Friday, May 3, 2024
Home Blog Page 663

Strong Cities Network / Will police controlled by the UN patrol our streets and maintain UN law

By
willco2
-
0

The American people have not figured out yet the attack on our Freedom is ongoing and will not stop till the Government has total control. I for one do not want anything to do with the UN. It is an organization that is in contradiction to the U. S. Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and Liberty as we know it.
Letting the UN have any authority in protecting Americans is absurd. We have rights still, Big Government wants to take them away and the UN is the easiest tool to achieve the goal. This must be kept a secret or the Citizens may rise up and stop it, so there is no traditional media covering it.  Is this why Obama has been giving military equipment to local police, why various agencies are buying up all the Ammo, why they want to take our guns, and why they are doing exercises in American cities like Jade Helm.
Americans do not want to see UN police in a position of Authority in our country!

 

Global Police Force to Fight ‘Extremism’ In U.S. / IS THIS A PLAN TO CONTROL U.S.

By
willco2
-
0

Obama Administration and UN Announce Global Police Force to Fight ‘Extremism’ In U.S.


ice President Joe Biden and U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch attend the 'Leader's Summit on Countering ISIL and Countering Violent Extremism' at the United Nations Headquarters, on September 29, 2015 in New York City. The Summit, hosted by Obama, addressed national, regional and global initiatives to counter ISIL and the spread of violent extremism. (Photo by )

Anthony Behar-Pool/Getty Images

by Pamela Geller2 Oct 201527,659

On Wednesday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced at the United Nations that her office would be working in several American cities to form what she called the Strong Cities Network (SCN), a law enforcement initiative that would encompass the globe.

This amounts to nothing less than the overriding of American laws, up to and including the United States Constitution, in favor of United Nations laws that would henceforth be implemented in the United States itself – without any consultation of Congress at all.
The United Nations is a sharia-compliant world body, and Obama, speaking there just days ago, insisted that “violent extremism” is not exclusive to Islam (which it is). Obama is redefining jihad terror to include everyone but the jihadists. So will the UN, driven largely by the sharia-enforcing Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the pro-Islamic post-American President Obama, use a “global police force” to crush counter-jihad forces?
After all, with Obama knowingly aiding al-Qaeda forces in Syria, how likely is it that he will use his “global police force” against actual Islamic jihadists? I suspect that instead, this global police force will be used to impose the blasphemy laws under the sharia (Islamic law), and to silence all criticism of Islam for the President who proclaimed that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
What is a global police force doing in our cities? This is exactly the abdication of American sovereignty that I warned about in my book, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America. The Obama Department of Justice made it clear that it was exactly that when it distributed a press release last week announcing the “Launch of Strong Cities Network to Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism.” In that press release, the DoJ complained that “while many cities and local authorities are developing innovative responses to address this challenge, no systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale.”
So if the local and municipal effort to counter the euphemistic and disingenuous “violent extremism” is inadequate and hasn’t developed “systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale,” the feds – and the UN – have to step in. Thus the groundwork is being laid for federal and international interference down to the local level. “The Strong Cities Network,” Lynch declared, “will serve as a vital tool to strengthen capacity-building and improve collaboration” – i.e., local dependence on federal and international authorities.
Lynch made the global (that is, United Nations) involvement clear when she added: “As we continue to counter a range of domestic and global terror threats, this innovative platform will enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices and to build social cohesion and community resilience here at home and around the world.”
This internationalist character was brought to the fore by the fact that the Strong Cities Network was launched on September 29 not at the White House or the Department of Homeland Security, or at the FBI headquarters or anywhere else that might be fitting for a national project, but at the United Nations.
Even more ominously, the DoJ press release says that the Strong Cities Network “will strengthen strategic planning and practices to address violent extremism in all its forms by fostering collaboration among cities, municipalities and other sub-national authorities.” Sub-national and international: the press release then quotes Governing Mayor Stian Berger Røsland of Oslo, Norway, a participant in the Strong Cities Network, saying: “To counter violent extremism we need determined action at all levels of governance. To succeed, we must coordinate our efforts and cooperate across borders. The Strong Cities Network will enable cities across the globe pool our resources, knowledge and best practices together and thus leave us standing stronger in the fight against one of the greatest threats to modern society.”
But what is that greatest threat, exactly? Remember, the DoJ presser says that the SCN will “address violent extremism in all its forms.” It also says that it will aid initiatives that are working toward “building social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism.” “Building social cohesion” is a euphemism for keeping peace between non-Muslim and Muslim communities – mostly by making sure that non-Muslims don’t complain too loudly about, much less work against, rapidly expanding Muslim populations and the Islamization of their communities.
The DoJ presser noted that at the launch of the Strong Cities Network, “welcoming remarks” would be offered by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City. The involvement of New York City’s Marxist internationalist mayor is yet another warning sign.
Assert American sovereignty and individual rights. Contact your representatives now. Exhort them to oppose SCN now. Exhort them to keep America free – while it still is.
Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of PamelaGeller.com and author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. Follow her on Twitter here. Like her on Facebook here.

Caton Farm Bruce Road SRA may change direction

By
willco2
-
0

 
MP900398879
Lockport, Homer area reps push for new road study
Susan DeMar LaffertyContact ReporterDaily Southtown
They contend that the “middle road” part of a proposed $600 million project is not needed
 
Homer Glen, Lockport and Homer and Lockport townships will pay consultants to re-evaluate a proposed new road that the four local governments no longer want.
 
The road would be part of a $600 million bridge and road project would run for 111/2 miles from Caton Farm Road and U.S. 30 in Crest Hill, over the Des Plaines River in Lockport to 159th Street and Cedar Road in Homer Glen.
 
Local officials agree on the need for a second bridge over the river to relieve traffic volume on the 9th Street bridge in downtown Lockport, which handles about 24,700 vehicles per day.
 
But representatives of the two towns and townships have questioned the need for a new “middle road” between Cedar and Gougar roads in the plan to connect Bruce Road to 159th Street. They’ve pointed out that there are three north-south roads within 11/2 miles — Interstate 355, Cedar Road and Gougar Road — in contending that a fourth road is not necessary.
 
And they’re willing to pay up to $390,000 to engineer an alternative route that would connect Bruce Road to I-355, allowing traffic to use I-355 to reach 159th Street and Cedar Road.
 
Lockport and Homer Glen and Lockport and Homer townships were all represented on the Transportation Corridor Committee that initially planned and approved the bridge and road project in 2009. The four governments now say eliminating the north-south middle road makes sense and makes the project less expensive.
 
“So many things have changed in the last five years,” Lockport City Administrator Ben Benson told the Will County Board’s public works committee Tuesday. “This (alternative) makes more sense. We need to get all TCC members on board.”
 
The public works committee asked the Transportation Corridor Committee to reconvene and consider the request to do away with the middle road. The TCC includes representatives of all governments in the corridor, including Will County, Homer Glen, New Lenox, Lockport, Crest Hill and Joliet and Homer, Lockport and Plainfield townships.
 
Benson said if the TCC decides that the route should not be changed “we will live with that outcome.”
 
If additional engineering studies are done, it could take up to three years to complete them, according to Bruce Gould, director of the Will County Division of Transportation.
 
Others are opposed to another portion of the project — the widening of Oak Avenue through the unincorporated Fairmont community in Lockport Township.
 
Valerie Broadhurst, representing the Fairmont Community Partnership, told the committee that making what’s now a two-lane rural road into a five-lane highway would have significant impacts on the impoverished area.
 
But the Fairmont part of the corridor will not be part of the engineering study, Gould said. He said studies that will evaluate the project’s environmental, social and economic impacts on Fairmont and all communities in the corridor have not yet been completed.
 

Europe: Seizing Homes to House Muslim Migrants

By
willco2
-
0

 

 
 
Pamela Geller
on 28 September, 2015 at 06:55
 
In a deeply disturbing development in the Muslim invasion of Europe, Europeans are being forced from their homes to accommodate the invaders.
Never let a crisis go to waste is the theme of the left. Every crisis must be used to seize power, money and property for the agendas of the left. The Muslim migrant crisis in Europe is no different……(more)
Swedes’ homes may be confiscated to accommodate asylum seekers using obscure legislation from 1992, the “Threat and Risk Assessment Commission” established that the Swedish government should have the option to seize property, especially summer homes, from the Swedish people in a time of crisis.
It was monstrous that Nazi concentration camps like Buchenwald and Dachau, hallowed ground, have been used for this. Now they are seizing people’s homes.
And now this:
“German nurse shocked after being forced out of flat to make way for refugees,” RT, 26 Sep, 2015
Having lived in the same flat for 16 years, a German woman is being forced to move out to make way for refugees, because building a new shelter is too expensive. The 51 year-old nurse, who has helped asylum seekers in the past, was shocked by the news.
Bettina Halbey, who lives alone in the small town of Nieheim, received a letter from her landlord and the local municipality at the start of September, Die Welt newspaper reported on Thursday. “I was completely shocked and I can’t even begin to find the words to describe how the city has treated me,” Halbey told the German publication. “I have had to go through a lot of difficulties recently, and then I get this notice. It was like a kick in the teeth.” Halbey will have until May 2016 to find a new place to live, along with her dog and her cat. The three-story building, where she rented a 90 sq/m flat will now be turned into accommodation for refugees, who are seeking to make Germany their new home. The mayor of Nieheim, Rainer Vidal, which has a population of just over 6,000, defended the decision to send the nurse packing, saying converting the building would be “the cheapest option.” “A new residential unit for 30 refugees in Nieheim would cost €30,000 ($33,600). This solution will cost me nothing,” he told Die Welt. Over half the population of Germany lives in rented accommodation and the country has laws to defend the rights of tenants. “Normally, only a private individual can terminate the terms of a contract for personal use. A municipality cannot move into a flat as a legal entity, so the process is legally highly questionable,” Ulrich Ropertz, spokesman of the German Tenants’ Federation, told the Telegraph. Halbey, who brought up two sons as a single parent, became so incensed by the decision that she wrote about her plight on Facebook. The social media reaction was instant. Over 200,000 people have shared her story, which was also picked up by the German media. The nurse says that she is not against Germany taking in refugees and she says she got on well with asylum seekers who had earlier become her neighbors. “We take care of each other. Helping people, this is of the utmost importance to me,” Halbey said.
image: http://pamelagellercom.c.presscdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Screen-Shot-2015-09-27-at-2.01.29-PM-800×521.png
Mayor Vidal slammed Halbey for going public with her complaints and added that she had been given ample time to find new accommodation.
“I find it very regrettable that the tenant has sought to go public with her issues. We have given her a generous period of notice, up until May of next year. We are also willing to help her find a new place to live. There have been several opportunities, but each one has failed because no one wants to offer her a flat because of her dog,” Vidal said.
On Thursday, the German government agreed to allocate a further €2 billion ($2.24 billion) for refugee housing, with €500 million ($560 million) to be spent on the construction of new accommodation centers. Local authorities have also implemented their own strategies, such as Hamburg’s plans to turn empty commercial properties into shelters, while empty apartments could serve the same purpose in Berlin.
Germany could receive between 800,000 and one million refugees this year, according to the UN, with an estimated 8,000 people arriving in Europe every day.
Read more at http://barbwire.com/2015/09/28/europe-seizing-homes-to-house-muslim-migrants/

Renewed Efforts to Defund Sanctuary Cities

By
willco2
-
0

Immigration News Today: Senate Republicans Renew Efforts to Defund Sanctuary Cities

By Michael Oleaga (m.oleaga@latinpost.com)
First Posted: Oct 08, 2015 03:43 PM EDT
David Vitter

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., questions Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director Richard Cordray during the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing on the CFPB’s semi-annual report to Congress on Wednesday, July 15, 2015.
(Photo : Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call via Getty Images)
Republican senators have continued the effort to defund “sanctuary cities” from receiving certain federal funds if such cities don’t comply with federal requests on immigrant detainees.

Sanctuary cities are jurisdictions that have decided to not follow with U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) request for detained immigrants. The “Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act” (S.2146), introduced by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., would defund some federal dollars from the sanctuary cities and “redirect these funds to states and localities that follow the law.”
According to a statement from Vitter, he has been working with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to vote on the legislation in the next few weeks. So far, the bill’s co-sponsors are fellow Republicans and include two presidential candidates: Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida.

 

The topic of sanctuary cities reignited following the death of Kathryn Steinle by an undocumented immigrant. Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, who was deported from the U.S. on five occasions due to drug-related felonies, shot Steinle in California. He was previously released from a San Francisco jail last April, and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), an agency within DHS, requested his detention in order for an ICE agent to pick him up.
“Kate Steinle’s murder tragically exposed the dangers of an inconsistent and ineffectual immigration enforcement policy, which encourages flagrant violations of our laws,” said Rubio, in a statement. “We need to fix our broken immigration system, but we can’t do it as long as the belief persists that our immigration laws can be violated without any consequences.”
Rubio’s inclusion comes two years after he was an original co-sponsor of the Senate’s bipartisan comprehensive immigration legislation, “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act” (S.744). The Senate bill called for several hundred miles of fencing on the southern U.S. border, in addition to an employment verification system for immigrants, training for nearly 38,405 full-time active duty U.S. Border Patrol agents, and it would have allowed the U.S. Attorney General to increase the number of immigration court judges and reform the visa process.
Cruz said jurisdictions should not accept federal taxpayer money while “turning a blind eye to the illegal aliens in their midst.” The Texas senator added that current laws are not enough to deter immigrants who have already been deported from the U.S.
“Of course, stiff penalties alone will not suffice. Congress must hold this (Obama) Administration accountable for its failure-if not its outright refusal-to enforce federal immigration laws and ensure the safety and protection of the American people,” said Cruz.
The “Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act” would also require DHS to publicly list the “sanctuary” jurisdictions, hold funds and grants to any aforementioned jurisdictions and establish a mandatory five-year sentence to immigrants — previously convicted of re-entering the U.S. “after being convicted of an aggravated felony or being convicted of having illegally re-entered the U.S. twice prior.”
__
For the latest updates, follow Latin Post’s Politics Editor Michael Oleaga on Twitter: @EditorMikeO or contact via email: m.oleaga@latinpost.com.

TagsImmigration Reform, Donald Trump, sanctuary cities, immigration, David Vitter, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Kathryn Steinle

Dan Proft "Illinois by the Numbers"

By
willco2
-
0

MP900398879
In the brave new world of Big Data, sometimes we forget that politics is about people’s lives.
In the binary world of partisan politics, sometimes we forget that those whom we elect are supposed to be the means to the policy ends they said they would advance were they selected.
When we forget these fundamentals, people without political clout get hurt and all of us suffer a loss of dignity in the process.
And so the number for your consideration in this installment of Illinois By The Numbers is 47.
47th is where Illinois ranks nationally in the provision of services to persons with developmental disabilities.
Put aside the dismal rankings of Illinois in terms of tax burdens, credit rating, unfunded liabilities, business climate, legal climate and all the rest of the metrics we use to discern a state’s fiscal health.
Providing or not providing for those who need state support through no fault of their own is a mirror that reflects our humanity; our moral health.
No other number more powerfully crystallizes how barbaric we have become as a state–and I mean that word, barbaric — than that ranking.
Politicians in both parties tell the voters they are running to, in part, take care of truly vulnerable persons.
And yet after all of the taxing and spending and borrowing and spending that both parties have done, if the truly vulnerable were their priority, how could Illinois be nearly last in the nation in providing services to the developmentally disabled?
Per Occam’s Razor, the plain, simple truth is: both parties have been lying and they continue to lie.
But it is worse than that. The further disgrace is the politicians who preen for onlookers, trotting out the developmentally disabled and tenuously-financed social service providers when they want to raise taxes or borrow money.
Persons with developmental disabilities and their families have been used by cynical, amoral Illinois politicians as cannon fodder for a big government agenda from which they derive no benefit.
The result of this political fraud is families who have a family member with a developmental disability have fled Illinois just as entrepreneurs have to live in, well, more civilized states.
This is happening on our watch. As an Illinois resident, this is happening on my watch. We are all culpable. And now, none of us can no longer pretend not to know.

What’s Trending in Illinois?

By
willco2
-
0

Matthew-Besler-headshot-2014-WEB

By Matthew Besler
 
The Illinois Opportunity Project recently addressed growing dissension in the Illinois House, where several Democrats broke with their party to uphold Governor Rauner’s veto of a major union bill, indicating that House Speaker Mike Madigan was losing his despotic control of the state. A closer look at recent trends in Springfield and among voters confirms that the power shift is real.
 
The defeat of “The AFSCME Bill” (SB 1229), which would have stripped the Governor of his authority to negotiate a major public contract, has not been the only win handed to the pro-business Governor by rebelling members of the Speaker’s caucus. Rauner’s overall record on veto overrides this year has been sixty wins and only one loss.
 
More importantly, Illinois Democrats are bleeding public support. A recent poll of likely General Election voters indicates that families and businesses are waking up to the games played by Springfield politicians. In response to the question, “True or Untrue: Bruce Rauner is trying to shake things up in Springfield, but the career politicians are standing in his way,” 70.6% said, “True.” According to the same poll, 76% of likely General Election voters understand Madigan controls Democrats in the Illinois General Assembly (ILGA). And only 11% have a favorable view of the Democrat-controlled state legislature.
Basswood Poll Graphic

The demand for independent legislators, and the equity, efficiency and excellence that is established through free-market policy solutions has never been louder. The opportunity to advance the cause of liberty and enterprise in Illinois has never been greater.
 
In order to capitalize on this opportunity, campaigns for state House and Senate seats will require innovative strategy and a powerful grassroots effort. The work to educate the electorate on policy solutions and to clearly identify candidates who are fighting for these solutions has already begun.
 
At The Illinois Opportunity Project, we have established an approach of developing and investing in talented leaders. We have also been diligent in our analysis of a political landscape that is in transition. Our work to date has helped us to develop a strategy that will influence Independents and persuadable Democrats to vote for liberty-minded candidates in 2016.
 
As the election season intensifies, those of us who believe in free minds and free markets need to keep our eye on the prize. Each of us has a role to play in the achievement of this victory. Join our Policy Revolution today by donating $25, $50, or $100, or contact us to become an advocate in your community. Together, we can ensure that today’s trend becomes tomorrow’s truth.
 

Why does EPA spend millions on guns and ammo

By
willco2
-
0

Does EPA Need Guns, Ammo And Armor To Protect The Environment?

From Investors Daily

BY STEPHEN MOORE

10/08/2015 05:51 PM ET

The Environmental Protection Agency spent millions of dollars over the last decade on guns, ammo, body armor, camouflage equipment, unmanned aircraft, amphibious assault ships, radar and night-vision gear and other military-style weaponry and surveillance activities, according to a new report by the watchdog group Open the Books.
The report raises questions about why EPA’s enforcement division employs well-armed “special agents” who appear to be conducting SWAT-type operations on American businesses and households it suspects of wrongdoing.
Illinois-based Open the Books scanned tens of thousands of checks written by the EPA and totaling more than $93 billion from 2000 to 2014.
The audit discovered hundreds of millions of dollars of questionable expenses, including high-end luxury furnishings, sports equipment and “environmental justice” grants to raise awareness of global warming.
It also revealed that seven of 10 EPA workers make more than $100,000 a year and that more than 12,000 of its nearly 16,000 employees were given bonuses last year despite agency budgets that were supposed to be constrained by budget caps and sequester cuts.
EPA’s $8 billion budget also found room for more than 1,000 attorneys, which would make the agency one of the largest law firms in the nation.
And more than $50 million of EPA funds since 2000 went to international organizations — dollars that flowed to countries such as China and Mexico. These activities appear to have little or no connection to the EPA mandate of safeguarding the air and water here in the U.S.
But the eye-grabber in the report is the agency’s ongoing military-type purchases. Some $75 million is authorized each year for criminal enforcement, including money for a small militia of 200 “special agents” that appear to be snooping on industry and preparing to use deadly force to enforce EPA edicts.
“We were shocked ourselves to find these kind of pervasive expenditures at an agency that is supposed to be involved in clean air and clean water,” said Open the Books’ founder, Adam Andrzejewski. “Some of these weapons are for full-scale military operations.”
Those who keep an eye on the agency have also been stunned by such outlays. “EPA has always been primarily an agency that is involved in analysis and regulation. Even its enforcement arm is mainly involved in litigation,” notes Marlo Lewis, who covers environmental issues for the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
“Since when did we start going down this road of allowing agencies of government to engage in military-style operations?”
In 2013, the EPA was involved in what many residents called an armed raid at a small town in Alaska where local miners were accused of polluting local waters. Fox News reported that EPA “armed agents in full body armor participated.”
The Justice Department has reported that there are now 40 federal agencies with more than 100,000 officers authorized to carry guns and make arrests. They include the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Park Service.
EPA has numerous joint projects with the Homeland Security Department. In 1988 the agency’s criminal enforcement division was granted police powers.
The EPA website describes the activities and mission of the criminal enforcement division as “investigating cases, collecting evidence, conducting forensic analyses and providing legal guidance to assist in the prosecution of criminal conduct that threatens people’s health and the environment.” But nothing about the use of lethal force.
Asked for comment on the Open the Books findings, EPA said purchases of armaments are necessary for “environmental crime-fighting.”
“For more than 30 years,” it said, “there has been broad, bipartisan agreement about the importance of an armed, fully-equipped team of EPA agents working with state and federal partners to uphold the law and protect Americans.”
The equipment is needed to “access potential crime scenes as quickly as possible,” it added.
One former EPA administrator with more than 30 years at the agency says of the Open the Books report: “EPA has been increasingly captured by the environmental left, and the purchases of military-style armaments has increased accordingly.”
The new report comes at a time when the EPA is under fire over a new regulation approved last week by the agency to tighten ozone emission rules. The National Association of Manufacturers calls it one of the most expensive EPA rules ever.
There’s also a fight in Washington over whether federal agencies can withstand another sequester spending reduction without jeopardizing vital services. The White House says further agency cuts would be disastrous.
But reports such as the latest by Open the Books are sure to be promoted by Republicans as evidence of rampant waste and misspending.
• Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation.

Trump "Had somebody in that room had a gun, the result would've been better,"

By
willco2
-
0

Trump: I Pack a Gun Sometimes
Image: Trump: I Pack a Gun Sometimes
Sunday, 11 Oct 2015 10:44 AMImage: Trump: I Pack a Gun Sometimes
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump says he sometimes carries a gun to protect himself, after a spate of shootings at colleges ramped up debate about firearms in the United States.
The revelation is likely to spark a backlash from advocates calling for tighter control of guns, after three separate shootings at US universities or colleges this month left 11 people dead.
Asked why years ago he obtained a concealed weapons permit, Trump told the CBS program “Face the Nation”: “Because I like to have myself protected.”
Host John Dickerson then asked Trump: “Do you carry?”
Latest News Update
Get Newsmax TV At Home »
“Sometimes,” replied Trump, whose popularity has surged on the back of a series of bombastic comments on a range of sensitive topics, including immigration and gun control.
Last week, days after a gunman shot dead nine people at a college in Oregon on October 1, Trump said that gun laws had “nothing to do” with the spate of shootings and that such incidents were simply a fact of life.
Special: New Probiotic Fat Burner Takes GNC by Storm
The mass shooting at the community college in Roseburg was “horrible,” Trump told CBS.
“Had somebody in that room had a gun, the result would’ve been better,” he said, adding that “I feel much better being armed.”
 

Obama Bans Pork from Prisons

By
willco2
-
0

Obama Bans Pork from Prisons, CAIR Praises Decision
Image: Obama Bans Pork from Prisons, CAIR Praises Decision (Matt Cardy/Getty Images)
By Greg Richter | Sunday, 11 Oct 2015 11:59 AM
Image: Obama Bans Pork from Prisons, CAIR Praises Decision
The federal Bureau of Prisons has banned pork products from being served in the 122 prisons it runs nationwide, The Washington Post reports.
The ban started with the new fiscal year, which began October 1, and is attributed by the bureau to prisoners not liking pork. Surveys over recent years have found prisoners like pork least of all meats, and it is too costly, prison bureau spokesman Edmond Ross told the Post.
The National Pork Producers Council was skeptical.
“I find it hard to believe that a survey would have found a majority of any population saying, ‘No thanks, I don’t want any bacon,'” Dave Warner, a spokesman for the group, said.
“In general we welcome the change because it’s facilitating the accommodation of Muslim inmates,” CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said. “We hope it’s not an indication of an increasing number of Muslims in the prison system.”
Non-pork options have long been available to observant Jews and Muslims, who can’t eat pork products for religious reasons.
The nation’s 206,000 federal prisoners still can buy packaged pork rinds and pre-cooked bacon in the prison commissary.
 

1...662663664Page 663 of 664

RECENT POSTS

EDITOR PICKS

POPULAR POSTS

POPULAR CATEGORY

© The Will County News