Editor: This is a guest column from a Texas reader/activist who would like to join with other Texans to begin to push back against the federal government’s program of seeding Texas with Muslim refugees. It is addressed to Texans! (Filed in our category for guest posts and comments,here). When I travel, people ask for examples of what civilization jihad is, halal slaughter is an example. From Texan Gary Henderson:
RRW Texas suggests that you check your local food stores, (all of them, even those mom and pop convenience stores that are not in prison for food stamp fraud), to see if they sell products certified by the Halal scam. If so, what do they pay for that “privilege”.
We already have the finest food inspection apparatus in the world, and we pay for that with our tax money. What possible reason would cause us to pay additionally for the inferior Halal killing machine.
Where is PETA when you need them? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/outcry-after-undercover-film-exposes-brutality-of-halal-industry-10019467.html
Let the Muslims pay for that.
It is rumored that Halal slaughterhouses often buy meat from non-Halal slaughterhouses and re-sell it as Halal! Imagine trickery, deception and manipulation and you have Halal certification, all made possible by our federal governments infatuation with the Muslim Brotherhood.
The worldwide Halal racket leaders estimate that they will eventually realize more than one trillion dollars in income, annually, for their efforts. And food products are just one source, cosmetics and other hard goods are also part of the scam.
In Texas, (we receive more immigrants than any other state), pay particular attention to the new Muslim startup areas that are importing Syrians and others to every corner of our fine state. They represent great opportunities for local merchants of every type, and the tax money we pay for these new communities has converted overnight many Texas conservative retailers, “good old boys” who have done business in their towns for generations, into “turn-the-other-cheek” liberals when they see the financial rewards possible for simply changing their stripes.
Keep me advised of the results of your investigations. You can be anonymous if you like or I’ll openly give you credit for your pioneering spirit. As Texans, we need to pay more attention to exposing those forces who are contributing to the demise of our great state and country.
The Days Are Dwindling Down.
Gary Henderson – Founding member, Texas Border Volunteers, Infidel Defense Alliance, Christian Defense Coalition, rrwtx@mindsversusmatters.com
To understand the horrific practice of Halal slaughter, do some research on the internet. See also this gruesome piece at the UK Independent.
Want to join others like Gary in Texas, then please sign up as an activist at the Center for Security Policy’s newactivist data base.
Note to our Dallas area reader worried about a Muslim cemetery planned for her town, get in touch with Gary and join others in your state. You can’t do this alone!
By the way, at one point a reader planned to write a blog on Halal slaughter and the meat industry in America—it is time!
Some of our regular readers might have noticed that we have a troll (‘314maker’) who has arrived in the last few days to criticize RRW and you.
I’m really o.k. with criticism and with trolls, but just wish one of them would one day take me up on my offer to write a guest column with reasoned arguments about why he/she believes that America should invite the world to come live here.
Here is ‘314maker’ trying to make the point that we don’t take all the refugees the UN has selected for us.
‘314maker’:
Seems like my comment was deleted. Again, just because a refugee is referred to the U.S. Program, does not mean the case will be accepted, nor does it mean the case will be given refugee status by USG officials.
Here is what I said in response to that comment from ‘314 maker’ yesterday (this is at our post on Idaho).
Ann:
As long as you don’t swear or threaten anyone personally I don’t delete comments. But, also, remember I don’t sit at the computer all day waiting for comments to roll in. This is a reminder to everyone, I post them when I have time in the middle of my otherwise busy life.
314maker, we have many times over the years reported that the UN specifically says it has chosen refugees for us. The UNHCR tells us they do!
But, since you are here, I would like to offer you the opportunity to write a guest post for us and explain why America has to take the large number of refugees we now take, and we want a logical explanation, with no mention of “nation of immigrants” and no appeal to religion, no name-calling, just simply explain why it is in our interest to admit large numbers of impoverished people to our cities and towns, and why it isn’t enough to take care of American poor first.
And, most of all we would really like to know if even you have a limit. Is there some number that is simply too many? Or, would you just erase all of our borders and invite anyone from anywhere to live here?
This is a serious offer of an opportunity to reach a lot of people with a logical reason why you are in support of mass immigration.
He/she has refused my offer. And, by the way, we are under no obligation to be fair and balanced. The Hard Left/Open Borders crowd is never fair and balanced!
‘314maker’:
Ann – I am not interested in writing a guest post and kindly request that you do not create one based on my comments. Your blog is highly editorialized (your prerogative) and routinely twists facts to support a certain mindset – a mindset which I want no part of, even in an attempt to correct. I believe in the process of refugee resettlement and I do not feel the need to justify this belief to you or your readers. I will, however, continue to read your blog and provide comments as I find your take on things quite entertaining.
He/she wants to keep commenting, but I suggested perhaps he/she could write his/her own blog and call it Refugee Resettlement Watch Watch! (but that would mean having to do some work!).
Ann:
I thought so…easy to comment critically, less easy to logically explain your point of view. Hey, here is an idea, rather than me giving you a platform to attack on a daily basis, why don’t you do the hard work of writing a blog—Call it Refugee Resettlement Watch Watchand I will prominently link it and promote it!
Editor’s note: For our many new readers,‘Comments worth noting’is a category in which we archive interesting comments! It is also where we archive guest columns like the one we hoped ‘314maker’ would write.
Spartanburg is not anti-immigrant or anti-Muslim. Neither are we indifferent to the suffering of people anywhere in the world, especially not to our own “least of these.” For this reason, we are pro-wise and controlled immigration. We are not seeing either anywhere within the federal framework and have not seen it since 1965.
“The federal government has no authority to be politically correct or to manipulate its people for political gain or to seek “integration” or “diversity” for its own sake.”
In fact, poor immigration policies and federal neglect to do its Constitutional duty has accelerated and exacerbated the problems of our economy, our own vulnerable citizenry and our precarious national security situation. The citizens are morally, Constitutionally and legally the central government’s primary concern. The central government exists for one reason only and that’s to protect us, our rights, our borders and our sovereignty. Their job is to maintain “domestic tranquility” and provide equal justice. We created the central government–“governments are instituted among men”. They did not create the states or us. We preexist it. It has no moral agency to provide mercy, even though laws can at times provide mercy. The administration of mercy belongs solely to the individual. The churches and all these resettlement agencies are responsible for providing their own funds according to what they are willing or are able to bear. The federal government has no moral or Constitutional authority to provide one dime to resettlement once the refugees pass through the gates of its Constitutional authority to regulate immigration and naturalization.
My problem is that the federal government has nothing it did not obtain from the citizens. It can only obligate its citizens to bear the burdens and to suffer the consequences that result from foolish schemes. Yes, the fiscal and social burdens the federal government is saddling us with matters, but as important as that is, it’s the moral and legal issues that are most concerning. The federal government is not providing equal justice. In fact, the immigration policies, or lack thereof, are horribly unfair and unequal. Its negligent in its duty to enforce its own laws and to uphold its primary reason for existence. The law hasn’t failed. Our public servants have.
What do you think caused Ferguson and Baltimore? Racism? Bad policing? Look deeper. What segment of our society is suffering most from unfair competition for limited jobs and opportunity? Who has been primarily displaced by massive numbers of foreign low-skill workers? Of course, there are other issues involved, but one of the main underlying problems is decades of immigration policy that favors immigrants, both legal and illegal, over our own citizens. Layers of bogus “help” programs and layers of narrative have been thrown over the real issues. These tactics are nothing but cover for political gain. Both parties. The bottom line is the federal government’s failure to uphold its moral and Constitutional mandate to protect its own citizens.
So what is wise immigration? It’s immigration that never harms or risks its own citizens in any way. It’s limited and selective. Next it chooses immigrants/refugees that are best suited to assimilate within its jurisdiction and in numbers small enough to not cause harm. The federal government has no authority to be politically correct or to manipulate its people for political gain or to seek “integration” or “diversity” for its own sake. It is to apply equal justice in everything it does, starting with its citizens. Nature will take care of the rest.
As kind as it may seem to bring in millions of illegal and legal immigrants, it’s anything but kind. It encourages illegal behavior and encourages subterfuge from people who should never have been allowed into this country. The wise policy would be to aid refugees overseas in areas close to their home so they can return when conflicts are resolved. The federal government has no right to take over the responsibilities of their home government or to place them on us. Our goal should be to help bring peaceful resolution to their conflicts and help the refugees go home. If peaceful resolution is not possible, then we aid the refugees where they are until they work out their internal problems.
We cannot save the world and if we’re to be an example, then we need to stand on solid principles, ensure equal justice and be certain aid money is not lining foreign or domestic politicians’, agencies or UN pockets, but is going to where it’s needed. Muslim countries must step up to their responsibilities. The sooner they do, the sooner the conflicts end. We cannot solve their problems for them. We can only guide with morals and principles. We help no one, here or abroad, by taking in hundreds of thousands of people who would rather go home and should.
The sooner the federal government does the right thing, the sooner people like you wrote about will get out of camps and back to their homes. If they still want to immigrate here, great…equal application of the law works when used. The world should be pressuring Muslim nations to fix their own house, not trying to take their responsibilities off their hands. That is immoral.
We welcome immigrants that come here to be Americans. We welcome people of character, like the people you wrote about, but diversity for the sake of diversity is conflict. Diversity within the shared framework of common values and principles enhances our culture. Cultures and beliefs built on rejection of our culture and values does not. People must come here because they want to assimilate, to be Americans. I wouldn’t go to Saudi Arabia and demand they adapt to me. I have every right to expect the same from foreigners entering my country and every right to expect my central government to ensure that’s the case with every immigrant allowed into its jurisdiction.
We have the right and the moral imperative to hold our central government responsible for its duties. Compassion not based in morals and principles is not compassion at all. It’s manipulative. Our responsibility is to first stand in the gap for vulnerable Americans, then to provide principled aid to the needy overseas so they can go home. We can do both.
Thanks ‘7delta’ for this clear, articulate response to the “compassion” argument. I’m too impatient to be good at writing like this (in addition to not being able to write this well no matter what!). Hey, I have an idea, maybe ‘7delta’ should write the opening statement for hearings that Rep. Trey Gowdy should hold in his subcommittee that is responsible for the Refugee Admissions Program of the federal government.
This post is archived in our “comments worth noting” category here.
For new readers, the controversy in Spartanburg began in March. See our original post with updates, here.
Editor: From time to time we publish good comments or opinion pieces from our readers. Previous commentary is archived in our category entitled ‘Comments worth noting/guest posts,’click here to read previous reader opinions. This opinion from reader ‘Julia’ is a view I share. When Fox&Friends and other Fox News talking-heads blamed Pamela Geller for what happened in Garland, Texas, we knew the writing was on the wall and that we have no defense for free speech in the dinosaur media. Fox (excepting perhaps Judge Jeanine!) has joined that despicable club.
From Julia:
Saturday, May 30, 2015, Fox&Friends joined an alarming trend when one of its hosts labeled former Marine Jon Ritzheimer and his fellow bikers who held a “Draw Muhammad” contest as “anti-Islamist activists.”
Is Judge Jeanine the only one left at Fox News who ‘gets it’ about free speech and Islam!
Perhaps Fox&Friends should have read the stories on“The Gateway Pundit”detailing how Islamists have made threats of violence – including murder – to attendees of the contest, published the home address of Mr. Ritzheimer, and caused Mr. Ritzheimer’s family to fear for their lives and go in hiding.
There has been a coordinated effort to characterize citizens who are concerned about the growing threats of terrorism in the U.S. as “anti-Islamic.” There are legitimate concerns about the radicalization of Muslims in America and F&F, by joining the effort to smear these individuals, is failing Fox’s “fair and balanced” approach to reporting.
What’s more is that F&F is employing the tactics of the left that one of its own contributors, Kirsten Powers, denounced in her new book, “The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech.”
Ms. Powers appeared on “Justice With Judge Jeanine” *** on Saturday, May 30, 2015, and was questioned by Judge Pirro on whether there is currently an attack on the First Amendment. Ms. Powers responded by warning that progressive scholars “have been taught that the First Amendment is not a bulwark against the government, but is an impediment to progressive policy;” that now there are “major legal scholars coming out and suggesting that maybe we need to to have hate speech laws;” . . . “and it’s terrifying.”
During this interview, Judge Pirro touched upon the movement to ridicule and ultimately marginalize those concerned about radical Islam when she suggested that “we’ve gotten to a point where even the word [Islam] is almost frowned upon.”
Leo Hohmann at World Net Daily recently reported on the plans of refugee resettlement contractors to quash the efforts of persons and groups opposing the resettlement of refugees in their communities. Part of these contractors’ plans include coordinating their offense with the Center for New Community and the Southern Poverty Law Center – groups known for ridiculing their opponents and associating them with hate speech.
Much has been written about an alliance between Islam and the left – be it Marxism, communism, etc.This targeting of persons and groups concerned about the spread of radical Islam in the United States suggests the reality of such alliance. That is, Islam is being used as a tool of the left to limit free speech and perhaps ultimately eliminate the First Amendment protections of speech in the U.S. Constitution.
This is why F&F’s joining in the chorus of the left’s demonization of Mr. Ritzheimer is so problematic. Inasmuch as Mr. Ritzheimer titled the protest the Freedom of Speech Rally Round II, Mr. Ritzheimer and the other contest attendees intended to act as “free speech proponents.”
F&F dropped the ball. They owe Mr. Ritzheimer an apology.
In addition, perhaps F&F can demonstrate its support of free speech by investigating and reporting on law schools that teach “that the First Amendment is not a bulwark against the government, but is an impediment to progressive policy.”
We won’t be holding our breath waiting for Fox&Friends to utter an apology! Why? Can you hear that sound (after the ad)?
*** Watch the Judge Jeanine interview with liberal Kirsten Powers about how the Left is killing free speech, here, beginning at the 1:57 mark.
We had a couple of good comments to our post over the weekend about ‘Ireland ‘welcoming’ Muslim ‘refugees,‘ and at the same time voting to make gay marriage legal in the heretofore largely Catholic country.
‘Cultural Marxism’ is succeeding in Ireland and America as it has seeped into every one of our institutions, most especially the churches.
I bet that even some of the leaders of the ‘church’ refugee resettlement agencies have no clue where all this came from and what they are doing to America. ISIS photo showing gay man being thrown to his death. So where are the Progressives condemning their brothers in arms, the Islamists? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2913733/Thrown-roof-stoned-death-crucified-world-reacts-horror-terror-Europe-new-ISIS-executions-medieval-brutality-jihadists-bring-West.html
Here is one commenter (Jim) in response to my comment about the only weapon the other side has (and it keeps most good people at bay) are the words racist, xenophobic, Islamophobic etc. etc. I said it is time, past time, to stop being frightened by words!
Jim (LOL! I never heard the word “Progs” (short for Progressives) to describe the hard Left. I like it!). Comment to this post:
I just call them ‘euphemisms’ any more. I saw what I thought was a very good post about progressivism and its lust for the death of the West. PC was born in the Ivy League and Berkeley, spawned by the ’60s and ’70s radicals who decided to destroy the system from within. They are succeeding beyond their wildest dreams. Saul Alinsky was their Messiah and Chicago is their Bethlehem. Old news I know, but amazing. Robert Bork’s ‘Slouching Toward Gomorrah’ was spot on.
“Progs” have a strange affection for Islam. Islam is an enemy of much of what Progs hate about western civilization such as – Christianity (and now Judaism), capitalism, individualism, and constitutional limits on government. So they are fellow travelers in that regard. Of course Progs claim they are defenders of gays and women and minorities, but you notice they are willing to look the other way if it is Muslims doing the oppressing of gays and women. In fact they will actually criticize those same people and defend Muslims in those situations. It is not bizarre if you pretend to think like a Prog – in their world anything that destroys the “evil” which is western civilization is therefore good.
In that regard Progressivism is a religion. As has been said so many times before, you do not need a god for it to be a religion, all you need is a devil. The devil is “the west”.
I maintain that what happened in the ’60s and ’70s has roots that go farther back in our history.
The counter-culture of that period (’60s and ’70s) was one of the first visible signs that “Cultural Marxism” was succeeding.
Years ago, when we (here at RRW) discussed the election of Barack Obama as President of the United States, we wrote several posts about how the US got to this point in our history and we told you about this short description of “Cultural Marxism” by William S. Lind. You must read the whole thing to better understand that for the revolution to succeed (in order for Marxism to succeed and destroy Capitalism) they needed first to destroy Western Civilization, the family and the church. William Lind (emphasis is mine):
In his columns on the next conservatism, Paul Weyrich has several times referred to “cultural Marxism.”He asked me, as Free Congress Foundation’s resident historian, to write this column explaining what cultural Marxism is and where it came from. In order to understand what something is, you have to know its history.
When Hitler came to power, the Frankfort School moved to Columbia University in NYC, Barack Obama’s alma mater. https://www.marxists.org/subject/frankfurt-school/
Cultural Marxism is a branch of western Marxism, different from the Marxism-Leninism of the old Soviet Union. It is commonly known as “multiculturalism” or, less formally, Political Correctness. From its beginning, the promoters of cultural Marxism have known they could be more effective if they concealed the Marxist nature of their work, hence the use of terms such as “multiculturalism.”
Cultural Marxism began not in the 1960s but in 1919, immediately after World War I. Marxist theory had predicted that in the event of a big European war, the working class all over Europe would rise up to overthrow capitalism and create communism. But when war came in 1914, that did not happen. When it finally did happen in Russia in 1917, workers in other European countries did not support it. What had gone wrong?
Independently, two Marxist theorists, Antonio Gramsci in Italy and Georg Lukacs in Hungary, came to the same answer: Western culture and the Christian religion had so blinded the working class to its true, Marxist class interest that Communism was impossible in the West until both could be destroyed. In 1919, Lukacs asked, “Who will save us from Western civilization?” That same year, when he became Deputy Commissar for Culture in the short-lived Bolshevik Bela Kun government in Hungary, one of Lukacs’s first acts was to introduce sex education into Hungary’s public schools. He knew that if he could destroy the West’s traditional sexual morals, he would have taken a giant step toward destroying Western culture itself.
In 1923, inspired in part by Lukacs, a group of German Marxists established a think tank at Frankfurt University in Germany called the Institute for Social Research. This institute, soon known simply as the Frankfurt School, would become the creator of cultural Marxism.
To translate Marxism from economic into cultural terms, the members of the Frankfurt School – – Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Wilhelm Reich, Eric Fromm and Herbert Marcuse, to name the most important – – had to contradict Marx on several points. They argued that culture was not just part of what Marx had called society’s “superstructure,” but an independent and very important variable. They also said that the working class would not lead a Marxist revolution, because it was becoming part of the middle class, the hated bourgeoisie. [I believe that the reason the Left is pouring immigrants into America is because the US working class is generally moving up in society and they need a constant infusion of poor people to keep the pressure on.—ed]
Who would? In the 1950s, Marcuse answered the question: a coalition of blacks, students, feminist women and homosexuals.
The modern-day ‘brains’ behind ‘Cultural Marxism’ (including Barack Hussein Obama) have simply added immigrants, especially Muslim immigrants, to the list of those who would help bring down Western Civilization. But, of course, I think they have a tiger by the tail and the minute the Islamists gain enough power they will rise up and destroy the pandering Left first. Some of my friends believe the Communists will control the Islamists. I don’t.
Lind concludes:
The next conservatism should unmask multiculturalism and Political Correctness and tell the American people what they really are: cultural Marxism. Its goal remains what Lukacs and Gramsci set in 1919: destroying Western culture and the Christian religion. It has already made vast strides toward that goal. But if the average American found out that Political Correctness is a form of Marxism, different from the Marxism of the Soviet Union but Marxism nonetheless, it would be in trouble.The next conservatism needs to reveal the man behind the curtain – – old Karl Marx himself.
There is no sense dwelling on it, and yakking about it! It is important to know history, but now back to work exposing the specific details about how the “Progs,” the Marxists, are working day and night to destroy your family, your church and Western Civilization and how you might stop it!
