Category Archives: Miscellaneous

What Iran shows us about the global jihadist movement

According to the very State Department that pushed so hard for the Obama administration’s Iran appeasement deal, that same nation upon whom we have lavished over $100 billion, lobbied on behalf of and promised protection of its nuclear infrastructure, remains the world’s leading state sponsor of terror.While many are aware of the pernicious activities of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard across the globe, and the Khameinist regime’s support of Shia jihadist groups like Hezbollah, lesser discussed is Iranian collaboration with Sunni jihadists.

For the latest evidence of an alliance that might surprise those who view Sunni and Shia Muslims as diametrically opposed mortal enemies, look no further than the recent news out of the U.S. Treasury Department.

As reported in the always-insightful Omri Ceren’s latest dispatch, Treasury announced that it was imposing sanctions on three senior Al Qaeda members stationed in Iran.

According to the Treasury press release, it took such action to “disrupt the operations, fundraising, and support networks that help al-Qaida move money and operatives from South Asia and across the Middle East.”

As Ceren highlights, one such Al Qaeda operative, Abu Bakr Muhammad Muhammad Ghumayn, controlled the financing and organization of Al Qaeda in Iran.

Another operative, Yisra Muhammad Ibrahim Bayumi, engaged in direct dialogue with the Iranian government, serving as a mediator. He was “reportedly involved in freeing al-Qaida members in Iran.”

It strains credulity to believe that a closed Shia nation like Iran, often competing against Sunni forces, would be unaware of Al Qaeda officers within its borders. And in this case we have clear evidence that it was comfortable with Al Qaeda operating on its soil because Iranian authorities were negotiating with the aforementioned Bayumi.

What are we to make of this revelation?

While Sunni and Shia Islamic supremacists may differ in terms of theology, strategies and tactics, their overarching goals are very much aligned – namely ensuring the dominance of Islam throughout the world by killing the infidel or forcing him to submit, with a focus on the “Great” and “Little Satans” of the United States and Israel.

The case of Israel, threatened by Sunni jihadists like Hamas on the one hand, and Shia jihadists like Hezbollah on the other, is most illustrative of this fact.

Another element of this story is relevant in light of the fact that 9/11 is again a live subject now that the federal government has finally released the 28 pages of its report regarding Saudi involvement in the attack.

Much though such ties have been ignored in our Ben Rhodes fantasy world, there is ample compelling evidence indicating Iranian support for the 9/11 attack as well.

In fact in 2011, U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels held in Havlish, et al. v. bin Laden, et al. that “Iran and Hezbollah materially and directly supported Al Qaeda in the September 11, 2001 attacks,” holding the Islamic Republic responsible for damages to family members of the attack’s victims.

The facts and findings of that court case detail chapter and verse the extensive ties between Iran and its proxies and Sunni jihadists spanning multiple decades and covering all manner of operations and activities. Some of the key high-level findings from page 15 of the report are chronicled below:

Bridging the divide

Foreign policy necessarily involves dealing with hostile regimes, and sometimes making common cause with them in order to advance greater interests.

But there is little to indicate that as concerns the global jihadist threat, comprised of state and non-state actors Sunni and Shia each with competing but often overlapping interests and motivations, that America has the faintest clue as to how best to proceed in its national interest, whether in the form of the 9/11-tied Saudis or the 9/11-tied Iranians.

With great regularity we appear to be on every side of every conflict, evincing a lack of clarity about ourselves and our enemies.

For the jihadists are playing a game of “Heads I win, tails you lose.”

They know what they want and are doing everything in their power to achieve it. Does America?

– See more at:

The threat of a Super-EMP

legacy 5
The threat is thanks to North Korea, but Iran is reported to have a base just south of the Chinese border.

James Hyde co-authored this two-part article. For part one, click here.

It’s a staggering prediction, something reminiscent of a post-apocalyptic, mega-disaster movie that has the winnowing characters scavenging for anything they can in a desperate search for water and food. But this is no movie, and it isn’t fiction. This frightening estimate has the consensus of the U.S. government, well-known, pro-electric-grid “protectionists” screaming into the winds of congressional resistance, and a number of think tanks that follow this issue closely.

Peter Pry, a former CIA analyst and executive director of the congressionally chartered EMP Commission shared the estimate withNewsmax:

“‘Within 12 months of an EMP attack or a massive solar flare between two-thirds to 90 percent of the U.S. population would perish’ from lack of electricity, Pry said, quoting the conclusions from the EMP Commission’s two public reports.”

That’s well beyond a stunning and chilling augury, one that should make Congress take the threat so seriously that it puts aside all else and acts immediately to protect our electric grid. But so far—and we’ve known about the effects of this weapon since the Starfish Prime nuclear test in 1962—it hasn’t generated the kind of legislation that would help prevent an extinction-level event.

In this, the second of two articles about the threat, we discuss how the threat comes from the detonation of a Super-EMP device 300 miles in our exo-atmosphere and right over the center of the United States. Because a Super-EMP is an EMP “device” as opposed to a conventional nuclear weapon, the nuclear yield is far less, while its load of gamma rays is far greater. That is what makes it so utterly destructive. The damage caused by the E1 pulse to our electric infrastructure is complete, long lasting (a decade or more) and incalculable cost-wise. It’s the aftermath of the impact that would open the door wide to the grim reaper carrying an enormous, razor-sharp scythe, especially for city and suburban dwellers.

The gamma rays focused on the center of the country radiate out horizontally, not into the ground. They then form a circular impact on the nation’s entire electric grid depending on its altitude (300 miles up seems optimum).  The E1 wave is an extremely fast electrical pulse that will take out objects dependent upon electrical conductivity, such as many cars (save for those manufactured before 1974), most of the technological gadgets to which we are addicted, and, unfortunately, far too many military assets that will be useless after the attack. Importantly, greater damage is done to such targets when they are powered on at the time the pulse hits the earth.

The truly existential threat of a Super-EMP attack on the U.S. comes courtesy of North Korea, a disgruntled and paranoid rogue state that has been trading nuclear secrets with Iran in a mutual pact to destroy us. As we pointed out in Part One of these two articles, Iran has pulled a brilliant end run around Obama, Kerry and the P5+1, and is reported to have a base just south of the Chinese border.

Kim Jong Un harbors schizophrenic delusions, chief among them is his belief that an imminent attack is coming from the U.S. and South Korea. Kim, likely with Iran nuclear physicists standing beside him, tested what may have been a hydrogen-based Super-EMP on January 6 of this year. Evidence of its highly efficient and destructive power came in just three words from North Korean news broadcasts. Their experts contend that they will destroy us, “all at once.”

All at once? The phrase struck us like an epiphanic sledge hammer when we read the story on Breitbart:

“In a commentary feature on its website, North Korea’s state media outlet boasted that its nation’s scientists are in ‘high spirits’ to detonate nuclear weapons capable of destroying America ‘all at once.’”

No nuclear or any other kind of attack could destroy the entire country “all at once” except a Super-EMP with the core component being hydrogen. A thermonuclear bomb is 1,000 times more powerful than the strongest conventional nuclear weapon. But the North Koreans were not acting on their own and the yield from the test was minimized.

At first, the reports from those testing air samples in the area claimed that it wasn’t a hydrogen bomb test. However, retesting had scientists saying that there was evidence of elements decidedly hydrogen in origin, but it was not a major thermonuclear bomb. So what was tested?

We realized when that question arose that the test hadn’t been of a full-blown hydrogen bomb, but a far smaller thermonuclear device that would serve as a Super-EMP weapon possibly developed by the North Koreans and the Iranians working together.

That degree of evil-axis cooperation brings a wintry chill up and down the spines of those of us who have studied this threat in depth. Those doing all they can to get Congress to take action on this issue include: R. James Woolsey, ex-CIA director, and Peter Vincent Pry, who established theEMP Task Force, a site where you’ll find a map detailing the EMP threat from North Korea.

The video highlights how North Korea’s KSM-3 satellite  (already circling the globe) which has, “the capability to deliver a small nuclear warhead to intercontinental ranges–against any nation on Earth.” It’s small enough to put into a faux satellite. The KSM-3 already passes over the U.S. from south to north, instead of west to east. That’s due in part to the absence of a strong missile defense system protecting our southern flank.

There are many other experts worthy of mention, in particular, Frank Gaffney, author of Guilty Knowledge, a book that highlights the U.S. government’s knowledge of the vulnerability of the grid, but willfully neglects to address the threat.

Rep. Trent Franks (R-A.Z.), a member of Congress has been tireless in his efforts to pass a number of bills to fix the problem. He has carried the torch to illuminate the issue in Congress numerous times, including his introduction of HR 2417, the Secure High-Voltage Infrastructure for Electricity from Lethal Damage Act (Shield Act), which has stalled in the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

The cost to protect the grid is modest at $20 to $30 billion. But there’s an added problem. Some 3,200 utility companies who would have to cooperate are risk averse to pass the cost onto ratepayers. If they did so, the actual cost would be $3.30 per month, according to Testimony of George H. Baker before the Joint Hearing on “The EMP Threat: The State of Preparedness against the Threat of an Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Event” May 13, 2015. Considering the nature of the threat, that’s a tiny price for a huge problem. A story published by The Hill explains the difficulty of getting serious legislative action to the president’s desk.

A Super-EMP attack or a cyberattack that takes out the grid is extremely serious. It’s made all the more so because the North Koreans are about to test launch another missile. They could very easily be launching a new satellite, this one carrying a Super-EMP device, in which case, if it is detonated over the center of the country, it could leave us in the dark “all at once” for as long as a decade or more.

James Hyde began his journalism career as managing editor of Financial Computing and Analytical Instruments and Computers magazines. He later became managing editor of United States Banker magazine, and won a Jesse H. Neal Award in 1986. Since then he has written one book and two syndicated columns that were circulated worldwide. He is a political analyst and has worked for a number of major political figures.

Amil Imani is an Iranian-American writer, poet, satirist, novelist, essayist, literary translator, public speaker and political analyst who has been writing and speaking out about the danger of radical Islam internationally. He has become a formidable voice in the USA against the danger of global jihad and Islamization of America. He maintains a website at and wrote the book Obama Meets Ahmadinejad and a new thriller Operation Persian Gulf

Amil Imani can be reached at Hyde can be reached at

Mark Zuckerberg aka FaceBook Backs Immigration Bill to Allow Unlimited Muslim Immigration

In January of 2015, a handful of Senators quietly introduced new legislation in Congress that would allow for virtually unlimited Muslim immigration into the United States – lifting caps entirely on several categories of visas favored by immigrants from Muslim countries.

The Mark Zuckerberg-backed legislation, S.153, is called the Immigration Innovation Act (or I-Squared), and it has taken on new significance following the terrorist attacks in San Bernardino. Those attacks were only possible due to Muslim immigration: Syed Farook is reportedly the child of Pakistani immigrants, and his jihadi bride, Tashfeen Malik, was reportedly born in Pakistan.

The I-Squared bill is significant for a second reason. One of the Senators who introduced the bill is also running for President:

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) 79%

. And several of Rubio’s most prominent financial backers are among the bill’s boosters.

I-Squared would expand five major visa categories used by Muslim migrants: the F-1 foreign student visa, green cards for foreign students, green cards for their family members, the H-1B foreign worker visa, and the H-4 spousal visa.


Under current law, the F-1 student visa operates under the assumption that foreign students have no intention of abandoning their home countries. It is intended to operate similar to a foreign exchange program, where the students return home after their studies are concluded. Current statute reads that an F-1 visa holder is “an alien having a residence in a foreign country which he has no intention of abandoning…” 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(F)(i) [emphasis added]

The I-Squared bill turns that on its head by removing the presumption that F-1 visa applicants return to their home country—rendering admissible a larger pool of foreign applicants, who openly and explicitly have no intention of returning home following their studies. It then allows an unlimited number of foreign students to get lifetime green cards (Section 303). Because the F-1 visa is uncapped, these changes are revolutionary.

Section 201 of the I-Squared bill, “Authorization of dual intent,” states, “the Immigration and Nationality Act… is amended by striking ‘which he has no intention of abandoning’” from the definition of an F-1 student visa.


This sea change to the F-1 student visa will vastly expand the use of a program that is already a pipeline for Muslim immigration.

According to State Department data, in 2014 the U.S. issued more than 70,000 student visas to foreign nationals from predominantly Muslim countries, as well as more than an additional 56,000 student visas to India.

As Pew noted in 2013, “India has the world’s second-largest Muslim population in raw numbers (roughly 176 million) though Muslims make up just 14.4% of India’s total population.” Because “there are an estimated 1.6 billion Muslims around the world,” according to Pew, this would mean that more than one in every ten Muslims worldwide resides in India (or 11% of the total Muslim population). Pew projects that by 2050, India, “is expected have 311 million Muslims… making it the country with the largest population of Muslims in the world.”

If the demographics of the visa issuances match the demographics of the nation, nearly 8,000 F-1 student visas went to Muslim Indians last year (14% of 56,000)—meaning that in fiscal year 2014, the U.S. likely issued around 78,000 student visas to Muslim students on F-1 visas.

Crucially, I-Squared’s changes to the F-1 visa program are paired with green card changes that would allow an unlimited number of foreign students on temporary F-1 visas to get lifetime green cards for themselves and their families. In other words: the bill takes an existing pipeline for Muslim migration—the temporary foreign student visa—expands that program, and then creates a new, uncapped immigration program that will allow these temporary Muslim students to receive lifetime green cards and a path to citizenship.

This new provision, however, contradicts the very logic underlying the student visa program. As immigration attorney John Miano and Michelle Malkin explain in their new book Sold Out, the purpose of the student visa was predicated upon the idea that the student return home after study:

The noble idea of educating international students and exposing them to American culture to “foster understanding” and “peace” rested on those students’ returning to their homelands after graduation to share their positive experience and apply what they had learned to improve their own countries… the original intent of the F-1 program was to invest in foreign students’ education in order to benefit America by creating goodwill ambassadors who return to their home countries, not to create cheap workers for U.S. companies.


Section 201(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act outlines categories of “aliens not subject to numerical limitations” for green cards.

One of the most radical rewrites to immigration law entailed in Rubio’s bill is the expansion of that provision to include an uncapped green card program for foreign students– this policy has been variously called “instant green cards” or “stapling green cards to diplomas.”

Section 303 of the I-Squared bill states that “Section 201(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act… is amended by adding… aliens who have earned a master’s or higher degree in a field listed on the STEM Designated Degree Program List published by the Department of Homeland Security on the Student Exchange Visitor Program website from an institution of higher education…” as a category of “aliens not subject to direct numerical limitation.”


Under current law, the U.S. already issues an historic one million green cards every year, with about 9 in 10 of those green cards going to non-Western migrants from Asia, Africa, Latin America, or the Middle East. This change would allow that one million figure to be expanded without limit for any foreign national who merely enters the United States on an F-1 visa and obtains a one-year Master’s certification in any field loosely connected with Science, Technology, Engineering, or Mathematics (STEM)—fields widely utilized by Muslim migrants.

According to State Department data, in 2014 the United States issued 32,006 F-1 visas to Saudi Arabia; 6,973 to Turkey; 4,278 to Kuwait; 2,137 to Bangladesh; 1,308 to Egypt; and 3,280 to Iran. According the Institute of International Education’s 2015 report, 79.2% of Iranian international students are pursing a field of study that qualifies as STEM.

Howard Professor Ron Hira has explained how an instant green card program for foreign STEM graduates is “likely to induce a large influx of new foreign students.”

“Many foreign students will see this as a brief and inexpensive path toward a green card,” Hira has said. “All of the STEM green card proposals would create a clear signal to future markets that obtaining a green card is a matter of getting such a degree.”

Immigration scholars have expressed concern that the I-Squared bill expands a dangerous visa program and combines it with a citizenship program—posing significant challenges for national security. When Breitbart News asked immigration attorney Ian Smith specifically about the process of denaturalization (stripping citizenship from an alien), Smith explained that under current law it’s “near impossible” for someone who radicalizes after gaining citizenship to be denaturalized.

While Rubio’s bill would create an uncapped green card and citizenship program for student visa holders, other lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have long raised concerns about the student visa program and the dangers it poses to national security.

Immediately following the 9/11 attack, Democratic Senator

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)


called for a six-month moratorium on student visas, telling ABC, “I have some concern about why we want to educate people from countries that sponsor terrorism, that provide money, that aid and abet, that provide support for terrorists,” Feinstein said.   In 2011, Feinstein noted, “several of the 9/11 terrorists entered the country using the student visa program, as did Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari, who… was arrested and charged with attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction. Among other sites, Aldawsari’s targets included ex-President George W. Bush and various targets in New York City. Aldawsari came to the U.S. on a student visa in 2008 and was student at Texas Tech University.”  

In 2014, Sen. Chuck Grassley warned that, “While there’s been a dramatic increase in the number of student visas granted, Immigration and Customs Enforcement hasn’t made it a priority to keep tabs on these visa holders… The 1993 World Trade Center Bombing, September 11 and the Boston bombing should have taught us that this program needs vigilant oversight and reform, but instead the program has expanded without the proper safeguards in place.”

NumbersUSA has similarly highlighted the threat:

Student visa holder Quazi Nafis was arrested [in October of 2012] for trying to blow up the Federal Reserve building in New York City… Nafis, a Bangladeshi national, acquired a student visa in December 2011… Terrorists started using student visas to gain legal access to the United States in the 1990s. Before the 1993 terrorist attack against the World Trade Center, Evad Ismoil had entered the country on a student visa to attend Wichita State University. He dropped out of college, only to resurface driving the van full of explosives during the attack. Several of the terrorists in the September 11, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center, such as Mohammed Atta and Marwan Alshehhi, used student visas.

In theory, Aafia Siddiqui—or “Lady Al Qaeda”— might have been a prime candidate for Rubio’s new green card program. A Pakistani immigrant who, according to reports, came to the United States on a student visa, Siddiqui rigorously pursued her education in STEM: she was a biology major at MIT with a scholarship and then went on to get her PhD in neuroscience from Brandeis. Yet beyond simply being an accomplished STEM scholar, her alleged ties to terror are equally notable. By 2004, “she not only made it on to the FBI’s list, possibly the lone female at Al Qaeda’s highest echelon, but was dubbed by US officials as the ‘most wanted woman in the world’ before she was convicted in 2010 of the attempted murder of American agents,” the Boston Globe reports.

Evidently regarding Siddiqui with high-esteem, ISIS has repeatedly demanded her release. In a piece titled “Lady Al Qaeda: The American-educated PhD the Islamic State Desperately Wants Freed,” the Washington Post writes, “Islamic State leaders want their lady back. They want her back so badly, jihadists said they would have traded James Foley for Siddiqui.”

Muhammad Sidiqqui / Public Domain

Photo by Muhammad Sidiqqui / Public Domain

Moreover, as the Washington Post reports, an upcoming book by Diego Gambetta, a sociologist at the European University Institute in Italy, and Steffen Hertog, an associate professor at the London School of Economics, documents how: “engineers are much more prone to become members of violent terrorist organizations. More than twice as many members of violent Islamist organizations have engineering degrees as have degrees in Islamic studies. Nearly half of those terrorists who had degrees had degrees in engineering.”

Under I-Squared, all that would be necessary for any Muslim foreign national to obtain lifetime residency in the United States, eventual voting citizenship, and permanent welfare eligibility would be for them to find any accredited American institution willing to accept their money and bestow any kind of vague STEM certification upon them. These “instant green cards” for Muslim nationals have no numerical cap whatsoever.

Indeed, the deluge of foreign nationals could be especially large given that this bill leaves the definition of what qualifies as STEM exclusively up to the executive branch— referring solely to a government website for its definition [“a field listed on the STEM Designated Degree Program List published by the Department of Homeland Security on the Student and Exchange Visitor Program website”]. Because I-Squared essentially gives the federal government unfettered freedom to determine what fields of study qualify, labor experts tell Breitbart that this would allow for a “definition creep” with more and more fields added to the list over time.

As it is now, the government website already includes areas of study perhaps not typically associated with the industry-crafted image of foreign STEM work: “Nutrition Sciences, Developmental and Child Psychology, Management Science, Business Statistics, Exercise Physiology, Natural Resources/Conservation, and Digital Communication and Media/Multimedia.”

John Miano told Breitbart exclusively that I-Squared seems to have intentionally left the list of qualifying degrees open-ended—failing to provide even a clear definition of what STEM stands for. Indeed, the first mention of “Science, Technology, Engineering and Math” (i.e. STEM) does not come until the third to last section of the bill—and even then, it is not in reference to defining the fields of study that would be exempt from green card caps.

“The way you can tell the bill was written by lobbyists is that it never even defines what STEM even means,” Miano said. “Does it [i.e. the ‘E’ in STEM] stand for English? Is ‘political science’ a ‘science’? The bill never provides a formal definition of STEM… Each ambiguity in the bill opens the door up to an agency interpreting the ambiguity, which opens the door to an industry lobbyist, who will go back to the agency and anything that the lobbyist can push through will become law.”

Moreover, even if a foreign student were to receive an advanced degree in a legitimate STEM field—which experts explain is a big “if”—there is nothing in the I-Squared bill that would require the foreign national to subsequently work in a STEM field. Once a citizen, that student would have full discretion to do whatever he pleases—he could become a hairdresser, a truck driver, a struggling artist, criminal or terrorist, etc. Or, he could choose not to work at all—as a U.S. citizen, he is entitled to every single federal welfare benefit. In that sense, it is a guaranteed global path to U.S. welfare.

Even worse, stapling a pathway to citizenship to a diploma and empowering universities to act as “gatekeeper for issuing green cards” would enable the creation of diploma mills, Ron Hira has warned. Such policies would “create major new markets for universities. Institutions would create and expand degree programs that are specifically tailored to foreign students interested in staying permanently. Master’s programs are very short in duration, as short as 12 months, and fairly inexpensive to run.” Hira explained, “Some universities will see this as an opportunity of selling landed status rather than as education.”

“The F-1 program, as it is known, has become a profit center for universities,” said U.C. Davis’ Norm Matloff. “International students are attractive for strapped colleges because they tend to pay full tuition or, in the case of public institutions, pay more than full price in out-of-states rates.”

This perhaps explains why 14 higher education associations wrote a letter endorsing Rubio’s I-Squared Act.

As Rutgers’ Hal Salzman told the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, “California State University-East Bay stopped admitting state residents into its graduate programs and admitted almost exclusively international students into its computer science program (which is about 90 percent international students). This was the University’s explicitly stated strategy to increase revenue to make up for budget deficits by excluding state residents who would pay lower tuition rates than out-of-state and international students… This appears to be a business model pursued by a number of colleges and universities across the country.”

Indeed, as the Wall Street Journal noted last month, universities are increasingly favoring the admission of foreign students—making it harder for young Americans to get accepted into college in their own country:

With foreigners enrolling in U.S. schools at record numbers, students such as Noah Hernandez, a freshman at the University of California, San Diego, are getting a global view of the world without leaving their home state… The growth in international students has contributed to tighter admission standards at many UC campuses. The UC system accepted 62% of in-state applicants in the 2014 school year, down from 84% four years earlier… This doesn’t sit right with families whose children have been denied admission: They say they have been paying California taxes for decades and that state universities have lost sight of their mission.


Although Rubio continues to repeat his Gang of Eight talking point about “merit-based” immigration, his new industry-backed plan would substantially increase family chain migration.

Throughout the Gang of Eight push to expand immigration, Rubio repeatedly claimed his La Raza-backed bill would promote a “merit-based immigration system” when, in reality, analysis revealed it would have released a tidal wave of family-based chain migration.

Similarly, Section 303 of Rubio’s new immigration expansion bill exempts family members of employment-based immigrants from numerical limitation. Section 303 of the bill states that “Section 201(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act… is amended by adding… aliens who are the spouse or a child of an alien admitted as an employment-based immigrant” as a category of “aliens not subject to direct numerical limitation”.


As NumbersUSA’s Director of Government Relations Rosemary Jenks told Breitbart News, Rubio’s new bill revives a controversial provision of his Gang of Eight bill to increase immigration on top of today’s record-splitting highs:

Spouses/minor children of employment-based immigrants generally represent just over half (usually 53-55%) of the visa category. It is a standard argument of those who want to significantly increase immigration that only the alien chosen for his skills, not the spouse/children, should be counted under the cap. Thus, you find this provision in a whole bunch of bills by mass immigration proponents. It’s been in virtually every comprehensive bill since the early 2000s, along with virtually every bill seeking to increase employment-based immigration.

This means that Muslim migrants entering the United States on an employment-based visa could collectively bring in an unlimited number of their Muslim relatives. Since these Muslim relatives are not coming to the U.S. to work in STEM fields, they would be free to take any U.S. job—or, conversely, not work at all. As green card holders, they would all be on a path to lifetime welfare access, citizenship, and U.S. voting booths. According to Pew, only 11% of American Muslims identify as Republican or leaning-Republican—making them one of the most reliable Democrat voting blocs in the world.

The possibility of unlimited Muslim migration is all the more compounded by the bill’s elimination [section 301(a)] of the per-country caps for employment-based immigrants, spouses, and their children—thus, increasing immigration from India, which has a large Muslim population and is currently restricted by the per-country caps.


Section 101 of the bill, titled “Market-based H-1B visa limits,” would completely eliminate the current H-1B cap. It would do this by immediately increasing the H-1B caps from 65,000 to 115,000— but, should the cap be hit, allowing it soar up to 195,000— tripling, in total, the number of base H-1Bs.

In addition to tripling the allotment of the ordinary H-1B category, Norm Matloff has explained that “the I-Squared bill… [contains a measure that] would in essence allow an unlimited number of H-1Bs, in that it would remove the cap, currently 20,000 per year, on the special H-1B category for foreign students earning STEM degrees at U.S. universities.”

Moreover, Section 103(a) of the bill, titled “Deference to prior approvals,” would restrict DHS’ ability to reject visa renewals. As John Miano told Breitbart, these restrictions placed on law enforcement would turn the H-1B renewal process into a “rubber stamp process where immigrants could renew their visa and be approved instantly.” Miano said that the proposed change forces one to ask: “Why even have renewals at all?”

In Florida, the H-1B visa has been used to displace many of Sen. Rubio’s own constituents. Disney Corporation recently laid off 250 of its American employees and replaced them with lower-salaried Indian nationals brought into the country on an H-1B visa. Before the American workers were let go, however, they were forced to train their lower-skilled foreign replacements.

The I-Squared bill has been endorsed by the lobbying firm co-chaired by Disney’s CEO, Bob Iger.

By removing H-1B caps, this bill creates yet another theoretically unlimited avenue for Muslim migrants to enter the United States.

According to State Department data, in 2014 the U.S. admitted over 4,000 migrants from Muslim-majority countries on H-1B visas, plus an extra 108,000 H-1B migrants from India. If the demographics of the employment visas match the demographics of the country, this would mean that more than 15,000 H-1B visas went to Muslim Indians (14% of 108,000)—meaning that in fiscal year 2014, the U.S. likely issued around 19,000 H-1B visas to Muslim foreign workers.

According to an April 2015 Brookings Institution report, Seattle is one of the nation’s top ten metropolitan areas with the biggest share of H-1B workers. The Puget Sound Business Journal similarly notes: “The Washington state chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) estimates more than 30,000 Muslims live in the greater Seattle area.”

The Puget Sound Business Journal reports that Seattle’s local government and businesses have had to work to accommodate the growing influx of Muslims who observe sharia law. For instance, the Business Journal notes that Seattle Mayor Ed Murray’s housing committee released recommendations earlier this year, which “would help followers of Sharia law buy houses.”

The Business Journal writes that the influx of sharia-adherent Muslims has been acutely felt throughout Seattle’s tech sector, such as at corporations like Microsoft. Microsoft—according to USCIS data analyzed by Computerworld’s Patrick Thibodeau—is the 12th largest user of the H-1B program, having brought in 1,048 foreign workers on H-1Bs in 2013. In a report highlighting how a “new Seattle company helps Muslim tech employees save for retirement,” the Journal writes:

It’s estimated that more than 1,000 Muslims in the Puget Sound region work for Microsoft… and for those who closely follow their faith, it can be difficult to participate in the company’s retirement plan. That’s because Sharia law forbids them from investing in funds with holdings in companies that peddle pornography, alcohol and other vices. It’s almost impossible for retirement funds to guarantee all their investments are free from those kinds of businesses. This has become an issue for workers at other tech companies, too.

Other reports have separately documented the struggle to integrate large flows of unassimilated Muslim migrants into Seattle and its surrounding area. According to the Population Research Bureau, there are 25,000 girls and women in Washington state at risk of suffering the anti-Western practice of Female Genital Mutilation. That number could increase dramatically under Rubio’s vision.

Microsoft has extensively pushed for expanding the H-1B program— and has lobbied for I-Squared. Moreover, Bill Gates is also a founding member of Zuckerberg’s immigration lobbying firm that has endorsed I-Squared—describing the bill as “our gold standard for high tech reform.” As the Washington Examiner’s Byron York has reported, last year Microsoft was lobbying to increase the H-1B guest worker program at the same it had announced plans to lay off 18,000 workers.

Microsoft has also been the second largest contributor to Marco Rubio’s campaign committee since 2011—having donated $33,100, according to Open Secrets.


Section 102 “Employment authorization for dependents of H-1B nonimmigrants” states that “The Secretary of Homeland Security shall (i) authorize an alien spouse admitted under subparagraph (H)(i)(b) or (L)… who is accompanying or following to join the principal alien to engage in employment in the United States; and (ii) provide the spouse with an ‘employment authorized’ endorsement or other appropriate work permit.”


Thus, not only would the bill expand the opportunity for Muslim migrants to fill jobs currently occupied by Americans—like what happened at Disney—but it would allow them to get work permits for their spouses, as well.

This provision would codify a controversial executive action from President Obama unilaterally increasing the issuance of H-4 visas, which prompted this response from

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL)



Yet again, the Administration is acting unilaterally to change immigration law in a way that hurts American workers. Fifty million working-age Americans aren’t working… Yet the Administration is now going to immediately add almost 100,000 new guest workers to compete against unemployed Americans… It is good news for citizens in other countries who will be hired. But for struggling Americans, it will only reduce wages, lower job opportunities, and make it harder to scrape by.

Rubio’s decision to create a new program for Muslim spouses to enter the United States may come under scrutiny given that Tafsheen Malik came to the U.S. on a K-1 “fiancée” visa before joining her husband in killing 14 and wounding 17 others in a jihadist strike.


Rubio’s decision to push such an extraordinary expansion of Muslim migration is consistent with several other high-profile actions he has taken during his Senate career. Rubio’s Gang of Eight bill, for instance, contained multiple provisions to expand Muslim migration. As Daniel Horowitz has explained, “section 3405 (page 693) [of the Gang of Eight bill]… created an entire new pipeline for refugees.” Horowitz declared, “In totality, this bill would have created endless avenues for this president to bring in an unlimited numbers of Islamic immigrants from the most volatile corners of the world.” Rubio—who has not retreated from a single policy provision in the Gang of Eight bill—recently doubled down on his support for this refugee language.

Rubio has also recently called for admitting Syrian refugees into the United States and helped vote down a

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)


amendment to pause immigration from over 30 Muslim countries with jihadist movements.Muslim immigration—even without the expansions being pushed by Rubio and Zuckerberg—is already one of the fastest-growing blocs of new immigration.

As DHS data presented by the Senate Immigration Subcommittee has documented, “over the next five years, the U.S. can expect to issue more green cards to migrants from Muslim-majority nations than the population of Washington D.C. (660,000).”

A recent Pew report found that “nearly all Muslims in Afghanistan (99%) and most in Iraq (91%) and Pakistan (84%) support sharia law as official law.” Yet in the last five years, the U.S. has issued 83,000 green cards to Pakistan, 83,000 green cards to Iraq and 11,000 green cards to Afghanistan.

Reports have documented the assimilation difficulties that large-scale Muslim immigration has posed for the West.

Equality Now issued a report detailing how Muslim migration means half a million girls in the U.S. are now at risk of suffering the anti-Western practice of Female Genital Mutilation. A September 2015 Congressional report found that Minnesota, which has the largest Somali population in the country, also has the largest number of radicalized individuals who have attempted to take up arms and join ISIS in the fight against the West.

A 2011 study by the Tahirih Justice Center, titled “Forced Marriage in Immigrant Communities in the United States,” found that in the U.S. there are “as many as 3,000 known or suspected cases of [forced marriage] identified by survey respondents in just the last two years… potentially thousands of young women and girls from immigrant communities may face forced marriages each year in the United States.”

Earlier this year, Ayaan Hirsi Ali observed that Islamic “honor violence” has become prevalent in the United States: “What most Americans just don’t get is that such horrors happen here in the United States of America—and not just in faraway countries like Afghanistan or Somalia.” Hirsi Ali points to cases such as “twenty-year-old Noor al-Maleki from Phoenix, Arizona… [who] was killed when her father ran her over with his Jeep in a parking lot, crushing her body beneath its wheels. Police alleged that her father believed she had become ‘too westernized.’… [or 19-year-old] Fauzia Mohammad, who was stabbed eleven times by her brother in upstate New York because she wore ‘immodest clothing.’”

“The numbers seem very likely to rise in the years to come,” Hirsi Ali explained. “Immigration trends over the last ten years, show a significant increase in the number of people moving to the United States from countries with high-honor violence rates—notably Somalia… as well as Iraq.”

Andrew McCarthy has warned about the continued admission of “assimilation-resistant Muslim,” writing: “As we are seeing in France, and have seen elsewhere in Europe and the Middle East, jihadism thrives when it has a support system of sharia-adherent Muslims. In Europe this means – as it would mean here – enclaves of assimilation-resistant Muslims… it is from the assimilation-resistance Islamic communities that future ‘homegrown’ jihadists will emerge – and that is apart from the material and moral support jihadists get from like-minded Islamists in these communities.”

“This is entirely a numbers game,” Ann Corcoran told Breitbart News exclusively. “Even the next generation isn’t assimilating! The melting pot concept does not work for mass Muslim immigration. Between our refugee program, our student visas, our diversity lottery, etc.—for Islamic supremacists, it’s all about increasing their numbers in the United States.”

“This is the most serious issue our country has faced perhaps since our founding,” Corcoran explained. “Unlike policies like Obamacare or Common Core, where we can go back and fight them—this is irreversible. Once the population reaches a certain level, there’s no turning back.”

Rubio’s campaign theme, “A New American Century,” employs a euphemism commonly used to describe demographic transformation brought on by immigration. For instance, the immigration lobbying firm chaired by Rupert Murdoch and Bob Iger is called the “Partnership for A New American Economy.” The National Journal has launched “The Next America” project to chronicle America’s becoming a majority-minority country. The White House’s immigration initiative is called the “New Americans Project.” And the Latino Victory Foundation and the “National Partnership for New Americans” recently launched the “New American Democracy Campaign” to get as many immigrants as possible to vote.

Breitbart News reached out to Sen. Rubio’s campaign weeks ago to ask him about his support for the I-Squared bill. Breitbart News asked simply: “How does Sen. Rubio believe the Immigration Innovation Act will benefit the economy and U.S. tech workers?”

In a separate request, Breitbart News also asked Sen. Rubio’s team how “large-scale Muslim immigration will benefit the U.S.”

Rubio’s team has not yet replied to either question.