Nonwhite Democrat Hawaiian Judge Extends Block on Trump Travel Ban


Judge Derrick Watson claims that President Donald Trump’s travel ban targeting six countries known to produce and harbor terrorists is unconstitutional because it discriminates against a religion.

Has this judge ever read the Koran? Does he really believe that Islam is a religion, when it clearly is a political ideology of conquest masquerading as a religion.


President Trump’s executive order to restrict travel to the U.S. from six majority-Muslim countries and suspend the U.S. refugee program has been blocked indefinitely.

The state of Hawaii sued to stop the travel ban, arguing the president’s policy violates the Constitution. U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson has extended his nationwide order blocking the executive order while the lawsuit continues.

Hawaii officials argued that the ban — a modified version issued after the first executive order was also blocked by federal courts — discriminates against travelers on the basis of religion. Watson said in his ruling that the state had shown “a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their Establishment Clause claim, that irreparable injury is likely if the requested relief is not issued.”

As the Two-Way has reported, the president sought to deny entry to citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days and suspend the U.S. refugee program for 120 days.

The first part of the executive order, affecting travelers from the six majority-Muslim countries, was also blocked by a U.S. district judge in Maryland. That preliminary injunction remains in effect. The Trump administration is appealing the Maryland ruling to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Trump administration promised “extreme vetting” of people seeking visas, and has issued guidelines in a series of memorandums from Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to U.S. embassies.

The judge is clearly wrong in this case, as judges often are. There are at least a dozen Muslim countries that are not on the banned list. There is no discrimination against Muslims because of that fact.

In World War II, imagine a ban against the Japanese being overturned on the grounds that Shinto (a Japanese religion) was being discriminated against.

Imagine a ban against Germans being overturned during the war on the grounds that Christians were being discriminated against.

Judge Derrick Watson is a fifth columnist traitor who deserves the same fate as all traitors.

Walking Tour Video: Paris is Lovely in the Spring (in 28 seconds)

It’s not the West your father knew. Vive Le Pen.

For good measure here’s a youtube video posted here last year that shows Paris streets today.

Maryland Judge Considers Forcing President Trump to Double “Refugee” (Dangerous Parasite) Inflow

There is no rule of LAW in America now. There are only political opinions of liberal judges who hate America–white and free America anyway.

As Rush Limbaugh has noted, we are on the verge of a Constitutional crisis. Either the Supreme Court steps in with some real law (not likely) or Trump risks being impeached and thrown out of office for defying these liberal judges.

Civil war, anyone?


A federal District Court judge in Maryland is considering whether he should order President Donald Trump to double the annual inflow of refugees up to 100,000 per year.

Any demand by the judge that the federal government airbus an extra 50,000 migrants — including many adherents of Islam’s sharia legal system — into American neighborhoods would be an unusual intervention into government roles normally left to the elected President and Congress.

If actually implemented, the judge’s plan also would be extremely expensive for Americans, because state and local communities subsidize each new immigrant with roughly $1,600 each per year for decades.

The judge who is at the heart of this case is Theodore Chuang. Learn more about the outrageously partisan Judge Chuang here.


Continue reading

Ate food at the African restaurant in Stockholm – was kidnapped and raped

Sweden protects the identity of its shitskin criminals by not making available their mugshots. That’s pathetic.

The filthy black animal in this case will enjoy his brief stay in prison. After that, it’s unclear whether he will be deported. If he’s not, he will continue to rape until a nice Swedish gentleman cuts off his masculinity. You see, this rape trial was his second trial for a sex crime in the last few months.

Fria Tider via Google translate

A 23-year-old immigrant from Eritrea sentenced to four years in prison and ten years of deportation for aggravated rape. Before several witnesses kidnapped 23-year-old a mentally disabled woman at a shopping center in Stockholm and raped her in a suburb on the other side of town.

It is the evening of 10 August last year that the woman, who because of his severe Asperger and autism live in a group home, visiting the restaurant Mama Africa in Kista Galleria in Stockholm. At the restaurant, she speaks with a dark-skinned man. The man is a 23 year old Eritrean who decides to abduct the woman to the suburb of Fittja, located on the other side of town, there to molest her.

Two employees at a hotel in Kista, both with an immigrant background, one of whom even he is Eritrean, witness the 23-year-old drag out the woman with her back to the ground to a waiting taxi. “He understood that the woman continually resisted and did not want to go by taxi to the man,” is the one man’s testimony according to the judgment. Despite the call none of them police.

Even the taxi driver, as he too is an immigrant, react and think about calling the police, but do not. Instead, he drives eritreanen and the woman all the way to Krögarvägen in Fittja.

In Fittja forced the woman into an apartment where there lives an Eritrean family. In a room in the apartment, she then for several hours beaten and raped. 23-year-old beat her with his fists, calling her “whore” and spray their victims with disinfectant. When the rapist fall asleep to fit the woman to sneak out of the apartment.

The time 7:55 encounters a police patrol woman at a school in Fittja. She would have no panties, is barefoot and considerably bruised. She was taken to the emergency ward for rape victims.

Now the 23-year-old convicted of assault against the mentally disabled woman: 4 years in prison and ten years of deportation. Despite this, he is likely to stay in Sweden after serving his sentence because, according to the Migration Board, not to deport refugees to Eritrea.

The woman feels after the assault very bad. She has twice after the assault admitted to a psychiatric clinic because she felt so bad mentally, writes in its judgment.

As recently as last summer acquitted 23-year-old in a prosecution concerning molestation after he molested a young woman on a train between Växjö and Jönköping. The Court found that the woman had himself to blame because she had not been clear enough to eritreanen that his advances were unwelcome. A moderate juror dissented, protested against the acquittal.

Look up Eritrean people on Google images and this primitive is one of the first you’ll see. It’s pure evil to invite such a creature to live in the West. Obviously, he has no ability to adapt and will have to be a government ward for life.

Geert Wilders Falls Short But Vows to Keep Fighting

Although Sky News often skews left, it’s reporting on Wednesday’s Dutch elections looks straight to me, unlike a half dozen other reports I read which slant toward hinting that nationalism is dead in Europe.

Sky News

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte has won the country’s election, holding off a strong challenge from far-right leader Geert Wilders, exit polls suggest.

Mr Rutte’s centre-right VVD party is reported to have taken 31 of the 150 parliamentary seats, or 21% of the vote – down from 27% in the 2012 election.

He said his victory had stopped the “wrong kind of populism” in its tracks, after last year’s Brexit vote and the election of President Trump.


Mr Rutte said: “We want to stick to the course we have – safe and stable and prosperous.”

The PM, who has moved more to the right on issues such as immigration defeated Mr Wilders’ anti-Islam, anti-immigrant PVV party, which is reported to have won 19 seats (13%).

This puts him equal second with two others – the Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) and the Democracy party D66.

Mr Wilders, who wants to close mosques, ban the Koran and leave the EU, received much of the media coverage during the campaign and he has achieved a rise of 3% compared to 2012.

In a tweet, the politician, known as the Dutch Donald Trump, thanked his backers and warned: “Rutte is not rid of me by a long shot”.

Meanwhile, the Green party saw a big rise in support, winning 16 seats, with their share of the vote up from 2% five years ago to 11% this time.

There was a high turnout where voters had 28 parties to choose from.

Coalition talks are now expected to last weeks or possibly months.

But most of the main parties have already stated they would not work with the PVV.

Sky’s Europe Correspondent Mark Stone said: “With the exit polls as they are, Geert Wilders has failed to do what many suspected he might be able to achieve which was to win the most seats in the Dutch parliament. That hasn’t happened.”

He added: “The populist uprising that many had expected – that Geert Wilders might be able to achieve – has not come to pass.”

Dutch Trump Geert Wilders May Win Netherlands Elections Today by Standing Against Islamification of Europe

Here’s a brief primer on the Dutch elections being held today, put together from two sources.

For the sake of the future of Europe, let’s hope that Geert Wilders sweeps to a giant victory.


His Twitter page is emblazoned with the phrase “Stop Islam.” He’s called some Moroccan immigrants “scum” who make Dutch streets “unsafe.”

Meet Geert Wilders, the Dutch politician and rabble-rouser known nearly as much for his thick head of peroxide platinum hair as for his Islamophobia.

Wilders, who heads the Freedom Party, is often dubbed the Dutch Donald Trump. But this far-right populist is both more ideological and less impulsive than America’s president. He has called for making the “Netherlands great again,” banning the Quran, taxing the hijab, shutting down all mosques, sealing off Dutch borders to Muslim newcomers, and pulling the Netherlands out of the European Union.

“All the values Europe stands for — freedom, democracy, human rights — are incompatible with Islam,” he said in a 2015 video. It was both shocking and hardly the most controversial thing he’s said.

He is a darling of the American far right and at the forefront of a wave of anti-immigrant populism sweeping Europe. After leading in the polls, his party is now projected to finish third in Wednesday’s Dutch elections, though because of the fractured nature of Dutch parliamentary politics, Wilders himself was unlikely to ever ascend to the prime minister’s office. That doesn’t mean he’s been marginalized: Wilders has already successfully dragged the political conversation in the Netherlands to the right — and may be helping to do the same for the rest of Europe.

NBC News explains some background relating to the Dutch elections that are happening NOW.

AMSTERDAM — For mainstream European politicians upended by the wave of anti-immigrant populism, political survival means swimming along with the tide.

A series of national elections this year will determine the fate of the European Union and immigration policy on the continent, and some are aiming to attract support away from the far-right.

This posture will be tested Wednesday when Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s center-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy confronts anti-immigration figurehead Geert Wilders’ Party for Freedom among a thicket of 28 other rivals.

The mild-mannered Rutte, who has a reputation for optimistic, socially liberal policies, took out newspaper ads late last year telling Dutch people to “act normal or leave” — a statement that observers took as a thinly-veiled attempt to imitate Wilders’ views. In December, Wilders was found guilty of inciting discrimination against Dutch Moroccans.

And in a television interview in September, Rutte used a local colloquial profanity to tell Turkish immigrants who attacked journalists to go back to their country.

In an interview with NBC News at a rally in the southern town of Breda on Sunday, Rutte denied copying Wilders.

“I have made no anti-immigrant statements,” he said. “I am fighting on my own agenda.”

Rutte seems like a late arrival to the exclusionary patter that has made Wilders so popular and controversial.

In the interview Sunday, Rutte described his “act normal” newspaper ads as a plea for public civility directed at everyone in Dutch society.

“It means that we all have to make sure that we are not just there to live our own lives but we also have a responsibility to make sure that we live in a context of caring about others,” he said. “It’s not just me, myself and I. We are a society.”

Wilders inciting discrimination conviction followed a 2014 municipal election rally when he led a crowd in chants of “Fewer! Fewer!” in response to the question: “Do you want more or fewer Moroccans in this city and in the Netherlands?”

Unlike Rutte, Wilders has rarely tried to climb down from his most inflammatory comments. In a tweet, he called the verdict, which carried no penalty, “insane.”

Though analysts point to Rutte’s slight improvement in polls, many Wilders voters remain unconvinced.

“I don’t think it’s authentic,” said Xandra Lammers, who supports Wilders, referring to Rutte’s tentative embrace of populism. “He’s swimming with the waves of Geert Wilders.”

Lammers, a professional translator, said she was once a leftist like most Dutch voters. She swung right after Dutch officials moved Moroccan immigrants to her Amsterdam neighborhood of Ijburg.

Since then, she’s been active on social media, blogging about what she calls the government’s “failed experiment” of creating a multicultural neighborhood.

(((ACLU))) Gears Up to Resist Trump Enforcement of Immigration Law by Taking to the Streets

An ACLU Muslim has pushed the Communist front organization toward street fighting in order to resist President Donald Trump.

This is a break with ACLU tradition, which saw the group fighting battles in the American courtroom.

As far as I’m concerned the ACLU has now declared itself to be a terrorist organization, trashing the rule of law. It should reap that which it has sown.


WASHINGTON — The American Civil Liberties Union wants to take over your town. On Saturday, the organization is launching a nationwide campaign to push local governments to become “Freedom Cities” by adopting a series of policies to make them safe havens for immigrants and refugees amid what the group has dubbed President Trump’s “mass deportation agenda.”

Trump’s administration is currently asking for cooperation from local law enforcement for the president’s crackdown on illegal immigration and on immigration from certain predominantly Muslim countries. The ACLU’s new strategy is designed to pressure city officials to reject that request. According to an ACLU strategy memo, the group is pushing local authorities to force the federal agencies focused on immigration enforcement to jump through a set of legal hoops that will “impede objectionable policies the president is pursuing.”

These proposed requirements include making U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection officials obtain a judicial warrant before asking local officials to detain anyone, blocking those officials from accessing people in local custody for “interviews or other investigative purposes,” preventing federal agents from asking local officials about someone’s immigration status, and blocking surveillance or interrogations based on profiling. While the Trump administration has suggested local officials who do not cooperate with federal immigration enforcement may be breaking the law, the ACLU memo argues the specific Freedom Cities policies are “on firm legal ground.”

And along with the lobbying and legal work that is typically the ACLU’s bread and butter, the organization is trying something new as it pushes the Freedom Cities agenda. The ACLU is providing supporters with a blueprint for activism to apply pressure on local authorities to adopt the plan. It’s a clear departure for the organization. For nearly a century, the ACLU has been nonpartisan and focused on legal battles. The organization’s foray into grassroots organizing and activism is the brainchild of Faiz Shakir, a 37-year-old former Senate aide who was hired in January as the group’s national political director.

“People have known us for, ‘See you in court,’” Shakir said in the Freedom Cities memo. “I hope now they’ll also know us for, ‘See you in the streets.’”

Here’s a friendly warning from a (suddenly former) ACLU Jew: