Since September 11, 2001, ninety-four people have been killed in the United States in ten attacks carried out by a total of twelve radical Islamist terrorists. Each of the attackers was either an American citizen or a legal resident. More than half of the ninety-four murders occurred last year, when Omar Mateen, who was born on Long Island, killed forty-nine people at a night club in Orlando.
According to the comprehensive terrorism database maintained by the New America Foundation, since 9/11 there have been three hundred and ninety-six people involved in American terrorism cases, which New America defines as “individuals who are charged with or died engaging in jihadist terrorism or related activities inside the United States, and Americans accused of such activity abroad.” Eighty-three per cent of these individuals were American citizens or permanent residents. (Seventeen per cent were non-residents or had an unknown status.)
And yet, for more than two weeks, President Donald Trump and his top White House aides have been obsessed with highlighting a threat that does not exist: jihadist refugees and immigrants from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. Continue reading
Seventeen years after first setting foot in Saudi Arabia, Dominic Steck shipped his two cats and returned to Germany with his wife and school-age children, who hardly know their homeland.
As Saudi Arabia steps up efforts to employ more of its own people, and with economic growth slowing, the ranks of well-paid white-collar expatriates like Steck are thinning.
For them, the good times are over.
Steck said that to reduce costs, his employers “sent the Westerners” away.
“I have to admit, they will save a lot,” he told AFP with a chuckle.
Cost-cutting, financial problems and a drive to employ more Saudis have all led to a noticeable reduction in expatriate employment as the Arab world’s largest economy adjusts to lower crude prices.
Saudi Arabia, which exports more oil than any other country, since last year has pursued its “Vision 2030” economic diversification effort to broaden its investment and business base, while placing more Saudis in the private sector. Continue reading
Many of my white friends have become Radicalized What do white people got to be so angry about? ~ Chris Rock
A while back ago I spoke in great pain on how I’m losing friends fighting racism. …
Source: Why Isn’t Anyone Talking About The Radicalization of Whites?
In 2016, the US birthrate fell to 59.6 births per 1,000 women, the lowest ever recorded. Birth rates rise and fall over time, so the rate may not stay stuck at that level. It seems clear, however, that white nationalists like Trump’s evil genius Steve Bannon are doomed to be disappointed if they think that white birth rates can fuel the country’s economic and demographic growth.
Birth rates tend to level off in wealthy, industrial societies. The number of children per woman falls with urbanization and rising women’s status and education. Rural birth rates are often higher. Children are free farm labor, for instance, and farmers have lots of room for a family. Farmers have no retirement fund for the most part, and lots of children will support them in their old age. In the world’s farming towns and villages, women often marry early, dropping out of school if they were ever in school in the first place. That they are poorly educated and often lacking in societal esteem means that their husbands can keep them barefoot and pregnant. I have seen these conditions in rural areas of the global South. But I’m also the grandson of Appalachian farmers and my great-aunts had 12 and even 16 children.
The countries with the highest birth rates in the world still have large rural sectors. Egypt is over 50% rural. India is an astonishing 70% rural. Although China is 40% rural, fairly high, its government instituted a one-child policy decades ago, with some success. As a result of this artificial intervention, China is now declining in population and faces the prospect of greying. Continue reading
Polls taken in 2016 show the American public strongly backs Donald Trump’s dramatic immigration policy change, which says the United States will revive the traditional practice of excluding migrants hostile to Americans’ civic society and constitutional traditions.
That’s the dramatic policy change — not Trump’s other curbs on Muslim refugee inflow — which has caused a dramatic wave of TV-magnified protests by left-wing, Islamic and Latino groups.
Trump is doing what American voters prefer. In June 2015, for example, a poll showed that 56 percent of Americans want to exclude migrants who believe in Islam’s sharia law, which requires that democracy and civic norms by subordinated the Islamic scriptures. In contrast, only about 20 percent of Americans told the pollster that they did not oppose the immigration of people who believe in sharia law. Continue reading