Immigration, Migrant, Refugee, Asylum Law Clean-up Required

By: Denise Simon – Founders Code

Okay, let us start with ‘catch and release’. MActually under GW Bush and Michael Chertoff, it was a policy of ‘catch and return’. That is until many home countries refused to take back their citizens. During that time, the United States had to have detention facilities to house these people until their case(s) could be worked through the various systems. Then the left decided there needed to be a lawsuit on the whole detention thing. Yup, it went to the Supreme Court and the decision was a time limit of 6 months of detention and then the case had to be resolved. Well, there were not enough judges, so ‘catch and release’ was tried, hoping they would show up to court… well 80% did not show up. Catch and release now remains.

Now we continue to hear new labels applied to people entering the United States by various methods including across the borders, by air and by ship. In fact more enter by air than any other means and overstay their visa. So, advertisements float around the world and especially in Central and South America on who to contact to get to the United States, how much it costs, what to do, what to say, what to have. Yup, advertisements and sadly that does include our diplomatic posts and embassies in regions of conflict(s). The buzzword today is ‘asylum’. Here is the rub on that…

People applying for asylum must first apply after they are provided an alien status and must prove why they cannot be returned to their home country. Over the years, that process has become twisted and no real proof or approval of the application is necessary especially in states where it is well known there are humanitarian issues. It should also be understood that asylum status is NOT a forever status as conditions can change, thus making it favorable for return to the home country. If that still proves impossible, coordination can be made with other countries that are not of origin to accept these people. President Clinton in 1994, when it came to Haitian and Cuban refugees, worked a deal to have many go to Suriname, Grenada, Barbados and St. Lucia. Further, he did a remarkable and clever thing… for those wanting to get out of their failed home state, he held hearings for their cases in their home country or aboard ships, so that they would not enter the U.S. in the first place.

The United States has about a 16-year waiting list for cases to get through the immigration court process, that is if and when people do show up.

Now for the international pressures of refugees from countries such as Honduras, Guatemala, Syria, Libya or Iran. The United States is a signatory to the United Nations Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. That DOES not force the United States to accept any refugee. It is time for the United States to make an annex condition stating a new and updated policy with regard to foreign nationals and refugees.

Check this: The Illegal Immigrant Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA, P.L. 104-208) made substantial changes to the asylum process: establishing expedited removal proceedings; codifying many regulatory changes; adding time limits on filing claims; and limiting judicial review in certain circumstances, but it did not alter the numerical limits on asylee adjustments. Okay, so perhaps we need a quota system. Well we have quota systems, so we need one that is law and enforced.

While we are at it, we need updated and concise cogent definitions of asylum. It cannot just be the word ‘fear’… that does not work or apply anymore. Heck people are borrowing children to fabricate a family and claim fear if forced to return… who is lying to who? Ever wonder why these people don’t apply to Mexico, Peru or Sri Lanka for refugee or asylum status? Just being snarky… Read more details here.

Now let us take a sample country like Honduras.

According to the State Department website, Honduras has some of the highest favorability ratings for the United States in the Western hemisphere. Sheesh, they should… why?

Several of our federal agencies give big money to Honduras, like the Department of Commerce and the Department of Agriculture. Then we have this agency that I watch constantly, The Millennium Challenge. Just in 2013 alone, MCC gave Honduras $15.6 million to improve public financial management and to create more effective and transparent public-private partnerships. What the heck does that mean? Trade between the United States and Honduras in 2015 was $10 billion.

Now, USAID gives money to Honduras, along with climate change money and military subsidies… oh yeah, did you know we have full control of our own air base in Honduras that we kinda share with the Honduran military? We have an estimated 700-1000 military personnel assigned to Soto Cano Air Base and our troops were living in air conditioned huts until about two years ago until we built condos for them… this time with running water.

So, what does our military even do in Honduras? Counter-narcotics… oh wait… isn’t that the reason all these Hondurans are leaving due to violent drug operations? We also do medical stuff like pediatric nutrition and dentistry via our military at Soto Cano, as well as weather prediction, fire protection and aircraft maintenance. From time to time we do patrol(s).

So, ask yourself, if the United States was not located in Honduras, or if USSCOM via Joint Task Bravo was not in Honduras for the last 35 years…what state would that state be in today? Well, in 2011, we should remember Operation Castaway. That was the Honduras version of Operation Fast and Furious. Ah yes, we do have FBI and ATF in Honduras even as recently as 2017 where trafficking weapons from places like North Carolina flows in and out of Honduras.

Perhaps it is time we fix the real problems in these home countries with the money we send there under our management and begin stopping failed nations like Honduras and the exodus problem causing our homeland problems.

Definitions, policies, laws and agreements need to be cleaned up for sure, country by country, document by document, agency by agency.


Scammed by a Black, a Woman and Now a 17 Year-Old

By: Lloyd Marcus

The ID (Investigation Discovery) channel reenacts real-life crime stories. I watched two stories in which single woman homeowners heard men breaking into their homes. In both incidents, the best the unarmed women could do was grab their phone, hide in their closet like scared rabbits and dial 911. My heart went out to the terrified defenseless women. If they had had a gun, the playing field would have been much more level.

Tragically, both women were found by their home invaders. While she screamed, cried, and begged for her life, the burglar pressed his pistol against one woman’s head and pulled the trigger, killing her instantly. In the second home-invasion, the burglar shot the woman over 10 times. She survived and praises God for her miraculous survival.

In both cases, these women would have had a fighting chance had they been armed with guns. I asked myself, why on earth does the American left so passionately want such women disarmed; defenseless, at the mercy of evil criminals. With leftists claiming to be extreme advocates for women, desiring to disarm women does not make logical sense. And yet, disarming every law abiding citizen in America is exactly what Leftists are trying to do, campaigning to demonize the NRA and gun-owners.

My fellow Americans, leftists only view you as pawns. Your lives are mere tools to use to further their anti-God, anti-freedom and anti-America agendas. Leftists are willing to sacrifice your well-being, best interest and lives to further leftists’ extreme causes and ideas. This is why leftists use everything that happens in life; every accident, tragic event and even the weather to move the ball toward their goals.

Exploiting the Florida school shooting, wacko leftist retired justice John Paul Stevens and other leftist nuts have called for the repeal of our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. https://bit.ly/2pXdYGV

Leftists also flood the media with deception and lies. Parroting fake news media, my relative ranted that you don’t need an assault weapon for hunting and home protection. She thinks current gun law allows nutcases to purchase a machine gun (assault weapon). Civilians cannot casually purchase machine guns. The AR15 which is hated by leftists requires the trigger to be pulled for each round fired. The AR15 is not a machine gun and has saved numerous homeowners lives.

Women defend themselves with guns against sexual abuse 200,000 times per year. Guns are used 80 times more often to save a life than to take a life. Of the 2,581,268 gun related incidents each year, 2,549,596 are self-defense. Only 31,000 are assaults. Eighty million American gun-owners kill 1500 criminals each year. Police kill 600 criminals annually. https://bit.ly/2JdBlDN

The term “assault weapon” is a made-up political term by gun haters to deceive people into thinking bad guys are legally buying machine guns. https://bit.ly/2GsZCEp Everything leftists try to sell us is always rooted in misdirected hate, irrational emotion, deception and lies.

While claiming he had no desire to take our guns, Obama deceptively tried to repeal our 2nd amendment right via the backdoor. Obama tried to ban traditional ammo. https://washex.am/2pWdb8Y

Like the Terminator robot in the movie, leftists never grow weary trying to overtake our country with their wacko ideas. They simply keep coming at us using different approaches and front-persons.

Insidiously, leftists lie saying, “You’re nuts, we’re not trying to take your guns. We only want another ‘commonsense’ gun law.” The tactic is called incremental-ism. Incrementally, we went from smoking sections to even tobacco-less vapor cigarettes being banned practically everywhere. I heard a new movie promoted on the radio. The announcer warned that the movie contained “historic smoking” as though seeing people smoking in buildings could be traumatic for viewers.

Incrementally, we went from leftists claiming homosexuals only wanted tolerance to preachers being jailed, Christians forced out of business and public schools teaching kids to try homosexuality. https://bit.ly/1QICy1E Parents are not allowed to opt out their children from LGBT indoctrination. https://bit.ly/2q3JAtJ

Leftists believe the masses are as shallow as they are — placing surface appearance above character. This is why leftists select front-persons based on race, gender and etc to be the face of leftists’ attacks on mainstream Americans. Leftists used Obama, a black. Then, leftists tried to use Hillary, a woman. Now, leftists are using David Hogg, a “yute”, to scam and bully the American people.

For example: Leftists used Obama as front-man. Obama’s skin color provided cover for him to unconstitutionally further leftists’ mission to transform America into a socialist/progressive nation. Opposing Obama was declared racist.

Leftists assumed Hillary would win the White House and they could use her gender for cover to continue implementing their agenda. Hillary and her fellow leftists still blame her crushing electoral defeat on misogyny. https://bit.ly/2EbJXqY

Leftists are now using a 17 year old as their front-person. Hiding behind David Hogg, leftists are using his age and victim status as cover to further their mission to disarm law abiding Americans. Hogg is allowed to spout false leftists’ talking points and make unconstitutional irrational demands with impunity. Leftists are gang attacking, seeking to silence and destroy anyone who dares offer facts, truth and logic that contradicts Hogg’s rants. According to leftists, disagreeing with Hogg makes you a hater of children and a gun nut. https://bit.ly/2Gq5zSj Yes folks, leftists arrogantly believe they can bully us into surrendering to their irrational emotion driven mission to disarm decent Americans.

As usual, rabid insane leftist aggressors are attacking the mainstream, in this case law abiding gun-owners, while portraying themselves as innocent victims of aggression from we everyday Americans.

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Help Lloyd spread the Truth: http://bit.ly/2kZqmUk


Perpetuating the Assault Weapon Lie

By: T.F. Stern | Self-Educated American

Image M-15 DEF Defensive Sporting Rifle courtesy of Armalite

For openers…the never-ending assault on the 2nd Amendment has been going on for a very long time.  It could be said that those pushing this agenda are beyond patient with their eyes open for any opportunity to move the individual’s right to own and bear arms into some dusty history book, a memory of things past.

If you haven’t been paying attention then perhaps a look at the newly revised definition of Assault Rifle as found in Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary might be a bit troubling for some.

Assault Rifle: any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire; also a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fire (bold type added for emphasis)

Does the word vague come to mind?  It should!  Keep in mind that sniper rifles used in the military are often blot action rather than fully automatic or even semi-automatic rifles.  So almost any rifle could be designated as looking like a military weapon later on down the road when the folks at Merriam-Webster alter the definition a little more to suit the communist agenda.

It wasn’t too long ago the New York Times came clean and admitted that 30 years ago the term Assault Weapon was a made-up term, created out of thin air so to speak to scare the average citizen into going along with a political movement to ban any weapon that looked scary.

Handguns were used in more than 80 percent of murders each year, but gun control advocates had failed to interest enough of the public in a handgun ban. Handguns were the weapons most likely to kill you, but they were associated by the public with self-defense. (In 2008, the Supreme Court said there was a constitutional right to keep a loaded handgun at home for self-defense.)

Banning sales of military-style weapons resonated with both legislators and the public: Civilians did not need to own guns designed for use in war zones.

If you haven’t figured it out yet, folks on the left can’t stand the 2nd Amendment and want to take away an individual’s right to own and bear arms.  They are willing to go for a piece at a time if they can’t do it all at once.

The use of trigger words (sorry for the intended pun) … trigger words that categorized look-alike weapons available to the general public as if they were the same as military grade weapons along with the alarming use of the term ‘war zones’ was enough to get the bill passed, even if it expired under the sunset clause after 10 years; the propaganda had worked.

I mentioned that the term Assault Weapon was created out of thin air; but it happened long before the 1990s.  The first recorded use came from NAZI Germany of all places.

According to Wikipedia:

“The term assault rifle is generally attributed to Adolf Hitler, who for propaganda purposes used the German word “Sturmgewehr” (which translates to “storm rifle” or “assault rifle”), as the new name for the MP43, subsequently known as the Sturmgewehr 44 or StG 44.”

For whatever reason the name stuck, perhaps because “Sturmgewehr” sounded threatening or more macho; but come to think of it, most words in German come off sounding threatening…never mind; it got signed off on and so that’s where we got the term assault rifle, at least that’s the story.

Jumping back to present day efforts to deprive average citizens from owning any assault rifle, a term which we now understand to be nothing more than a figment of the lefts very successful imagination and efforts; from the Chicago Tribune, suburban Deerfield, just north of Chicago, has given “owners of assault weapons living in north suburban Deerfield have until June 13 to remove the firearms from within village limits…”

“The new ordinance prohibits the possession, sale and manufacturing of certain types of assault weapons and large capacity magazines within the village, according to the ordinance.  One change from the law as it was originally discussed exempts retired police officers from the ban, according to Village Manager Kent Street.

Violations carry a fine of between $250 and $1,000 per day, according to Matthew Rose, the village attorney.  He said the fine is levied each day until there is compliance.”

Wasn’t it George Washington who explained that the general public should not only be armed; but be armed to the same extent as their government?  Why would a retired police officer’s 2nd Amendment rights be superior to any other citizen’s?

The 2nd Amendment is the target and once an item is placed on the communist agenda it never stops being a goal to achieve.  If it takes a year, ten years or several generations you can count on the folks on the left to seize any crisis and use that crisis to its advantage.


Foreign Espionage Spying On Cell Phones In Washington, DC

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

There was an investigation and the report is complete…but who has it, where is it? Between the FBI, Secret Service, DHS, Capitol Police as well as other agencies…why the suspense? Why is it still going on?

In related reading, this site published in November of 2017: Surveillance: China’s Big Brother, America’s Also?

U.S. Suspects Cellphone Spying Devices in Washington


(AP) — For the first time, the U.S. government has publicly acknowledged the existence in Washington of what appear to be rogue devices that foreign spies and criminals could be using to track individual cellphones and intercept calls and messages.

The use of what are known as cellphone-site simulators by foreign powers has long been a concern, but American intelligence and law enforcement agencies — which use such eavesdropping equipment themselves — have been silent on the issue until now.

In a March 26 letter to Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, the Department of Homeland Security acknowledged that last year it identified suspected unauthorized cell-site simulators in the nation’s capital. The agency said it had not determined the type of devices in use or who might have been operating them. Nor did it say how many it detected or where.

The agency’s response, obtained by The Associated Press from Wyden’s office, suggests little has been done about such equipment, known popularly as Stingrays after a brand common among U.S. police departments. The Federal Communications Commission, which regulates the nation’s airwaves, formed a task force on the subject four years ago, but it never produced a report and no longer meets regularly.

The devices work by tricking mobile devices into locking onto them instead of legitimate cell towers, revealing the exact location of a particular cellphone. More sophisticated versions can eavesdrop on calls by forcing phones to step down to older, unencrypted 2G wireless technology. Some attempt to plant malware.

They can cost anywhere from $1,000 to about $200,000. They are commonly the size of a briefcase; some are as small as a cellphone. They can be placed in a car next to a government building. The most powerful can be deployed in low-flying aircraft.

Thousands of members of the military, the NSA, the CIA, the FBI and the rest of the national-security apparatus live and work in the Washington area. The surveillance-savvy among them encrypt their phone and data communications and employ electronic countermeasures. But unsuspecting citizens could fall prey.

Wyden, a Democrat, wrote DHS in November requesting information about unauthorized use of the cell-site simulators.

The reply from DHS official Christopher Krebs noted that DHS had observed “anomalous activity” consistent with Stingrays in the Washington area. A DHS official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the letter has not been publicly released added that the devices were detected in a 90-day trial that began in January 2017 with equipment from a Las Vegas-based DHS contractor, ESD America .

Krebs, the top official in the department’s National Protection and Programs Directorate, noted in the letter that DHS lacks the equipment and funding to detect Stingrays even though their use by foreign governments “may threaten U.S. national and economic security.” The department did report its findings to “federal partners” Krebs did not name. That presumably includes the FBI.

The CEO of ESD America, Les Goldsmith, said his company has a relationship with DHS but would not comment further.

Legislators have been raising alarms about the use of Stingrays in the capital since at least 2014, when Goldsmith and other security-company researchers conducted public sweeps that located suspected unauthorized devices near the White House, the Supreme Court, the Commerce Department and the Pentagon, among other locations.

The executive branch, however, has shied away from even discussing the subject.

Aaron Turner, president of the mobile security consultancy Integricell, was among the experts who conducted the 2014 sweeps, in part to try to drum up business. Little has changed since, he said.

Like other major world capitals, he said, Washington is awash in unauthorized interception devices. Foreign embassies have free rein because they are on sovereign soil.

Every embassy “worth their salt” has a cell tower simulator installed, Turner said. They use them “to track interesting people that come toward their embassies.” The Russians’ equipment is so powerful it can track targets a mile away, he said.

Shutting down rogue Stingrays is an expensive proposition that would require wireless network upgrades the industry has been loath to pay for, security experts say. It could also lead to conflict with U.S. intelligence and law enforcement.

In addition to federal agencies, police departments use them in at least 25 states and the District of Columbia, according to the American Civil Liberties Union.

Wyden said in a statement Tuesday that “leaving security to the phone companies has proven to be disastrous.” He added that the FCC has refused to hold the industry accountable “despite repeated warnings and clear evidence that our phone networks are being exploited by foreign governments and hackers.”

After the 2014 news reports about Stingrays in Washington, Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla, wrote the FCC in alarm. In a reply, then-FCC chairman Tom Wheeler said the agency had created a task force to combat illicit and unauthorized use of the devices. In that letter, the FCC did not say it had identified such use itself, but cited media reports of the security sweeps.

That task force appears to have accomplished little. A former adviser to Wheeler, Gigi Sohn, said there was no political will to tackle the issue against opposition from the intelligence community and local police forces that were using the devices “willy-nilly.”

“To the extent that there is a major problem here, it’s largely due to the FCC not doing its job,” said Laura Moy of the Center on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown University. The agency, she said, should be requiring wireless carriers to protect their networks from such security threats and “ensuring that anyone transmitting over licensed spectrum actually has a license to do it.”

FCC spokesman Neil Grace, however, said the agency’s only role is “certifying” such devices to ensure they don’t interfere with other wireless communications, much the way it does with phones and Wi-Fi routers.



DHS letter to Sen. Ron Wyden: http://apne.ws/eJ7JipM

DHS enclosure in letter to Sen. Ron Wyden: http://apne.ws/dBMPqWw