On the day before the Fourth of July, the New York Times went out of its way to show its disgust for Americans against illegal immigration in Murrieta, California who turned away buses of illegal immigrants for, of all things, waving American flags and chanting “USA!”
“Nobody was even being released in Murrieta,” the Times‘ editorial board wrote on Thursday. “But the mayor urged residents to complain, and in a pageant of ugliness, dozens took action: They waved flags, screamed ‘U.S.A.!’ and turned three buses back.”
The Times’ editorial urged Obama to “go big” on executive actions by granting amnesty to the parents of so-called anchor babies — children who are born in the country to illegal immigrant parents.
The paper did not mention that pro-amnesty protesters in Murrieta chanted “Viva La Raza!” and waved Mexican flags. They also did not explain why Murrieta’s residents, like those across the country, were incensed that the federal government, without notice, tried to force them to take care of illegal immigrants who may be criminals and carrying diseases. At least four illegal immigrants who were on the buses had to be hospitalized with scabies and fevers.
Read the full story at Breitbart.com.
The United States government is actually suing a private American business for discriminating against Hispanic and Asian employees because they don’t speak English on the job.
It involves a Green Bay Wisconsin metal and plastic manufacturer that fired a group of Hmong and Hispanic workers over their English skills, “even though those skills were not needed to perform their jobs,” according to the feds. More importantly, forcing employees to speak English in the U.S. violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, says the Obama administration.
Here’s the twisted explanation from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that enforces the nation’s workplace discrimination laws; the Civil Rights Act protects employees from discrimination based on national origin, which includes the linguistic characteristics of a national origin group. Therefore, according to this reasoning, foreigners have the right to speak their native language even during work hours at an American company that requires English.
Requirements of English fluency and so-called English only rules are often implemented to make what is really discrimination appear acceptable, says the government attorney handling this case. “But superficial appearances are not fooling anyone,” he assures. “When speaking English fluently is not, in fact, required for the safe and effective performance of a job, nor for the successful operation of the employer’s business, requiring employees to be fluent in English usually constitutes employment discrimination on the basis of national origin — and thus violates federal law.”
Under President Obama the EEOC has taken a number of unprecedented actions to protect foreigners in the workplace, including illegal immigrants. In 2009 the agency issued a controversial order making a workplace English rule illegal. The directive came after the EEOC bullied a national healthcare firm to pay nearly half a million dollars to settle a discrimination lawsuit in which the government alleged that Hispanic workers were punished for speaking Spanish.
Read the full article at Judicial Watch.
A Webster man says his apartment complex manager told him his American flag was a “threat to the Muslim community,” and that he has to take it down. But he’s not giving up without a fight.
Stepping onto Duy Tran’s balcony in Webster, one thing is clear: “It means a lot to me,” he said.
He’s talking about his American flag that he proudly put up when he moved in just a few days ago. But then an apartment manager at the Lodge on El Dorado told him he had to take it down.
“What really stunned me is that she said it’s a threat towards the Muslim community,” said Tran. “I’m not a threat toward anybody.”
Read the full story at KHOU.com.
Army Staff Sergeant Cory Schroeder was told by University of Wyoming’s (UW) student government that he would not be allowed to say the Pledge of Allegiance before its meetings because it could offend international students.
Schroeder was newly elected in May as a senator in the Associated Students of the University of Wyoming (ASUW) government to serve for the upcoming school year. He has been in the Army for over six years and completed a tour of duty in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
Schroeder became upset when he realized the meetings did not open with the option of saying the Pledge.
“Multiple senators sat me down and said it was a ‘very touchy subject’ and ‘we don’t want to offend anybody,’” Schroeder told Campus Reform.
Schroeder spoke with ASUW Vice President Ricardo Lind-Gonzales, who allegedly said that he would put the issue of the Pledge on the agenda and that Schroeder would be given a chance to speak about it. However, the issue was subsequently left off the agenda for the remainder of the school year.
Read the full story at CampusReform.org.