Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Yankee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    64

    Judges open up the flood gates to asylum seekers

    http://www.vdare.com/epstein/050414_mutilation.htm

    Female Genital Mutilation: Ninth Circuit Opens The Refugee Floodgates
    By Marcus Epstein

    [Recently by Marcus Epstein Immigration At CPAC: Grass Roots Restive, But Not Yet Revolting]

    On March 2, the notoriously liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Mohammed v. Gonzales [PDF] that women from countries which allow female circumcision are eligible for asylum in the United States.

    This ruling has many significant ramifications for American immigration policy. The first is the sheer number of people who could become potential asylum seekers in this country.

    Since 1996 the US government has recognized female genital mutilation as a form of gender persecution. However, asylum was only granted to girls and women who proved that there was reason to believe they could not avoid the practice in their homeland.

    What Mohammed vs. Gonzales establishes is that women who live in a society where female circumcision is permitted are subjected to "permanent and continuing harm." Therefore, their gender has become a "persecuted social group."

    All of them, even those already subjected to genital mutilation, can now seek refuge in the United States under this new classification.

    According to Amnesty International, more than 100 million women have been subjected to female genital mutilation. Within the same societies, there are millions more who have not yet endured the practice.

    All of them are now eligible for asylum.

    Even the supporters of Mohammed admit that allowing this many asylum seekers (not to mention their family members) is completely unrealistic.

    Stephen Knight, the coordinating attorney at the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies at Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, told the LA Times that the decisions would not "open the floodgates" because few women in such countries "have the wherewithal to get to the U.S." [Court Eases Asylum Rule for Genital Mutilation. By Henry Weinstein. March 11, 2005.]

    His statements are contradictory as he admits that the decision opens the floodgates by permitting literally hundreds of millions of women to immigrate to the United States, but denies that the open floodgates will allow much water to flow through.

    This is not to say that this will not change in the future, and I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if Mr. Knight [Send him mail] and his ilk demand that the U.S. taxpayers provide those women with "the wherewithal to get to the U.S."

    It is hard not to sympathize with women who undergo this horrific procedure, [To read a description of it, click here.] but it is important to recognize that accepting thousands, if not millions of African immigrants into this country is not the answer.

    Just days before the decision was reached, the Atlanta Journal Constitution published a story called "Ancient Rite Or A Wrong" about how "Genital cutting of girls becomes an issue in Georgia, nationwide."

    This problem is not because the descendants of Juliette Gordon Low have suddenly discovered a new hobby, but because this country has imported the most medieval and disgusting customs of the Third World into the country via their immigrants.

    Despite growing international opposition, immigrants are bringing the entrenched custom to Europe, Australia, Canada and the United States.

    In this country alone, an estimated 168,000 girls and women have undergone the procedure or are still at risk, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The number is growing as the number of immigrants from practicing countries grows.

    These immigrants are not adapting Western ideas about women; rather they are bringing their misogynistic views to America.

    Laila Mohamed, a former caseworker for Refugee Family Services in Clarkson told the AJC, "In [African immigrant communities] most of the women still are believing in this tradition."

    With political correctness, it becomes more and more difficult to stop horrific practices that are cultural norms among immigrants.

    For example, in Germany and Britain there has been a large problem with Honor Killingsâ€

  2. #2
    Yankee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    64
    I just want to cry. Between all the legal immigrants, the illegals and the asylum seekers this country will be totally overrun with people. I sympathize with these people that they want a better life but we can not take all these people here. Watch church groups or their kind start flying these women in.

  3. #3
    BlueHills's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    356
    Yankee,

    I agree with your conclusions and sentiments completely. I hadn't heard of this ruling before (I find myself avoiding the news more and more just to keep my anger in check), so I did a Google search just wanting to verify that the author's interpretation was correct. I couldn't find anything immediately to indicate that it wasn't. Even worse it seems that it is proposed, if not already in practice, that refugee status be granted to parents (maybe even prospective parents) of a child in those countries who say they object to FGM (would be no way of knowing if they actually do or not) -- so that would be instant asylum for entire families rather than just the woman or girl. It appears that even claims of domestic violence, with some limitations, are supposedly valid reasons for asylum.

    I think you are correct about the church groups too. Refugees are a cash cow for both Catholic and Lutheran Social Services. I can't remember the exact figure, but I believe these groups get between $1,700-$1,800 from the federal government for each refugee "settled" -- which in many cases doesn't mean doing much more than showing the refugee the location of the local welfare office.

    Congress has the authority to correct this and some other issues with overly lenient, broad, and generous asylum laws being as much of the source of the problem as the liberal interpretations of the 9th Circuit. I think it was also the 9th Circuit that ruled that criminal illegal aliens could only be incarcerated for some certain period of time if their home country would not accept them resulting in a bunch of criminal illegal aliens being released into the U.S.

    And, yeah, as the author implies our own successful culture that obviously works better than many others (if it didn't it wouldn't be the culture that created the place they want to come to) is being decimated, shredded, and replaced by cultures that work less well (if not, then why are the refugees trying to get away from those cultures -- yet in many cases then insist on being able to continue the same practices here?). But, our own brainwashed lunatics blabbering bumper sticker slogans tell us that there is "strength" in all that while never having to explain exactly what is stronger. Rampant immigration + multi-culturalism = social and environmental disaster. If we try to solve all the problems of the world by bringing them here, the only thing we will have here is all the problems of the world -- compounded. Looking back over the last 30 years, it is almost unbelievable how this nation has disintegrated into a mass of self-destructive insanity. That's true of "western" nations, in general, I guess. Heck, the French can't even say that their beautiful beloved France is being overrun by barbarians without being fined for telling the truth.

  4. #4
    Senior Member JuniusJnr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,557
    I was in Egypt when the first lady of the day went over there to mind their business. Around the time a CNN reporter got a poor family to let her televise the procedure. Those involved were later said to be murdered by other family members for bringing such shame on the family name.

    While I, too, feel sorry for the victims, I don't want them in my country. That same mentality brought down through the ages that allows this barbarous practice also fills the heads of the fledgling terrorists with the hate that consumes them and makes them aspire to be martyrs who fly airplanes filled with people into buildings filled with more people.

    I think it is as capricious for us to assume that we have the right to change the beliefs of other people as it is to offer asylum to their victims. Now, if we were to send in agitators to teach them how to fight for themselves, maybe it would be a condonable thing to me. But otherwise, it's time for us to stay home, mind our own business and solve our own problems. We don't need to point out other people's problems, invite them to come here to outrun their problems, and give them new and better avenues to attack us from within. I honestly don't believe those people love us for meddling in their buisness. I have personally looked into the eyes of the unwashed masses in a few of those countries. It isn't anything close to love that smolders there.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    san francisco
    Posts
    823
    It's sickening that the 9th Circuit is right here in my hometown of SF.What's even more sickening is that the judges in America are akin to the highpriests of ancient times;they wield more actual power than the people or the politicians.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •