Sunday, August 30, 2015

Mexican Government Files Brief in Case Demanding Birth Certificates for Anchor Babies

On August 24, the government of Mexico filed an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (Austin Division) in support of a lawsuit filed against the Texas Department of State Health Services by a group of illegal aliens represented by several nonprofit civil rights organizations alleging that the state has violated the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause by rejecting their applications to obtain birth certificates for their U.S.-born children.

The original plaintiffs in the case, Maria Isabel Perales Serna and a group of other aliens who entered the United States illegally, on their own behalf and on behalf of their U.S.-born children, were represented by the Texas Civil Rights Project and Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid, Inc., which filed the suit against the Texas state agency on May 26. In the lawsuit (Maria Isabel Perales Serna et al. v. Texas Department of State Health Services et al.) the plantiffs complained that “scores of women from Mexico and Central America have been denied birth certificates for their Texas born children.” Consequently, says the complaint: “This leaves the child with no birth certificate, and mother and child with no official proof of the parent-child relationship.”

The plaintiffs complained Texas officials reject Matrículas Consular identification cards issued by Mexican consulates to their citizens living abroad as acceptable forms of identification to obtain birth certificates for their Texas-born sons and daughters, based upon the immigration status of the plaintiff parents. They further alleged that the lack of a birth certificate is causing them serious harm. They also contended that the state of Texas’ actions “violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as the Supremacy Clause.”
The argument that the 14th Amendment automatically grants citizenship to babies born in the United States to illegal alien mothers (so-called “anchor babies”), while currently accepted by the Obama administration’s officials, has been disputed by many constitutional scholars. Several presidential candidates, most vocally Donald Trump, have called for an end to birthright citizenship for babies born to mothers who are in the country illegally.
On July 22, Texas Department of State Health Services Commissioner Kirk Cole and State Registrar Geraldine Harris filed a motion asking U.S. District Court Judge Robert Pitman to dismiss the lawsuit, stating: “Under the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution, the Court lacks jurisdiction over all claims against DSHS.” Quoting the case Tex. Natural Res. Conservation Comm’n v. IT– Davy, Cole and Harris noted: “Under state sovereign immunity, ‘the State and its agencies are generally immune from suit unless the State gives its consent to be sued.’ ”
The motion to dismiss was submitted to the federal court by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and members of his team.
The next chapter in this unfolding story occurred on August 24, when the Mexican government filed its amicus curiae brief. In outlining what its interests in the case are, the brief stated: “Mexico is responsible under international and domestic law to protect its nationals wherever they may be residing.”
The “anchor babies,” whom Mexico and the plaintiffs complain are being denied birth certificates, therefore, are obviously Mexican nationals in whom Mexico has interests and a responsibility to protect.
Yet, further along in the brief, we read the following argument:
Mexico fears the creation in Texas of a vulnerable citizenry: undocumented citizens of the United States. The Texas Department of Vital Statistics refuses to provide birth certificates to U.S. citizen children when their parents are unable to present U.S. government-issued identification, even when those parents present other highly reliable identity documents. In refusing to issue birth certificates to U.S. citizens, the State of Texas harms these individual U.S. citizens in violation of the U.S. Constitution and international law.
Are the babies Mexican nationals, in whom Mexico has an interest, or U.S. citizens? They cannot be both. If they are U.S. citizens, then whether or not Texas issues them birth certificates is between them (or those representing them) and Texas, and is none of the Mexican government’s business. If they are Mexican citizens, on the other hand, then the Mexican government should ask their parents to bring them home to Mexico.
We noted earlier the plantiffs’ complaint that “scores of women from Mexico and Central America have been denied birth certificates for their Texas born children.” Consequently, “This leaves the child with no birth certificate, and mother and child with no official proof of the parent-child relationship.”
In considering if the plaintiffs in Serna v. Texas have a legitimate grievance, it might be interesting to see how the United States handles birth certificates for children born abroad to U.S. citizen parents. A notice on the State Department’s website provides this advice:
A child born abroad to a U.S. citizen parent or parents may acquire U.S. citizenship at birth if certain statutory requirements are met. The child’s parents should contact the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate to apply for a Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of America (CRBA) to document that the child is a U.S. citizen. If the U.S. embassy or consulate determines that the child acquired U.S. citizenship at birth, a consular officer will approve the CRBA application and the Department of State will issue a CRBA, also called a Form FS-240, in the child’s name. According to U.S. law, a CRBA is proof of U.S. citizenship and may be used to obtain a U.S. passport and register for school, among other purposes.
If the Mexican government really wants to help the babies born to its nationals residing illegally in the United States obtain birth certificates and establish proof of parent-child relationships, why doesn’t it follow the same procedure the United States does for its citizens giving birth abroad, and issue a Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of Mexico?
This would be much more helpful to everyone concerned than expecting Texas to issue birth certificates based on the Mexican Matrículas Consular identification cards. It would also avoid interference in the internal operations of a sovereign U.S. state.
Mass Immigration and the Undoing of Europe

  • In Germany, where traffickers are now dropping off illegal immigrants on Autobahns, authorities have reacted -- not by trying to intercept or discourage traffickers, but by putting up new road signs alerting drivers of potential pedestrians on the highway.
  • Last month alone, more migrants landed on the shores of Greece than in the whole of 2014.
  • If the mainstream media keep reminding everyone how the rioting immigrant youths in France or Britain are driven by economic inequality now, imagine the scale of unrest once European welfare states cannot finance "half the planet" anymore and are forced to cut welfare benefits.
  • No one, however, especially the media, blames migrants for their own actions.
  • This is the real tragedy of the unfolding refugee crisis in Europe: apart from those fleeing combat zones, most migrants swarming European borders and coastlines do not appear to be in any real or dire need.
With the European Union surrendering its immigration policy to people smugglers, the immigration crisis in Europe keeps reaching staggering new heights. The word has gone out that Fortress Europe is scalable. From Morocco to Turkey, people smuggling has turned into an irresistibly big business.
From small-time thugs to the terror outfit Hamas -- for $2500-$3000 per person smuggled -- many evidently want to seize a slice of this lucrative business that was created by the EU's collective inaction.
In Germany, where traffickers are now dropping off illegal immigrants on Autobahns, authorities have reacted -- not by trying to intercept or discourage the traffickers, but by putting new road-signs alerting drivers of potential pedestrians on the highway.
Even before this year's mass immigration began, Germany was struggling to deal with roughly a quarter of a million asylum applicants -- without even accounting for the illegal immigrants already in the country. The recent wave of migration would push those figures to record heights.
The trend in Germany merely reflects the overall scale of the European immigrant crisis. In July 2015, an estimated 50,000 refugees entered Greece, a surge of 750 percent. Last month alone more migrants landed than in the whole of 2014.
In Germany, the head of Lower Saxony's Municipal Federation, Marco Trips, told local reporters that the "system has already collapsed." This sentiment is apparently shared by municipalities across Germany. In a historic move, the German federal government has now called in the military to assist in setting up new tent cities and providing basic amenities for ever-rising number of refugees.
The majority of those entering Europe illegally seem not to be fleeing armed conflicts, but seeking a better life in a welfare paradise. Europe's answer is to throw money at the problem -- money Europe does not have. Britain's Defence Secretary has suggested that the UK's £12 billion ($19 billion USD) foreign aid budget can "discourage" mass migration.
The European welfare system, funded increasingly by governments' debt in recent decades, is showing signs of an impending collapse. There is no end in sight for Greece's debt crisis, despite repeated bailout packages to the tune of €326 billion ($375 billion USD). Slow economic growth, high youth unemployment and an aging population makes the European welfare model increasingly untenable.
If the mainstream media keep reminding everyone how rioting immigrant youths in France or Britain are driven by economic inequality now, imagine the scale of unrest once European welfare states cannot finance "half the planet" anymore and are forced to cut welfare benefits.
African migrants camp out on the beach in the northern Italian town of Ventimiglia, along the French border, as they wait for the opportunity to cross into France. (Image source: AFP video screenshot)

Europe's answer to this imminent financial doom is to create still more welfare dependents or, even better, "invite" them by failing to secure the borders.
EU bureaucrats not only refuse to implement basic border controls but rebuke any EU member state moving to secure its borders. European politicians and the mainstream media are up in arms against Hungary's move to erect a border fence along its southern border. American public broadcaster PBS ran a report telling its viewers about Hungary's "new Iron Curtain." The Associated Press quoted unnamed "critics" who compared the Hungarian fence to "Communist-era barriers like the Berlin Wall."
The EU bureaucrats in Brussels want to force a single asylum policy on all 28 member states, asking that they take in more migrants. According to this common asylum policy proposed by Brussels, asylum seekers entering EU would be divided among EU members.
Hungary, with 60,000 migrant arrivals so far just this year, entering mainly from Serbia, remains the most vocal opponent of the EU's proposed policy.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has been virtually ostracized by European politicians and media, for not complying with EU's immigration policy. Contrary to the EU's position, he has called for a "distinction" between EU member-state citizens moving within Europe and non-EU foreigners. "There are economic immigrants who are just in search of a better life... Unfortunately in Hungary we can't give jobs to all of these immigrants," Orbán said, and called the EU's proposal for member states to take in more refugees "absurd, bordering on insanity."
Europe, itself reeling under a financial crisis, cannot provide housing, employment and social benefits to the thousands who each day land on European shores and cross over borders. German newspapers are full of countless reports of immigrants disappointed after arriving in Europe, almost always followed by a reporter's plea for urgent action to address the said grievance. These "disappointments" often turn into violent clashes. Police across Germany have their hands full just to keeping rival migrant gangs from turning on each other or on officials.
No one, however, especially the media, blames migrants for their own actions. The mainstream media in Germany apparently refuse to connect the dots, so as not to "feed into negative stereotypes." A columnist for Germany's Tageszeitung even wrote of an elaborate government conspiracy that drives immigrants to turn violent -- allegedly just to give them a bad name.
Tageszeitung also ran a story lamenting the "alarming conditions" of refugees landing on Greek islands. The article was accompanied by a photograph of smiling, well-fed, sturdy young men, posing for "selfies" on their smartphones while holding cigarettes in their hands. One of them was thoughtful enough to bring along a selfie-stick for his smartphone, to capture the moment he fled a "war zone" or acute "economic misery."
This, however, is the real tragedy of the unfolding refugee crisis in Europe: apart from those fleeing combat zones, most migrants swarming European borders and coastlines do not appear to be in any real or dire need. Economic disparity on other continents should not oblige Europeans to open its own floodgates for mass migration.
This crisis seems to be one of Europe's own making -- that seems to be the logical conclusion of Europe's debt-driven welfare system and the EU's contempt for national boundaries

Dividing the Arabs: America and Europe's Double Game

Sunday, August 23, 2015

The Last Sermon of Friedrich Griesendorf,a German ClergymanReprinted and translated from the Eversburg Newspaper, Eversburg, Germany Friedrich Griesendorf, who died in 1958, was a very educated man. He was at one time a court clergyman for the German Kaiser, Wilhelm II. After World War II, he was a pastor in the Eversburg church parish—where a camp of Serbian prisoners of war was located. Before retiring, he dedicated these lines to his German parishioners:“Our country los...t the war. The English, Americans, and Russians won. Maybe they had much better equipment, larger armies, better leadership. In reality, it was an explicit material victory. They took that victory. However, here among us is one nation that won another much more beautiful victory, a victory of the soul, a victory of the heart and honesty, a victory of peace and Christian love. They are the Serbs. We knew them earlier, some a little and some not at all. But we all knew what we did in their homeland. We killed hundreds of the Serbs who defended their country for one of our soldiers who represented the occupier—the oppressor. And not only that, we looked favorably when others shot at the Serbs from all sides; the Croatians (Ustashi), the Italians, Albanians, Bulgarians and Hungarians. Yet we knew that among us in the prisoner of war camps were 5,000 Serbian officers, who earlier were the elite of the society and, who now resembled living skeletons, exhausted and spent from hunger. We knew that among the Serbs smoldered the belief ‘He who does not revenge is not sanctified.’ We are truly afraid of the revenge by these Serbian martyrs. We were afraid that after our capitulation they would do what we did to them. We imagined murder, plunder, rape, demolition and destruction of our homes. However, what happened? When the barbed wires were torn down and 5,000 living Serbian skeletons found themselves free in our midst, those skeletons caressed our children. Only now can we understand why our greatest poet, Goethe, studied the Serbian language. Only now can we comprehend why the last word for Bismark, on his deathbed, was—‘Serbia.’ That kind of victory is more sublime than a material victory. It seems to me that only the Serbs could win such a victory, being brought up in their St. Sava’s spirit and epic poetry, which our Goethe loved so much. This victory will live for centuries in the souls of us Germans. I wanted to dedicate my last clergyman’s sermon to that victory and the Serbs who won it.”—Friedrick Griesendorf.Note: After the war, the German government errected a monument in Eversburg, Germany— to honor and pay tribute to these 5,000 Serbianprisoners of war.
THE STORY YOU HAVEN’T HEARD: ‘In 1971, Muslims murdered 2.4 million Hindus and raped 200,000 Hindu women’

Will the Muslim violence against the Indian people, and the contamination of barbaric Islamic ideals blended into their culture, ever end? The Israeli’s and Hindus are the largest victims of perpetural Islamic invasions and violence lasting for more than 1,000 years. Muhammad Ali Jinna, a member of the Indian National Congress and later of the All-India Muslim League (a Khilafat movement that also germinated the Palestine conflict), demanded a two-state partition, creating the Lahore Resolution, which formed the separate creation of Pakistan.
This partition of people created a domin effect of other tensions and problems spreading from Khalistan to Bangladesh, to Kashmir, to Balochistan and to continued terrorism and tension existing even today. The British tried to discourage Muhammad Ali Jinna against rallying for the partition and warned against it many times, which ended in riots, mass exodus, clashes and deaths of millions. The article covers a poorly exposed incident of Muslim massacres of Hindus that we never hear about. It’s a pity the article forms a common Hindu anti-Western mindset, and fails to acknowledge any attention to the simple fact that Britain saved India from Muslim rule. India would bend to Mecca today had it not been for the clever rulers of South India who formed an alliance with Britain for exclusive trade agreements which developed into British rule and the expulsion of Muslim rule and Sharia law. You never hear Indian people admit to this fact. Instead they are focused purely on anti-Western rhetorics. It’s not Britain who destroyed India. It’s Islam that looted, massacred and destroyed Indian culture from within. Muslim terrorism, attacks, tensions continue in India to this day.

.Understanding Islamic violence; how to defend our freedoms
Interview by People of Shambhala.
In the wake of renewed violence against Hindus in Pakistan, and with more than 100 Hindu families seeking asylum in India, Director of the Canadian Hindu Advocacy group spoke to People of Shambhala. Mr. Banerjee talks about the background to the conflict, and why Pakistan was created in 1947. Why the West should include Hinduism, not just the “Judeo-Christian” tradition. And he also discusses Islam and violence against Hindus and the West, and how we can defend our values and freedoms.
PoS: At the moment about 100 Hindu families are seeking asylum in India, from Pakistan, and are claiming discrimination and violence. There were four doctors murdered on the first day of Eid, and, I think, a Sikh was stabbed as well. Can you tell us a little about that situation?
RB: Sure. The situation is very natural. Most people don’t understand what Pakistan is. Pakistan is a country that was formed for the Muslims. India is a multi-ethnic country for everybody. So Pakistan was formed with the very idea that the only people that should be in Pakistan are Muslims. There is nothing strange about what’s going on in Pakistan today. It’s being going on for a long time.
At independence Pakistan’s population was about ten percent Hindu and Sikh. Now it’s less than one percent. So the question is where did that nine percent go? Well, they were either ethnically cleansed, driven away, or slaughtered in large numbers in the 1971 war between India and Pakistan. In East Pakistan an estimated 2.4 million Hindus were slaughtered in just one year, and hundreds of thousands of Hindu women were raped.
There is nothing surprising about any of this because Islam was introduced into the Asian subcontinent with the objective of occupying and exterminating the Hindus. According to the historian William Durant, and other historians, an estimated 80 million Hindus were killed, were slaughtered, and thousands and thousands of Hindu temples were smashed, and mosques were built on top of them. The Muslims of India tried very hard over the period of their 700 years [of occupation] to wipe out the Hindus. But there was resistance from some of the Hindu kingdoms. They never had full control over India so they were unable to achieve that goal. But that’s the eternal goal. According to Islam, Hinduism is the lowest form of life on the planet. Because Hindus, according to them, they’re polytheistic, they believe in multiple gods. They believe we worship idols, and idol worship is a sin in Islam.
a5e03-bangladeshgenocide1-701742PoS: One thing that has struck me is just the extent of the attacks on Hindus, Buddhists, Yezidis, Zoroastrians, Kalash. Yet we don’t hear anything about this. You mentioned the war of 71; 2.4 million dead, 200,000 Hindu women raped, but we don’t hear anything about that in the West.
RB: No you don’t, because there’s a systematic effort by Muslims and petrodollars to cover it up. The reason you don’t hear about it is because they make tremendous effort to silence it.
PoS: In all fairness, some Middle Eastern newspapers that probably cater mostly to Muslims have covered some of it, but you don’t seem to find it in the West, which is even more incredible. Why do you think Western journalists won’t cover something like that? The West always portrays itself as caring about minorities and being the people that always stand up to stop genocide, and that are always campaigning against violence against minorities. But nothing.
RB: This may offend you a little bit.
PoS: It won’t [laughs].
RB: It probably will [laughs]. But, it’s because the West have been hypocrites.
PoS: Yeah.
RB: If you look at Britain, for example, when they went to India they did not stop genocide or massacres, they expedited them. They actually supported the Muslims against the Hindus, helped them to perpetrate massacres. In terms of the establishment of the state of Pakistan, if you read people like William Dalrymple, a British historian, it becomes quite clear that the British encouraged the creation of Pakistan in order to divide the [anti-colonial] independence movement. [*Dalrymple’s theories are inaccurate and merely theories. The Britain discouraged against the partition of India, but the decision was created by Indian-Muslim voters themselves spearheaded by Muhammad Ali Jinna]
PoS: Do you think there is still a kind of colonial residue in the atmosphere. Do you think there is some kind of patronizing attitude in the media? Is that why we don’t see atrocities reported?
I’ve heard this question before. That it’s a form of racism that they don’t condemn Muslims for their human rights violations is because they are non-Western and [therefore] they are expected to be barbaric. There might be some of that, but these days it’s rather more a culture of fear. I mean, if you publish a cartoon of Mohammed, even if you’re in the West, you get threatened, and you possibly get killed, and you have riots going on. So now it’s more of a culture of fear.
The IKEA Murders: Sweden in Crisis

  • The mosque fire received huge attention, while the rape epidemic is basically ignored. When a Swedish woman and her son are brutally knifed to death in the most Swedish of all places – an IKEA store – the Prime Minister has nothing to say.
  • The normal democratic order, where citizens can contact politicians or the media to make their voices heard, has all but evaporated in Sweden. Newspaper websites have removed the reader comment fields, and the politicians hide behind a wall of officials who brand callers expressing concern "racist," and hang up. Sweden is governed by a power that has shut down the democratic process.
  • Questions flooded the social media: Who are these people that are let into Sweden? How many of them are not innocent victims of war, but in fact war criminals and other criminals, hiding among the refugees?
  • The most relevant question is: Why has one government after another chosen to spend Swedish taxpayers' money to support and shelter citizens of other countries, while some of them try to kill us?
  • None of the mainstream media has confronted the government about the violent crimes committed by asylum seekers against Swedes. On the contrary – the media have done the utmost to convince Swedes that everything is safe and sound in Sweden. Better than ever, in fact.
  • "Where do I apply for asylum... when the day comes that I can no longer live here?" – "Ewa," on Facebook.
  • Violent crime is up 300% and rape is up 1,472% since 1975, the year the Swedish Parliament decided to turn homogenous Sweden into a multicultural country.
A surge of rage has washed over otherwise docile Sweden. After a double homicide at an IKEA store in Västerås, where an illegal alien stabbed two random Swedes to death, more and more people are questioning why the government is exposing Swedish citizens to murderers from across the globe.
On August 10, news of the IKEA murders shocked Sweden. Two asylum seekers from Eritrea (the second largest source of asylum applicants in Sweden), were suspected of having grabbed knives from the kitchenware department and attacked two random Swedes. The victims were 55-year-old Carola Herlin and her 28-year-old son, Emil.
Carola Herlin, Director of the Moro Backe Health Center, was murdered on August 10, along with her son, in the IKEA store in Västerås, Sweden.

The elder of the two asylum seekers, a 36-year-old man, had twice been denied residency status in Sweden -- because he had already been granted residency it in Italy -- but he had not yet been deported. (Eritreans without residence permits in other EU-countries automatically get to stay in Sweden.)
The killer also inflicted life-threatening injuries on himself, and underwent several surgeries before the police could finally question him. On August 14, he confessed. His 23-year-old compatriot was released from custody, because the police no longer believe he had anything to do with the murders or had even known what his friend was planning to do.
Fear has now struck the Swedes. Even those who had routinely brand critics of immigration and multiculturalism racist, were shaken to the core. Questions flooded the social media: Who are these people that are let into Sweden? How many of them are not innocent victims of war, but in fact war criminals and other criminals, hiding among the refugees? And should we pay billions in taxes to support and shelter citizens of other countries, while some of them try to kill us?
The fact that the police refuse to deny the persistent rumor that one of the IKEA victims was beheaded, only adds fuel to the fear.
So many questions and no answers. No one from the government has even bothered to make a statement about the horrific double murder. None of the mainstream media has confronted the government about the violent crimes committed by asylum seekers against Swedes. On the contrary – the media have done the utmost to convince Swedes that everything is safe and sound in Sweden. Better than ever, in fact. The day after the double murder, Sweden's largest morning paper, Dagens Nyheter, published an article titled, "After all, deadly violence on the decline." The article begins:
"In recent weeks, several brutal murders have been committed, and many people ask themselves where society is headed. The answer is that Sweden has, after all, become a safer place. Deadly violence has been on the decline for some time."
Nowhere does the article explain that the reason deadly violence has been on the decline is that emergency medicine is now able to save the lives of a lot more victims of knife- and gunshot-injuries. The so-called Laser Man, for example, shot a number of immigrants in Sweden in the 1990s. Forensic pathologist Jovan Rajs commented, "The Laser Man shot eleven people, and one of them died. In the 1930s eight or nine would have died, in the 1970s about five, and today probably none."
Ergo, deadly violence remains on an even level thanks to better health care in Sweden, but all other kinds of violent crime (including attempted homicide) has gone off the charts. Violent crime is up 300% and rape is up 1,472% since 1975, the year the Swedish Parliament decided to turn homogenous Sweden into a multicultural country.
Ninety percent of asylum seekers to Sweden lack proper identification papers, so in reality no one knows how many murderers, rapists and thugs hide among the 100,000 or so people granted asylum in Sweden every year.
Frustrated Swedes are now howling with powerlessness on social media. The normal democratic order, where citizens can contact politicians or the media to make their voices heard, has all but evaporated. Newspaper websites have removed the reader comment fields, and the politicians hide behind a wall of officials, who brand callers expressing concern "racist," and hang up. Thousands bear witness to this on Facebook. One person who actually got to talk about her uneasiness is Ewa, who writes on Facebook about calling Immigration Services:
"Well, I've unleashed the devil now. I called Immigration Services and demanded to talk to a Unit Manager. ... I gave him an earful about every injustice I could think of, like how badly we treat our elderly and how we take away their homes and give them to asylum seekers. I also told him how unsafe Swedish women feel due to all these gang rapes perpetrated by asylum seekers and other foreigners. Also asked him if we all have to be beheaded before they stop taking in these kinds of people. ... Now I'm sitting here, feeling completely empty after crying, screaming, discussing, raging and getting all this frustration out of me. Told him there are many of us who feel depressed because of what Immigration is doing. He was really sorry I feel this way. Yes, I told him, a lot of people feel this way but they are afraid to open their mouths because then they are labeled racist. You don't even have to be a Sweden Democrat to see that our country is falling apart more and more with each passing day. Something you and all the rest at Immigration Services are responsible for. Where do I apply for asylum, I asked, when the day comes and I can no longer live here? Our country is ruined economically, socially and so forth and you are responsible. He answered that it was the politicians who decided about this, but that they would do everything in their power to make things better."
Another woman, Amanda, wrote on Facebook that she e-mailed Prime Minister Stefan Löfven. She noted that "nothing may change, but at least I've made my voice heard." Her e-mail read:
"Hi, why did the Prime Minister feel it was essential and urgent to go and talk about the fire at the mosque in Eskilstuna, no one even knew what started it when he held his speech? But now, he's as silent as the grave. Why? It's his/your unconditional and lax immigration policies that have enabled this culprit to move freely in society, despite having received a deportation order not just once, but twice. Can you tell me if this is something the citizens of this country should get used to, that immigrants, upon receiving deportation orders, kill people in order to get a lifelong contract with the Swedish state? It is your personal responsibility every time this happens, I hope you know that. Because this is nothing if not a political issue regarding immigration, and... its massive consequences to an entire nation."
The mosque fire in Eskilstuna that Amanda referred to happened December 25, 2014, and is one of many incidents affecting Muslims and other immigrants that have received huge attention, while the rape epidemic in Sweden is basically ignored. After the fire, the Prime Minister was quick to make a statement:
"It is despicable, a despicable act. We will never tolerate this type of crime. People who want to practice their religion should have the right to do so. Today I feel great sympathy and empathy for those affected."
Three months later, it turned out no crime was behind the mosque fire, and police dropped the investigation. Most likely, it was caused by an accident or children playing with fire.
But when a Swedish woman and her son are brutally knifed to death in the most Swedish of all places – an IKEA store – the Prime Minister has nothing to say.
The Swedes are not prone to rebellion. To find a citizen that took up arms and marched on the citadels of power, one has to go back to the days of Gustav Vasa – the king who during his reign, 1523-1560, founded the nation-state of Sweden.
Although Sweden today is not occupied territory, it is governed by a power that has shut down the democratic process by the "December Agreement" of 2014. In the general election that year, the only party critical of mass immigration, the Sweden Democrats (SD), became the third-largest party in Parliament. The left-wing and center-right blocs then agreed to lock SD out of political power, but SD refused to be silenced. When the left-wing minority government budget was presented one month after the election, SD voted for the opposition's budget – a shocking and unique occurrence in the Swedish Parliament. Here, it is considered "good manners and decorum" to vote for your own budget proposition first, then lay down your vote and let the government win. But after the Sweden Democrats' "coup," Prime Minister Stefan Löfven (of the Social Democratic Party) was forced to govern with a center-right budget during his first year in office.
One would think that this came as a pleasant surprise to the center-right opposition, but that was not what happened. No one wants support from the "racist" Sweden Democrats. Rather than call a snap election, the two blocs entered into an agreement in which the center-right opposition promises to abstain from voting when it comes to important issues such as a proposed budget.
Thus, the December Agreement is in reality a kind of "relay-race" dictatorship: The left-wing government gets to do what it wants for the next four years, and after that, for next the four years (if there is a change of power), it will be the center-right government's turn. This means both parties are free to ignore the 58% of Swedes who now feel that immigration is too high, and may choose to vote for the Sweden Democrats in the next election.
When the Swedes got the news about the December Agreement, they did what they usually do – clenched their fists in their pockets, formed Facebook groups and wrote angry comments on Twitter and Facebook. But the politicians congratulated each other on once again restoring order; they ignored the people's concern that democracy had now become even more eroded.
A well-known stand-up comedian, Magnus Betnér, thought it a good idea to mock frightened Swedes in a YouTube clip:
"Yes, it's really tragic two people were murdered in IKEA. ... but... it's not dangerous; Sweden has never been safer than it is now. ... Very few of you guys watching this clip will be murdered. And those of you who are, will be murdered in your own homes."
When the establishment refuses to take people's concerns seriously, rumors on social media spread fast. A stubborn rumor claims that Carola Herlin was beheaded by the Eritrean murderer. According to sources interviewed by Gatestone, the woman had her throat slit and was also stabbed in the abdomen. Her son tried to defend himself, but received a deadly stab wound to the stomach.
When Dispatch International called Per Ågren, the police investigator in charge of the case, and asked him about the rumor, he said: "I'm not going to confirm... describe anything at all about what happened, except to say that two people were murdered. You won't find out how from me."
One of the first measures taken by the police after the IKEA murders was to start guarding all the buildings housing asylum seekers in the county. There was some apprehension concerning "dark forces," the police claimed, without specifying who these "dark forces" were. The night of August 15, an asylum house in Arboga had to be evacuated after someone shouted something about a bomb outside. Now the mainstream media were really on their toes: Carola and Emil Herlin, according to their reports, had been "at the wrong place at the wrong time."
The newspaper Aftonbladet interviewed an anonymous woman who said, "My cousin has lived here for over a year. He told me the Swedes are the nicest people in Europe. Then something like this happens. I could never have imagined."
Once again, it is supposedly the Swedes who should bow their heads in shame. Supposedly, we are not the ones grieving; we do not have the right to be frightened to death over the immigration policy of our rulers – it is the asylum seekers who are the victims, even when they kill, rape, rob and abuse.
The burning question is: What will the people do, whom no one will listen to? In East Germany of 1989, the people took to the streets, scaled the Berlin wall and made the government to resign. The other communist dictatorships of Eastern Europe fell in similar ways. The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (the right to bear arms), exists to ensure that the citizens are able to seize power from a tyrannical government.
If powerlessness drives people to answer violence with violence, maybe one should not ask why Swedes are "racists" if they do not want the highest immigration level in Europe?
The most relevant question is why one government after another has chosen to spend Swedish taxpayers' money on citizens of other countries. While Swedish students take a plunge in the PISA tests, 60% of the welfare benefits go to immigrants who make up about 15% of the population. Healthcare and other social services are deteriorating, according to many Swedes, while violence is exponentially increasing. When more and more Swedes feel that they are being badly treated in their own country, the politicians have created a powder keg ready to explode at any minute.
The truth is that even the docile Swedish people have a limit. When those in power expose us to bloodbaths, whether in the Big Square of Stockholm in 1520 or at IKEA in Västerås in 2015, there will always be those who are ready to overthrow the mighty. Just as in Gustav Vasa's day, a lot of Swedes have firearms. They are not as easy to come by as in the United States, but more and more Swedes are getting hunting licenses, and are thereafter legally able to buy guns. From now on in Sweden, anything can happen.
Hearts welded together in love is the requisite, then, for "heart marriage." Whatever the legal custom is, then, is the requirement for "legal marriages." You cannot call the union of every Mr. and Mrs. a marriage. Many are merely legal permits to live together, respectably, or respectively.
The well known story in Gen. 29:16-28 of the problems Jacob had in his wooing of Rachel is a classic illustration of these two types of marriage.
"And Laban had two daughters; the name of the elder was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel. Leah was tender eyed, but Rachel was beautiful and well favored.
And Jacob loved Rachel and said, I will serve thee seven years for Rachel, thy younger daughter. And Laban said, "It is better that I give her to thee than that I should give her to another man; abide with me." And Jacob served seven years for Rachel, and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her. And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her. And Laban gathered together all the men of the place and made a feast.
And it came to pass in the evening that he took Leah his daughter and brought her to him, and he went in unto her. And it came to pass in the morning, behold it was Leah. (Now just imagine that!) And he said to Laban, What is this thou hast done unto me? Did not I serve with thee for Rachel? Wherefore then hast thou beguiled me? And Laban said, It must not be so done in our country to give the younger before the firstborn. Fulfill her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years. And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week; and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also. And he went in unto Rachel and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years."
Society governs legality, but the principles of true matrimony were established by God. According to their customs, or laws, he was legally married to Leah, but did not get the "pink slip" on Rachel for seven years later. This one he loved, but had a legal permit to live with the other. To which of these, then, was he really married? With which did he have unity, physically, mentally, and spiritually? Was it with the one with whom he lived seven years before they were "married"?
Could you say that God had joined Jacob and his first wife together?
Quickly sonic of you already may have jumped to a conclusion: This Writer has become an advocate of free love. Verily no! For this same Book which gave us these principles of marriage, gave us also the commandment to abide by the laws of our country, being subject to authority over us. In our country a license and a marriage ceremony are both required. The sin of omission is equal to that of commission. One purpose of this Study is to challenge you to know and understand that our tremendous problem of divorce is marriage.
In presenting this series on Marriage recently, to a group of Missionaries dedicated to teaching Truth to the heathen, one precious child of God whom I love dearly and appreciate the effective work she and her husband are doing, became exasperated, with unconcealed warmth. Into the air were flung expressions as: ... "No right to meddle into our private lives. I don't have to obey him ... I know best ... How do you know whether God joined us together or not? According to this then I am not even married ... What do you want us to do, get a divorce? ..."
Another wise son of God simply said, "Get married!"
This is my answer.
Throughout the scriptures, God uses the parallel of Love and marriage between a husband and wife to express or describe the spiritual union or relationship with Christ and His Bride, the Church. With Him the principle is synonymous. The physical or natural helps us to understand the spiritual; the spiritual helps us understand the physical.
In Ephesians 5: 22-23 wives and husbands are given certain commandments: "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the Church: and He is the savior of the body. Therefore as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands, in everything.
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church and gave Himself for it; That He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word. That He might present it to Himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the Church. For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the Church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband."First let us deal with the duties of a wife. One, amplified, commandment is given the wife: submit.
As used in this passage submit comes from a Greek word, hupotasso, which means to subordinate; to obey; be under obedience; put under; subdue unto; subject to. Generally, it means beneath; below, inferior position; determine. Specifically, in this exact usage, it means covertly, or modestly.
These last two words clarify the relationship the Holy Spirit intended the true wife toward her husband. Webster defines covertly as secretly; in private; sheltered; not open or exposed. Moderately means not going to extremes; keeping within the bounds; not excessive; not violent or rigorous.
Thinking of the wife's submission to her husband under these impulses makes the teaching compatible with all Christ's teachings. She is not to wear a sign that she is holding an inferior position in the household and being dominated by her husband. Indeed, if the husband is fulfilling his part, she can not be. The love agreement between them, God inspired, demands privacy in this realm. It is between the two of them that this relationship exists. Neither makes an open show -- he of his domination or she of her subordination, but in a sheltered, private, daily routine, because of respect and reverence, this partnership holds; from love, not force nor violence.
Allow your thoughts to trace out marriages you know that may have suffered irreparable damage because of a lack of proper understanding in this regulation. Often unbelieving husbands, claiming nothing from The Holy Word but this obedience of the wife, force her into a miserable conformity to his domination even in things spiritual. She might be drawn into insatiable hunger to fellowship with a group of Christian believers; he, unbelieving, forbids her. Then the battle: Do I obey the Lord who tells us not to forsake the assembling of ourselves together, or do I obey my husband? She might be led of the Holy Spirit to give of her increase, the tithe, to the Lord, but her husband forbids this giving. Does she obey the Lord or go by the admonition of the husband?
Oh how severe the trial! How sorely the people perish for want of knowledge! God, in His infinite wisdom and mercy, has given us the principle governing every phase of our living. There is the right answer even to this. He gave it. Husbands, Love your wives. Even as Christ loved the Church; even as they love their own bodies.
There was the believing wife who loved her unbelieving husband. She studied her Bible and longed to follow His precepts. She also worked, helping with the support of the children. One day, forcibly, through the reading of The Word, God spoke to her that she should pay tithes from the money she earned. Money was the sore spot of this union. So her battle began! Should she obey God or her husband? The situation was not just a thought principle, but became an enraged warfare at the discovery that ten dollars had been taken from the hundred she had made and thrown away -- robbing the children. She was forbidden, under threat, ever to tithe again.
Tears. Agony of heart. Weeping in prayer. Yet for all this that principle remained. God would not make an exception because of her particular situation. There was no other remedy but to give of her increase, for she preferred the reproach and condemnation of even her beloved husband to the danger of disobedience to God. Then she began to sneak around, slipping a little here (all the time her own money which she earned), holding out a little there, so at the first of the month, when her check was received, she might have the cherished tenth to secretly give to her Lord.
This condition is not an isolated one. Many are the sad cases of wives who are caught in this adversity. This woman sought help from an elderly couple whose lives were spent in spiritual living. She plainly presented her problem and three times they told her in the plainest terms, quoting nothing but The Word, God's answer, yet she could not grasp it; could not synchronize these two opposing acts of obedience.
Then the Light of revelation taught her: "Render unto God the things that are God's and unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's!" The tenth, principle of giving, is not man's but God's. Man, even a husband, cannot claim that portion therefore has no choice of control. Only when this truth seeped into her understanding did this believing wife find peace of mind. She was fulfilling all of God's commands by this recognition. In Christ Jesus, in things of the spirit, there is neither male or female. All are one in Him. Of the other ninety percent, the husband took control.
Obedience of the wife is over-emphasized and under-understood. Often the expression is chirped, "The husband is head of the house." Misquote. The husband is the head of the wife. But as to the managing of the house, several scriptures define this duty as the wife's or mother's. Possibly the most beautiful is found in Proverbs 31: 10-3 1.
Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies. The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil (no lack of gain). She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life. She seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands. She is like the merchant's ships; she bringeth her food from afar. She riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion to her maidens. She considereth afield, and buyeth it; (a good business woman) with the fruit of her hands she procureth a vineyard (good manager).
She girdeth her loins with strength, and strengtheneth her arms. She perceiveth that her merchandise is good; her candle goeth not out by night. She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the distaff. She stretcheth out her hand to the poor; yea she reacheth forth her hands to the needy. She is not afraid of the snow for her household; for all her household are clothed with scarlet. She maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing is silk and purple. Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land. She maketh fine linen, and selleth it; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant. Strength and honor are her clothing; and she shall rejoice in time to come. She openeth her mouth with wisdom; (she is a teacher); and in her tongue is the law of kindness. She looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread of idleness. Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her. Many daughters have done virtuously but thou excellest them all. Favor is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the Lord, she shall be praised. Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates."
Surely this is God's plan for true marriage. No thought of our presumptuous idea of insubordination, inferiority and servitude. Her husband loved her. My conviction is that rarely would you ever find a woman who is greatly loved who does not instinctively submit, complementing the love.

The Words That We Speak



The words that we speak, are they life or death? Do they give us hope or discouragement? Since we are held responsible for every word we speak, I think we had better listen very carefully to what we are saying, not just to our brethren, but also to ourselves. Notice what Jesus said: "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned" (Mt.12:36-37). Let us look at the words, justified and condemned a little more closely. By being Justified -- we are being freed from all blame, we are without guilt and we are shown or proven to be right. Condemned means -- to be pronounced unfit for use, guilty. By our own words we can be free from blame and without guilt, or we can pronounce ourselves guilty and unfit for the use of God. If it is the Word of God -- it is Life, it is freedom. If it is ourselves speaking -- it is death, and words of death will destroy, kill everyone that hears us; and not only they who hear us, but ourselves as well. Proverbs 18:21 says, "Death and life are in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof."


So what do we love -- Life or death? What are we eating, and what are we 'living' on? Is it Life or Death? It is one or the other. Let us quote Proverbs 18:21 again, it says that "Death and life are in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof." And in 18:20, "A man's belly shall be satisfied with the fruit of his mouth; and with the increase of his lips shall he be filled." Is our belly satisfied and filled with life, which is Christ, and live; or are we filled with the manna of death, which is an enemy, and die? Let it be life, and then this verse will come to pass, "The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death" (1 Cor.15:26).


All evil comes forth from the heart and proceeds out of the mouth. " The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? (Jer 17:9). "...For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh" (Mat 12:34). "But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies" (Mat 15:18-19). We need the circumcision that is of the heart, by the spirit (Rom 2:29), then the evil that comes out of our hearts will cease. "And I will give them one new heart, and I will put a new Spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh" (Ezek 11:19).


Let us take a moment to see what the heart expresses through the tongue. "And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and is set on fire of hell, for every kind of beast, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind: But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be. Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter?" (Jms.3:6-11). I could go on with the rest of the verses, but I am sure you can read the whole chapter yourself, which is very good.


Has anyone ever said something negative to you, and you just wilted and felt like you had died inside, or perhaps they said some beautiful words to you, then you just blossomed like a flower. This is the way of the tongue. Let us, therefore, tend to life with our tongue, which may seem to be an impossible task; but be assured with God all things are possible (Mk 9:23). We will and shall be able to tame the tongue and only speak living words of life and reality. In Proverbs 26:20 we also find these words: "Where no wood is, there the fire goeth out: so where there is no talebearer, the strife ceaseth." When our wood, hay and stubble is consumed, the carnal fire has gone out, but the eternal flame of God will burn for ever. Praise God Hallelujah!


We can see there is a negative (dark) side, but there is always a positive (light) side as well. What is important to us is that which is positive, that which gives us life eternal, and we know our life comes from God the Father through Christ Jesus, Who is the savior of all man. It is good to know the dark side of things, so we can stand against the wiles of evil, but it is so much better to live and have our being in the positive (the side of light and life).


I myself want to live. What about you? I know the answer to that. We are all wanting to live, and not just live but to live life more abundantly.


So now that we know we are all wanting to live, let us look at some of the scriptures that speak of those things that give us life:


Proverbs 10:20 says, "The tongue of the just is as choice silver", (silver speaks of redemption & righteousness),( see also Proverbs 25:4-5 and Psa. 12:6).


"A wholesome tongue is a tree of life" (Prov. 15:4), and we know that Jesus Christ is the Tree of Life -- ever living (Rev. 2:7).


"The mouth of a righteous man is a well of life" (Prov.10 :11), and John 4:14 tells us that He (Jesus) is the water for the thirsty. Jesus also said, "If any man thirst, let him come unto Me, and drink" (John 7:37). "In the lips of him that hath understanding wisdom is found..." (Prov. 10:13), "...and with wisdom the house is built" (Prov. 24:3-4).


"The lips of the righteous feed many" (Prov. 10-21), and Jesus said, "Feed My sheep" (John 21:15-17).


To have all the words of life we must be circumcised in the heart and put on the mind of Christ, also communicate, and have an intimate relationship with Him, with Christ the living Spirit which dwells in us. And He is in us, don't we know? "But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach" (Rom. 10:8). You see He is so close, in our mouths and in our hearts -- so why don't we speak words of Life and Live? Because our hearts first need to be circumcised and we need to have His mind. "Be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind" (Rom 2:12). "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways" (James 1:8). We know a double mind can mean death or life. And "For to be carnally (fleshly) minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace" (Rom 8:6). As long as we are thinking or speaking negatively of anything or anybody, we do not have His mind, nor are our hearts circumcised. We die each time we utter ill words, they cause us to abide in death. To walk in His life, we must have His fullness and His mind. There cannot be any negative thoughts or words spoken, because they will result in death. As long as we possess carnal minds, we have death, we are dying, and we will go to the grave.


Jesus tells us in John 5:19 "The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do: for what things soever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." He also said in John 14:24, "...The word which ye hear is not Mine, but the Father's which sent Me."


Can you see what Jesus is saying to us? We have to hear the Father and speak what we hear. Let me make this very plain. We can know the Bible from one end to the other, have it all memorized in these heads of ours, and we can tell the world all about it, till we are blue in the face; but without the Spirit, and if God did not tell us to speak -- it is death!


Jesus, in John 6:63, said, "It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit, and they are life." Do you see it? The flesh profits nothing -- the carnal mind, the written word. Second Corinthians.3:6 says, "...The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life." So let us not speak the scriptures for the sake of being heard; but let it be the Spirit that quickens -- makes alive. So when the Spirit moves through us, let us speak like it says in 1 Corinthians 2:4-7, "And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory. "And now, "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus..." (Phil 2:5). Then the words that we speak are Spirit and Life. They glorify God, not ourselves! Amen.

Friday, August 21, 2015

Why is Obama bringing 100,000 Muslims a month into America?

Welcome to “The Michael Savage Newsletter,” your daily insider report on all things “Savage.”
In today’s issue: Obama vowed to “transform America” if elected, and he seems to be living up to that promise in one particularly troubling way.
Dr. Savage wants to know why the president seems intent on flooding the country with Muslim “refugees” who he says “would like to hurt us.”
“Nobody listening to this program wants war,” Savage said to his audience.
But if a man wants to break into your house and burn your house down, you have to go to war.
Right now, the country is flooded with Muslims who would like to hurt us.
And if you don’t like hearing me say that, send my notes to the FBI.
I am so tired of the cover-up.
The FBI director himself a month ago said there were sleeper terror cells in 49 states, every one except Alaska.
How did they get here?
Through Obama’s refugee and asylum programs.
Why is he bringing 100,000 Muslims a [year] into America?
Islam is opposed to Christianity at its core.
And where is the Republican Party in all this?
Why were they put in power?

FRANCE: Anti-Islamization National Front Party Mayor successfully blocks construction of new mosque

One year in office and Mantes-la-Ville Mayor Cyril Nauth has made good on a campaign promise to stop construction of proposed mosque and build a larger police station on the property instead.

Mantes-la-Ville Mayor Cyril Nauth of the National Front party
Mantes-la-Ville Mayor Cyril Nauth of the National Front party

France 24  Mantes-la-Ville Mayor Cyril Nauth had promised to block the project, citing problems in the neighbourhood where the future mosque was supposed to stand, as well as potential financial liabilities for the local government.

The previous Socialist-led city council approved in October a measure to purchase a publicly owned building and then resell the property to the local Muslim organization, who would be in charge of transforming it into a place of worship.

2014 French Municipal elections showed an historic shift to the right (droite)

Nauth, a member of the conservative anti-Islam National Front (FN) party, expressed concern that the religious group might fail to disburse city hall the 650,000 euros needed for the purchase of the property.

Le Figaro (h/t bonapak) The mayor wanted to install a municipal police station in the old treasury building instead of having it converted into a mosque. (A large police station is much better use of the space when you have a significant Muslim population in the area)

A plague of mosques is obliterating French culture thanks to massive Muslim immigration
A plague of mosques is obliterating French culture thanks to massive Muslim immigration, National Front will stop that.

The municipality wished to transfer its municipal police, from its current 90 m2 local to this new place, making 300, and bear the numbers 10 to 13. The basement could be used to install the archives of the city. A “serious, solid and concrete” project, inspired by the “general interest” which is not the case “of a Muslim place of worship,” while advancing the municipality to justify its project.

The situation was blocked for two years as the Muslims appealed to the former socialist government to gain approval for the mosque. This building belongs to the Community of Agglomeration of Mantes en Yvelines (Camy). Consulted on the operation, the State recommended that the building be sold initially in the city, which legally has the political powers regarding the Islamic cult. The city would then sell the building to the Muslim Association.  A sales agreement was signed in 2014.

2014 French Municipal elections showed an historic shift to the right (droite)
2014 French Municipal elections showed an historic shift to the right (droite)

Part of the reason the current mayor won the election was his strong opposition to the mosque. The Versailles Administrative Court has suspended the project based on a provision that blocks the construction of places of worship which ironically, was launched by the previous socialist government.

France 24 “Besides discriminating against us [Muslims], I don’t see any reason to oppose this project,” Albelaziz El Jaouhari, a Muslim leader in Mantes-la-Ville, told Le Monde. “We have been trying to build a dignified place to pray for the past 25 years. Every other religious group has a place, and I don’t see why it is different for us.”

Some like to call it a shift to the "extreme right." Whatever!
Some like to call it a shift to the “extreme right.” Whatever!

Muslim residents of Mantes-la-Ville, a town of 19,000 west of the French capital, currently gather for prayer in a building that is rented from the local government. But leaders say the space is too small and does not meet building codes.

Nauth was among a handful of candidates from the anti-Muslim immigration National Front who won municipal elections across France last year. However, he holds the distinction of being the only FN member to become a mayor in Ile-de-France, or the Paris metropolitan region.


Muslims in Mantes-la-Ville have expressed concern over what they said has become an increasingly hostile environment since Nauth won the March 30 ballot. Pork pâté, which like all pork products is considered unclean by Muslims, was left in their mosque’s mailbox last year.

Planned Butcherhood: Ripping Organs from Babies with Beating Hearts Written by 

If you thought Planned Parenthood couldn’t possibly sink any lower than having its officials coldly market human body parts, think again.
Because now a video has emerged showing organization employees talking about cutting organs from babies with beating hearts.
The disgusting revelation is part of the seventh undercover video released by The Center for Medical Progress, which has made news exposing Planned Parenthood’s immoral and illegal practices. The new footage shows a Planned Parenthood (PP) worker removing the brain of a baby — without anesthesia — while the child’s heart was beating. Holly O'Donnell, an ex-procurement technician with StemExpress, LLC who helped with the “procedure,” explained how she was “flabbergasted” at what transpired. “‘I want you to see something kind of cool; it’s kind of neat,’” O’Donnell says her supervisor told her. “So she has one of her instruments, and she just taps the heart, and it starts beating. And I’m sitting here and I’m looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating, and I don’t know what to think”

But O’Donnell wouldn’t not know what to think for long. She then described what happened after she realized she’d be asked to “cut the head open”:
"I didn't want to do this. And so she [her supervisor, “Jessica”] gave me the scissors and told me I have to cut down the middle of the face. And you can't even like describe what that feels like. And I remember picking it up and finishing going through the rest of the face and Jessica picking up the brain and putting it in the container with the media.… And she left and she’s like, “Okay, you can clean up.” And I’m just sitting there, like, “What did I just do?” And that was the moment I knew I couldn’t work for the company anymore.
This apparently is not an isolated incident, either. As the Media Research Council informs, reporting on the story:
The San Jose Planned Parenthood location will perform an abortion up to 20 weeks of pregnancy. O'Donnell remarked about the incident, “I don’t know if that constitutes it’s technically dead, or it’s alive.”
According to state and federal law, the same treatment must be given to a born-alive infant after an abortion as would a normally-delivered baby (1 U.S.C. 8, CA Health and Safety Code 123435). If a heartbeat is present, any kind of experimentation on a fetus with a discernible heartbeat is illegal by California law (CA Health and Safety Code 123440).
In another part of the video, Dr. Ben Van Handel, Executive Director of Novogenix Laboratories, LLC, admits harvesting organs from babies with still beating hearts is a common practice. Van Handel said, “There are times when after the procedure is done that the heart actually is still beating.” Novogenix Laboratories has worked with Planned Parenthood to harvest human organs for years.
In previous PP videos, organization employees were shown harvesting babies’ body parts without the mothers’ consent and cavalierly talking about, writes CNS News, “altering the abortion process to get ‘intact fetal cadavers,’ and help to identify body parts from aborted twins, including intestines, brain, lung, arm and ‘orbits,’ eyeballs.”
Critics might wonder what kind of people would involve themselves in such barbarity; after all, the doctors and technicians in question are highly trained and could make a good living in a legitimate area of medicine. So are at least some of these abortionists sociopaths, people with no conscience whatsoever? Some certainly fit the bill. Just consider Kermit Gosnell, who’s now serving a life sentence for performing illegal abortions (i.e., killing babies a bit too old for the government’s tastes) at his Women's Medical Society in Philadelphia, which was dubbed a “Shop of Horrors.” He was found to have been displaying aborted babies’ body parts in jars — like a serial killer collecting “trophies.”
Or consider PZ Myers, a tenured Minnesota biology professor and abortion apologist who identifies himself as a “godless liberal” on his blog. After a pro-lifer sent him pictures of aborted babies he replied, as if it were something to boast about, “You want to make me back down by trying to inspire revulsion with dead baby pictures? I look at them unflinchingly and see meat. And meat does not frighten me.”
Such attitudes prompted commentator Matthew Archbold to write in 2010 that he used to think abortionists were explained merely by “greed” overriding “humanity,” “feminism run amok,” and “the extreme of secularized logic.” But now he realizes: “It’s worse than that. We’re immersed in a culture with a death fetish.” Are some abortionists people who’ve found a way to legally indulge a desire to serially kill others and get paid for it?
While this seems likely, it also appears true that the skids for most evil are greased by rationalization: when people lie to themselves, when they distort, twist, and obscure reality for themselves. Note, for instance, that O’Donnell referred to the murdered and mutilated baby not as “he” or “she,” but “it.” This could remind a movie junkie of serial killer Buffalo Bill from Silence of the Lambs threatening his victim with, “It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.” Of course, this language implies objectification, the treating of the person as a “thing.” Yet O’Donnell does have a conscience; what she’s doing is trying to psychologically and emotionally distance herself from the reality of her actions. (A sociopath’s conscienceless state, we should note, would render this wholly unnecessary since there is no reality that could make him feel guilty.) This is just as how military men might call killing the adversary “neutralizing the target” or innocent victims “collateral damage.”
But we shouldn’t fool ourselves with our own tongues. What’s occurring in abortion mills coast to coast is nothing less than cold-blooded murder. And while we hear much about the mythical “War on Women,” do we care at all about the very real War on Babies? With Planned Parenthood still receiving $500 million annually in tax money and the Democrats fighting to maintain that funding, we have to wonder.