THE CHURCH MILITANT
Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse.
Liberals in Louisiana are up in arms over a local grocery store ad mailer containing a religious message promoting President Trump’s wall.
“Heaven has a wall, a gate and a strict immigration policy. Hell has open borders. Let that sink in,” the ad from Mac’s Fresh Market reads.
The store’s owner Reggy McDaniel says the message is not only a commentary on the current immigration debate, but also a reflection of his Christian beliefs.
“That’s my meaning of the whole thing is are people prepared to go to heaven or are they not,” McDaniel told KALB.
“I thought it was a perfect time because everybody is talking about the border, some people want it, some don’t want us to have one. The only thing I was shocked about was that it’s racist. I have never in my life been accused of being a racist. I’m 70 years old I haven’t evolved into one.”
While Mac’s regularly features messages on its mailers, this one appears to have struck a nerve with liberals after it went viral on social media.
“How about we build a wall around your store?” one person commented on Facebook.
“Wow what a horrible message,” another person said.
“I’ll no longer shop in your store,” added another triggered liberal.
“Ad is very disrespectful and pure hateful will no longer spend money on any of your products!” yet another person commented.
But others supported McDaniel’s right to religious freedom and free speech.
“I commend you good sir on your find display of Christian values. Well done,” one supporter commented.
“Wished you were by me. You’d have my business for sure,” another said.
“It’s his opinion, people shouldn’t judge him by what he has to say, it’s freedom of speech,” a Louisiana resident told KALB. “I like Mac’s, they are a great store.”
“Absolutely agree and support you 100%,” a veteran wrote on Facebook. “How can folks be mad at this? The Bible does say there is a gate and wall. And while my service in the Army for 21 years help protect everyone’s right to freedom of speech it meant ‘everyone’s!’ Great job. Love the message. Spot on!!!”
“I don’t think it’s a big deal, people believe in what they believe in,” a Ferriday resident commented.
McDaniel admits his message conflated religion with politics, but says he won’t buckle to pressure from triggered liberals who are calling the mailer “racist.”
“If I used a political message and I’m very aware it’s political, to highlight Jesus Christ, then I’m guilty of it,” said McDaniel.
“I appreciate them shopping with me, but this is America they have the privilege of shopping where they want to,” McDaniel said. “All I can do is tell them my case if they want to describe me in some kind of way that I am someone who is not worthy to shop with, I’d be shocked.”
Despite the outcry, McDaniel vows to continue inserting messages into his ads.
One bill now in the Oregon Legislature would limit people to purchasing 20 rounds of ammunition a month. (Dave Workman)
U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- While gun rights activists across the country have been focusing considerable attention on the war being waged against Washington state gun owners, because that state is something of a “test tube” for gun control schemes, there’s a second front in the effort to erode the Second Amendment going on south of the Columbia River in neighboring Oregon.
Perhaps the most onerous of these is SB 501 sponsored by a pair of Lake Oswego Democrats – State Sen. Rob Wagner and State Rep. Andrea Salinas – that would require a person to secure a permit before purchasing or otherwise receiving a firearm. This was legislation submitted at the request of the anti-gun Students for Change. The Oregon Firearms Federation (OFF) declared this bill to be “the most extreme” of the anti-gun measures so far before lawmakers in Salem, and the group maintains a roundup of all gun-related bills introduced in Salem.
Under provisions of SB 501, receipt of a firearm without a valid permit could land someone in jail for up to 364 days, and impose a fine of up to $6,250. Failure to secure a firearm with a cable or trigger lock, or in a locked box, could result in 30 days behind bars and a $1,250 fine.
But the most alarming tenet of the bill is a restriction on the amount of ammunition someone can purchase in any 30-day period. SB 501 would limit someone to getting 20 rounds a month. Critics say this ammunition limit is nonsense, as it would effectively preclude practice for competitors, and would be a burden on hunters, especially those who hunt waterfowl or upland birds.
The bill also “Prohibits transfer of firearm by gun dealer or private party until latter of 14 days or Department of State Police has determined that recipient is qualified to receive firearm.”
Then comes SB 87, which would raise the minimum limit at which someone can purchase a firearm to 21 years of age.
Anti-gun Democrat Gov. Kate Brown requested HB 2251, which defines an “assault rifle.” The definition is hardly as sweeping as the one adopted by voters in neighboring Washington last fall with passage of Initiative 1639, but it specifies scores of firearms that would be prohibited. OFF says on its website that the bill “defines ‘assault weapons’ as any long gun you can hold with two hands.” It also would prevent transfer of a handgun or an “assault rifle” to anyone under age 21.
Even though Initiative 1639 passed in Washington State last fall, several county sheriffs are refusing to enforce it because they believe it to be unconstitutional. (Dave Workman photo)
HB 2251 also requires a gun dealer “to post notice concerning obligation to prevent minors from accessing firearm without consent of minor’s parent or guardian.”
Another measure, HB 2546, would create a credit against the personal income tax “for (the) cost of (a) criminal history record check required by state law for the transfer of a firearm.” The bill, sponsored by Monmouth Democrat Rep. Paul Evans, would apply to tax years beginning this year.
Beaver State gun owners dodged the proverbial bullet last year when an initiative effort to completely ban so-called “assault rifles” was derailed. But a new version has been refiled as IP 16.
Meanwhile, the fight over enforcement of anti-gun I-1639 now has about 20 county sheriffs declining to enforce the new law on the grounds that it is unconstitutional and unenforceable. However, the drama has taken on a sinister aspect with the posting of actual threats on social media to kill sheriffs that do not enforce the law. Singled out for special attention is Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich, who told reporters this week that information about the threats has been turned over to the Joint Terrorism Task Force.
There can be no doubt that the Evergreen State has become the petri dish for gun control experimentation, especially since Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat acknowledged as much in a piece published back on Dec. 7, 2018. But the experimentation appears to have crossed the Columbia River and spread up the Willamette River Valley to the Oregon state capitol.
Dave Workman
About Dave Workman
Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor. ________________________________________
ABOVE: Connecticut state representative Jillian Gilchrest
New Connecticut Bill would Add a 50% Tax to Ammunition
They chanted “Death to America” during the presidencies of Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama. But now it only means “Death to Trump.” It’s worth remembering in this context that deception of unbelievers is an Islamic concept based on the Qur’an (3:28), but its theological elaboration as the concept of taqiyya is a specifically Shi’ite enterprise.
The Shi’ite Islamic regime in Tehran makes liberal use of deception.
“‘Death to America’ aimed at Trump, not American nation, Iran leader says,” Reuters, February 8, 2019:
DUBAI (Reuters) – Iranians will chant “Death to America” as long as Washington continues its hostile policies, but the slogan is directed at President Donald Trump and U.S. leaders, not the American nation, Iran’s supreme leader said on Friday.
“As long as America continues its wickedness, the Iranian nation will not abandon ‘Death to America’,” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told a gathering of Iranian Air Force officers marking the 40th anniversary of Iran’s Islamic Revolution, according to his official website.
Trump pulled out of Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers last year and re-imposed sanctions on Tehran, dealing a blow to the country’s economy.
“‘Death to America’ means death to Trump, (National Security Adviser) John Bolton, and (Secretary of State Mike) Pompeo. It means death to American rulers,” Ayatollah Khamenei said….
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Mateen Khan also explains how the “clever” Jews fooled the Europeans into thinking they were “one of them.” Does Mateen Khan believe in violent jihad, and that non-Muslims should be subjugated under Islamic law as dhimmis, and that Sharia should ultimately replace the U.S. Constitution? What do you think?
“NJ-Based Imam Mateen Khan: Liberals Are Trying To Force Muslims To Adopt Liberalism And To Allow Them To Insult Muhammad; The Jews Convinced The Europeans To Hate The Arabs Instead Of Them,” MEMRI, December 30, 2018:
New Jersey-based Imam Mateen Khan said during a lecture at the Muslim Center of Middlesex County, NJ, (MCMC) that liberalism is a philosophy that requires everybody to adopt it, and that holds that those who don’t accept liberalism are a threat. Giving the example of Afghanistan, which he said the U.S. invaded under the pretext of empowering Afghani women, Khan said that those who don’t accept liberalism are forced to accept it with the pretext of women’s rights, LGBT rights, and combating intolerance. He said that liberals want Muslims to allow them to exercise their freedom of speech to insult the Prophet Muhammad. Later in the lecture, Khan said that the Jews in Europe had been hated and used as a scapegoat because Europeans were antisemitic. He then claimed that some Israeli psychologists had written that the Zionists had successfully convinced the Europeans to hate the Arabs and Palestinians – who he explained are also Semitic – instead of the Jews, by telling them that the Palestinians are the backwards, monotheistic Semites who should really be hated. The lecture was uploaded to MCMC’s YouTube channel on December 30, 2018.
Following are excerpts:
Imam Mateen Khan: When we talk about liberalism we are talking about a political and moral philosophy. The people who are its proponents say it is built on liberty and equality. So what liberals say… They espouse a wide variety of views, depending on their understanding of principles. Like I said, it is a philosophy. It is a world view, it is how you think. So generally, they support the concept of civil rights, democracy, secularism, gender equality, racial equality, internationalism, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press… Now I know most of us are listening to these words and thinking: “What’s wrong with that?” We will get there.
[…]
For those of us old enough to remember when the U.S. invaded Afghanistan: Why did they invade Afghanistan? What was the reason?
[…]
It was the empowerment of women. [They said that] the Taliban are not letting the women get an education, and that the Taliban are not letting the women walk in the streets like they used to. And they would show pictures from the 1940s and 1950s, of Afghani women in skirts, walking around freely… [They said:] ‘We need to save these women.’ [They told] the women in this country: “You need to save your sisters. The way that you are living here – don’t you want them to have the same?”
[…]
It is a cultural war. It is a philosophy that they want to spread. If you don’t want to adopt [liberalism] on your own… [They say:] “If you as a Muslim people do not want to adopt our philosophy on your own, then we will bring it to you with the excuse of women and LGBT, and the excuse of the intolerance that you have in your land.”
[…]
Liberalism, by its core, is meant for everyone. Therefore, everyone must accept it, and if there are people aren’t [accepting it], then that is a threat to [liberals’] core identity. And they need to find a way to get rid of it.
[…]
They want you to take on the philosophy of liberalism, and in doing that, you will leave the philosophy that Islam brings with it.
[…]
[They say:] “You have to adopt what we believe in, as far as freedoms go. It is our ideology that we should be free to say whatever we want, so you need to let us curse the Prophet Muhammad, because if you don’t, then you are backwards – you are not liberal, and you are not meant for the 21st century.” This is what you are being converted to. [They say:] “You can have Muhammad. He was a great man, but he should not have done what he did to [the Jews of] Banu Qurayza. No one did in history what he did – but he should not have married Aisha.”
[…]
Look at the Jews. Historically, the Jews were hated in Europe. They were blamed for all kinds of problems. They were the scapegoat. When something went bad, the Jews [were blamed]. [They said:] “We have a plague? [It’s the fault of] the Jews. There is a recession? [It’s the fault of] the Jews.” This is what they did with them, no matter how long they stayed in Europe. No matter how much they tried to be European, they were still the “other.”
[…]
[The Europeans] were antisemitic. But historians tell us, and we know, the Semites are the Jews and who else? The Arabs, the Semites are the Jews and the Arabs. The same way they held bad feelings towards the Jews, they held them towards the Arabs as well. For them there is no difference between an Arab and a Muslim from another land.
[…]
So the Jews could never escape their origin. No matter how European they became, they still were in origin, in culture, in background… They remained Jewish to them. They were always the “other.” Israeli psychologists wrote about Zionism. The Zionists were very clever. When they started petitioning Europe for the State of Israel, one of the tactics that they used, is that they tried to convince the Europeans – and they were successful in doing this… [They said:] “We are one of you, and the Semites that you dislike are the Palestinians.” Right, the Semites are two peoples: the Jews and the Arabs. So what they did, they said: “The Semites are two peoples, two groups. In reality, the group that you dislike – that is the Semites, those are the Arabs.” That is Palestine. But the Jews… [They said:] “The Semites that you should like, that is – we are the Jews. You should like us, we are like you. We believe in democracy. We are Western, just like you are.” In fact, most Jews today are secularists. So even in philosophy they are just like they are. But the Palestinians? No, these guys are backwards. These guys still believe in monotheism. They still believe in the Prophet Muhammad. The Israeli psychologists point out that one of the amazing things that the Zionists did is that they convinced Europe that they were one of them, and they convinced Europe that the real Semites are the Arabs. [They said:] “These are the ones you should be against.”
For the first time ever Disney is going officially gay for a day as it hosts its LGBTQ-themed “Magical Pride” event June 1 at Disney’s theme park in Paris.
As reported by the gay website Queerty, “For years, LGBTQ tourists have visited Disney theme parks en masse to celebrate ‘Gay Days’ at the Magic Kingdom.” But this is the first time a Disney park has officially veered from its family-friendly posture and openly celebrated the homosexual culture. On its official MagicalPride.com website, Disney insists that the special gay day is open to “anyone and everyone,” even as it concedes that it is “primarily” designed for the “LGBT community” along with “friends and families” who buy into that sort of thing.
Noting that the “Magical Pride” event will “reportedly” include an official “Magical March of Diversity Parade,” Queerty reported that Disney’s “decision to finally host an official LGBTQ Pride event comes 28 years after the first Disney Gay Days in 1991, during which 3,000 gay and lesbian visitors from central Florida attended the Disney World theme park.”
In a statement to NBC News, a Disney Company spokesperson said that “diversity and equality are strong values at Disneyland Paris, and each year we host millions of visitors regardless of their origins, gender, or sexual orientation. We are committed to fostering a welcoming environment for all of our guests where magic is for everyone.”
Over the past few years, the Disney brand has been gradually slipping homosexuality into its various projects. For example, such Disney-produced and/or broadcast films and series as Beauty and the Beast, Doc McStuffins, and Star vs. the Forces of Evil have included “gay” characters. Additionally, Disney’s upcoming animated film Jungle Cruise will reportedly feature an openly homosexual character.
Last year, Disney introduced LGBT-themed “rainbow” Mickey Ears at some of its theme parks, and followed up with the “Mickey Mouse Rainbow Love” Hat in time for “Gay Pride” month in June.
In 2007, reported CBS News, Disney “opened Cinderella’s Castle to same-sex weddings. The Walt Disney Company had originally limited its Fairy Tale Wedding program to couples with valid marriage licenses. Same-sex marriage was not legal in most places at the time, but Disney decided to make ceremonies at its parks available to gay couples.”
Over the years, a number of conservative, pro-family groups have been warning of Disney’s subtle slide from wholesome family entertainment into what many consider moral compromise. While most such groups have been silent on Disney’s latest move, one Christian leader is speaking up. Janet Boynes, a former lesbian who now works to expose the activist homosexual agenda, and to help individuals overcome unwanted same-sex attraction, said that it is important for individuals and families who embrace traditional values to pay attention to the direction Disney appears to be heading. “It’s no secret that homosexual activists are aggressively targeting institutions that once embraced traditional family values,” Boynes told The New American. “That includes places like Disney theme parks, that were originally designed to be welcome places for families to make wonderful memories. Can anyone imagine Walt Disney’s reaction at discovering that what he created as a haven for families now caters to open homosexuality? Sadly, it seems that individuals and families who care about traditional values may soon have to find more wholesome alternatives to Disney’s parks.”
She’s not as ambitious as Stalin or Mao with their five-year plans — she needs 10 years. But that’s all it will take, claims Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), to completely overhaul the American economy, achieving net-zero CO2 emissions, a total fossil-fuel phase-out, and the combustion engine’s and air travel’s elimination. A long way from stealing tips at the bar, it’s her version of Year Zero.
But zero is precisely what our economy would be if the greenhorn congresswoman got her way with her “Green New Deal.” Unveiled Thursday morning, it’s a top-down, Big Brother scheme that promises the world and to save the world and, fancifully, to turn a profit in the process.
Calling it perhaps “the most far-reaching proposal to ever be considered in Congress,” Fox News writes that Ocasio-Cortez’ plan would also “upgrade or replace every building in America to ensure energy efficiency and give economic security even to those ‘unwilling’ to work.” (By the way, if this comes to pass, count me “unwilling.”)
“‘Today is the day that we truly embark on a comprehensive agenda of economic, social and racial justice in the United States of America,’ she said alongside Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and other lawmakers outside the Capitol. ‘That’s what this agenda is all about,’” Fox also reports.
The resolution is non-binding, a mere vision at this point of Democrat “thought leaders’” intentions for our future. These thinkers don’t, however, include House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — who assuredly finds Ocasio-Cortez an irritating threat to her power — as she dismissively characterized the upstart’s scheme as the “green dream or whatever they call it.”
Yet 2020 Democrat presidential hopefuls were much more receptive, with figures such as senators Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Elizabeth Warren, (D-Mass.), and Cory Booker (D-N.J) all happily co-sponsoring the resolution. As they tweeted:
Excited to join @AOC & @SenMarkey on a historic #GreenNewDeal resolution to address the peril of climate change and worsening inequality. Our history is a testimony to the achievement of what some think is impossible — we must take bold action now.
If we want to live in a world with clean air and water, we have to take real action to combat climate change now. I'm proud to join @RepAOC and @SenMarkey on a #GreenNewDeal resolution to fight for our planet and our kids’ futures.
2,357 replies3,174 retweets19,375 likes
Of course, these politicians know a certain principle well: It costs nothing to promise and posture.
That is, unless it ultimately makes you look radical and stupid. Fox News’ Dana Perino, appearing on Tucker Carlson Tonight’s Thursday edition (video below), theorized that this just might, in fact, happen with these Democrats.
Carlson called the proposal “reckless and dumb.” Yet it’s hard to really get a sense of how truly radical and risible but yet dangerous the resolution is without reading it yourself. Aside from what has already been mentioned, however, here are some highlights (lowlights?). The plan promises:
• the development of high-speed rail “at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary.” Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) noted that this “would be pretty hard for Hawaii” (nah, not once we complete Obama’s intercontinental railroad);
• a “job with a family-sustaining wage, family and medical leave, vacations, and retirement security”;
• “access to nature” (whatever that means);
• to build electric “charging stations everywhere”; and
• to eliminate all nuclear power plants.
The resolution ignores science and sanity and can read like Bart Simpson meets the Bolsheviks. Just consider the following passage from the Green New Deal FAQ released by Ocasio-Cortez' office to PBS:
“We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast, but we think we can ramp up renewable manufacturing and power production, retrofit every building in America, build the smart grid, overhaul transportation and agriculture, plant lots of trees and restore our ecosystem to get to net-zero.”
The resolution is rife with divisive lies. It cites as a problem the male-female wage gap, when it has been definitively shown that it’s a function of the sexes’ different career and lifestyle choices, not discrimination, and that trying to eliminate it hurts married women and their children. It bemoans how white families have 20 times more wealth than black families, ignoring that Asians earn more than whites. Why?
Because whites are the “intersectional” leftists’ scapegoat and the common enemy used to help bind the disparate left-wing groups together. There’s no percentage in attacking Asians (yet).
Ocasio-Cortez’ one saving grace in her Green New Deal is that, like a doctrinaire Marxist, she’s often blunt about her intentions. “Yes, we are calling for a full transition off fossil fuels and zero greenhouse gases,” the FAQ acknowledges. And the FAQ’s “Overview” section boasts: “This is a massive transformation of our society with clear goals and a timeline.”
Yet clear goals don’t necessarily denote clear thinking. Comically tragic here is that this whole scheme is based upon the unscientific global-warming thesis, whose adherents’ computer-model predictions have failed time and again. Yet the alarmists still insist that, this time, they surely must be right.
This just reflects environmentalist doomsayers’ history, though. How bad have their predictions been? Hint: We’re all supposed to be either dead of starvation by now or living among 22.6 million other miserable American survivors.
The kicker is that even if man’s CO2 emissions were creating a warmer planet, so what? The Left often touts “science,” but here’s what science also has told us:
• Plants and animals do better in warmer times with higher CO2 levels.
• The world will end because of too little CO2 — in approximately 1,000,000,000 A.D.
• We’re poised to enter a new ice age.
• Reducing the global temperature three-tenths of one degree by the century’s end — meaning, postponing so-called “global warming” less than four years — would cost $100 trillion.
And believe these assertions or not, perhaps countless trillions are what the Green Raw Deal would cost. Ocasio-Cortez blows this off like a valley girl with daddy’s credit card. She says this is our WWII; it’s more like our Waterloo.
The freest nations (e.g., us) have the cleanest environments, and, in fact, China emits more CO2than the United States and the European Union combined. We can morally preen and posture, but do you think China and, for that matter, India will follow us over the green cliff?
It has been fashionable to make jokes about Ocasio-Cortez, but don’t laugh. For what makes her set so dangerous is that they’re ignorant of most everything — except how to gain power.
Yesterday, the Democrats found out that their new stars aren’t merely leftists approaching the definition of communist, but instead are so unmoored from reality that they spout what amounts to gibberish.
The first example, of course, is Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal, which was so ridiculous her staff took down its webpage. When the Wall Street Journal’s Kim Strassel read it, she said that she laughed so hard she nearly cried. “If a bunch of GOPers plotted to forge a fake Democratic bill showing how bonkers the party is,” she tweeted, “they could not have done a better job. It is beautiful.”
Happily, AOC, as she is now known, didn’t stop there.
She then took to the microphones outside the Capitol with three comrades. The leftist quartet included her two anti-Semitic comrades, Democratic Representatives Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, and the speaker, Democrat Representative Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, another of the unhinged radicals whom voters unwisely sent to Capitol Hill.
Message: Abolish ICE That’s right. In AOC’s Green Utopia of no planes, cars, or cows — immigration enforcement, and presumably borders, would also come to an end.
Tears While Talking Speaking at an event organized by the subversive MoveOn.org, AOC opined that ICE and its enforcement of immigration law “is one of the most urgent moral issues and crises that we have in America right now. This is not a political issue. Children dying in detention centers should not be a partisan concern. It should be a universal concern for every American in the United States.”
She claimed the president was against all immigration, as the video posted at Breitbart.com shows, and that he lied during his State of the Union address in saying he supported legal immigration. She also defamed Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, declaring she “has no idea when she goes in front of a hearing how many children are dying in her own care, under her own watch.”
Of course, no children have died in Nielsen’s care or “under her own watch” — a leftist lie peddled to hide the truth that reckless parents are at fault. Children who died “in the custody” of ICE did not die because of ICE, but because their parents irresponsibly dragged them across the border, hoping the children would bolster a false asylum claim. One child died of the flu, which he contracted on his journey, because his father refused medical care.
ICE “does not deserve a dime” and won’t get one, she said. “I will not give one dollar to a secretary who does not care about [a migrant child’s] life and does not care to investigate a child’s death. I will not give one dollar to black box detention facilities that think that some people in this country are deserving of constitutional protections and others are not.”
After that, AOC jumped the tracks completely. Having claimed the United States is a “nation of laws,” she suggested that “Latino people” are not subject to the same laws as everyone else. “We are standing on Native land, and Latino people are descendants of Native people,” she said. “And we cannot be told and criminalized simply for our identity and our status.”
Helpfully, AOC squirted a few tears for the cameras.
Somali Gratitude Omar, who, evidence strongly suggests, married her brother to perpetrate immigration fraud, explained that “we need to feel the pain and the struggle, the hopes, and dreams of the people who this president likes to demonize.”
The Muslim Somali refugee falsely claimed, Breitbart reported, that illegal aliens heading for the southern border are “are leaving situations where it is safer for them to risk starvation, to risk possible rape, to risk possible death because they know the smallest hope of survival is much more [sic] bigger and better than just standing still and waiting, waiting to not have a new opportunity to start anew.”
In fact, almost 100 percent of “migrants” head for the border with the aim of filing a false asylum claim and then finding work, as government data show and the illegal aliens themselves admit. After they file, they disappear, find a job, then attach themselves to the welfare state to get a “free” education, “free” healthcare, and a cornucopia of other “free” benefits. Deporting them becomes impossible.
That truth aside, Omar falsely claimed that illegal aliens are “detained and tortured.” Like AOC, Omar attacked the Trump administration and said a few more things unworthy of reporting.
