Illegal Immigration: Also Bad for Our Kids

Here’s an excellent comment on the US immigration policy that favors poorly educated illegal workers over legal PhDs.

I’ll never understand Bush & Co’s preference for drug-dealing, murdering, grade school drop-out foreign invaders over doctors from India, carpenters from Holland, engineers from Taiwan, etc.

Sure, somebody has to haul the garbage but we have our own drop-outs for that (and garbage men make good money anyway). Drives me nuts when they say “who will” then: “mow the lawn”, “take care of the kids”, “clean the pool”, etc.

Do it the way it was done when I was growing up:

Mow your own lawn, make your kids do it or pay the kid next door to do it.

If you’re the parent, YOU are supposed to raise the kids.

What pool?

If they bring up lettuce, I read here or elsewhere less than 2% of the illegals are actually working in agriculture. The rest are in construction, landscaping (and other well-paid jobs – and simultaneously collecting welfare), or drug dealing or other crime (and simultaneously collecting welfare).

Lettuce is not a strategically essential commodity. It’s not a life-or-death vegetable. Lettuce is NOT in the same category as bread, milk, and eggs (if those basics were disappearing, I still wouldn’t approve of illegal workers – in that case, I’d call for government subsidies or something). Those farmers/corporations growing lettuce need to

a) find Americans who will do the work (if needed, pay more)

b) invent a machine that will do the work

c) become more efficient (IOW, MODERNIZE!), or

d) grow something else!

Lettuce won’t disappear. Even if every lettuce grower disappeared*, lettuce wouldn’t. Sure, a grower may be paying Americans $25 an hour to pick it and it’s only affordable to rich-people restaurants but it’d still be out there – let it turn in to a Thanksgiving or Christmas-dinner item only, no big deal, that’s the way it works some times (think cranberries at Thanksgiving).

*I saw an episode of “How it’s Made” – an educational/entertainment show on the Discover channel a while back with *enormous* hydroponic greenhouses growing lettuce. I don’t recall any Mexicans, I recall lots of white folks, mostly women.

Sure, the initial investment would be high but (I know squat about farming) the yield looked to be *very* high, with the lettuce heads almost touching each other. Plus I assume pesticides would be a minor issue or a non-issue. Those lettuce “factories” are probably more expensive that $5-an-hour Mexicans, but they’d also likely be a lot cheaper than $25-an-hour Americans.

Another advantage would be you could build them in at least somewhat colder areas rather than high-cost-of-everything California.

Our kids earned their pocket money from an early age by hauling out the trash, doing the laundry, mowing the lawn, and even picking the odd lettuce. They learned basic economics, the value of money, teamwork, responsibility, how to plan and execute routine tasks, self-sufficiency, and respect for manual labor.

Having poor illegals do these jobs not only exploits them but deprives our kids of the chance to learn the basic skills they’ll need as adults.

It Depends On The Meaning Of The Word “Consensus”

The Global Warmers are going to need Bill Clinton to nuance this.

Survey: Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming

In 2004, history professor Naomi Oreskes performed a survey of research papers on climate change. Examining peer-reviewed papers published on the ISI Web of Science database from 1993 to 2003, she found a majority supported the “consensus view,” defined as humans were having at least some effect on global climate change. Oreskes’ work has been repeatedly cited, but as some of its data is now nearly 15 years old, its conclusions are becoming somewhat dated.

Actually, Oreskes’ was wildly misreported. But now (my formatting and emphasis):

Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte recently updated this research. Using the same database and search terms as Oreskes, he examined all papers published from 2004 to February 2007…

Of 528 total papers on climate change,

- only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus.

- If one considers “implicit” endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%.

- However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright,

- the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no “consensus.”

The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here.

Not only does it not require supporting that man is the “primary” cause of warming, but it doesn’t require any belief or support for “catastrophic” global warming.

In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.

Get out of that.

America’s Most Unwanted

Have been helpfully identified by Ms. Clinton’s felonious fund raiser.

The story (my format, ellipsis, and emphasis);

Sen. Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign announced late Wednesday that it will give all money donated by a leading contributor to charity after it was revealed that the donor, Norman Hsu, was a fugitive from the law…

Among those who have said they will return or donate money raised by Hsu are:

(Sen. John) Kerry (of Massachusetts)…

Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts…

(Sen.) Barbara Boxer (of California)…

(Sen.) Dianne Feinstein of California…

Al Franken, a Senate candidate in Minnesota…

(Rep.) Michael Honda (of California)…

(Rep.) Doris Matsui of California…

Rep. Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania….

Sen. Barack Obama’s political action committee.

There’s a nice Pinter play here, in which the doomed protagonist is condemned to spend eternity locked up with this collection of liars, appeasers, and killers.

Cat’s Paws

For those of us struggling to explain why the US is cited as being more corrupt than the UK, here’s a possible explanation.

Transparency International measures the corruption levels of pols and public employees across the world using the reports of foreigners doing business there. The latest report is here, and shows the Brits at 8.6, and the US down at 7.3, even worse than France! – the higher the score, the less corrupt.

Of course many corrupt countries can be splendid to live in – for example Italy, which scores 4.9.

Still, I never encountered corruption in 25 years of working in the US and with US companies.

Seems I should have looked under the flight path from SFO:

One of the biggest sources of political donations to Hillary Rodham Clinton is a tiny, lime-green bungalow that lies under the flight path from San Francisco International Airport.

Six members of the Paw family, each listing the house at 41 Shelbourne Ave. as their residence, have donated a combined $45,000 to the Democratic senator from New York since 2005, for her presidential campaign, her Senate re-election last year and her political action committee. In all, the six Paws have donated a total of $200,000 to Democratic candidates since 2005, election records show.

It isn’t obvious how the Paw family is able to afford such political largess…

The Paws’ political donations closely track donations made by Norman Hsu, a wealthy New York businessman in the apparel industry who once listed the Paw home as his address, according to public records. Mr. Hsu is one of the top fund-raisers for Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign. He has hosted or co-hosted some of her most prominent money-raising events.

Indeed.

UPDATE:

It gets worse:

A Democratic fundraiser who has raised $1 million for presidential candidate Hillary Clinton says he has done nothing wrong and has asked no favors in return, but Norman Hsu didn’t mention that he’s a wanted man.

A California prosecutor says Hsu pleaded no contest to grand theft, was sentenced to three years in prison and then disappeared, The Los Angeles Times reported Wednesday.

He will no doubt claim he was sentenced out of context.

The Dark Heart Of England (Part 3)

This looks at the perps in the uniquely English practice of forced adoption.

England has a secret legal process that seizes newborns from their mothers for adoption. The law gives the mothers none of the protections it grants murderers, and grievously harms mothers and kids since behavioral genetics says kids are best raised by kin.

Here we identify the perpetrators and their level of complicity, starting with a ruling by the Brit equivalent of the Supreme Court (my emphasis to highlight the passive case):

The mother has a long history of problems with alcohol, although she has also had periods of stability and sobriety. When not abusing alcohol she is able to look after her children properly and to establish good relationships with them. Unfortunately, because of her problems, they have all suffered periods of separation from her, including periods in care.

The older three were all the subject of care orders when Nina was born.

Because of the mother’s history and abuse of alcohol during the pregnancy, Nina was placed in foster care when she left hospital soon after the birth.

Note the only harm noted by the judges is the kids being separated from their mother, and she’s accused only of “problems with alcohol”, which is not an offense. It’s also subjective – remember the old saw that an alcoholic is someone who drinks more than their doctor.

Of course these kids didn’t “suffer” care orders, the following people hurt them, in descending order of complicity

Social services employees.

Consultants who testified against the woman, maybe regarding her “alcohol abuse”.

The Judge and his support team in the secret Family Court

The pols who have passed the laws creating this system and the government workers that keep it ticking.

Next case (my ellipsis and emphasis):

Social services’ recommendation that the baby should be taken from…a 22-year-old charity worker who has five A-levels and a degree in neuroscience, was based in part on a letter from a paediatrician she has never met.

Hexham children’s services, part of Northumberland County Council, said the decision had been made because Miss Lyon was likely to suffer from Munchausen’s Syndrome by proxy, a condition unproven by science in which a mother will make up an illness in her child, or harm it, to draw attention to herself.

Under the plan, a doctor will hand the newborn to a social worker, provided there are no medical complications. Social services’ request for an emergency protection order – these are usually granted – will be heard in secret in the family court at Hexham magistrates on the same day.

Note, the mother’s crime is again subjective, and in this case junk science.

So add to the list of perps the maternity unit medical staff who take the baby when it’s born.

Then we must add the adoption agencies that advertise these purloined kids for profit.

And finally add those couples who fail to ensure that the kid they adopt has not been taken against its mother’s will.

So how many unique perps?

In 1995, about 800 babies were taken each year, and its seems plausible these were really at risk from their parents (psychopaths can be parents too). During Blair’s rule, an extra about 1,500 babies have been taken each year, and it’s reasonable to ascribe this to his incentivizing adoption.

The now-suppressed YouTube recording identified 4 social services perps. The court itself will have about 5 people who are complicit. Add three at the maternity unit and 1 expert witness, and we get a total of 13. Then add 2 adoption agency staff, 2 adopters who didn’t check the provenance of the baby, and management overhead of 50% to get a total of 25 per baby.

Over the 1500 babies that’s 37,500 perps. But many will be repeat offenders, so allow a factor of 4 overlap, yielding a perp core of 9,375. To which we can add a few hundred pols and central government workers who fly top-cover for this system.

So all this evil is likely the work of just 10,000 individuals!

Since that no other nation (possibly excepting Portugal) takes babies unless their is clear evidence of physical abuse by the parents, what enables these 10,000 English monsters to operate?

Despotism

This occurs when people operate without check because they have good jobs for life. My guess is about 40% of people in this position become despots.

Despotism probably afflicts many Family Court judges.

Masculinity

Mrs G says that no-one who has born a child would take another woman’s kid, and thinks the primary perps must be men, supported by childless women.

Psychopathy

Remember 3% of the population enjoy hurting people, and they’ll gravitate to jobs where they can do that without check

My guess is the bulk of the social service employees perps are psychopaths. They’re quite poorly paid, so don’t qualify for despotism, and many are women (three of the four in the YouTube tape were female, and the male was a classic psychopath).

We conclude the main characteristic of these 10,000 or so is psychopathy, tainted with a bit of male despotism. The Brit population contains about 1.8 million psychopaths, so there are plenty to fill the available slots.

But that doesn’t explain why the English are unique in allowing this – after all, every society has the same 3%.

And it’s not a small evil – Italians, French and folks in all the other nations we’ve lived in would explode with violence if anything remotely similar was attempted in their countries. Somehow their sane 97% keeps the evil 3% under control.

So we have to look for weaknesses in the English character, and that’s the subject of the next post.

For those depressed by reading this far, take heart!

In our final posts we’ll explain how abused English mothers can use asymmetric warfare to keep their kids.

How Junk Science Makes Our Kids Poor

Governments’ use of Junk Science makes the general population disdainful of all science, Junk and honest. So less kids become scientists, moving scientific progress from our societies that distort science to those that don’t.

The most damaging distortion is a failure to quantify – here’s a Brit example:

Shocking pictures highlighting the danger of smoking are to be put on cigarette packets to try and persuade people to kick the habit…

One picture is expected to show a woman with an empty pram alongside the warning that smoking reduces fertility.

Another is likely to warn that smoking causes impotence by showing a drooping cigarette to symbolise erectile dysfunction.

The problem with this advert is that it defies common sense – until the 1960s, smoking was the rule rather than the exception, and yet:

In 2004 the UK fertility rate was 1.77 children per woman, considerably lower than the 1960s peak of 2.95 children…

Most young Brit families know that a) they have less kids than their parents and grandparents and b) said parents and grandparents smoked. Our household jokes that Mrs G’s smoking and drinking while pregnant with Gandalf junior stunted his growth to a mere 6′ 7″.

The second damaging distortion is pols politicizing science to increase tax and regulation.

This is another Brit example, on of course the Global Warming scam.

The opposition Tories just dropped their deranged Greenfly project (my ellipsis):

(The Torry leadership has) rejected a widely ridiculed proposal by David Cameron to restrict people to one return short-haul flight per year at a standard rate of tax and charge more for subsequent aircraft trips.

Only to replace it with another, even nuttier scheme (my emphasis):

Plans that would curb drastically the number of flights taken by British travellers are being considered by the Conservatives with new taxes on air travel and a halt to airport expansion.

Short-haul flights would receive particular attention: VAT would be levied on fuel for domestic flights for the first time and airlines would be forced to give over airport slots to long-haul trips. All flights would be subject to a separate per-flight tax based on the amount of CO2 generated, replacing the air passenger duty and shifting the burden from passengers to airlines, although this might force up ticket prices anyway.

This entire policy is based entirely on the views of 52 scientists:

…the widely touted “consensus” of 2,500 scientists on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is an illusion: Most of the panelists have no scientific qualifications, and many of the others object to some part of the IPCC’s report.

The Associated Press reported recently that only 52 climate scientists contributed to the report’s “Summary for Policymakers.”

(The link is an excellent demolition of the scam by Fred Singer, Emeritus Professor of Environmental Science at UVa).

The Brit public might be inclined to shrug off one mistake, but after decades of false alarms (Global Cooling, mass epidemics of herpes/AIDS/CJD/SARS), they now conclude all scientists are dishonest.

So smart Brit and American kids decide to be lawyers or hackers rather than scientists.

And that hands the future to the many Asian nations that have a stricter regard for the truth.

Muscular Christianity

You probably saw this story, but may have missed the robust demonstration of Victorian values.

…four Fijian missionaries were on a proselytising mission on the island of New Britain when they were massacred by Tolai tribesmen in 1878.

They were murdered on the orders of a local warrior chief, Taleli, and were then cooked and eaten…

Thousands of villagers attended a reconciliation ceremony near Rabaul, the capital of East New Britain province, once notorious for the ferocity of its cannibals.

Their leaders apologised for their forefather’s taste for human flesh to Fiji’s high commissioner to Papua New Guinea.

So far, so touchy-feely.

But the unfortunate Fijians were under the command of a doughty British clergyman, and he was not amused:

He reluctantly agreed to launch a punitive expedition, ordering his men to burn down villages implicated in the murders and destroy wooden canoes.

At least 10 tribe members blamed for the attack were killed in an area known as Blanche Bay. Rev Brown claimed the raids made the region safe for Europeans.

In a letter to the general secretary of the London Missionary Society he wrote: “The natives respect us more than they did, and as they all acknowledge the justice of our cause they bear us no ill will.”

That’s the stuff.

Indian Summer

US immigration policy actively encourages poorly educated illegal immigrants and discourages smart legal immigrants. That’s a terminal fault.

A destructive policy is one that does irreversible damage to a nation – for example Russia’s encouragement of abortion over birth that’s causing that nation’s population to tank.

Reducing the competence of a nation is in the same category, since smart nations grow richer and stronger while dumb ones (e.g. those afflicted with cousin marriage) end up cesspits – like Gaza.

Which makes it shocking that the US elite is busily reducing the nation’s smarts:

A report issued last week by the Kauffman Foundation says while Congress has been fighting over illegal aliens and a guest-worker program for low-skilled workers, a crisis is developing among those waiting in line to become legal immigrants to the country.

More than 1 million skilled workers and their families already are in the United States competing for about 120,000 permanent resident visas each year, and many of those say they may just return to their home countries instead, the researchers said.

“The whole immigration debate in the public mind to date has concentrated largely on low-skilled immigrants, and in the course of debating it, we’ve turned away and haven’t focused on this pool of high-skilled immigrants,” said Robert Litan, vice president of research and policy at the Kauffman Foundation.

That has consequences:

The researchers said the threat of a reverse brain-drain is real — they found that about one in three workers here on employment-based visas either plans to leave the United States or is uncertain about remaining.

Of course the Open Borders zealots are the perpetrators:

The Senate this year tried to overhaul the nation’s immigration system, but the bill foundered over concerns that too little was being done to enforce the laws, illegal aliens were being granted amnesty and guest workers would drive down wages of U.S. workers.

Some high-skilled foreign workers complained that the bill treated illegal aliens better than legal, high-skilled workers already here and waiting for green cards, or legal permanent residence. They said illegal aliens would not be limited by their country of origin, so millions of illegal alien workers from Mexico could gain a path to citizenship while those legally waiting in line would still be subject to country-by-country limits.

As we know, a lot of the high-skilled folks come from India:

Between 1995 and 2005, for example, one in four technology or engineering companies was founded by an immigrant, with Indian immigrants accounting for more new companies than the next four — Britain, China, Japan and Taiwan — combined

India is in the process of becoming a world leader – its population is growing 1% faster than China’s and will overtake it in a few years, it’s growing as fast as China, and unlike China it’s a democracy with a modern and free economy, so is unlikely to hit the rocks.

If the US continues to treat Indian PhDs worse than illegal agricultural workers, the PhDs will head home to fuel their own economic miracle.

And that would make the current US prosperity an Indian Summer.

Pots, Kettles (Part Deux)

This is entirely pinched from the excellent EU Referendum.

The president of the EU has taken an exception to the death penalty, and sent the following message to the governor of Texas:

“The European Union strongly urges Governor Rick Perry to exercise all powers vested in his office to halt all upcoming executions and to consider the introduction of a moratorium in the state of Texas.”

Adding:

“There is no evidence to suggest that the use of the death penalty serves as a deterrent against violent crime and the irreversibility of the punishment means that miscarriages of justice, which are inevitable in all legal systems, cannot be redressed.”

To which a spokesman for the Governor of Texas replied:

“Two hundred and thirty years ago, our forefathers fought a war to throw off the yoke of a European monarch and gain the freedom of self-determination.

“Texans long ago decided the death penalty is a just and appropriate punishment for the most horrible crimes committed against our citizens.

“While we respect our friends in Europe, Texans are doing just fine governing Texas.”

The EU president should do the following calculation: compare (murder + war + genocide) deaths over the past 100 years for a) the US and b) Europe. (After all, if you’re a victim, it doesn’t make a lot of difference if you die in an air raid, a concentration camp, or a mugging.)

That makes the murder rate in Europe about 100 times higher than that in the US.

This is not just an academic point, since the EU is storing up another big killing by forcing on Europeans a form of government they detest.

The Brit Pedophile Parlor

The Brit socialist government is putting intimate details of every kid in the country (except theirs) onto a database with 330,000 users. That’s impossible to secure, so the world’s pedophiles just got lucky. Shame about the kids.

The database is called ContactPoint and was set up in response to the murder of an illegal immigrant kid (who, being illegal, wouldn’t have been on this database if it had existed at the time). The initial dataset covers all kids under 18:

• name, address, gender and date of birth;
• a unique identifying number;
• the name and contact details of any person with parental responsibility or who has care of him at any time;
• details of any education being received by him, including details of any educational institution attended;
• the name and contact details of any person providing primary medical and other services specified by the Secretary of State;
• information as to the existence of any cause for concern in relation to him;
• other information, not including medical records or other personal records, specified by the Secretary of State..

…(but) the database will not include telephone numbers or addresses of celebrities’ children, nor of those of children with violent parents.

I’m guessing pols will categorize themselves as “celebrities”. For the rest of the kids, it gets worse (my ellipsis):

The database can include information of a ‘sensitive’ nature, defined as issues relating to sexual health, mental health and substance abuse, although consent from the child or the child’s guardians is needed, and it will not appear as such on the database; it will only note that the child is receiving help from ’sensitive services’ and will not say what this is.

(BUT) Refusal of consent can be overridden if this can be justified.

(The) children’s minister, has said that drug or alcohol use by parents, relatives and neighbours, together with other aspects of their behaviour, may be recorded. The database can also apply to 18–25-year-olds who are care leavers or have learning disabilities…although the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child only applies to those under 18 in England and Wales…and their permission is needed.

So with a few mouse clicks the world’s pedophiles can find Brit kids of specific gender and age, in a specific location, with (say) learning, sexual, and alcohol problems, and problematic parents.

And it’ll be really easy for them to do it:

It will be available to an estimated 330,000 vetted users. Some of those allowed to check records, such as head teachers, doctors, youth offender and social workers, are uncontroversial, but critics have questioned why other potential users, such as fire and rescue staff, will have access to the database.

The only secure database is deep underground, with USA NSTISSAM Level I shielding, zero external connectivity, guarded by heavily armed and trigger-happy Special Forces. Everything else you hack.

And let’s look at those users and their vetting.

The professions listed are all power-centered, and these attract a disproportionate number of sinners (and some saints). So this group will contain at least the same proportion of psychopaths as the general population – 3%.

That’s about 10,000 psychopaths with access to the life of every Brit kid.

And you can’t vet them out – if we could, crime levels would be minimal. That’s because deep vetting is very expensive – my security vetting took a team 6 weeks.

That’s not possible for 330,000 users, so most psychopaths (always clever liars) will get through. Plus many “normal” users will sell the kids’ details for money or to buy off threats to themselves or their families.

Then there’s phishing, as used by the world’s criminal fraternity to access the IRS database.

And there are many other ways to hack a network-accessed database – you just need good Unix skills.

Brit pols must know this database is wide open. But they’re lefties, so consider the resulting rapes, abductions, and killings an acceptable price to pay for building their Holy Grail – a complete database covering every citizen (except them).

The good news is that easily hackable databases can also be easily wiped.

If that’s not done soon, Brit parents should either take up politics to get their kids shielded, or emigrate.