Halal: How Non-Muslims are Being Forced to Pay for Islamic Expansion

In India, a country known to have a Hindu majority, meat vendors such as Licious and FreshToHome are selling only halal meat to their customer base, despite the fact that it is comprised of Hindus, Chritians, Sikhs, atheists, as well as, of course, Muslims.

In the United States, the Mayor of New York, Bill de Blasio, promises the availability of halal food to Muslims, while warning the Jews to cancel any celebrations. This, again, is a country with a majority of non-Muslim citizens.

Eateries including McDonalds, KFC, Subway and Pizza Express are international brands, operating across countries of different cultures, and cater to customers of all faiths, but have decided to go halal in many areas in order to court their Muslim buyers exclusively.

If you are based in the Americas, Europe, Australia or New Zealand, and are specifically and explicitly being offered halal meat only, know that you are being deceived and compelled to sponsor the purpose of Islam and its expansion, and could be involuntarily financing jihad in its many forms.

What is halal and Halal Certification?

The halal cut is the only method in which an animal can be slaughtered as dictated in the Islamic texts. The process of killing an animal by following the halal norms is as brutal as it gets; it subjects the animal to a prolonged and painful death, and it is appalling that animal welfare organizations such as PETA have done nothing about it yet.

For the uninitiated, the jugular vein, windpipe, or carotid artery of an alive and healthy animal is pierced and cut halfway through, and the animal is left aside till its body drains out all the blood. A Muslim recites an Islamic prayer during this process, and dedicates the animal or the meat obtained from its slaughter to Allah. This Islamic prayer is known as shahada or tasmiya. Here it must be noted that only a Muslim can perform the act of slaughter.

The finished products then are given a Halal Cerificate, which is a document issued by the Muslim authorities based in the exporting country. The Halal Certification attests that the food product in question fulfills the requirements necessitated by Islamic law for its consumption.

The discrimination rooted in the halal industry

While the progressive world evoked by the liberals can’t stress equality enough, imagine a thriving industry that employs people belonging to only one religion or faith system flourishing among us. Yes, that is the discriminatory world of halal, which is being thrust upon many societies of the world whether or not they have a Muslim majority.

By selling a commodity that has an Islamic prayer recited upon it, and has been dedicated to Allah, the vendors of halal products are imposing Islam on all their non-Muslim consumers.

The multi-million-dollar halal industry thriving on money shelved out by Christians, Hindus, Sikhs and all faith systems including atheists, deliberately, and as a principle, employs only Muslims. If this is not a screaming specimen of discrimination practiced by employers, I wonder what is. The halal industry operating in meat- and animal-related products by design and intention denies equal employment opportunity to able and skillful labors, solely for not being the followers of Islam.

This discrimination is not limited to the act of slaughtering the animal alone. As an industry, halal-certified food items go through various rounds of processing, namely, chopping and mincing, washing and cleaning, packaging, labeling, and other logistic services. The Islamic diktat mandates that every individual involved in each of these steps to be a Muslim for the finished product to be considered halal. In other words, it is a well-calculated deceit aimed at concentrating the accumulation of wealth to followers of only one religion.

By throwing their intolerant and insatiable tantrums, Muslims in countries with non-Muslim majorities have twisted the arm of secular systems in their favor. Islamic fundamentalists recognize the shame instilled in the hearts of civilized societies about being tagged Islamophobes, racists, and all other such epithets. They exploit this to the fullest until non-Muslims concede to their unfair demands.

A practice that was initially limited to the processing of non-vegetarian food, the halal monopoly, after occupying massive portions of the markets for non-vegetarian food, has made inroads into the vegetarian domain also. Spices, vegetable oil, cereals and many other grocery products that you may find at your local store bear the halal mark. Though non-Muslims are permitted in the production of these items, the halal certification authority employs Muslims explicitly, and levies a fee for inspecting the food product and issuing it the Halal Certificate. It is a business operation that generates money off all these vegetarian and non-vegetarian products by monopolizing the certification process.

Many Muslims won’t eat anything that’s not halal, while non-Muslims generally don’t care. That is how the entire population worldwide is playing into the hands of the Islamists. Just by buying a sandwich from your regular sandwich shop or preparing a meal for your family, you could be making Islamists wealthy. This wealth can then be invested in the service of Islam, its expansion, its religious ambition of world domination and more.

So non-Muslims may want to consider all the pros and cons before they buy halal.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

UK: Muslim prominent in scheme to bring hardline Islamic practices into schools given top police force post

Muslim migrant tells Danish man: “You Danes are being exterminated. You’re like animals…We will not integrate”

Sweden: Muslim migrant-linked gang violence increases despite coronavirus

UK pol asks government to account for rise in Muslim Brotherhood activity, taking advantage of coronavirus pandemic

Syrian author: “We have a trait that distinguishes us from all other peoples of the world, which is love of death”

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Trump Suggests He May Withhold Bailout Funds From States With Sanctuary Cities

President Donald Trump suggested Tuesday that he may withhold federal bailout funds from states with cities that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities.

Trump was asked at a White House event with business leaders about the idea of another round of stimulus money for U.S. taxpayers. The president said he liked the concept of payroll tax cuts, then shifted to the possibility of bailout funds for state governments.

“The problem with the states is we’re not looking to recover 25 years of bad management and give them the money they lost. That’s unfair to other states,” Trump said.

“If it is COVID-related, we can talk about it, but we want certain things also, including sanctuary city adjustments,” he continued. “We have so many people in sanctuary cities, which I don’t even think they are popular even by radical left because people are being protected that shouldn’t be protected and a lot of bad things are happening with sanctuary cities.”

The president continued to suggest that, for state governments to be eligible for more bailout aid, they would have to clamp down on their cities that refuse to work with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“If we are going to do something for states, I think they probably want something having to do with sanctuary cities and other different points that we can discuss a little bit later on,” he said.

Trump has previously tried to withhold funds from sanctuary cities.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in February that the White House is legally allowed to withhold millions of dollars in federal law enforcement grants from states and other localities that refuse to work with ICE, delivering a major victory for the administration in its fight against sanctuary jurisdictions.

Democrats, however, have tried to stop the administration from tying coronavirus aid to immigration policy.

The CARES Act, a $2.2. trillion stimulus relief package for Americans suffering from the coronavirus, included millions in law enforcement grants. Language in the bill specifically forbid Trump from withholding those funds from jurisdictions that have sanctuary policies in place.

In response to the coronavirus pandemic, the Trump administration has closed the northern and southern borders to all “nonessential” traffic, and the president has issued an executive order that bars many green card applications from foreign nationals living abroad.

RELATED ARTICLES:

What Good is Saving Lives if We’re Not Allowed to Live?

Coronavirus Pandemic + Trump Derangement Syndrome = Bad Math

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

$66 Mil, Federal Agents, National Guard Wasted on 2,500-Bed Camp That Averaged 30 Immigrants

Against the advice of frontline agents, the federal government opened a temporary immigration detention facility that was barely used and cost a ghastly $66 million to operate for just five months. During that time the tent encampment situated in a rural west Texas community near the Mexican border housed an average of just 30 detainees, according to a scathing federal audit that blasts the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for the waste. Though it has a 2,500-person capacity, the facility never held more than 66 illegal aliens on any given day, investigators from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found.

Not only did Customs and Border Protection (CBP) pay a private contractor tens of millions of dollars in facility costs, it spent “about $5.3 million for food services—the preparation and delivery of meals and snacks—it did not need,” the congressional probe reveals. In an enraging example, investigators write that, during the first three months, the government paid for about 675,000 meals despite ordering only 13,428 because there were not enough detainees. The U.S. also “leveraged significant federal personnel resources” that added up to an additional $6.7 million. This includes 75 unarmed guards to monitor the camp around the clock and officers from DHS agencies such as CBP, the Border Patrol (BP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as well as soldiers from the National Guard. Investigators did the math and figured that each illegal immigrant detainee that stayed at the camp was guarded by four soldiers, three security guards and at least one CBP agent. The resources “could have been allocated to other missions,” the GAO writes in its report.

Here is a breakdown of the federal officers wasted on this seldom-used immigrant detention camp in addition to the separately paid contract security guards. Twenty-one CBP agents responsible for facility operations, such as detainee intake, welfare checks and transportation, among other things. Eleven BP agents from the El Paso sector, one of the nation’s busiest, 10 CBP officers from the Office of Field Operations and five ICE agents to help coordinate on decisions made about individuals at the facility. On top of all that, 116 Texas National Guard soldiers were deployed to the encampment for logistical support such as meal distribution and monitoring security cameras, among other duties.

The facility in the El Paso County town of Tornillo was once used to detain illegal immigrant minors and was briefly reopened for single adults around the beginning of August 2019. It finally closed at the start of 2020, but not without fleecing American taxpayers. It’s not like the government didn’t have opportunities to shut it down earlier. In fact, initially the camp was only supposed to open for three months at a cost of $47 million and could have been closed based on the numbers—less than 1% of capacity. Instead, the feds extended the deal for two months at a cost of $19 million. “Border Patrol officials in the El Paso sector told us that the sector recommended to Border Patrol headquarters that the facility be closed and resources reallocated elsewhere for other CBP missions, due to the consistently low numbers of individuals held at the facility and the personnel resource requirements to operate the facility,” the GAO report states.

But, as we regularly see in government, there is often little consensus—or cooperation—among agencies, even when they exist under the same umbrella. In this case the DHS, the gargantuan agency created after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack. Congressional investigators write that CBP pushed to keep the Tornillo camp open though it was hardly used. The 60,000-employee agency is charged with keeping terrorists and their weapons out of the U.S. while facilitating lawful international travel and trade and apparently it pulled more weight than the frontline BP agents. “In contrast, CBP headquarters officials told us, despite the consistently low numbers of detainees held in the Tornillo facility, they decided to continue operations for the 2,500-person facility because they were operating in an environment with considerable uncertainty related to migrant flow and wanted to prepare for the possibility of increased apprehensions,” the report says.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Judicial Watch: Emails Suggest Obama FBI Knew McCain Leaked Trump Dossier

Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Court Orders Maryland to Release Complete Voter Registration Records

Judicial Watch’s Campaign for Clean Elections

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

COVID-19 Damage Control: At What Cost?

This is not to say that the virus does not exist, nor that pockets of America do not suffer disproportionately from the health consequences of COVID-19. As the hysteria-driven lockdowns of coronavirus persist, constitutional conservatives are slowly emerging from under their beds.

Spear carriers for social isolation and economic constriction in America have reacted to critics with the same derision accorded wearers of red MAGA hats.

In less than thirty days, Americans have been persuaded to swap Constitutionally-guaranteed civil liberties in exchange for the illusion of protection from a virus that has touched a relative few.

However, neither the vast majority of Americans, nor family, friends, or neighbors, have been infected by the virus. Yet, the American public is expected – no, required – to support a one-size-fits-all national response that, to this writer, is akin to killing a flea with an elephant gun.

As international travel is acknowledged as the world’s COVID-19 courier, I’m led to an inescapable conclusion:

COVID-19 is, first and foremost, an unintended consequence of three factors, in order of significance: Open Borders movement, business globalization, and international tourism.

Presently, the nation of Sweden has the most relaxed posture in western Europe regarding COVID-19; she has no lockdown whatsoever. Many media pundits are nearly gleeful in reports of higher infection rates in Sweden compared to the rest of Europe. However, in its daily briefings on the virus, the Sweden Department of Public Health insists that its infection rate would be much lower, had the government enacted screening measures early on, for Swedish vacationers returning from Italy.

According to the state department of health here in Minnesota, our rate of infection as a percentage of the population is the lowest of any state in the nation.

The mean age for deaths attributed to COVID-19 here is 86. Pre-existing health problems accompany nearly all the fatalities, and the majority have been residents of nursing homes.

This past week, several meatpacking companies throughout the Midwest – names like Smithfield, Cargill, Tyson, and Brazilian conglomerate JBS – reported closures of plants in which anywhere from 20 to 80 employees tested positive for corona virus. What do nursing homes and meatpacking plants share in common? The majority of workers in both industries – industries hard-hit by labor shortages- are recent arrivals from third-world nations; populations for whom international travel is commonplace.

New York City – the epicenter of COVID-19 in the United States – is also America’s symbol for the “nation of immigrants.” Additionally, she is a preeminent international business center. Business travelers from across the globe travel in and out of New York City by the hundreds every single day.

Finally, New York City may be the most popular tourist destination in America for foreign travelers. Walk down Fifth Avenue on any given weekend in Autumn if there is any doubt.

Is it any wonder, then, that COVID-19 fatalities in the New York Tri-state area make up as much as half of the nation’s COVID-related deaths?

What we are witnessing is the unintended consequence of unbridled, open borders migration, be it for business, escaping third world poverty, or tourism.

Globalists are hard at work on damage control. Their messengers of doomsday scenarios will claim victory regardless of the outcome. If the death count is high, they’ll say “we told you so”. If the death rate is low, they’ll take credit for convincing the world to heed their warnings.

And let’s not forget the icing on the cake.

Leftists the world over are not about to pass up an opportunity to exploit a crisis that could hurt the President’s re-election campaign. If turning a blind eye to civil liberties sends President Trump packing and derails the conservative/national sovereignty contingent, well, you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette. Collateral damaged be damned.

And the collateral damage? There are many versions of death. Nearly all agree that economic recovery will be long and drawn out, at best. The fallout will certainly be the death knell for many rural towns throughout the Midwest that have been hanging on by fingernails for years as it is. Hospitals will go broke. Record numbers face unemployment. Children are kept from schooling. Small retail businesses and the hospitality industry are crushed, many for good. Socializing is verboten. All in the name of containing a virus for which attributable deaths in New York’s Tri-state area (a population of nearly 20 million) make up roughly FIVE ONE HUNDREDTHS OF ONE PERCENT of its population.

My late mother, a nurse, had a one-liner of dark humor she picked up on the hospital floor: “the operation was a complete success, and the patient died.”

NOTE: This is a guest column by my friend Bob Enos of Willmar, Minnesota.  Regular readers of Refugee Resettlement Watch may remember Bob who compiled a great deal of information on the economic cost of migrant and refugee labor and wrote several articles for RRW in the past.

Watch Mr. Enos give a presentation to a county board meeting in 2015 about his economic analysis of the cost to the county and state of the immigrant labor that benefits large global corporations at taxpayers’ expense.

Go here to read previous posts at RRW either written by him or about his work.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Iowa: Republican candidate calls for redefining Islam as ‘militant cultural imperialism seeking world domination’

Phillips said he has spent time personally studying Islam and believes that when a Muslim swears the oath to the Constitution using the Quran, that negates the constitutional law because they are “sworn to turn this country into an Islamic country.”

Hamas-linked CAIR has already weighed in, calling upon “state and national Republican Party leaders to repudiate the Islamophobic, unconstitutional statements” made by Phillips. That was to be expected, but Rick Phillips’ statement opens up a needed debate on the nature of Islam and the potential impact of jihad and Sharia upon America. The larger question Phillips poses is this: if the normative belief of any religion contradicts the American Constitution, and if a religious practice teaches the supremacy of that faith over America, and in fact views America as part of the House of War (dar al harb), is that religion protected under the American Constitution? In other words, does the Constitution allow for sedition and subversion as long as it is carried out under the auspices of a religion?

Rick Phillips is being attacked as an “Islamophobe,” but the questions he raises have too long been swept under the rug, and they require attention for the survival of America and its values. This does not mean that it is prudent to revoke the religious status of Islam altogether, but his recommendations should lead to further discussion about treason vis-a-vis the general understanding of religious freedom today, the activities of Muslim Brotherhood operatives, the imposition of the “Islamophobia” subterfuge, the tolerance of radical mosques, and much more.

“Republican in Iowa’s 2nd District primary calls for Islam’s religious status to be revoked,” by Ian Richardson, Des Moines Register, April 13, 2020:

A Republican candidate for Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District, whose platform calls for redefining Islam as “militant cultural imperialism seeking world domination,” drew fire Monday for saying he doesn’t believe Islam is protected under the First Amendment.

Pella Republican Rick Phillips told Quad Cities television station WHBF that he believes the founding fathers were specifically talking about Christianity and its denominations when they established the freedom of religion outlined in the Bill of Rights.

“They were not talking about anti-Christian beliefs,” he said. “Now, if a person doesn’t want to believe in Christ, that’s their business. But to say that this First Amendment right includes all religions in the world, I think, is erroneous.”

Reached by the Des Moines Register Monday afternoon, Phillips said he has spent time personally studying Islam and believes that when a Muslim swears the oath to the Constitution using the Quran, that negates the constitutional law because they are “sworn to turn this country into an Islamic country.”

He said former president Barack Obama brought several Muslims into the country and there has been an increasing number of mosques built since 9/11.

“All this is packaged as if it’s harmless, and stuff like that,” he said. “But I really see this as an invasion to install a caliphate — an Islamic form of government — here.”

Both the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Muslim civil rights and advocacy group, and the Republican Party of Iowa have condemned Phillips’ remarks.

In a news release, Robert S. McCaw, director of government affairs for CAIR, called on state and national Republican Party leadership to “repudiate these Islamophobic, unconstitutional views.”

“The Constitution must protect Americans of all faiths,” he said. “The kind of hatred and anti-American views promoted by Mr. Phillips places in danger both constitutional protections of religious freedoms and the safety of ordinary American Muslims.”

Republican Party of Iowa spokesman Aaron Britt said in an email that Phillips’ comments “are not reflective of the views of the Republican Party of Iowa.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Jihad groups celebrate coronavirus as “small soldier of Allah,” deadly jihad attacks increase during lockdown

A Jerusalem Post Mistake Provokes Gleeful Tweets From the Anti-Israel Brigade

France: Muslim migrant threatens cops with knife, is shot dead

UK: MI5 aware of 43,000 terrorist suspects, not 23,000 as previously claimed

India: Muslims attack female doctor at Delhi hospital, doctors hide as Muslim mob tries to break open door

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Visit Ground Zero of Virus Response with DHS’s Chad Wolf

Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf has his hands full with the coronavirus, but there’s one group of people he’s not about to go into disaster relief mode without: clergy. Find out why he made them “essential personnel” as well as the challenges he’s encountered with a full-blown, 50-state emergency.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Sunday Is Coming’

VP Mike Pence: There’s ‘Always Hope’

EDITORS NOTE: This FRC-Action podcast is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

GEORGIA: Muslim plotted to wage jihad by blowing up the White House

“Taheb planned to conduct a terrorist attack on the White House as part of what he claimed was his obligation to engage in jihad.”

Doubtless Hamas-linked CAIR and other American Muslim groups are even as we speak explaining to Hasher Taheb that jihad is nothing more than dropping the kids off at school and blowing milk bubbles through a straw.

“Foiled Jihadist Pleads Guilty For Plotting To Blow Up White House With Anti-Tank Weapon,” by Andrew Kerr, Daily Caller, April 1, 2020:

A Georgia man who told an undercover FBI agent that he planned to wage “jihad” by attacking the White House with explosives pleaded guilty on Wednesday to a charge of attempting to destroy a building owned by the United States.

Hasher Jallal Taheb, 23, had also planned to target the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial and a synagogue prior to his arrest in January 2019, according to the Department of Justice.

“Taheb planned to conduct a terrorist attack on the White House as part of what he claimed was his obligation to engage in jihad,” Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers said Wednesday. “And that was just one of the iconic American landmarks he wanted to target.”

Taheb and the government agreed that he should receive a 15-year prison sentence, the Department of Justice said.

The would-be jihadist told an undercover FBI agent in October 2018 that he would lead a “martyrdom operation” at the White House, according to an FBI affidavit.

Two months later, in December, Taheb requested the undercover agent to obtain an arsenal of explosive devices and semiautomatic weapons, including a shoulder-fired anti-tank weapon, which he said he would use to blow a hole in the White House so they could “go in and take down as many (people) as they possibly could,” The New York Times reported….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Muslim Doctor: Zionists Use Coronavirus to Distract the World From Their Scheming

UK: Muslim migrant stabs 7-year-old girl to death, media never mentions nationality of murderer

America and The Enchantress Work Together to Undermine Iran!

France: Muslim migrant with “jihadist motive” goes on stabbing spree, two dead, several wounded

Germany: Muslim migrant randomly attacks two people with machete and axe, police say it’s “mental illness”

Muslim cleric: “May Allah send such a terrible virus to India that 100 to 200 to 500 million people die in India”

India: Muslim licks currency notes and wipes nose with them, says “Coronavirus is Allah’s punishment to you”

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Iran, Hezbollah Use Mexican Drug Cartels to Infiltrate U.S.

Iran and its terror proxy Hezbollah are financing Mexican drug cartels, smuggling people into America and recruiting them (for pay) as sleeper jihadist cells.

The recruits are mainly immigrants to Mexico from the Middle East, mostly from Lebanon where Hezbollah is based.

The coordinated operation is part of Iran’s war on America.

While Iran and Hezbollah are known to be active in the drug trade further south in Latin America, many are unaware that Iran, through its proxy Hezbollah, finances money laundering operations and human smuggling through the Mexican drug cartels at the U.S. border.

The operation is founded on the known fact that the U.S.-Mexican border is easy to penetrate, with tens of thousands of illegal immigrants and asylum seekers from Mexico and other Latin American countries coming into the U.S. from Mexico every month.

In southern Chiapas in Mexico, there are Muslim communities. These communities are made up of Syrians and Lebanese who migrated to Mexico decades ago as well as recent Mexican converts to Islam. In addition, Islam is gaining a foothold and in southern Mexico, with indigenous Mayans converting by the hundreds.

These communities are funded in the Diaspora and all contain sleeper cells. With the help of Mexican drug cartels, they finance and traffic extremists to the United States.

Canada has also become their target after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau lifted the visa requirement for Mexican citizens.

For example, Ayman Juma, a Lebanese citizen linked to Mexican drug cartels and involved in the drug trade in Latin America and Mexico, is a member of the Hezbollah. He is also associated with al-Qaeda.

Juma has smuggled tons of drugs from Mexico to the United States. The money made is partially used to fund terrorism, especially to prepare terrorist attacks against Israel as well as Hezbollah’s activities in America.

Hezbollah also managed to smuggle 200 illegal Lebanese immigrants through Mexico to America. All of them are part of a network of Iranian and Hezbollah supporters.

After his arrest, Mahmoud Youssef Kourani, a Lebanese citizen who infiltrated the United States through the Lebanese-Mexican smuggling network, admitted to the FBI that he spent part of his time in the United States to raise funds to support Hezbollah’s activities. His efforts netted $40,000 for the terror group.

According to what Korani also told the FBI, his brother is the head of Hezbollah’s military division.

The smuggling network is a clear example of the symbiotic relationship between the Mexican drug cartels and Hezbollah. Salim Bougader, for example, ran a Lebanese smuggling network in Mexico where he successfully brought in many enemies of the U.S. into the country.

For example, one of the many smuggled in by Bougader worked for a Hezbollah-funded television station that glorified suicide bombers and was part of an anti-American propaganda machine during the time when U.S. soldiers were dying while serving in the Middle East.

Hezbollah, in cooperation with Mexican drug cartels, also smuggles drugs to Europe and the Middle East, as well as to the United States. According to the U.S. Justice Department, it is obvious that Hezbollah views America as a source of funds for its operations.

Due to their partnership, it would be reasonable to assume that Hezbollah is also complicit with the Mexican drug cartels that are responsible for killing tens of thousands in Mexico every year in drug-related violence.

Although the United States has one of the most powerful intelligence services in the world and is not located in the Middle East, radical Islamic terrorism continues to threaten America — especially through Mexico, which has the largest border with America and one that is relatively easily to penetrate.

This leads one to the conclusion that, at the very least, a border wall is needed to protect the U.S.’ national security interests from the likes of Iran and Hezbollah.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Bernie Sanders Demands That Israel “Lift Its Restrictions on Humanitarian Aid,” But There Are No Such Restrictions

The book Ilhan Omar doesn’t want you to read

Hamas top dog: “If ventilators are not brought into Gaza, we’ll stop the breathing of six million Israelis”

Saudi Arabia accused of weaponizing mobile technologies against its citizens in the US

Turkey vows to continue forcing more migrants across the Greek border after coronavirus ends

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Will the Supremes Hear Ultimate States Rights Case?

Editor:  Sorry I haven’t been posting much here lately, I’ve been busy at RRW (as well as being distracted as I assume many of you are as well by of demands of just living these days!), but this is very important and I’m not sure how many of you read RRW.

Cross-posted this morning in an effort to find groups that could support the Thomas More Law Center’s legal petition to the Supreme Court.

I know it’s a little hard to believe that there are other things going on in America besides the virus crisis, but here is important news I should have mentioned sooner.

The Thomas Moore Law Center has filed a petition to attempt to get the Supreme Court to review the Tenth Amendment case that has been working its way through the legal system.

The heart of the case is the Tenth Amendment argument that the federal government has no Constitutional power to shift the cost of refugee resettlement onto state governments as it has been doing for decades.

TMLC is looking for other like-minded organizations to file amicus briefs in support of their argument which has far-reaching implications beyond just the refugee program!

Here is their press release from earlier this month.

Thomas More Law Center Petitions U.S. Supreme Court to Review Tennessee’s Challenge to Federal Refugee Resettlement Program

ANN ARBOR, MI – In what could have far reaching implications for all states seeking to withdraw from the federal refugee resettlement program, the Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”) collaborating with attorney John Bursch, filed a certiorari petition Monday, March 16 in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The petition asks the Court to hold that the Tennessee General Assembly has standing to challenge the constitutionality of the federal government’s forced state funding of the federal refugee resettlement program. ​

The Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”) is a national nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Both TMLC and Mr. Bursch are representing Tennessee without charge.

John Bursch, a former Michigan state solicitor general, nationally prominent appellate lawyer and past chair of the American Bar Association’s Council of Appellate Lawyers, authored the petition for certiorari.

The petition argues that the issues presented in the Tennessee case cut to the core of the Constitution’s protection of states against overreach by the federal government. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to appropriate state funds, contrary to the wishes of the state, to fund a federal program.

According to the petition: “If a state legislature cannot vindicate its rights in court when the federal government picks the state’s pocket and threatens the state if it dare stop providing funds, then federalism is a dead letter.”

The petition seeks to overturn a Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision which ruled that the General Assembly does not have institutional standing to challenge the constitutionality of the resettlement program. The cert petition does not challenge the federal government’s right to resettle refugees in Tennessee. What it objects to is forcing Tennessee taxpayers to pay the costs of the resettlement.

Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of TMLC, noted: “From the beginning, opposition to the federal refugee resettlement program has been about protecting Tennessee’s state sovereignty from impermissible federal interference. The federal government cannot simply commandeer state tax dollars to fund a purely federal program to extend benefits to noncitizens.”

Tennessee initially agreed to participate in the federal resettlement program because the federal government promised to reimburse 100 percent of the cost. In fact, Congress crafted the 1980 Refugee Act specifically intending that states not be taxed for programs they did not initiate and for which they were not responsible. As is often the case, however, the federal government began shrinking its financial support to the states and by 1991 eliminated it entirely. Due to the mounting costs the federal government was not covering as promised, Tennessee withdrew from the program effective June 30, 2008. But that didn’t stop the federal financial burden on Tennessee taxpayers. The federal government simply designated Catholic Charities of Tennessee, a non-governmental private organization, to continue the program with state dollars.

Between 2007 and the end of 2019, resettlement agencies pumped more than 15,000 refugees into Tennessee cities and towns. They came from Afghanistan, Bosnia, Burma, Central African Republic, Congo, Eritrea, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan 3 and many other countries. They often arrive from United Nations camps in poor health, with no job skills or English-language abilities.

The resulting cost to state taxpayers amounted to tens of millions of dollars. In 2015 alone, the refugee-related Medicaid costs paid by Tennessee tax dollars topped $30 million.

Instead of resolving the merits of Tennessee’s claim, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals sidestepped the pivotal constitutional issue concerning federalism by ruling that the Tennessee General Assembly lacked standing to bring its lawsuit.

The petition filed on March 16, 2020, argues that this was in error:

“The General Assembly is an institutional plaintiff asserting an institutional injury; the federal government has co-opted the General Assembly’s appropriation power and impaired its obligation to enact a balanced state budget. That is because the federal government can siphon state funds—to help pay for a federal program from which Tennessee has withdrawn.”

TMLC originally filed the federal lawsuit in March 2017 on behalf of the State of Tennessee, the Tennessee General Assembly, and state legislators Terri Lynn Weaver and John Stevens challenging the commandeering of millions in state taxpayer dollars for a purely federal program.

A U.S. district court judge dismissed the case on the federal government’s motion. The Sixth Circuit affirmed the lower court’s dismissal on the sole grounds that the General Assembly lacked standing. It never reached the merits of the case.

The Supreme Court now has a chance to shed light on the proper role of the states relative to the federal government—which is the bedrock constitutional principle of federalism.

The petition states: “The (Tennessee) General Assembly does not object to the federal resettlement program. It does not even object to the federal government resettling 4 refugees in Tennessee. The General Assembly does object to the federal government reaching its hand into Tennessee’s pocket to pay for the cost of such a program, particularly when the enabling legislation was enacted with the promise to reimburse states for all expenses incurred in this program.”

The federal government mandates that states provide Medicaid to otherwise eligible refugees, or face termination of federal benefits.

Accordingly, the federal government forces Tennessee to continue funding the refugee program by threatening to pull $7 billion in federal Medicaid funding, which represents 20 percent of the state’s total budget.

The argument in favor of the General Assembly’s standing is bolstered by the fact that both chambers of the Tennessee General Assembly voted overwhelmingly in 2016 in favor of filing a civil lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the federal refugee resettlement program. The State Senate passed Senate Joint Resolution 467, by a vote of 27-5 while the House voted 69-25 to pass the same resolution.

And without any waiting period they can automatically apply for all welfare programs provided by the State of Tennessee.

Read TMLC’s Petition for Certiorari here. 

If you know any organization that is in agreement with the broad-reaching tenets of the case, please have them contact the Thomas Moore Law Center immediately.  Time is short!

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Borders Matter to Dems! When the Border is Between New York and Rhode Island! LOL!

This story gave me a laugh (I know it is a serious issue)!  However, I can’t help chuckling about the Open Borders Dems who all of a sudden are becoming tribal about their people in their states. Civil liberties be damned!

Not sure how this fits into Frauds and Crooks, but what the heck, I’ll archive it in my ‘Politicians as frauds’ category.

From Bloomberg:

Rhode Island Police to Hunt Down New Yorkers Seeking Refuge

Rhode Island police began stopping cars with New York plates Friday. On Saturday, the National Guard will help them conduct house-to-house searches to find people who traveled from New York and demand 14 days of self-quarantine.

“Right now we have a pinpointed risk,” Governor Gina Raimondo said. “That risk is called New York City.”

[….]

Rhode Island has just over 200 [cases of COVID-19 at the time this story was posted—ed], and it has begun an aggressive campaign to keep the virus out and New Yorkers contained, over objections from civil liberties advocates.

Raimondo, a Democrat, said she had consulted lawyers and said while she couldn’t close the border, she felt confident she could enforce a quarantine.

Many New Yorkers have summer houses in Rhode Island, especially in tony Newport, and the governor said the authorities would be checking there.

“Yesterday I announced and today I reiterated: Anyone coming to Rhode Island in any way from New York must be quarantined,” the governor said. “By order. Will be enforced. Enforceable by law.”

More here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Minnesota: Woman Charged with Visa Fraud; Injured Illegals to Help them Get Special Visas

Michelle Malkin Blasts ADL for Demanding a Piece of the COVID-19 Relief Pie

Pressure on ICE to Release Detained Illegal Aliens; First Case of Alien with Coronavirus is in NJ

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

U.S. Finally Suspends Refugee Admissions

Finally.

It’s surreal that major cities and states are being shut down, and people ordered to stay in their homes, but the stream of migrants keeps on coming. And there’s a push to have the bailout/stimulus bills include even more immigration.

Finally we’re suspending refugee processing.

The United States is putting a temporary pause on refugee admissions in light of the coronavirus pandemic, according to two sources familiar with a Trump administration call to refugee organizations Wednesday morning.

The move comes after the International Organization for Migration, which is in charge of booking refugees on their travel, and the UN refugee agency announced a temporary suspension of resettlement travel. The agencies shared concerns in a statement Tuesday, saying international travel “could increase the exposure of refugees to the virus.”

At least they’ve got their priorities in order. We wouldn’t want the next Tsarnaev brothers to catch some coronavirus from the infidels.

A State Department spokesperson confirmed the temporary suspension, saying that the pause is expected to be in place from March 19 through April 6. Wednesday is the last day for refugee arrivals.

It’s incomprehensible that we still have refugees coming in. But every single American be have their doorknobs welded shut, but the migrant flow must go on. The Democrats won’t be able to turn more states blue without it while destroying the country.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Iran: Top Muslim cleric says reports that he approved use of Israeli coronavirus vaccine are “absolutely fake news”

More Coronavirus Craziness From Turkey

Pakistan: Muslim leader says coronavirus is wrath of Allah on non-Muslim nations that have persecuted Muslims

Iranian TV: Coronavirus may be “ethnic weapon” that US developed to target Iranians and Chinese

Islamic State calls on Allah to increase coronavirus torment against idolatrous nations

ISIS, Muslim Brotherhood fatwas forbid new churches, allow looting non-Muslim money and say women inferior to men

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Protecting America’s Borders Is Critical to Combating Coronavirus

In mid-March, President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador closed his country’s borders to foreigners. At that point, his country had zero confirmed cases of COVID-19, commonly known as the coronavirus.

Bukele closed down schools, temporarily shut down the international airport, and banned flights from Mexico when he believed the Mexican government allowed corona-positive passengers to board El Salvador-bound flights.

While these measures might seem extreme, to date El Salvador has only one confirmed case.

El Salvador’s actions demonstrate that borders play a key role in combating against the coronavirus.


In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>


On Friday, the U.S. and Mexico announced a joint agreement to close their shared border for nonessential travel over the next 30 days.

This means that for the next month, the U.S. Border Patrol will immediately return illegal immigrants across the border instead of processing and holding them in immigration facilities. Points of entry across the border are operational only for trade and commerce.

Closing the border to nonessential travel while still allowing trade was the right move by President Donald Trump.

The U.S. and Mexico are each other’s largest trade partners and with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, there are safety guarantees to protect lawful cross-border trade. Americans should be confident that necessary supply chains like food and manufactured goods are well-protected.

More importantly, this travel restriction protects border agents from unnecessary exposure to the coronavirus and reduces the workload they are experiencing from the border crisis.

It is also a smart move as it allows Customs and Border Protection to redirect manpower and sanitary resources that would have gone to inadmissible migrants toward first responders and critical industries.

Border agents are at the front lines and put their lives at risk every day protecting the country. With the coronavirus, they are now unwittingly risking their family, friends, and Homeland Security co-workers. Trump was right to give them this momentary reprieve and, should the crisis continue, the travel restrictions should be extended.

A recent Politico article reported that “nearly 500 Homeland Security employees are quarantined because of the novel coronavirus, and at least 13 are confirmed or presumed COVID-19 positive.”

Despite what partisan pundits in the mainstream media want you to think, travel restrictions are not racist or xenophobic. Currently, 41 countries have implemented travel restrictions or border control policies.

It is important to note that Friday’s border action was a joint agreement with Mexico. Hopefully, the Trump administration is deepening cooperation with Mexico on their domestic efforts to counter the coronavirus.

As cases of the virus increase in Mexico, the Mexican government is seriously falling behind on developing and executing a plan.

The capital city has only prohibited events larger than 1,000 people and recently allowed a concert of 70,000 people to take place.

Flight restrictions from high-risk countries are not in place and President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador continues traveling around the country, hugging and kissing supporters.

Recently, around 400 Mexican businessmen chartered private planes to Vail, Colorado, for a skiing trip. Upon return, a few tested positive for COVID-19. The Jalisco government is looking for them and asking them to self-isolate.

Should Mexico’s lack of internal enforcement continue, the U.S. should also consider banning flights.

In the midst of a highly contagious global pandemic, definitions of normalcy are rewritten. Viruses do not respect borders or boundaries. What was extreme a month ago is now prudent and responsible.

COMMENTARY BY

Ana Quintana is a senior policy analyst for Latin America and the Western Hemisphere in The Heritage Foundation’s Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies. Twitter: .

Lora Ries is a senior research fellow specializing in homeland security at The Heritage Foundation. Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLES:

As Businesses Struggle Amid COVID-19, Here’s the Conservative Way the Government Can Help

‘Not at This Time’: DHS Chief Says Nationwide Lockdown Not Happening Yet

What a Nurse Wants You to Know About the COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 Pandemic Highlights Importance of Economic Freedom

Top WHO Official Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus Won Election With China’s Help. Now He’s Running Interference For China On Coronavirus

Josh Hawley Says WHO Sided With China, Needs To Face ‘Consequences’


A Note for our Readers:

This is a critical year in the history of our country. With the country polarized and divided on a number of issues and with roughly half of the country clamoring for increased government control—over health care, socialism, increased regulations, and open borders—we must turn to America’s founding for the answers on how best to proceed into the future.

The Heritage Foundation has compiled input from more than 100 constitutional scholars and legal experts into the country’s most thorough and compelling review of the freedoms promised to us within the United States Constitution into a free digital guide called Heritage’s Guide to the Constitution.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET ACCESS NOW! >>


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The Media’s Appalling Fixation on Trump’s Use of ‘Chinese Virus’ [Video]

America is in a state of lockdown, the stock market is plummeting, and countless people around the world could get sick and die as the result of a deadly pandemic, but still many in the American press will use their time to give cover to the People’s Republic of China.

At a press conference Wednesday, President Donald Trump was asked why he used the phrase “Chinese virus” to describe the new coronavirus disease, known as COVID-19.

Cecilia Vega of ABC News asked: “Why do you keep calling this the Chinese virus, there are reports of dozens of incidents of bias against Chinese Americans in this country. Your own aide, [HHS] Secretary [Alex] Azar, says he does not use this term. He says ethnicity does not cause the virus. Why do you keep using this? A lot of people think it’s racist.”

Other reporters asked essentially the same question.


In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>


“Because it comes from China,” Trump responded to Vega. “It’s not racist at all. No, not at all. It comes from China, that’s why. It comes from China. I want to be accurate.”

Trump doubled down, explaining that he chose to use the “Chinese virus” phrase to push back on the idea, spread by Chinese officials, that the virus was started by the U.S. military.

Again, in this time of crisis, our esteemed press is asking the questions most on the minds of the American people, right?

Just unbelievable. What’s worse than the knee-jerk speech-policing in such a serious time is how it’s clearly being used for the purposes of China’s propaganda.

Trump is right about his rhetoric. The virus originated in Wuhan, China, and it’s appropriate to label it by where it came from, as we do with many other viruses.

Just a few months ago, most American media outlets had no problem identifying COVID-19 with China, unless they think they were peddling racism and xenophobia as many now claim.

What changed?

As Trump noted, Chinese officials and various state-backed media outlets have stepped up their campaign to lay this disaster at the feet of the United States.

They are using the idea that calling COVID-19 the “Chinese virus,” “China coronavirus,” “Wuhan virus,” or anything else that may direct attention toward their government’s misbehavior is racist and must be silenced.

It’s a message that’s well-tailored to suck in the social justice warrior journalists and left-wing commentariat to carry out the goals of the communist Chinese regime.

It’s important to keep a focus on the origin of the pandemic in light of the fact that the actions of the Chinese communist government to suppress information in the early stages of the outbreak have deeply exacerbated this catastrophe.

It’s incredible that in the face of the Chinese government’s expulsion of American journalists and refusal to provide reliable information about the outbreak in China, our own press is most troubled by the president’s attempt to draw attention to this with a simple phrase of identification.

And if American journalists are so concerned about racism and government mistreatment of minorities, why not get more worked up about China’s current treatment of Muslim Uighurs who’ve been detained in concentration camps and, according to reports, are being used as essentially slave laborers to make up for labor shortages.

The biggest threat we will face in coming months isn’t racism, it’s the potential for a massive pandemic worse than any we’ve seen in a century.

It’s especially important that as we first manage the very serious health crisis, we also remember how a ruthless authoritarian regime turned a limited catastrophe into a global one.

Hopefully this message will get through to the press. Maybe now is the time to restore some of their lost credibility rather than further damaging it.

COMMENTARY BY

Jarrett Stepman is a contributor to The Daily Signal and co-host of The Right Side of History podcast. Send an email to Jarrett. He is also the author of the new book, “The War on History: The Conspiracy to Rewrite America’s Past.”Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLES:

4 Ways Coronavirus May Change How You Vote

Churches on the Front Lines of Responding to Coronavirus

Sebastian Gorka Exposes the Great Lie of Socialism

Expelling US Journalists, China Escalates Political Warfare Over Coronavirus


A Note for our Readers:

This is a critical year in the history of our country. With the country polarized and divided on a number of issues and with roughly half of the country clamoring for increased government control—over health care, socialism, increased regulations, and open borders—we must turn to America’s founding for the answers on how best to proceed into the future.

The Heritage Foundation has compiled input from more than 100 constitutional scholars and legal experts into the country’s most thorough and compelling review of the freedoms promised to us within the United States Constitution into a free digital guide called Heritage’s Guide to the Constitution.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET ACCESS NOW! >>


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

House Democrats: Let Convicted Terrorists Work for the TSA!

My latest in PJ Media:

This was utterly predictable in today’s atmosphere of leftist insanity, but it’s appalling nonetheless. As the sage Joe Biden would say, Look, Fat, look, here’s the deal: I’ve been warning for years that it would sooner or later become “Islamophobic” to offer even the mildest opposition to jihad violence and that the “Islamophobia” mongers would become increasingly open about their support for jihad terrorists, and here we are. On Thursday, 174 Democrats in the House of Representatives voted against an amendment to the Rights for Transportation Security Officers Act that would prevent the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) from hiring convicted terrorists.

Yes, that’s right: if these House Democrats had gotten their way, on your next flight, you could have gotten a pat-down from a TSA agent who previously conspired to down the airplane you were planning to fly on. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.) explained that the amendment “was pulled back by leadership because the socialist wing of the party did not want to have that amendment go forward on this bill. When it was offered, overwhelmingly the majority of the House would like to see the TSA not hire terrorists or those who have been convicted of sexual misconduct with minors and others. But the socialist wing of the party, that controls now the Democratic Party, said that that could not be offered.”

However, as these prospective TSA employees might have said, Allahu akbar! The whole thing exploded in their faces: enough Republicans and renegade Democrats voted for the amendment to pass it. But among the luminaries who thought it so important to avoid even the appearance of “Islamophobia” that they opposed an amendment barring terrorists from pawing through your belongings as you made your way through security were the infamous “Squad,” Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D, Minn.), Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.), and Ayanna Pressley (D., Mass.), along with the supposedly sane and responsible House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D., Md.).

The TSA has always been more security theatre than actual security, but that’s beside the point here: AOC, Omar, Tlaib, and the 171 other House Democrats who opposed this measure didn’t vote against it because it would be ineffective, but clearly because it would offend a key portion of their constituency, which for most, if not all, Democrats today consists of people who believe that terrorists are victims, that American imperialism is the real problem, and that Donald Trump is “racist” for wanting to protect Americans from jihad terror attacks by foreign nationals coming from the countries included in his travel ban and from violent crimes by illegal aliens coming into the country from Mexico.

There is much more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

New York: Muslima stole over $150,000 to support the Islamic State, tried to join

Islamic State issues “Sharia” advisory telling Muslims not to travel to Europe because of coronavirus

UK: Muslim rape gang causes “severe psychological harm” to 15-year-old non-Muslim girl with multiple rapes

India: Four Muslims returning from Dubai refuse coronavirus tests, say Islam does not permit such tests

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Most House Democrats Vote Against Amendment that Would Keep Convicted Terrorists from Working for the TSA

What could possibly go wrong? Convicted terrorists are simply people who have acted upon their justifiable grievances against the U.S. and Israel, right? Don’t you stand against colonialism, imperialism, and racism, you greasy Islamophobe?

“174 Democrats Vote Against Amendment That Aims To Make It Harder To Hire TSA Employees With Terrorist Or Sexual Crime Record,” by David Krayden, Daily Caller, March 6, 2020:

House Republicans and 42 Democrats joined forces Thursday to pass an amendment to the Rights for Transportation Security Officers Act that would keep people convicted of sexual assault, terrorism and other violent crimes from working for the Transportation Security Agency (TSA).

But 174 House Democrats — including House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer — did not support the legislation.

The vast majority of Democrats voted against the amendment, which was authored by Democratic Illinois Rep. Lauren Underwood.

Republican House Leader Kevin McCarthy was quick to criticize the Democratic leadership for rejecting the law.

“[The amendment] was pulled back by leadership because the socialist wing of the party did not want to have that amendment go forward on this bill,” the California representative said Thursday, according to the Washington Free Beacon. “When it was offered, overwhelmingly the majority of the House would like to see the TSA not hire terrorists or those who have been convicted of sexual misconduct with minors and others. But the socialist wing of the party, that controls now the Democratic Party, said that that could not be offered.”

Every member of the “squad” voted against the amendment. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not cast a vote….

Critics have also faulted TSA for being lax when it comes to identifying people on the terror watch list….

The Rights for Transportation Security Officers Act passed the House with a vote of 230-171….

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Democratic Party—No More Moderates

Bloomberg Was ‘Never Prouder’ Than When He Supported the Ground Zero Mosque

At AIPAC, Biden Disappoints (Part 3)

Fresh from signing peace deal, Taliban murder 20 soldiers and cops in jihad massacres

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.