvation Army is one of the few charities my family still supports and I was so disappointed to see them taking the open borders/pro-amnesty postion as part of the NAE.  I am glad it wasn’t true.

Still, Anderson proclaimed that NAE’s board had voted with “no dissent” for the pro-CIR stance. Unmentioned was that evidently some NAE board members had abstained, including the Salvation Army. “Please know that Salvation Army leadership chose to abstain from signing the final resolution on immigration reform,” reported an Army spokesman. “While the [NAE] news releases did not report this specifically, the fact remains that any resolution produced by the National Association of Evangelicals does not automatically become the official policy of a member organization (ie: The Salvation Army) unless they choose to make it so. In this case, The Salvation Army chose not to adopt the resolution nor will it become our stance on immigration reform. In actuality, The Salvation Army has never established any official position on this topic and has chosen to remain politically neutral on the matter.”

Dear Salvation Army, get out of this group of radical leftists where the ends justify any means (even lying!).

African-Americans vs. African immigrants (again!)

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

This is a theme we have reported on several times in the past.*  Violence is on the rise in traditional African- American communities where numbers of African (largely Muslim) immigrants are on the increase.   The difference here is that it’s the New York Times publishing the politically incorrect news.   Hat tip:  a friend from Tennessee.

Their fear and frustration are shared by many local West African immigrants, whose fast-growing presence in the neighborhood — and in the city over all — has been accompanied by increasing tensions with the local black American residents.

“They think they’re better than black people,” James Carroll, a retired Army specialist standing in front of a busy convenience store, said of the West African immigrants. “We’re supposed to be one community — we’re supposed to be able to get along — but they don’t give it a chance.”

Some of the tension can be attributed to cultural differences that all immigrants face, though the West Africans in Claremont, as conservative Muslims, have the added challenge of adjusting to a post-9/11 New York. But resentment and mistrust has escalated to actual violence, and, they say, left them feeling under siege.

After reports of nearly two dozen attacks on West African immigrants in the last two years, community leaders reached out to the police, who interviewed 17 Africans in the neighborhood and filed 11 criminal complaints. Two of those were deemed hate crimes, including an attack in June that left a Gambian immigrant hospitalized for eight days.

They have made no arrest in either bias case, but a police mobile truck with a video camera now stands outside the mosque.

The reporter tells us that most of these African immigrants are illegally in the US and points out the rapid increase in population in Bronx neighborhoods.

The African population in the Bronx has grown considerably in recent years: the census reported 12,063 sub-Saharan Africans in 1990, while the most recent census estimate was 61,487.

African-Americans feel their communities are being invaded—no kidding!

Zain Abdullah, an assistant professor of religion, race and ethnicity at Temple University in Philadelphia, says it is common for African immigrants to suffer harassment when they settle in traditionally black neighborhoods in big cities, like Detroit, New York and Philadelphia.

“Many African-Americans feel that the influx of Africans coming in represents a kind of invasion,” he said. “Culturally, African-Americans have always imagined themselves as Africans, or at least of African descent, but they might have never encountered Africans from the continent. The actual encounter is shocking.”

Isn’t diversity beautiful!   Incidentally, it is into this neighborhood that the International Rescue Committee is resettling Bhutanese refugees as well.  It almost seems that stirring up racial and ethnic tension is the game plan!

* If you would like to find more locations in the US where American Blacks have come in conflict with immigrants, use our search function.   You might search for African- Americans and immigrants and you will come up with lots of previous posts on the topic.

Far Left has taken over major church groups

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

I told you about the National Association of Evangelicals coming out in favor of amnesty for illegal aliens the other day, so there isn’t much new in this story from the Washington Times on Friday entitled “Evangelicals rally behind immigrants” except for one telling line.   This is  how the article begins:

“Jesus was a refugee,” said Leith Anderson, director of the National Association of Evangelicals, who, along with other evangelical leaders, advocated a pro-immigration stance at an Oct. 8 Capitol Hill press conference. They issued a resolution formulated from a faith-based perspective.

Mr. Anderson also presented the organization’s support of comprehensive immigration reform later that day at a hearing held by the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, border security and citizenship.

U.S. immigration policies are antiquated, laden with red tape and in need of a human rights approach to reform, the evangelicals said.

Their amnesty approach drew detractors.

“By the grace of God, each American benefits from membership in one of the most just, merciful and righteous bodies politic that has ever existed,” said James R. Edwards Jr., a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies. “But just because the United States stands in the world as a beacon of liberty and justice doesn’t mean anybody who wants to come live in this nation can do so by their own will. Yet some 12 million or so people whose civic membership belongs to some other nation have forced themselves upon this nation.”

Thanks to the Center for Immigration Studies fellow for adding some sense to this.  But, as you read the article notice that the Evangelical leaders never concern themselves with the rights of poor Americans (for jobs and government help), it is all about the immigrant.   That’s because in my opinion, this isn’t about helping the poor, it’s about politics and the goals of the Radical leftists and Marxists whose influence has taken over the leadership of not just the Evangelicals who make up the NAE, but major Catholic and Jewish denominational groups as well.

This is the telling line in this story:

The recent evangelical involvement marks the growing interfaith voice in the immigration debate, which the Center for American Progress has called “a sweeping grass-roots movement.”

So, the Center for American Progress (CAP) is involved in helping this “sweeping grass-roots movement.”   We’ve told you about the ‘think-tank’ before.  It is run by John Podesta, the radical leftwinger who ran the Clinton White House and Obama’s transition team.  Earlier this year, the Center for American Progress advocated bringing 100,000 Iraqis to the US in an airlift, here.   If you’ve followed the rise and fall (not really a fall) of Obama’s green jobs czar, Van Jones, CAP is where Jones came from and where he returned to.  You get my drift.

An aside:

Years ago, in the early ’90’s, I had an occasion to do some research on an initiative that came out of Leftwing foundations, specifically that time Pew Charitable Trusts, to “green the churches.”  These organizers were not religious people, in fact some were virtual atheists, but they understood that to get to large numbers of Americans they needed to ‘change’ the churches and they set out to create programs to reach churches with an environmental message knowing that people of faith would be concerned for protecting the Earth that God had created.   They succeeded as we see today in “greening the churches” and that is why you see so much “environmental” political rhetoric spewing forth from religious leaders today.  Just google “greening of the churches” and you’ll see what I mean.  This is just one recent article in Sojourners magazine, a magazine for the progressive social justice movement, to make my point.

If you think about it, most “environmental” concern is directed at reducing private property rights, THE cornerstone of capitalism.  You will see what I mean, here,* in this article Janet sent this morning about the United Nations using biodiversity claims to begin controlling land and resources.

Back to immigration.  So, just as there was a concerted effort by Radicals and Marxists to reach churches on environmental issues, I suspect there was a plan to reach them on immigration as well.

I’ve told you my theory before.  This is about a one world government and people like Podesta are in it up to their eyeballs.   You can tell me I’m a tinfoil hat wearer, it doesn’t matter.    They need immigrants, they need to literally mix up the people of the world, to break down borders, and that is why they don’t give a damn about Americans who are hurt by the immigrant tide.  Those poor (lower class!) people are expendable, just as Mao mowed down millions to bring revolution to China, so too do they effectively mow down Americans by flooding America with demanding poor and angry immigrants.

Remember Saul Alinsky, the granddaddy of community organizing, says you need to create “chaos” to bring “change,” and in order to bring “chaos” you need a war of “have-nots” against “haves.”     But, also for you in the “religious left,” don’t forget who Alinsky dedicated his book, ‘Rules for Radicals,’ to—Lucifer.

* Notice in this article the role the Natural Resources Defense Council plays in stopping resource use, like the California water issue.  The President of NRDC is a member of the board of the Apollo Alliance, here.  It is a tangled web, LOL, an understatement indeed!

Will granting amnesty to illegals in the US encourage more illegals?

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Yup, that is a no-brainer.  And, according to a recent Zogby poll, reported at the Center for Immigration Studies, it’s confirmed.

A new survey by Zogby International finds that people in Mexico think that granting legal status to illegal immigrants in the United States would encourage more illegal immigration to the United States.

Read all about it, here.   Just a reminder, not all illegal aliens are Mexicans.   Somalis, Iraqis and others from countries that might wish us harm, come across the border too.

Immigration/women’s rights advocate facing jail time in Maine

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Update October 15th:  She gets 6 months.  In sentencing her the Judge said, “The suggestion of no jail time is simply not an option. Everyone must comply with the law, even if they do good deeds.”  Thanks again to Susan for the tip.

This is an update on a story we first reported, here.   According to this article in the Portland Press Herald, she will be sentenced today.  Hat tip:  Susan.

PORTLAND — Federal prosecutors want the director of a Portland-based nonprofit organization to spend 15 months in prison for forging bank records and lying to her probation officer.

The lawyer for Shalom Odokara has said he will ask the judge for a sentence that doesn’t include prison time.

Odokara, 49, is scheduled to be sentenced this afternoon by Judge D. Brock Hornby in U.S. District Court. She pleaded guilty in June to two counts of making false statements to her probation officer, and has admitted to violating the terms of her probation for an earlier federal conviction.

Odokara is the founder and director of Women in Need Industries, and is well known in Maine as an advocate for women’s rights, immigrants and victims of domestic violence. The seventh annual Festival of Nations, created by Odokara, was held at Deering Oaks in July.

Until her resignation on July 2, Odokara was vice chair of the Portland Planning Board.

Most city officials were surprised by revelations about Odokara’s criminal history and her false statements, which came to light in June.

Odokara pleaded guilty in 2006 for her role in a scheme that involved the embezzlement of $108,000 from the World Bank. According to court records in Washington, D.C., Odokara was a consultant to the World Bank when she and a friend carried out the scheme over several months in 2001.

Her previous status as a do-gooder got her some legal breaks in the past, looks like her luck has run out on that score.

Wolff, the government prosecutor, said in court documents that the court went easy on Odokara for the World Bank conviction because of the positive work she has done with Women in Need.

“The defendant made a mockery of the court’s leniency, however, when she committed a new federal offense and violated her probation within weeks of being sentenced,” Wolff wrote. “The defendant’s incarceration will unfortunately halt the work done by her organization in the community. The defendant has only herself to blame for this consequence of her criminal behavior.”