trump-immigration-evangelicals
Use of the Bible to attain an Illegal Goal is breaking Gods Law i itself.

Reblogged from Reclaim our Republic

12 Feb 2017 by Dr Don Boys

 

Last Wednesday, the Washington Post published an open letter from more than 500 “conservative evangelical pastors and leaders…urging President Donald Trump to reverse his temporary pause on refugee resettlement…” Some celebrity names were Bill Hybels, Daniel Akin, Max Lucado, Tim Keller, etc., and the organizer of the open letter was World Relief, the social action arm of the National Association of Evangelicals. Furthermore, the letter did not reveal that World Relief and other groups are paid for each refugee they settle!

President Trump was trying to be correct, careful, but not callous by putting a temporary halt to refugees from seven Middle East nations. After all, his main responsibility is to keep America safe; and therefore, bringing thousands of Muslims who have no concept of democracy and, in fact, have a dedication to sharia law demands caution.

Left wingers, including many Evangelicals, are belching out anger, angst, and animus as they twist scripture to use against President Trump’s temporary pause of refugees. And let’s be honest, part of the Evangelical concern is based on money as mentioned above. The many religious groups that settle “refugees” in the U.S. are paid millions of dollars for their altruism. However, altruism is not altruism if there is a profit to be made.

Those religious groups include the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services, World Relief, Church World Services, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, Episcopal Migration Ministries, the International Rescue Committee, and the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants. When these groups send out a news release making their case for more immigration, they never mention that they receive $2,050 for each person they settle. Isn’t that an obvious conflict of interest? For sure, it is not full disclosure.

But it gets worse because all those religious groups must sign a federal waiver that they will not attempt to share the Gospel with the “refugees.” Wait a minute, I thought that was the basic reason all religious groups exist. No, in order to receive federal funds (your tax dollars), these groups agree they will not attempt to win refugees to Christ! It is illegal if they do, the cash will stop flowing. And practically all of the immigrants are Muslim, not Christian. But that’s another column.

But let me get to the twisting of Scripture by religious leaders as they try to convince shallow Christians to swallow the Evangelical ruse and permit unlimited immigration.

The senior pastor of Mosaic Church in Memphis said, “We were once the same kind of refugees. Our families come from similar situations.” No, many of these modern “refugees” chose to break the law and many come unvetted, uninvited, and unwanted to America. President Trump says that won’t happen anymore and for that he is castigated by the haters on the left.

I remind these “do gooders” (as opposed to those who do good) that the Bible often speaks of borders, borders that should be respected. All the major cities in the Ancient Middle East had massive walls, not to keep people in, but to keep gatecrashers from coming in uninvited.

These compromising Evangelical leaders are trying to drive a square peg into a round hole with a sledge hammer, but it simply won’t fit. The President of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference Samuel Rodriquez opined, “It’s about our Christian faith. It’s about Matthew 25 and Leviticus 19. It’s about finding a way where we can reconcile Romans 13, ‘respecting the rule of law.’” No, Sam, like many Evangelicals, has to twist the Scripture like a pretzel to make it mean what it was never meant to mean.

My critics declare that I am unkind, unreasonable, even unchristian for opposing amnesty, open borders, and sanctuary cities; however, their charge is not based on solid reasoning or the Scripture. They twist the Scripture to make it fit their unreasonable, unconstitutional, and unbiblical demands.

We are told that the illegal immigrants are trying to escape tyranny and poverty so America should make room for them since we are a Christian nation. Does that mean that we must accept any number of aliens? Does it mean that federal officials are not obligated to carefully investigate everyone who wants to stake a claim in America? Almost all my critics and supporters of amnesty and unlimited immigration confuse what a person should do with what a nation should do and they twist the Bible to support their political position.

The Bible twisters almost always use Exodus 23:9 to support their cause of immigration, amnesty, and sanctuary cities; however they use a flawed hermeneutic to build their tenuous case. That verse commands, “Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.” However, that chapter is dealing with an individual’s obligation to be gracious–not national guidelines for treatment of immigrants. Of course, those religious leaders who use that verse know what they are doing but are being dishonest to give credibility to a very shaky principle.

But that has nothing to do with illegal aliens. Fuzzy-thinking preachers neglect to tell their congregations that the Jews were in Egypt by invitation and were not trespassers. In fact, they were special guests as long as Joseph was alive and a friendly Pharaoh reigned. The Jews had not entered the land illegally as do modern invaders. The Jews were strangers in Egypt but not illegal aliens.

The preceding verses in Ex. 23 verify my contention about this being a personal obligation not a national policy. That passage warns the ancient Jews (and us today) that “Neither shalt thou countenance (give approval) a poor man in his cause.” Moses was warning us about showing favor to a person because of his condition, whether rich or poor. We are not to be swayed by our emotions but by justice. The ancient adage is, “Let justice be done, though the heavens should be dissolved.”

Leviticus 19:33 is also used wrongly: “And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him.” Again, the preceding verses prove that God was giving instructions for personal conduct by warning them not to consume blood; not to get tattoos or pierce their flesh; not to prostitute their daughters; keep the Sabbath days; not to be involved with sorcery and fortune telling, etc. Then He warned them not to vex a stranger living among them. In fact, Moses went on to say, “thou shalt love him as thyself.”

These verses do not apply to the immigration issue even slightly. Illegal aliens purposefully choose to break our laws, even arrogantly demanding entrance into our nation expecting to be cared for upon their arrival. They are not sojourners or strangers but scoundrels (with a few innocent women and children) and are being encouraged to break our laws by many leftwing religious groups, even some Evangelicals.

Most of the “refugees” are plucked out of an alien culture known for being bellicose, backward, and brutal–never knowing or desiring democracy and the rule of law. They arrive in an American city without any input from the citizens who have built the homes, businesses, streets, churches, colleges, hospitals, etc.! Many aliens will no doubt become productive citizens while others will continue their backward lifestyle. Some are or will become terrorists and it only takes one to kill your family or bomb your church.

The National Center for Lesbian Rights issued a statement calling Trump’s temporary order to keep out immigrants from seven nations as “an attack on American values.” Say what! A bunch of lesbians speaking of American values is like an abortionist speaking about his love for children; an arsonist speaking of his commitment to fire safety; and an anarchist boasting of his desire for constitutional government.

The immigration issue, especially as it relates to Trump’s temporary ban, is proof that many religious leaders wear pantyhose, silk shorts, shirts with lace around the edge and sniff perfume from frilly handkerchiefs–and are shamelessly called men of God!

Boys’ new book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published recently by BarbWire Books; to get your copy, click here. An eBook edition is also available.

 

http://barbwire.com/2017/02/12/evangelical-leaders-twist-bible-promote-immigration-denounce-president-trump/



 

MISUSE OF SCIENCE AND SOCIAL PRESSURE PUSHING AMERICA INTO ‘STRONG DELUSION’

shutterstock_233431657_science

12 Feb 2017 by 

 

“And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.” (2Th 2: 11)

This warning and promise of scripture is given to those who live in the days just prior to the return of the Lord Jesus Christ. It, along with many other passages speak to a time when “knowledge will be increased” (Dan 12: 4), but spiritual blindness will also be at a peak. The world will be as spiritually dumbed down as it will ever get.

God does not willfully trap people in this delusion, but because they want to live outside of his will, he lets them pursue it to the point of reprobation. (Ro 1: 28) Reprobation is a ticket to the interventional judgment of the Living God. It is to be – judged already!

The crowd that falls into this category has two things in common. The first is that they are the largest group on the planet earth and second, they are perfectly sure they are on the correct path.

Those who walk with God have God as their reward. The secular minded have only what the god of this world gives them as a reward – and they are perfectly satisfied with it.

The ruler of the cosmos (Satan) is delighted to give them what they want to keep them under the strong delusion, to wit:

 “And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, showed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.” (Lu 4: 5-6)

The “whomsoever” in this verse is us, it is Gov. Cuomo and anyone else who will buy into secularism’s last day’s justifications for our worst behaviors.

They would insist that they are too educated, advanced and brilliant to fall down to a demonic entity or an idol as did the uneducated ancient civilizations. Their worship today is indirect and more subtle, but it is just as prominent today as it ever was.

For a case in point consider just one of today’s headlines.

In an article published by Slate a picture of a smiling Gov. Cuomo of New York and a brimming Nancy Pelosi in the background is a title that read; “What’s the Purpose of a State Constitutional Amendment Enshrining Roe v. Wade?

The word “enshrine” is as near to the idea of worship as it gets.

We may pride ourselves for not repeating the silly superstitious ways of our forebears who ignorantly offered their children in sacrifice to the idol Moloch – but we are exactly like them.

Enshrining the continued murder of un-born babies after 44 years and nearly 60 million already wasted is indeed worship of the Devil.

What’s worse is that it is done in the name of another false god moderns worship called science.

But let’s put up our necessary disclaimer for those who think we are just Bible thumpers making a fuss.

Science is both useful and a wonderful pursuit of modernity until it is misused and or misapplied to create the kind of secularism that dismisses God and makes fools of men. Empiricism is not imperial, it can uncover truth but it cannot create truth.

Having dispensed with that, now let’s look at the goofy application of good science that Cuomo and every other abortionist in the world uses to justify slaughtering their own kind.

From the eighth grade and beyond every student of science knows that when the DNA of male and female join to form the DNA of a new human being in the womb, the creation of a new human being has begun.

We don’t need to use the phrase “Abortion stops a beating heart” to make our case. Stopping this process is to kill a human being as sure as smashing the larvae eliminates the butterfly.

Similarly, no matter what gender humans decide they are, or what length they go to change their gender, the DNA will not lie for them. It is human, it is gender specific, and only social pressure from a PC indoctrinated world would ask science to tell such a whopping lie for them.

Ignoring the moral teachings of scripture is bad enough, but denying the very science the world so vigorously defends and depends upon is what constitutes the best definition of the phrase “strong delusion.”

The practice and promotion of abortion gives full definition to this verse taken from Proverbs.

 “There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” (Pr 16: 25)

What seems right to modern man turns out to be all wrong for modern babies, in fact, it is murder!

As for homo-inclinations and transgenderism it is clear that we have capitulated into the dark realm where we cannot differentiate between diversity and perversity.

This kind of national insanity will lead us to hard times which will spring upon us without warning.

You can take this as a warning.

http://barbwire.com/2017/02/12/misuse-of-science-and-social-pressure-pushing-america-into-strong-delusion/

warning-2-thes-2-10-12

2-chronicles-7-14-pray

Advertisements

Islamic extremism deadliest ideology in U.S. for first time in 30 years

2_162017_ap-161643354625428201_c0-313-3786-2520_s885x516

– The Washington Times – Thursday, February 16, 2017

Last year’s Orlando nightclub shootings propelled the annual number of deaths linked to domestic extremist-related attacks to their highest level in decades and made Islamist extremism the deadliest ideology for the first time in 30 years.

According to a new report from the Anti-Defamation League, the preliminary tally of homegrown extremist-related deaths in the U.S. shows that 69 people died in such attacks last year, the most since the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.

Omar Mateen’s pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State and al Qaeda during the Pulse nightclub massacre led to classification of the attack, which killed 49 people, as domestic Islamic extremism — setting 2016’s figures far afield from prior years. For the past 30 years, extremism-related deaths were most commonly likely to be linked to right-wing ideologies, the report states.

Of the 372 people killed in the U.S. over the last 10 years by domestic terrorists, 74 percent died at the hands of right-wing extremists. About 24 percent were killed by domestic Islamists, and the remaining 2 percent killed by left-wing extremists, according to the report released Thursday.

“Anti-government extremists and white supremacists were responsible for only a minority of extremist related deaths in 2016, though they did commit two triple homicides,” states the ADL report “Murder and Extremism in the United States in 2016.”

“These low figures also occurred during a year in which non-violent right-wing extremist activity was high, in large part due to agitation and propaganda by the so-called alt-right and other extremists in connection with the 2016 presidential election,” the report stated.

ADL notes that homicides by white supremacist groups were uncharacteristically low in 2016, and that such groups “are typically responsible for more such killings than any other extremist movement.”

The ADL has not included the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in this or similar past surveys because the attack was masterminded abroad and carried out by foreigners.

“In a country as large as the United States, no one extremist group or movement has a monopoly on violence,” said Oren Segal, director of ADL’s Center on Extremism and an author of the report. “It is clear from the trends that we cannot ignore one threat of extremism over another. Extremists come in many forms, and extremist violence, whether inspired by [Islamic State] or carried out in the name of white supremacy, is still very much a serious threat.”

A separate report issued this week by the Southern Poverty Law Center found that the number of hate groups operating in the U.S. last year increased, with a noticeable spike in the number of anti-Muslim groups.

The center’s report blamed that spike on both anger over terrorist attacks such as the Orlando nightclub shooting and President Trump’s “incendiary rhetoric, including his campaign pledge to bar Muslims from entering the United States.”

ADL analysts caution in their report that the high number of deaths in the Orlando massacre can distort statistics and perceptions of the extremist landscape in the country, and were it not for that single attack, 2016 might have been considered a “mild year” for extremist-related deaths.

Including the Orlando attack, the ADL report counts 11 lethal incidents and 69 deaths that were connected to extremism in 2016 — compared to 29 incidents that resulted in 65 deaths in 2015. Experts say additional analysis may result in an increase in the number of deaths associated with domestic extremism, as has been the case in prior years.

Among the other lethal incidents highlighted by the ADL was the targeting of police officers by black nationalists. In July, two separate attacks on law enforcement by men with black nationalist ties left eight police officers dead.

The attacks, in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and Dallas, “represent the worst spate of black nationalist-related murders of police officers since the late 1960s and early 1970s, when more than two dozen police officers, and several more corrections officers, were killed by black nationalists, particularly from the Black Liberation Army and the Black Panther Party,” the ADL report states.

In Dallas, 25-year-old Army veteran Micah Xavier Johnson opened fire on police officers as hundreds gathered to protest fatal police-involved shootings in Baton Rouge and St. Paul, Minnesota.

Less than two weeks later, gunman Gavin Long fatally shot three officers in Baton Rouge. Authorities said the gunman identified himself as a black nationalist.

Since 1965 the ADL reports that 104 police officers have been killed by domestic extremists — including 57 by right-wing individuals, 44 by left-wing individuals including anarchists and black nationalists, and three have been killed by domestic Islamists.

Islamic extremism deadliest ideology in U.S. for first time in 30 years

What The 9th Cir Wants IN USA: Islamic Morality Police Murder Girl, 10, for Stepping Outside

And this is what the insane Leftests want for America!

Reclaim Our Republic

trump-court-9th-circuit

Feb 10, 2017 By Tad Cronn

From the Daily Mail, by way of Russian reports, comes this most recent tale of horror committed by the Islamic State in occupied Mosul, Iraq.

You may have heard of Mosul. It’s Iraq’s second largest city, that was liberated from Saddam Hussein and the “non-existent” terrorist forces by the U.S. military in 2003. Then Obama pulled out the troops to please his base of mewling leftists, and ISIS took over the city, along with a whole lot of other territory in Iraq, and undid everything that had been accomplished in that country.

After a months-long push, U.S. and Iraqi forces recently “re-liberated” the eastern half of Mosul, leaving the western half under ISIS control for the moment.

The story of 10-year-old murder victim Faten apparently comes from there. It’s hard to be sure, since American media have for years ignored the horrors in…

View original post 359 more words

BREAKING: Assad Confirms Jihad Militia That Killed Chris Stevens Now In U.S. Refugee Population

hillary-clinton-and-chris-stevens-1024x536-700x340_480

While certainly beginning to wane by 1986, the Cold War was still much a reality. Both the United States and their arch enemy, the Soviet Union, lived with the reality that the other had weapons so destructive that neither side’s leader likely slept very soundly at night. Still, something really telling happened that year.  The Soviet-American relationship was about to take a turn.

The Chernobyl Power Station suffered what was, at that time, the worst nuclear mishap to ever happen. After Mayak in Russia (which had been the worst disaster of its kind prior) had decimated the U.S.S.R. only about thirty years prior, Ronald Reagan said, “The United States is prepared to make available to the Soviet Union humanitarian and technical assistance dealing with this accident.”

He added that America was looking to gain,” information on the accident and request the closest possible coordinated effort among all concerned countries.”  Lastly, Reagan also added that “To minimize the danger, we hope the Soviet Union will fulfill its international obligations to provide information on the accident in a timely manner.”

serveimage-32-600x375

This was said to a communist country that wanted to destroy us, but this did not just happen once. When (also in 1986) the Space Shuttle Challenger erupted into a ball of fire, fell from the purple sky, and killed everyone on board (including the first civilian in space for America) on live television, a Soviet Embassy spokesman said, “On behalf of the embassy, I express deep condolences and sympathy to the American people in connection with this enormous tragic accident involving the shuttle Challenger.”

Regular citizens were too full of sorrow in Russia, with even common office workers saying “I think it’s very sad. Any human losses in this field, whether in the Soviet Union or America, are a tragedy. Space exploration is a risky business, but such crashes are a small tragedy for mankind.

That kind of kinship towards one’s enemies is not totally absent today from the human the spirit to the degree that many of us have feared. Syria’s embattled president, Bashar Assad, is trying with great passion and convincing demeanor to warn everyone in every nation that is taking in refugees fleeing the war that has befallen his nation to beware of the terrorists that he warns are”definitely” mingled into the mix.

hg-600x371

We know already that Ambassador Stevens made repeated requests for help and back up and was ignored. It seems that he and only one other person were all that stood between him and the people who were working to bringing in heavy weapons to Syria from Libya. This means that Assad is perfectly correct about not only the terrorist threat, but that America’s top brass may have actually allowed Stevens to be murdered. HE MIGHT HAVE BEEN LEFT TO DIE ON PURPOSE TO HIDE WHAT HE KNEW.

In an interview with Yahoo News, Assad was asked if he thought, since he was certain that terrorist elements were involved, whether or not he felt that Trump or the protesters were correct about the travel ban. Assad chose to leave such matters to the people and leadership of the U.S. (a respect that much of the world has not shown him, including Obama’s America) saying only that, “is an American issue.

He did go on with his point, however,  by saying that the internet is full of factual reports that show not only articles and official documents outlining the fact of terrorist infiltration within refugees ranks, but also videos of the terrorists saying it for themselves.

One would expect Assad to laugh merrily as sharia practitioners who act more like swine than human beings sweep over his enemies and bring great sorrow to their societies, but surprisingly that is not his tone. Even when asked if there were a lot of terrorists mixed in, his answer was filled with prudence when he observed that it does not take a large number of such terrorists to inflict great harm. That said, he seemed to imply that the number was pretty high without coming right out and saying it.

gfgfgf-600x338

Those terrorists in Syria, holding the machine gun or killing people, they [appear as] peaceful refugees in Europe or in the West,” said the Syrian president. He added that rather than see his people spread all over the nations of the Earth that he would like to see them all come home.  “For me, the priority is to bring those citizens to their country, not to help them immigrate.

Like most things that the mainstream media misses, this hidden nugget of information could be as (or even MORE) important than his reaffirmation that terrorists are hiding amongst the refugees, though his firsthand confirmation does help. The real gem is that he WANTS HIS PEOPLE HOME!

This means that Trump will likely have an ally in his quest to not have America awash with Syrians who are displaced due to a war that Bush helped to cause and that Obama helped to fund. It means that Trump’s repeated calls for a safe zone, followed by an eventual reunified Syria, followed by the whole of EU/U.S.A. not needing to take in any more people with the war over has official backing from the leader of the nation to whom an exodus affects most. This also means that Russia and the United States now have a common goal with all three parties agreeing if they are wise enough to make the deal. (That we all know, is Trump’s specialty, so this could be amazing news)

dfdsds-600x391

Assad, rather than portraying the mad butcher who gasses his own people (which is unlikely to have been the case), the soft-spoken Syrian leader declared that each nation needed to weigh the humanitarian cost with proper risk analysis. Some may argue that Assad is not someone to be trusted, that the Germans who studied the gas attack were wrong, and that Assad did gas his own people. If so, then let us reason still. Pretending that it is true, does his evil mean that he knows nothing of terror? Does it mean that his years of experience and Islamic background with expertise in knowing each nuance of each radical faction is now worthless because he is evil?

If Assad was saying, “let the West die from these terrorists,” or, “we will never accept those who fled home,” or  ANYTHING that imply that he could benefit from lying then we could all write off his warnings and put his words under those of Kim Jung Un and simply have a good laugh. This is not the case. Assad seems to be saying that instead of lashing out at America and nations that spent billions to dethrone him and who almost went to war with Russia over it, that the West needs to act very carefully. It seems as if the old adage that says that the enemy of your enemy is your friend is simply not true in this case.

BREAKING: Assad Confirms Jihad Militia That Killed Chris Stevens Now In U.S. Refugee Population

Trump reportedly considers new immigration order after court defeat

I, for one, am tired of living in a degenerate society, where the now, dead Hollywood is more of a Political Power working for Globalism and where people from 3rd world Countries come in and fill our homeland with all kinds of disease and who no nothing, nor understand our Democracy and way of life.

Unbelievable that our President is having to fight our own people and High Positioned People to keep our Country safe. Because of how they’ve been and are being I hope he cracks down even harder on things.



Although President Trump said he is convinced that his travel ban will eventually win in court, he said Friday that he is considering crafting a “brand new order.”

He said any action would not come until next week, but he stressed that “we need speed for reasons of security.”

The comments, which were made on Air Force One, suggest that he is going to take bifurcated strategy, according to The Wall Street Journal. In that case, his administration could continue a legal fight for his first order all while crafting another.

“I have no doubt that we’ll win that particular case,” Trump said at the White House, during a press conference alongside visiting Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

The Justice Department is weighing its options, which also include appealing to a broader panel of judges or the Supreme Court.

The decision Thursday was made by a panel of three judges with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals based in San Francisco.

In their unanimous decision , the judges refused to reinstate Trump’s immigration order and rejected the government’s position that such presidential decisions on immigration policy are “unreviewable.”

“There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy,” the judges wrote. “…Although our jurisprudence has long counseled deference to the political branches on matters of immigration and national security, neither the Supreme Court nor our court has ever held that courts lack the authority to review executive action in those arenas for compliance with the Constitution.”

The initial order, which was signed Jan. 27, suspended entry for visitors from seven predominantly Muslim countries for at least 90 days and froze the entire U.S. refugee program, The Journal reported.

Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law in Houston, said the “million-dollar question” is whether the Trump administration would appeal to the Supreme Court.

That could run the risk of having only eight justices to hear the case, which could produce a tie and leave the lower-court ruling in place.

“There’s a distinct risk in moving this too quickly,” Blackman said. “But we’re not in a normal time, and Donald Trump is very rash. He may trump, pardon the figure of speech, the normal rule.”

 

 

Trump reportedly considers new immigration order after court defeat

 

Radical Erdogan Builds 9000 Mosques & Bans Christian Liturgy

 

erdogan-dictator

We see Radical Islam on the rise everywhere and what’s even more disturbing is that these radicals have penetrated almost every part of Europe and America.  Their clear intent is to have more kids than the women of their hosting nations.  Demographics indicate that Sweden is almost a gone case and that it has become the rape capital of Europe. England could follow a similar path in 10-20 years as Muslim women are giving birth to 4 kids on average to every 1.5 children European couples have.    The videos below illustrate how the situation is going from bad to worse.

Then we have Radical Insane Erdogan, the wannabe Sultan whose ambition it is to promote Radical Islam as far as he can. He has built the largest Mosque in the world, and it’s not in Turkey, but it has been constructed in America. Now we find out that he has built almost 9,000 new mosques in Turkey and is banning Christian liturgy.  If the Europe does not wake up to Radical Islam, there will be no Europe to wake up to in the years to come.  The only places that are actively destroying the jihadists are Russia and China

A total of 8,985 mosques were built between 2005 and 2015 by the Turkish government over the last decade in Turkey, according to statistics released by Turkey’s Religious Affairs Directorate

While the Turkish government has built so many mosques across the country with state funds, it has banned Orthodox Christian liturgy in the Sumela Monastery, a historic site in Trabzon.

 

“Trabzon was settled by Greeks probably by the 7th century BC,” writes researcher Sam Topalidis for the website Pontos World. “Trabzon was the ancient capital of the Greek speaking Komnenos Byzantine Kingdom (1204–1461). It survived until 1461, eight years after the fall of Byzantine Constantinople when both localities fell to the Ottoman Turks.”

According to Topalidis, Trabzon’s Muslim population increased dramatically under the Ottoman rule due to:

Muslims moving into the city (Most of the Trabzon’s Muslims were involuntary immigrants)
Deportations of Christians out of the city, probably to Istanbul
Christians converting to Islam, probably for fear of deportation
“However, the most important reason for the conversions was probably due to the higher taxes paid by Christians (compared to Muslims), a strong economic incentive for the poorest Christians,” writes Topalidis.

The tax he refers to is the “jizya tax” — money paid by Christians and Jews in order to be allowed to survive and to keep practising their religion, according to Islamic lawFull Story

 

Radical Erdogan Builds 9000 Mosques & Bans Christian Liturgy

Judge Jeanine: Entry to US is not a right for non-citizens

Judge Jeanine discusses President Trumps Travel Ban getting halted by Federal Judge

 

8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens

constitution

JUDICIAL OVERREACH ON NATIONAL SECURITY

A federal district court judge in the state of Washington temporarily blocked the enforcement of President Trump’s “Executive Order: Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States” (Jan. 27, 2017). The executive order had suspended the admission refugees to the United States, including from Syria, and of non-U.S. resident travelers from seven majority Muslim countries considered prone to terrorism. U.S. District Judge James L. Robart, who acted last Friday in a case brought by the states of Washington and Minnesota, specified that his decision is to be implemented nationwide. In issuing his temporary restraining order, the judge found that the states had standing to bring the case, that they were likely to succeed on its merits, and that a temporary restraining order was in “the public interest.” Not surprisingly, President Trump tweeted his displeasure with Judge Robart’s decision.

President Trump has every right to be upset on the merits of Judge Robart’s action, even if his use of the phrase “so-called” in describing the judge may have been a tad over the top. Instead, President Trump might have used the words “irresponsible” or “reckless” in characterizing a decision that is a clear violation of the Constitution’s separation of powers and is potentially detrimental to national security.

Despite the president’s objections, the Trump administration appears to be complying with Judge Robart’s decision to date.  However the Department of Justice appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to immediately reverse what Judge Robart had done and restore President Trump’s entry suspension order. The appeals court declined to do so right away. It set forth a briefing schedule calling for the plaintiffs to file their papers by 3am ET on Monday and for the Department of Justice to reply by 6pm ET.

President Trump acted well within his constitutional and statutory authority to issue his executive order. “The exclusion of aliens is a fundamental act of sovereignty,” the Supreme Court concluded in a 1950 case. “The right to do so stems not alone from legislative power, but is inherent in the executive power to control the foreign affairs of the nation. When Congress prescribes a procedure concerning the admissibility of aliens, it is not dealing alone with a legislative power. It is implementing an inherent executive power.”

Congress reaffirmed the president’s power with respect to decisions excluding aliens in the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”), which was originally enacted in 1952, and has been amended several times, including in 1996. The following language has remained intact: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.” (8 U.S.C. § 1182(f)).

President Trump’s executive order, in the interest of protecting national security, directed changes to the policy and process of admitting non-citizens into the United States. It was intended to provide a period of review for relevant agencies to evaluate current procedures and to propose and implement new procedures. The purpose falls squarely within the president’s constitutional and statutory authority and responsibility, as stated in the executive order, “to ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism.”

In order to allow the opportunity for appropriate review and proposal of changes to procedures for the protection of national security, the executive order suspended for 90 days entry of immigrants and non-immigrants from seven countries: Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. It suspended, for 120 days, the United States Refugee Admission Program, with the exception of Syria where the suspension is indefinite. After the refugee suspension ends, the Secretary of State will have the authority to prioritize applicants on the basis of religious-based persecution provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.

While the affected countries are all Muslim majority countries, they represent only seven out of the 56 Muslim majority countries that belong to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Out of the ten countries with the largest Muslim population, only one country – Iran – is on the executive order’s list of seven. Non-Muslims as well as Muslims from the seven countries would be affected by the executive order. The countries themselves were selected on the basis of their being nurturing grounds for the export of terrorism, a perfectly rational basis to distinguish one country from another for the purposes of national security. No invidious discrimination is involved.

Nevertheless, without any legal analysis and lacking access to the kind of classified information on threats to national security that the president of the United States has at his disposal, Judge Robart took it upon himself to substitute his judgment for the president’s. The judge gave unwarranted deference to the speculative, vague interests asserted by the states of Washington and Minnesota, who claimed without any concrete evidence that the temporary suspension of entry of aliens from the seven countries “adversely affects” their own “States’ residents in areas of employment, education, business, family relations, and freedom to travel.” This preposterous conclusory assertion overlooks the fact that the affected individuals temporarily barred from entering the country are not residents of these states and are not entitled to the states’ protection. Moreover, the states are overlooking their responsibility to protect the safety of their actual residents, which the executive order is designed to assist in doing. The federal executive branch is charged with the responsibility for protecting all of the American people from national security threats, including but not limited to the people of Washington and Minnesota.

Judge Robart goes even further afield in giving deference to the states’ unsupported claim that the executive order would inflict damage on their own operations, tax base and public education system. Under this theory, individual states would have the right to challenge any federal policy decision on the basis of virtually any claim of possible harm to their states’ more parochial interests. The result would be to upend the relationship between the federal and state governments under our constitutional system. In any case, by declaring that his order would have to be implemented nationally, Judge Robart improperly imputed to the other 48 states the claims of the two states before him that are actually within his jurisdiction to adjudicate. Indeed, a federal district court in Massachusetts reached a contrary conclusion on the very same day that Judge Robart issued his decision. In a far more thorough opinion, the federal district court in Massachusetts determined that President Trump’s executive order was a lawful exercise of the political branches’ plenary control over the admission of aliens into the United States. There is no basis for disregarding this opinion and making Judge Robart’s scantily reasoned decision the law of the land nationwide.

During oral argument, Judge Robart said to the Department of Justice attorney, “You’re here arguing on behalf of someone who says we have to protect the US from these individuals coming from these countries, and there’s no support for that.” His observation, which he asserted without any proof on the record, is irrelevant. The countries were selected based on a list of “countries of concern” compiled previously by the Obama administration. They all have been proven unable to control both terrorism within their borders and the export of terrorism outside of their borders. President Trump had a rational basis for the selection of the countries subject to the temporary suspension. It is not within Judge Robart’s constitutional authority to substitute his judgment for the president’s on such matters of national security. He failed to meet the test he himself stated in his decision: “The role assigned to the court is not to create policy, and it is not to judge the wisdom of the policy created by the other two branches.”

As for those objecting to the prioritization of persecuted religious minorities for future refugee status, they may want to read the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which describes exactly what those religious minorities are facing in Syria, Iraq and other parts of the Middle East and Africa today. Genocide is defined as any of a number of acts such as killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm or forcibly transferring children, “committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” Persecuted Christians in that part of the world surely fall into that category.

Moreover, a “refugee” is defined in the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees as “someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.” Does anyone seriously believe that Christians would be safe to return to countries such as Syria, Iraq or Libya today?

Judge Robart exceeded his judicial authority and has potentially put Americans at needless risk. If the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals does not promptly reverse his reckless decision, the Department of Justice will need to take this case directly to the Supreme Court.