BREAKING: Islam Prohibited In Public Schools, Supreme Court Voted… Thanks To Trump

hen then-candidate Donald Trump spoke at rallies and discussed the importance of electing a conservative Supreme Court Justice could be nominated, the left was oblivious to how important that single issue was. Conservatives recognized that America was at risk if Democrats kept the power.Recently, the full panel of 9 justices came together for the first time to decide the fate of Islam being taught within our public school system. The decision shows just how close we came to disaster. The 5-4 ruling ultimately decided that Sharia Law or any ideology that contradicts basic human rights will not be taught in America’s public schools.This shows just how important the election of President Trump was and his decision to appoint Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.“The government certainly has no business being involved in religion, but this isn’t a government issue or a religious issue,” Gorsuch said in a statement. “This is about the judicial branch interpreting the laws as they apply to the teaching of religion. We should be teaching any religions in this country besides standard Judaeo-Christianity, as our founders wanted, and we certainly shouldn’t be filling the children with lies about Islam being a ‘religion of peace’ when they see the carnage on the news almost every day.”Gorsuch cast the tie-breaking vote that decided that only the “true historical account” of Islamic history would be taught in the classroom.

Would You Support A Law Requiring All Welfare Recipients To Pass A Drug Test First?

Since Trump has been in the White House, he has been moving fast to get some important regulations passed. The latest is to drug test all unemployed Americans who are seeking unemployment benefits. This means that those who are out of work need to keep a clean slate while they look for work and apply for benefits.Prior to this regulation being passed, drug testing wasn’t enforced on the unemployed unless they were seeking jobs that required testing to be done and this was mandated at the state level. The new resolution was passed by the House in February and approved by the Senate on Tuesday. It will now head to Trump’s office for the final approval. While it will be approved by Trump, the date it goes into effect is unknown at this time.In the past, when Obama was in office, Republicans thought that too much oversight was given to the government and some things should’ve been decided at the state level. Democrats, on the other hand, argue that the law makes unemployed Americans fall victim of the stereotype that unemployment is associated with drug use. According to some studies, there are mixed results when it comes to the correlation. Some argue that welfare recipients are more likely to use drugs than those who are in the working world, which creates angst among taxpayers who are technically funding their addictions.“If you’re looking for work, you’re guilty of drug use until proven innocent,” said Senator Ron Wyden.Initially, the law stated that states could drug test those seeking unemployment benefits if they were applying for jobs in a list of given fields that typically require testing. Some of those jobs included: flight crew members, anyone who carries a firearm and commercial drivers, but in 2016, the law was eligible for repeal according to the Congressional Review Act. Because of this, Congress is allowed to overturn newly implemented federal regulations with only a majority rather than the normal three-fifth required vote. This type of maneuver can only be done when there is a regime change, and in the past, it had only been done once before, when President George W. Bush canceled out a labor-safety regulation that was put into effect while Clinton was in office. Trump is making up for it, as this is the eighth Obama-era regulation that has been canceled out.The Department of Labor will have an opportunity to write up a new regulation, but they will have to be careful what they write because it has to be much different than the regulation that was nixed, according to the Congressional Review Act.As of now, several states are on board with the drug testing regulation and are already devising ways in which they can implement the policy.Currently, all political parties are offering up their different opinions regarding the regulation.“Yesterday, congressional Republicans continued their attack on the poor by forcing drug testing as a prerequisite or receiving unemployment benefits,” said Rep. Gwen Moore. “As a former recipient of such services, I am appalled by the Republican Party’s discriminatory policies and deeply sown disdain against those battling poverty.”

Somalis In Tennessee Take Over Small Town — This is CHILLING!

Residents of Shelbyville, a small town in Tennessee, have been seeking help ever since Muslim migrants began targeting the local Christians with violence.

The small town in Tennessee has that typical small town look and feel.  Small movie theater,  sheriff,  church.  However, as the Somali migrants have gathered here in large numbers, the small Tennessee town’s residents have been forced to defend themselves.“They’ve had an impact here. Unfortunately, it’s not been a good impact,” said Brian Mosely, a reporter for the local Shelbyville Times-Gazette stated. “I found that there was just an enormous culture clash going on here,” he said. “The Somalis were, according to a lot of the people I talked to here, were being very, very rude, inconsiderate, very demanding. They would go into stores and haggle over prices. They would also demand to see a male salesperson, would not deal with women in stores. Their culture is totally alien to anything the residents are used to,” Mosely said.Not only is their a ‘culture clash’, violent crimes have now hit their town.

Several months ago, the liberal media completely white-washed a series of events where three churches were shot up by Muslims. Jihad Watch was the only one to even report on the story, where AK47’s were used to shatter the windows of multiple churches in the area. They reported:“A Muslim shoots up three churches and nothing is said about his motive or his Islamic identity. Would the same courtesy be shown a Christian who shot up three mosques? Why the coverup? Who is responsible for it?Three churches were shot up in the Shelbyville, TN area starting on the night of Sep 27, 2016. The Horse Mountain Church of Christ was shot 16 more times the night of Sep 29. The Philippi United Methodist Church along with another church was also struck by 7.62 x 39 rounds on the 29th. (7.62 x 39 rounds are consistent with an AK47 or a SKS rifle) The Bedford County Agriculture Center was also attacked with gunfire on the 29th, shattering the front glass. There were also reports of utility boxes being shot during this time.”In a report by Freedomdaily a while back, Somali migrants completely took over a small Minnesota white neighborhood several months back and started threatening to rape and murder females who were standing in their yards:Local reports reveal that white woman was just minding her own business outside of her home when a mob of migrant males approached her and began screaming disparaging comments at her, threatening to rape and kill her. KSTP TV interviewed the victim, where she relayed her horror about the incident that transpired in her neighborhood.“They were screaming at the house that they were going to kidnap me and they were going to rape me,” one Minneapolis resident told KSTP TV. “It was a very traumatizing experience.”The unnamed woman wasn’t the only one targeted with a barrage of terroristic threats, as the mob made their way around the upscale neighborhood yelling comments at numerous homeowners, while driving their vehicles onto the sidewalks and lawns while shooting off bottle rockets and screaming.We can’t stand for this. It may not be your town USA, but if it continues like this, it may just be. We must stand up for our rights as AMERICANS. We must fight tooth and nail to stop Somalians and other Muslims to be able to come into our country and especially take over our cities. President Trump has vowed to help with this and we as Americans must stand together and do our part. If this is as infuriating for you as it is for us, please share and let your local representatives know that we will not stand for this.3 Replies to “Somalis In Tennessee Take Over Small Town — This is CHILLING!”

Judge Throws Out Case, Says “In God We Trust” Will Stay On Currency. Do You Support This?

A judge recently struck down a case regarding the religious wording on U.S. currency. The plaintiff argued that the phrase “In God We Trust,” that is seen on American dollars, is a breach of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and places a burden on a person’s right to exercise religious freedom.The Ohio judge, Benita Pearson disagreed with the plaintiff, issuing that they had no proof of the claimed burden, and stated the following:“Plaintiffs cannot demonstrate that the use of the motto on currency substantially burdens their religious exercise,” she wrote in her ruling. “Credit cards and checks allow Plaintiffs to conduct the bulk of their purchases with currency not inscribed with the motto. And for cash-only transactions, such as a garage sale or a coin-operated laundromat, the use of the motto on currency does not substantially burden Plaintiffs’ free exercise.”The attorney who has been the main plaintiff and standing behind the case is California attorney Michael Newdow, who has been on a mission to rid the words “Under God,” from the Pledge of Allegiance. And now he is set on removing “In God We Trust,” from American currency. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court’s Northern District of Ohio in 2015. Newdow is claiming that the phrase is in violation of the First and Fifth Amendments, along with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.“Plaintiffs either specifically do not trust in any ‘G-d’ (with NOT trusting G-d being a basic tenet of their belief systems) or hold G-d’s name so dear and exalted that to inscribe it on a monetary instrument is deemed sinful,” said Newdow in his court documentation.Judge Pearson, on the other hand, felt differently about the plaintiff’s case and raised the following argument:“Plaintiffs argue that cash transactions force them to bear a message that they [feel] violate their religious beliefs,” she wrote. “But as the Supreme Court stated in Wooley v. Maynard, ‘The bearer of currency is thus not required to publicly advertise the national motto.’ Furthermore, Plaintiffs’ other concerns, that they may be subject to peer pressure or ridicule, or that their children may question their beliefs, are unlike the choice between a ‘basic benefit and a core belief’ described in the Supreme Court’s case law.”And while the separation of church and state has been one of the nation’s founding principles, some commenter’s offered their own arguments on the topic…“Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion. It doesn’t matter if it violates free will or not. The words “In God We Trust” respects an establishment of religion. On that grounds it should be stricken from government currency.”“The phrase “seperation of church and state” is a simplistic and misleading representation of the intent of the founding fathers. Their goal was to foster, nourish, and encourage religious belief in God (as oppposed to belief in no god) because they correctly believed that people who think they will someday return and report to their creator are much more likely to be peaceful, loving, thoughtful, forgiving, courteous, etc than people who do not hold such a belief. History is proving the correctness of their perception. All the stats say we are becoming less and less believers in God and they also clearly show our slow decent into rudeness, selfishness, greed and violence. Some will say there is no connection, they need to think that through very carefully.”

Sheriff’s Department Is Being Fined $10,000 For Only Hiring U.S. Citizens. Is This Fair?

Want to see more stories like this? Join the AWM Fans Facebook group today!If you wanted to get a job with the Denver Sheriff’s Department, you needed to meet the job requirements just like anywhere else. But there was one difference. Job seekers would be automatically disqualified from a job at the Denver Sheriff’s Department if they were not a U.S. citizen.Most people thought this was fair. If you want to protect and serve America, you should at least be an American, right?And as the Department cut millions of dollars in overtime pay from their overworked deputies, they aimed to hire scores of new people and put them on the streets to protect Denver. To get one of their largest applicant pools in history, the department placed an ad and listed U.S. citizenship as a requirement. They thought there wouldn’t be a problem. But the government didn’t like it…By spring 2016, the department had hired 200 new deputies, flooding the workplace with more eager police officers. The veterans and senior officers were grateful for the reinforcements. Everyone was happy.But now the Justice Department has slapped the Sheriff’s Department with a fine of $10,000 for purposely discriminating against job seekers. Learn more about this below!Besides issuing Denver’s Sheriff’s Department with the fine, the Justice Department has handed over a list to help the sheriff mitigate their discriminatory hiring practices and give job applicants a fair chance.The Denver Sheriff’s Department said it was an accident. They didn’t mean to ‘discriminate’ but felt that hiring US citizens was the right thing to do.Then they issued the following statement:“The Denver Sheriff Department maintains its commitment to treat all people with dignity and respect, and is proud to have one of the most diverse workplaces in Colorado,” said Denver Sheriff’s Department spokesperson Simon Crittle. “While we didn’t commit this violation intentionally, we accept responsibility and are taking steps to clarify policy and amend language in hiring documents.”The Mainstream Media has launched an assault on police departments across the United States in recent months. They’re accusing them of discrimination both on the street and in the workforce. Young men and women are brainwashed by this information and the number of applicants has fallen.Therefore, many police departments are casting a wider net and loosening the regulations around their hiring procedure.While the Denver Sheriff’s Department was fined, people all over America were angered by the injustice.But the Justice Department was just trying to protect more people’s rights. And they commended the Denver Sheriff Department for cooperating with the change in hiring practices. They issued the following statement on their website:“We commend the Denver Sheriff Department for its cooperation and commitment to removing unnecessary and unlawful employment barriers,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “Eliminating this unlawful citizenship requirement will help ensure that the Denver Sheriff Department hires the best and most qualified individuals to protect and serve. The entire community will benefit from these reforms.”Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which is a group aiming to restrict immigration to the United States, prefers to keep the discriminatory hiring practice in play.Krikorian said: “We’re handing over a gun and a badge to somebody whose background we don’t really know a lot about,” Krikorian said.Do you illegal immigrants should be banned from joining the police force?JOIN THE DISCUSSION in the comments below!

Trump ‘seriously considering’ a pardon for ex-Sheriff Joe Arpaio

EXCLUSIVE: President Trump may soon issue a pardon for Joe Arpaio, the colorful former Arizona sheriff who was found guilty two weeks ago of criminal contempt for defying a state judge’s order to stop traffic patrols targeting suspected undocumented immigrants. In his final years as Maricopa County sheriff, Arpaio had emerged as a leading opponent of illegal immigration.“I am seriously considering a pardon for Sheriff Arpaio,” the president said Sunday, during a conversation with Fox News at his club in Bedminster, N.J. “He has done a lot in the fight against illegal immigration. He’s a great American patriot and I hate to see what has happened to him.”Arpaio, 85, was convicted by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton of misdemeanor contempt of court for willfully disregarding an Arizona judge’s order in 2011 to stop the anti-immigrant traffic patrols. Arpaio had maintained the law enforcement patrols for 17 months thereafter. The man who built a controversial national reputation as “America’s toughest sheriff” admitted he prolonged his patrols, but insisted he did not intend to break the law because one of his former attorneys did not explain to him the full measure of restrictions contained in the court order.He is expected to be sentenced on Oct. 5 and could face up to six months in jail. However, since he is 85 years old and has no prior convictions, some attorneys doubt he will receive any jail time.’Is there anyone in local law enforcement who has done more to crack down on illegal immigration than Sheriff Joe?’Citing his long service as “an outstanding sheriff,” the president said Arpaio is admired by many Arizona citizens who respected his tough-on-crime approach.Arpaio’s widely publicized tactics included forcing inmates to wear pink underwear and housing them in desert tent camps where temperatures often climbed well past 100 degrees Fahrenheit. He also controversially brought back chain gains, including a voluntary chain gang for women prisoners.Civil liberties and prisoner advocates as well as supporters of immigrants’ rights have criticized Arpaio for years, culminating in his prosecution. He lost his bid for reelection last year.“Is there anyone in local law enforcement who has done more to crack down on illegal immigration than Sheriff Joe?” asked Trump. “He has protected people from crimes and saved lives. He doesn’t deserve to be treated this way.” Stopping the flow of undocumented immigrants across the southern U.S. border was a central theme of the president’s campaign. Arpaio endorsed Trump in January 2016.    Trump indicated he may move quickly should he decide to issue a presidential pardon. “I might do it right away, maybe early this week. I am seriously thinking about it.”Trump could decide to await the outcome of an appeal by Arpaio’s lawyers who contend their client’s case should have been decided by a jury, not a judge. In a statement after the verdict, his attorneys stated, “The judge’s verdict is contrary to what every single witness testified in the case. Arpaio believes that a jury would have found in his favor, and that it will.”Reached Monday for reaction to the possible pardon, Arpaio expressed surprise that Trump was aware of his legal predicament.“I am happy he understands the case,” he told Fox News. “I would accept the pardon because I am 100 percent not guilty.” The former sheriff said he will continue to be a strong supporter of the president regardless of whether he receives a pardon. But he also voiced concern that a pardon might cause problems for Trump, saying, “I would never ask him for a pardon, especially if it causes heat. I don’t want to do anything that would hurt the president.”  Trump has not granted any pardons so far in his presidency. Gregg Jarrett is a Fox News Anchor and former defense attorney.


10-Year-Old Asks To Mow White House Lawn… Gets Amazing Response Directly From Trump

On Wednesday, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders read a very interesting letter to America.It came from Frank, a 10-year-old entrepreneur, who asked if he could cut the White House’s grass with his lawnmower.In the letter, the boy explained that he’s been mowing his neighbors’ lawns in the nearby town of Falls Church, Virginia and was itching to mow the White House lawn.And he just got a “yes” directly from President Donald Trump.Frank wrote:“Dear Mr. President,It would be my honor to mow the White House lawn for some weekend for you, even though I’m only 10, I’d like to show the nation what young people like me are ready for. I admire your business background and have started my own business. I’ve been mowing my neighbors’ lawns for some time, please see the attached flyer, here’s a list of what I have and you’re free to pick whatever you want: power mower, push mower, and weed whacker, I can bring extra fuel for the power mower and charge batteries for the weed whacker, and I’ll do that with no charge.Sincerely, Frank.”SHS responded to Frank live by saying:“Frank, I’m happy to report back to you that I just spoke with the President, he wanted me to be sure and tell you that you’re doing a great job and keep working hard. He also asked me, we found out when we called, to let you know that we would be reading this letter to wish you a happy birthday. I think Frank went from 10 to 11 in the time that we received and were able to respond to this letter, and he also wanted to invite you to spend a morning here at the White House with the groundskeeper.”In addition, Sanders also said that this young man “embodies the enterprising and ambitious spirit of America.”

4-Year-Old’s Headstone Removed Because A Single Person Complained (Photos)

A mother is outraged after council chiefs removed her deceased son’s star-shaped headstone following a complaint from another family who claimed it wasn’t “in keeping” with the rest of the cemetery.Max Corbett-Gardener was just 4 years old when he passed away after complications from his severe epilepsy. His mother, Jo Corbett-Weeks, 42, saved up $4,580 to design a specially-made headstone featuring a teddy bear holding a star inscribed with a tribute to her son, the Daily Mail reports.The heartfelt memorial was erected on Max’s grave to commemorate what would have been the boy’s seventh birthday. But three days later, the headstone was removed from Great Malvern Cemetery by council chiefs in Worcestershire.“It would have been Max’s seventh birthday on the Sunday, and this was like a birthday present to him from me,” Corbett-Weeks, who has two other children ages 16 and 5, told BBC. “I chose a star-shaped stone because I wanted something suitable for Max – something personal.  “This stone is just so perfect for my poor little chap,” she added.

A family had complained to the Malvern Town Council that the headstone was not “in keeping” with the rest of the cemetery. Corbett-Weeks says the stone was then removed without her knowledge or consent and she is demanding that it be reinstated.“I was totally unaware this was going on. The council did not contact me and it was the stonemason who told me he’d been ordered to remove it,” Corbett-Weeks explained. “I feel upset, distressed and angry. We have been through so much as a family. I could understand if the grave was uncared for or unsightly, but it isn’t.“The headstone meant a lot to me and the family but now we are fighting to have it put back,” she said. “It’s a horrible situation. We just want to have somewhere to grieve.”The memorial was placed in the adult area of the cemetery, where Corbett-Weeks had her son buried so that he could be close to other family members.The council said that if the application for the stone had been received within the usual time frame, they would not have given the stonemason permission to install it in the first place. They added that had the star-shaped headstone been installed at the children’s area of the cemetery, it would have been allowed.“We have a conformity of shapes in our lawn cemetery. We were contacted by people who objected to the shape,” a Malvern Town Council spokesman explained to BBC. “The longer it stayed up, the harder the process would have been.“It was a very difficult decision to remove it but one we had to make straight away,” the spokesman said.The council added that the complaint was not so much about the shape of the headstone as it was about following protocol.’It wasn’t necessarily an objection to the shape but why we appeared to be applying one rule to one family and other rules to another,” the spokesman continued. “The stonemason in this situation did not have permission to put the stone up – and the stone is not in keeping with the graves in that area.“By not following the correct process he has caused considerable distress to both families,” the spokesman concluded.The council is arranging a meeting with Corbett-Weeks to discuss a new design for her son’s headstone.

China implements UN sanctions against North Korea, as Trump trade probe looms

In an unprecedented move against North Korea, China on Monday issued an order to carry out the United Nations sanctions imposed on the rogue regime earlier this monthChina made the announcement amid not only Pyongyang’s escalating war of words with the United States regarding the North Korea nuclear missile program, but also as President Trump was reportedly set to order an investigation into China’s trade practice — a probe which could lead the U.S. to levy its own sanctions on Beijing.Trump has sought China’s help in dealing with North Korea, as China has remained one of the last defenders of dictator Kim Jong Un and could apply enormous financial pressure should it turn on the North Korean leader.But in recent months, Trump has grown increasingly wary of getting any substantial aid from China, leading to the trade probe, as Axios has reported. Trump, as a presidential candidate, heavily criticized China, only to initially soften his tone upon winning the White House.Trump tweeted Monday he was set to “focus on trade,” but didn’t specifically cite China.

Just hours before Trump was believed ready to announce the trade investigation, however, China’s Commerce Ministry on Monday announced that all imports of coal, iron ore, lead concentrates and ore, lead and seafood from North Korea would be banned.There was some disagreement about when the sanctions would go into effect. The Associated Press reported the ban would start at midnight on Sept. 5, but Reuters wrote it could begin as early as Tuesday.The U.N. Security Council unanimously approved the tough new sanctions on Aug. 5 in a bid to punish North Korea for its escalating nuclear missile programs. The sanctions include a ban on exports valued at more than $1 billion.The U.S.-drafted resolution looks to increase economic pressure on North Korea in an attempt to open up negotiations on the nuclear missile program.U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley praised the resolution, calling it “the single largest economic sanctions passage” against Pyongyang.However, she cautioned other council members that sanctions were not enough: “We should not fool ourselves into thinking we have solved the problem, not even close.”The Associated Press contributed to this report.