Category Archives: United Nations

Border Patrol’s website offers advice on eluding … Border Patrol

obama border patrol

Via Fox News: Immigrants who want to enter the U.S. illegally can learn how and where to avoid the Border Patrol from an advisory on the agency’s own website, which critics say is evidence of the Obama administration’s “schizophrenic” approach to enforcement.   

Safety and sanctuary can generally be found at schools, churches, hospitals and protests, where Customs and Border Protection agents are barred under a “sensitive locations policy” from carrying out their duty of enforcing border security. In fact, the agency’s website states that actions at such locations can only be undertaken in an emergency or with a supervisor’s approval.

The policies are meant to ensure that ICE and CBP officers and agents exercise sound judgment when enforcing federal law at or focused on sensitive locations, to enhance the public understanding and trust, and to ensure that people seeking to participate in activities or utilize services provided at any sensitive location are free to do so, without fear or hesitation,” the government website states in both English and Spanish.

While the explanation is apparently meant to show the deference Customs and Border Protection agents show to sensitive societal institutions, critics, including the Media Research Center, say it also tells illegal border crossers where to go if they are being pursued. Agents are barred from interviewing, searching or arresting suspected illegal immigrants in such locations.

“So, almost any illegal alien can escape arrest by either walking with a second person (a march), attending some type of class, or finding a nearby church, medical facility or school bus stop,” the Center wrote in a post bringing the advisory to light.

A “Frequently Asked Questions” section explains in detail what the Customs and Border Patrol’s parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security, considers safe zones for illegal immigrants.

  • Schools, such as known and licensed day cares, pre-schools and other early learning programs; primary schools; secondary schools; post-secondary schools up to and including colleges and universities; as well as scholastic or education-related activities or events, and school bus stops that are marked and/or known to the officer, during periods when school children are present at the stop;
  • Medical treatment and health care facilities, such as hospitals, doctors’ offices, accredited health clinics, and emergent or urgent care facilities;
  • Places of worship, such as churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples;
  • Religious or civil ceremonies or observances, such as funerals and weddings;
  • During public demonstration, such as a march, rally, or parade.

Critics of the Obama administration’s immigration policies have long complained that it undermines the mission of border enforcement by imposing rules on agents that they say leave them unable to do their jobs.

“This administration has systematically and maliciously attacked and deconstructed all phases of border enforcement,” said Dan Stein, president of Federation for American Immigration Reform. “It’s to the point now where virtually nobody has to go home. ICE is no longer carrying out its core mission, of finding, identifying and removing illegal aliens from the country. Agents are in a state of despair,” Stein added. “They are being turned into nursemaids, chaperones and bus drivers.”

Telling people suspected of breaking the law where they can seek refuge makes no sense, said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies.


“It’s schizophrenic,” Vaughan said. “What the Obama administration has done is to create sanctuaries for illegal aliens and to publicize them. That is fine for a social welfare agency, but not for a law enforcement agency. No law enforcement agency would ever want to broadcast where lawbreakers can go to be shielded from the consequences of their actions.”

The site does say the “sensitive locations policy” does not apply to places directly along the border, but warns its own agents that if they plan to move on a suspect in such a location near the border they “are expected to exercise sound judgment and common sense while taking appropriate action, consistent with the goals of this policy.”

The CBP website also provides a toll-free number and email address to allow illegal immigrants to report possible violations of the “sensitive locations” policy.



Say goodbye to your neighborhood: Obama ‘fair housing’ rule enforces racial, religious, income ‘desegregration’

If you’re living in a neighborhood of mainly “whites,” or Christians, or non-refugees, or middle-class income earners, or traditional man-woman households, and your town or city receives federal dollars, say goodbye to the neighborhood as you have known it.

middle-class suburbiaThat’s because last July, the Obama Administration’s Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) finalized a new “fair housing” rule called “affirmatively further fair housing choice” (AFFH), which will begin to be enforced nationwide in 2019.

As explained by Ed Gramlich of the National Low Income HousingCoalition, in “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: Final Regulations,” the new rule is an addition to the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which prohibits housing discrimination against the “protected classes” of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or disability, by requiring “program participants” to “affirmatively further fair housing” by taking steps “to actively overcome historic patterns of segregation“.

“Program participants” are defined as “jurisdictions” (towns/cities/counties/states) and public housing agencies (PHAs) that receive federal funds for housing and urban development, which in practice means every neighborhood in the US, for is there a town or city or county or state that doesn’t receive federal dollars for housing and urban development?

Translated into plainer English, that means if your town/city/county/state contains sections and neighborhoods that lack blacks, Muslims, LGBTs, Mexican illegals, Syrian refugees, and the mentally ill, the assumption is that the homogeneity is a result of discriminatory housing practices. And if your town/city/county/state gets federal dollars for housing and urban development — which means everywhere in the U.S. — then your local government is required to “desegregate” and break up your neighborhood’s offensive homogeneity.

In the preamble to the rule, HUD stresses that “the new AFFH approach does not mandate specific outcomes. Rather, it establishes a standardized fair housing assessment and planning process to give program participants a more effective means to affirmatively further the purposes of the Fair Housing Act.” Blah, blah, blah.

What will happen

(1) HUD will provide each “program participant” (henceforth, I’ll call it “your town”) with the following:

  • Data on housing in your town and the surrounding region.
  • The new “affirmatively further fair housing choice” (AFFH) rule that provides “a standard framework” for program participants to use to identify and examine “fair housing issues” and the underlying “contributing factors” that cause any housing discriminatory issues. A “fair housing issue” is defined as “a condition that restricts choice or access to opportunity, including:
    • Ongoing local or regional segregation, or lack of integration.
    • Racial or ethnic concentrations of poverty.
    • Significant disparities in access to opportunity.
    • Disproportionate housing needs based on the “protected classes” of race, color,
      national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability.
    • Evidence of illegal discrimination or violations of civil rights laws, regulations, or guidance.

(2) Your local government then uses the data to assess whether and how “fair” the housing is in your town; identify neighborhoods lacking “fair housing”; and set “fair housing goals and priorities”. All of that should be submitted to HUD in an “Assessment of Fair Housing” (AFH), the development of which requires “public participation”.

(3) HUD receives, reviews, and decides whether to accept your town’s AFH.

(4) If accepted, your town must “certify (pledge) that they are affirmatively furthering fair housing choice” by incorporating its HUD-approved AFH into its Consolidated Plan (ConPlan) and Public Housing Agency (PHA) Plan. Specifically, this means, your town must “take meaningful actions” to “address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to community opportunity” by:

  • “Replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns.”
  • “Transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity.”
  • “Fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing law.”
  • Removing “obvious impediments” to “fair housing,” such as “refusing to rent to families with children,” lack of large rental units, zoning that limits multifamily housing, and “insurance practices that reinforce segregated housing patterns” (whatever that means). See “Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice“.

(5) HUD will “monitor” your town’s “compliance” to the new “fair housing” rule by requiring your local government to submit an Annual Performance Report of its ConPlan (called CAPER), wherein your local government must:

  • Summarize the “impediments to fair housing” in your community;
  • Describe the actions taken in the past year to overcome the effects of those “impediments”.

(6) Your town must submit a new AFH every 5 years, which will result in a new ConPlan and PHA Plan.

When new rule will be enforced

HUD says “Most program participants will not be required to use the new AFFH system until 2019.” The exact timing or due date for a “program participant” to submit an “Assessment of Fair Housing” (AFH) depends on:

  • Whether the “jurisdiction” (town/city/county/state) receives less or more than $500,000 in federal funds;
  • Whether the public housing agency has less or more than 550 public housing units and vouchers.

If you thought Agenda 21 is bad, this new “fair housing” rule is Agenda 21 On Steroids, and it will wreak havoc in neighborhoods and communities across America. And yet, not a word from Congress or the useless media.

Please help publicize this by disseminating this post via email and social media. Thank you.


Mysterious surveillance cameras being installed on utility poles across America

Big Brother is watching

Mysterious boxes containing surveillance cameras are appearing across America, unknown to and without the approval or supervision of local law enforcement.

(1) Phoenix, Arizona

The most recent one, with tainted windows, appeared on a utility pole near 21st and Glendale avenues in Phoenix, Arizona (see below).

mysterious box on utility pole in Phoenix

Jon Erickson reports for ABC15 Arizona, April 6, 2016, that local resident Brian Clegg alerted Arizona’s largest utilities provider Salt River Project (SRP) to the mysterious box, which faced Clegg’s house, a strip mall and a high school.

An SRP representative told ABC15 that no one had permission to put the box on their utility pole, and that there were indications that law enforcement “was connected” to the box. But SRP would not elaborate.

Clegg said the crew who installed the box came in a truck marked “Field Pros.” A Google search of that name does not return any utility or surveillance company, nor is the company registered in Arizona.

Late last month, Clegg videoed an SRP crew removing the box.

ABC15 reader Paula Frazier wrote in a comment that the mysterious box “was pointed toward a strip mall with an ammo shop” and that ATF wants “to know who’s buying guns and ammo.”

Frazier is right: There is an ammo shop, United Nations Ammo Company, in the strip mall at N. 21st and Glendale Ave. — the location of the mysterious box on the utility pole.

United Nations Ammo Company, Phoenix, AZ

(2) Limestone, New York

Last October, residents in the rural community of Limestone, NY, were also perplexed by cameras mounted on utility poles at the intersection of Route 219 and Bailey Drive.

Ed Reilly reports for ABC7 Buffalo, October 8, 2015, that Limestone officials said the cameras are not being used for traffic, and admitted that they don’t know themselves why the cameras were installed. 

“They should have come to the board first and told us what they are doing because it is our community,” said Former mayor and current board member for the Town of Carrollton Ralph Bottone said inquiries had gone unanswered.

Limestone residents said the cameras were installed approximately a month ago and aimed at Rt.219 traffic heading north and south only a few miles from the Pennsylvania border.

The New York State Department of Transportation (DOT) told 7 Eyewitness News that its only connection to the cameras was approving an installation permit for the Department of Homeland Security, and that the DOT does not operate or monitor the cameras. Homeland Security had little to say other than issuing a short statement: “We can’t confirm or deny that the cameras belong to Homeland Security.”

(3) Lehigh Acres & naples, Florida

Dave Hodges reports for NBC2, March 29, 2016, that a Lehigh Acres resident was suspicious about an electric box that was installed on a power pole outside his home. It didn’t look like anything else in the neighborhood, and it seemed to be pointing toward his house.

Armed with a lengthy pole with his cell phone attached to one end, he lifted his phone up to get a peek at what was inside the box. When he looked at the video, it was unmistakable: A camera was peering out from the other side of black, tinted glass.

The man called the Lee County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) to complain, and not long after, a work crew with a bucket truck was on his street taking down the electric box with the camera inside. But they wouldn’t tell him what the box or camera were for.

A homeowner living near the electric box in Lehigh Acres said she was told the box was there to improve cell reception and might be moved in a few months. By Tuesday morning, the electric box in Lehigh Acres was taken down.

There is at least another identical electric box installed in a different neighborhood in Lehigh Acres. Homeowners in the area were mostly unaware of the camera except for Mike Frisby, who said that “The shape and everything lead me to think it was a camera.”

NBC2 reached out to the Lee County Sheriff’s Office for an interview, but the request was declined. In an email, a spokesperson for the sheriff’s office wrote:

“We are not at liberty to discuss any special investigative techniques or tactics that we employ. It would be ludicrous to comment on our capabilities and inform the criminal element just how we operate. We follow state laws that govern search and seizure, as well as laws handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States.”

The Lehigh Acres electric boxes are similar to fake electric boxes installed in a Naples, Florida community that turned out to be surveillance cameras. Residents in that neighborhood also said they were told the boxes would help boost cell phone reception.

Slade Gurr, CEO of Covert Law Enforcement that sells surveillance technology, says it’s not uncommon for law enforcement to conceal these cameras from the public because “It really defeats the purpose to tell someone that there will be a surveillance system available.” He says these covert cameras have become increasingly helpful to law enforcement — “Officers today using technology are able to do things that in the past it might have taken four or five officers and several days to conduct the type of investigations that we’re able to do.” Gurr believes that most law enforcement agencies are not using covert cameras for general surveillance of the public but for specific investigations where “there’s typically a specific reason or specific type of investigation that is being conducted.”

But ACLU of Florida Executive Director Howard Simon is calling foul: “That is a bunch of bologna. This is not a law enforcement tactic.” Simon says law enforcement agencies should provide proof that surveillance cameras are making a difference by accomplishing their purpose. More important to Simon is whether there are policies in place to prevent potential abuse of surveillance cameras by law enforcement, so that residence in the area under surveillance are assured “there are also protections in place to protect the privacy of the citizens of the community.”

Writing for the blog The Torn Republic, Dave Hodges claims — without providing either evidence or a source citation — that the mysterious boxes with surveillance cameras are installed by the Obama Administration’s ATF “as part of the Safe Cities Network” and in “acquiescence to United Nations authority”.

For what the Safe Cities Network it, please see my post of October 19, 2015, “Obama cedes U.S. sovereignty to international body via Strong Cities Network“.

H/t FOTM‘s Glenn47


A preacher raised from the dead

The United Nations is now without excuse if the persecute the Church

Reverend Lee Stoneking addressing the General Assembly of the United Nations in New York City. April 22nd, 2015.

The Great Commission

 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go.  When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” – Matthew 28:16-20

Submitted for your encouragement.

Iran’s Executions and Human Rights Abuses Hit 27-Year High

Executions….whatever. Let’s make a deal with Iran and give them some money! Smart power or something.


Via Huffington Post: The Islamic Republic hit the highest rate of executing people since 1989. The official number indicates that Iran executed nearly two times more people in 2015 in comparison to 2010 when the hardline president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was in office, as well as roughly 10 times more than the number of executions in 2005.

Approximately 1000 people were executed in 2015, according to the latest report from the United Nations investigator, Ahmed Shaheed, the special rapporteur for human rights in Iran. The unofficial number is higher.

The peak of the executions in 2015 was between April and June in which nearly 4 people were executed every day on average. Most of the executions were carried out in prisons located in urban areas such as Ghezel Hesar and Rajai Shahr in Karaj, and Adel Abad in Shiraz.

Iran has surpassed China in the number of executions being carried out per capita. Most of the executions in Iran are being done by hanging. In addition to the alarming increase in executions, fundamental rights of Iranians and ethnic and religious minorities appear to have regressed in 2015 as well. In addition, this year witnessed the highest level of disqualification of political candidates, 61 percent, since the establishment of the Islamic Republic, 1979.

Who and Which Groups are Being Mainly Targeted

Iranian authorities claim that these executions are overwhelmingly related to drugs offenses. Nevertheless, many of the executions were linked to other issues. Only around 65 percent of those who were executed were charged with violating Iran’s narcotics law.

In other areas, according to Amnesty International, the Islamic Republic remains a leading executioner of minors. Currently, 160 juvenile offenders are on Iran’s death row. Other human rights groups also believe that Iran has executed more juveniles than any other country. Michael G. Bochenek, senior counsel of the children’s rights division at Human Rights Watch pointed out “Iran is almost certainly the world leader in executing juvenile offenders.” Some articles in Iran’s criminal code allows girls as young as 9 and boys as young as 15 to receive death sentences.

In addition, ethnic and religious minority communities, including the Sunni, Arabs, and Bahai continue to be systematically targeted and discriminated against.

Iran’s Sunni are the largest minority in the country. Some of the discrimination that the Sunnis have suffered, according the UN report, are that the Sunni communities in Iran “have long complained that Iranian authorities do not appoint or employ them in high ranking government positions such as cabinet-level ministers or governors. They have also raised concerns regarding reported restrictions on the construction of Sunni mosques in Shia-majority areas, including the capital Tehran, and the execution or imminent execution of Sunni activists the government alleges were involved in terrorist-related activities.”

Other groups include journalists, artists, writers, musicians, and human rights activists who witness arbitrary arrests, detentions and prosecutions.

Amnesty International and the United Nations do not have executive power to force Iran to reform its law or hold Iranian leaders accountable, but the UN can offer recommendations such as the latest one in which Iran is asked to “take the necessary steps to ensure and that it citizens fully enjoy the rights and freedoms awarded to by the Iranian constitution with special emphasis on the right to freedom of expression, the right to political activity and their right to assemble”. According to Nazanin, an Iranian lawyer based in Karaj, “ Iran’s judiciary and parliament will ignore these recommendations and not follow up with them”.

Read the whole story here.

kerry and obama


Senators accuse State Dept. of defying Congress with $500M UN climate payment

Whatevs….it’s not like $500M is that big of a deal. Just tack it on to the $19,000,000,000,000+ national debt!

kerry and obama

Via Fox News: Two Republican senators are accusing the State Department of misusing taxpayer dollars by green-lighting $500 million for a United Nations climate change program without first obtaining congressional approval. The senators now are demanding the department justify the “cloak-and-dagger” contribution to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) – even threatening legal action.

Senator Cory Gardner

Senator Cory Gardner

Lawyers cannot replace the constitutional requirement that only Congress can appropriate money,” Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., said, adding that he’s demanding a “full legal analysis.”

Gardner, in a statement to, alleged the department was trying to “wave a magic wand and write a half-billion dollar check to a Green Climate Fund that they admit was never authorized by Congress.” He also vowed to “pursue legislative action that prevents cloak-and-dagger re-programming of money outside of congressional approval.”

At the center of the dispute is whether the State Department abused its authority in shifting funds between an existing program and the climate fund. The Obama administration – despite resistance from congressional Republicans — has committed the U.S. to contributing $3 billion to the fund, a program established by the United Nations to help poor countries adopt clean energy technologies to address climate change. Nearly 200 other nations have agreed to provide $100 billion per year by 2020, from private and public sources.

Along with Gardner, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., maintains Congress has not allocated any funding for what he calls the “international climate change slush fund” and has in fact “prohibited the transfer of funds to create new programs.”

The State Department acknowledges the funding was never explicitly approved by Congress – but argues the department was within its authority to shift funding to the Green Climate Fund, because Congress did not explicitly prohibit funding the GCF.  

Under questioning by Barrasso at a March 8 Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Heather Higginbottom told the committee the funds were diverted from the department’s Economic Support Fund — which provides economic funding to foreign countries — to the GCF after a full review by department lawyers.

State Department spokeswoman Katherine Pfaff also confirmed to the source of the funding was the economic fund, but could not say from which exact program the money came. And she bluntly addressed the GOP senators’ accusation. “Did Congress authorize the Green Climate Fund? No,” she said, adding that department lawyers “reviewed the authority and the process under which we can do it.”  The administration, meanwhile, has requested another $750 million for the GCF in its fiscal 2017 budget. Higginbottom also insisted they were not required to notify Congress about the transfer from the Economic Support Fund.

green is the new red

At the hearing, though, Barrasso said the first installment of the $3 billion pledge was “a blatant misuse of taxpayer dollars.”

Read the whole story here.



2016 Olympics will have a ‘refugee’ team

Identity politics, affirmative action, and victimhood have arrived at the International Olympics.

Not only are pre-op transgenders (including fully-biological males who will compete as females) now allowed to compete, the 2016 Olympics Games in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, will have a “refugee” team!

International Olympic Committee logo

Since its inception, the Olympics Games have been nation or country-based, i.e., individuals compete as nationals of a country. But the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has given its approval for 43 athletes to compete at this summer’s Rio Olympics as a team of Refugee Olympic Athletes (ROA) under the Olympic flag.

As BBC News reports, March 2, 2016, IOC president Thomas Bach said, “By welcoming ROA to the Olympic Games in Rio, we want to send a message of hope to all the refugees of the world. This team will be treated like all the other teams. This team may end up between five and 10 athletes maybe. We have no target. It depends very much on the sporting qualifications.”

IOC president Thomas Bach is a German lawyer

IOC president Thomas Bach is a German lawyer

Selection criteria for the team of Refugee Olympic Athletes (ROA) are sporting ability, “personal circumstances” (whatever that means), and United Nations-verified refugee status. Athletes will then be supported with funds to train. They will be housed in the athletes’ village and will enter the opening ceremony as the penultimate team, ahead of hosts Brazil.

So far, fewer than half of the 7.5 million tickets issued for the August 5-21 Rio Games have been sold.

My questions are:

  1. If these “refugee” athletes are so physically fit as to be Olympian athletes, why don’t they return to their home country and fight?
  2. Why are the athletes not competing as members of the country that had generously taken them into their fold?
  3. How long is an athlete classified as a “refugee”? Let’s say an individual had fled from Syria to Germany 5 years ago, is this person still considered a “refugee”?