Detroit"s Digital Divide: Low Income Citizens Build Their Own Internet

The city of Detroit, in the U.S. state of Michigan, has experienced an impressive economic and demographic shift over the past 50-years.

Deindustrialization coupled with depopulation has stripped the city of it’s economic strength cascading it into turmoil. Global competition from automakers shifted manufacturing jobs out of the area. As businesses left, communities decayed, inducing a terrifying surge in violent crime. Urban rot came next festering from within and eventually sending the city into bankruptcy in 2013 where it reemerged in 2014.

Five-years later, Detroit has gotten worse – not better - and the city is having trouble providing basic utilities for its residents.

In particular, the city along with internet service providers are failing to deliver high-speed internet to a significant part of the low income areas. 

That is why one community group of technology geeks have banded together to create an internet of their own.

Equitable Internet Initiative (EII) is a program that teaches Detroit residents how to build high speed WiFi networks. EII says Detroit is one of the top 5 least connected cities in the United States coupled with 60% of the city residents that do not have access to high-speed internet. The group aims to stop the growing digital divide that is leaving many low income residents behind and forgotten in the inner cities where there is only death and destruction.

EII has trained teams in the North End, Island View, and Southwest Detroit to setup infrastructure: a church that functions as a hub and internet service provider which then a signaled is beamed to communities that don’t have access to high-speed internet.

Residents who want internet from EII have to meet two requirements:

1. can’t afford internet


2. don’t already have internet or <10 Mbps

Once the requirements are met, EII will send a team to the residential location and install an outdoor directional antenna and an indoor router with a setup time around one-hour. EII recognizes that access to high-speed internet is a worldwide problem and if that is not fixed a “digital class system” will develop.

EII wants high-speed access for everyone..Popular Mechanics also said,

The EII offers a radical proposition that would allow people to get Internet outside of a major telecom. But it’s got its own money concerns. Initially, it worked off a federal grant. When that money dried up, the deal with Rocket Fiber made it viable again.

 

But that partnership will not cover the costs of more and more internet connections growing in perpetuity. Jenny Lee, the executive director of Allied Media Projects, the group behind EII, raised the question in a recent article. “How do we do this in way that doesn’t replicate the inequities of other utility companies? Are we going to be the equivalent of water department coming to shut you off if you don’t pay your bill?”

 

One way the group hopes it will prove its worth is by creating apps. Its Next Gen Apps program teaches students coding basics like CSS, HTML, Javascript, and Node.js. Combined with the EII’s efforts to provide internet in their areas, there’s a hope that people will truly make the internet their own.

Bottomline: Detroit is a prime example of citizens working together for survival in a post collapsed bankrupt city. The one question we have: how long until government shuts down this private internet?

 

The EU Lectures Journalists About PC Reporting

Authored by Bruce Bawer via The Gatestone Institute,

• Nor, we are told, should we associate "terms such as "Muslim" or "Islam"... with particular acts," because to do that is to "stigmatize." What exactly does this mean? That when a man shouts "Allahu Akbar" after having gunned down, run over with a truck, or blown to bits dozens of innocent pedestrians or concertgoers, we are supposed to ignore that little detail?


• But that is what this document is all about: advising reporters just how to misrepresent reality in EU-approved fashion.


• It is interesting to note that while many people fulminate over President Trump"s complaints about "fake news," they are silent when an instrument of the EU superstate presumes to tell the media exactly what kind of language should and should not be used when reporting on the most important issue of the day.

"Respect Words: Ethical Journalism Against Hate Speech" is a collaborative project that has been undertaken by media organizations in eight European countries – Austria, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Slovenia, and Spain. Supported by the Rights and Citizenship Programme of the European Union, it seeks, according to its website, to help journalists, in this era of growing "Islamophobia," to "rethink" the way they address "issues related to migratory processes, ethnic and religious minorities." It sounds benign enough: "rethink." But do not kid yourself: when these EU-funded activists call for "rethinking," what they are really doing is endorsing self-censorship.

In September, "Respect Words" issued a 39-page document entitled Reporting on Migration & Minorities: Approach and Guidelines. Media outlets, it instructs, "should not give time or space to extremist views simply for the sake of "showing the other side."" But which views count as "extremist"? The report does not say – not explicitly, anyway. "Sensationalist or overly simplistic reporting on migration," we read, "can enflame existing societal prejudices" and thus "endanger migrants" safety." Again, what counts as "sensationalist" or "overly simplistic"? That is not spelled out, either. Nor, we are told, should we associate "terms such as "Muslim" or "Islam"... with particular acts," because to do that is to "stigmatize." What exactly does this mean? That when a man shouts "Allahu Akbar" after having gunned down, run over with a truck, or blown to bits dozens of innocent pedestrians or concertgoers, we are supposed to ignore that little detail?

Or perhaps we should entirely avoid covering such actions? After all, the document exhorts us not to write too much about "sensationalist incidents involving migrants," as "[v]iolent individuals are found within every large group of people." If, however, we do feel compelled to cover such incidents, we must never cease to recall that the "root causes" of these incidents "often have nothing to do with a person"s ethnicity or religious affiliation." What, then, are those root causes? The report advises us that they include "colonialism, racism, [and] general social inequality." Do not forget, as well, that there is "no structural connection between migration and terrorism."

When the EU-funded activists behind the document "Reporting on Migration & Minorities" call for "rethinking," what they are really doing is endorsing self-censorship.

At least the report"s authors do not have the audacity to maintain that there is no connection between Islam and terrorism. But they do urge us to remember that Islam is "diverse." The notion that it is inherently violent is -- what else? -- a "stereotype." So is depicting Islam as "grounded in a different reality and lacking common value with other cultures" or portraying Muslim immigrants as being "fundamentally different from the citizens of the host country." And it is just plain wrong, needless to say, to encourage "the widespread perception that there is a "cultural clash" between Islam and the West with religion at the heart of the "problem."" (On the contrary: Islam is, the report tells us, "a belief system that can exist alongside others.") And do not dare to suggest that Islamic culture is in any way "inferior to Western culture." Or that Muslim men are "highly patriarchal." (Repeat after me: "Many societies around the world remain highly patriarchal, independent of religion.") And do not pay too much attention to Muslim women"s "clothing styles." Why? Because doing so tends to "homogenise" them. (Banish from your mind the thought that it is the clothing itself that homogenizes them.)

During the last couple of years, many countries in Europe have experienced a veritable tsunami of Islamic migration. But responsible journalists, according to "Respect Words," must never, ever put it that way: "When describing migration, don"t use "phrases such as "tide," "wave" and "flood"" (or, the authors later add, "horde" or "influx") because such language can "evoke the sense of a "mass invasion."" It "dehumanises migrants," you see, and "constructs a false sense among the audience of being "under siege" by an "enemy" that must be repelled." Of course, much of Europe is "under siege"; this fact is becoming clearer by the day; to use milder terms when discussing this topic is to do nothing less than misrepresent reality. But that is what this document is all about: advising reporters just how to misrepresent reality in EU-approved fashion.

"Inform your audience," the report urges journalists, "about the reasons why people feel compelled to leave their homelands, and investigate what connections there may be to policies and practices of European states." Possibly, however, a massive percentage of the Muslims pouring into certain European states are doing so because of those states" "policies and practices" -- namely, their readiness to start handing immigrant families large sums of cash the minute they arrive, to set them up with free housing, furnishings, etc., and to allow them to stay on the dole for the rest of their lives. Many of those countries are more generous to Muslim newcomers than they are to their own citizens who have fallen on hard times; immigrants often go to the front of the line, while elderly citizens of some of these countries – people who have worked hard and paid into the welfare system since the world was young – have been turned out of their homes in order to accommodate newly-arrived Muslim families.

But these obviously are not the "policies and practices" to which the "Respect Words" document is referring. Quite the opposite. The transparent implication here is that Muslim refugees and asylum seekers are fleeing conditions for which they and others in their countries of origin hold no responsibility whatsoever and that can, in fact, ultimately be traced back to Western wrongdoing, whether in the last generation or centuries ago. Never mind that Muslims took over Persia, the Byzantine Empire, all of North Africa and the Middle East, Greece, Northern Cyprus, much of Eastern Europe, and Southern Spain. Ultimately, everything that is wrong with the Muslim world is seemingly the fault of the West, so Europeans owe all incomers a new life -- and perhaps even a new country -- peaceably handed over to them so that they can import sharia law?

No, the report does not quite go so far as to make this argument. But the report does caution that even to touch on the question of "whether asylum seekers" claims are genuine" or "whether migrants have a right to be in the country" is thoroughly inappropriate: it places the focus on "law and order" rather than on such things as "the fundamental right of asylum." Yes, you read that correctly: "the fundamental right of asylum." Never mind that under international law not everyone is entitled to asylum -- and that a huge proportion of self-styled asylum seekers in Europe today have no legitimate grounds for such a claim but are, like many of us, seeking better economic opportunities.

But such facts are inimical to the authors of the "Respect Words" document. In their view, no human being can be "illegal"; therefore, the word "illegal," they admonish, should be used to describe actions, not people.

The only surprising thing about this document is that it actually includes a brief section on anti-Semitism, in which it suggests -- believe it or not -- that equating Israel and Nazi Germany may not be a good idea. For the most part, however, the report is one long taxpayer-funded catalog of politically correct protocols which -- if adhered to by everyone in Europe who is professionally involved in reporting on events concerning Islam and immigration -- would guarantee a full-scale whitewash of the alarming developments currently underway on this unfortunate continent. It is interesting to note that while many people fulminate over President Trump"s complaints about "fake news," they are silent when an instrument of the EU superstate presumes to tell the media exactly what kind of language should and should not be used when reporting on the most important issue of the day.

Russia Provides New Internet Connection To North Korea

Authored by Martyn Williams via 38North.org,

A major Russian telecommunications company appears to have begun providing an Internet connection to North Korea. The new link supplements one from China and will provide back-up to Pyongyang at a time the US government is reportedly attacking its Internet infrastructure and pressuring China to end all business with North Korea.

The connection, from TransTeleCom, began appearing in Internet routing databases at 09:08 UTC on Sunday, or around 17:38 Pyongyang time on Sunday evening. Internet routing databases map the thousands of connections between telecom providers and enable computers to figure out the best route to a destination.

Until now, Internet users in North Korea and those outside accessing North Korean websites were all funneled along the same route connecting North Korean ISP Star JV and the global Internet: A China Unicom link that has been in operation since 2010.

Global Internet connectivity to Star JV. The orange denotes the China Unicom connection and blue the TransTeleCom. The graphic shows the Russian connection coming online around 0900 UTC, a short period of instability then a stable connection with two networks. (Dyn Research)

“The addition of Russian transit would create new internet path out of the country, increasing its resilience and international bandwidth capacity,” said Doug Madory, who analyzes global Internet connectivity at Dyn Research.

The new link comes at an interesting time.

On Saturday, The Washington Post reported that US Cyber Command has been carrying out denial of service attacks against North Korean hackers affiliated with the Reconnaissance General Bureau. The attacks attempt to overwhelm their computers and the Internet connection with traffic making them slow or impossible to use.

The US cyber attack was due to end on Saturday, reported the Post. That means the new Russian connection went online just after the US Cyber Command attack ended.

TransTeleCom, or TTK, is one of Russia’s biggest telecommunications companies and a subsidiary of the Russian railway operator. Fiber optic lines are laid alongside the railway and, according to a map on its website, on a route from Vladivostok right up to the North Korean border. 

A map of the TTK network shows a link running right up to the North Korean border.

That’s presumably at the Friendship Bridge, a railway crossing over the Tumen River that connects Khasan in Russia with Tumangang in North Korea. It’s the only connection between the two countries.

The Friendship Bridge connecting Russia (right) and North Korea (left). Photo: GoogleEarth.

This isn’t the first time North Korea has had alternate routes for Internet connectivity.

From 2012 for about a year, a second link to Star JV existed via Intelsat, an international satellite telecommunications operator, but in recent years the Chinese link has been the sole connection to Star JV.

Relying on one Internet provider has always left North Korea in a precarious situation.

More than once the link has been the target of denial of service attacks. Most were claimed by the “Anonymous” hacking collective, but on at least one previous occasion, many wondered if US intelligence services had carried out the action.

North Korea has few Internet users, but access to the network is available at major universities, to foreigners via smartphone, at government departments and major companies. Elite families are also suspected of having access. The cyber units of North Korea’s military also enjoy access.

The link is also vital for overseas researchers and academics who rely on access to North Korean state media websites for information.

Hungary Builds A Wall, Cuts Illegal Immigration By Over 99%

Authored by Jack Montgomery via Breitbart.com,

Hungary has slashed illegal immigration by over 99 per cent after rolling out a series of powerful border fences in response to the European migrant crisis, possibly providing a lesson as to the potential impact of constructing President Trump’s much-discussed southern wall in the U.S.

Speaking on the second anniversary of the government’s move to seal Hungary’s border with Serbia - which is also an external border for the European Union - Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Chief Security Advisor, György Bakondi, announced that the fences have caused illegal immigration to collapse from 391,000 in 2015, to 18,236 in 2016, to just 1,184 in 2017.

“The system of technical barriers is the key to the success of border security, and without it, it would be impossible to stop the mass arrival of immigrants”, the security chief explained.

Hungary had to respond rapidly to the migrant influx which burst upon Europe after Germany’s Angela Merkel announced there was “no limit” on the number of asylum seekers her own country would accept, so its frontiers are defended by twin fences peppered with watchtowers and patrolled by thousands of newly recruited border guards rather than a solid wall — which would have taken longer to construct.

"UN slams Hungary because their wall is doing its job" https://t.co/6n97uC6ykn

— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) September 13, 2017

The Hungarians introduced these zones after it was discovered that many of the Paris 2015 terrorists had passed through their territory - a step-change from other EU member-states, which leave migrants more or less at large, with sometimes deadly consequences, in obedience to EU law.

“There is continuous migration pressure on our borders,” insisted Dr Zoltán Kovács, the Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Relations.

“The measures introduced in the interests of protecting the border continue to be necessary; it is thanks to these that the number of migrants entering Hungary illegally and in an uncontrolled manner has fallen drastically.”

Nevertheless, as it has been steadily reinforced illegal migration has slowed to a trickle - drawing the ire of open borders activists like billionaire financier George Soros and globalist officials at the European Union and the United Nations.

For example, UN Refugee Agency chief Filippo Grandi visited the border and complained:

“When I was standing at the border fence today, I felt the entire system is designed to keep people, many of whom are fleeing war and persecution, out of the country”.

Grandi also called on Hungary to get rid of the border-spanning transit zones it has established, which allow all asylum seekers entering the country to be detained while the validity of their claims are assessed.

“People who attack the fence are taking a stand in favour of allowing large numbers of people to enter the country without any form of control,” added Mr. Bakondi.

The Excuse is Immigration, But Federal Checkpoints Violate Everyone’s Rights

Via The Daily Bell

Federal agents set up shop in New Hampshire last week. They ran a Constitutionally-illegal checkpoint, violating the Fourth Amendment rights of countless Americans.

The big reward? They arrested 25 illegal immigrants, seven of them children. More than half of those detained had overstayed visas. That means they came to the U.S. legally in the first place and did not leave when their visa expired.

What could have spurred this callous disregard for the law? Well, a personal anecdote could shed some light on the situation.

A friend of mine from Brazil had a six-month visiting visa to the United States. He would come and stay with his uncle who had permanent residency. The way the rules work, it that my friend could use the visa as often as he wanted to travel to the United States, but couldn’t stay for longer than the six month period.

It was literally completely legal for him to fly to Brazil, spend the night, and fly back to the United States the next day. Then he could stay for another 6 months.

Being a rule follower, he did what the law said and flew back to Brazil where he stayed for about four months. The ticket to get back to the U.S. cost about $1,000. But when he arrived, he was denied entry to the United States. He was sent back to Brazil, and his visa was suspended for five years.

Why did this happen? After all, he followed all the rules. Officials said if he was staying 6 months at a time, he must have been working. Yes, because he stayed within the legal limits of his visa, the federal officials surmised that he must have violated the conditions of his visa.

Perhaps this unpredictability of U.S. Customs creates an incentive to overstay visas. Maybe the $1,000 plane tickets make it tempting to overstay a visa. Because maybe even if you follow the rules, you will arbitrarily be denied anyway, wasting your time, burning your money, and being separated from the rest of your family still in the States. Speaking of family, maybe the fact that many of the detained immigrants have kids in school in the U.S. means it is a ridiculous burden to make them leave every six months.

Yes, they broke the law. They broke complicated and restrictive immigration laws.

But why is it so important to follow immigration laws, while immigration officials completely disregard the Fourth Amendment?

Great job! Agents enforced immigration law by breaking Constitutional law. They stopped every car on I-93, without suspicion or probable cause. Generally, occupants of the vehicles are asked whether or not they are an American citizen.

If they refuse to answer, exercising their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, that is considered evidence of a crime, and they are detained for further questioning and possible search. Exercising a right is used as evidence of a crime. That is the point we have gotten to in the U.S.A. police state.

Using these illegal stop and search tactics, police found evidence of other crimes as well, unrelated to immigration.

The checkpoint also resulted in the seizure of two pounds of marijuana, as well as smaller amounts of cocaine, mushrooms and hash oil, all of which were seized from U.S. citizens, according to the Woodstock Police Department. In addition to the immigration detentions, 32 arrests were made for a range of infractions.

So there you have it, Americans’ Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights were violated so that federal agents could prosecute victimless crimes. The only true victims in this whole checkpoint situation were all the people stopped by the agents.

Perhaps you aren’t concerned with the illegal immigrants’ treatment. What you should be concerned about is the convenient excuse increased immigration enforcement gives federal agents to trample your rights.

The harder they go after illegal immigrants, the more Americans will be ensnared, and have their rights violated. They will be stopped at checkpoints, subjected to illegal searches, and forced to be a witness against themselves.

This is how the government operates. Whether it is under the guise of a drug war, illegal immigration, or terrorism, their guns are truly only aimed at one target. The American people.

Visualizing The Countries Most And Least Accepting Of Migrants

According to new research from Gallup, many countries on the frontlines of Europe"s migration crisis are among the least-accepting countries worldwide for migrants.

Statista"s Nial McCarthy notes that the research found that Macedonia, Montenegro, Hungary, Serbia, Slovakia and Croatia which are all along the Balkan route for asylum seekers recorded the lowest scores for accepting migrants.

You will find more statistics at Statista

Iceland was at the opposite end of the scale, scoring 8.26 out of 9.0. It was followed by New Zealand and Rwanda.

Germany which has taken in huge numbers of refugees in recent years came 23rd overall with 7.09. The United States came 18th with 7.27. The United Kingdom came a distant 38th for migrant acceptance, scoring only 6.61 out of 9.0.

Justin Trudeau To Refugees: There&#039;s "No Advantage" To Entering Canada Illegally

Eight months.

That’s how long it took for Canadian Prime Minister and liberal hero Justin Trudeau to realize his promise to welcome all immigrants and refugees to Canada may have been a little short-sighted. After the prime minister proudly proclaimed on Twitter back in January that Canada would welcome all those fleeing “persecution and war,” the prime minister changed his tone this week when he warned refugees crossing into Canada from the US that sneaking into the country illegally wouldn"t fast-track the process of granting asylum.

To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada

— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) January 28, 2017

In the months that have passed since Trudeau made his famous promise, the number of refugees streaming over the border into the Canadian province of Quebec surged dramatically, straining local resources available to process their claims of asylum and provide necessities like food and shelter. The asylum seekers are primarily Haitians who fear that the Trump administration might revoke a special protected status implemented after the 2010 earthquake.

Here’s Trudeau, who was speaking at - of all places - a news conference before Montreal’s Pride parade:  

"If I could directly speak to people seeking asylum, I"d like to remind them there"s no advantage," Trudeau said at a news conference Sunday in Montreal.

"Our rules, our principles and our laws apply to everyone."

Trudeau also stressed that anyone seeking refugee status will have to go through Canada"s "rigorous" screening process.

The surge of migrants has overwhelmed both the Canadian legal system and the capabilities of local agencies tasked with aiding refugees. We reported earlier this month that Canada sent soldiers to a popular crossing site in upstate New York to help build a small encampment for newly arriving refugees. But beads have quickly filled up. According to CBC News, more than 3,800 people walked over the border into the province during the first two weeks of August, compared to the 2,996 who crossed throughout all of July.

As CBC notes, Unlike in the United States, Haitians have no special status in Canada, and about half of Haitians seeking refugee status in Canada have already been denied during the past couple of years.

Trudeau critic Michelle Rempel said the Canadian government too willingly ignored the brewing refugee crisis on its doorstep, and continues to play down the need to deal with the problem.  

“Conservative immigration critic Michelle Rempel said Trudeau is downplaying the urgent need to deal with the surge in people crossing the border.

"They knew it was going to be a problem this summer. And their response has been building tent cities on the U.S./Canada border," she said in an interview with CBC News."

Too help alleviate the problem, Rempel says the federal government should increase funding for the IRB, the board that evaluates all asylum claims. Even before the surge at the border, the IRB was hopelessly backlogged, ensuring that claimants could remain in the country in a legal limbo while they waited for their hearing.

Allowing the department to process claims more quickly would remove this incentive for asylum seekers to cross illegally.

Still, given his professed love for immigration and multiculturalism, we wonder just how far Trudeau will go to stanch the tide of refugees. Will there be more soldiers and more camps? Or will Trudeau hire an army of claims processers to start kicking people out of the country – or at least ensure that those allowed to remain deserve to do so?

One thing"s for sure: He"s going to need to do something.
 

Canada Sends Soldiers To Popular Border Crossing

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau should probably stop telling refugees that “everybody is welcome in Canada,” after his vow to protect asylum seekers inspired thousands of migrants to journey north across the US-Canada border, fearing deportation should they remain in the states following the election of President Donald Trump.

The influx of migrants has overwhelmed the ability of local and federal agencies to process and provide for the newcomers, leaving many in an uncomfortable legal limbo as they wait for their hearing dates. In recent months, thousands of Haitian asylum seekers have crossed into Quebec following Trump’s threat to remove the temporary protected status granted to nearly 60,000 Haitians living in the US following Haiti’s 2010 earthquake. Of the 4,345 people who either sought asylum at the Canadian border or were intercepted by police in the first six months of 2017, 3,350 were recorded in Quebec.

With the pace of new arrivals increasing, the federal government is being forced to take action.

According to the Associated Press, the Canadian government has dispatched soldiers to a remote back road connecting Quebec with upstate New York. The site has become a popular route for migrants, with more than 400 crossing on Sunday alone.

The military will assist the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Canadian Border Service agency in constructing a registration center complete with tents that can house close to 500 people at the site.

The site will function as a point of entry where asylum seekers are processed and turned over to the government. Soldiers will not play a security role, according to the AP.

Once the settlement is finished, only a few will stay behind. The rest will go back to their home base.

The decision to construct the makeshift shelter comes as Quebec is running out of space to house the migrants.

Local officials recently opened a temporary shelter in Montreal’s Olympic Stadium as they scramble to meet the demand for beds, with some local aid workers telling the Montreal Gazette that government-funded aid programs are “close to their limits.”  

It appears that, with local agencies straining under the workload, Trudeau has come through with some federal aid. But when will the progressive iconic and frequent Trump antagonist realize that Canada has simply taken in too many migrants?
 

Greece Among Countries With The Most Slave Labor In Europe

The European Union recorded the largest increase in slavery of any world region in 2017, with the arrival of more than 100,000 migrants, many of them extremely vulnerable to exploitation, analysts said on Thursday. As KeepTalkingGreece.com reports, Greece, Italy, Cyprus, Romania and Bulgaria are the countries with the most slave labour within the EU.

The risk of slave labour in farming, construction and other sectors rose across the region, with 20 of the EU’s 28 member states scoring worse than in 2016 in an annual global slavery index by British analytics company Verisk Maplecroft.

“The migrant crisis has increased the risk of slavery incidents appearing in company supply chains across Europe,” said Sam Haynes, senior human rights analyst at Verisk Maplecroft.

Globally there are 21 million people in forced labour, including children, in a business worth $150 billion a year, according to the International Labour Organization (ILO).

The index, which assessed incidents of human trafficking or slavery, as well as laws and law enforcement in 198 countries, ranked Romania, Greece, Italy, Cyprus and Bulgaria as the countries with the most slave labour within the EU.

All are key entry points for migrants in the region, Verisk Maplecroft said.

Some 115,000 migrants and refugees have reached Europe by sea so far in 2017, with more than 80 percent arriving in Italy, according to the International Organization for Migration (IOM).

Many agree to pay large amounts of money for the journey and end up working virtually for free, trapped by debts owed to the agents who brought them across the border, said Alexandra Channer, principal human rights analyst at Verisk Maplecroft.

“Many illegal migrants entering the EU are so in debt to a trafficking gang or unscrupulous agents that they have no hope of paying that cost,” she told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Local authorities are struggling to manage the slavery issue effectively due to the large numbers of arrivals, she added.

Globally, North Korea retained the top spot as having the worst record of slave labour, while, outside the EU, Turkey lost the most ground in the ranking, slipping into the “high risk” category.

India improved the most, jumping from 15 to 49, while Thailand also made significant gains in the fight against slavery, moving up 21 places to 48.

But both countries remained rated as at “extreme risk” with severe abuses reported in construction, brick kilns, garment production, manufacturing, farming, fishing and rubber production, according to the analysis.

Channer said the index aimed at helping businesses identify countries most at risk of slave labour.

Source: Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Soros-Sponsored Immigration Network Exposed In Italy

Via GEFIRA.org,

The following article is based on Francesca Totolo’s research published on lucadonadel.it.

Open Borders, Media Censorship

Why is there a migrant crisis in the Mediterranean? Why are NGOs involved? Because there is an extensive network of open borders activists and organizations behind it; many of them are directly funded by or cooperated with George Soros’ Open Society. Is it illegal? Not really. Political activism is an essential part of democratic societies. However, sometimes it goes too far, or the promoted causes prove to be either unrealistic or unsustainable.

The network of the “immigration lobby’’ in Italy is made up of International NGOs financed by the Open Society Foundation (green), Italian NGOs financed by OSF (blue), and organizations with shared projects with OSF (purple).

1. Open Society Foundations and Associazione Carta di Roma

Associazione Carta di Roma was founded in December 2011 to put into execution a moral code for correct information on immigration. Since February 2016 the “Glossary’’ of the Charter of Rome (Carta di Roma) is an integral part of the “Unified charter of duties of the journalist’’. Permanent invited members are the UN High Council for Refugees, the International Organization for Migrations and the National Office against Racial Discrimination.

The glossary of the Charter of Rome been revised and corrected by the editors to guarantee political correctness, limiting the use of words that are deemed not adequate when the subject of a piece of news is without citizenship and in a foreign country. The accepted terms are: -asylum seeker, refugee, person protected by subsidiary protection, beneficiary of humanitarian protection, victim of smuggling, irregular migrant (previously commonly defined as clandestine), mixed migratory influx. The term “clandestine’’ is now punished with fines, and warnings from the Order of Journalists.

In the majority of cases the Charter of Rome considers redundant mentioning the nationality of those who commit crime on Italian territory.

Sponsors of the Charter are Open Society Foundations, the UNHCR and the Valdese Church.

Associazione Carta di Roma lists the following “reliable’’ sources, many of which are Italian or international NGOs directly funded by the Open Society Foundation: Amnesty International, ASGI, COSPE, 21 Luglio, Fortress Europe, A Buon Diritto, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Save The Children, currently involved in the migrant traffic in the Mediterranean and finally UNAR, recently involved in a scandal of gay prostitution.

2. Open Society and COSPE ONLUS

Cospe Onlus is a non-profit, private organization founded in 1983. It operates in 30 countries with 150 projects “to favour equal and sustainable development, respect of human rights, peace and justice for people’’, supporting the right to international mobility. Its goal is a world where “diversity is considered a value, a world with many voices, where the meeting of different people results in mutual enrichment and where social justice goes through equal rights and opportunities’’.

Cospe and NGOs in the Mediterranean

Cospe is among the original founders and promoters of SOS Mediterranee Italia, an NGO that works in the Mediterranean cooperating with Médecins Sans Frontières on the ship Acquarius

Cospe’s partners, include the already mentioned Associazione Carta di Roma, which shares Cospe’s platform on “correct communication’’ on the immigration question; they organized seminaries for journalists on the topics of immigration and racial discrimination. Carta di Lampedusa (Charter of Lampedusa) is a free association of individuals born in 2014 to work against laws limiting immigration and for the abolition of all European laws that limit freedom of movement.

Cospe Budget

The last budget published is from 2015. Cospe gathered funding of approximately €9.5 million, of which €7.5 million was from public subjects, the most relevant of which are the European Union (66%) and the Italian Ministry for Foreign Affairs (27%).

3. Open Society and ASGI (Association for Juridical Studies on Immigration)

ASGI’s task is to disseminate ideas on immigration laws among lawyers, jurists and academics; it has contributed to the creation of national and EU laws on immigration, asylum and citizenship, promoting political dialogue and protection of foreigners. ASGI was founded by the Open Society Foundation and is directly funded by it.

ASGI projects

ASGI focuses heavily on the current situation in Hungary. The UNHCR requested a temporary suspension of asylum requests to Hungary, according to the rules of the Dublin Treaty: ‘“Given the worsening conditions of asylum seekers in Hungary, we ask to suspend the transfer of any asylum seeker to this country, until the policies of the Hungarian government are not in line with European and international law’’.

Anti-discrimination service: ASGI provides juridical support against ethnic, racial and religious discrimination in Italy, with an operative centre in Milan and a number of secondary centres in Turin, Florence, Naples, Rome and Verona, a network of professionals that collaborate in monitoring discrimination matters. It is funded by Charlemagne Onlus, Tavola Valdese and the Open Society Foundations.

ASGI’s Manifesto

According to ASGI, the reasons for migration to Europe are: wars, repressive regimes and dictatorships, consequences of colonialism, exploitation of natural resources of the African continent, demographic growth, climate change.

In terms of immigration, asylum and citizenship reform, ASGI proposes:

–channels for free access to a country for job seeking purposes;
-ways to make temporary visas permanent;
-easier family reunion processes;
–voluntary repatriation or alternative measures as opposed to forced repatriation;
–right to vote in administrative elections for non-EU foreigners, on the same conditions as for EU nationals and easier acquisition of citizenship;
-on asylum the EU should: desist from hostile policies adopted in the last years such as the EU-Turkey agreement of March 2016, and collaboration with dictatorships such as those in Libya, Sudan, and Niger; create an obligatory redistribution plan for refugees, adjust the current Dublin regulation with the possibility of requesting asylum in the country chosen by the asylum seeker.

ASGI’s network

Migregroup: it participates in the project Boats4people, and supports the online platform WatchTheMed, that maps deaths and violations of migrant rights at the external frontiers of the EU.

WatchTheMed was founded by NGO Habeshia run by father Mussie Zerai, (self-proclaimed father Moses for his ability to make migrants arrive in Europe). The organization has a list for ‘’the good migrant’’, where interested people can find information on how to arrive in Europe through the Mediterranean. ONG Sea-Watch, currently present in the Mediterranean transporting migrants to Europe, is a part of the platform of WatchTheMed.

ASGI collaborates with Associazione 21 Luglio, Senza Confine (No Borders), Doctors for Human Rights, SIMM (Italian society for medicine of migrations).

4. Open Society and CILD (Italian coalition for freedoms and civil rights)

Created in 2014, CILD is a network of organizations to promote rights and freedoms for everyone, with advocacy campaigns, public and legal actions. CILD supports easier access for migrants in face of “mixed influxes’’. After a recent change in the law to welcome unaccompanied minors in Italy, it pushed for a change in citizenship laws, currently materialized in the attempt to switch from Ius Sanguinis to Ius Soli.

Its manifesto includes a change of vision on immigration, as a system of asylum, not criminal, based on welcoming duties and enlargement of citizenship.

CILD activities include, the project Open Migration, which focuses on a fact-checking of news on immigration; its articles cover criticism of the investigation of NGOs in the Mediterranean, a claim that refugee appeals are not overburdening the judicial system, and another claim that immigrants are overrepresentated in the jail system due to preventive custody, ignoring the data showing that migrants commit crimes in Italy at 6 times the rate of natives.

CILD’s network

It includes, among others:

A Buon Diritto: an advocacy group on the immigration issue. Funded by the Open Society;
ANSI (National Association Intercultural Press): promoted and constituted by foreign journalists, supported by Cospe and Open Society^;
Antigone: organization for the rights and warranties of the penal system, funded by the Open Society;
ARCI: large popular movement to promote emancipation, with over a million subscribers, supported by Open Society;
ASGI: detailed above;
Associazione 21 Luglio: focuses on the Roma minority. Funded by the Open Society;
CIR (Italian Council for Refugees): funded by Open Society;
Cittadini del Mondo (Citizens of the world): open borders promoter, funded by Open Society;
Cospe Onlus: referred above
Fondazione Leone Moressa: think thank with a focus on immigration, funded by the Open Society;
Lunaria: non-profit with a focus on globalization and migration, regularly collaborates with the Open Society;
NAGA: migrant rights with a focus on Roma, funded by the Open Society;
PARSEC: social studies research institute with a focus on immigration, created the project “parlare civile’’ (civil talking) that focuses on politically correct wording, supported by the Open Society;

5. Open Society and A Buon Diritto

A Buon Diritto (For good law) is an advocacy group focused on immigration, its website is full of the contributions from the Open Society. Its president is Luigi Manconi, also known as Simone Dessì, a former activist of Lotta Continua (Contiued Fight), a communist party. Its publications include “Accogliamoli Tutti’’ (Let’s welcome all of them), a book that claims that “the only efficient immigration policy is welcoming everyone’’, citing replacement migration, the replacement of elderly, dying Italians with young immigrants as the core element of its thesis. It claims that this approach is based on “common sense and a pragmatic approach to govern immigration, not passively receive it’’. The foreword is by former Ministry of Integration of Italy Cécile Kyenge.

Another publication is “Abolire il Carcere’’ (Abolish jail), a “reasonable proposal of reform for the safety of citizens’’.

Its initiatives include:

-‘’Navigare a vista’’ (Navigate in sight), a “tale of the search and rescue activities by NGOs in the Mediterranean’’.
-‘’The great lie of taxi-ships: NGOs and rescue in the sea’’, a conference attended by Luigi Manconi, Emma Bonino, former Minister of Foreign Affairs, and representatives of the NGOs Proactiva Open Arms, MSF and Save the Children, all currently active in the Mediterranean.

Conclusions

The network, as exemplified by CILDI, is extensive and intricate. It ranges from former ministers, Kyenge (Immigration) and Bonino (foreign affairs), both directly responsible for the large influx of migrants being forcefully accepted into Italy, to support groups promoting press censorship, but also providing juridical support, advocacy and publications.

Only in few cases one can inspect their budgets, not exactly a trait suggesting transparency and openness.

The main theme of the Open Society network is to use anti-discrimination laws to promote unlimited migration via the abolition of borders. The idea is clearly stated in the manifesto of many organizations. Most organizations promote their extreme views as “fact based’’ or “common sense’’ to give themselves an aura of scientific approach, while providing subjective and ideological interpretation of data and omitting inconvenient information. That is also why they omit the nationality of the criminal. It’s equivalent to admitting there is a problem but it should not be talked about. This is typical of totalitarian regimes, not democratic and certainly not “open’’ societies. The stated goal of “correct information on the theme of immigration’’ is certainly not achieved this way.

Finally, the no-borders strategy is being implemented with the widespread action of the immigration lobby in favour of NGOs operating in the Mediterranean. Whether through its funding or publications covering the topic, conferences, research or information channels for migrants, the network effectively provides support for migrants, regardless of whether they are legal or illegal.

Italy Threatens EU With "Nuclear Option": Give 200,000 Migrants EU Visas, Sending Them North

Two weeks after Italy reacted with anger to Austria"s deployment of troops and armored vehicles to the border between the two nations, while reactivating border controls at the Brenner Pass over concerns that Italy will be unable to handle the roughly 85,000 migrants and refugees who have entered the country so far in 2017, the Italian government has threatened to retaliate in way that assures an imminent migrant crisis as well as an escalation of tensions between the two EU nations.

According to The Times, an Italian minister and a senator have threatened to issue temporary EU visas to thousands of migrants in an effort to "resolve" Italy"s escalating migrant and refugee crisis, which would then allow the refugees to travel north. The move, which has been described as a "nuclear option," would allow the nearly 200,000 migrants currently stranded in Italy, to travel across Europe using a Brussels directive loophole.

Paolo Gentiloni, the prime minister, is livid that the rest of Europe has refused to take its fair share of migrants and that they have closed ports to rescue ships as the number of refugees attempting the treacherous crossing from Libya to the Continent has surged.

Italy previously called on its EU neighbors to help with the escalating humanitarian crisis but it has been disappointed by their complete lack of action. The face off prompted former Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi to shock the European liberal establishment, when last Friday he released excerpts from a new book in which he said that "we need to free ourselves from a sense of guilt. We do not have the moral duty to welcome into Italy people who are worse off than ourselves" adding that "we need to escape from our "do gooder" mentality."

Migrants disembark from the Medecins Sans Frontiers ship Vos Prudence after
being rescued at sea, at Salerno"s harbor, Italy, on Friday

Renzi also warned last Friday that Rome would look to curb funding to EU nations that had refused to offer help. "They are shutting their doors. We will block their funds," he said, sounding suspiciously like Turkey"s Erdogan who has so far prevented a new refugee crisis in Europe by gating some 2 million migrants inside Turkey"s borders.

One week later, not even Renzi"s dramatic reversal has prompted a reaction from the EU, leaving Italy in the same place as before, which as a reminder is that due to its geographic location, Italy has been one of the first entry points  for people fleeing from the south to reach Europe. More than 86,000 migrants have crossed the Mediterranean to Italy already this year, leaving the nation scrambling - and struggling - to cope with the huge increase of people fleeing north Africa.

Meanwhile, hundreds of asylum seekers are packed into overcrowded centers - dubbed "human warehouses" by locals  - scattered across small villages throughout the country.  Mattia Toaldo, a senior analyst at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told The Times: "If migrants continue to arrive and Italy decides to give them papers to cross borders and leave Italy it would be a nuclear option."

And since "Italians have lost any hope of getting help from the EU" they may say, "If you won"t make it a common challenge, we will" Toaldo added.

This is precisely what some in Gentiloni"s government are already doing: Mario Giro, Italy"s deputy foreign minister, and Luigi Manconi, a senator with the ruling Democratic Party, told The Times that issuing migrants with temporary visas was under discussion. Giro believes that Italy can exploit European Council Directive 2001/55, developed after the Balkans conflict to give temporary European entry permits to a large number of displaced people.

Needless to say, if Italy pursues this course of action, and ultimately activates the "nuclear option", support for the Schengen scheme, which allows all EU citizens to travel freely across the Continent, may be in jeopardy. Worse, since for most of the migrants the final destination will be Germany, it may rekindle the same migrant crisis which at the end of 2015 saw Angela Merkel"s approval rating plummet as her countrymen slammed her "Open Door" (since shut) policy.

The Italian rescue ship Vos Prudence arrives in the port of Salerno carrying 935
migrants, including 16 children and 7 pregnant women on Friday

The move will also drastically escalate tensions with not only Austria, but neighboring Frace, which have used dogs and the threat of armoured vehicles to push back migrants who try to enter through Italy"s northern border. France 24 reports that perhaps in anticipation of such a move, vast white tents erected in a former military zone on the outskirts of the tiny village of Conetta, house some 1,400 men from across Africa, packed onto endless rows of bunks.

"I used to call this place a modern lager," Cona mayor Albero Panfilio told AFP, referring to concentration camps. The commune of Cona includes the little village of Conetta. "After two years this is (still) a place where human beings are squashed in together, with no hope for the future."

"Now I call it a human warehouse. The migrants arrive, they don"t know where to put them, they have a warehouse, they dump them here." He added that the asylum seekers were treated "like garbage."

Meanwhile, 10 kilometers away, in Bagnoli di Sopra, 700 migrants are crowded into another former military base surrounded by barbed wire fences with no access to journalists. 

Finally, a question emerges: with Europe helpless to prevent Italy from pursuing this path should Rome choose to do so, will Brussels activate its own "nuclear response" in retaliation. Recall that in 2011, a "united Europe" and the ECB removed then-PM Sylvio Berlusconi almost overnight when the former premier threatened to exit the Eurozone, by sending yields on Italian bonds soaring above 10%. While this time Italy"s economy is (relatively) sound, should Rome proceed to dump 200,000 unwanted migrants in Europe"s lap, the one certain response would be a financial one, with Mario Draghi sending a very clear message if not to his native country, then certainly the current government, which will immediately be blacklisted by Europe, with any and all measures taken to remove it.

San Francisco Awards $190,000 To Illegal Immigrant Over "Sanctuary City Violation"

The tax payers of San Francisco, courtesy of a plea deal negotiated by the City Attorney"s Office, will soon be handing over $190,000 to an illegal immigrant, who had a warrant out for his arrest mind you, after he filed a lawsuit alleging that city police violated "sanctuary city ordinances" by handing him over to immigration officials.  No, you"ve not lost your mind, this is real life.

The incident all started when Pedro Figueroa-Zarceno visited a San Francisco police station to report that his car had been stolen.  In the process of filing the complaint, officers discovered there was a warrant out for Figueroa"s arrest but apparently they were unable to track down further details.  Figueroa was eventually allowed to leave the police station through a side exit where immigration officials were conveniently waiting for him.

Here is more from the San Francisco Examiner:

A man who San Francisco police turned over to immigration authorities in violation of The City’s sanctuary ordinance is set to be awarded $190,000 in a settlement agreement reached with the City Attorney’s Office, which his lawyer hopes will push police to obey such laws.

Pedro Figueroa-Zarceno, 33, sued The City on Jan. 17 for violating its sanctuary city laws when officers at Southern Station allegedly cooperated with immigration officials. Figueroa-Zarceno, an undocumented immigrant and native of El Salvador, went to the station at 1251 3rd Street in Mission Bay in December 2015 to report a stolen car.

But instead of helping him find his car, officers called immigration authorities, who took him into custody outside of the station.

Police reports and case documents previously obtained by the Examiner showed that officers at the station detained Figueroa-Zarceno after they ran his name and found a warrant for his arrest. But they were unable to find details on the warrant, so Figueroa-Zarceno was released from a side door, where he was then arrested by immigration officials. Those officials had been notified by San Francisco police.

All that said, Attorney Saira Hussain wants you to know that it"s "really important" that San Francisco"s sanctuary city laws are protected...other laws, not so much.

“It’s really important for San Francisco to remain a sanctuary city not in name only but also in practice,” said Saira Hussain, a staff attorney at the Asian Law Caucus, who represented Zarceno.

City law, the Due Process for All Ordinance, bars law enforcement from cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, among other federal immigration officials, except in a few exceptions when violent criminals are involved. Part of the law’s purpose was to encourage immigrants to report crimes they may otherwise not report because they fear law enforcement will turn them over to immigration authorities.

Of course, none of this is particularly surprising given that, as we recently noted, the city of San Francisco launched a whole new group in the Public Defender"s office specifically dedicated to representing illegal immigrants.  As an NBC affiliate in the Bay Area noted, the new office is expected to handle just 50 clients per year of the 1,500 detained immigrants that currently have scheduled court dates.  

Unlike in criminal court, immigrants are not automatically entitled to legal representation in deportation proceedings. However, studies have shown that detained immigrants with attorneys are six times more likely to win their cases.

While San Francisco also provides funding to nonprofits specializing in legal aid to immigrants, the public defender"s office is intended to serve those already in detention, a demographic the nonprofits generally don"t serve.

The unit"s attorneys are each expected to handle around 50 clients per year -- a small portion of the estimated 1,500 detained immigrants who currently have court dates in San Francisco, around 85 percent of whom do not have attorneys.

If cities get to randomly pick and choose which laws they"re going to enforce, can we kindly request that someone create a "sanctuary" for those wanted for grand theft auto?  Some of us are in the market for a couple really nice Lambo"s but are somewhat "economically challenged" at the moment...frankly, it"s just not fair and we"re feeling "triggered".

71% Of People In Poland Want To Ban Muslim Immigration

Authored by Martin Armstrong via ArmstrongEconomics.com,

The only way to protect Poland from Islamic terror attacks is to not allow Muslims to migrate en masse. That is now the view of 71% of the people.

This is becoming the major issue in Poland and is at its core dispute with Brussels. As a reminder, Poland recently followed Hungary"s lead in corralling migrants...

Poland is mulling setting up special camps where asylum seekers would be housed in containers and kept behind fences in the event of another migration crisis, according to the country’s interior minister.

“The thing is to be ready for such a situation in the form of places in which those waiting for deportation would be kept who may try to break the law,” Mariusz B?aszczak told Polish radio on Tuesday. “That’s all it entails. Besides, there are similar container camps in France and in Germany.”

It’s a very similar approach to one adopted by Hungary, which has come under fire from the EU for its harsh approach to asylum seekers.

The camps are part of an overhaul of the asylum system to restrict migration planned by the country’s Law and Justice party (PiS) government.

It would allow border guards to detain asylum seekers for up to 28 days along the border while their applications are processed, “which will prevent efforts to illegally move to Western Europe.”

When it comes to reducing the chances of Poland being hit by Islamic terror attacks, the overwhelming consensus is to simply ban Muslim migrants for the so called Syrian refugee crisis.

The most amazing thing is Brussels takes the position of accept refugees or get out of the EU.

Poland still has its own currency. For its own survival, it should link with the USA and exit the EU. Many American banks and companies have moved their back-offices to Poland. They have far more to gain with a trade relationship with the USA than with the EU.

The H-1B "Scam" Exposed

Via Defiant Thinking,

The federal H-1B program is intended to allow foreign workers into the US to do high-skill jobs for which employers can’t find qualified domestic workers. In reality, it’s a way for US employers to lower their labor costs, ignoring the large pool of fully qualified (but more expensive) US workers in favor of cheap foreign labor.

This isn’t a small program, either; in 2014 there were 124,326 new applications approved and 191,531 renewed. Since this is a three-year program with one possible renewal, the total number of H-1B foreign workers in the US is triple that, or close to a million lower-wage workers in positions that should otherwise go to US workers at much higher wages.

Where are those workers coming from? According to a recent report to Congress, in 2012 most – 64% – come from India, with no other country sending anywhere close to that many (China came closest at 7.6%).

You will find more statistics at Statista

And which indurty are they overwhelmingly working in?

You will find more statistics at Statista

Given that so many come from India, and that they’re coming under the pretense that they are significantly more qualified than their American counterparts, you may be stunned to learn just how poor the Indian training system when it comes to computer programming.

According to a 2017 skills assessment of graduating Indian software engineers conducted by Aspiring Minds, an Indian skills assessment company:

• Out of the 2 problems given per candidate, only 14% engineers are able to write compilable codes for both and only 22% write compilable code for exactly one problem.


• Only 14.67% of engineers are employable for IT Services company, while a worryingly low percentage of 2.47% are observed to be employable in IT Product company.


• Amazingly, just 2.21% of candidates are able to write functionally and logically correct code.

This is the labor pool from which we’re pulling the majority of overseas workers, who our US staff supposedly cannot compete with.

If you want to learn more about how we’re being played by the H1b program, see this recent 60 Minutes story, or spend some time on the Protect US Workers site. It’s an outrage, and it needs to be stopped.

This Guy Has Eight Passports

Authored by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,

A few weeks ago I caught wind of a guy who has citizenships from eight different countries.

This “octa-citizen” has passports from Canada, UK, Ireland, Belize, Grenada, Dominica, St. Kitts, and Cape Verde.

Let’s be honest– that’s probably way too many. But the concept of acquiring multiple nationalities is completely sound.

If you have one nationality, it means that a single government has total control over your life, your finances, your business, and your personal affairs.

It means that you’re chained to the consequences of that single government’s decisions, no matter how destructive, no matter whether or not your agree.

If they decide to provoke another shooting war and impose a draft… or levy debilitating taxes… or print so much money that the consequent inflation causes social unrest… then you have little recourse.

A second passport is like an insurance policy.

Sure, hopefully you never need it. And hopefully you never need the fire insurance policy that protects your home either.

But if that day ever comes when you smell smoke, you’ll thank your lucky stars that you’re covered.

Having another citizenship means that if the worst ever happens in your home country, you’ll always have a place to go where you and your family are welcome to live, work, study, invest, and do business in peace and safety.

Again, maybe that never happens. HOPEFULLY that never happens.

But it seems risky to bet everything on hope, especially when there are so many substantial risks looming.

We often discuss the pending insolvency of some of the world’s most important central banks, as well as the outright bankruptcy of nearly every major western government.

History shows that countries in this position almost invariably experience severe problems as a result of their excessive debts and irresponsibility.

And it would be terribly foolish to simply ‘hope’ that repeating these same mistakes will somehow result in zero consequences.

Having a second passport doesn’t mean that you’re crazy, pessimistic, or even unpatriotic.

It’s just a sensible thing to do.

Worst case, even if you never actually need the ‘insurance policy’ of having another nationality, a second passport will provide additional options for visa-free travel and international business.

For example, US citizens who want to travel to Brazil need to obtain a visa in advance.

But citizens from dozens of other countries, from Argentina to Belgium, do not.

Being a citizen of certain countries (like Mexico, for example) entitles you to own certain property or start special businesses.

Again, maybe you wouldn’t ever use these benefits. But it’s hard to imagine you’ll be worse off for having additional options.

More importantly, remember that a second passport can often extend to your family as well.

So even if you don’t see yourself traveling or doing business or buying property abroad, your children and grandchildren might want to do so.

Obtaining a second passport will provide those same options and benefits to them. It’s a perpetual gift that you can give to future generations of your family.

So how does one actually obtain a second passport?

Well, you can pay for one.

St. Kitts, Dominica, Antigua, Cyprus, Malta, Grenada, etc. all have formal programs which grant citizenship to foreigners in exchange for a large investment or donation.

These can cost anywhere from $100,000+ to more than $2 million… which is a LOT to spend on an insurance policy for most people.

Fortunately there are easier (and cheaper) ways.

The simplest and most cost effective way to obtain another passport, by far, is to go back to your family tree.

If you have parents or even grandparents from places like Ireland, Poland, Italy, Lithuania, and literally dozens of other places around the world, you may be able to apply for citizenship.

If you think you might qualify, the best place to start is with the local consulate nearest you.

Call and ask them– they’ll be able to walk you through the process and documentation requirements.

If you’re not part of the lucky bloodline club, no worries, there are still other options.

Plenty of countries around the world allow foreigners to become naturalized citizens after a certain period of time as a legal resident in the country.

Panama is a great example; after five years of legal residency, foreigners qualify to apply for naturalization and citizenship.

This doesn’t mean you actually need to move overseas (but trust me, it can be an amazing experience if you do.)

Many countries, including Panama, have favorable legislation where you can still be considered a legal resident and eventually qualify to apply for naturalized citizenship without actually living there.

This is an incredibly easy option– all it takes is time and patience.

As a final option, if you’re planning on having children, you might consider heading overseas for the birth.

Most countries in the Western Hemisphere award instant citizenship to any child born in their territory.

This includes the United States, Canada, Mexico, and just about every country in Latin America.

I flew some of my relatives to Chile a few years ago for this reason– their child was born in Santiago and will be able to enjoy the additional options and benefits of Chilean nationality for life.

This is literally a life-long gift you can give to your child; and it will likely pass on to their children, and their children’s children, all because of actions that you take.

There are very few things within our power that have such a lasting, multi-generational impact.

Citizenship is one of the most important.

Do you have a Plan B?

Italian Officials Call For Investigation Of George Soros Supported NGO Migrant Fleet

Via Disobedient Media

Italian authorities are calling for monitoring of the funding of an NGO fleet bussing migrants into the EU from the North African coast after a report released the European Border and Coast Guard Agency has determined that the members of the fleet are acting as accomplices to people smugglers and directly contributing to the risk of death migrants face when attempting to enter the EU.

The report from regulatory agency Frontex suggests that NGOs sponsoring  ships in the fleet are now acting as veritable accomplices to people smugglers due to their service which, in effect, provides a reliable shuttle service for migrants from North Africa to Italy. The fleet lowers smugglers" costs, as it all but eliminates the need to procure seaworthy vessels capable making a full voyage across the Mediterranean to the European coastline. Traffickers are also able to operate with much less risk of arrest by European law enforcement officers. Frontex specifically noted that traffickers have intentionally sought to alter their strategy, sending their vessels to ships run by the NGO fleet rather than the Italian and EU military.

On March 25th, 2017, Italian news source Il Giornale carried remarks from Carmelo Zuccaro, the chief prosecutor of Catania (Sicily) calling for monitoring of the funding behind the NGO groups engaged in operating the migrant fleet. He stated that "the facilitation of illegal immigration is a punishable offense regardless of the intention.” While it is not a crime to enter the waters of a foreign country and pick them migrants, NGOs are supposed to land them at the nearest port of call, which would have been somewhere along the North African coast instead of in Italy. The chief prosecutor also noted that Italy is investigating Islamic radicalization occurring in prisons and camps where immigrants are hired off the books.

Italy has for some months been reeling under the pressure of massive numbers of migrants who have been moving from North Africa into the southern states of the European Union. In December 2016, The Express cited comments made by Virginia Raggi, the mayor of Vatican City, stating that Rome was on the verge of a "war" between migrants and poor Italians. The wave of migrants has also caused issues in southern Italy, where the Sicilian Cosa Nostra has declared a "war on migrants" last year amid reports that the Italian mafia had begun fighting with North African crime gangs who entered the EU among migrant populations.

CCTV footage showing an Italian gang leader, Emanuele Rubino, retrieve a handgun (circled) before shooting Gambian Yusapha Susso in a turf war last year

In February 2016, Disobedient Media published research indicating that multiple ships operating in the fleet mentioned by Frontex are sponsored by NGO groups with financial ties to organizations run by George Soros and donors to Hillary Clinton. Reports have also emerged citing a study by counter-extremism group Quilliam which states that ISIS now controls the human trafficking scene in North Africa and is actively recruiting from the migrant population. In addition to acting as de facto accomplices of human traffickers, the NGO"s criticized by Frontex may also be contributing to the worsening terror situation in Europe though their actions.

Don&#039;t Confuse Immigration With Naturalization

Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

As the immigration debate goes on, many commentators continue to sloppily ignore the difference between the concept of naturalization and the phenomenon of immigration. 

While the two are certainly related, they are also certainly not the same thing. Recognizing this distinction can help us to see the very real differences between naturalization, which is a matter of political privilege, and immigration, which simply results from the exercise of private property rights. Immigration results naturally from allowing persons to exercise their property rights. Naturalization, on the other hand, is a political act. 

Naturalization Is about Politics, not Property

Naturalization is the process by which persons become citizens and gain access to political institutions. This is a distinct phenomenon from the process of migration. Certainly, an immigrant can relocate without any intent of going through the naturalization process, as is the case for many immigrants to the US today. Those familiar with migrant worker programs in the US, for example, are well aware that there are many workers who work in the US but do not begin the naturalization process. 

Much of the confusion in the US stems from the lax nature of US naturalization laws. Thanks to "birthright citizenship" in the United States, it is assumed in the modern US that even if a person never becomes naturalized, his or her children will automatically become citizens if born on US soil. 

In many parts of the world, however, simply being born within the boundaries of a certain state does not guarantee naturalization. 

Switzerland, for example, provides a much clearer picture of how immigration and naturalization can be viewed as quite distinct. Indeed, in Switzerland, the naturalization process can take many years for adults, and citizenship is by no means guaranteed even to the children of non-Swiss citizens on Swiss soil. For an example of this, we need look no further than this recent article in The Atlantic which outlines the story of one Nancy Holten who has lived as a non-citizen in Switzerland for 34 yeas. Recently, she was rejected for citizenship for the second time. This doesn"t mean Switzerland is a closed economy, of course. Non-citizen permanent residents are numerous in Switzerland, making up nearly one-quarter of the total population. The lack of citizenship, however, is not a barrier to owning property or entering into employment contracts. 

This reality reminds us that citizenship and political participation — i.e., naturalization — are not the same thing as the free exercise of property rights. 

Property Rights vs. Political "Rights" 

Immigration, on the other hand, can — and should — occur outside the sphere of state power. In order for immigration to take place, the state merely need take no action and leave the matter to private employers, workers, and landowners.

In other words, if a person can find someone willing to rent or sell him real estate, and if the migrant can secure income through employment or some other voluntary means, then the immigrant will be free to relocate — thanks to the invitation of private owners and employers. 

Thus, in a system where income and access to other resources must be procured largely through private means, immigration — when it occurs — is simply the natural outcome of the exercise of private property rights. Unfortunately, most modern states cloud this picture by extending the welfare state to migrants. This, in turn, changes migration from a voluntary agreement between private parties into a matter of "public" funds and political action. The answer to this, of course, is to end the subsidy — not to intervene in the private economy. 

Moreover, political problems that arise from imprudent policies on naturalization and welfare state spending do not justify government intervention in private property.  After all, unlike political "rights" such as voting, private property rights are universal and are not rendered moot by a change of government policy or a change in government jurisdiction. 

By moving from one jurisdiction to another, a person does not suddenly forfeit the right to rent an apartment freely offered to him by a landlord. He does not lose the right to take a job freely offered by an employer, and he does not lose the right to sell goods and services to persons who freely offer to buy them. 

Unlike the political privileges conferred by naturalization, these property rights remain the same always and in every location. Any interference by the state into these voluntary market activities would be rightly considered a violation of basic human rights. 

Nevertheless, in spite of states can and do engage in a variety of activities intended to hamper, prohibit, or regulate the exercise of private property rights based on whether or not a private party travels over an international boundary to conduct business. 

Often, these efforts to limit property rights take the form of preventing buyer and seller from engaging in commerce. This can be done through physical barriers or by acts of a legislature intended to impose prohibitions on certain types of employment and other voluntary contracts. 

In many cases, employers will only be allowed to employ persons with the correct government paperwork. Those who do not have the right paperwork, however, are in violation of government laws and may not be hired. In some cases, landlords are even prevented from renting their own property to potential renters who lack the correct arbitrary government designation. 

In this, of course, we see little difference from regulatory regimes such as the war on drugs in which some plants are declared to be legal, while other plants are deemed illegal and verboten. 

In all cases, of course, state enforcement of these arbitrary designations relies on the imposition of stiff fines and draconian prison sentences for many involved. This was certainly true in the case of William Hadden, a property owner who rented an apartment to non-government-approved persons:

The 69-year-old landlord was arrested and charged with dozens of crimes, including harboring fugitives and conspiracy — because his property manager rented to illegals. Although acquitted by a jury, he could have spent the rest of his life in prison, and been forced to forfeit the 60 or so units he owned jointly with his son to the State of Kentucky.

In his article "The Tragedy of Immigration Enforcement," Lew Rockwell noted that "If you give government a job to do, even one that seems justified in the abstract, it will use its power to make a terrible mess in practice." Rockwell goes in on in the article to note the many ways that federal control of immigration has empowered federal agencies to regulate, monitor, and control countless small business and employers across the US who have committed the "crime" of entering into employment contracts without federal approval. 

Indeed, in recent decades, countless small business owners have been ruined by federal intervention in these voluntary employment contracts, while countless others have been driven into black and gray markets in attempts to exercise what should be regarded as unassailable property rights. 

Those who advocate for this type of government control over private property often rationalize their position on the grounds that private owners and employers must be imprisoned, fined, harassed, and impoverished in the name of preventing immigrants from accessing the political system or the public purse. 

Unfortunately, this sort of thinking confuses the issue of naturalization and immigration. If it is a concern — for whatever reason — that immigrants have access to political institutions and public funds, then the correct response is to directly limit that access. 

Stealing the property of landlords and employers, on the other hand, — as part of a circuitous effort to stick it to immigrants — only destroys the free exercise of property rights while refusing to directly confront the issue at hand — a bloated welfare state and a broken system of naturalization.