Women’s March leader and Democrat mouthpiece Linda Sarsour told the Islamic Society of North America at their September conference that American Muslims should not “humanize” Israelis.
It’s comments like this that put Jews in danger. The Democrat Party must disavow this anti-Semitic hate speech.
Women’s March leader Linda Sarsoursaid over the weekend that Muslims shouldn’t be humanizing Israelis, referring to Israel as the “oppressor.”
As reported by The Investigative Project for Terrorism and the Algemeiner, during the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)’s conference, Sarsour declared that American Muslims “are complicit in the occupation of Palestinians, in the murder of Palestinian protesters” if they’re not actively promoting the Palestinian cause.
“If you’re on the side of the oppressor, or you’re defending the oppressor, or you’re actually trying to humanize the oppressor, then that’s a problem,” Sarsour said.
Organizers of a Christmas market in the Belgian city of Bruges have changed its name to ‘Winter Market’, with some claiming the switch was made so as not to offend Muslims.
According to a report by HLN, instead of Christmas-themed lighting, the market will be lit up with “winter lighting”.
Senator Pol Van Den Driessche of the country’s opposition party called the change “unbelievable and incomprehensible.”
“From now on we can no longer speak of the ‘Christmas market’ in Bruges, but of the ‘winter market’,” he added. “This is not only a ridiculous decision, it also goes against our individuality. Bruges has a very beautiful and old tradition in terms of Christmas. Whether you are religious or not, it is part of our culture. I do not want to give in to this foolish form of ‘tolerance’.”
Some respondents to the article asserted that the change was made to avoid offending Muslims.
“Do we still live in Belgium?” asked one. “Our norms and values are eroding, our culture is disappearing and our feasts need other names. And we must respect their Ramadan and Sugar Feast.”
However, organizer Pieter Vanderyse said the change was made merely to make the market appear more “neutral,” adding that other Belgian cities had changed their ‘Christmas Markets’ to ‘Winter Markets’.
This is not the first time that the Christian foundation of Christmas has been hidden in order to avoid offending Muslims.
In December 2016, the Austrian embassy changed the name of its “Christmas delicacies”to “Winter delicacies” out of consideration for the feelings of Muslims.
Earlier this month, a school in Chesterfield County, Virginia banned Christmas carols containing word “Jesus” in fear they may be offensive to ‘diverse students’.
Last year in Germany, a school was forced to re-locate its annual Christmas party after a single complaint from a Muslim student.
A Christmas tree in the Italian city of Bolzano was also removed from the town hall after fears that it could “hurt the feelings” of or “offend” Muslims.
Last year, a Christmas movie set to be screened in the French city of Langon, where Muslims are allowed to pray on the streets, was banned, because it was “too Christian”.
President Trump plans to sign an executive order that would remove the right to citizenship for babies of non-citizens and unauthorized immigrants born on U.S. soil, he said yesterday in an exclusive interview for “Axios on HBO,” a new four-part documentary news series debuting on HBO this Sunday at 6:30 p.m. ET/PT.
[…]Trump told “Axios on HBO” that he has run the idea of ending birthright citizenship by his counsel and plans to proceed with the highly controversial move, which certainly will face legal challenges.
“It was always told to methat you needed a constitutional amendment. Guess what? You don’t,” Trump said, declaring he can do it by executive order.
When toldthat’s very much in dispute, Trump replied: “You can definitely do it with an Act of Congress. But now they’re saying I can do it just with an executive order.”
“We’re the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States … with all of those benefits,” Trump continued. “It’s ridiculous. It’s ridiculous. And it has to end.”
I’m just as giddy as this reporter!
It’s complete insanity and it’s a perfect issue to have the midterms be a referendum on!
Democrats think it’s just fine for an illegal alien to illegal cross the border and go to a US hospital to give birth (paid for by US taxpayers at a cost of anywhere from $32,093 for a vaginal birth to $51,125 for a C-section) then give the anchor baby full citizenship rights and get them straight on the taxpayer dole.
Republicans — under Trump — think it’s insane to spend billions of taxpayer dollars raising these anchor babies over the course of their lives (taxpayer funded births, food, clothing, housing, schooling etc.).
Children born to illegal-alien parents cost U.S. taxpayers $2.4 billion each year according to a new report from the Center for Immigration Studies. The report concludes that of all births in the U.S. likely paid for by taxpayers, $5.3 billion is spent each year on children born to illegal alien or immigrant parents.
Analyzing government data, CIS says that roughly 1 in every 5 child born in the United States has a foreign-born mother, accounting for 791,000 births each year. Of those, an estimated 290,000 children are born to illegal-alien parents each year. CIS estimates that 67% of illegal-alien parents are either uninsured or have access to Medicaid.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, there are 4.5 million childrenunder the age of 18 living in the United States who were born to illegal-alien parents. Once these children become adults, they can sponsor their illegal-alien parents for green cards through the immediate family green card category.
Force everyone to vote on it and make it clear where they stand!
We’re not doing anything like Old Linsdey’s “Gang of Eight”immigration reform (cursed be his name), but if New Lindsey (blessed be his name) puts out a clean bill to repeal birthright citizenship that’d be just wonderful!
Retiring House Speaker Paul Ryan — who has absolutely no say in this matter — rushed to the media to denounce Trump in defense of his globalist donors:
No one care what you think, bud. Go tell it to the Koch brothers.
Leftists on social media lost their minds Monday after The New York Times released an exposé, detailing Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) Democratic challenger, Beto O’Rourke‘s, early career in real estate development, and revealing for the first time this campaign that O’Rourke isn’t a blue collar hero but rather the son-in-law of a billionaire.
The NYT reports that O’Rourke’s father-in-law proposed gentrifying a neighborhood in El Paso by force, bulldozing public housing to make way for restaurants, a shopping district, and an art walk. Beto, the Times claims, served as the “pretty face” for the plan while also serving in city government, and often tangled with low-income El Paso residents protesting the plan.
“What might not have been entirely clear to everyone at the meeting was that the plan’s success was largely dependent on the city’s ability to convince property owners in the most blighted areas to turn over their holdings to the private trust. In the case of recalcitrant owners, eminent domain would be used,” the Times reported.
Beto, who was an El Paso councilman at the time his father-in-law was looking to make the big changes, eventually abstained from voting on the matter, but not until after it was pointed out that publicly defending the development was, for Beto, a conflict of interest.
The New York Times is, by no means, a right-leaning publication, and is likely pulling — perhaps quietly — for Beto O’Rourke to unseat Ted Cruz. But leftists lashed out immediately, regardless, accusing the paper of trying to tank Beto’s upstart campaign just days before Election Day.
Some Twitter users even compared The New York Times’s “hit job” on Beto to a piece the paper published on a suddenly re-opened investigation into Hillary Clinton‘s handling of classified information, a development that happened just days before the 2016 Presidential election, through no fault of The New York Times.
The good news for the NYT, at least, is that it probably won’t be held responsible for Beto O’Rourke’s likely loss to Ted Cruz. Despite raking in more than $38 million just last quarter (and spending $22 million of that), O’Rourke is running at least 6 points behind the incumbent Republican in most polls.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi doesn’t care what Democrats have to say or do to get elected, as long as she’s got the gavel in her hands come January.
Pelosi reiterated that point during a surprise appearance at the Bentzen Ball comedy festival at the Lincoln Theater on Saturday. The self-presumed future House speaker dropped in on a live podcast by Jonathan Van Ness – star of Netflix’s “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy” – to offer her take on the balance of power on Capitol Hill.
Once Van Ness collected his emotions from meeting the master legislator, he prodded Pelosi about whether the left should follow Michelle Obama’s mantra “when they go low, we go high” even “when GOP ads lie or (Republicans) try to steal an election,” according to The Huffington Post’s Jennifer Bendery.
Jonathan Van Ness: Dems say, "When they go low, we go high." Why not get dirty too, when GOP ads lie or when GOP tries to steal an election, like with Stacy Abrams?
Pelosi: "We have to win. Go low, go high, whatever. We just have to win." 😂 #BentzenBall
“Jonathan Van Ness: Dems say, ‘When they go low, we go high.’ Why not get dirty too, when GOP ads lie or when GOP tries to steal an election, like with Stacy Abrams?” Bendery posted to Twitter. “Pelosi: “We just have to win. Go low, go high, whatever. We just have to win.’”
It wasn’t the first time Pelosi has touted her “say whatever” strategy to wrest control from Republicans in the lower chamber. In early October, Showtime host Alex Wagner questioned Pelosi about the possibility of a takeover and whether she envisioned a second stint as speaker. Dozens of Democratic House candidates have campaigned on a promise not to vote for Pelosi as leader if the party takes control, The American Mirror reports.
“If Democrats take the House,” Wagner said, “are you going to be the person with the gavel in your hand, and are you going to be the person that calls up Donald Trump to try to work with him?”
Pelosi ignored the suggestion of working with the president.
“Yes, I anticipate that I’ll be the person with the gavel in hand, but I haven’t asked anybody for a vote. In fact, I’ve told the candidates, ‘Do whatever you have to do, just win baby!’
“But I do think that I’m in very good shape with my caucus,” Pelosi said.
LifeSite, a Christian pro-life news outlet, was allegedly blacklisted by its web host and given just 12 hours to find another host the website, or risk being offline.
“LifeSite just received an email at 8:30 p.m. EST from our web-hosting company alerting us that they will be taking our website down within 12 hours, if not sooner,” claimed LifeSite in a statement, Saturday. “We received absolutely no forewarning whatsoever about this decision.”
“Our web developer is scrambling right now to set up a possibly-needed temporary solution to keep the website live. However, we’re going to have to go through the ordeal and expense of moving server companies,” the news outlet continued. “We also intend to fight these attacks, which will carry significant legal costs.”
In an update made following the original statement, LifeSite added, “Our web developer was up all night implementing temporary measures to keep our site online even if our current web-hosting company followed through on its threat to shut down our services. We are extremely grateful for his hard work on a Saturday night. However, this is only a temporary solution. We are currently looking for a web-hosting company that will not cave to threats of this kind.”
On its website, LifeSite describes itself as a “non-profit Internet service dedicated to issues of culture, life, and family,” launched by the pro-life Campaign Life Coalition in 1997, which “emphasizes the social worth of traditional Judeo-Christian principles but is also respectful of all authentic religions and cultures that esteem life, family and universal norms of morality.”
LifeSite was not the only website blacklisted by its web host this week, with free speech social network Gab losing its web host Joyent late on Saturday and being given until just Monday morning to migrate to another host.
On Saturday, Gab claimed the blacklisting could leave the social network offline for weeks, and as of writing, Gab is currently offline.
“As we transition to a new hosting provider Gab will be inaccessible for a period of time. We are working around the clock to get Gab.com back online,” declared the social network in a statement. “Thank you and remember to speak freely.”
Tom's Blog 