Can something good come out Trump’s Jerusalem blunder? If he cuts off foreign aid to everyone who disagrees with him it will save American taxpayers a fortune, free up our allies from the obligation to kow-tow to American dictates and cue Muslims to rise up against the puppet dictatorships that oppress them:
“Privacy protection … combines elements of liberalism and libertarianism.” Neither the ACLU nor the conservative House Freedom Caucus wants Section 702 to re-authorized as it stands, leaving American citizens exposed to “inadvertent” surveillance supposed to have been directed at foreigners:
- Strange Bedfellows: Critics Left and Right Oppose Warrantless Wiretapping Renewal (Christian Science Monitor)
“[O]n advice from a “lawyer in the Maryland Office of the Attorney General,” opponents of the Muslim housing project have been warned “to be very careful about what” they say lest their words be used against them in a lawsuit by the project’s supporters:
“Muslims to quietly go about charity giving in a way that is consistent with the emphasis in Islam on discretion, of ‘giving charity so that the left hand does not know what the right hand gives’, but this is a story which needs to be told”:
- The Difference Made by Muslim Charities Is Often Ignored – Especially over Christmas (Independent)
“Sovereign Islamic debt issuance by non-Muslim countries is set to hit a 3-year high in 2017.” Islamic finance is “based on the principles of risk and profit-sharing … [and professes no] interest on loans, and … [no] funding activities involving alcohol, pork, pornography or gambling”:
“Increasingly, Jews and Muslims are spending the holiday in church soup kitchens and senior centers for service-oriented projects, and sometimes in text study sessions that tease out common ground”:
“The targeting of the Christian holy sites by Jewish extremists, and the arson and vandalism of over 53 churches in Jerusalem and Palestine, in so-called price tag attacks is no different than the dozens of times that the graves of Muslims have been defaced”:
The Indian government doesn’t care whether instant divorce is permitted or forbidden by Islamic law, arguing, “The government is of the view that the issue arises from the humanitarian concept of gender justice, gender equality and dignity of women and not arising from faith and religion” …
… while the EU refuses to intervene in private divorces, leaving each member state to decide on their validity:
Leave a Reply