New Austrian Gov"t Promises "Sanctions" Against Migrants Who Don"t Integrate

Authored by Jacob Boejesson via The Daily Caller,

Austria’s incoming conservative government is taking a hard line on immigration by promising “sanctions” against those “refusing to integrate.”

Sebastian Kurz, 31, is set to become the world’s youngest leader after winning the parliamentary election in October with his People’s Party. Kurz will serve as chancellor with support from the populist Freedom Party.

A new platform unveiled Monday calls for faster deportations and a halt to illegal immigration. The main emphasis for migrants will be put on integrating to Austrian society by adopting local values.

Monthly payments to migrants will be cut to 365 euros ($432 USD) with the possibility of earning an “integration bonus” of 155 euros ($184 USD).

“We want to protect our homeland Austria as a liveable place with all its cultural assets,” the new government’s platform reads, according to The Local.

 

“This includes deciding for ourselves who can immigrate and live with us and ending illegal immigration.”

The new government has also proposed reforms that would allow authorities to access migrants’ cell phones to verify their identity and travel routes. Migrants may also be asked to hand over any cash and belongings as they enter the country to help fund their welfare.

An estimated 5,500 people marched against the new government Monday in the capital of Vienna.

Protestors shouted “Nazis out” and “Refugees welcome” in response to the Freedom Party’s role in the new administration. The protests were small compared to the last time the Freedom Party entered government in 2000, when an estimated 150,000 participated in demonstrations.

Victoria"s Secret Staff Think The Chinese Are Spying On Them

Stories about the shambolic Victoria’s Secret fashion show – which is slated to take place Tuesday Nov. 28 in Shanghai – just keep getting weirder.

Chinese bureaucrats have so far refused to cooperate with the show’s producers and planners, denying visas to Gigi Hadid, one of the show’s highest-profile models, and Katy Perry, the US pop superstar who was slated to be the musical guest.

The Communist Party has also inexplicably refused to issue press passes and visas to members of the western media who were supposed to travel to China to cover the event.

Already, we imagine the marketing brass at L Brands have learned their lesson, and that this will be both the first, and the last, VS fashion show held in China.

But as if all this weren’t enough, the New York Post is now reporting that the show’s organizers believe the Chinese government is spying on them. Which, of course, is probably true, given Chinese authorities’ well-known penchant for monitoring foreigners.

The Post says e-mails of VS show staffers and production crew are apparently being monitored by Chinese authorities.

TV and media-industry insiders who are desperately trying to figure out what’s going on amid the production chaos are getting frustrated by messages from colleagues in China simply saying that they can’t speak frankly about the issues with the government because their communications are being watched.

Perry had her visa application declined because she once showed support for Taiwan (which is in an independence struggle with China) during a Beijing concert. Hadid’s was denied because of a picture her sister, Bella Hadid, published on Instagram that the Chinese public deemed offensive. Plus, fellow Angel Adriana Lima’s visa application has been imperiled by an unknown “diplomatic issue.” Meanwhile, a host of other models have also had their visas denied.

Many fashion bloggers have also been denied visas, and TV producers have discovered that they need permits to shoot outside of the Mercedes-Benz Arena, where the show, which is slated to air on CBS later this month, is set to take place.

As one source put it, “If you’re going to China you want to show that you’re in China!”

The surveillance is apparently making it difficult for the show’s organizers to find replacements for the models who have been denied entry. Harry Styles has already been booked to fill in for Perry.

“They want to discuss what’s going on as far as replacements for those denied visas and alternative arrangements, but they have to be tight-lipped because it seems that the government is watching their e-mails,” said a source.

With more than a week to go before the show, we can only imagine what fresh entanglements will crop up as the date draws nearer.
 

Leaked Report Shows Violence Spirals In Germany"s Refugee Shelters

Authored by Soeren Kern via The Gatestone Institute,

• German authorities have justified their failure to inform the public about the scale of the problem by citing the privacy rights of the criminal offenders.


• Experts have long warned that the practice of housing migrants from different ethnic and religious backgrounds in tight accommodations is the ideal breeding ground for violence.


• "A maintenance man who worked in a refugee shelter reported "mafia-like" conditions. Refugees were required to pay for access to the electrical sockets there." — Der Tagesspiegel.

Violent crime, including murder, rape and physical assault, is running rampant in German asylum shelters, according to a leaked intelligence report. German authorities, who appear powerless to stem the rising tide of violence, have justified their failure to inform the public about the scale of the problem by citing the privacy rights of the criminal offenders.

The report, leaked to the newspaper Bild, was prepared for Markus Ulbig, the interior minister of Saxony, where more than 40,000 migrants are being housed in refugee shelters. According to the report, there were ten murders or attempted murders at Saxon migrant shelters in 2016, as well as 960 physical assaults, 671 cases of grievous bodily injury, seven rapes, 10 sexual assaults of children and 268 cases of drug trafficking. The report also cited hundreds of incidents of theft, coercion, arson, brawls and attacks on police officers.

The violence at Saxon migrant shelters continued during the first six months of 2017: there were more than 500 physical assaults, several homicides and hundreds of reported thefts.

Experts have long warned that the practice of housing migrants from different ethnic and religious backgrounds in tight accommodations is the ideal breeding ground for violence.

In Germany as a whole, around 40,000 crimes — nearly 150 each day — were reported in refugee shelters during the first nine months of 2016, according to another leaked report by the Federal Criminal Police (Bundeskriminalamt, BKA). These crimes included 17,200 physical assaults, 6,500 thefts, 510 sexual assaults and 139 murders or attempted murders.

Observers say this is just the tip of the iceberg, as most crimes go unreported out of a fear of revenge. The BKA does not make public its data about migrant shelter criminality and there have been no additional leaks of such information. Anecdotal evidence, however, suggests that migrant-on-migrant crime is endemic across Germany.

Migrant men exercise at the shelter where they live in Sarstedt, Germany, on November 17, 2015. (Photo by Alexander Koerner/Getty Images)

In Saxony-Anhalt, for instance, a parliamentary inquiry into a stabbing between Afghans at an asylum shelter in Bernburg revealed that migrants have assaulted other migrants at shelters across the state, including in Aschersleben, Ballenstedet, Bitterfeld-Wolfen, Burg, Dessau-Rosslau, Eckartsberg, Genthin, Haldensleben, Halle, Harbke, Kemberg, Leuna, Lutherstadt Eisleben, Magdeburg, Naumburg, Oranienbaum, Oschersleben, Salzwedel, Sangerhausen, Seegebiet Mansfelder Land, Stassfurt, Wanzleben, Weissenfels, Wolmirstedt, Zeitz and Zerbst. The stabbings involved migrants from Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Benin, Bosnia, Burkina Faso, Eritrea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, India, Iran, Iraq, Kosovo, Macedonia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Russia, Serbia, Somalia, Syria, Turkey and Ukraine.

In Baden-Württemberg, 87% of all migrants who were victims of crimes in 2016 were attacked by other migrants, according to official statistics.

In Berlin, police recorded more than 2,000 physical assaults at migrant shelters during 2016, in addition to 800 thefts, 86 rapes and three homicides. Der Tagesspiegel reported:

"The fact that there is an accumulation of criminal offenses in refugee shelters is not surprising. Cramped spaces, wearisome waiting, constant noise and unrest and an uncertain future generates aggression. There are also ethnic and religious conflicts. Many Syrians cannot deal with Afghans, many Serbs do not deal with Iraqis, many Muslims reject Christians, many Sunnis do not want to deal with Shiites. A maintenance man who worked in a refugee shelter reported "mafia-like" conditions. Refugees were required to pay for access to the electrical sockets there."

In Hamburg, 219 sexual assaults against women and children at migrant shelters were reported there during the first six months of 2017, compared to 200 such assaults reported during the same period in 2016.

In Schleswig-Holstein, rival gangs of migrants competing for the drug trade at migrant shelters in Lübeck and other cities have attacked each other in more than a dozen mass brawls. The gangs are said to involve migrants from Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, as well as from North Africa.

In Bavaria, a 41-year-old Afghan migrant at a refugee shelter in Arnschwang stabbed to death an eight-year-old boy from Russia, apparently because the boy was too noisy. It later emerged that a Bavarian court had warned that the Afghan, who had previously been arrested for arson, posed a threat to others. Bavarian officials had ignored that warning and placed him at the refugee shelter where the boy was staying with his mother. The murder prompted calls for the 6,500 single mothers at migrant shelters in Bavaria to be housed in separate units.

Also in Bavaria, a 47-year-old migrant from Kazakhstan at a refugee shelter in Eggenfelden castrated a 28-year-old Ukrainian migrant, who subsequently bled to death. It later emerged that the Kazakh man had been raped by the Ukrainian man, who was aided and abetted by a group of migrants from Chechnya.

In Lower Saxony, a 26-year-old migrant from Sudan sexually assaulted a 12-year-old girl from Serbia at a refugee shelter in Braunschweig. More than a hundred Serbians attempted to deliver street justice before police intervened with pepper spray.

In North Rhine-Westphalia, a mass brawl at a migrant shelter in Dortmund resulted in the stabbing of a 28-year-old migrant. When police attempted to arrest the 19-year-old perpetrator, they were attacked by a mob of more than 40 migrants. Police used dogs to restore order. In Cologne, a mass brawl between groups of African migrants resulted in the stabbing death of a 22-year-old man. At an asylum shelter in Espelkamp, a 32-year-old migrant from Lebanon stabbed another migrant, who bled to death at the scene. The Lebanese man was arrested and then released; the public prosecutor said there was insufficient evidence to prosecute the man.

In Hesse, migrants have stabbed other migrants at shelters in Bad Salzschlirf, Dillenburg, Ehrenberg, Fulda, Giessen, Helsa, Hilchenbach, Kassel and Wetzlar.

Elsewhere in Germany, migrants have stabbed other migrants at shelters in Albbruck, Alsterdorf, Asperg, Bad Aibling, Beelitz, Bonn, Dorfen, Gelsenkirchen, Gera, Görlitz, Helmstedt, Hilchenbach, Iserlohn, Kirchheim, Leipzig, Neugablonz, Neustadt, Peine, Prenzlau, Schaidt, Simmozheim, Tröstau, Ulm, Usedom, Waffenbrunn, Wardenburg, Weißenbrunn, Weißkeißel, and Wernau — among others.

Back in Saxony, when Bild asked why such crimes, which are rarely reported by the police or media, are being kept secret, an interior ministry spokesperson replied that publishing such information was not in the public interest: "The facts which the investigative authorities deem appropriate for public knowledge depend on the circumstances of the individual case."

The interior ministry said that the high levels of violence were not surprising:

"In general, long-term accommodation of many people in small spaces, such as first-time reception facilities, can lead to temporary, exceptional mental states which can lead to physical disputes in individual cases. Such an effect is further enhanced by heterogeneous ethnic and cultural backgrounds."

The interior ministry added that some of the violence could be prevented by providing migrants with "a sufficient supply of leisure activities."

Erdogan Tells US "We Don't Need You"

Amid the escalating visa and arrest crisis between Ankara and Washington, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan decided to pour some more gasoline on the fire, and said on Thursday that if the U.S. does not accept Turkey the way it is "then we do not need you", and blamed the ongoing diplomatic dispute on a US ambassador "who doesn"t know his place."

"We are not a tribal state. We are the state of the Republic of Turkey and you will accept it. If you don’t, then sorry but we do not need you,” Erdogan said quoted by Hurriyet, addressing a meeting of provincial governors in the capital Ankara.

Calling on Washington to “return to reason,” Erdogan repeated his claim that it was U.S. Ambassador to Ankara John Bass who prompted the current crisis. "Let me be very clear, the person who caused this is the ambassador here. It is unacceptable for the United States to sacrifice a strategic partner to an ambassador who doesn"t know his place," Erdogan said as quoted by Reuters.

“What a shame if the great United States of America is being governed by an ambassador in Ankara. Because this is the position they are holding. They should have said, ‘You cannot treat my strategic ally this way, you cannot act this way.’ But they couldn"t say this," he said, as quoted by Anadolu Agency.

Erdogan’s comments came a day after Ambassador Bass stated that the decision for visa suspension was taken by the U.S. government, which also confirmed that the decision was taken in coordination with the State Department, the White House and the National Security Council. “Our ambassadors tend not to do things unilaterally,” State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert said on Oct. 10. Nevertheless, the Turkish president again claimed that it was Bass who prompted the current visa suspension crisis.

Erdogan continued his angry tirade, stating that "the decision taken by the U.S. Consulate and the statements made after it are not related to the truth or reality. A junta within the American bureaucracy that is related to the previous administration aims to sabotage relations between the new administration and Turkey."

In what has become a recurring event, Ankara and Washington are drifting ever deeper into their worst bilateral crisis in years after U.S. Istanbul Consulate official Metin Topuz was arrested last week, prompting the U.S. to announce on Oct. 8 that it has stopped issuing non-immigrant visas in Turkey. In return, Ankara imposed tit-for-tat measures implementing the same measures.

Separately, Erdogan once again criticized Washington’s hesitation to sell arms to Turkey, while instead providing arms to the “terrorist organization”, referring to the Kurds, for free. He also said Ankara will stand behind its decision to mutually suspend visa services with Washington “if the U.S. secretary of state and the president defend the ambassador’s step.”

“Turkey has acted based on the principle of reciprocity, following unjust and non-proportional steps taken against our citizens with the suspension of visa applications. Turkey is never a party that extends a problem,” Erdo?an added.

“Our wish for our interlocutors to return to reason and calm, abandoning steps that would harm our friendship and alliance,” he said.

Erdogan also stated that the detention process of the U.S. consulate officer Topuz “is ongoing within the constitutional framework.”

“The legal process on the individual working at the U.S. Istanbul mission as a local personnel, who is the citizen of our country and does not hold any diplomatic immunity, is ongoing within legal practices, agreements and the Vienna Convention,” he said.

The first US consulate employee arrest took place last week, when Turkish citizen Metin Topuz was detained. The pro-government newspaper Daily Sabah reported that he was accused of “facilitating the escape” of “known Gulenists” from Turkey. Topuz"s arrest prompted the US embassy in Turkey to announce it was suspending “all non-immigrant visa services at all US diplomatic facilities,” stating that “recent events” had “forced the United States government to reassess the commitment of the government of Turkey to the security of US mission facilities and personnel...”

There is yet some hope that relations between the two nations will improve. Overnight Bloomberg reported that representatives from U.S. and Turkey will meet in coming days to try and reach a solution to the mutual suspension of visas, Turkey’s state-run Anadolu Agency says, citing Deputy Prime Minister Bekir Bozdag. The deputy PM also said that there is no obstacle to detained U.S. consulate worker’s access to lawyer, and added that Turkey-U.S. ties strong enough to overcome visa crisis.

That said, a few more similar outbursts by Erdogan, and ties between the two nations will be irreperably destroyed.

"Freedom Insurance" Has Never Been More Crucial - How To Get A Second Passport

Authored by Nick Giambruno via InternationalMan.com,

The biggest threat to your personal freedom and financial security is the government, hands down.

Today, skyrocketing government debt is only making that threat worse. In the US, the bill amounts to more than $167,509 per taxpayer.

At some point soon—in a desperate attempt to squeeze citizens for every penny—politicians will try to further restrict people’s movements. They may even prohibit people from leaving outright.

Wealthy people are always the first they trap. New Jersey already hits certain taxpayers fleeing that sinking ship with an “exit tax.”

There’s also a federal exit tax. It’s a significant blow to wealthy people giving up their US citizenship.

But wealthy people (and Americans across the board) are not the only ones at risk.

Many countries have notoriously turned to people controls at one point or another. For example, the Soviet Union routinely revoked the citizenship of its perceived internal enemies.

In Castro’s Cuba, the government made citizens apply for exit visas to leave the island. It did not grant them easily.

Or look at how the US government revoked Edward Snowden’s passport with the stroke of a pen.

This all reinforces a grave truth… You don’t own your passport or your citizenship. The government does. And it can use that as a weapon.

If you hold unpopular political views, don’t be surprised if the government restricts your travel options. The same goes for wealthy people who want to leave a country in financial trouble.

The good news is, you can do something about this problem…

A second passport is your best insurance against any out-of-control government.

You probably know the benefits of diversifying your investment portfolio. If you put all of your asset “eggs” in one basket, you could lose your entire portfolio if that basket breaks.

The same idea applies to political risk… the risk bureaucrats and politicians pose to you.

Most people have medical, life, fire, and car insurance policies. You hope you never have to use these policies. But you have them anyway. They give you peace of mind and protection if the worst comes to pass.

International diversification is the ultimate insurance policy.

I call it “freedom insurance.”

It frees you from dependence on any one country. Achieve that freedom, and it becomes extremely difficult for any one group of bureaucrats to control you. The results can be life-changing.

A second passport is a crucial piece of the puzzle. Among other things, it lets you invest, bank, travel, live, and do business in places you otherwise couldn’t.

Unfortunately, there is no route to a genuine second passport that is fast, easy, and cheap. Deciding the best place and way to get one is not necessarily simple. There is no one-size-fits-all solution.

But today I’ll show you the path of least resistance.

It helps to view the whole world as your hunting ground. Don’t dismiss the idea of becoming a citizen of a small or backward country. Unlike most mega-government countries, these places generally lack the capacity and desire to monitor their citizens or treat them as milk cows.

The Four Roads to a Second Passport

There are exactly four legitimate routes to a valid second citizenship and passport. If you hear about a fifth route, assume it’s a scam.

To find the best route for you, start with the decision tree below.

No matter the country or method, you should be able to point to specific naturalization laws with explicit requirements. Everything should be clearly spelled out in black and white. You’ll usually find this information on a government, consulate, or embassy website.

Route No. 1: Citizenship by Ancestry

If you qualify, a citizenship-by-ancestry program is the fastest and cheapest route.

Each country has its own eligibility requirements and procedures. If you have an ancestor from one of these countries (usually no more remote than a great-grandparent), you should find citizenship information on the country’s website. Or you can visit the consulate.

If you’re eligible, you will need to give the consulate official legal and translated documents (birth certificates, marriage certificates, death certificates, naturalization records, etc.) proving lineage to the relevant ancestor when you apply.

Route No. 2: Economic Citizenship Programs

Economic citizenship is the most expensive route to a second passport. But it’s also the quickest.

You make a substantial payment or investment, and in return, the government grants you full and permanent citizenship. You can often complete the process in a matter of weeks. And you don’t ever need to live in the country.

Currently, the governments of Dominica and St. Kitts & Nevis (two English-speaking countries in the Caribbean) offer the only established and reliable economic citizenship programs. A passport from either government enables visa-free entry to most of Latin America, the Caribbean, and Europe.

Dominica is currently the cheapest option. It requires a donation to the government starting at $100,000. You should also expect additional administrative costs for due diligence, background checks, processing, and other fees. That can amount to at least $10,000.

Other countries also offer economic citizenship programs. But they haven’t been around nearly as long as the Dominica and St. Kitts programs.

A reliable and stable history is important. Ultimately, any government has the authority to revoke the passport and/or citizenship of any of its citizens at any time for any reason, real or concocted.

A shift in the political winds could mean that an economic citizenship program in favor today could be out of favor tomorrow. That could have negative consequences for foreigners who participated in the program.

Only the St. Kitts and Dominica programs have stood the test of time (decades) and been successfully used by thousands of people.

Route No. 3: Extreme Measures

If you’re willing to take extreme measures, there are shortcuts.

You could marry a foreigner. Many countries will grant citizenship to foreign spouses after a period of time, usually at least two years.

France grants citizenship upon completion of military service.

Jews are eligible for Israeli citizenship. However, in most cases, military service is required of applicants over the age of 18.

Brazil offers a shortcut to citizenship for those who adopt a child.

Route No. 4: Residency

So, if the family bloodline leads to a dead end… and you aren’t willing to marry a foreigner, serve in a foreign military, or take any other extreme measures… and you can’t afford an economic citizenship program… the last route is permanent residency.

Most countries will grant citizenship after five or so years of permanent residency. Some take more time, some take less.

Here, again, the time requirement varies widely. And these requirements are constantly changing. Some countries require you to spend substantial time on the ground and build real connections to the country. Others are less stringent.

Some factors you should weigh in considering a country’s program:

• 
  

  Required length of residency

  
  


• 
  

  Minimum time required in-country during the residency period

  
  


• 
  

  Costs and/or mandatory investments

  
  


• 
  

  Requirement to demonstrate language proficiency

  
  

A Crucial Step

The easiest route to citizenship in a second country will differ for most people, depending on their personal circumstances. It’s not a fun process any way you slice it, but that should not dissuade you. The benefits far outweigh the costs.

The rules on second passports can change quickly. So it’s important to have the most up-to-date, accurate, and actionable information out there.

Be sure to get our guide we just released on the easiest countries to get a second passport from. Click here to download the PDF.

EU Unveils Plan To Resettle More North African Refugees, Support Project With 500 Million Euros

Just days after The Economist primed the world with its narrative that sending 1.2 bilion unskilled Africans to Europe would increase global GDP, The EU"s executive has unveiled plans to resettle at least 50,000 refugees, focusing on people from northern Africa, to bypass smugglers.

As we noted previously, The Economist"s argument is plain idiotic.  

The Economist confuses countries with companies that are profit-oriented, and where people are disposable resources. Yet, countries are communities, and citizens do not usually expect their governments to merely maximize GDP. History teaches us that migration causes social unrest, disrupts social cohesion and ultimately the stability of the recipient nation. And even if we set aside these social or national considerations, the Economist’s reasoning is still false.

The whole argument breaks down on social security and the massive world oversupply of unskilled labour.

Social security determines the minimum price of labour.

If there is abundance of unskilled workers, governments step in and buy or take out of the market the oversupply of labourers for a minimum price called social welfare.

And so, as DW.com reports, the EU central planners think more immigrants, more social welfare, more forced dependency on the uber-alles-arching Brussels corporotocracy...

The plan announced by the European Commission, the EU"s executive arm, on Wednesday involved setting aside 500 million euros ($587 million) for the resettlement effort.

It would involve bringing at least 50,000 people considered the most vulnerable and in need of protection directly to Europe over the next two years. The focus should be on people in North Africa and the Horn of Africa, the commission said, mentioning Libya, Egypt, Niger, Sudan, Chad and Ethiopia. Libya is the main departure point for people making dangerous journeys across the Mediterranean in smugglers" boats to reach Europe.

"Europe has to show that it is ready to share responsibility with third countries, notably in Africa. People who are in genuine need of protection should not risk their lives or depend on smugglers," EU Migration Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos told media in Brussels.

The EU has already resettled 23,000 people, mainly from refugee camps in Turkey and the Middle East, under previous resettlement schemes.

The move is part of the EU"s effort to cope with an ongoing migration crisis which has seen more than a million refugees and unauthorized migrants enter the bloc over the past two years and threatened European solidarity. The recommendations from Brussels are not legally binding on member states, which are individually responsible for deciding on resettlement numbers.

Of course, as is well known, European countries have struggled to agree on and implement migration policies as well as deals to distribute asylum seekers who arrive at EU border countries across the bloc. Separately, Brussels on Wednesday also released plans to allow countries in the Schengen free movement area to reintroduce border controls for security reasons for up to three years during a crisis.

Of course, it is not lost on us that Europe is already struggling to distribute thousands of migrants in the bloc, so how does this help? As we concluded previously,

Africa has 1.2 billion people that will double in the next 25 years, of which huge numbers are about to join European labour force in the coming decades. At the same time the highly educated and skilled western populations will decline, reducing the demand for unskilled labour even further. There is no chance that Europe can afford to keep its social welfare without enforcing a quota on migrants. And even if social security is dropped altogether, the European labour market will reach a situation where there are so many labourers that they become as worthless as they are in Nigeria. For the unskilled European working class it is tantamount to suicide to vote open borders advocates into office.

Interestingly enough, The Economist implicitly stated that Africans are not able to utilise their labour force themselves. Bringing the African population under European supervision failed during the very brief period of colonisation of Africa, and now the Economist wants to bring the Africans under European supervision by using open borders policy and moving the African population to Europe.

Does the Economist really suggest that white Europeans are the only ones who can solve Africa’s problems?

Congress Passed A Bill To Deport Suspected 'Gang' Members - There's Just One Problem

Authored by Sarah Cronin via TheAntiMedia.org,

Last week the House passed a bill to expand the government’s ability to deport immigrants on the basis of alleged gang affiliation. 

Promoted by Republicans as a way to target members of gangs such as the transnational M13 gang, H.R. 3697, the “Criminal Alien Gang Member Removal Act,” amends the Immigration and Nationality Act by adding gang affiliation to the list of criminal offenses that qualify as grounds for detention and deportation.

The bill passed 233 – 175 with almost unanimous Republican support and now must gain approval in the Senate, where it is currently pending in the Committee on the Judiciary. While the bill still has yet to come to a vote in Senate, it has already gained the presidential nod of approval. Shortly following the bill’s passage, the White House Press Secretary published a statement applauding Congress’ decision, and the administration already affirmed that “If H.R. 3697 were presented to the president in its current form, his advisors would recommend that he sign the bill into law,” according to a  statement of administrative policy published last Tuesday.

The bill has received strong criticism from House Democrats and organizations such as the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), who claim the bill provides the government with sweeping discretion to detain and deport immigrants using a broad and arbitrary label.

The bulk of the debate on the bill revolves around how it defines ‘gangs.’ The bill defines a gang as any group of five or more people that has as one of its primary purposes the commission of one or more specified criminal offenses. The bill goes on to expand on these ‘criminal offenses’ to include felony drug offenses, which would include the possession of marijuana. It also explicitly names the ‘harboring’ of undocumented immigrants as a crime.

This means, theoretically, that any organization that helps, shelters, or hires undocumented immigrants could be considered a gang, and thus any immigrant member of such group could theoretically be detained or deported as a gang member.

The National Immigrant Justice Center’s recent policy report explains: 

“For example, the government could attempt to designate a church group that elects to offer shelter to an undocumented immigrant as a gang. Similarly, a fraternity whose members use expired identification documents to purchase liquor or engage in initiation rites or a Fortune 500 company that employs workers who may or may not have irregular documents could also fall under this definition.”

The government already has a history of liberally applying the ‘gang’ label. Just ask the Juggalos, a fan group of the Insane Clown Posse. They took to the streets Saturday to protest the FBI’s designation of their group as a gang in the bureau’s National Gang Threat Assessment report back in 2011. The fans and the band have been fighting to clear their name ever since. The issue even ended up in court last year when the Clown Posse sued the FBI for withholding documentation about the gang classification of their fans.

In a revealing profile about the group, Vox writer Dylan Matthews explained that the parallel would be to criminalize someone for being a “Belieber”(Justin Bieber fan) or a “Swiftie” (Taylor Swift fan). While perhaps ridiculous in theory, the classification has had serious consequences for group members, causing some fans to lose their jobs and, in some cases, their parental rights because of their affiliation with the so-called ‘gang.’

In the case of H.R. 3697, the consequences of alleged gang affiliation would be much more dire — as in no-bond mandatory detention.

“Mandatory detention refers to a provision of the INA that states that non-citizens with certain criminal convictions must be detained by ICE. People who are subject to mandatory detention are not entitled to a bond hearing and must remain in detention while removal proceedings are pending against them,” explains a policy handout by the Immigrant Law Research Center.

H.R. 3697 would expand the terms of mandatory detention, which the ACLU considers a clear violation of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. It also transfers the discretion of determining bond eligibility from the Attorney General to the Secretary of Homeland Security.

“[The bill] grants the Department of Homeland Security massive discretion to designate a group of people as a ‘criminal gang,’ based on secret evidence, and without meaningful judicial review,” the ACLU writes in their vote recommendation and analysis of the bill.

While the practice may appear unconstitutional, it wouldn’t be the first time the government has sanctioned detention without trial. During the War on Terror era, the government adopted the practice of ‘indefinite detention’ whereby suspected terrorists can be held without charge or trial. Despite facing challenges in Congress and in the courts, indefinite detention was signed into law as a provision of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, where it remains in legal standing today.

In the same way the War on Terror became a catch-all justification for constitutionally questionable policies, it seems that the vaguely defined threat of immigration and ‘criminal aliens’ will be this administration’s keyword for getting around civil liberties.

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.

New NGO Racket: Smuggling, Inc.

Authored by Soeren Kern via The Gatestone Institute,

• Although the European Union successfully bribed Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan last year -- inducing him to slow the flow of migrants heading through Turkey into Greece -- Italy has received almost 100,000 people so far this year.


• This summer, even more than in previous years, it has become plain that some of the NGOs working in the Mediterranean are acting as something more than intermediaries. Many have in fact been acting as facilitators. This makes the NGOs effectively no more than the benign face of the smuggling networks. Undercover workers have also discovered NGOs handing vessels back to the smugglers" networks, effectively helping them to continue their criminal enterprise indefinitely.


• A group that which seeks to oppose Europe"s current self-destructive insane trajectory can now not even source independent financial support. Groups, however, that continue to push Europe along its current trajectory continue to get all the official support they need. In the difference in reaction to these two groups lies a significant part of the story of the ruin of a continent.

Sometimes it is in the gap between things that the truth emerges.

In recent years Europe has been on the receiving end of one of the most significant migrant crises in history. In 2015, in just a single year, countries such as Germany and Sweden found themselves adding 2% to their respective populations. Although much of the public continue to labour under the misapprehension that those still coming are fleeing the Syrian civil war; in fact, the majority of those now entering Europe are from Africa, particularly from sub-Saharan Africa.

Although the European Union successfully bribed Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan last year -- inducing him to slow the flow of migrants heading through Turkey into Greece -- Italy has received almost 100,000 people so far this year. Spain -- which had ducked much of the movement of recent years -- now finds itself receiving thousands of people who are sometimes (as in this memorable footage from earlier this month) simply landing on the country"s beaches and running straight into the country. In doing so, they are not only breaking into Europe in a fashion that is illegal, but flouting all the asylum protocols, and other protocols, however inadequate, that are meant to exist.

In reaction to such events, the Spanish authorities have done something extraordinary. They have gone the way of the Italian authorities and made more efforts to intercept boats heading towards the country. Not in order to turn them around or block them, but in order to "rescue" them. In merely one day last week, the Spanish coastguards "rescued" 600 migrants. The purpose of the quotation marks around "rescue" is because its use in this context is highly contestable. Somebody may be rescued from a burning car, or rescued from a sinking boat. But if thousands of people intentionally head across narrow stretches of water, it can hardly be said that each and every one of them has been "rescued".

What have they been rescued from? They may be rescued from war. Or they may be rescued from poverty. Or slightly less rosy economic prospects than someone born in Spain. Most of these people have simply been rescued from Africa or whatever their country of origin. This situation leads to the questions which European politicians even now refuse to address -- which is whether Europe should indeed be "rescuing" anyone who ends up in a boat near Europe.

Whenever they are polled, the public in Europe consistently say that they want the migration to slow down or stop. This is a majority opinion in every European country. Across the EU as a whole, a recent survey found that 76% of the European public think that the European Union"s handling of the whole crisis has been poor. But it is in the gap between the treatment of two actors in this crisis that we can discern a terrible fact about the fate of Europe.

Throughout the crisis of recent years -- and especially since the height of the crisis in 2015 -- the official vessels operated by the European states have been joined by members of non-governmental organsations (NGOs), either on the vessels or running vessels of their own. A significant amount of the "rescue" part of the migrant crisis (finding boats and transferring those onboard onto safe vessels or guiding their vessels into port) has been done by NGOs. Organisations such as Save the Children and Médecins sans Frontières have been invited to do this by European government agencies, and many of them receive significant levels of government funding as well as charitable giving from the public.

Yet, this summer, even more than in previous years, it has become plain that some of the NGOs working in the Mediterranean are acting as something more than intermediaries. Many have in fact been acting as facilitators. Agents who have infiltrated the NGO groups have found collusion between the NGOs and the smugglers networks, including coordination with these brutal and mercenary organisations. Investigations have found NGOs to have been breaking their own agreed operating rules by coordinating locations to meet and pick up vessels sent out by the smugglers. This makes the NGOs effectively no more than the benign face of the smuggling networks. Undercover workers have also discovered NGOs handing vessels back to the smugglers" networks, effectively helping them to continue their criminal enterprise indefinitely.

Some NGOs that work to pick up migrants from boats in the Mediterranean and transport them to Europe have been discovered handing vessels back to smuggler networks, helping their criminal enterprise. Pictured: A small rubber boat overcrowded with migrants passes a boat set alight by the crews of Phoenix, a vessel operated by the "Migrant Offshore Aid Station" (MOAS) NGO, after all passengers were evacuated, on May 18, 2017. MOAS"s protocol of torching the smuggling boats after debarkation prevents smugglers from reusing the vessel. (Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

In frontline countries such as Italy, this unlawful activity has been causing growing public anger. Elsewhere in Europe, the notion that these NGOs are not entirely angelic in their operations is taking longer to sink in. But compare the reaction to them -- in receipt as they continue to be of large quantities of public and governmental money -- with a group that has a different view to that of the NGOs.

At the start of this summer, a group called "Defend Europe" raised money to hire and sail a ship off the coast of Italy. The ship aimed to deter migrants from crossing the Mediterranean. One activist was recorded saying, "We want to get a crew, equip a boat and set sail to the Mediterranean ocean to chase down the enemies of Europe." Some of the other characters and rhetoric associated with this movement may be equally unsavoury. For some weeks, the "Defend Europe" vessel, with banners prominently displayed, has floated in the Mediterranean and told people in a variety of languages, "No Way. You will not make Europe home" and "Stop human trafficking."

Now one may abhor this tactic, approve of it, or feel a whole range of emotions in between. The treatment of "Defend Europe", however, compared to the pro-migration NGOs, is startling. In recent weeks, when the "Defend Europe" vessel had some minor technical problems, it caused undisguised glee in the Western media. The suggestion that a pro-migration NGO vessel might have to rescue it caused even more delight. Now the group has had its sources of funding withdrawn. Not that "Defend Europe" would ever have received government aid. Far from it. But this past week, the US-based crowd-funding website Patreon shut down the group"s profile page, making it impossible for them to raise funds through it. The ostensible cause was that Patreon believed the actions of "Defend Europe" were "likely to cause loss of life."

It may easily be argued, of course, that pro-migration NGOs that are colluding with smuggling gangs and assisting them in their work are "likely to cause loss of life", if not in the Mediterranean then in encouraging thousands of people to give their money to smuggling gangs and encouraging millions more to set out for a new life in a continent which is increasingly less likely to receive them with warmth. A group that seeks to oppose Europe"s current self-destructive trajectory can now not even source independent financial support. Groups, however, that continue to push Europe along its current trajectory continue to get all the official support they need. In the difference in reaction to these two groups lies a significant part of the story of the ruin of a continent.

"The Perfect Storm Is Brewing": Goldman Warns Italy Has The Lowest Capacity To Absorb Migrants

While Europe"s economy and capital markets have been spared any major shocks in the past year, and in fact European GDP has been on a surprisingly resilient uptrend in recent quarters led higher by the relentless German export-growth dynamo (courtesy of the very, very low Deutsche Mark and a lot of broke Greeks), an old and recurring problem has re-emerged, one which threatens the stability and cohesion of the European Union itself: the latest surge of refugees which, arriving mostly from North Africa in recent months, has made Italy its primary landfall target resulting in a surge in migrant arrivals on Italian shores. However, with the rest of Europe largely shutting its borders to this refugee influx forcing Rome to deal with what many in Italy see as an unwelcome presence, a distinct sense of bad-will has been floating around Europe in recent months as Rome"s pleas for more solidarity from its European peers have been stubbornly ignored. Meanwhile, Italy has accepted nearly 100,000 refugees in the first six months of the year and the number is rapidly rising.

Now, a new report issued by Goldman Sachs will likely pour even more gasoline on the fire, as it finds that just as Rome alleges, "Italy has the lowest capacity to absorb migrants among the major EU economies. This is measured using three indicators of integration: (1) economic integration; (2) social integration; and (3) policy effectiveness."

While hardly new for regular readers, this is how Goldman lays out the problem:

migrant flows into Europe are changing and countries differ in their capacity to integrate new arrivals. An increasing proportion of migrants crossing the Mediterranean Sea come from sub-Saharan Africa rather than fleeing conflict in the Middle East. Increasingly, the destination countries are Italy and Spain, with reduced flows through Greece and the western Balkans towards Germany, largely as a result of the EU-Turkey agreement and the imposition of stricter border controls.

As a result of this constant migrant flow, successful integration is naturally a key objective for policymakers, who hope that the influx will boost output growth in the long run while seeking ways to mitigate the short-run costs caused by disruption to the labour market and wider society.

 Here, Goldman"s analysts take a broad view of the integration process and provide an initial comparison of countries’ capacity for immigration: "We focus on Italy throughout, which has become the main destination country of trans-Mediterranean migrant flows and faces a general election next May."  Goldman also adds that successful integration matters for the bank"s macroeconomic outlook two reasons.

First, the bulk of migrant flows into the EU this year have been in the central Mediterranean, oriented towards Italy. Second, the country already faces economic and political pressures from its struggling public finances and the rise of populism ahead of next year’s election.

And yet, what Goldman finds is that the nation that has been "tasked" with accepting the vast majority of migrants in 2017 is the one that is most unsuited to do just that. Here are the summary findings:

• Economic integration, measured by relative immigrant-native unemployment rates, appears particularly low in Italy, Greece, Spain and Hungary. These countries suffer from high unemployment across the population but immigrants bear a disproportionate amount of the burden. In contrast, the UK has the lowest immigrant-native unemployment gap.


• Social integration, roughly estimated using information on public attitudes towards immigration, is weakest in the countries most affected by the migration crisis. While the crisis shows signs of easing for countries such as Greece, it is intensifying in Italy.


• Policy effectiveness, measured by independent research by the MIPEX organisation, is lowest in Greece and Hungary.

Some additional details, first on economic integration:

Economic integration can be measured by assimilation to the labour market. Exhibit 3 shows the immigrant-native gap in unemployment rate for 1st and 2nd generation migrants across several EU countries. The immigrant-native gap in unemployment provides an initial and general measure of economic integration, with full integration implied by no gap at all. Looking at the change in this gap across generations provides a dynamic measure of the integration process: a smaller gap for the children of migrants relative to their parents implies integration over generations. In this way, Exhibit 3 illustrates two ways to analyse economic integration across countries:

• By considering the bars in levels, one can compare the level n of integration across countries (by generation).


• By considering the difference between generations, once can compare the rate of integration across countries.

Spain and Greece show the lowest levels of economic integration, implied by the widest immigrant-native gaps. Italy and Hungary show the lowest rates of economic integration, with 2nd generation migrants faring even worse than their parents on average. These four countries also have the highest unemployment rates among the population as a whole. The point to be made is that within these countries, unemployment disproportionately affects the immigrant population and there is a clear lack of catch-up by the 2nd generation.

Ok, so Italy is hardly the place to park refugees if one hopes to see them integrated economically. What about socially? Here is the answer:

Social integration can be estimated by the public’s attitude towards immigration. Social cohesion is hard to measure but can be estimated from certain kinds of information produced by surveys. Existing research focuses on two indicators: the discrimination against migrants and the host country’s degree of acceptance of immigration. We choose to consider the latter. Exhibit 4 shows public sentiment in the EU toward new immigrants, based on the Eurobarometer 2017.

 

Prima facie, Hungary appears the most socially hostile to migrants, with Italy and Greece also expressing robust anti-immigration sentiment. In all countries, negative attitudes have been provoked by the migration crisis. Yet while migrant flows to Hungary and Greece have slowed, in Italy they are picking up. According to the Italian interior ministry, migration figures in Italy are on track to exceed the annual record of 181,000 immigrants set in 2016 and widespread violence in Libya has driven the number of asylum seekers crossing the central Mediterranean to surge by 44% compared with the same period last year

So far, Italy - along with Hungary - appears to be the most inhospitable nation in Europe when it comes to two key core verticals: economical and social.  How about the inverse: which European nations have the most effective policies, an indicator of a government"s ability to promote integration. Goldman"s answer:

The Migration Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) is an indicator produced by the Migration Policy Group and the Barcelona Centre for International Affairs. It uses a range of policy areas to evaluate and compare how governments are promoting integration. Exhibit 5 shows the overall score MIPEX has given each country. Greece and Hungary have the least effective policies for integrating migrants. In 2013, Greece passed legislation obstructing the right of immigrants to vote at the national level, while a repeal of birth-right citizenship laws has left many children born in Greece without equal rights. Italy performs moderately well against this indicator and MIPEX recognises that it has made the first steps towards legal integration and equal rights. However, the challenge of achieving this in practice remains; although most long-term migrants have found jobs, they are often below their level of qualification.

Which brings us to Goldman"s conclusion on which European nation is best suited to accept the thousands of daily migrant arrivals: in short - it"s not Italy, or as Goldman puts it "Overall, Italy has the lowest capacity to absorb migrants compared with the major EU economies."

From the indicators used, Italy appears the least economically and socially integrated, despite performing marginally better than the EU average according to the MIPEX score for policy effectiveness. Our findings are highly significant in light of this year’s surge in trans-Mediterranean migration to Italy and the country’s vulnerable public finances. Moreover, Italy’s handling of the migration crisis will be a central issue when the country goes to the polls in the general election next May, particularly as a driving force behind support for populist opposition parties.

And while Goldman reiterates the long-held conventional credo that "the influx of migrants to Italy has the potential to bring economic benefits in the long run and offers a means to counter the country’s demographic problems (Italy’s population shrunk for the second year running in 2017)" it admits that "realising these benefits is conditional on successful economic and social integration" something which most likely will not happen as Goldman"s "analysis casts doubts over Italy’s capacity to achieve this and suggests the ‘perfect storm’ is brewing."

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.

The French Government Built A Migrant Shelter In This Small Town – Residents Responded By Building A Wall Around It

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

When most people consider how many migrants have entered Europe in recent years, they probably assume that the whole continent is a beacon of tolerance and love for foreigners who are seeking a better way of life. But a more accurate picture of Europe would suggest that the only thing most Europeans are tolerant of, is their corrupt governments who aren’t willing to close the borders. That tolerance is quickly wearing thin however, as most Westerners reject the migrants, who are burdening the social fabric of their communities.

Which would explain a recent incident in the French town of Séméac, where the government recently bought a hotel in the hopes of turning it into a migrant shelter.

Protesters in a town in southwest France have built a nearly-two-metre-high wall around the entrance to a disused hotel to try to prevent it being turned into a migrant shelter.

Working under cover of darkness, a few dozen residents of Semeac in the Pyrenees mountains erected a wall 18 metres (60 feet) long and 1.8 metres high barring access to the Formule 1 hotel, a spokesman for the group confirmed.

“We not against taking in migrants,” Laurent Teixeira told AFP. “But you have to take account of the citizens.”

The locals are frustrated with the government for not being transparent with the public, and not really having a plan for the migrants. The French government is currently under pressure to establish as many shelters as they can, in anticipation of another spike in migration later this summer.

Teixeira accused the authorities of failing to consult residents about the project to turn the former budget hotel into a shelter for up to 85 migrants.

“Nothing is planned for the migrants’ daily life,” he said, arguing that schools and other public services in the town of 5,000 people would be unable to cope with the newcomers.

Protester Hugo Lacoue, a tobacconist, said he was opposed to migrants being hosted in a suburban neighbourhood.

But it’s safe to say that those aren’t the only reasons why these French villagers are concerned about the migrant shelter. The politically correct media in that country probably wouldn’t publish the fears that are really on the minds of these people.

Like the fact that rapes and other violent crimes are skyrocketing in countries that have accepted the migrants with open arms.

Or that the countries which haven’t brought in so many migrants don’t have any terrorist attacks.

Or that migrant shelters often devolve into drunken riots where refugees burn down their own shelters, and assault police officers and their fellow refugees. Surely, that’s not something that this small town is equipped to deal with.

But most importantly, the media will never report on the fact that walls really do work.

Sweden Wins Award For 'Best Country To Be A Migrant'

We have written frequently on the topic of migrant crime in Sweden over the past several months.  From attacks on journalists and cops, to the development of so-called "no-go zones" where basic police and postal services have been suspended due to soaring crime levels, parts of the otherwise quite Nordic country have been literally transformed by an influx of migrants over the past several years. 

So, what"s attracting the droves of migrants to the frozen tundra of northern Europe.  Well, luckily U.S. News & World Report has an official ranking to help answer that question and turns out it"s not just the allure of Swedish soccer, or their fans...

As US News points out today, 80 countries around the globe were ranked based on their appeal to migrants and Sweden "won" the coveted top spot.  Criteria for the ranking ranged from economic stability and income equality to the availability of language training and the amount of remittances that migrants sent back to their home countries.

To determine the Best Countries to Be an Immigrant, U.S. News assessed international perceptions of a country, as well as immigration policy and economic data.

More than 21,000 people from all regions of the world participated in the Best Countries survey, in which they assessed how closely they associated 80 countries with specific characteristics. Four of these – "economically stable," "good job market," "income equality" and "is a place I would live" – were included in the Best Countries to Be an Immigrant ranking.

Countries also were scored in relation to others on the share of migrants in their population; the amount of remittances the migrants they host sent home; and graded on a United Nations assessment of integration measures provided for immigrants, such as language training and transfers of job certifications, and the rationale behind current integration policies.

Scores for these eight factors on a 100-point scale were averaged together for an overall score.

Of course, we suspect that not everyone in Sweden is excited about this new honor, including that Swedish police officer who recently offered up a little more truth than people are used to when he posted an epic rant on Facebook about immigrant crimes plaguing his police department and his country.  Here is a small taste of the rant (full post here):

"Here we go; this is what I’ve handled from Monday-Friday this week: rape, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, rape-assault and rape, extortion, blackmail, assault, violence against police, threats to police, drug crime, drugs, crime, felony, attempted murder, rape again, extortion again and ill-treatment."

“Suspected perpetrators; Ali Mohammed, Mahmod, Mohammed, Mohammed Ali, again, again, again. Christopher… what, is it true? Yes, a Swedish name snuck in on the edges of a drug crime. Mohammed, Mahmod Ali, again and again."

“Countries representing all the crimes this week: Iraq, Iraq, Turkey, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Somalia, Syria again, Somalia, unknown, unknown country, Sweden. Half of the suspects, we can’t be sure because they don’t have any valid papers. Which in itself usually means that they’re lying about their nationality and identity.”

As the Washington Post points out, Sweden wasn"t the only Nordic country to fare well in the ranking, with Norway, Finland and Denmark all winning a spot in the top 10 largely due to favorable perceptions found in the survey about their economies and commitment to income equality. Other countries, such as Canada and Switzerland, were given positive marks not only for their economy but also integration measures for immigrants, such as language training.

Meanwhile, the U.S. scored well because of the large numbers of remittances. Britain ranked even lower — 17th — despite its strong economy, because its immigration policy specifically favored its own nationals. U.S. News noted that it was one of only six countries that had similar policies, including Saudi Arabia and Myanmar.

To summarize, the countries with the best economies and highest entitlement spending per capita allow their migrants the greatest opportunity to export domestic wealth and are therefore the "winners."