Obama Actually Committed More Religious Discrimination than Any That Trump Is Accused of

Where was the outrage against the Obama Administration? Where is the outrage against the people protesting against Trump?

From: Canada Free Press

By - Ron A. Y. Rich - January 31, 2017

Any intellectually honest people who care about immigration should be far more upset with President Obama’s immigration policies than President Trump’s.

Syrian Christians constitute 10% of the Arabs in Syria, yet during the Obama administration, they constituted from .5% to 1% of the refugees permitted to escape into America from Syria. It is patently obvious that Christians face far greater persecution in Syria and other Arab countries than Muslims, so the statistic described above demonstrates clear discrimination against Christians by the Obama administration, based 100% on religion and 0% on counter-terrorism.  If anything, Christians are less likely than Muslims to be members of ISIS or Muslim fundamentalists or terrorists.

Note the contrast with the policies of the Trump administration, where the ban on immigrants from certain ISIS-infested countries makes no mention of religion and does not take religion into account. It is clearly based on an attempt to prevent potential or actual terrorists from infiltrating our country. The hypocrites of the left also conveniently fail to note that the 7 Arab countries singled out for the ban are precisely the identical Arab countries singled out for extra careful security measures by the Obama administration, so on top of everything else, the leftists and others who focus on the 7 Arab countries singled out by Trump are hypocritical in their outrage.

The Unites States State Department even under Obama found that Christians in more than 60 countries face persecution from their governments or the surrounding neighbors simply because of their belief in Jesus. Yet what did Obama do about it? How many Democratic politicians and Hollywood actors and actresses complained about this?

An estimated 322 Christians are killed because of their faith each month.  What is the estimate of Democratic politicians and Hollywood actors and actresses complaining about this?

A Pew Research Center Poll found that more than 75% of the world’s population centers are areas with severe religious restrictions, many of them Christian. What percentage of Democratic politicians and Hollywood actors and actresses are complaining about this?

The fact that Christians are singled out more than Muslims is obvious. The question is why more Christians, let alone more people of all religions as well as atheists haven’t spoken up about the discrimination.

An estimated 2/3 of Christian Arabs left the “Palestinian” areas between 1949 and 1967, when these areas were exclusively under the control of Arab Muslims, but their numbers have grown subsequent to that time when these areas became partly under Israeli control.

The contrast is even greater in Israel proper. There were an estimated 34,000 Christians in the area now encompassed by Israel in 1949; now there are an estimated 150,000, constituting approximately 9% of the Israeli Arab population, and 2% of the total Israeli population.

Under Jordanian rule, Christians were forbidden to purchase land and houses, and many were persecuted, tortured, and murdered because of their religion. 

The Palestinian Authority notoriously denies Jewish historical ties to Jerusalem, but they not as notoriously, but equally despicably, deny Christian ties to Jerusalem as well.

Bethlehem and Nazareth used to be populated by Christians in the majority.  After Jordanian control and now Palestinian Authority control, they are in the minority.

Three quarters of the Christians who used to live in Bethlehem now live abroad.  Many of Jerusalem’s Christians now live in Australia. Chile alone has become the home to 30,000 Christians who used to live in Israel and Jordan.

In 2002, a la Hamas in Gaza, Muslims took over the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem and fired at Israeli soldiers from it, knowing that Israel tries to avoid firing at religious holy places and civilians.

In the recent fighting, 100,000 Christians fled from Mosul , and for the first time in almost 2,000 years, virtually none are left. How many of the anti-Trump protestors are protesting? How many did Obama let into America?

In Nigeria, thousands of Christians were denied schooling, clean water, heath care, and ultimately their very lives.

Saudi Arabia tortures and murders Muslims who convert to Christianity as a matter of course, and is not exactly a haven to Christians unfortunate enough to have been born there.

The atrocities against Christians may be worst in Syria, but they continue in one way or another in many parts of the world. Yet, coming back to our opening paragraph, the Obama Administration only permitted ½ to 1% of the Syrian refugees who were Christian to enter the United States, vs. 99 to 99.5% Muslims, which is a far more direct and outrageous implementation of discrimination based on religion than anything proposed or implemented by the Trump Administration.

Where was the outrage against the Obama Administration? Where is the outrage against the people protesting against Trump?


God bless,
JohnnyD

The Truth about Trump’s Executive Order Restricting Entry into the US: Why It Is Good Policy

From: Eagle Rising

Written by Paul Dowling

“Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it.”  —Jonathan Swift

The Order

President Trump signed an executive order on Friday, January 27, 2017, that puts tight restrictions on immigration into the US from seven Mid-Eastern countries, suspends refugee admissions for 120 days, and places a ban on all Syrian refugees until further notice.  The order has been as highly praised as it has been widely criticized, and airport-based protests across the country have ensued.

Serious Matters

Allowing doctrinaire Muslims, who believe in the Jihad, to enter the United States is a serious matter.  And, yes, even those who are coming on student visas can be Jihadists.  It should be pointed out that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, one of the Boston Bombers (along with his brother Tamerlan Tsarnaev), was a student at the time of the Boston Bombing; in fact, he was a sophomore living at University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth’s Pine Dale Hall dormitory.  And just how did the Tsarnaev brothers come to the United States?  Well, they were originally admitted on tourist visas.  To cite the Wikipedia, “He [Dzhokhar] and his family had traveled to the United States on a tourist visa and subsequently claimed asylum [refugee status] during their stay in 2002.  He became a naturalized U.S. citizen on September 11, 2012.”

Deaf Ears: The Absence of Vetting Proves Deadly

The Tsarnaev family, had it undergone the kind of extreme vetting Trump is now proposing, never would have been allowed to obtain refugee status, let alone American citizenship.  The Russians knew this family was bad news, and, at one point, even went out of their way to warn US authorities about them.  Needless to say, their warnings fell on the Obama Administration’s deaf ears.

So, the fact is that President Obama had been warned that these were dangerous people and potential Jihadists.  But Obama did nothing, even though his own administration had been warned about the Tsarnaevs by Russian intelligence.  Also, the American intelligence community knew, from Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s YouTube postings, that Tamerlan had become a radical Jihadist.  US intelligence was knowledgeable with regard to his dangerous beliefs and violent tendencies.  Tamerlan was even suspected in the murder of two Jews and their roommate (Erik Weissman, Raphael Teken, and roommate Brendan Mess) in Waltham, Massachusetts, on September 11, 2011, the ten-year anniversary of 9/11.  Yet, with this dark cloud hanging over the family, its members still received US citizenship a year later.

If Trump Had Been President . . .

If Donald Trump had been President of the United States four years ago, and had put out a similar executive order to the one he just recently issued, it is likely that the Tsarnaevs never would have been able to withstand the extreme vetting process Trump now intends to use to protect American lives in the future.  The problem with preventing future terrorist acts is that, since acts prevented never come to fruition, Trump will not receive full credit for the lives saved.  America’s unimaginative Democrat propaganda media will, instead, work tirelessly to criticize President Trump, by virtue of his being a Republican.  Indeed, it is interesting that the same media that are criticizing Trump for protecting human lives today also failed to criticize Obama for his unwillingness to protect the lives of the bombing victims of the Tsarnaevs.  If Trump had been the president back then, and the Boston Bombing had happened to due Trump’s failure to vet the Tsarnaevs, Trump would have been criticized without mercy for not doing exactly what he is doing right now.  By the same token, any executive action by Obama to do what Trump is now doing would never be criticized, simply because he is a Democrat.  Actually, there is proof of this.

Here Comes the Proof

Back on December 18, 2015, President Obama signed a law—as part of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of FY2016—targeting the Muslim countries chosen by Trump in his recent executive order.  (This is why Trump chose those specific countries.)  Trump, it turns out, just wanted to follow Obama’s law, rather than using an executive order to create new law, which would have been un-Constitutional.

So, Trump is just executing a law signed by Obama.  The reasons those particular countries were chosen is because six of them are failed states with tremendous terrorist activity sponsored by the Islamic State (aka ISIS), and Iran is a state-sponsor of terror and the sworn enemy of America.  Here is a list of seven countries: Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.

Remember Paris!

Obama’s 2015 law defines the seven countries at issue as “countries of concern,” probably due to the fact that the Islamic State has pledged to use Jihadists from those areas to infiltrate the refugees coming to America, the same way they infiltrated the refugees arriving in France, in order to perpetrate the Paris Attacks in November of 2015.  Six of the Jihadists that carried out the Paris Attacks were refugees.

The Unfair Propaganda Media

It is interesting that no one in the legacy media said anything negative about Obama, when his administration targeted those six countries.  But Trump, on the other hand, is being vilified for using exactly the same criteria Obama used. To quote William A. Jacobson, of Legal Insurrection, “What?  So there was a Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 two years before Trump? . . .  But almost no one critiqued it in 2015 because it was Obama’s administration overseeing it. . . .  But why didn’t CNN note that the seven countries were not named [by Trump] and that in fact they are only on the list because of Obama’s policy?  Because mainstream media have been purposely lying, either due to ignorance or because of unwillingness to read the document and ask questions and because they are too ready to accept ‘facts’ without investigating.  They want to blame Trump for a ‘Muslim ban’ because they were ready with that script since last year.”

A Good Policy Can Save Lives

Better vetting of the Tsarnaevs would have meant zero people maimed or killed in the Boston Marathon of 2013.  No Tsarnaev refugee family in America would have meant a much happier and safer America as a result.  The Russians told America, during the vetting process, about the Tsarnaevs’ jihadist family culture and other problems, but our government wanted to play nice and let the refugees stay.  Of course, the anti-Trump protesters care little about the families of those killed on April 15, 2013; the anti-Trump protesters are likely people who were not personally affected by the Tsarnaevs’ terrorist attack—or any terrorist attack, for that matter—and are, therefore, not mindful of, or sentimental about, the real risks involved in allowing bad people not to be properly vetted.  To these protesters, being nice to potential Jihadists is more important than saving lives, for they think, quite childishly, “It will never happen to me.”  And, by extension, they cannot quite conceive of death by Jihadist refugee happening to anyone else, either.

Mr. Nice Guy Risks Even More American Lives

At the time of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s arrest and incipient interrogation, Mr. Nice Guy, President Obama, sent in federal lawyers to stop the police from questioning the terrorist.  President Obama cared more about a Jihadist’s legal defense than he did about discovering whether there were more bombs set to go off that might harm more Americans (which was the point of the questioning Dzhokhar was undergoing).

No More Mr. Nice Guy

Trump’s belief, in contrast to Obama’s and the Democrats’, is that protecting human lives is important, even if doing so means “no more Mr. Nice Guy” and is, therefore, unpopular with Democrats and their propaganda media.  Since no Democrat will likely be killed, due to Trump’s protective order, Leftists are not likely to thank him for a job well-done.  Conservatives are grateful for a President of the United States who cares about their lives.  Conservatives love America and appreciate being protected by a president who puts Americans first.  America may not be perfect, but it is better than any other country out there.  If anyone can find a better place, I urge that person to vote with his feet and move there.

Trump’s Calculation

What Trump has figured out is that, as a Republican, he is damned if he does something and damned if he does not do anything: He can be criticized for extreme vetting now or be criticized for not doing a responsible job of vetting later, when a terrorist attack occurs on his watch.  President Trump seems to have decided that, if he must be blamed by the media for something, he would rather be blamed for being too safe than be blamed for the irresponsible deaths of innocents.


God bless,
JohnnyD

Chris Kyle's Iraqi Interpreter Has Blistering Message for All the Protesters Over Trump's 'Muslim Ban'

From: Independent Journal Review

by - Justen Charters - 1-29-17

This week, President Trump has sparked lots of controversy with a series of executive orders.

The one that's been getting the most attention of late bars visa entry for 90 days for people coming from the following seven countries: Libya, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Yemen, and Somalia.

There's been major consternation over the order, due to its inclusion of interpreters who help the U.S. military in Iraq. In some circles, it's being called an all-out “Muslim ban.”

Independent Journal Review wanted to get a take from someone who understands what it's like to live in a country rife with jihadists.

We talked to Johnny Walker, who worked as Chris Kyle's Iraqi translator during the Iraq War.

Walker held nothing back:

"I agree 100% with President Trump's decision. The national security of the United States is a paramount issue.

All President Trump is doing is ensuring that people can go about their day without living in so much fear. Women won't have to worry about walking around the mall; kids won't have to worry about going to the school.

Look, these countries don't have a database that keeps track of its citizens. And we can't depend on a government database in countries that do, because if they have one it has a political agenda behind it.

It wouldn't be hard for someone to get into the U.S. whose loyalty lies with ISIS or a militia aligned with Iran. While the militia isn't necessarily our enemy right now, they don't have loyalty to the U.S., they are loyal to the interests of the government that funds them. And that government says “Death to America.”

ISIS's strongholds are in Iraq and Syria. We all know what they want to do to Americans."

He pointed out how some of the Iraqi government is involved with terrorism:

Image Credit: Johnny Walker/Independent Journal Review

"Besides, the government of Iraq is involved with the militia who gets all their support from Iran, the number-one state sponsor of terrorism. ISIS has a haven in Libya.

Al-Shabaab is in Somalia and has pledged their allegiance to ISIS.

Iran has several terrorist groups affiliated with it. Yemen has Al-Qaeda, ISIS and the militia. And in Sudan, Hamas raises money for terrorism and has a presence.

The bottom line is this: Americans need to understand that this is for national security."

Then Walker explained the one area where he disagrees with the order:

"But we also need to be concerned with the interpreters, linguists and soldiers who worked shoulder-by-shoulder with the U.S. to fight against terrorists. There are thousands of translators and friendly forces over there who earned the right to come to America.

They've all become targets to groups like ISIS because they worked with America. They made many sacrifices in doing so, they deserve a second chance."

And spoke about his personal experience as a translator:

I was one of those translators. I worked with Navy SEALs to help kill the enemy. Working with the American military, made my family and me a target. Al-Qaeda murdered my brother because of me helping the Americans.

There are translators over there, who have proved their loyalty. ISIS and other groups keep a list of their names. It's not like in Washington, D.C., you can't just hide out somewhere.

In all seven countries, you're either known by your family or tribe, and everyone is connected. You cannot hide yourself, they will find you. When the terrorists find you, they don't just murder you, they murder your brother, sister, dad, mom, grandparents, cousin, and friends, too."

Walker made it clear that he doesn't think everyone in Iraq should come here:

“No, I don't believe that everyone deserves to come here, but the ones who showed their loyalty do.”

He also reaffirmed his support for Trump:

“I am in full support of the decision that the president has made. We all need to forget about ourselves and put American lives first. Trump's decision will help prevent terrorism and the death of more innocent people.”

Then, Walker finished by posing a question for everyone who thinks Trump is racist because of the “Muslim ban”:

“What about all the other rich Muslim countries? They banned Muslim immigration from the very beginning. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar— are they racist, too?”

A fine question, but one that Trump's critics are sure not to answer.


God bless,
JohnnyD

DEAR ‘MEDIA’: It’s NOT A ‘Muslim Ban’ You Goofy Dorks (VIRAL VIDEO)

This video DESTROYS the narrative that President Trump’s Executive Order was a ‘Muslim ban’.

You MUST see this!

Paul Joseph Watson slams the protesting leftists and stumps them with FACTS:


The Truth About Trump's 'Muslim Ban'






God bless,
JohnnyD

Trump not Legitimate President? Democrats are not Legitimate Americans!

From: iPatriot

by - Dustin Koellhoffer - January 19, 2017

Over 200 years of peaceful transfers of power ends tomorrow.  The Left says Trump did not legitimately win the election.  Today’s blacklisters are the communists America tried to root out in the 50s.  Here is all the proof that the Leftists are the totalitarian socialist fascists who deal in deception and lies.

Leftarts are saying Donald Trump is not a legitimate president.  They say he did not legitimately win the election based on the popular vote – even though Hillary lost every battleground state and then some.  Rush Limbaugh made a perfect analogy of how the electoral college works and the rules of the election by comparing it to the 1960 World Series.  The Pittsburgh Pirates won 4 of 7 games and the title, but the New York Yankees scored 55-27 total runs.  The title is not based on who scores the most runs in seven games, but who wins the most games.  Pitt won four of the games by a small margin, but the Yankees ran up the score in the games they won.  Trump won the states, but California, New York, Illinois, and Virginia ran up the vote tallies in their states with bogus votes from illegals and felons and fraud.  (Detroit was caught yielding a phony tally for Hillary thanks to Jill Stein demanding a recount, and that’s just one city.)

That’s how leftists defraud the people, but it doesn’t matter because America is not a democracy.  The Founders made America a republic because democracies always fall to their own corruption.  Leftarts cannot face reality.  America is not a democracy, but a republic.  The presidential election is not a contest of votes, but a contest of states.  Just because states like California can stuff the ballot box by allowing illegals to vote in American elections in violation of federal law does not mean their votes should count.  Donald Trump did not have to win the majority of votes, but the majority of states, and he won six out of seven battleground states plus three more that were not on the Democrat’s radar!

But the Left says the election results are still illegitimate because they claim Russia hacked the election to influence voters against Hillary – even though all they are accused of doing is exposing Podesta’s emails in which the DNC detailed herself w they screwed Bernie Sanders out of the nomination.  They also say FBI Director Comey tainted the election by reopening the investigation into Hillary’s email violations of national security – even though he had already provided proof she had done so.  These people who curse Russia as influence peddling in an America election had no problem with Obama trying to oust Israeli PM Netanyahu or stopping Brexit.  When the shoe is on the other foot they are the world’s greatest whiners.  Even so, they have no moral comprehension of Middle America’s disgust with Washington corruption the Left embraces.

Since losing the election, leftists have resorted to a dozen schemes to sabotage Trump and assassinate him either physically or via media propaganda.  The degree of their hateful insanity is only beginning to manifest in their actions.  Democrats believe Obama has led them to the point of being on the verge of establishing them as the One Party rulers of America and fundamentally transforming the nation into their socialist banana republic plaything.  Trump has not only spoiled that dream, but is also raining on the Republican’s parade to work with Democrats for their own financial benefit, RINOs like McCain who aid the Democrats in their efforts.

CIA leaks to the media are proof that democrat operatives remain in the government to sabotage Trump’s efforts to repair the nation.  There should be no leftists anywhere in our government from the president down to teachers.  Hopefully, President Trump will make it a priority to eliminate America haters from positions of power.  Anyone who believes American is the problem in the world rather than the solution has no place in America teaching Americans or leading this nation.

Obama is the antithesis of an American.  He was raised in Indonesia as a Moslem and educated as a Communist.  His actions have been to manage America’s decline.  The people whom he put into position of power were academics with no real world achievements, only ideas of how to make socialism work – which it never has because it must be inflicted on the people by force.  Even his CIA Director Brennan supported communism in his youth and reportedly converted to Islam under Obama.

As Trump prepares to be inaugurated as the 45^th President and restore the republic, thereby bursting the bubble of the socialist Left that strove to impose socialism, Islam, and totalitarian fascism on the American people.  They hire “protesters” to scream ‘fascists’ at the Republicans who will restore freedom, while the Congressional Black Caucus sets out to destroy any blacks who stray from the Democrat Plantation.  Trump’s first order must be to conduct an extermination of all the leftist cockroaches that infest the government.  These people do not belong in America, let alone in control in government.  The Left says Trump is not a legitimate president.  I say Democrats are not legitimate Americans.

America has been corrupted by the Left to turn from God, morality, and righteousness.  Disbelief in God is not enlightenment.  Believing Man is the center of the universe and his own moral authority is not progress.  Liberals are backwards.

The Left is the root of corruption.  They are the socialists, fascists, communists, Nazis, Islamists, and totalitarians.  Rosie O’Donnell proves that the Left are the Nazi fascists, while Mark Wahlberg proves that the Right is righteous.  She calls for Martial Law to stop Trump from becoming president because of the false charges liberals made against him, but gives Hillary a pass on her proven crimes and endorse Obama’s treason betraying his Oath of Office to uphold and defend the Constitution and American law.  This is how the Left gains and keeps control – through totalitarian socialist fascism.

America is divided between the Right and Left, Republicans and Democrats, free republic or socialist dictatorship.  There is no working together, there is no unity, there is no compromise.  God and Satan cannot occupy the same church together.

Like Christians who invite Islamists to their church for anything other than teaching them about Christ betray Jesus, Americans who embrace communist socialism betray the Constitution.  Muhammad rejected Christ and asking a Moslem to teach Islam in a Christian church is asking his congregation to love Satan and follow him.  Jesus never said to love Satan or invite him to rule.  Islam is the ultimate form of socialism – their utopia in which all the people are the same and bow to their leaders.  Atheists may whine they have a “fantasy” god, but the god of Islam keeps their people in submission via the brainwashing taught by Muhammad.  Teaching communism in American schools is no different.

Democrats are inviting Islam into the West where they are raping women and committing terror attacks on the innocent.  This is the result of appeasement and betrayal.  America needs to not only reject Democrats, but eject them!  Will Smith declared that all Trump supporters should leave America.  America was not built by black racists who have joined with the white racist totalitarians of the Democrat Party, but by white Christian republicans.  The ones who need to be ejected are not the patriots, but those who hate this nation and want to transform it into a corrupt hellhole that worships the Golden Calf.


God bless,
JohnnyD

We The Deplorables

Brought to you by the Heterophobic, Republiphobic, Christophobic, Ameriphobic, Realityphobic,

Democrat Party

God Bless,

JohnnyD

When Teddy Roosevelt Banned Muslims from America

The bill would prohibit the entry of the “entire Mohammedan world.” 

 

From: Front Page Magazine

by - Daniel Greenfield - August 18, 2016


A hundred years ago, Muslims were furious over an immigration bill whose origins lay with advocacy by a headstrong and loudmouthed Republican in the White House.

The anti-immigration bill offended the Ottoman Empire, the rotting Caliphate of Islam soon to be defeated at the hands of America and the West, by banning the entry of “all polygamists, or persons who admit their belief in the practice of polygamy.”

This, as was pointed out at the time, would prohibit the entry of the “entire Mohammedan world” into the United States.

And indeed it would.

The battle had begun earlier when President Theodore Roosevelt had declared in his State of the Union address back in 1906 that Congress needed to have the power to “deal radically and efficiently with polygamy.”  The Immigration Act of 1907, signed into law by President Theodore Roosevelt, had banned “polygamists, or persons who admit their belief in the practice of polygamy.”

It was the last part that was most significant because it made clear what had only been implied.

The Immigration Act of 1891 had merely banned polygamists. The newest law banned anyone who believed in the practice of polygamy. That group included every faithful believing Muslim.

The Ottoman Empire’s representatives argued that their immigrants believed in the practice of polygamy, but wouldn’t actually take more than one wife. This argument echoes the current contention that Muslim immigrants may believe in a Jihad against non-Muslims without actually engaging in terrorism. That type of argument proved far less convincing to Americans than it does today.

These amazing facts, uncovered by @rushetteny reveal part of the long controversial history of battles over Islamic migration into America.

Muslim immigration was still slight at the time and bans on polygamy had not been created to deliberately target them, but the Muslim practice of an act repulsive to most Americans even back then pitted their cries of discrimination and victimhood against the values of the nation. The Immigration Act of 1907 had been meant to select only those immigrants who would make good Americans.

And Muslims would not.

In his 1905 State of the Union address, President Theodore Roosevelt had spoken of the need “to keep out all immigrants who will not make good American citizens.”

Unlike modern presidents, Roosevelt did not view Islam as a force for good. Instead he had described Muslims as “enemies of civilization”, writing that, “The civilization of Europe, America and Australia exists today at all only because of the victories of civilized man over the enemies of civilization", praising Charles Martel and John Sobieski for throwing back the "Moslem conquerors"  whose depredations had caused Christianity to have "practically vanished from the two continents."

While today even mentioning “Radical Islam” occasions hysterical protests from the media, Theodore Roosevelt spoke and wrote casually of “the murderous outbreak of Moslem brutality” and, with a great deal of foresight offered a description of reform movements in Egypt that could have been just as well applied to the Arab Spring, describing the "mass of practically unchained bigoted Moslems to whom the movement meant driving out the foreigner, plundering and slaying the local Christian."

In sharp contrast to Obama’s infamous Cairo speech, Roosevelt’s own speech in Cairo had denounced the murder of a Coptic Christian political leader by a Muslim and warned against such violent bigotry.

Muslims had protested outside his hotel, but Teddy hadn’t cared.

The effective implementation of the latest incarnation of the ban however had to wait a year for Roosevelt’s successor, President Taft. Early in his first term, the Ottoman Empire was already protesting because its Muslims had been banned from the country. One account claimed that 200 Muslims had been denied entry into the United States.

Despite these protests, Muslims continued to face deportations over polygamy charges even under President Woodrow Wilson. And polygamy, though not belief in it, remains a basis for deportation.

Though the law today is seldom enforced.

American concerns about the intersection of Muslim immigration and polygamy had predated Roosevelt, Taft and Wilson. The issue dated back even to the previous century. An 1897 edition of the Los Angeles Herald had wondered if Muslim polygamy existed in Los Angeles. “Certainly There is No Lack of Mohammedans Whose Religion Gives the Institution Its Full Sanction,” the paper had observed.

It noted that, “immigration officials are seriously considering whether believers in polygamy are legally admissible” and cited the cases of a number of Muslims where this very same issue had come up.

A New York Times story from 1897 records that, “the first-polygamists excluded under the existing immigration laws were six Mohammedans arrived on the steamship California.”

To their misfortune, the Mohammedans encountered not President Obama, but President Herman Stump of the immigration board of inquiry. Stump, an eccentric irascible figure, had known Lincoln assassin John Wilkes Booth and had been a wanted Confederate sympathizer during the Civil War.

In the twilight of his term, Stump had little patience and tolerance for either Islam or polygamy.

The Times story relates the laconic exchange between Stump and the Muslim migrants.

“You believe in the Koran?" asked President Stump.

"Thank Allah, yes," responded the men in chorus.

“The Koran teaches polygamy?" continued the Inspector through an interpreter.

"Blessed be Allah, it does!"

"Then you believe in polygamy?" asked Captain George Ellis.

"We do. We do! Blessed be Allah, we do," chorused the Arabs, salaaming toward the setting sun.
"That settles it," said President Stump. "You won't do."

President Stump’s brand of common sense has become keenly lacking in America today.

None of the laws in question permanently settled the issue. The rise of Islamist infiltration brought with it a cleverer Taquiya. The charade that Muslims could believe one thing and do another was dishonest on the one hand and condescending on the other. It was a willful deception in which Muslims pretended that they were not serious about their religion and Americans believed them because the beliefs at stake appeared so absurd and uncivilized that they thought that no one could truly believe them.

Theodore Roosevelt knew better. But by then he was no longer in office.

Unlike today’s talk of a ban on Muslim migration from terror states, laws were not being made to target Muslims. Yet Muslims were the likeliest group of foreigners to be affected by them. Even a hundred years ago, Islam was proving to be fundamentally in conflict with American values. Then, as now, there were two options. The first was to pretend that there was no conflict. The second was to avert it with a ban.

A century ago and more, the nation had leaders who were not willing to dwell in the twilight of illusions, but who grappled with problems when they saw them. They saw civilization as fragile and vulnerable. They understood that the failure to address a conflict would mean a loss to the “enemies of civilization”.

Debates over polygamy may seem quaint today, but yet the subject was a revealing one. Islamic polygamy was one example of the slavery so ubiquitous in Islam. The enslavement of people is at the heart of Islam. As we have seen with ISIS, Islamic violence is driven by the base need to enslave and oppress. Polygamy, like honor killings and FGM, is an expression of that fundamental impulse within the private social context of the home, but as Theodore Roosevelt and others understood, it would not stay there. If we understand that, then we can understand why these debates were not quaint at all.

American leaders of a century past could not reconcile themselves to Islamic polygamy. Yet our modern leaders have reconciled themselves to the Islamic mass murder of Americans.

Thus it always is. When you close your eyes to one evil, you come to accept them all.


God bless,
JohnnyD


 

Barack Obama is the “Real” Illegitimate President, Not Trump

From: Constitution

by - Dave Jolly January 17, 2017 

Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) and other unhappy Democrats are saying that President-elect Donald Trump is not the true legitimate president-elect. I contend that not only IS Donald Trump the rightful and legitimate President-elect, but that Barack Hussein Obama was the real illegitimate president that should face felony charges for committing the greatest fraud against the United States, the US Constitution and the American people!

Donald John Trump was born in Jamaica, Queens, New York in 1946. His father Frederick Christ Trump was born in Bronx, New York. No one has questioned his birth certificate nor his college records.

Barack Obama cannot make the same claim. Even though many people don’t like to talk about the birther issue, it still has not been resolved. There is still circumstantial evidence indicating that Obama was NOT born in Hawaii but in Kenya.

In 1991, a literary catalog produced by New York publisher Acton and Dystel, was promoting a book entitled Journey in Black and White written by Obama. The catalog, published by Acton and Systel was distributed to other publishers and business colleagues. It included brief biographies of 90 authors who were clients of the publisher. The biography for Barack Obama starts out with,

“Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.”

As it turns out, the book was never published under that name. Years later, Obama re-wrote the book and published it under the title of Dreams from My Father.

In 2006, then Senator Barack Obama and wife Michelle visited Obama’s home town and family. The Kenya government had already designated the small village as an official national landmark as the home of Barack Obama. Prior to his visit, the people of Kogelo had dedicated their small 4 room school to the US Senator, naming it the Senator Obama Kogelo Secondary School. The school had been built on land that Obama’s paternal grandfather had donated for the school. When the senator saw the conditions of the school, which had no running water, no electricity and no sanitation, he promised Yuanita Obiero, the school’s principle,

“I know you are working very hard and struggling to bring up the school, but I have said I will assist the school, and I will do so.”

Five years later, the school has received no assistance from its honored namesake and the town is beginning to give up hope of ever getting anything from him. They feel he has broken his promise to help, but then what’s new.

During the 2008 presidential campaigns, former President Bill Clinton was the loudest birther questioner until suddenly he went silent. Rumors had it that someone associated with Obama’s campaign threatened the life of Clinton’s daughter Chelsea if Bill didn’t drop the issue. He was silent from that day on.

In 2010, James Orengo, Kenya’s Minister of Lands and a member of the Kenyan Parliament publicly stated:

“If America was living in a situation where they feared ethnicity and did not see itself as a multiparty state or nation, how could a young man born here in Kenya, who is not even a native American, become the president of America?”

In 2012, Donald Trump was being interviewed by Sean Hannity when he made this statement:

“Nobody has more sealed records than this president. So many of his applications … are sealed. He spent $3 million to keep everything sealed. You can’t find out anything about his college. I’m not talking about his marks. I’m talking about his application. It would be so interesting to see.”

If you go searching for Obama’s college records, you will quickly discover that all of his records from Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard law School have all been sealed.  If Trump is right in that Obama has spent $3 million sealing all of his records, it really pours fuel of the fires of conspiracy and makes one wonder what is so damaging in those records to warrant such extreme measures be taken to protect them.

Prior to the 2012 presidential campaign, the White House issued what they claimed to be the official long form of Barack Obama’s birth certificate from Hawaii. However, over 200 Arizona citizens petitioned then Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arapio to investigate the birth certificate and whether Obama was eligible to be President. Arpaio set out to prove that Obama was in fact eligible to run and serve as President, but the department’s investigation discovered overwhelming evidence showing that the birth certificate presented by the White House was a forgery and that the act of presenting that to the American people constituted a fraud. The investigation also lead to questions about the authenticity of Obama’s Selective Service Card and his Social Security Number, a number that was supposed to have been issued in Connecticut, not Hawaii.

In 2014, Donald Trump offered $50 million to anyone who could produce Obama’s true birth records and another $5 million for Obama’s college transcripts. No one has ever collected.

In 2014, a news correspondent with a very liberal network inadvertently slipped while on the air. During the US – Africa Leaders Summit held in DC, MSNBC host Joy Reid was talking with NBC White House Correspondent Chris Jansing. Reid stated:

“The White House clearly, I assume, is hoping that this will be part of president’s legacy given his background.”

To which Jansing responded:

“Yeah, the fact that he’s from Kenya, and that fact that when he was elected there were expectations from the African continent that he would do great things for them. This is a concerted effort by this administration to get American companies to invest.”

Ten minutes later, Jansing tried to cover the slip of the tongue over, but in reality, she has spoken the truth.

If Barack Obama is a legitimately born US citizen and qualified to run for and hold the office of President of the United States, why has he spent so much money and effort to hide his records? Why has he continually refused to provide evidence of his eligibility?

Only a guilty person hides their past, not an innocent one. Obama could have ended all of the questions and controversy by opening up his records, but he refused to do so. If anyone wants to question the legitimacy of a President, it needs to be Obama, not Trump.


God bless,
JohnnyD

A Guide to Basic Differences Between Left and Right

From: Town Hall

by - Dennis Prager - Jan 17, 2017

Source of Human Rights:

 

Left: Government 

Right: The Creator

 
Human Nature:

Left: Basically good (Therefore, society is primarily responsible for evil.)
Right: Not basically good (Therefore, the individual is primarily responsible for evil.)

Economic Goal:

Left: Equality
Right: Prosperity

Primary Role of the State:

Left: Increase and protect equality
Right: Increase and protect liberty

Government:

Left: As large as possible
Right: As small as possible

Family Ideal:

Left: Any loving unit of people
Right: A married father and mother, and children

Guiding Trinity:

Left: Race, gender and class
Right: Liberty, In God We Trust and e pluribus unum

Good and Evil:

Left: Relative to individual and/or society
Right: Based on universal absolutes

Humanity's Primary Division(s):

Left: Rich and poor; strong and weak
Right: Good and evil

Ideal Primary Identity of an American:

Left: World citizen
Right: American citizen

How to Make a Good Society:

Left: Abolish inequality
Right: Develop each citizen's moral character

View of America:

Left: Profoundly morally flawed; inferior to any number of European countries
Right: Greatest force for good among nations in world history

Gender:

Left: A social construct
Right: Male and female   

Most Important Trait to Cultivate in a Child:

Left: Self-esteem
Right: Self-control

Worth of the Human Fetus:

Left: Determined by the mother
Right: Determined by society rooted in Judeo-Christian values

Primary Source of Crime:

Left: Poverty, racism and other societal flaws
Right: The criminal's malfunctioning conscience 

Place of God and Religion in America:

Left: Secular government and secular society
Right: Secular government and religious society

American Exceptionalism:

Left: Chauvinistic doctrine
Right: Historical reality

Greatest Threat to the World:

Left: Environmental catastrophe (currently global warming)
Right: Evil (currently radical Islamist violence)

International Ideal:

Left: World governed by the United Nations, and no single country is dominant

Right: World in which America is the single strongest entity

Primary Reason for Lack of Peace in Middle East:

Left: Israeli settlements in the West Bank
Right: Palestinian, Arab and Muslim denial of Jewish state's right to exist

Purpose of Art:

Left: Challenge status quo and bourgeois sensibilities
Right: Produce works of beauty and profundity to elevate the individual and society

Guns:

Left: Ideally universally abolished, except for use by police, the armed forces and registered sportsmen
Right: Ideally widely owned by responsible individuals for self-protection and the protection of others

Race:

Left: Intrinsically significant
Right: Intrinsically insignificant

Racial, Ethnic and Gender Diversity at Universities:

Left: Most important
Right: Far less important than ideological diversity

Black America's Primary Problem:

Left: Racism
Right: Lack of fathers

Greatest Playwright:

Left: Entirely subjective; there is no greatest playwright

Right: Shakespeare

War:

Left: Not the answer
Right: Sometimes the only answer

Hate:

Left: Wrong, except when directed at the political
Right: Wrong, except when directed at evil

Cultures:

Left: All equal
Right: Some are better than others

America's Founding Fathers:

Left: Rich white male slave owners
Right: Great men who founded the greatest society

Purpose of Judges:

Left: Pursue social justice
Right: Pursue justice

National Borders:

Left: A relic of the past
Right: Indispensable for national survival

View of Illegal Immigrants:

Left: Welcomed guests
Right: Illegal immigrants

Nature:

Left: Intrinsically valuable
Right: Made for man


God bless,
JohnnyD

Andrew Napolitano: Why the criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton is back to front and center

From: Town Hall

By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano -  January 12, 2017

The criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton is back front and center now that the FBI has released proof that her failure to safeguard state secrets caused the secrets to fall into the hands of foreign governments, some of which wish the United States ill.

Even though the case against her -- which was closed and then reopened and then closed again -- is old news and she obviously is no longer a candidate to become president of the United States and has been staying below the radar for the past two months, recent developments have regenerated the case.

Here is the back story.

On July 5, FBI Director James Comey announced publicly that the FBI would recommend against seeking an indictment of Clinton for espionage -- the failure to safeguard state secrets that had been entrusted to her. He argued that though the case against her was strong -- as secretary of state, she had been extremely careless with secrets; exposed hundreds of materials that were confidential, secret and top-secret; and used non-secure mobile devices while in the territory of hostile governments -- no reasonable prosecutor would take the case.

Why was the decision of whether to prosecute Clinton left to Comey?

The FBI’s job is to gather evidence of federal crimes and to present that evidence to career prosecutors in the Department of Justice for evaluation. The FBI has numerous investigative tools available to it. One of those tools is presenting evidence to a grand jury and requesting subpoenas from it. Another is presenting evidence to a federal judge and requesting search warrants from the judge. A third is obtaining the indictment of someone who is in the inner circle of the person who is the true target of the investigation and then persuading that indicted person to become a government witness.

None of those tools was used in the Clinton case.

As well, a major interference with the case occurred when Attorney General Loretta Lynch agreed to meet privately with former President Bill Clinton. He was -- and still is -- also the subject of an FBI criminal investigation. Though both Lynch and Mr. Clinton denied talking about the investigations, the attorney general took herself and senior DOJ management off the Hillary Clinton case, leaving the FBI director with the authority to decide whether to prosecute. So based on Comey’s decision that no reasonable prosecutor would take the case against Mrs. Clinton, it was closed.

The case was briefly reopened 11 days before Election Day. The FBI announced it had stumbled upon a potential treasure-trove of emails contained in a laptop jointly owned and used by Hillary Clinton’s closest aide, Huma Abedin, and her husband, former Rep. Anthony Weiner. The FBI believed at the time that the laptop contained nearly every email Abedin had received from Clinton. Weiner was under investigation for various sexual crimes, and the FBI had obtained the laptop in its search for evidence against him.

Then, a week later, the FBI announced that it had found nothing among the 650,000 emails in the laptop that would cause it to reopen the Clinton case, and it closed the case a second time.

Donald Trump argued during the last weeks of the presidential election campaign that Clinton had exposed state secrets to hostile foreign governments. FBI agents who disagreed with their boss’s decision not to seek the indictment of Clinton made the same arguments. Clinton denied vehemently that she had caused any state secrets to pass into the hands of hostile foreign governments.

Then Trump was elected president of the United States.

Then Clinton left the public scene.

Then, last Sunday evening, during the NFL playoff game between the New York Giants and the Green Bay Packers, the FBI posted on its website more than 300 emails that Clinton had sent to an unnamed colleague not in the government -- no doubt her adviser Sid Blumenthal -- that had fallen into the hands of foreign powers. It turns out -- and the Sunday night release proves this -- that Blumenthal was hacked by intelligence agents from at least three foreign governments and that they obtained the emails Clinton had sent to him that contained state secrets. Sources believe that the hostile hackers were the Russians and the Chinese and the friendly hackers were the Israelis.

Last Sunday’s revelations make the case against Clinton far more serious than Comey presented it to be last summer. Indeed, Sen. Jeff Sessions, who has been nominated by Trump to be attorney general and who has been a harsh critic of Clinton's, told the Senate Judiciary Committee this week that he would step aside from any further investigation of Clinton, thereby acknowledging that the investigation will probably be opened again.

One of the metrics that the DOJ examines in deciding whether to prosecute is an analysis of harm caused by the potential defendant. I have examined the newly released emails, and the state secrets have been whited out. Yet it is clear from the FBI analysis of them that real secrets were exposed by the nation’s chief diplomat -- meaning she violated an agreement she signed right after she took office, in which she essentially promised that she would not do what she eventually did.

The essence of the American justice system is the rule of law. The rule of law means that no one is beneath the law’s protections or above its obligations.

Should Clinton skate free so the Trump administration can turn the page? Should the new DOJ be compassionate toward Clinton because of her humiliating election loss and likely retirement from public life? Of course not. She should be prosecuted as would anyone else who let loose secrets to our enemies and then lied about it.


God bless,
JohnnyD

“The Future of Conservatism in America”

From Town Hall

by - Allen West - Jan 11, 2017


In some ten days, we will have the inauguration of President Donald J. Trump. There can be no doubt that the election of Mr. Trump enabled a philosophical stay of execution for America. In these past eight years, we have been heading down the failed road of progressive socialism, which the political, media, academic, and entertainment elites all favor – to the demise of the greater Nation. Hence we have seen such an apoplectic response emanating from these circles who fail to comprehend how the “forgotten men and women” of America rejected and repudiated that which they embrace in their posh cocktail parties and liberal socialist circles.

Last November’s election was a victory, but it is not the end because anyone that has served in the military knows, after a successful attack…there is a counter-attack forthcoming. The key aspect for a restoration of this Constitutional Republic is to remain on the offense, proactive, not reactive, and draw the comparative analysis between the two competing philosophies of governance in America; progressive socialism and constitutional conservatism.

Last week I had the distinct pleasure and honor to sit with incoming Chairman of the House Republican Study Committee (RSC), the caucus of conservatives, and largest caucus on Capitol Hill, Representative Mark Walker (R-NC). The amazing thing about Rep. Walker is that he is in his second term in the US House of Representatives. The other great thing about Rep. Walker is that he possesses a vision for conservatism in America. Just last week he penned an OpEd that appeared at FoxNews.com where he coined his vision as “Effective Conservatism”. I believe his objectives will produce better results than a previous mantra of “compassionate conservatism”, which became a code word for greater government spending – something used against the administration that introduced the term.

Rep. Walker in his piece alluded to a trifecta that will enable his vision of “effective conservatism”, the right policy, the right approach, and the right voice. I fully concur with Rep. Walker’s postulate and want to elaborate upon his assertions.

First, we must not just talk about the five fundamental of constitutional conservatism – limited government, fiscal responsibility, individual sovereignty, free market/enterprise economy, and strong national security. We must draw that comparison to what todays “liberalism”, truly progressive socialism, represents – wealth redistribution, nationalizing of production, expansion of the welfare nanny-state, social egalitarianism, and secular humanism. From a philosophy of governance perspective, this analysis is vital to establish, but it singularly does not make conservatism effective.

Second, conservatism must move away from words such as “outreach” and embrace the idea of “policy inclusiveness”, and this is not the oft overused term of “big tent”. This is how we evidence that conservatism, not just its philosophy, but from a practical aspect is relevant to everyone in America. We must break down the left’s “safe space” of identity politics. Conservatism for America means the policies that promote and advance economic empowerment, not economic enslavement and servitude. Reason being is that conservatism elevates the individual, while progressive socialism organizes the collective. Conservatism believes in a safety net, while progressive socialism loves a hammock. It means carefully articulating the policy failures of progressive socialism over the past 50+ years from Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” to Barack Obama’s “fundamental transformation”.

Constitutional conservatives such as Rep. Walker, and others, must carry the message of how economic growth reaches every corner of America, and mainly our urban centers. How do we bring to fruition the Reagan, Kemp, and Laffer concept of “Urban Economic Empowerment Zones”, to get capital reinvestment for small business entrepreneurship into the communities most deserving. What type of policies will strengthen the traditional two parent home, especially in the black community which has fallen from almost 77%, prior to Johnson’s policies, to now 24%. What policies will give parents better educational opportunities, choice, for their children, not relegating them to failing government schools. Interesting, Barack Obama canceled the DC school voucher program, yet dispatched his kids to the prestigious Sidwell Friends School. For progressive socialism, it is about do as we say, not as we do.

What policies will create a safe environment for all Americans reestablishing the rule of law and order in our communities? The travesty that is Chicago must end, and sadly it is a cancer that has metastasized all over our Nation.

Conservatism is the answer, whereby progressive socialism, totally emotional based, has only served to exacerbate these issues and make them worse. And in response to the failures, it becomes a game of seeking blame, not one of self-reflection, you know, it is the fault of Fox News and the Russians.

Lastly, constitutional conservatism must be presented, personally, based upon principles and how they will relate to the individual. Every person in America wants to be successful, and that should be determined by them, not by some far away group and their vision of mass participation trophies that only serves to make them feel good about giving something. This is done to the detriment of individual will and determination that ends up being the real loser.

I was born and raised in the historic inner city Atlanta neighborhood called the Old Fourth Ward. It was there that my parents, Herman Sr. and Elizabeth Thomas West, famously known as “Buck and Snooks”, and were registered Democrats, inculcated in me these foundational conservative values – faith, family, individual responsibility, advancement through education, and service to the Nation. As well, my folks believed in their personal right to own firearms to protect their freedom and loved ones, Dad had a single barrel pump action shotgun, and Mom had her .38 special revolver.

Effective conservatism means engaging all America with a relevant principled based message that is not rooted in politics, but the policies for personal, individual growth, opportunity, and promise. It is a message established in the values leading to each of us having the God-endowed right to pursue our happiness, and not have a group of elitists try to manipulate and promise our happiness.

Effective constitutional conservatism makes victors, regardless of where you come from. Progressive socialism makes victims based upon identity politics…that is the message to solidify the future of Conservatism in America.


God bless,
JohnnyD