The Return of the Shale Boom

The shale boom is back.

After a decrease in shale oil production in 2016 we’re seeing an upswing in 2017:

The Energy Information Administration on Monday said it expects an increase in domestic shale-oil production to nearly 5 million barrels a day for April, which would be the highest monthly level in roughly a year.

The EIA offered forecasts for a climb from seven major U.S. shale producers by 109,000 barrels a day to 4.962 million barrels a day in April from March, according to the agencies monthly Drilling Productivity Report.

EIA: Monthly oil production by basin.
Source: Energy Information Administration.

Improved Efficiency

During the two-year span of falling oil prices, companies retooled. By employing new technology and rethinking the fracking process, they became more efficient and lowered their “brake-even price,” the lowest oil can be for a producer to recoup its costs.

When oil prices rebounded, companies took advantage and ramped up production.

Big Oil Finds in Texas and Alaska

In addition, as technology and techniques to find and get shale oil continue to advance, more areas become commercially available for production.

For instance, late last year, a massive oil and natural gas field was found in Texas:

Geologists say a new survey shows an oilfield in west Texas dwarfs others found so far in the United States, according to the US Geological Survey.

The Midland Basin of the Wolfcamp Shale area in the Permian Basin is now estimated to have 20 billion barrels of oil and 1.6 billion barrels of natural gas, according to a new assessment by the USGS.

That makes it three times larger than the assessment of the oil in the mammoth Bakken formation in North Dakota.

The estimate would make the oilfield, which encompasses the cities of Lubbock and Midland — 118 miles apart — the largest “continuous oil” discovery in the United States, according to the USGS.

And Alaska could be the next fracking frontier:

A pioneer of the U.S. shale revolution wants to take fracking to America’s final frontier. Success could help revive Alaska’s flagging oil fortunes.

Paul Basinski, the geologist who helped discover the Eagle Ford basin in Texas, is part of a fledgling effort on Alaska’s North Slope to emulate the shale boom that reinvigorated production in the rest of the U.S. His venture, Project Icewine, has gained rights to 700,000 acres inside the Arctic Circle and says they could hold 3.6 billion barrels of oil, rivaling the legendary Eagle Ford.

[ … ]

The companies’ first well, Icewine 1, confirmed the presence of petroleum in the shale and found a geology that should be conducive to fracking, Basinski said. Their second well, due to be drilled in the first half of 2017, will fracture a small section of that range and see how readily the oil flows.

“We don’t know what we have yet,” said Michael McFarlane, Burgundy’s president. “We know that the shale has sourced a tremendous amount of oil, but is it commercial? That’s a question that we haven’t answered yet.”

If companies can figure out how to safely get and transport shale oil at a cost that makes business sense, we’ll see it come to market.

Great for U.S. Companies and Workers

Rising domestic energy production is great news for U.S. companies and workers.

Even with the fall in oil prices in the last few years, since President Barack Obama lifted the oil export ban in 2015, exports have surged. As production increases, there will be more opportunity for American workers to satisfy overseas energy appetites.

Abundant shale energy is also good for manufacturing. ExxonMobil recently announced $20 billion in manufacturing investments that will create 45,000 jobs.

After some dark times, it’s looking brighter for American shale energy.

UPDATE: Check out this fascinating 360-degree video from a drilling rig in Texas’ Permian Basin.

MORE ARTICLES ON: ENERGY

RELATED ARTICLES:

More Evidence that the Energy Revolution has Sparked a Manufacturing Renaissance in the U.S. by Karen Alderman Harbert

How to Think About NAFTA as the U.S.-Mexico Energy Landscape Changes by Sean Hackbarth

EDITORS NOTE: An oil rig worker in the Permian basin outside of Midland, Texas. Photo credit: Brittany Sowacke/Bloomberg

JUST RELEASED: Troubled Dawn of the 21st Century

troubled dawn book coverA a chronicle from the turning point September 28-30 2000 to Gaza withdrawal and beyond January 2006.

“…a new world order is taking shape before our eyes. Will it be a world faithful to democratic values, and huddled under the umbrella of American military might, or a world delivered up to the logic of blackmail: we can do this to you because you don’t know how much we suffer and you can’t hit back at us because if you do we’ll send the whole world down the tubes. What is happening to Israelis today will happen to every one of us tomorrow.” – Troubled Dawn, April 2002

July 2000.

The Oslo Process reaches a dead end with the failure of the Camp David talks. What did you know about Islam then? September 28, 2000, Ariel Sharon’s “provocative” visit to the Temple mount triggers riots in Israel. Two days later, an international blood libel, the “killing” of Mohamed Al Dura, breaks the taboo against genocidal Jew hatred. Did you know the scene was staged?

Al Aqsa Intifada! “Suicide bombers” go on a killing spree in Israel. In fact, they were martyrdom operations committed by shahids. The French called them kamikaze.

The floodgates opened, spewing murderous rhetoric and thuggish antisemitic violence worldwide. We were told peace process, national liberation, two-state-solution, and the Palestinian plight. Who knew that 9/11 was on the horizon? Did we understand why Israel and, by extension, the Jews were held responsible for endless atrocities committed against us? Accused of disproportionate force? What did I know about the history of jihad conquest?

American, Jewish, consecrated to the art of the novel, living in Paris since 1972, I found myself in the European heart of that upheaval. I set aside my literary research and focused on the 3-dimensional international novel unfolding before my eyes.

Troubled Dawn is the writer’s notebook I opened at that tipping point in contemporary history, my learning curve, a bildungsroman, a singular account of events as they unfolded. No retrospective reconstitution could ever convey the dramatic suspense of those years.

Perplexed, wounded, horrified by the power of the media and self-appointed experts to hone public opinion into a destructive weapon I forged my own tools to understand and resist those hostile forces. Hundreds of pages of notebook entries published here for the first time, interspersed with my earliest articles, trace my itinerary from an alarmed citizen to an internationally recognized journalist.

EDITORS NOTE: Readers may order Troubled Dawn of the 21st Century by clicking here.

Canadians who want Immigrants Screened for ‘anti-Canadian values’ Attacked by Establishment Media

Monday’s headlines proclaimed “disappointment” and “concern” over a new CROP poll of Canadians’ attitudes toward immigration.

Despite the extraordinarily painstaking efforts by leftist leaders, the media and Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups such as the National Council of Canadian Muslims (former CAIR-CAN), all serving as thought police, Canadians are not quite that naive. Given the voluminous liberal outrage against the former Conservative party’s “Zero Tolerance Against Barbaric Cultural Practices Act” and the federal, provincial and municipal anti-Islamophobia agenda that is being forced upon Canadians, still Canadians support the screening of immigrants for “anti-Canadian values.” Yes, values screening. It is not racist, xenophobic, “Islamophobic” or any other kind of phobic to want to protect Canadian freedoms from sharia incursions, and, indeed, from barbaric practices from any culture. They have no place in Canada.

The article below states:

Of course we can’t empirically test for violent tendencies, misogyny and indolence. There are many good practical reasons not to pursue these policies.

We can however, implement a zero tolerance policy against barbaric practices that violate the constitution, and put an end once and for all to initiatives that potentially threaten the principles of a free society, such as “Islamophobia” initiatives. All such endeavors should be put to rest. The history of “anti-Islamophobia” drives are nefarious. They are being forced upon the West by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and have caused damaging divisions among Canadians. Muslims are protected by existing laws in the same way as is any other group: hate laws are already in place, and that is enough.

“Most Canadians support ‘values screening’ — which is neither surprising nor concerning”, by Chris Selley, National Post, March 13, 2017:

Monday’s headlines proclaimed “disappointment” and “concern” over a new CROP poll of Canadians’ attitudes toward immigration. “A majority of Canadians express concerns,” Société Radio-Canada declared on its home page. Notably, we learned that 74 per cent of respondents support implementing (as the pollsters put it) “a test of values to identify (potential immigrants) who have ‘anti-Canadian’ values.”

That’s Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch’s signature immigration proposal: personal interviews for all new immigrants; values screening; and passing the extra costs on to the new arrivals. This is by no means the first poll to find widespread support for the ideas. And one wonders how often we need to learn of it before we stop being shocked and disappointed — or even particularly concerned.

In theory, in isolation, the ideas are perfectly defensible. All immigrants got personal interviews until 2002. Immigrants pay all manner of fees throughout the process. And if we could somehow empirically test potential immigrants for violent tendencies, misogyny and indolence — three “anti-Canadian values” Leitch has suggested — then we surely would.

To hear some of Leitch’s opponents, you would think the idea of pushing “Canadian values” on immigrants — if not the very idea of “Canadian values” — was beyond the pale. Of course it is not. The “A Look at Canada” citizenship guide — the Liberal one, which the Conservatives replaced amidst apocalyptic howls — says Canadian values include equal rights, “respect for cultural differences,” “freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of religion,” and “law and order.” Being proud of “our international role as peacekeepers” is a Canadian value, it says.

Why push these supposed values on immigrants in book form, but not in person? Are they important or aren’t they?

Of course we can’t empirically test for violent tendencies, misogyny and indolence. There are many good practical reasons not to pursue these policies. The consensus among bien-pensant campaign watchers is that this is nothing more than a populist “dog whistle” appeal to nativists and xenophobes who believe immigrants are more likely to be violent, misogynist and indolent.

But most Canadians aren’t watching the campaign at all, and couldn’t pick Leitch out of a lineup. If you ask them whether Canada should screen immigrants for objectively undesirable traits, then of course most are going to say yes. It’s absurd to hold that up as evidence of a surge in anti-immigrant sentiment, especially when the poll in question provides plenty of evidence to the contrary: 78 per cent think immigration makes Canada a better place to live or makes little difference; 83 per cent think we have much to learn from other cultures; 79 per cent have no desire to see a Trump-style figure in Canadian politics.

If you were inclined to worry about anti-immigrant sentiment, there’s plenty you could latch on to in this 61-page poll that’s far more disquieting than support for “values screening.” But that’s the genius of a wedge issue like this: it provokes a level of outrage and condemnation that to those not following closely would seem unhinged, which in turn makes the policy and the candidate seem all the more reasonable by comparison.

“Leitch’s proposal to screen every immigrant and visitor is nothing but Donald Trump’s executive order, disguised as Canadian values, and crafted to keep Muslims out of Canada,” leadership candidate Deepak Obhrai said in a statement last week. He suggested it could incite racists to murder, such as in Kansas last month.

I’m disgusted by Leitch’s campaign and even I think that’s crazy. But more to the point, it won’t help. Fighting populism with hyperbole is like fighting fire with kerosene, and it’s strange how few anti-populists seem to realize this. If Leitch’s proposal weren’t surrounded by a bunch of exploding heads and people screaming “Trump! TRUMP!” at her, it would just be one silly, unpractical and unnecessary idea among dozens in play in this campaign.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Canada: Hindus Confront Liberal MP Over Islamic Prayers in Schools, Blasphemy Law (video)

Tennessee files constitutional challenge to refugee settlement program

Robert Spencer Video: Parents of People Killed by Muslim Hit Trump for Calling Murders Terrorism

If Geert Wilders’ wins today could there be a political crisis in The Netherlands?

On Israel News Talk Radio’s -Beyond the Fringe  program  this  week  listen here , co- host Rod Bryant and I devoted a segment to the fracas between The Netherlands and Turkey this past weekend in the run up to today’s general election in what could be a crucial test of rising nationalist populism in Europe.

The race pits current ruling coalition Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the Freedom and Democracy Party VVD versus Geert Wilders, the tall bleached blonde leader of the breakaway Freedom Party (PVV) who espouses anti-Islam, anti EU and anti mass Muslim immigration stands crystallized in his campaign call to “take back our Netherlands.”

We pointed out to our global and Israeli listeners Wilders’ long held pro Israel stands and heroic opposition to the Islamic Republic in a visit to Tehran that had him ejected as persona non grata. Wilders also espouses the view that Jordan is Palestine.

How the Dutch Turkish faceoff could figure in today’s vote

Current Dutch PM Mark Rutte veered closer to Wilders’ positions with his dramatic actions the weekend prior to the March 15, elections. He denied a visit by the Turkish Foreign Minister preventing him from landing to attend a rally of Dutch Turks in Rotterdam and ejected a Dutch Families Minister to Germany, a move that was protested by Dutch Turks in Rotterdam with a Muslim mayor. The rallies by Turkish ministers of Erodgan’s government in Holland were scheduled to urge the 400,000 Dutch Turks to vote in the April 16th national referendum in Turkey making President a veritable autocrat extending his term by a decade to 26 years. There are 5.5 million Turkish ex pats in EU core countries in France, Germany, Austria and the Netherlands.  All of whom have, with the exception of France have blocked rallies by Turkish officials of the AKP government in Ankara.

That sparked calls from aspiring neo Ottoman Caliph, Turkey’s President Erdogan, calling Rutte’s actions “Nazi Remnants”. Bryant and I commented that was bizarre coming from a Turkish leader who idealized Hitler.

Both Rutte and Erdogan demanded apologies and called in their respective ambassadors.

The weekend fracas has boosted polls figures on Monday for both Rutte and Wilders with just a three seat spread between the two parties; the VVD with 27 versus 24 for the PVV. Later polls taken following nationalized televised debates showed the results were even closer.

Dynamics behind today’s Dutch general elections

Dutch opinion polls show terrorism, anti immigration and preserving national values as leading issues.  This race  that culminates today could go either way or result in Wilders being first past the post with enough seats to possibly having King Willem  ask Wilders to form a government in the Hague Parliament, the tweeder kamer.  However that could be a long shot.  Rutte of the VVD and other smaller center parties have said they would never join a PVV led coalition government making the possibility of Wilders being the next Dutch Prime Minister, Dutch political prognosticators in Holland suggest the prospects might slim to none.

An RT.com article showed final Dutch polls indicating that Geert Wilders Freedom Party (PVV) claiming upwards of 24 to 28 seats as voting opens today in the Netherlands.

The movement by Mark Rutte, leader of the VVD towards nationalist views in the confrontation with Turkish President Erdogan may have shifted un-decided Dutch voters towards the PVV and resurrected Sybrand Buma leader of  the Christian Democrats (CDA) to poll in third position behind Wilders.

Rutte and Buma may have turned more nationalist in the waning days of the campaign. However, they cling to support of Dutch membership in the EU, while Wilders supports NExit which antedated that of the Brexit referendum vote in the UK.

One domestic issue that Wilders has flagged, protection of pension benefits has divided Dutch workers from their union leaders. That was evident in an interview with the union leader in the port Rotterdam. He noted his members would likely vote for Wilders.

It looks like whatever results from final polling results that the wrangling over formation of a ruling coalition from the 28 parties contesting for seats in the Hague parliament, the tweeder kamer, will take a while to sort it out. PM Rutte, as a formality, resigned as government leader on Thursday and informed King Willem setting the stage for today’s general election.

Could there be a political crisis in Holland?

Nevertheless, even if Wilders doesn’t get that opportunity, some observers suggest that by losing he has won because he has led Dutch popular opinion on national issues. A Politico EU article that looked at the prospects of prime contenders in today’s Dutch general elections commented on the masterful role of Geert Wilders staking out parliamentary positions and seizing the news cycle. As one Socialist party figure stated, if Wilders is first past the post “it might create a political crisis.”

None of the leading parties, whether, Mark Rutte’s Freedom and Democracy VVD or resurrected Buma’s Christian Democrats CDA, the latter polling in third position, and other smaller parties may be able to cobble together the requisite 76 votes in the 150 seat Hague Parliament, the tweeder kamer, to form a ruling coalition. That is the daunting task that King Willem will have to address when polling ends tonight.

One comment made in the Politico EU article may be prescient. Whatever the results, Wilders looks like the leader of the opposition. Stay tuned for the outcome of today’s momentous Dutch general election results.

RELATED ARTICLE: Sweden Can’t Find Contractor Willing to Build Police Station in Muslim Migrant Suburb — ‘It’s Too Dangerous’

RELATED VIDEO: The day before the Dutch election there were debates. The last of these debates was a debate between the leader of the Dutch Freedom Party Geert Wilders, and the leader of the Christian Union Party. This debate is translated into English.

Since President Trump took office over 2,400 refugees from travel-ban countries entered U.S.

Pew Research has done a handy little summary of where we stand with refugees admitted this fiscal year, but most importantly they made a useful graph of how many entered from travel-restricted countries since the first week of December, through Trump’s inauguration and up to last Friday.

There is nothing we haven’t already been talking about as we reported also from Wrapsnet over recent weeks and months, but they put it in a neat little package for your review on the eve of the 120-day moratorium on refugee resettlement.

Pew Research Center:

A total of 2,466 refugees from six countries under new travel restrictions – Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen – have resettled in the United States since Donald Trump became president, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of U.S. State Department data. The number of refugees from the six travel-restricted countries represents 32% of all refugees who have entered the U.S. since Trump took office.

Pew continues….

Including refugees from countries with no travel restrictions, a total of 7,594 refugees have entered the U.S. during Trump’s first seven weeks in office (Jan. 21 to March 10). Of these refugees, 3,410 are Muslims (45%) and 3,292 are Christians (43%), with other religions or the religiously unaffiliated accounting for the rest.

So far in fiscal 2017 (which began Oct. 1, 2016), refugees who hold citizenship from the six restricted countries have accounted for more than a third (34%) of 37,716 refugee admissions.

More here.

President Trump has set the ceiling for the entire 2017 fiscal year at 50,000, a number we explained here is not that low!

This post is filed in our Trump Watch! category as well as ‘refugee statistics’ and ‘where to find information.’

EndNote: It is amusing to me to see research/articles like this because for years and years (I started writing RRW in 2007) no one paid any attention to the numbers, religions and ethnicities of refugees entering the US. It is nice to see so many news outlets educating the public!

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Flow chart for refugee admissions shows where Trump team could downsize program with funding cuts

California judge seeks to prevent immigration arrests inside state courts

Horowitz: Where is Congress? Why are they not helping Trump on immigration?

Middle East experts: Kurdish safe zones could thwart Iranian threat to Israel

One report: Trump Department of State to cut funding to UN by 50%

VIDEO: Obama had British Intelligence spy on the Trump campaign

Thomas Dillingham for Nation One News reports, On March 4th President Trump learned that former President Obama had him “wiretapped” during the election. He sent out a Tweet to let Americans know what he found. Here is Dillingham’s report on the revelation by Fox News that the British spy agency GCHQ was used to provide data, collected by the CIA, FBI and NSA on candidate Trump and his campaign.

Government_Communications_Headquarters_logo.svgAccording to Wikipedia:

The Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) is a British intelligence and security organisation responsible for providing signals intelligence (SIGINT) and information assurance to the British government and armed forces. Based in “The Doughnut”, in the suburbs of Cheltenham, GCHQ is the responsibility of the UK Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, but it is not a part of the Foreign Office and its Director ranks as a Permanent Secretary. Read more.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Judge Napolitano: Obama Used British Intel Organization to Spy on Trump

Obama-British Intel agency conspiracy to spy on Trump exposed by NJ judge

Claim: ‘3 intelligence sources’ say Obama used Brits to spy on Trump

Judge Napolitano: ‘Three Intel Sources’ Say Obama Looked to Brit Agency to Spy on Trump

Judge Nap: Obama ‘Went Outside Chain of Command,’ Used British Spy Agency to Surveil Trump

FOX NEWS BOMBSHELL: Fox News Sources Say Obama Used Brits To Spy On Donald Trump

Democratic Congressman Handcuffed During ICE Sit-In

RELATED VIDEO: Fox News report on British used to spy on Donald J. Trump.

EDITORS NOTE: Copyright Disclaimer – Citation of articles and authors in this report does not imply ownership. Works and images presented here fall under Fair Use Section 107 and are used for commentary on globally significant newsworthy events. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for fair use for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.

Tennessee files suit against federal government over cost to state of refugee program

It’s been a  long time coming, but yesterday, the State of Tennessee filed its Tenth Amendment case against the US Department of State and the Department of Health and Human Services over the issue of cost-shifting of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program to the states.

Readers, this is big news!

Here is Michael Patrick Leahy at Breitbart yesterday (I see that Drudge featured the story last night and Fox News has picked it up as well):

The Thomas More Law Center filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the Tennessee General Assembly and the State of Tennessee in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee on Monday challenging the federal refugee resettlement program for violating the state’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The lawsuit places Tennessee at the center of the national debate concerning the operation of the federal refugee resettlement program.

President Trump will be holding a rally in Nashville on Wednesday to garner public support for his agenda. His revised Executive Order 13780 temporarily halting the federal refugee resettlement program and temporarily banning travel from six Middle Eastern countries goes into effect on Thursday.

[….]

The Refugee Act specified that 100 percent of each state’s cost of Medicaid and cash welfare benefits provided to each resettled refugee during their first 36 months in the United State would be reimbursed to each state by the federal government. However, within five years of having created the federal program, Congress failed to appropriate sufficient funding and instead, costs of the federal program began shifting to state governments.

Within ten years of passing the Refugee Act, the federal government eliminated all reimbursement of state costs, a huge financial cost to the states that was, in effect, yet another unfunded federal mandate.

[….]

The lawsuit seeks to define Tennessee’s rights in light of the forced expenditure of state funds in support of a federal program from which the state has formally withdrawn.

Continue here and see below the full text of the press release from the Thomas More Law Center.

For all of you in states that have withdrawn from the program***, you must push your governor and legislators to join this case.

If your state has not withdrawn and is willing to sue on states’ rights grounds, this is the direction you should be following: withdraw and then sue when the feds assign a non-profit to run the program!

To further your understanding, here (and below) is the full press release from the Thomas More Law Center, yesterday:

First in the Nation — Tennessee Files Lawsuit Challenging Constitutionality of the Federal Refugee Resettlement Program

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI, today filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the State of Tennessee, the Tennessee General Assembly, and two State legislators, challenging the constitutionality of the federal refugee resettlement program as a violation of the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the principles of State sovereignty.

Defendants in the lawsuit include the U.S Departments of State and Health and Human Services, and their respective Secretaries.

Assisting the Thomas More Law Center, pro bono, is attorney B. Tyler Brooks with the law firm of Millberg Gordon Stewart PLLC located in Raleigh, North Carolina.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, noted, “Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts has observed, ‘The States are separate and independent sovereigns. Sometimes they have to act like it.’ We intend to follow that advice in our lawsuit on behalf of the State of Tennessee and its citizens. We are asking the Court to stop the bleeding out of millions of Tennessee taxpayer dollars each year to fund a federal program from which the State officially withdrew in 2007.”

Thompson added, “Although there are compelling policy reasons to dismantle the existing refugee resettlement program in favor of resettling refugees in Middle East safe- zones as President Trump has suggested, this lawsuit focuses solely on the unconstitutional way the federal program is currently operating in the State of Tennessee.”

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. The purpose of the lawsuit is not to inflict harm on refugees, but to preserve the balanced constitutional relationship between the federal government and the States. It seeks a court declaration that the federal government has violated the Tenth Amendment and an order permanently enjoining the federal government from forcing the State of Tennessee to pay money out of its treasury to finance the federal refugee resettlement program.

The Tennessee General Assembly, by overwhelming majorities in both the House and Senate, passed Senate Joint Resolution 467 (“SJR 467”) during the 2016 legislative session, which authorized legal action to stop the federal government from unconstitutionally commandeering State funds to finance the federal refugee resettlement program.

State Senator John Stevens and State Representative Terri Lynn Weaver are the two legislators who joined the lawsuit as individual plaintiffs. Senator Stevens is First Vice-Chair of the Senate’s Standing Committee on Finance, Ways and Means, which is responsible for all measures relating to taxes and oversight of public monies in the State’s treasury. Representative Terri Lynn Weaver is the Chairman of the House Transportation Subcommittee which is charged with oversight of the budget relating to transportation.

Senator Stevens stated, “Through federal economic dragooning of our State’s budget, past Presidents and Congresses have quieted my vote and thereby my constituents’ voices. President Trump through executive action has reversed the overreaches of the Obama Administration in numerous ways. I trust President Trump in this regard. However, he needs our help.”

Continued Stevens, “The Constitution does not allow the Federal Government to force me as the elected representative of the 24th Senate District to implement federal programs while they sit in Washington insulated from the consequences.”

Representative Weaver, who played an instrumental role in mobilizing legislative support for passage of SJR 467, commented, “Of all the legislation that I have worked on, this by far is the most important. The only way we can get back to our constitutional beginnings and the intent birthed by our Founding Fathers is to go and take it back. We are looking forward to linking arms with the Thomas More Law Center for the long haul to regain sovereignty for our great State.”

Senate Majority Leader Mark Norris, another strong advocate for the lawsuit, emphasized the point that the lawsuit should not be taken as a criticism of the Trump Administration, “We want to convey to the President that we support his efforts concerning immigration and refugee resettlement and believe this suit for declaratory relief is consistent with what would likely be his position regarding states like Tennessee which have withdrawn from the refugee resettlement program but are forced to continue paying costs associated with it.”

When Congress enacted the Refugee Resettlement Act of 1980, the explicit intent was to assure full federal reimbursement of the costs for each refugee resettled and participating in benefit programs provided by the states. Eventually, however, federal reimbursements to the states for these benefit programs were reduced and, by 1991, eliminated entirely. The states thereby became responsible for the costs of the programs originally covered by the federal government.

Tennessee officially withdrew from participation in the refugee resettlement program in 2007. However, instead of honoring Tennessee’s decision to withdraw from the program, the federal government merely bypassed the State and appointed Catholic Charities of Tennessee, a private, non-governmental organization to administer the program. Catholic Charities receives revenue based upon the number of refugees it brings into the State.

Currently, Tennessee State revenues that could otherwise be used for State programs to help Tennesseans are, in effect, appropriated by the federal government to support the federal refugee resettlement program. This arrangement displaces Tennessee’s constitutionally mandated funding prerogatives and appropriations process.

The Complaint is here.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at http://www.thomasmore.org.

NOTE: These are the so-called Wilson-Fish states that have withdrawn from the program over the years.

In addition to these below, several states have withdrawn in the last year and those include: Texas, Kansas, New Jersey and Maine. Florida is considering it right now.

Texas citizen activists must press your governor. He has already shown a willingness to sue the feds, but this is a much stronger case!

To the right of the state (and one county) is the federal NGO running the program in the state (I don’t know who has been assigned in the 4 recent withdrawals mentioned above):

Alabama: USCCB – Catholic Social Services
Alaska: USCCB – Catholic Social Services
Colorado: Colorado Department of Human Services
Idaho: Janus Inc. (formerly Mountain States Group), Idaho Office for Refugees
Kentucky: USCCB – Catholic Charities of Louisville, Kentucky Office for Refugees
Louisiana: USCCB – Catholic Charities Diocese of Baton Rouge, Louisiana Office for Refugees
Massachusetts: Office for Refugees and Immigrants
Nevada: USCCB – Catholic Charities of Southern Nevada
North Dakota: LIRS – Lutheran Social Services of North Dakota
San Diego County, CA: USCCB – Catholic Charities Diocese of San Diego
South Dakota: LIRS – Lutheran Social Services of South Dakota
Tennessee: USCCB – Catholic Charities of Tennessee, Tennessee Office for Refugees
Vermont: USCRI – Vermont Refugee Resettlement Program

RELATED ARTICLES:

Tennessee became the first state in the nation on Monday to sue the federal government over refugee resettlement

Hawaii teacher says he will not teach illegal immigrant students – Story | WFLD

Is President Trump Making Americans Free to Speak Truth Again?

In Hans Christian Andersen’s classic fairy tale, “The Emperor’s New Clothes”, two con men came to town. The Emperor loved clothes more than anything else. The con-men convinced the Emperor to pay them a huge amount of money to weave him an outfit made with a beautiful unique fabric. They pretended to be hard at work weaving. The con men said any government official who could not see the fabric was unworthy of their office. Anyone else who could not see the fabric was simple minded. On the big day of the unveiling, the Emperor paraded through the city in his new outfit. Fearful of being thought of as unworthy of their office or simple minded, everyone raved about the Emperor’s outfit; the perfect fit, the flow of the fabric and the beautiful colors. A little boy yelled, “The Emperor is naked.”

It is the 2015 ESPN Awards. The hall is filled with the best of the best in sports. “And, the winner of the 2015 Author Ashe Courage Award is Caitlyn Jenner!” The hall erupts with applause. Everyone knows they had better pretend this is wonderful or risk losing their job, branded simple minded and a hater. A little boy is overheard, “Mommy, why is Mr Jenner dressed like a lady?” No a child did not ask such a question, but it is exactly what most in that hall were thinking.

Like the supplicants in the fairy tale, Obama and his Leftist brethren intimidated Americans into not publicly stating obvious truths. Anyone quoting the Genesis view of marriage was toast; losing their job; forced into mind altering therapy; pastors thrown from their pulpits and Christians jailed.

We have been living in this bizarre-o world in which telling the truth is not tolerated. On the one hand we are told gay pride is beautiful. Obama ordered the military to celebrate gay pride. Obama officially declared June LGBT month. Grade school kids are taught to celebrate gay pride. Tens of thousands show up at gay pride parades.

And yet, showing pictures of the triple X debauchery on display in our streets during the gay pride parade will land you in big trouble.

I thought, okay, if this is beautiful, why not feature a few pictures in my article of the routine behaviors in gay pride parades; naked men simulating copulating; two men in a giant penis costume. Readers of my article thought me rude and crude for using those pictures. Thousands of people, families with children witnessed these acts live. We’re told all who do not celebrate this behavior are simple minded and haters. Meanwhile, I caught heck for merely showing pictures of the wonderful event the federal government was mandating that Americans celebrate.

That is how the Left’s game is played. They (fake news media, democrats and Hollywood) paint a beautiful picture of their non-mainstream stance on an issue. Then, they bully us, attacking us as haters whenever we dare to tell the truth or show pictures.

Leftists celebrate abortion as a woman’s right even as late as the day of the baby’s birth. Meanwhile, they claim we hate women if we dare to tell the truth or show pictures. Leftist hate ultrasound and pictures confirming that it is a baby inside the mother. Fox News blocked Matt Drudge from posting a picture of a 21-week-old unborn child reaching its hand out of the womb during a rare operation. Drudge wanted to show its humanity.

Here are more abortion truths that drive Leftists up the wall. Planned Parenthood was founded by racist Margret Sanger to exterminate blacks. PP still targets black neighborhoods. PP was caught chopping up and selling baby body parts for profit; intact heads selling at a premium.

Partial birth abortion is when the abortionist delivers the entire body except for the baby’s head. The abortionist inserts scissors into the back of the baby’s head to kill it. I realize that sounds horrible folks, but it is the truth. Leftists help PP hide these repulsive truths from the masses. If the public saw it, they would be sick and outraged. Over the years, I have noticed that rabid pro-abortion Leftists are outraged whenever someone harms a puppy.

As I said, Leftists are angered by any image confirming that the mother is carrying a baby. Doritos caught heck from Leftists for their Superbowl ad which featured a fetus in ultrasound imaging reacting to its father eating Doritos. Leftists hate ultrasound because when mothers see the truth that its a baby rather than an “unviable tissue mass”, they usually choose life.

Then, there is the black thing. Leftists say you had better not tell the truth about why blacks are suffering in cities controlled by democrats; generational poverty; epidemic school dropouts; high out of wedlock births, over 70% fatherless households; high unemployment and record-breaking black-on-black crime.

All this black suffering is the result of Democrats pardoning blacks of all personal responsibility for their lives. Democrats claim all issues plaguing blacks are the fault of white racist America. This Leftist poisonous lie robs blacks of their personal power by placing their success or failure in the hands of someone other than themselves. Leftists hate this truth. America is the greatest land of opportunity on the planet for all who choose to go for it! Period.

Despicably, Leftists lie claiming cops routinely murder blacks. The truth is blacks are killing each other to the tune of 20, 30 and 40 every weekend in cities like Chicago and Baltimore, controlled by democrats for decades.

But Leftists forbid us from telling the truth about black lives. Doesn’t common sense suggest that if Leftists truly cared about black lives, they would relish an honest discussion? Leftists high-tech crucified white TV commentator Bill O’Reilly for compassionately daring to address the real reasons why blacks are suffering. For years, I am routinely excoriated, called an Uncle Tom and a traitor to my race for simply stating truths; petitioning blacks to assume responsibility which equals real black empowerment.

Since Trump’s election, I sense a new positive vibe rapidly spreading across America. I believe Americans are feeling free to speak truth again.

Democrats and the Science of ‘Thintelligence’

Michael Crichton is a man, author, filmmaker, doctor, teacher and visionary. Crichton is the author of The Andromeda Strain and Jurassic Park.

Crichton in Jurassic Park wrote, “They don’t have intelligence. They have what I call ‘thintelligence.’ They see the immediate situation. They think narrowly and they call it ‘being focused.’ They don’t see the surround. They don’t see the consequences.”

Democrats suffer from “thintelligence.”

An example of Democrat’s thintelligence is climate change. In an March 9th, 2017 article titled 30 New (2017) Scientific Papers Crush The Hockey Stick Graph And ‘Global’-Scale Warming Claims Kenneth Richard writes:

There were at least 60 peer-reviewed scientific papers published in 2016 demonstrating that  Today’s Warming Isn’t Global, Unprecedented, Or Remarkable.

As of the end of January, another 17 papers had already been published in 201717 New (2017) Scientific Papers Affirm Today’s Warming Is Not Global, Unprecedented, Or Remarkable

Within the last month, another 14 papers have been published that continue to cast doubt on the popularized conception of an especially unusual global-scale warming during modern times.

Yes, some regions of the Earth have been warming in recent decades or at some point in the last 100 years.  Some regions have been cooling for decades at a time.  And many regions have shown no significant net changes or trends in either direction relative to the last few hundred to thousands of years.  In other words, there is nothing historically unprecedented or remarkable about today’s climate when viewed in the context of natural variability.

Read more…

What natural variability deniers fail to see is “the surround.” By not seeing the surround they don’t see the consequences of their actions to try to halt the natural variability of the climate. Blinded by thintelligence they push forward an agenda to reduce CO2 emissions (CO2 being necessary for plant growth), regulate water use, impose CAFE standards on all motor vehicles and worst of all use food (corn) for fuel (ethanol).

There are three indisputable facts about the climate:

  1. The climate (weather) changes. If you don’t believe this just look out your window.
  2. These changes are cyclical that adhere to nature and nature’s laws (natural variability). If you don’t believe this then why does the earth have a summer, fall, winter and spring seasons?
  3. There is nothing that mankind can do change nature and nature’s laws. Man cannot control the weather (climate) by his own actions or inaction.

Crichton observed, “You know what’s wrong with scientific power? It’s a form of inherited wealth. And you know what assholes congenitally rich people are.”

Crichton warned, “In the information society, nobody thinks. We expected to banish paper, but we actually banished thought.”

We agree with Dr. Crichton.

RELATED ARTICLE: Axing Wasteful EPA Program that Gave Leftist Groups Millions Called “Racist” – Judicial Watch

Time for the Florida Legislature to Term Limit School Board Members

Term limits are very popular in America. One way to “drain the swamp” is to term limit members of Congress. The surge in term limit legislation has been at the state level.

The Florida Legislature in 2016 passed legislation making it the first in the nation to call for an Article V amendment convention exclusive to the subject of putting term limits on Congress. The memorial, HM 417, passed the State House and State Senate by a unanimous voice vote.

In 1992 Florida passed Amendment 9 term limiting members of the state legislature passed. The amendment was passed with the approval of 76% of voters. Amendment 9 offices covered are: Florida Representative and Senator, Lieutenant Governor, Florida Cabinet, and U.S. Senator and Representative. [Emphasis added]

So while the Sunshine State awaits an Article V amendment convention perhaps Floridians should look at term limiting local school board members?

One state is already on its way to term limiting school board members. In a column titled “Term limits for school board members would get public vote under House measure” by Ed Anderson, from the Louisiana Times-Picaune reports:

Voters across the state would decide this fall whether their local school board members should be subject to a three-term limit, according to a bill approved by a House committee Wednesday.

steve_carter_crop.jpg

Rep. Steve Carter, R-Baton Rouge.

The Committee on House and Governmental Affairs voted 14-4 for House Bill 410 by Rep. Steve Carter, R-Baton Rouge, sending it to the full House for more debate.

The bill is a major education initiative by the state’s biggest business lobby, the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry; the Council for a Better Louisiana, an education advocacy group; and the chambers of commerce across the state.

[ … ]

Carter said the bill allows local voters to decide the issue, not the Legislature. “Fresh blood is what is needed in education,” he said.

“Every four years, voters have an opportunity to decide to keep or replace school board members,” argued Nolton Senegal, executive director of the Louisiana School Boards Association. He said 60 percent of the board members turned over four years ago.

According to Ballotpedia:

The following statistics about school board elections in 2014 apply to the top 1,000 public school districts, as measured by student enrollment:

  • A total of 2,189 school board seats were up for election in 670 school districts in 37 states.
  • 75.51 percent of incumbents whose seats were on the ballot ran for re-election.
  • 35.81 percent of those incumbents ran unopposed.
  • 124 school districts held elections in which all the incumbents ran unopposed.
  • Only 30 districts with 58 seats up for election featured no incumbents running.
  • 81.31 percent of incumbents were re-elected, including unopposed incumbents.
  • 70.88 percent of incumbents who faced challengers won re-election.
  • 61.40 percent of all seats up for election were retained by incumbents.

There are 67 county school boards in Florida. They wield great power to tax and spend, primarily via property taxes and local referendums. Incumbents are the problem as they become entrenched and typically vote unanimously on issues important to parents, students and teachers. Many parents, students and teachers feel disenfranchised. School choice helps somewhat to empower parents and students.

Another way to “drain the education swamp” is to impose term limits on local school boards.

RELATED ARTICLE: My Local School Board May Begin Silencing Parents Over Transgender Agenda

RELATED VIDEO: Candidate Trump promises to support Term Limits for members of Congress.

The Radical Ties of the Imam Behind the Trump Immigration Lawsuit by Jordan Schachtel

Originally published in the Conservative Review, March 10, 2017:

The plaintiff listed in Hawaii’s lawsuit against President Trump’s executive order on immigration is a member of an organization that has several current and former leaders tied to terrorist activity.

Dr. Ismail Elshikh — the imam of the Muslim Association of Hawaii — is suing Trump in reaction to the second version of his immigration moratorium, which was signed on Monday. The order imposed a 90-day hold on foreign nationals from six terror-tied countries from entering the United States.

According to the Muslim Association of Hawaii website, Imam Elshikh is a member of the North American Imam Federation (NAIF), a fringe Islamic organization that has a board and current leadership stacked with radical Islamic connections.

Kyle Shideler, a terrorism expert and director of the Threat Information Office at the Center for Security Policy, tells CR that it’s concerning that Imam Elshikh is a part of NAIF.

“Given NAIF’s history it should come as no surprise that the end goal of this lawsuit is, ultimately, weakening American counter-terrorism or immigration security efforts,” Shideler said.

He added: “That a member of an organization whose leaders have included a convicted war criminal, an individual who defended donating money to a Hamas linked charity, and an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism bombing wants to tell the American people who they can admit for immigration should say a lot about why such an executive order is needed in the first place.”

Steven Emerson, the executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, also voiced his concerns about Elshikh’s associations. He tells CR:

“NAIF is an extremely radical Islamist group whose leaders and members have defended some of the most violent terrorist groups in the world. Some members have been found to be actually linked to acts of Islamist terrorism. This is a group, some prosecutors have argued, whose incitement for violence could qualify their categorization as a providing material support for terrorism.”

Current NAIF board members include the former leader of an al-Qaeda-connected mosque and a radical preacher. Former leaders include a man convicted of leading an international death squad, and a prominent Islamist preacher who has praised Osama bin Laden.

Current NAIF leadership

Omar Shahin, a current board member of NAIF, is the former president of the Islamic Center of Tucson, a mosque that was once utilized as the “de-facto al-Qaeda headquarters in the United States,” according to the Investigative Project on Terrorism. As imam of the mosque, Shahin raised funds for the Holy Land Foundation, which was later shut down for funneling money to the terrorist group Hamas. He also held fundraisers for the Global Relief Foundation, which was later deemed by the U.S. Treasury Department to be connected to al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

El Shikh received his PhD from the Graduate Theological Foundation Islamic Studies Department, which is headed by Shahin. The program was created in collaboration with the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an organization that was started as a Muslim Brotherhood front group.

Dr. Waleed Meneese, another NAIF board member, has explicitly called for fellow Muslims to kill Jews. “When the Children of Israel returned to cause corruption in the time of our Prophet Muhammad,” Meneese said in a recent sermon. “And they disbelieved him, God destroyed him at his hand. In any case, God Almighty has promised them destruction whenever they cause corruption,” he said of the Jewish people.

Meneese has also called for the killing of apostates from Islam, and for the treating of non-Muslims as second-class citizens.

Former NAIF leadership

Ashrafuzzaman Khan is the former president of NAIF and a current leader at the Muslim Brotherhood-connected Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA). In 2013, he was tried in a Bangladesh court as he was accused of drafting a kill list of intellectuals inside the country. He was charged with 11 counts of war crimes as the alleged leader of the Al-Badr death squad. In 2013, he and an accomplice were sentenced in absentia for the abduction and murder of 18 people, including nine university professors, six journalists, and three physicians.

Egyptian cleric Wagdi Ghoneim was the chairman of NAIF at the turn of the century. In 2005, he agreed to deportation to Qatar after U.S. authorities were concerned about his potential connections to terrorist organizations. Ghoneim has called Osama bin Laden a “martyred heroic mujahid” and is now closely tied to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. He has been banned from entering several countries due to his radicalism.

LINK: Wagdi Ghoneim Video

Another former NAIF board member is Siraj Wahhaj, who was infamously listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombings. Wahhaj testified in defense of the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel-Rahman, who served a life sentence for being the mastermind behind terrorist plots in the United States.

What else?

The North American Imam Federation is perhaps best known as the group that allegedly planned and staged the “flying imams” incident. After a 2006 NAIF conference, several imams connected to the group were booted from a domestic flight after exhibiting bizarre, threatening behavior, terrifying fellow passengers. NAIF and the Hamas-tied Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) showcased the incident as a prime example of America’s supposed problem with “Islamophobia.”

President Trump’s immigration moratorium, blocking non-citizens from coming into the U.S. from the six terror havens of Iran, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Libya, will go into effect next week, barring a successful legal challenge by Elshikh and Hawaii or other actors.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

A Short History of Islam in Hawaii

DTN: North American Imams Federation 

‘Battle of Rotterdam’ — On the Eve of a Historic Election in the Netherlands

geert wilders party logo

Geert Wilders with Freedom Party logo.

Invasion of Europe news….

Western Civilization is under assault: “If this continues, our culture will cease to exist.” – A Dutch citizen of Amsterdam told The Washington Post this week.

All eyes will be on the Dutch election scheduled for this Wednesday!

And, if things couldn’t be more tense in the lead-up to election day, last night Turkish Muslim protestors were driven from the streets of Rotterdam by mounted police officers and water cannons.

Trumpeted The Sun:

THE BATTLE OF ROTTERDAM Dutch riot cops use batons, water cannon and horse charges to clear thousands of Turkish protesters in Rotterdam

DUTCH riot police have broken up protests by supporters of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan after Turkish ministers were barred from speaking at a rally in the Netherlands.

Hundreds of demonstrators gathered outside the Turkish consulate in Rotterdam last night after cops prevented Turkey’s family minister from entering the building.

The Washington Post, in a lengthy story written before the Battle of Rotterdam last night, tells us what is at stake on Wednesday:

Anti-immigrant anger threatens to remake the liberal Netherlands

AMSTERDAM — Xandra Lammers lives on an island in Amsterdam, the back door of her modern and spacious four-bedroom house opening onto a graceful canal where ducks, swans and canoes glide by.

The translation business she and her husband run from their home is thriving. The neighborhood is booming, with luxury homes going up as fast as workers can build them, a quietly efficient tramway to speed residents to work in the world-renowned city center, and parks, bike paths, art galleries, beaches and cafes all within a short amble.

By outward appearances, Lammers is living the Dutch dream. But in the 60-year-old’s telling, she has been dropped into the middle of a nightmare, one in which Western civilization is under assault from the Muslim immigrants who have become her neighbors.

“The influx has been too much. The borders should close,” said Lammers, soft-spoken with pale blue eyes and brown hair that frames a deceptively serene-looking face. “If this continues, our culture will cease to exist.”

The stakes have risen sharply as Europeans’ anti-establishment anger has swelled. In interviews across the Netherlands in recent days, far-right voters expressed stridently nationalist, anti-immigrant views that were long considered fringe but that have now entered the Dutch mainstream.

Voters young and old, rich and poor, urban and rural said they would back the Geert Wilders-led Freedom Party — no longer the preserve of the “left-behinds” — which promises to solve the country’s problems by shutting borders, closing mosques and helping to dismantle the European Union.

Ronald Meulendijks (left). Photo: Michael Robinson Chavez/The Washington Post.

“They’ve found a very powerful narrative,” said Koen Damhuis, a researcher at the European University Institute who studies the far right. “By creating a master conflict of the national versus the foreign, they’re able to attract support from all elements of society.”

[ … ]

“The main issue is identity,” said Joost Niemöller, a journalist and author who has written extensively on Wilders and is sympathetic to his cause. “People feel they’re losing their Dutch identity and Dutch society. The neighborhoods are changing. Immigrants are coming in. And they can’t say anything about it because they’ll be called racist. So they feel helpless. Because they feel helpless, they get angry.

Echoing a theme I’ve heard on my travels everywhere in America:

“A government has to treat its own people correctly before accepting new ones. First, you must take care of your own.”

And if the government fails, Meulendijks has dark visions of what’s to come.

“I think Holland will need a civil war,” he said, “between the people who don’t belong here and the real people.”

Continue reading here.

Did the civil war begin in Rotterdam, last night?

Americans should be enormously thankful that we have a window on our own future as we watch the invasion of the European continent.  And, now that Donald Trump is in office, we, God-willing, will not go down the path Europe has been on for way too long.

Go here for our complete ‘Invasion of Europe’ archive.  And, here for The Netherlands, Geert Wilders, here.

BTW, we heard Wilders speak as a side event at CPAC 8 years ago (2009). It was a side event because the organizers of CPAC refused his presence on the main program. (CPAC organizers have been notoriously Republican establishment dolts who never understood where the people were headed on the issues of Islam and immigration.)

NOTE: Ronald Meulendijks has a poster of Geert Wilders in his IJburg apartment. “I think Holland will need a civil war,” he said, “between the people who don’t belong here and the real people.”

VIDEO: Geert Wilders and Fitna at CPAC 2009

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Islamic Republic of Iran’s latest terrorist plots By Heshmat Alavi

Muslims and non-Muslims given guidance on how to fight Trump’s refugee slowdown

Michigan: More confirmation that refugee resettlement is an industry

Why do we take any ‘refugees’ from Russia? Are they even legitimate refugees?

Hawaii needs refugees! Sues feds over refugee pause, travel restrictions from certain Muslim countries

USCRI needs money now that President Trump has slowed the number of their paying clients

Idaho refugee contractor: Refugees pay taxes!

Harvard University Smears Websites that Aren’t Hard-Left as ‘fake news’

“As previously reported, liberal journalists have struggled to come up with a concise definition of ‘fake news,’ even as they declare war on it. Some liberal journalists have lumped in legitimate news organizations with objectively false websites, leading to concerns that a crackdown on ‘fake news’ will be used by liberals to silence their conservative counterparts.”

Exactly so. There are real fake news sites on the Harvard list, sites that publish wholly false or unsubstantiated stories simply as clickbait in order to generate revenue.

But to add to them The Daily Caller, The Drudge Report, Breitbart News, The Washington Examiner, The Washington Free Beacon, Independent Journal Review (IJR), The Blaze, and The Weekly Standard (Never-Trump hysteric Bill Kristol must be climbing the walls over that one), as well as Judicial Watch, The Geller Report, FrontPage Magazine, Jihad Watch and others makes the agenda clear: Harvard, and the Leftist intelligentsia in general, is trying to stigmatize and marginalize every point of view except its own.

Merrimack College’s Melissa Zimdars and those who take her list seriously at Harvard and elsewhere apparently think that if they call every perspective they dislike “fake news,” they will be able to destroy the influence of such perspectives, and attain the hegemony of their own point of view. The only problem with this is that their own point of view contains so many obvious falsehoods and fallacies (Islam is a religion of peace, poverty causes terrorism, etc.) that it will continue to falter at the bar of reality, and people will continue to look to these so-called “fake news” sites for the truth.

Note also that Zimdars labels Jihad Watch as “Unknown.” This classification she explains thusly: “Unknown (tag unidentified): Sources that have not yet been analyzed (many of these were suggested by readers/users or are found on other lists and resources). Help us expand our resource by providing us information!”

So a site that purports to identify “fake news” relies on unsubstantiated rumor, hearsay and innuendo to make its classifications. Doesn’t that make Zimdars’ Harvard-endorsed list a quintessential example of…fake news?

“Harvard Smears Conservative Media As ‘Fake News,’” by Peter Hasson, Daily Caller, March 10, 2017:

A list of “fake news” websites recommended to students by Harvard University labels almost every leading center-right website as an illegitimate source of news.

The Daily Caller, The Drudge Report, Breitbart News, The Washington Examiner, The Washington Free Beacon, Independent Journal Review (IJR), The Blaze and The Weekly Standard are all on the list, deemed illegitimate for reasons such as “clickbait,” “bias,” or “unreliable.” Liberal news sources like BuzzFeed, The Washington Post, The Huffington Post, Vox.com and Salon aren’t on the list.

The list, compiled by Merrimack College associate professor Melissa Zimdars, is recommended to students as part of a Harvard library guide on “Fake News, Misinformation, and Propaganda.” The list is linked under a banner titled, “Identifying Fake News Sites.” A comment next to the link calls the document a “Huge list of fake news sites.”

As previously reported, liberal journalists have struggled to come up with a concise definition of “fake news,” even as they declare war on it. Some liberal journalists have lumped in legitimate news organizations with objectively false websites, leading to concerns that a crackdown on “fake news” will be used by liberals to silence their conservative counterparts….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Toronto imam says Muslims will eventually kill all Jews

Orlando judge revokes bond for widow of Pulse nightclub jihad mass murderer

Judge refuses to halt Trump’s new immigration order

Judge James Robart, who issued a temporary restraining order against the initial ban in February, declined to apply it to the new executive order. Perhaps he was stung by the criticism: in his first restraining order, he falsely claimed that no jihad terror attacks had been committed by migrants from the countries covered in the ban, when in reality there had been many.

Could this be an indication that the hard-Left, out-of-control judiciary is finally having to demonstrate more responsibility? Unlikely, but it’s still a good sign.

“Judge Refuses To Halt Trump’s New Immigration Order,” by Kerry Picket, Daily Caller, March 10, 2017:

A federal district court denied a request to place an emergency restraining order on President Donald Trump’s modified immigration executive order, an attorney representing states opposing the order told Reuters Friday night.

The initial executive order posted by the Trump administration — which restricted travel from seven countries with majority Muslim populations — last January was challenged by lawyers in states such as Washington and Minnesota.

Seattle U.S. District Court Judge James Robart issued a temporary restraining order against the initial policy last month.

The new order narrowed the travel restriction down to six countries and would give exception to green card holders among other changes. According to Reuters, Robart did not apply his restraining order to the new immigration order….

RELATED ARTICLE: UK: 5,500 cases of FGM in 2016 alone, not a single prosecution

The Trojan Horse of Terrorism

In a March 7, 2017 story by Dan Bilefsky, headlined “Hungary Approves Detention of Asylum Seekers in Guarded Camps,” the New York Times reported that,

“Europe’s simmering backlash against immigration came into sharp relief on Tuesday when the Hungarian Parliament approved the detention of asylum seekers in guarded and enclosed camps on the country’s southern border, in what human rights advocates called a reckless breach of international law.”

According to the Times,

“Prime Minister Viktor Orban justified the measure on the grounds that it would secure the European Union’s borders from migrants and act as a powerful deterrent against migration, which he called the ‘Trojan horse of terrorism.’ ”

The Prime Minister is quoted as saying,

“We are under siege.  The flood of migration has slowed down but has not stopped.  Laws apply to everyone.  This includes those migrants who want to cross Hungary’s border illegally.  This is the reality, which cannot be overruled by charming human rights nonsense.”

Unfortunately, it is “charming human rights nonsense” that now informs immigration policy on the political left in the United States, just as it has in most Western European nations.  While liberals and Democrats oppose any and all limitations on immigration from majority Muslim countries… in the apparent hope that American Muslims will repay the favor by becoming a reliable Democratic voting bloc… even they express concern over the potential for isolated terror attacks in the near term.  What apparently escapes their attention is the clearly stated long term goal of Muslim migration: the complete domination of Islam over all the nations of the world.

In his first speech before a joint session of Congress on February 28, President Trump paused, gazed directly into the camera, and carefully enunciated words that Barack Obama famously refused to utter. He said,

“Our obligation is to serve, protect, and defend the citizens of the United States… We are also taking strong measures to protect our nation from radical Islamic terrorism.”

However, as appealing and as essential as that resolve might be, by focusing only on the unspeakable atrocities of radical Islamists, we run the risk of overlooking or downplaying what is an even more deadly and more pervasive long term threat: the danger of what Hungarian Prime Minister Orban referred to as the “Trojan horse of terrorism,” the unfettered flow of Muslim migrants and refugees across international frontiers into the Western world.

In his book, Slavery, Terrorism, and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat, Dr. Peter Hammond explains something that every Christian, every Jew, and every other non-Muslim on the face of the Earth must understand… which is that Islam does not qualify as a religion in the normally accepted sense of the word.  Instead, as a complete legal, political, economic, social, and military system with a religious component, the West’s dangerous flirtation with multiculturalism can only be described as “charming human rights nonsense.”  And while most non-Muslims worry about the possibility of being murdered in an isolated “lone wolf” terror attack, they all but ignore the long term implications of Muslim expansionism.    

Dr. Hammond explains the process of “stealth jihadism” carried out by muhajirs, or Muslim immigrants.  He tells us that “Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.  When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.”

In his May 8, 2015 treatise, titled, Islam, Interreligious Dialogue, and Evangelization, Andre Villeneuve, Ph.D. of Saint John Vianney Seminary, describes the ecumenical schizophrenia displayed by the Catholic Church in their approach to Islam in just the past two decades.  He quotes Pope Benedict XVI in his Regensburg Lecture of September 12, 2006.  Benedict quoted the 14th century Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus, who said,

“Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

However, Villeneuve goes on to describe a contrary view held by the current prelate, Pope Francis.  He writes,

“After praising the commitment to prayer, faith, devotion, and ethical values of many Muslims, (Pope) Francis encourages Christians to adopt a welcoming attitude towards the increasing number of Muslim immigrants in traditionally Christian countries, while asking for a reciprocal freedom of worship for Christians living in Muslim countries.”

Reciprocal freedom of worship?  It is, at best, a naive pipe-dream.  While a few majority Muslim nations have tolerated Christian congregations in their midst, many of those Christians are now victims of genocide.  To expect that those attitudes will ever change is worse than naïve… it is dangerous and it is suicidal.

Christians are taught from early childhood to heed the words of Jesus in Matthew 5:39.  In his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said,

“But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.”

As the leader of the world’s 1.2 billion Roman Catholics, Pope Francis is obliged to instruct his flock to “turn the other cheek.”  However, while that counter-intuitive advice may be valuable to me in a one-on-one relationship with my next door neighbor or a co-worker, just how far does it go?  In other words, how are we to react when all of western civilization hangs in the balance?

On September 3, 2011, Swiss parliamentarian Oskar Freysinger, of the Christian Democratic People’s Party addressed some very important thoughts to a Berlin audience… thoughts that the American people would do well to hear and heed in 2017.  He said, in part, “My dear Berlin friends, I come to you today as a neighbor and as a concerned friend…”

Referring to the rules imposed on non-Muslims living in majority Muslim nations, Freysinger said, “The dhimmi attitude of Europeans sustained a wound which must not heal over if the millennia-old European civilization is to survive, for Europe is more than a plot of land, more than a continent, more than the sum of its countries.  Europe is an idea, a cultural landscape, an intellectual space shaped by history.  Europe is the cradle of the modern constitutional state, the treasure house of human rights, of freedom of opinion and expression.

“This is ever more strongly endangered by the possibility that our political elite will bend their necks before (an Islamic) religious dogma that is alien to our intellectual history, our values, and our constitutional state.  This dogma is gnawing away at the pillars of our system of laws, wherever it is allowed some space.  This dogma demands total obedience from its followers.

“They are in no case to integrate into our value system.  That would be like treason and can even be punished with death.  They are expected to conquer our intellectual home, make the Western world subject.  Not with tanks, rockets, or riflemen.  Not through brutal revolution.  No, Islam is in no hurry.  It has an eternity.  A long process of softening up and leisurely occupation of our child-poor society is foreseen.  The Islamic doctrine is expected to gradually creep into everyday life and Fortress Europe will crumble from within.

“And what are we doing?  We are allowing this violent doctrine, unhindered in cultural ghettos, to strain at toppling the nation of laws…  When women are beaten and whole city districts are taken over, we look the other way.  We believe we can soften the power hunger of the holy warriors with welfare money.  We believe we can buy peace! What lunacy!  No one fingers the Prophet’s beard.  Fanatics cannot be bought.  Germany should know that better than any country in the world…”

He concluded by saying, “If we lose this battle there will be no second chance, for Islam does not give back what it has conquered.  So I summon all the humanists of this continent not to keep their heads in the sand and to resist the Islamic dogma’s drive to conquest.  Let us stand together and uncompromisingly insist upon the primacy of our civil law over any religious dogma.  Let us find our way back to our precious intellectual heritage.  Islam is only as strong as we are weak”

It is estimated that, by the end of this century, in the absence of some unforeseen divine intervention, Muslims will exceed 50 percent of the world’s population.  But long before that time, it is reasonable to assume that most of 21st century Western civilization will have become unraveled and our descendants will find themselves facing a squalid 7th century lifestyle. As Prime Minister Orban so aptly describes it, the current level of Muslim immigration into the West can best be described as the “Trojan horse of terrorism.”  Left unfettered, it can have no good end.  As matters now stand, we cannot assume that the Europe we have known and loved for many centuries, and from which our forbears emerged, will continue to exist beyond ten or twenty more years.

While Europe may be the “cradle of the modern constitutional state, the treasure house of human rights, of freedom of opinion and expression,” the United States is the laboratory in which those concepts were tested and proven.  That fact, alone, gives Islamists all the justification they need to see us wiped from the face of the Earth.  There is far too much at stake to be gambled away in some “charming human rights” experiment, in a contest we cannot win.  And if we are so unwise as to invite the forces of Islam to coexist with us, on our own soil, then we too, like Europe, will crumble from within.

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump reportedly considering Mideast peace conference