In today’s news, there are reports zooming from everywhere about “Operation Crosscheck”, In January, President Donald Trump signed the Executive Order that restores the full and proper mission of the Immigration & Customs Enforcement Agency, (ICE)
Operation Crosscheck is being implemented in Southern and Central Texas with many “Illegal Aliens”arrests.
Seen above, ICE Agents are training to implement the “Secure Communities Program”. ICE Agents will now be targeting “Illegal Immigrants” for removal from the United States.
Federal grant monies will be stripped from cities (Sanctuary Cities) and states who harbor Illegals Immigrants.
In an effort to ensure the implementation of this process, the President will be tripling the current number of active ICE Agents and increasing the number of Border Patrol Agents by 5000.
The Trump Administration has stated it will now enforce the rule of law and restore value in “American Citizenship”.
By: Don Hooper – Big Jolly Politics (http://bigjollypolitics.com/firing-trebor-gordon/)
Section 1983 of Title 42 of the U.S. Code is part of the Enforcement Act or Civil Rights Act of 1871. This provision was formerly enacted as part of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 and was originally designed to combat post-Civil War racial violence in the Southern states. Reenacted as part of the Civil Rights Act, Section 1983 is the primary means of enforcing all constitutional rights.
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction therof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.
Houston City Councilman Mike Knox fired Trebor Gordon after a video of Gordon speaking at the May 16, 2016 Harris County Executive Committee meeting went viral.
During the meeting, a group of precinct chair candidates were presented for approval.
Gordon raised an issue as to whether Syed Ali, a Muslim, could serve as a precinct chair.
Specifically, Gordon said the following:
“Islam and Christianity do not mix. During my prayer, [Gordon is the Chaplain for the Harris County Republican Party] this man did not bow his head. During the pledge of allegiance, he did not utter a word. He didn’t even try to fake it and move his lips. If you believe that a person can practice Islam and agree to the foundational principles of the Republican Party, it’s not right. It’s not true. It can’t happen. There are things on our platform that he and his beliefs are total opposite.”
In January 2015, the Harris County Republican Party applauded Gordon for “fighting for free speech and fair elections in Houston!” The party lauded Gordon for his lawsuit against the city’s limit on fundraising. Now, when Gordon is fired for his speech, radio silence from the party.
Gordon is a conservative minister and a war veteran. He is also black. During the May meeting, Gordon decided to question Mr. Ali’s qualifications to serve as a Precinct Chair.
A Precinct Chair is the local representative of the party. With the sudden death of El Franco Lee, the Harris County Democratic Party is currently seeing how important these locals are to their party. Gordon, recognizing the importance of this local position, questioned Mr. Ali’s qualifications for the Precinct Chair position.
What if Mr. Ali flew to Syria every weekend to meet with the Islamic State and throw gay people off of buildings? Would that have changed the interpretation of Gordon’s speech? What would happen if we learned that ISIS secretly wanted to kidnap members of the Log Cabin Republicans and throw them off buildings? Would Gordon be a hero if his questioning revealed that Mr. Ali’s beliefs directly conflict with the party?
The folks against Gordon want to claim that Gordon’s query is a religious test; but, in reality, it was a simple inquiry. Do Mr. Ali’s beliefs comport with the Republican Party? Whether or not you agree with the inquiry, Gordon or anyone else has the right to vocalize the question. See the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
I know a little something about free speech. Recently, Devon Anderson did her very best to suppress my speech about her ludicrous prosecution of David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt. At a recent Downtown Pachyderm meeting, I asked Paul Simpson to join me in supporting Daleiden and Merritt at the courthouse and he declined to do so. Is he too busy? Uninterested?
Gordon, as a government employee, held a special protection against retaliation. So, his firing is clearly wrong. And it raises the necessary question: Must an employee’s speech fit within an employer’s moral staircase?
There are many hot button issues right here in Houston, Texas. Let’s take guns, for instance. I like guns. I believe that the Second Amendment allows us to own as many various types of firearms as desired. There are others, including some Republican Precinct Chairs, who disagree. What about HERO? Gordon was a staunch anti-HERO advocate. Simpson was absent from that fight. What about the ten billion dollar unfunded pension liability? Gordon’s former employer, Mike Knox, has made no contribution to this issue.
Muslim Pep Rally
Paul Simspon, both during and immediately following the Executive Committee Meeting, failed to recognize Gordon’s right to free speech [and free exercise of religion]. Time and time again, Simspon has proven that if you aren’t on his moral staircase, your right to speech is waived. Within the last few weeks, Simpson and Devon Anderson held a Muslim pep rally in Southwest Houston.
Gordon’s plight should raise eyebrows and will definitely suppress speech. If a public employee can lose his job for asking questions at a Harris County Republican Party Executive Committee meeting, what about you? Certainly, Gordon’s situation will make folks think about liking a post on Facebook, writing a Tweet, submitting an open records request, or participating in coffee chat at the office.
I leave you with a quote from United States Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis:
“If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”
By: Don Hooper – Big Jolly Politics (http://bigjollypolitics.com/firing-trebor-gordon/)
By TK Whiteman – February 9, 2017 (ConservativeFiringLine.com)
With updates slowly but steadily percolating to the surface, it’s being made public to the American people that three Pakistani-Muslim brothers are under investigation by the US Capitol Police.
But the trio aren’t under investigation for anything as mundane as spitting on the sidewalk or walking on the grass.
Tucker Carlson’s The Daily Caller (TDC) is reporting that the brothers Imran, Jamal and Abid Awan are being investigated for “accessing [Congressional] members’ computer networks without their knowledge and stealing equipment from Congress.”
Also noted the TDC;
Capitol Police spokeswoman Eva Malecki said the investigation was still ongoing, and arrests have not been made but staff were “asked to update their security settings.”
Other than a criminal investigation of illegally accessing the computer systems of a yet to be disclosed number of members of congress as well as theft of government property, the Brothers Awan are also under the microscope for who in exactly in Congress hired them.
And that list of Congressmen and women is of some rather high profile lawmakers.
FrontPage Magazine has published; (Emphasis mine)
All three of the Pakistani brothers had been employed by Democrats. The offices that employed them included HPSCI minority members Speier, Carson and Joaquín Castro. Congressman Castro, who also sits on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, utilized the services of Jamal Moiz Awan. Speier and Carson’s offices utilized Imran Awan.
Abid A. Awan was employed by Lois Frankel and Ted Lieu: members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. Also on the committee is Castro. As is Robin Kelly whose office employed Jamal Awan. Lieu also sits on the subcommittees on National Security and Information Technology of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Tammy Duckworth’s office had also employed Abid. Before Duckworth successfully played on the sympathy of voters to become Senator Tammy Duckworth, she had been on the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces of the Armed Services Committee.
Gwen Graham, who had also been on the Armed Services Committee and on the Tactical Air and Land Forces subcommittee, had employed Jamal Awan. Jamal was also employed by Cedric Richmond’s office. Richmond sits on the Committee on Homeland Security and on its Terrorism and Cybersecurity subcommittee. He is a ranking member of the latter subcommittee. Also employing Jamal was Mark Takano of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
Imran had worked for the office of John Sarbanes who sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee that oversees, among other things, the nuclear industry. Other members of the Committee employing the brothers included Yvette Clarke, who also sits on the Bipartisan Encryption Working Group, Diana DeGette, Dave Loebsack and Tony Cardenas.
But finally there’s Andre Carson.
Carson is the second Muslim in Congress and the first Muslim on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and, more critically, is the ranking member on its Emerging Threats Subcommittee. He is also a member of the Department of Defense Intelligence and Overhead Architecture Subcommittee.
Yet another somewhat disconcerting tidbit TDC cited;
Jamal, who public records suggest is only 22 years old and first began working in the House when he was 20, was paid nearly $160,000 a year, or three times the average House IT staff salary, according to InsideGov, which tracks congressional salaries. Abid was paid $161,000 and Imran $165,000.
Despite the three receiving abnormally high paychecks for services rendered, they did beat the high price of living in the DC area by all living under the same roof.
But even that left more questions than answers;
Abid, Imran and Jamal have all shared a house in Lorton, Virginia, that is owned by Hina R. Alvi [who just happens to be Imran Awan’s wife]. Alvi is a female House IT employee who works for many of the same members as the three brothers, as well as the House Democratic Caucus.
In a separate article from TDC, reporter Luke Rosiak cites even more troubling factual information. Specifically, despite the three having very chequered pasts, how in the world did they manage to pass the background checks needed to work on Capitol Hill?
As reported, the three brothers and wife “have a history of massive debts and bankruptcy, a fondness for fast cars and real estate, and unusually complicated webs of intertwined finances”
Despite the generous salaries, the four were involved in multiple suspicious mortgage transfers and a debt-evading bankruptcy. Abid had more than $1 million in debts following a failed business called Cars International that he ran in Falls Church, Va., from November 2009 to September 2010. Business associates said in court documents that Abid had stolen money and vehicles from them.
Article by: By TK Whiteman – February 9, 2017 (ConservativeFiringLine.com)
Conservative Columnist Autry J. Pruitt Addressing Racism in America
Judge Jeanine Pirro explains the “Refugee”controversy in her “Opening Statement” (video above).
With all the opinions, both professional and amateur regarding the acceptance of refugees into the United States, The Quantum Liberty Blog has decided to provide you with an analytical breakdown on US policy and procedures for refugee status and acceptance onto United States soil.
The responsibility of the United States Government and the President of the United States, is to ultimately protect it’s citizens from all enemies, foreign and the domestic.
Outlined in the information to follow, is an overview of the policies and procedures to ensure the protection of the American people from any possible dangers, while ensuring the proper implementation of the Refugee and/or Asylum-Seeker process.
It is important to note:
Determinations by President respecting number of admissions for humanitarian concerns. If the President determines, after appropriate consultation, that (1) an unforeseen emergency refugee situation exists, (2) the admission of certain refugees in response to the emergency refugee situation is justified by grave humanitarian concerns or is otherwise in the national interest, and (3) the admission to the United States of these refugees cannot be accomplished under subsection (a), the President may fix a number of refugees to be admitted to the United States during the succeeding period (not to exceed twelve months) in response to the emergency refugee situation and such admissions shall be allocated among refugees of special humanitarian concern to the United States in accordance with a determination made by the President after the appropriate consultation provided under this subsection.
- Is located outside of the United States
- Is of special humanitarian concern to the United States
- Demonstrates that they were persecuted or fear persecution due to race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group is not firmly resettled in another country
- Is admissible to the United States
You (a bona fide refugee) must receive a referral to the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for consideration as a refugee. (For more information on the referral criteria, see the USRAP Consultations and Worldwide Processing Priorities page).
***The question to note at this point: Have ALL the refugees attempting to enter the United States, properly adhered to this important process?
If you receive a referral, you will receive help filling out your application and then be interviewed abroad by a USCIS officer who will determine whether you are eligible for refugee resettlement. For more information about eligibility, see our Refugee Eligibility Determination page.
Refugee Travel Outside the United States
If you have refugee status and want to travel outside the United States, you will need to obtain a Refugee Travel Document in order to return to the United States. If you do not obtain a Refugee Travel Document in advance of departure, you may be unable to re-enter the United States. If you return to the country from which you fled, you will have to explain how you were able to return safely.
Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien’s status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(b) of this title.
The U.S. refugee protection system, while generous in many respects, has become less robust over the last two decades. The unique and often diverse needs of emerging refugee populations have exposed severe limitations in the standard resettlement approach. The system’s U.S. Refugee Admissions Program faces significant challenges, among which include heightened security reviews, inadequate coordination between government and NGOs, and unresolved policy tensions between the goals of protecting the most vulnerable.
Vital to the security of the American people and the sovereignty of the United States, this important issue must be resolved with great haste. The rise of terroristic acts within United States borders is of great concern! The American people, ultimately would like to experience the securities that are promised by the United States Constitution.
Reminiscent of marches in Europe, thousands of Muslims protested in downtown Chicago, against America and Israel. As seen in the video (above), this was a very well organized event. Protesters carried, signs and waved flags representative of Iraq and Turkey. What looked to be draped in a, Iraqi flag, was a coffin being carried by protesters. (Please note: This event is from July 2014, which should cause any liberty minded American great concern as to the progression of organization after only 2 years have passed.)
Chants lead by a man over a loudspeaker included: “Muslim, Muslim don’t you cry…(inaudible response)”, “Free, Free Palestine…(inaudible response)” along with other inaudible chants. But regardless, the mood illustrated was a definite disdain with Israel and the United States.
We have learned and must acknowledge that Jihad comes in many forms and fashions. As evidenced in this video, Jihad has definitely come to Chicago, Illinois
To further understand why massive protests are beginning now and have not been a notable occurrence in the past, we must first understand the ideology, when and how Muslims are called to Jihad.
Definitions to understand:
Mustahabb (Arabic: مستحبّ /mustaḥabb/, literally “recommended”) is an Islamic term referring to recommended, favored or virtuous actions. Mustahabb actions are those whose status of approval in Islamic law (ahkam) falls between mubah (neither encouraged nor discouraged) and wajib (compulsory).
Kafir (Arabic: كافر kāfir; plural كفّار kuffār; feminine كافرة kāfirah) is an Arabic term (from the root K-F-R “to cover”) “unbeliever”, “disbeliever”, or “infidel”. It is used as a derogatory term.
In Islam, shirk (Arabic: شرك širk) is the sin of practicing idolatry or polytheism, i.e. the deification or worship of anyone or anything other than the singular God i.e. Allah. Literally, it means the establishment of “partners” placed beside God. It is the vice that is opposed to the virtue of Tawhid (monotheism).
Fard or its synonym wājib (واجب) is one of the five types of Ahkam into which Fiqh categorizes acts of every Muslim. The Hanafi Fiqh however makes a distinction between Wajib and Fard, the latter being obligatory and the former merely necessary.
Jihad is of various kinds, some of which are obligatory upon everyone who is accountable, and some are obligatory upon the community as a whole. if some people undertake them then the rest are relieved of the obligation. And some kinds of jihad are mustahabb.
Jihad al-nafs (jihad against one’s self) and jihad al-Shaytaan (jihad against the Shaytaan) are obligatory upon everyone who is accountable. Jihad against the munaafiqeen (hypocrites), kaafirs (disbelievers) and leaders of oppression and innovation is obligatory upon the community as a whole. Physical jihad (i.e. fighting) against the kaafirs may become an individual obligation upon everyone who is able to do it in certain circumstances, which will be described below.
Ibn al-Qayyim said:
Once this is understood, then jihad is of four kinds: Jihad al-nafs (jihad against one’s self), jihad al-Shaytaan (jihad against the Shaytaan), jihad against the kaafirs and jihad against the hypocrites.
Jihad al-nafs (jihad against one’s self) is of four kinds:
1 – Striving to learn the teachings of Islam without which one cannot attain success and happiness in this world or in the Hereafter; if this is missing then one is doomed to misery in this world and in the Hereafter.
2 – Striving to make oneself act in accordance with what one has learned. Simply knowing without acting, even though it may not cause any harm, is not going to bring any benefit.
3 – Striving to call others to Islam, teaching those who do not know about it. Otherwise one will be one of those who conceal that which Allaah has revealed of guidance and teaching, and it will not benefit him or save him from the punishment of Allaah.
4 – Striving to bear patiently the difficulties involved in calling people to Allaah and the insults of people; bearing all that for the sake of Allaah.
If a person achieves all these four levels, then he will be one of the rabbaaniyyeen (learned men of religion who practise what they know and also preach to others. Cf. Aal ‘Imraan 3:79). The salaf were agreed that the scholar does not deserve to be called a rabbaani unless he knows the truth, acts in accordance with it and teaches it to others. Whoever teaches, acts in accordance with his knowledge and has knowledge, he will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Why aren’t all Muslims “Active” in the aggressive Jihad?
Defines a communal obligation in Muslim legal doctrine. In juxtaposition to fard al-ayn, fard al-kifayah is a legal obligation that must be discharged by the Muslim community as a whole, such as military struggle; if enough members in the Muslim community discharge the obligation, the remaining Muslims are freed from the responsibility before God.
Jihad is obligatory and becomes fard ‘ayn if a person is present where fighting is going on. This is the first of the situations in which jihad becomes an individual obligation.
(Source: https://islamqa.info/en/20214 )
The Muslim protesters in Chicago cannot be described as those in Europe, however there were people of all ages. Active protesters included: Older and younger, both men and women, even mothers who pushed their babies in strollers.
There was no visible sign of local police monitoring the protest and the News Media was conveniently absent. The protesters appeared to be nonviolent and there was no evidence of property destroyed (as seen in the video above).
As witnessed throughout the world, when Muslims turn out to protest, this is only the tip of the iceberg when considering their final agenda.
Current Issue Articles with Video, Pictures, Twitter Posts, and Controversial Perspectives.