October 3, 2011
Alien Nation by Peter Brimelow 
Recent News
“You Were All Here Before Us”: Joe Biden Takes Hispandering To New Lows
Joe Biden, the first part-time comedian elected to the U.S. vice-presidency, is at it again. Having manufactured a phony biography, insulted President Barack Obama and rewritten the teaching of his Roman Catholic Church on abortion, he has now rewritten the history of the United States.
Was Awlaki an American?
Friday morning, Predator drones operated by the CIA and Joint Special Operations Command rendezvoused over Yemen and launched Hellfire missiles that blew to pieces the radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.
A declared enemy in the war on terror was eliminated.
Yet Awlaki was a U.S. citizen.
Reps. Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul denounced the action. Kucinich said President Obama "trampled on the Constitution." Paul said Awlaki had never been convicted. "Nobody knows if he killed anybody." Paul described what was done as "assassinating" an American.
Did we have the right to target and kill Awlaki?
According to U.S. intelligence, Awlaki inspired or incited the Fort Hood massacre and Times Square bomber. Intelligence officials say he played a direct role in the attempt to bring down an airliner over Detroit at Christmas 2009. That would make him an accomplice in attempted mass murder.
Indeed, there is more hard evidence tying Awlaki to acts of terror against the United States than there ever was tying Saddam Hussein to acts of terror against us.
Yet it is also true that Awlaki was never convicted of these crimes. What, then, is the legal case for killing him?
Answer: America is at war with al-Qaida—a war authorized and funded by Congress. In that war, Awlaki, hiding in a foreign country, has been inspiring and inciting Muslims to massacre U.S. citizens who are noncombatants—a war crime under the Geneva Conventions. Adds Obama, Awlaki was the "external operations" chief for al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula.
And even if Awlaki were not an operations officer in al-Qaida, only a propagandist, his actions would seem to constitute wartime treason.
When killed, he was traveling with 25-year-old Saudi-born Samir Khan, another American, who edited and wrote Inspire, the English-language magazine of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. Khan, who had proclaimed, "I am proud to be a traitor in America," was also killed in the drone attack.
Do we have a right to target enemy propagandists who do not carry out acts of mass murder but encourage or instigate them?
Ezra Pound, the American poet and expatriate who
Sailer on Unz: Immigration, The Minimum Wage, And The Rule Of Law
In his The American Conservative magazine, physicist-turned-entrepreneur Ron Unz has just offered a lengthy critique of what he kindly identifies as the Sailer Strategy: the idea that the GOP can only and could easily win by mobilizing its white base, by championing issues that would actually benefit working class whites, such as an immigration moratorium. (Immigration, the Republicans, and the End of White America, American Conservative, September 21, 2011]. We’ve been writing about this for years on VDARE.com: one post-Obama discussion is here.
Ron also treats respectfully VDARE.com’s central contention: there are mass immigration is causing problems, both politically (especially for the GOP) and economically (for example, worsening income inequality.) And he has succeeded in getting this concept discussed on national television, in Counterpunch [The Republicans, Immigration and the Minimum Wage, By Alexander Cockburn, September 30, 2011] and in National Review: Ron Unz on Immigration Part I,II,III,IV,V,etc (none of which acknowledged us, of course). Quite an achievement.
While I quite enjoy being depicted as the evil brains behind the operation, rather like how Cardinal Richelieu is portrayed in The Three Musketeers, I must say that I was more struck by the second section of Ron's article, in which he offers a fairly novel policy proposal.
But on the Sailer Strategy: my perspective is far less triumphalist than Ron makes it sound. I merely argue that the short-term electoral costs of taking steps to deal with the long-term electoral threats to the GOP posed by decades of mass immigration and Affirmative Action are more bearable than the eventual electoral costs of doing nothing ... or of doing what the Democrats recommend.
The Democrats' intention, as they've made clear in countless public venues, is literally
Immigration Cartoon Of The Day
This daily cartoon contributed to VDare by Baloo. His site is HERE
Obama’s Totalitarianism And The Last Days of Indian Sovereignty
[Recently by David Yeagley: An Indian Patriot Sues The People Who Shut Down American Renaissance’s 2010 Conference]
American Indian sovereignty is over—at least for the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. On September 21, 2011, the U.S. federal government told the Cherokee Nation who was Indian and who was not. District of Columbia District Judge Henry H. Kennedy, Jr. ordered the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma to include Negroes as citizens.[Court order PDF]
Wouldn’t you know it? The Obama Administration puts the Negro at the center of all racial issues. The white Oedipal liberals have been happy to dilute, displace, and otherwise denigrate their own race, and they’re not about to let Indians be Indians—in peace, anyway. No, the Negro must be included in the Indian Nations, too.
Actually, the federal government has been declaring Negroes as Indians since the 1980s, when Negroes claiming to be Indians appealed to Washington for recognition so they could obtain a tax-free casino on “Indian” land.
But Judge Kennedy’s decision to declare Negroes citizens of an Indian nation represents the first act of the U.S. government that directly abrogates Indian sovereignty.
The casino bit, which involved the collusion of local and national politicians and other dubious characters, had really very little to do with real Indians. The casino “pop-up” tribes simply declared Negroes Indians.
But the Kennedy decision says real Indians can’t say who’s Indian anymore. Indian Nationhood is degraded to the level of a social club—which must include Negroes.
Back in March, 2007, the Cherokee Nation amended its constitution, d
“Haitian Youth” Raymond Herisse And Urban Beach Week: Coming To An America Near You—Unless There’s An Immigration Moratorium
At 4 a.m. on May 30—Memorial Day—in the middle of “Urban Beach Week”— Raymond Herisse, 22, of Boynton Beach, Florida, was shot dead by police in the South Beach area of Miami Beach.
One of Haitian-American Herisse’s many mug shots.
[VDARE.com note: As usual, none of the mainstream media has published anything useful about Raymond Herisse's citizenship status, where he was born, et cetera.However, leftwing blogger Axis of Logic describes him this way: Miami Police Assassinate Character of Haitian Youth After Taking His Life]
“Urban Beach Week,” aka “Hip-Hop Weekend” has come to mean anarchy in Miami Beach. Up to 300,000 black “hip-hop” fans, many intent on wreaking havoc, descend upon a city with fewer than 90,000 residents, only four percent of whom
Democrat Decries “Highly Unusual” Federal Attacks On State Immigration Enforcement
In addition to not enforcing existing immigration laws, the Obama Administration has launched a full charge against embattled states seeking to protect themselves from massive illegal alien invasions.
If this doesn’t make your blood boil, you might as well emigrate! Of course where to, in our increasingly shattered world, is a good question.
Your constitutional rights, under Article IV, section 4, which requires the Federal government to protect the citizens from invasion, are under attack—as they have been throughout this president’s administration.
Now even the Open Borders Washington Post is having to report this anti-states policy on its front page: Justice targets laws like Arizona’s: US vs. States on immigration; Obama administration may file new suits,[ By Jerry Markon, September 29, 2011]
“The Obama administration is escalating its crackdown on tough immigration laws, with lawyers reviewing four new state statutes to determine whether
National Data, By Edwin S. Rubenstein | Blacks (And Other Americans) Lose Employment Ground On Obama’s Watch
An extraordinary ninety-five percent of black voters cast their ballots for Barack Obama. But, funny thing, blacks have suffered more than any other group during the Obama years. The winners: immigrants.
Just look at unemployment rates. While Black unemployment has for decades exceeded that of other groups, and was notably slow to improve after the 2001-2002 recession, the gap widened noticeably during the Obama years in spite of the fact that the Federal Government, and especially the Obama Administration has de facto discrimination in favor of black employment:
In words: at the start of Obama administration (January 2009),
- The unemployment rate for African Americans was 12.7%. In August 2011 (
“Hitler’s Revenge” Paralyzing GOP Hopefuls As Obama Plays Race Card
Real Clear Politics is described at Wikipedia as being a
“…political news and polling data aggregator …the site includes columns and commentary from both sides of the political spectrum.”
I find that to be accurate (and the site very valuable).
Once in a while, there is a house commentary—presumably on an issue the management finds insufficiently ventilated by the MSM. Such a one is The GOP and Race: The Perils of Unseating a Black President, By Erin McPike, September 28, 2011
Management is right. McPike raises a question of enormous importance: do the GOP aspirants have the steel to deal with defeating Obama?
It is the key question.
As I wrote back in March:
“The 2012 election is liable to be the most racially polarized in American history. President Obama has made this inevitable. I believe this explains the widely reported pessimism and defeatism amongst prospective GOP nominees. It is not that they don’t think Obama can be defeated. It is that they know the hatred and rage such a victory will generate in the MSM and the Inside-the-Beltway establishment will make the next President’s life very stressful. Think Watergate!”
This is an extremely serious matter. As I noted in June (Defeating Obama: Could GOP Prospects Stand The Rage):
“Over at View From The Right “James P.” wrote
… rage, hate, and insanity… will emerge full-force against the candidate who takes on Obama, and will be doubled if he wins. The Republican candidate will have to have a very strong character to withstand that hate and to govern effectively. Does Romney want to win badly enough to go down in history as "the man who defeated the First Black President"? If he wins, will Romney spend his entire time trying to appease liberal
Washington Monument Closed For Cracks—How Symbolic Can You Get?
Talk about symbolism! The Washington Monument is closing indefinitely because of cracks caused by the recent earthquake. How symbolic can you get of the U.S. decline?
The Fulford File By James Fulford | Kevin Williamson and NRO vs. Federale (And The American People)
Federale, who blogs at federaleagent86.blogspot.com and also on VDARE.com, is an anonymous member of the Federal immigration enforcement bureaucracy who—unlike John Morton and the President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama—actually believes in immigration enforcement.
Fonte on “Global Governance"—John O’Sullivan’s Foreword to Sovereignty Or Submission: Will Americans Rule Themselves Or Be Ruled By Others?
Peter Brimelow writes: At VDARE.com, we’re preoccupied with what we call “The National Question”—whether the U.S., or for at matter any other First World country, can survive as a nation-state, the political expression of a particular nation, defined as a specific ethno-cultural community. We mostly focus on the internal problems caused by the importation, through government policy, of masses of non-traditional, and arguably unassimilable, immigrants. The Hudson Institute's John Fonte has a powerful chapter entitled "Assimilation of Immigrants: Patriotic or Multicultural?" in his new book Sovereignty Or Submission
. But his main focus is external: the subordination of the nation-state to “global governance”, basically the dirty deal being done by what Fonte calls “post-national elites” over the heads of the national electorates who are under the misapprehension that their representatives (ha!) represent them. Note the common thread: both immigration and global governance are elite enthusiasms.
Americans got a glimpse of this with George W. Bush’s so-called Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America—at the 2005 tri-national summit announcing which Bush distinguished himself by denouncing the Minutemen border activists as “vigilantes”—and with Governor Rick Perry’s astounding proposal for the 4,000 mile-long, 1200-foot wide Trans-Texas Corridor, which his Presidential rival Congressman Ron Paul denounced as a threat to U.S. sovereignty (back in the days—sigh—when Paul used to talk about U.S. sovereignty).
John Fonte provides not just a glimpse, but an expose. We here post John O’Sullivan’s Foreword and summary of Sovereignty Or Submission
By John O’Sullivan
For some years, John Fonte has enjoyed an odd and slightly enviable reputation. He is the scholarly defender of democratic sovereignty most likely to be invited to debate the matter with his opponents in the academic school of global governance. This is partly because he is a courteous, well-informed, logical, and honest debater. That happens to be likewise true of his better antagonists, such as Peter Spiro, on the global governance side. It is not true of all, however.
Dr. Fonte is also one among very few scholarly defenders of sovereigntist ideas. In the academy, the media, the law, the foreign policy establishment, the corporate world, the wider political elite, and—almost inevitably—the bureaucracies that serve international institutions and nongovernmental organizations, the ideology of global governance is the prevailing orthodoxy. Those scholars who adopt a hostile or even skeptical attitude to its doctrines are in a distinct minority, resembling an endangered species in the academy.
Although global governance in its current form is a relatively new idea—dating roughly from the end of the Cold War—it is increasingly the basis of government decisions, bilateral agreements, and international treaties such as the Kyoto protocols or the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court. Books, op-eds, law journal articles, proceedings of international conferences, and think tank reports advocating various aspects of global governance appear almost daily in both print and electronic media. There has been little organized opposition.
Dr. Fonte’s book is a major counterblast from the sovereigntist sid
Obama Subdividing America (Along Racial Lines)—to Win
"Now even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us, the spin masters and negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of anything goes.
"Well, I say to them tonight, there's not a liberal America and a conservative America; there's the United States of America. There's not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there's the United States of America."
That was state Sen. Barack Obama in his keynote address to the 2004 Democratic convention. His rejection of tribal politics, his stirring call to national unity, vaulted him into the Senate and was the first step on the path that took him to the White House.
Well, that was then, but now is now.
According to The Washington Post, Obama's 2012 campaign is today busily subdividing the nation
Saving the Rich and Losing the Economy--With Over One Million Legal Immigrants, Illegals And H-1Bs!
Economic policy in the United States and Europe has failed, and people are suffering.
