I’ve told you before that I turn on CNN every morning so I get a feel for where the Left is going every day and today I said uh-oh, here we go on the Burmese Rohingya again. CNN featured a longer piece on the “plight” of Rohingya Muslims in Burma (a Buddhist country).
I couldn’t possibly rehash the decade long controversy (the decade I chronicled in my Rohingya Reports category where 220 posts are archived), but I want you to know why this matters to you and that is that we are admitting Rohingya refugees to live in towns near you—14,882 in the last decade—including over 1,000 since Trump became President (So much for a so-called “Muslim ban!”)
Before I get to the numbers breakdown over the last ten years….
…here is a bare bones story about stepped-up UN (with the US!) efforts to smackdown the Buddhist government of Myanmar.
Continue reading “Rohingya 'refugees' back in the news (why you should care)!”
Category: Muslim refugees
Playing the Catholic card at the Supreme Court last week
Update April 30th: Jihad Watch: Bishops to Americans: Drop dead!
Did you know that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops filed an amicus brief against the Trump Administration in the travel ban case before the high court?
I didn’t, but it really isn’t a surprise.
Of course, they are free to file briefs, but I just wish they would for once admit that they receive millions of your dollars from the US Treasury every year for their Migration Fund (nearly $100 million to the Bishops alone, not including the other millions that go to Catholic Charities to ‘care’ for those migrants).
Just once I wish they would admit they have a pecuniary interest in how the travel ban is resolved.
See Catholics close 20 offices as government revenue dries up.
Do you, my Catholic friends, know that the Bishops want more migrants admitted to the US from terror-producing countries?
Continue reading “Playing the Catholic card at the Supreme Court last week”
Does America have a moral obligation to resettle refugees?
That is the question a young opinion writer asks and answers (in the affirmative of course!) in the wake of Wednesday’s Supreme Court hearing on the President’s travel ban.
The long opinion piece in Deseret News by writer Gillian Friedman evoked a largely negative response by readers. I especially got a chuckle out of this comment:
Continue reading “Does America have a moral obligation to resettle refugees?”
Supremes to hear Trump travel ban case today, fears Trump will win
According the NPR people lined up as early as this past Sunday in order to get a coveted seat for the hearing on the President’s travel ban.
National Public Radio‘s Nina Totenberg has a lengthy, pretty straightforward, story. Here is a bit of it:
The Supreme Court’s Grand Finale: Trump’s Travel Ban
The Trump administration’s travel ban finally reaches the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday, posing enormous questions involving the structure of the American government and the values of the country.
At issue is the third version of the ban — which the president has complained is a “watered down” version. The court allowed it to go into effect while the case was litigated, but the lower courts have ruled all three versions either violate federal law or are unconstitutional.
Like the earlier two bans, version 3.0 bars almost all travelers from six mainly Muslim countries, and it adds a ban on travelers from North Korea and government officials from Venezuela.
The questions in the case are the stuff of history:
~Can the courts even review a presidential order on immigration that invokes national security?
~Did the president violate the immigration law’s command against discrimination based on nationality?
~And does the executive order violate the Constitution’s ban on religious discrimination?
The travel-ban argument will be the last of the term. And the importance of the argument is not lost on the court. For the first time since the same-sex-marriage arguments in 2015, the court is allowing same-day distribution of the session’s audio. Nonetheless, people started lining up at 7 a.m. Sunday in hopes of snagging a seat Wednesday.
The court itself will be under extreme pressure. There are only about two months left in the term and an unusually large number of cases yet to be decided.
One key question is this one:
Can the court consider Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric?
See more of the NPR story here. Legal beagles will find it interesting.
Then see that the Leftwing Slate predicts:
Trump’s Going to Win
Why the Supreme Court will probably uphold the president’s travel ban.
A decision isn’t expected until June.
For more background visit my ‘Supreme Court’ category by clicking here. Don’t miss my post of two days ago, here.
Gatestone: Fearless Swedish Somali woman speaks, and you should listen!
Especially so-called feminist women should listen!
Do not miss this interview of former refugee Mona Walter by Natalia Osten-Sacken at Gatestone Institute.
I’ve snipped just a bit of the interview, but the entire discussion is riveting. See what she says about the moral equivalency the Pope has been promoting!
Continue reading “Gatestone: Fearless Swedish Somali woman speaks, and you should listen!”